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.

[Account Deleted]

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...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/10/28/AR2005102801172.html>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...

[Account Deleted]

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.

[Jeff Hauser]

Re Starr/Fitz:

Are you kidding me?

Starr leaked like a freakin sieve. Fitzgerald's team revealed NOTHING.

Starr wrote up a boudoir novel that went far and above any legal requirements in terms of a report; Fitzgerald is scrupulously avoiding any dissemination (yes, pun...) of info embarassing to the Bushies that is not required for the pursuit of his job.

Fitzgerald is a professional prosecutor. Starr was a spurned wannabe Justice w/no criminal prosecutorial experience put in place by a hack, Sentelle.

[Syl]

mcg

Well 'working on the case' are the words used by the MSM. That doesn't mean it was Fitz's investigators.

[Sue]

Like Levin, I associated Fitzgerald's words with Libby. The press conference was about Libby. I felt the same way Levin did about Fitzgerald's words.

[Sue]

Top,

Nope. Neither is the 5th. :)

[Syl]

I loved that part where a reporter asked about the 'flurry of activity' this past week.

Fitz says, nope, flurry of attention.

LOL

[topsecretk9]

Jeff H

tell it to the hand...Starr may not have been what Fitz is today, but to deny the press dynamic against Starr is the alternate realty thing.

[topsecretk9]

reality I meant

[boris]

Like Levin, I associated Fitzgerald's words with Libby. The press conference was about Libby. I felt the same way Levin did about Fitzgerald's words.

Same here.

[JayDee]

That's it, Kathie. Short and sweet. Libby lied because he didn't want to admit to a crime, and he thought the reporters/whores who helped sell this dirty war would keep their mouths shut to protect their admin access. By lying, he obstructed the investigation and made it impossible for an ethical prosecutor to charge for the underlying crime. Pretty simple.

But the winger whining about irrelevancies is fun to track. Sort of like how Fox News was running an old picture of Saddam Hussein during their coverage of the Libby indictment. They not only know their fans absorb information subliminally, like hypnosis subjects - they rely on it!

Glad to hear that at least some of you recognize a true American hero in this Fitzgerald guy. There's still a few good guys mixed in with the corrupt corporate shills, thank God.

[ordi]

Windansea,

then what else does he have left to investigate or finish?

[quote]"Is the investigation finished? It's not over," Fitzgerald said at a news conference. "But … very rarely do you bring a charge in a case that's going to be tried in which you ever end a grand jury investigation. I can tell you that the substantial bulk of the work of this investigation is concluded." [quote]

http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory?id=1259935

[Fresh Air]

Sorry, Jeff. Still don't see your point. Both men got the job done, and both were thorough and diligent. Calling someone a "hack" really doesn't support your position either. Give it a rest.

[Syl]

Sue

"Like Levin, I associated Fitzgerald's words with Libby."

Okay. Maybe so, then. It is serious business to do what was done.

[khaltom]

27 million free people = dirty war.

[boris]

Had he told the truth, according to Mr. Fitzgerald

There's the rub. Fitz's idea of the truth in this case is blinkered. Yes, even to the extent that he could mistake a true statement as a lie relative to his take.

[topsecretk9]

Sue

Since this result of all this is no actual outing...sounds like Wilson should have just filed a civil suit from the beginning and dispensed with the criminal charade. No?

[averagejoe]

When will Joe Wilson be charged with perjury? His lies and undermining of national security are well documented. Unlike basing it on the memory of two lib reporters.

Stock market up big today!!!! Scooter who?

[JayDee]

Go free all the oppressed people in the world, khaltom. Go use your own money and your own blood to do it. Don't use fake intelligence to pervert the Constitutional process of the United States of America. If you really believe in spreading democracy, stop supporting the destruction of it here at home.

[Syl]

whoopsies

I see a problem. Item 23 in the indictment. All libby said to cooper was basically 'I heard that too'. That is NOT confirmation.

Fitz is under the impression it is. That's just confirmation of gossip. Libby didn't add any more details.

