Maybe Libby Can Try An Insanity Defense

Here is the nine page press release which summarizes the twenty-two page indictment of Lewis Libby.

Some obvious puzzles remain:

Who was Novak's source?

Was national security harmed by the leak of Ms. Plame's identity?

Will there be other charges against other officials?

As to the indictment:

The charges against Libby with respect to Russert are gruesome - if Russert is to be believed (and Fitzgerald believed him), Libby simply invented a conversation in which Russert passed to Libby info about Wilson's wife.  I can't imagine what Libby could have been thinking, and I wish I had been a bit more trusting of Tim's bizarre denial.

The discrepancy between Libby and Cooper is not cavernous, but it is not good.

The Judy Miller story seems to be strangely incomplete - the June 23 conversation, which came as a late disclosure, is not mentioned here.

Finally, Libby's general story - he learned about Plame from reporters - was daft.  Libby had multiple conversations with government officials (State, CIA, the VP, Ari Fleischer) involving Plame.  Did he think they would *all* forget when they talked to investigators?  If I weren't reading his testimony, I would not believe he had gone down this road.

A small part of Libby's problem, I'll bet, is that his misleading testimony, especially about Russert, forced Fitzgerald to waste a lot of time pursuing subpoenas against reporters.

I will also guess that Rove was caught in Libby's tailwind - Libby's story was so phony that problems with Rove's story probably took on a more sinister tone than if they had ocurred in isolation.

Two asides:

However embarrassing it might be, the NY Times may be forced to confront the fact that Nick Kristof is an important part of this story, since Fitzgerald essentially dates the beginning of this story to Kristof's May 6 column.  The column was riddled with inaccuracies which Mr. Wilson has since disavowed - let's see if the Times tackles this.

And, per the summary (p. 5), it will be a bit harder for Joe Wilson and his many defenders to sustain the notion that his wife was not involved with selecting him for this trip:

...on or about June 11, 2003, Libby was informed by a senior officer of the CIA that Wilson’s wife was employed by the CIA and was believed to be responsible for sending Wilson on the trip.

IIRC, it appears that Libby told Ari Fleischer about Ms. Plame on July 7, which is the day that phone logs show Novak calling Ari.  Surely that adds to the possibilty that Ari was Novak's first source.

MORE:  A chance to help, or hurt Libby's case - from the indictment:

On or about July 10, 2003, LIBBY spoke to NBC Washington Bureau Chief Tim
Russert to complain about press coverage of LIBBY by an MSNBC reporter. LIBBY did not discuss Wilson’s wife with Russert.

A Lexis-Nexis maven might be able to deduce the show that prompted  Libby's irate call.  I *think* Russert said it was a "cable" news show when explaining his role to Brian Williams, which would match with the "MSNBC" in the indictment.

The point?  Well, let's see what we find.  But if Libby called Russert to complain because he was panned for his role in the Wilson saga, it may be a bit more plausible that he and Russert discussed the Wilson trip.  And that might be relevant in a he said/he said courtroom showdown.

Of course, if he was panned for his bad taste in cowboy hats, that could be a killer.

[UPDATE:  Michael Crowley of The Plank at TNR is way ahead of me, and nominates this Chris Matthews rant about Libby, Wilson, and Niger from July 8.  *If* this is right, then Libby and Russert surely discussed Joe Wilson, and the dispute is over whether Wilson's wife was also mentioned.  Well, it is a small breeze blowing Libby's way.  As to Russert, let's guess that he has been asked by the prosecutor not to tip his testimony by addressing this in public.  Is he a newsman, or a lawman, and what about our right to know?]

Look, *if* Libby is not insane (likely, actually) and *if* he turned down a plea deal (do we know that?), he must think he can defend this case.  But how?

Comments

[Sue]

Fitzgerald just said that if everyone had told the truth in 2004, no charges would have been filed. That means, no leaking of a covert operative?

[politicaobscura]

Don't feel bad about not believing Russert. His written statement to the press was (perhaps) unclear on purpose. I suppose Fitz said to Russert, "you can deny, but don't deny to strongly"... that probably led Libby to believe that perhaps there was some wiggle room.

All in all, pretty small potatoes for a two year investigation.... nothing of which has anything to do with the supposed crime...

[Geek, Esq.]

The questions remain because of Libby's egregiously criminal behavior. "Like throwing sand in the umpire's eyes" indeed.

Reading between the lines, it's all about intent at this point. And that means getting people to turn on one another.

[Anarchus]

So, is Libby "stuck on stupid", and/or did Libby feel so guilty over disclosing classified information (Plame-Wilson's identity was not common knowledge outside the intelligence community) that he lied badly to cover it up?

[Dwilkers]

Just incredible.

Libby's behavior I mean. I have to assume that Fitz not only believes it is true that Libby lied and obstructed, but that he believes he can prove it. It is beyond belief that in this political environment a high powered lawyer like Libby would - knowing there was a special prosecutor and a grand jury investigation - lie, deflect, obfuscate and cover up as Fitz is charging.

Dumb. Dumb, dumb, dumb. Its just astonishing that he would put himself in this position.

