
IANAL* but . . .
Re plea deals and pardons,
Libby would have been much better served if that much vaunted poor memory of his had kicked in a lot sooner, say when he was talking with the FBI and testifying before the Grand Jury. Instead he tried to play it too smart thinking no one would ever call him on it. It might have worked, what with a compliant and stenographic press and an ally in Attorney General John Ashcroft shepherding any investigation. Unfortunately, it didn’t work out that way. Through a series of events unanticipated by Libby a tough, straightshooting prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald was put on the case and the “lie and laugh at the saps” strategy went out the window.
At this point Libby could have and probably should have done a Rove.
He should have read the tea leaves, realized it doesn’t take a weatherman to know which way the wind is blowing, and gone back to the Grand Jury as many times as necessary and blabbed his heart out. He could have cleared his previous “faulty” Grand Jury testimony that way. This would have eliminated the 2 Grand Jury related perjury charges eventually leveled against him as well as vitiating any charge of obstruction. Lying to the FBI would still have been out there but with a good attorney and his revised Grand Jury testimony, I can't help but think that this could have been finessed. After all, would Fitzgerald really have wanted to impeach testimony that would have provided the strongest and most direct link to the logical focus of his investigation Vice President Dick Cheney? I don’t think so.
Of course, as we all know, Scooter chose to stick to his lies and protect his boss. Now some say that after his conviction, they have some sympathy for him, that he was a fall guy, a scapegoat. I beg to differ. Libby was after George Bush, Dick Cheney, and Karl Rove the most important and powerful person in the White House –which means the country which means the world. He was the point man on lying us into a disastrous war and destroying our civil liberties.
Scooter Libby is not a nice man. He is not a confused man. He is not the victim. We are.
Scooter Libby was the Chief of Staff to the most powerful and arrogant Vice President in our history, someone who is regularly described as the Prince of Darkness and Darth Cheney. You can not work for someone like that and be just some poor dumb slug. You have to be an active and willing participant, a facilitator. You have to believe. And Scooter does believe, not in the oafish Bush, but in his boss and in the fear, threat filled world he inhabits.
Still even at this point, a deal with Fitzgerald was possible.
Fitzgerald is a good prosecutor and he had a solid case, but he still had to get a jury to buy it. There is a degree of uncertainty in even the best cases, a stubborn juror, an unexpected development or snag. Both Fitzgerald and Libby had reasons to deal, but in the end, I think the price was just too high for Scooter. Once indicted, I just can’t see Fitzgerald letting Libby off without pleading to at least one of the Russert counts and holding the other perjury charges and obstruction over him to ensure cooperation. In such a situation, I think that Scooter felt he had nothing to lose by going to trial and maybe something to gain. Best case scenario, he could get off on all counts. More likely, he would get hit with the Russert counts but lose most of the others at trial or on appeal. In the end, he would still be facing a few years in a minimum security federal facility.
Maybe he imagines on using the time to write a book, possibly something with a horny New York Times reporter, aspens, and a bear. In any case, he will be a martyr to the cause and, no doubt, once out he hopes to live on wingnut welfare for the rest of his days.
A deal before sentencing is still possible but with a conviction in hand Fitzgerald has a much stronger hand and Libby, a much weaker one. At the moment, I think Scooter is still committed to seeing this whole process through to the bitter end. But that may change. In the coming months, the reality of a few years in stir may begin to sink in for Scooter. His wife, children, and freedom may begin to exert pressure on him to deal with Fitzgerald for a lighter sentence. And keep in mind that sentence may not be just a couple of years.
If in June, there is no deal and Judge Walton comes back with a sentence of 7-10 years, Scooter may have even more reason to do considerable rethinking of his position. Playing the martyr is a lot different from actually being the martyr, especially when the appeals process doesn’t look promising.
Now I am sure that many of you are saying that this increases the likelihood of a pardon waiting out there, that there is already a deal cut but it isn’t with Fitzgerald but with Bush and Cheney. Well, Bush is an unpredictable idiot so there is always that possibility but I will tell you why I think it’s not likely.
Bush is an “out of sight, out of mind” kind of guy. He has a track record of being loyal to his people only for as long as they work for him (or until he dumps them). So why would he exactly care what happens to Libby? Scooter is long gone from the White House and Scooter was never Bush’s man anyway. His master was Dick Cheney. The trial made this especially clear.
Libby’s defense team only envisioned calling Cheney as long as they thought this would help Scooter’s case, and by extension continue his protection of the Vice President. This was not the same tack they took with the President’s office where they claimed they were going to throw Rove under the bus. They never made good on the claim but they did make it. So somehow I don’t think Libby’s “protect the Vice President but not the President” strategy is going to persuade Bush into a pardon. Nor do I think that there is any blackmail out there to coerce Bush into granting such a pardon. He after all gets advice from a “higher father” and believes that history, not Scooter Libby, will vindicate him.
*"I Am Not A Lawyer"



204 Comments












Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About Firedoglake
hugh!
zed!
fiz!
team plame!
yes! o happy zed!
going for three….
ok, enough parallel play – time to let the last thread know…
Delurking for a second to make a suggestion re: IANAL. For all things Plame related I vote to use IANAMW or IANAEW for Marcy Wheeler or emptywheel, respectively.
all by your lonesome Kirk? not for long I bet.
I actually read the post.
Spot on, Hugh.
wish someone would double dare Bu*h to pardon Libby. no, really. then he couldn’t hide behind the 5th amendment.
Here’s a question I have.
Isn’t Libby useless to Fitz as a witness now? I mean in a hypothetical Cheney trial, wouldn’t the defense just point out that the Govt is relying on the word of a convicted perjurer and obstructer of justice? I would think that would be serious impeachment material.
But, IANAL, so if there are any out there who care to comment….
Great post, Hugh!
Thanks.
when are the impeachment hearings gonna start?
Hugh, great post, thank you!
viget @ 9
That is of course, unless Libby has a story to tell that comes complete with documents…
It was the documents that sunk Libby in this case as much as the testimony.
Don’t forget EW keeps pointing out that there are still missing documents that we know exist, but did not come out in this trial.
Is it b/c Team Fitz doesn’t have them yet?
Yeah, Shrub’s track record on loyalty is that it always comes up to him; it never goes down to subordinates. (Cheney’s is probably about the same, but he’s less public.) I wonder why anyone would trust either one for protection.
Maybe he imagines on using the time to write a book, possibly something with a horny New York Times reporter, aspens, and a bear.
*shudder* a companion piece to “The apprentice” *shudder*
viget @ 8
Actually in deconstructing conspiracies and criminal enterprises which Fitzgerald has plenty of experience in doing, you start with the weakest link and build up. This means that your case is going to be based a lot on the testimony of people who have already been convicted of something else.