[arrowhead]

I have to agree with Levin. The strongest rhetoric that Fitzgerald used in the entire press conference was reserved for something that he hasn't charged anyone with - revealing classified information and compromising a CIA Agent.

The reporters' questions were very good. I guess I'm one of the few who wasn't that impressed with Fitzgerald. He talks too much for my taste, and when pinned down dodged the questions on the issue that was central to his investigation, the outing of Valerie Plame.

[ed]

no, because the cia made the request for inquiry and fitz admited that classified info was misused.

[khaltom]

JayDee: RELAX!!

[Syl]

JayDee

You're so weird, you're not worth the bother of answering most times. Congress already approved and they used more than wmd intelligence to cast their vote.

The Constitutional process was used. Better read up on the timeline. Bush's speeches and Powell's little demonstration came afterwards.

[Kathie]

I think that the "sand in the eyes" analogy refers to the point that because Scooter lied they could go any further to investigate the CIA outing. In reality it is really sad because Wilson and wife are such creeps. Scooter could have just said, the Vice presidents office didn't send Wilson anywhere PERIOD.

[topsecretk9]

no, because the cia made the request for inquiry and fitz admited that classified info was misused.

after many months of shilling, a request that has raised as many questions as this investigation

I am just saying from a practical standpoint as far as a civil proceeding is concerned, hindsight being 20 20, the sequence of events has put Wilson in a most uncomfortable situation

[Slartibartfast]

I can tell you that the substantial bulk of the work of this investigation is concluded.

Don't get all excited about that; plenty can come out in plea-bargain. If Libby does in fact have the goods on yet another party, it's plea bargain that could bring that out.

Not saying it will, mind you, just at this point I don't know what to expect.

[John]

Some folks here misunderstand Fitzgerald's job. He's a prosecutor who is investigating potential crimes via the grand jury process. He's not some kind of roving (ooo, sorry) Investigator Without Portfolio. If he finds enough evidence to charge someone with a crime, he can talk about the charge and the evidence that supports it. Everything else that he learns, if it doesn't lead to an indictment, remains secret and he can't talk about it.

I'd love to know what he learned about Rove, Cheney, Wilson, Plame, and even the President - but not only is that not his job, he's prohibited from talking about it if (at this stage) it doesn't relate to the charges against Libby.

[Kathie]

I think that the "sand in the eyes" analogy refers to the point that because Scooter lied they could go any further to investigate the CIA outing. In reality it is really sad because Wilson and wife are such creeps. Scooter could have just said, the Vice presidents office didn't send Wilson anywhere PERIOD.

[windansea]

Scooter could have just said, the Vice presidents office didn't send Wilson anywhere PERIOD.

yep....all the crimes he is charged with occured during the investigation...not before

[Syl]

windansea

"all the crimes he is charged with occured during the investigation"

That mitigates nothing. His indicted crimes obstructed the investigation.

[topsecretk9]

So Scooter and Sandy open a consultancy firm advising clients what not to do with classified info

[JC]

"...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."

Uh - that particular CIA fellow was mistaken, or was a mole for the battles inside the CIA, with "go to war" on one side, and the "not go to war" on the other.

All you have to do is read page 1 and 2 -

"the CIA decided on its own initiative to send Wilson to the country of Niger to investigate allegations involving Iraqi efforts to acquire uranium yellowcake, a processed form of uranium ore. Wilson orally reported his findings to the CIA upon his return."

So BACK IT UP again in equating "a CIA official TOLD" Libby something, that this is how it actually happened.

Cmon guys...

[ordi]

Slartibartfast,

I was not getting excited. Just asking a simply question.

Which was:

then what else does he have left to investigate or finish?

[Anderson]

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

I took that as "none of today's charges," all of which hinge on lying.

Not "no charges at all."

[Syl]

JC

Your quote is from a 'mole' on the other side.

Are you saying your mole is right and the other mole is wrong?

This is CIA stuff. Nobody will ever know.

All that matters is that one mole got to libby and cheney first.