[Jim E.]

So when Rove said he was going to have a great day and great weekend, was he signaling how much he hates Libby?

Maybe Libby can wear that old XFL jersey:
"He Hate Me"

[boris]

Dumb. Dumb, dumb, dumb. Its just astonishing that he would put himself in this position.

So far it's just the BDS side of the story. There is the type of authority that lacks respect for self defense. This reeks of it.

[Brad DeLong]

It is amazing. Either Scotter Libby is the Stupidest Man Alive(TM)--blowing way past all other contestants--or I simply don't understand what's going on.

And I *still* don't understand Cheney's casual lying in the summer-fall of 2003--his claims to be ignorant of Wilson. What did he gain by that? What was the purpose of that?

[Joshua Chamberlain]

I guess you believe Russert and Cooper, but it all hinges on their testimony. The perjury isn't whether Libby lied to them It's whether, when he described his state of mind in 2003 to the grand jury in 2004, he was accurate. You need evidence of both (i) him learning of Plame's identity and (ii) him telling Russert and Cooper who she was, to make that case. Good luck.

[Sue]

Nothing about erasing a file.

[Just Passing Through]

This brings the old memories of the incredible hubris of the Watergate defendents to mind to some extent. And I stress only to some extent. Their hubris came from the initial self-delusion that they were untouchable.

There's more than that in this one. That Libby would maintain his story about Russert for as long as he did and as deep as it must have been getting simply makes no sense.

[clarice]

Exactly, Joshua--Can you imagine the reporter's testimony on cross? LOL

[Sue]

Raw Story is saying Rove is still being investigated on the forgery of the Niger documents.

[Fresh Air]

Anyone dumb enough to lie to a grand jury shouldn't be allowed near the White House. This is truly pathetic: The man fabricated an entire converation with Tim Russert? What is this guy, schizophrenic or something?

Good riddance. Cheney will be better off without him.

Doesn't everyone understand by now that it isn't the crime; it's the cover-up? Do we have to go through the list?

[Jeff Hauser]

Kudos to Tom for pegging this. I think it's over.

Anyone who thinks Libby will avoid prison time is fooling themselves; Fitzgerald's case needs only see one of many allegations vindicated to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt on most or all counts.

I also think we'll never know much that would be interesting about this case, due to Fitzgerald's integrity. The juxtaposition of Fitzgerald to Starr is, to me, the most striking part of today.

[clarice]

http://americanthinker.com/comments.php?comments_id=3511

[Hutch]

Take a look at paragraph 22 of the indictment. I wonder what that means? I think the content of those discussions must be of interest to Fitz and team. If there are others shoes to drop, it will be because Scooter had help in being stupid.

[mcg]

I am and remain a right-wing nutjob whose only problem with Bush is that he's not conservative enough. But I have to say that despite my pains over Libby's apparent (albeit not presumed) guilt, I was very impressed with Fitzgerald today---with one small exception. Given how seriously he takes the secrecy of the process, and the great lengths he went to in the press conference to stress the law surrounding that secrecy, why didn't he even *mention* the leaks that plagued this whole process of late? Again, it's a small nitpick but a real one.

[Sue]

I don't know who all of the people are by their titles.

[Fresh Air]

Jeff Hauser--

I don't see the contrast with Starr at all. Starr merely proved, using the voluminous evidence available to him, that Bill Clinton lied under oath.

Here, Fitzgerald alleges (persuasively, IMO) that Libby too lied under oath. The difference is in (a) the target (you better make damn sure you have the goods if it's the president of the United States); and (b) a relatively skimpier set of evidence (though still adequate to the task).

Different assignments.

[nittypig]

Russert's testimony is by far the most damning and the most important. Will we get more coverage on Russert and that conversation from the media? Will he be making the rounds on Sunday morning :)

[ordi]

Interesting that Joe Wilson has his lawyer speaking for him now. WHY NOW? HMMMMM

[Lilly]

I'd be curious to know how many hours of sleep did Mr. Libby average in the 6-8 months prior to May/June 2003. The lead up to the war must have been intense for the working on preparing the nation for war. War was declared in March, Bahgdad fell in April. Fatigue and frayed nerves must have played an enormous role in any error of judgements and/or misrecollection of conversations and when they occurred.

[politicaobscura]

Brad, you "still don't understand" because you haven't understood what Cheney said.

Cheney said this: "He doesn't know Joe Wilson" (which is true).

And he said, "I don't know who sent him" (which is also true).

I guess I don't understand why people don't understand what Cheney said.

[KHaltom]

Now it is criminal to lie to reporters.

[Sue]

No, it is criminal to lie to prosecutors. ;) Had he told the truth, according to Mr. Fitzgerald, in 2004, it would have been over then with no charges filed. Which means they didn't out a covert agent.

[clarice]

But NOT for reporters to lie to us.LOL

[Syl]

mcg

Fitz did speak about the leaks. He was asked about it. He said it's illegal for him or the investigators to leak (which they have not), not illegal for witnesses.