TiredFed @ 8
double dog dare him
Hugh,
You may not be a lawyer, but with a post like that, you could play on on TV.
Nicely done
great post, Hugh -
as ever, you are a writer and a scholar!
and TiredFed –
happy for your company here :)
Anyone here giving credence to the Leopold screed @ truthout.org?
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/030707A.shtml
looseheadprop @ 17
Aw, gosh. *blushes*
I say No Deal
Scooter Libby went this far, why stop now. He’ll be richly compensated for this in time.
(((Waves to loudounlib)))
Great post Hugh. IIRC those who know these things thought a sentence of 1-2 yrs the most likely under fed guidelines. That’s still a long time for a non-hardened white collar criminal.
Juror #10 is on Tweety right now, Ann Reddington.
I agree with Hugh, I don’t think Jr. is going to pardon scoots. It’s not in his nature, mercy, that is. Unless it buys him something, why would he do it?
A pardon does open up scoots to tell all with no further protection and I don’t think Jr. and his minions want that to happen. They’d rather the Wilsons and congress have to pry it out of him.
My 2 cents.
looseheadprop @ 13
Also, don’t forget that Libby, as a perjuror and felon, will not be a credible witness FOR Cheney. Even if Libby never flips, any testimony he gives that would normally be favorable for Cheney, now means squat in court in terms of the weight it will carry. Libby is completely impeachable as a witness in the legal sense of the term.
HUGH!
Most excellent to see you front page one.
(((waves back at petedownunder – g’day!)))
Viget – I would answer your question IF proper accolades/credit are given for my omniscience on the Libby trial. Till then I’m keeping my omniscience to myself.
Hugh – Nice to see you headlining. I would comment, but see above.
A agree with Revdeb at 24 and others who have made the point. With Chimpy loyalty is one way only. If he thought it would do him some good he’d pardon Scoots, otherwise it would be Irving who?
This –
reminds me that George W. Bush is also a vindictive kind of guy and a sadist and a passive-aggressive type. Remember the story about him on his bike riding slowly in front of his mom just to piss her off?
It would fit Bush’s personality to let Libby twist in the wind just as a fkyu! to Cheney. W will undoubtedly believe to the bitter end that his problems were all Cheney’s fault.
If Libby is pardoned, he loses his Fifth Amendment right to silence in the Wilson/Plame civil suit. He can be compelled to testify and held accountable for perjury. IANAL
Nice debut, Hugh!
I want to know who the ” ‘em” is that Harriet Grant said they’re gonna [expletive].
These were her first words to her newly felonized hubby, per Milbank.
Hugh! Congratulations to you and FDL. Back to read the article.
Maybe it’s just my impatience bleeding through, but why on Earth does it take over three months to get to sentencing?
TeddySanFran @ 32
My guess would be the “em” that left Scooter without a chair when the music stopped. Must… buy… more… popcorn…
So much for the justice system proving that no one is above the law.
nihil obstet @ 31
I hope this is true
Did that juror just say she wanted Libby to get a pardon? I missed her reason, my phone rang!
Hugh – great post!
I don’t blame Libby for not spilling the beans & cutting a deal with Fitz before the trial. Two reasons for him keeping his whiny trap shut: first of all, I don’t think it would be wise to cross Cheney & Bush. All of these men likely have enough dirt on each other, and you know Rove and others would use reality and create a lot of mischief for a flipped Libby. Rove could have got the WH spin machine in full attack mode, claiming perhaps that Libby was the one who manipulated pre-war intel, and/or censored it before it got to Cheney’s desk. They would have pulled out all the stops to discredit him as a lewd, perverted “Democrat” who betrayed Cheney and the WH due to his own evil plans.
Perhaps it sounds a little paranoid, but I just wouldn’t want to stab those powerful men in the back.
Second, Libby is obviously a very confident man, and he probably never invisioned he’d actually be convicted. I’m sure Cheney and others continued to feed his ego and push the notion that his defense was a “slam dunk”.
Time for me to get back to work… I just wanted to chastise you a little, Hugh, for putting this image in my head:
ewwww! I wonder who he’d cast as starring in the movie about his life…
Jan Rooth @ 34
It’s The American Way
Jan Rooth @ 34
Because the Probation department has to do a pre-sentence investigation and write a pre-sentence report.
The defense then gets a period of time to respond to that report
I too don’t especially like the “fall guy” meme…
It breaks two ways:
1) Poor Libby, he’s taking the blame for other’s wrongdoings, so implied is that he really didn’t do anything wrong (which is how the corp media is playing it), or
2) There are others higher up the chain(ey) that are guilty, but are not being punished.
It actually made me kind of angry that the juror, right out of the expressed the jury’s “synpathy” for Libby…
give me a break… the f**king jerk lied to Federal prosecutor in grand jury testimony to protect himself (cus he definitely knowlingly outed a classified CIA operative) and Chain-ey
The last thing we need is the jury who convicted him spreading sympathy for him…
my goodness,
i just walked in the door, turned on Hardball and heard what i thought was a juror from the Libby trial saying that she didn’t want him to go to prison.
Was that a juror i just heard say that??
I would have sworn you were a lawyer.
Good to see you posting!! More!
Any pardon will be a decision from input from several actors. Remember that the family probably got together to give that divorce to one of the brother’s wife who was going to write a book. Everybody involved has a book’s worth of dirt. Didn’t his dad do some pardoning in his day?
My eyes are bleeding. O’Beirne on Hardball.
Bucky O’Beirn.
I say ‘No Deal’
And I laugh at Mrs. Libby’s judgment of men. Scooter is taking Bush’s bullet instead of her love.
What a creep. But just like any other crime family, you don’t snitch. Libby knows this.
They’ll create a new foundation for Scooter. It might be called the “Protecting our Foreign Intelligence Assets From Inside the Beltway Foundation.”
Scooter will be Chairman. The board will have Ollie North, John Poindexter, Elliot Abrams, Michael Ledeen and others on board. Jonathan Pollard and Larry Franklin will be corresponding members.
Did I leave any important board members out?
Jan Rooth @ 33
Scooter was indicted at the end of October of last year and yet his trial only took place this year. These things take a long time and there is an attempt to accommodate everyone’s schedule and everyone’s schedule is different. Fitzgerald has cases coming up in Illinois. Judge Walton’s time is also heavily booked. Team Libby will need time to strategize and make something up. And then they all have to get together.
Ya gotta wonder when it’s going to sink in to Libbys’ brain that Shooter doesn’t care about him, and that he’s given his loyalty to a man that has been perfectly happy to use him as a shield. If Shooter gave a damn about Libby wouldn’t he have stepped forward by now and save him from national humiliation, ridicule, and probable incarceration?
Bucky O’Beirne is a lying cow~
splitting hairs while spitting on justice.
Reading Froomkin’s chat transcript from today – think the person who posted this is an FDLer?
Washington: Guilty! Guilty! Guilty!
Dan Froomkin: You left out one “Guilty!”
“Scooter Libby is not a nice man. He is not a confused man. He is not the victim. We are.” Very well said! Thank you.
about that picture. Ahmed Zappa sure looks different these days. Frank’s son has really gone downhill if he is hosting a game show like this one, considering the last one he did was freaking great.
Remember that the jury was made up of 11 people who did not have an axe to grind with this administration. Hard to find 11 people in DC who don’t but they did. This was the absolute best jury that scoots could ever possibly get. Sure they felt sorry for him. They don’t know what we do. They are not news hounds like we are. Not surprised by their sympathy.
I don’t share it.
I was disugusted last night by Matalin on Nightline – “this kind of stuff is done all the time, it benefits Republicans and it benefits Democrats and…(long pause) it benefits the public.” I saw her nose grow…
And of course the lovable drag queen Toenails… dutifully spewing the same talking points…. (it was kind of funny to see her interject a TP that had nothing to do with the subject at hand… so she stumbled a little bit to be sure and get it in)…
Disgusting…
Marie Roget @ 20
Let’s hope Leopold is right! If only Congress does their job and continues Fitz’s investigation.
I don’t understand the argument that Libby should have made a deal after the indictment to drop all of the charges except for one of them.
All of the experts say that the sentences in a cast like this one will run concurrently, not consecutively. So isn’t one guilty verdict just as bad as five?
RevDeb @ 56
Very well said. That’s a keeper, RevDeb.
randiego @ 38
Yes, you heard her right. She says Scooter is a nice guy and she could picture him out west with his cowboy hat on. She used to live out West and was taken in by Miller’s Wyoming tales of Libby. She just kept saying he was “nice guy”. Shoot, I’ve been “nice” all my life, but if I get convicted I become a criminal. Thank goodness she went for a guilty verdict.
lhp@13,
Is it possible that Fitz kept some documents out of sight for future use should congress decide to investigate? (And what’s taking them so long?)
Ed*ard Teller @ 49
Reuel Marc Gerecht , Daniel Pipes, Richard Perle, Woolsey.
v o x p o p g i r l @
47
FDL’ers I miss:
Kate O’beirn’s Teeth
“Hurm.”
RevDeb’s right — we need some pushback that the defense got to select a jury that didn’t hate BushCo. All this spin about the jury “not understanding the case” needs to be countered with restatement of the tedious voir dire.
That said, I do wish the most public juror was not a former WaPo employee; plays into the spin machine bigtime.
Y’know, the torrent of bullshit coming out of Kate O’Beirne’s mouth doesn’t help her this time: not when the juror’s so succinct. She’s probably looking across and thinking ’she’s just like the bullshitter defence witnesses’.
Still waiting, though, for Tweety (one day, one day) to ask her about her husband’s role in Iraq. Because, per Kate, what your spouse does is totally fair game.
oh… and Toenails gave Ray Suarez (right wing stooge) a deep, heartfelt grin at the end while giving a suggestion for a future topic that “she was sure he would get to”… and then he looked deeply into her eyes with a knowing grin.
Really, truly, what has become of our country…
Suarez came to Santa Fe a few months ago to promote his book … you know, the one with the large cross on the front.
Ed*ard Teller @ 48
This reminds me. Is it Hudson Institute policy to have convicted felons working for them as senior advisors? If they do, maybe Scooter can do some personal research on conditions in the nation’s prisons.
I never thought i’d see & hear the day that Chris Matthews would be doing what he’s doing right now on his show.
It’s crystal clear that Tweety knows all the deets of the Libby case inside out and he’s not about to let a lying cow and moral coward like Kate O’Beirne get away with one single thing.
cc in nm @ 42
Yeah, but that’s sorta understandable, when you’re in that position. A bit Stockholm Syndrome, but it’s also along the lines that one death is a tragedy, but a million deaths is a statistic.
I thought that his exchange with Noron yesterday showed that the gloves had come off a little. He seemed to take Scoots’ ‘viewer complaints’ somewhat personally. But just fuck off, 60 Grit.
Juror #10 is the lawyer!!
Don’t know that I’d hire her.
Would somebody with expertise please explain (debunk) the talking point that “classified” is not the same as “covert” and therefore there could be no underlying crime?
O’Beirne just said it and Vicky said it on CNN yesterday (she said Fitz knows the difference and was careful to say “classified”).
Kate O’Beirne = Ole Sandpaper Snatch
…for those keeping score ; )
You all saw this juror thing at huffpo? Seems like a dumb idea to me, to write something like this while appeals are still pending, but whatever.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/…..ocs/libby/
cc in nm @ 42
I just read over at dKos (BarbinMD’s front page story) that Tweety has a second juror on tonight, juror #10, a woman, who says that she hopes Libby will be pardoned.
I wrote a diary at dKos a little while ago (not to be a diary whore) that speculated that the jury found the meat grinder quote incriminating because, rather than showing that Libby was being sacrificed for Rove, it showed that Libby was taking the fall for Cheney. And that the jury held Libby accountable for lying about what he had been “tasked” to do by Cheney, but thought that Cheney was the one who should really be held accountable.
Just a theory. Me, personally, I only feel sorry for Libby’s kids. At least, I would, if I wasn’t so sure that Libby will never spend a day in jail. Although he’s probably a bitch to live with right now, and that’s not good for little kids. It’s not their fault that Daddy is a lying sack of shit.
Terry Olson @ 62
I don’t know. Actually what I was wondering was whether Scooter has a “pearl harbor” file.
Everyone who has ever worked in government keeps on. It’s got stuff that bulletproofs you and shows why you are not responsible for the screw up in question (the normal sort is a sheild)
But some darker souls also keep the other kind of Pearl Harbor file, the kind that incriminates others. Roy Cohen once addressed my crim law class in Law School, he evidently had many files and bragged about it.
I actually refer to the latter kind of file as a J. Edgar file. For obvious reasons.
So, I’m wondering; are the docs that MArcy has proven to exist that were not used at trial, not used b/c Fitz is holding them back? or b/c Fitz still doesn’t have them? or some other reason?
Several points.
I think that Libby’s attorneys never intended to call Cheney. However, by threatening to call Cheney, that gave them grounds to dismiss for cause any juror with strong anti-Cheney opinions, as well as grounds to quiz all the jurors on their politics.
I also think that Libby will be assuming that a pardon will be coming, but that it will be delayed until after the November 2008 election. I think that Libby’s still loyal to Cheney, expects that loyalty to be rewarded, and that he has no motive to cooperate because if he’s a good boy he gets a pardon, and if he helps anyone go after Cheney he gets no pardon.
So Fitzgerald isn’t going to be able to use his usual MO; Libby will not flip. That means that the only way forward is impeachment hearings for Dick Cheney, with Libby as star witness. If Libby tries taking the Fifth, then he can be granted immunity.