[ordi]

Fitz also said something about whether you are anti-war or for the war that his investigation is not going to comfirm your point of view one way or the other. He said his investigation is NOT about the war.

Anyone have a transcript yet?

[Syl]

I gotta say...

re Fitz?

I'm impressed.

[Appalled Moderate]

clarice:

Do you believe libby lied to the grand jury and to FBI investigators? If not, what do you base your opinion on?

[Kyda Sylvester]

Fitzgerald was impressive and Scooter screwed the pooch. Big time.

What is it about being inside the Beltway that turns reasonably smart and honest people into fools and knaves? The water? The rarified air? Or is it just the age-old story about power and corruption? Whatever, it's pitiful.

[khaltom]

Reporters can leak anything they want and get away with it. Scooter was dumb to think he could smoke out some unknown facts re Wilson from the Washington press corps by talking to them. When they figured out what he was doing, they turned on him. Would any sane White House offcial EVER talk to Russert again?

[topsecretk9]

Ordi--

yeah, what up? Wilson is like a moth to a light when a camera is around...I thought he would be standing on the steps of congress with Chuck Schumer?

[topsecretk9]

What is it about being inside the Beltway that turns reasonably smart and honest people into fools and knaves?

the idiots with press passes

[ordi]

With Joe Wilson suddenly standing behind his lawyer it will be interesting to see if he makes the rounds on the cable news networks and the sunday shows.

[Sue]

I don't know criminal law, but I know civil law. The Wilson's are preparing their damages. See the following...

Career Derailed

[Kathie]

Scooter couldn't tell the truth because he would have then been charged with outing a CIA agent. Fitz didn't charge that because he couldn't get to it because Scooter continued to lie.

[Syl]

I think the only thing that could have saved Libby was to testify truthfully (obviously) and that back in 2003 the only thing he ever said to reporters was 'I heard that too'. And then he would be at the mercy of the reporters' testimony. Some mercy. But it wouldn't have depended on when he first heard about wilson's wife and from whom.

But if I were a reporter and he'd said to me 'I heard that too' I would dig for more info by asking him what else he'd heard. And push and push. He would have added a detail or too. Then all was lost.

I think he was a goner, period.

Too bad it had to be so damning this way by testifying he hadn't heard that before. One conversation with someone else in the administration could be forgotten...but four of them?

[Rick Ballard]

Syl,

I was impressed too. Not as forthright as Shippers but nothing like the weasel Walsh. I'm not impressed with his PR skills at all but he wasn't hired as a flack.

We'll see how he does in the real big leagues. I sincerely hope this goes to trial. I just heard Bush express his thanks for Libby's work. I do believe that I'd go to trial with a pardon in my pocket.

Free Scooter!!!!!

[topsecretk9]

Sue

Valerie was by definition the ultimate private person. She didn't seek any publicity or any acclaim or any thanks for her work.

Just how does the Vanity Fair article play into all of this?

[Sue]

Top,

That would be the regret Joe feels. His lawyer has told him it will mitigate his damage claim. :)

[windansea]

Scooter couldn't tell the truth because he would have then been charged with outing a CIA agent. Fitz didn't charge that because he couldn't get to it because Scooter continued to lie.

nope..Fitz said in press conf that if everyone had told the truth there would have been no charges

[Sue]

Mark Levin on Fitzgerald's press conference:

What I resent about this press conference is the effort by Fitzgerald to paint Lewis Libby as outing a cover CIA operative, jeopardize national security, and harm CIA recruitment. As many times as I have now read this indictment, I see obstruction, perjury and false statements. I see no charges relating to any of this rhetoric.

[Syl]

Rick

I don't want this to go to trial at all. Because nothing in the indictments had anything to do with the actual outing and no charges filed on that score, the focus won't be broad enough to cover some of the bases we'd like to see covered.

Oh, there will be some context brought in for motive, but not enough to satisfy everyone of all the details around the case.

But, any testimony could reveal something that some may not want revealed. And Fitz has the ability to further charge people just by what may come out in testimony.

[Whitehall]

So reading the indictment, Libby is being charged with lying to the GJ about lying to the Media.

The evidence for this is the testimony of the Media.

Someone correct me if I wrong here but it looks like a MSM conspiracy to me.

[Syl]

Mark Levin is reading Fitz wrong. Fitz was talking about the seriousness of the charge behind the investigation. He did not connect that directly to Libby.

Only the specific charges in the indictment.

[topsecretk9]

Sue:

Which makes me wonder, a journalists privilege will not be helpful in a civil proceeding...

[mcg]

Fitz did speak about the leaks. He was asked about it. He said it's illegal for him or the investigators to leak (which they have not), not illegal for witnesses.

Syl: thanks for this, I must have missed it (listening while I worked). But how can we say the investigators haven't leaked? There's plenty of info the NYT, WaPo, etc. claim to have obtained from people working on the case. Did he suggest they were making things up out of whole cloth?

[Syl]

Whitehall

Except for that leetle detail that Libby said he first learned of wilson's wife's CIA connection from Russert.

He had already learned it from at least 4 in the administration by the time he ever spoke with Russert.