Bucky O’Beirne can talk and whine all she likes, because what’s done is done.
Judy Miller, Scooter Libby martyrs. Spare me. There seems to be a pattern here
Over checking the LGF site. Nothing today about Libby. I guess they shot their wad yesterday.
Tweety actually asked Kate O’Bierne why the conservative line is that Libby should get off, when Clinton was held responsible for his perjury and all the republicans were hot to impeach and force him out of office for lying in a civil case. Kate actually said that because Libby never admitted to the perjury he should be let off, while Clinton admitted to his perjury and thus deserved the harsher treatment! Tweety called her on that and reminded her that Libby had been found guilty in a court of law, but naturally that doesn’t make a dent in O’Biernes’ rationalization. That’s their story and they’re sticking to it!
I don’t see Libby dealing either. 3-5 years with book offers is better than not breathing.
And sadly, Congress is about politics, not the truth. Not many PJFs in the halls of the senate/house. So I seriously doubt Leopold’s story has any traction. Unless it becomes politically advantageous for Congress to start asking questions. That would require a major grassroots effort.
Although I wouldn’t doubt if Darth resigns soon, for health reasons or to spend more time with his family. But not because of Libby’s verdict, but the mess created by privatizing services at Walter Reed and Building 18 and giving the gig to former Helliburton exec.
But then, I’m a cynic.
Dover Bitch @ 72
If you are covert, that fact would be classified. Therefore, unless the CIA declassified that information (like in the CIPA process) and they did not, Pat cannot say that Plame was covert or Pat would be unlawfully divulging classified information.
Ergo, all Pat can lawfully say is that her status is classified
goehring was a fall guy for hitler. yamamoto a fall guy for tojo and the emperor shit for brains.
fall guys get lined up at the wall just before their bosses. no pity. pure scum that obeyed orders knowing they were violating a lot of laws. Since we have a sneaking suspicion that Libby has broken several more, like his colleagues have admitted to, I suggest that our government should be taking applications for the firing squads used on persons committing treason. Actively attempting to commit, hide, conspire et al; is also treason.
politicians. As you can obviously see, they will do anything to subvert justice and have people killed on a whim. perhaps it is only smart people that believe the death penalty would be a deterrent to them when faced with a choice of committing a crime that their job application clearly notes that violating the terms is cause for execution. we may get a slightly better field of candidates in the future.
there can be, “no quarter”
Chris Matthews is now experiencing the kind of insane exasperation we’ve all be going through for the last 6 years.
AZ Matt @ 80
Don’t forget to wash your cache
Wasting energy hoping some pressure will be felt by Darth Cheney and the Naked Emperor is naive.
Brookings Institution’s Stephen Hess is right when he says today in an AP interview “
“Publicly he may be scarred, he’s a damaged commodity, but the question is whether he still has clout in the administration and the answer has to be yes,”
And, I would add Cheney nor Bush really care what 75% of America thinks of them. This makes them the strongest of lame ducks.
Hess continues;
“
The AP writer adds -
Unless we can find a good number of Democrats — fat chance for the party has always been content with crumbs thrown out by the more acerbic Republicans — in the House to make noise of impeachment — Lyndon Johnson’s Pig F*cker theory comes to mind — then these two will continue to thumb their noses at the American people ad nauseum for the next two years.
The article concludes that being ridiculed by the NY Times in some circles is a badge of honor.
Dover Bitch @ 72
Fitzgerald has been very precise about saying that her name was being actively protected by the CIA. But I think it’s a bullshit quibble by bullshit merchants. My gut sense is that Fitz didn’t prosecute the underlying crime primarily because he knew that he’d be smothered in graymail.
Methinks the ladies doth protect too much.
That Tweety is reading out the Burdick verdict on pardons is pretty telling.
Impeachment may be starting at the grassroots. This dingo’s kidney is proud to say that he grew up and went to high school in one of the towns mentioned.
SteveW @ 58
I think the deal that Fitzgerald could have offered would not have been that much different from what Libby might have expected at trial, which along with protecting Cheney might have made it less attractive. The number of counts that Libby was convicted on may influence where Walton falls out in interpreting the sentencing guidelines.
“Fascinating, Fascinating, Fascinating!” – Juror #10
looseheadprop @ 83
Thank you for this reply and for all the information you have provided throughout this case. This site is the best.
TWEETY about this trial: “Not since Alger Hiss”. !!!! Love it!
looseheadprop @ 83
And as Amb. Wilson said to Keith last night, the CIA won’t even say that Valerie Wilson was employed by them before 2003. It’s a real-life version of ‘the Secretary will deny all knowledge’.
http://www.rawstory.com/news/2….._0307.html
I think the sentencing guidelines would put Libby’s likely sentence in the 18 month range. There will be people who complain about a “slap on the wrist.” B.S. Let them leave their lives and families and do 18 months.
It’s irrelevant anyway. He’s gonna get pardoned.
I met a friend of Judge Walton’s last night. He says that Walton is known to hand down the toughest of sentences.
IANAL either, and therefore really surprised that Libby could deal at this point, but if what I heard last night is true – Libby might do well to deal or to turn.
But of course there’s always the pardon to consider.
You’re absolutely right though Hugh, this guy deserves no sympathy.
Elliott @ 86
Good Point!
Tom McQuire at JustOneMinute is babbling to himself. If go there and scroll down a ways he mentions FDL and some of the crew.
Ed*ard Teller @ 49
Where’s Dick Armitage?
TiredFed @
8
So, does this mean that if you get a pardon you must testify? This is not immunity we’re talking about, it’s the right not to incriminate yourself. I’m not sure that works here.
99 – on the board of Conoco with Duberstein. Maybe considering buying a vacation home with Sue Ellen and Griles?
Congratulations Hugh– great writing!
Conyers on Ed Schultz– says this thing goes all the way to the top.
He’s “disappointed” that Fitz did not go further.
Conyers vacillating about Congress taking things further, sez Fitz may say he’s got something going on and that they will have to wait.
Ed says that Fitz says he’s done and continues to pressure him about Congress picking up the investigation.
Conyers says he’ll tell him in 24hrs (waa?) if they are going to move forward and then changes the subject to voting reform.
Conyers reaffirms that he will call Ed tomorrow with f/u and says he wants to do more, but then says he has a full plate b/c of no oversight these past years.
(something may just be happening!)
As a convicted perjurer, unless he has some bullet proof corroborating evidence, Scooter does not have much left to bargain with.
Of course, it is possible, perhaps probable, that when he left the OVP he took some insurance with him.
Hate to be a naysayer, but I think it’s doubtful that Junior will refuse to pardon Libby. Remember Cheney’s note, the crossed-out “this pres” before “asked Scooter to stick his head in the meat grinder”? If Libby sings to Fitzgerald, it will be a song in which Bush will figure prominently in the lyrics. That’s why he’ll get the pardon.
inmymind’seye @ 97
The chatter this morning was that Judge Walton would consider that senior-level perjurers deserve senior-level sentences. Still, it’s fascinating to see the Beltway gang so deeply in the tank.
@103: it’s not as if being pardoned for a felony means you’re excluded from future Republican administrations. Though Scooter may have to wait a while.
v o x p o p g i r l @ 69
He’s read Anatomy of Deceit. It’s all there in black and white, and in words of not too many syllables.
looseheadprop @ 13
Didn’t Ashcroft give the White House time to destroy documents and the legal team time to vet materials turned over to the DOJ before starting an official inquiry? I would imagine many of these documents are long gone
There were backup documents.
Someone on the inside gave the location.
If you’ve been accepted a pardon, you’ve accepted the implication of guilt (that’s the Burdick reference a bit further up, IIRC). Thus you can’t incriminate yourself by talking: you’ve already been criminated.
I read about the juror speaking in favor of a pardon before coming here to FDL to see if the news had been raised here yet. (It had.) My view’s very simple: she didn’t engage in jury nullification and fulfilled her oath to find Libby guilty of crimes he committed beyond reasonable doubt. It’s legal to pardon crimes that were actually done – there’s no obligation to pardon only people you believe are innocent. The position is not inconsistent: guilty, but should be pardoned.
Granted, I vehemently disagree Libby should be pardoned but, at least she was a responsible juror and made a judgment based on the law.
I wonder if the “let’s *expletive* ‘em” statement by Harriet (mentioned upthread, but I forgot by whom…. sorry)
meant to get the OVP and WH admin?
Angie @ 102
Thanks for that. Will try and listen to Ed tomorrow. Why do politicians almost always balk at doing the right thing? I like Conyers, but isn’t this what he was waiting for when the Dems were out of power?
What if there IS another case?
none @ 74
I really liked it! And frankly, I think that his account of how careful they were will make it even harder for Libby to win an appeal. No hung jury, no deadlock, a willingness to really listen to the minority. Not good for Libby.
egregious @ 108
Ah ha!
I always wondered how all this info came out… guess I need to read Marcy’s book!
I remember at the very beginning of this investigation pondering how exactly it would be conducted and if there would be any incriminating info… suspected strongly that there would be none left by the time the pros got there. Thanks God for the backup file and the inside info…
Just to throw something else out there that might have been forgotten. The Administration has dredged up again its line that they can’t comment on an ongoing legal proceeding, even though as the case approaches the appellate level the reasons for any such reticence become increasingly tenuous. But here are the non-commenting comments of the White House on October 28, 2006 after Libby’s indictment was announced.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news…..028-7.html
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news…..028-4.html
v o x p o p g i r l @ 85
Matthews has been feeling this way for quite some time, but certainly not as long as many of us who were reading other sources of information before the invasion. Chris was imprisoned in the MSM himself before the invasion and believed much of the hype.
At the Libby trial I talked with Matthews for 1o minutes or so and I mentioned that I would flip my lid if I heard Hillary or any other rep or the MSM say “if only we knew then what he know now” horseshit. I let him know that he should have been listening to the Diane Rehms show and the BBc before the invasion. They had expert after expert( Scott Ritter, Madeline Albright, Zbigniew Brezinski and many more) telling us that the case being made for an invasion was hogwash.
Chris said that 65% of the American public supported the invasion before the war. They were watching the same programs that Chris was watching and getting his news from.
Ann in AZ @ 100
I remember reading, and pretty sure it was here at FDL, that a crooked mayor near the end of his term pardoned his cronies just before he left office, and that gave the prosecutor the testimonies he needed to nail the mayor.
I have tried to find the reference to this using the google but haven’t been successful so far; so if any one knows the details, please help me out.
What I don’t understand is that if Libby is pardoned and then told to testify in the civil suit, what is to keep him from lying on the stand? He’s already been tried and convicted for lying and is a free man. Wouldn’t he just feel free to do some more lying?
pseudonymous in nc @
88
Is Chris Matthews referring to the Burdick Supreme Court decision that was handed down in 1915?
Knut Wicksell @ 106
Did Matthews really read Anatomy of Deceit??
Wow~
Did he mention it on his show?
Hugh @ 116
I remember those statements well and have thought of them often… I finally concluded what they were really saying was:
“Scooter, don’t take us out and we’ll pardon you.”
Ann in AZ @ 100
If Libby is pardoned, and is called to congress to testify, he will not be able to plead the 5th since you cannot be tried for a crime twice. Which is why I think it is not a good idea to get too wrapped up in whether Libby gets pardoned or not, since ultimately he is not the point. As LHP put it, Fitz punted the ball to Conyers. The sooner Libby is pardoned, the sooner his ass will be hauled to capital hill where he will be asked questions w/out the protection of the rules of evidence.
pseudonymous in nc @ 94
You know, I was thinking about the Mission Impossible tag line when he said that! We think alike.
Ha! Fucker can’t even pronounce the word “prevarication”!
What a dumbass!
v o x p o p g i r l @ 121
Matthews does know about Marcy’s book.
Ann in AZ @ 100
It depends on what the pardon is for. If it is a backwards looking pardon limited to the conviction, you’re right.
If it a forwards looking pardon for currently uncharged crimes (like the kind Casper Weinberger got) it would have virtually the same effect as immunity
Hugh @ 90
IAAL (I am a lawyer)Cooperation and acknowledgement of guilt count “big time” under the sentencing guidelines, so Scooter would clearly have been better and may not have faced any jail time had he copped a plea and squealed on Shooter before the trial. Post-conviction, he still could, through cooperation and belated acknowledgement of guilt, get a better bargain than the sentence Walton will impose; however, I would assume some jail time for such a deal. I expect an appeal denial by June of next year, so Scooter will be looking at slammer time before the pardon comes down on November 5, 2008. I think the real focus now should be on a Congressional investigation, impeachment, and conviction of Shooter. Pelosi says impeachment is off the table, but I think that applies to the Chimp. Impeaching and convicting Cheney would have a salutory effect on Bush. To paraphrase Voltaire, “In this country we find it pays to convict an admiral from time to time to encourage the others.”
J Bourque @ 110
I think that’s an important principle to preserve in other areas, such as the ‘ticking nuke’ scenario banded about by pro-torture types. Torture’s a crime, but in extreme cases, it may be pardonable.
For Republicans, politics sometimes involves crime, and it’s always pardonable.
egregious @ 108
didn’t that further irritate Fitzgerald?
cathy @ 119
He would face more charges if he lies again under oath.
thanx egregious & angie~
cool.
Marcy and Jane told me.
pol @ 107
Gone as in destoryed? or gone as in safe in ana undisclosed location?
I think Jane gave Tweety a copy…iirc
Ann in AZ @ 100
If he gets a pardon, then he cannot plead the Fifth Amendment wrt testimony on that issue b/c he cannot be tried for it again. If he refuses to testify it is contempt of court and into the slammer like JudyJudyJudy until he decides to talk. But I think he’s clam, personally. He’s a good soldier.
Kathleen @ 117
Interesting convo w/Tweety…
Also, fyi, Bob Simon on 60 Minutes had an excellent teardown of all of the admin’s arguments for war in January 2003 (or at least early 2003 before the invasion)… he destroyed the aluminum tubes arguement, the Al Qaeda connection and the Niger uranium buy… it was excellent. (I believe it was on before the SOTU, so I had to turn it off when the idiot was spewing his lies.)
Also, Frontline did a great, detalied expose debunking the lies that Bush was spreading… it ran shortly after the 60 minutes piece.
The info was out there… not making the big headlines, but it was there.
ACK!!
All Things Considered is being the fluffer for a Libby pardon.
*hurl!*
TRex @ 138
fluff on, baby. fluff on.
Stephen Parrish, CPA @ 120
Yep. He’d printed it out, and read bits from this graf:
He talked about how Ford carried that verdict in his pocket, while 60 Grit said Cap Weinberger never considered his pardon an acceptance of guilt.
I had to switch off NPR this morning or I would have screamed myself hoarse at Byron York before I got to work. Did you know that because someone, somewhere was charged with a crime in Whitewater (never mind that it was well before Clinton’s testimony), that means that the Clinton “perjury” wasn’t a “no underlying crime” situation like the Libby case? Aaaargh!
HotFlash @ 135
Possibly but he still doesn’t strike me as a Frank Pentangeli (Warning: Godfather II reference).
TRex @ 138
It’s the Cocktail Party caucus. There were a few key members on Hardball. Ultimately, there are two parties — Us and Them — and to the DC press pack, Scooter is ‘One of Us’.
v o x p o p g i r l @ 139
Okay, they’re presenting an opposing viewpoint now, but now as persuasively.
Sigh.
I sit through this every day. You have to bear with my frustration sometimes.
Elliott at 118 says:
I do wish one of the lawyer types would weigh in on this point. More importantly though, I now have a completely different question for Christy or Jane or Marcy or anyone who can actually answer it accurately. I just watched Kate O’Bearne (sp?) on Hardball say that Valerie Plame volunteered her husband for a trip to Niger the day before the VP asked the question about the yellowcake. Can anyone give me chapter and verse to prove that she is absolutely wrong? Of course, when she said this to Chris on national TV, and was insistent about it, he more or less relented as if she knew better than he did. I don’t think it makes any sense, but it should not go unaddressed or unanswered.
TRex
how’s your back! your back! your baaccckk!?
Redshift @ 140
So much of the conservative pushback on the Libby conviction can be summed up with: IOKIYAR.
oldtree @
55
That’s Howie Mandel, not Ahmed Zappa. Breathe out….
Redshift @ 141
Cor, Byron York?! Goddamn. Talk about a man completely devoid of shame. They just keep coming like people on angel dust. No matter how many times you shoot them, they won’t go down.
Chris Matthews: And a war of aggression by the way is a war crime.
Elliott @ 146
Slowly getting better.
I made this mistake of trying to move some furniture on Saturday and re-injured it. So, you know, steady on.
I don’t know if anyone has mentioned this but I heard this morning on AAR that Libby is only out on bail until June when he is sentenced. Bush could be forced to pardon Libby before the administration would like to.
Marcy on Democracy Now – Now
“no underlying crime” BS…
Would somebody shout that down??
Falls under the category, “If you repeat a lie often enough, ….” Goebel-speak I believe?
That is the corporate media mantra. (Even PBS and NPR qualify as corporate media these days…)
Eureka Springs, AR @ 153
Linky to listen live?
kathleen @ 117
Guess what, Tweety? You’re a professional newsman, and that means your job is to dig up and understand all that information that “the public” doesn’t have time or skills to get because it’s not what we’re paid to do. Feh.
With the Dems having won and the surge surviving, the only saving Libby is doing now is of Cheney’s face and a $weet job after Bush goes home to Crawford. Yes, he may be a convicted felon and would normally be subject to disbarment, but with the pardon will come one last lean-on to reinstate his license in, say, a year or so. Loyalty and silence will probably add another 2m to his asking salary.
Let’s face it, if Libby really was going to talk, he’d wait and do it in a six-figure book deal. If he really does kiss and tell, I might even read it.
oh and Murray Waas is with Marcy. Cool!
TRex @ 151
sorry to hear that you reinjured it. :(
egregious – It’s on the tele. but check
democracynow.org
linky
http://www.democracynow.org/ar…..07/1436232
pseudonymous in nc @ 140
I recognize those symptoms, and I think we have a new-minted Plameologist here.
Hugh!
Late in here, just back from work…
But, this is a great post. Thanks for taking on the “fall guy” meme, esp.
I’m glad that you got the FDL message “we want more of Hugh!”
TRex @ 149
There were others who were giving it to him pretty good, so it wasn’t all bad, but he was so awful and shameless I couldn’t stand even a minute of it.
Murray Waas: If everybody can lie, we might as well not have a legal system.
oh, ha — the break music on Democracy NOW! is “Tell Me Lies” by Fleetwood Mac.
Yes, thank Hugh!
Now that we have Vermont approving and calling for them, what do we have to do to get them on a ballot in 49 more states???
Hugh @ 142
I’m pretty sure he won’t rat. I expect that the admin has both a carrot and a whip w/Scooteer’s name on them, I think that is the usual MO. Money or whatever on the one hand and the J Edgar file (h/t lhp) on the other.
Valley Girl @ 163
we like Hugh, we really really like Hugh!
Woodhall Hollow @ 123
If you commit a crime, get convicted, then get pardoned, but subsequently go out and commit that same crime again in a different venue, I believe you can be retried…unless your pardon was for forward looking pardon for currently uncharged crimes, which I don’t think the Prez will give him unless he wants him to squeal like a pig. Please tell me I’m right on this…LHP!!! And thanks for your clarification at #127.
TRex @ 138
Just our of curiosity, what is your range?
I have to admit I am skeptical of the notion that a pardon of Libby will somewhat force him to spill the beans on Cheney. A more likely scenario would be for Libby to not go beyond what has already come out in court and make use of that bad memory of his for everything else.
Excellent post and very logical argument, Hugh, though I think another conclusion is also possible as you get to the end. Two points give me pause:
1. Fitz had already ruled out going after Rove, so Libby’s defense trying to blame Rove was not necessarily putting Rove at greater risk. In the trial, the defense could go as far as they wanted to implicate Rove, but Fitz’ team would have been trying to undermine that, because their target was Libby — for this trial. They didn’t try Libby to convict Rove. I think the WH and Rove would have understood this logic and were probably aware of the possible Rove play by Libby’s defense. They would not have been surprised. But Rove was already home free, so his putting up with this was the response to the Cheney note about not letting Scooter take the fall for someone else’s incompetence.
2. We also need to account for all of the neocon/Cheney sympathizers coming out with editorials/comments in favor of a quick pardon. Just kneejerk reactions from wingnuttia? I don’t think so. In addition to those I mentioned this morning, there was also a half page op-ed in the WSJ. These are the kinds of people that the WH listens to, just as they did on Iraq. So I’m not sure we can write off the all of these efforts as somehow coincidental or uncoordinated or unplanned. Instead, this suggest that a powerful group with influence at the WH have decided that it’s necessary to lay the political groundwork for a pardon, and can’ believe they would have done this without checking with the President’s men. How does this play out? Stay tuned.
Democracy Now here
From today’s Froomkin
pseudonymous in nc @
140
The paragraph you quoted was one that I posted some threads ago after I read that decision.
Ann in AZ @ 170
Yes, if Libby lied again, he could be tried on new charges, but one would think that he would not want to go down that road again, since by the time he got convicted of the 2nd set of charges Bush would be long out of office.
The main point is that if Libby was pardoned, be would not be able to plead the 5th (as he would now if Conyers were to call him) as he has the right not to incriminate himself. If he were pardoned and refused to testify, he could be sent to jail for contempt of congress.
I really wish the Dems would get tough on this. They could start by calling Armitage, Rove and Ari up there. It would put the Bush admin in a real pickle politically. If they took the 5th (as is their right) they would make it look like the Admin is hiding something, and if they testified they better do so truthfully. Remember, Congress could also subpoena evidence (in a secret session) that Fitz is holding and none of these guys really knows what Fitz knows and so lying would be a very dangerous road to take.
Judge Walton can break the carefully laid out timelines by Team Libbey (retrial motion this summer, appeal in 08 summer and stretch it to Dec08/Jan09 for pardon) by ordering Libbey to start the prison term this summer, while appeals are pending, etc. That would force Bush/Cheney to consider pardon this year, which will trigger some congressional investigations, etc.
Now the baton has been passed from Fitz to Walton.
No Pardon!!!!!
He lied because this administration has lied continually for the past 6 years and has NEVER been held accountable.
This is the party that continually reminds this country that they are the Christian God fearing people while the Democrats are the liberal Godless ones who are ruining this country by the way they live and their lack of morals.
Yet, scadal after scandal has plagued this administration and this party in the last 6 years.
Scooter libby lied because he thought HE COULD and that it would be taken care of just like everything else in this administration is.
The president doesn’t like a law legally voted on by Congress? He signs a signing statement.
He lies about why we are at war with Iraq.
I don’t feel sorry for Scooter Libby. I feel sorry for his family. Scooter Libby is a lawyer. He lied to the FBI and he lied to a Grand Jury.
What saddens me is that he worked in a climate where the truth meant so little.
new thread
Why is the sentencing in June?
Isn’t that a long time?
ecoast @ 178
and I hope he runs with it,
wouldn’t surprise me if he did.
Scarecrow #172,
I think there are fault lines between the President’s office and the Vice President’s. This was seen back at the White House’s defense (was it Scott McClellan’s?) of Rove but conspicuously not Scooter. I have problems with Team Libby’s threat to stick it to Rove as being seen as benign or business as usual by Rove or the White House.
The conservative defense of Libby is problematic since many of these have criticized Bush for his execution of his Iraq policies. So I don’t know how much weight they would carry. As Bush approaches the end of his second term, what pressure can conservatives or anyone else put on him? If the escalation in the face of the Iraq Study Group recommendations and the will of the American people is any guide, the answer is not much.
Woodhall Hollow at #177 says:
So you don’t think Libby would just pull the old “I can’t remember a thing!” act, repeating that he has a very bad memory. The “That’s my story and I’m stickin’ to it!” routine is old hat for him by now.
I, too, would like to see some signs of life from the Dems, though. Even if the Administration claims Executive privilege on Fitz’s Grand Jury materials, a lot of people would really like to know where those forged Niger yellowcake documents came from, for instance. Could it be that Cheney and Libby know? Do the rest of the neocons have a clue where they came from? They have a whole lot to do and so little time to do it. Or do they think they don’t have to prove themselves before the next election?
I’d say the best defense is a good offense.
The President and VP and their respective staffs are now, without real question, on the record as being involved in the covertly planting cherrypicked disinformation into the US media.
Under the National Security Act of 1947, that’s not really allowed.
If the President wants to engage in covert actions (planting stories, a la Armstrong Williams) without acknowledging the WH sourcing of that story, here’s what the existing law provides.
Without acknowledging the role of the Government, the President authorizes planting of cherrypicked classified information in the US media to influence the political process. Only Libby, the VP and President know what is taking place. [I keep thinking I remember that Libby also sold Miller on the story that the full doc was even more damning than what he released to her - would be nice to know if that was also ‘authorized’]
So you have the President, VP and Libby involved in a plan to covertly plant cherrypicked classified intel into the domestic media for political pushback purposes, and all without identifying the connection of the WH or OVP.
Next you have an attempt to claim that taking classified intel and having a secret trinity hand off cherrypicks from that classified intel to a reporter – with the reporter then having full control over whether she would print it, edit it, print parts and not other parts, strip from or add to context and herself make the personal decision of how much of that info, and in what context, the American public would receive —- that this is somehow a “declassification.”
That could be right if it weren’t wrong.
What was done with Miller could, possibly, conceivably, be a “dissemination” but even there, it would be an illegal on without a confidentiality agreement.
The President can do many things and has lots of discretion. One thing he does not have the discretion to accomplish is a delegation of declassification authority for the highest levels of classified material to: Judy Miller.
Whatever the questions and issues on whether Cheney has declassification authority, Miller does not. So the President could declassify – he could have Cheney declassify – he could engage in an authorized dissemination to Miller directly or via Cheney or via Libby. But he can not say: Here’s classified info – Scooter, give it to Judy Miller and I guess if she publishes it, that’s kind of like it being declassified.
If she doesn’t – what? It’s “secret DEclassification?” Not that they haven’t done secret stuff to death (my favorite still being that Padilla’s own words were too secret for Padilla to hear)
I think Congress should investigate this – and it is a nice springboard to investigation of the other abuses relating to Plame and hopefully to bringing back Indep Counsel authority and using it.
angie @ 135
You’ve heard that too?
I never can get edit to work e and f were the only things that should have been in the blockquote (f stops with the bold).
Ann in AZ @ 184
You hit on the most important thing, which is that congress could use the conviction of libby, and the question asked by the jurors (where is everyone else?) to begin a deeper investigation, and go into the political lies that Fitz couldn’t try.
Yes, a vicious White House operative is a “patsy”. We should pity the poor soul. After all, the lies and intrigues he willingly took part in only resulted in about half a million deaths. Poor, poor Scooter.
He is not a “fall guy”. He did not volunteer to take the rap. Others told lies too, no doubt, and still are. He’s just the only one Fitz had enough evidence on to convict.
TRex @ 138
Did you hear Daniel Schorr?
Marie Roget @ 20
It is possible. The conviction of Libby gives Madame Speaker the political cover she would need to combat the RWNM. The wurlitzer will be in full spin mode if Congress investigates.
gotta give Hugh a shout-out for front-pagedness!
Heard Daniel Schorr inn the car driving home. Old Man, time to retire, you are toothless. You offer no light, waste airtime. (And maybe you never offered light. . . )
I am afraid his single claim to fame is making Nixon’s enemies list. He has otherwise been as triangulating as any candidate we can mention.
My local station is a paragon of “balance” and hence has received no recent support from me.
Now I will tell them WHY. NPR has sold out, jumped the shark, no longer can call itself independent.
Hypatia @ 193
Something happened to Daniel Schorr over the past 4-5 years. It is hard to believe that he is the same person, it is almost as if someone else is writing his peices for him.
Libby looked stunned, leaving the courtroom just after the verdict.
None of his usual smiley poses.
He has to be considering the odds of actually getting a pardon from a presidency that’s falling apart day by day.
Cheney is himself rapidly becoming a scapegoat.
Any day now Cheney could tip over.
With Cheney out of the picture will Bush be likely to honor Libby’s loyalty to Cheney?
Will the Bush presidency even last until 2008?
If you were Libby, would you be counting on a pardon?
I think Libby will make a deal.
.
Libby’s fate has always rested with Dick Cheney. It doesn’t matter what Shrub thinks. If Dick has a thrombosis or stroke, Libby’s dessert for cellmate Bubba. If he retains his Svengali-like hold over Shrub, Libby gets his pardon. But not until Christmas or New Year’s 2008.
The only one who could interfere with that is Karl Rove. For there to be a conflict, Rove and Cheney would have to vehemently disagree over the direction for the party post-2008. Or for there to be an even greater controversy that would require letting Libby take his lumps. Unhappily for Libby, candidates for that mount daily. Iraq, Walter Reed, the US Attorney firings, etc.
Libby’s pardon is about Cheney retaining his extensive network. Cheney has every reason to make a hard sell for the pardon to ensure that network survives. Apart from retaining power, Cheney needs it to avoid trailing liability. He has taken no prisoners and knows that potential disaster lurks on every hard drive in Washington.
Unswerving loyalty and support for his people – Rumsfeld still maintains an office and govt-paid staff just down the road from the Pentagon – is all that stands between Cheney and either continuing power and wealth, or disaster.
[Mod Note; FWIW, we like to stay away from the subject of the potential activities of potential cellmates.]
dalloway @ 104
I think that Cheney was referring to himself when he wrote “this pres.” Then he crossed it out when he remembered that Scotty and other White House staffers would see Cheney referring to himself as “this pres” rather than “His Dread Lord.”
Scooter Libby isn’t merely the “fall guy” for Cheney, Rove and Bush; Libby is also one of the main players in this criminal syndicate that launched the bogus war in Iraq. He’s not just protecting his co-conspirators. He’s also protecting himself from further culpability in the most outrageous crime spree in American history.
Dover Bitch @
72
“Classified” incorporates “covert”. All “covert” agents have classified identities. Thus revealing those identities is a crime if willfully done. The IAPA law protects “covert agents” and sources if they have SERVED (they need not be stationed or live) overseas within five years of exposure. But the CIA may decide that because a person’s work is critical to ongoing covert activities or that revealing their identity may pose risks to their contacts their identity must remain classified.
The IAPA is rarely used, and the current case actually demonstrates the flaws in its composition. If it is intended to protect covert agents from exposure it really makes it difficult…as it seems that the leaker must actually know that the agent is being exposed, that they served overseas within the last five years, and that the exposure was with the intent to harm the US and benefit their enemies.
So if a government official does it for other motives (to get political leverage, to get personal revenge, or perhaps even for money) then the law may not apply. If the leaker gave a name off a classified document…and it wasn’t specified when the agent served abroad or if they were ever “covert” within the last five years…the “knowledge” criteria may not hold.
Thus this specific law is so poorly written that it virtually allows leakers carte blanche
with leaking scores of names with the “I didn’t know” or “I had noble intentions” defense.
That’s why Fitz avoided using that law and constantly referred to Plame’s Classified status instead. The CIA doesn’t want to threaten ongoing overseas operations by specifying when and where Plame served. But the fact that they have allowed discussion of her last station assignment in Belgium to be revealed…and that fell just outside the 5 year “boundary”~ and yet they will not discuss anything more recent~ might indicate that she has served abroad within 5 years of the Novak “outing”. They still keep a tight lid on her activities and this must mean that her more recent tasks were quite important to many ongoing covert activities.
Her neighbors said she travelled abroad “frequently” on business.
Unclassified workers at the CIA actually have no problems listing “CIA” on their campaign contributions forms. It would only be those working with covers that required a cover organization.
looseheadprop @
83
Unclassified CIA employees can reveal that they work for the CIA.
For example…from the same FEC records that Plame listed Brewster Jennings & Associates we see that there are many CIA employees that have no issues with stating their employment with the Agency.
http://herndon1.sdrdc.com/cgi-…..3020372053
http://herndon1.sdrdc.com/cgi-…..4020020076
http://herndon1.sdrdc.com/cgi-…..3020191349
One can find lots of CIA employees, analysts, directors, and other non-covert employees that state the CIA is their employer. They don’t put down a cover firm.
BUT PLAME HAD A COVER…AND LISTED IT ON HER FEC FORMS. SHE WAS COVERT.
pseudonymous in nc @
88
If Plame wasn’t in a highly classified position then Toensing or members of the MSM could simply ask…what was Valerie Plame’s job at the CIA…and did she travel abroad on CIA business within 5 years of Novacula’s “exposure”…and they would be told what her job was and a definitive NO!
As pointed out by Libby in his testimony before the GJ…he knows lots of CIA employees that don’t have their identities classified. That fact seems to escape Toensing and her fellow myrmidons – they should tell us precisely what Plame did in the CIA and show us the letter they received from the CIA stating such!
Stephen Parrish, CPA @
95
Cassidy is now a Senior staff-person to Top Tubthumplican, John Boehner!
A bit more on how Cassidy gets paid for having multiple jobs at the same time- talk about double-, triple-, and quadrupl-billing!
http://www.legistorm.com/perso…..13436.html
Dr Zen @
189
Not sure if he didn’t “willingly” volunteer. After all Cheny wrote to Scotty that “not going to protect one aide while sacrificing the guy that
the Pres.was asked to put his neck in the meatgrinder…”HotFlash @ 99
can’t forget Doug Feith either.