[JM Hanes]

In light of the litany of lies listed in Fitzgerald's indictment, don't Judy Miller's reservations about the quality of Libby's waiver look considerably more reasonable? Assuming Fitz's case holds up, the only possible explanation for Libby's strategy that doesn't count as stuck on stupid is that he was relying on reporters' willingness to protect their sources. By the time his mistake was clear, he'd already committed to a fundamental lie.

Libby's bizarre letter to Miller now clearly reads like the Hail Mary pass it must have represented. I've always wondered about the basis of his claim to know precisely how all the other reporters had testified, let alone his assertion that he had been exonerated by such testimony, but never mind. Scooter was telling Judy both to testify and to protect him at the same time -- precisely the kind of mixed signals she and her lawyer cited from the start.

[Patrick R. Sullivan]

This is an amazing day, Brad DeLong and I in complete agreement:

'or I simply don't understand what's going on.'

Which he demonstrates by:

'And I *still* don't understand Cheney's casual lying in the summer-fall of 2003--his claims to be ignorant of Wilson.'

Cheney said he didn't 'know' Joe Wilson, which is true. And that he didn't know who sent him to Africa. Which is also true.

What is 'going on' is that a prosecutor without a case--after the fourth time he was asked, he finally admitted no crime had been committed in naming Valerie as CIA--got lucky, apparently. Someone lied during the investigation, so he didn't have to close up shop with nothing to show for his expenditure of millions of dollars of taxpayer money.

But, if I were Libby, I'd claim that my 5th Amendment rights against self-incrimination were violated by the President of the United States.

[AT]

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

Exactly which tort claims would Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary Joseph C. Wilson the Fourth make?

[Syl]

Patrick R. Sullivan

You're right about the Cheney quotes, but wrong about Fitzgerald.

The reason he didn't find an underlying crime was that the investigation was obstructed.

Now we'll never know IF there was an underlying crime or not.

[windansea]

"all the crimes he is charged with occured during the investigation"

That mitigates nothing. His indicted crimes obstructed the investigation.

I agree....not trying to mitigate anything....just stating a fact.

[Sue]

Syl,

Then charge him. It wasn't serious enough to bring charges, the press conference was about the indictments, and that is what he should have kept his remarks limited to. IMO, of course.

[John]

I think it's getting a little ahead of the game to say that Fitzgerald struggled for two years to find a crime and, because perjury was the first thing he charged, it's obvious there was no underlying crime in the first place. First, the process isn't over yet. Second, Fitzgerald made the point repeatedly today that Libby's lies and obstruction - the sand in the umpire's eyes - made it difficult or impossible to determine whether a crime had in fact been committed. That is, after all, the real point of an "obstruction of justice" charge. Not, "hey, you made the prosecutor's life complicated with your lies and so now we're going to ding you" but "you made it impossible to determine the truth".

[arrowhead]

"What is 'going on' is that a prosecutor without a case--after the fourth time he was asked, he finally admitted no crime had been committed in naming Valerie as CIA--got lucky, apparently."

I agree and also believe that Fitzgerald thought he could flip Libby. That didn't happen and the gj came to an end. Perhaps his comment about keeping the investigation open is intended to hold out that carrot to Libby for a little while longer hoping to catch a bigger fish instead of the minnow (relatively speaking) that he has in his net.

[Syl]

Reporters and their confirming sources.

There's something wrong here. If reporters think 'I heard that too' is a confirmation (as fitz seems to think as well) it would explain some of the garbage that comes out in the press.

Remember, Rove only said 'I heard that too' to Novak and Novak considered Rove his second source!

Journalists are really dumb, or lazy, or both. They're supposed to get two sources.

One source tells a reporter "Senator Fletcher sleeps with a teddy bear".

So the reporter hunts around for confirmation and finds Senator KnowItAll who says 'Yeah, I heard that too!'. The reporter thinks THAT is confirmation?!?!?!

Nuts.

[JC]

Syl,

This isn't hard.

a. Wilson's position didn't have the ability to send anyone anywhere. She wasn't "responsible" for sending anyone anywhere. So how could this particular CIA official know what they were talking about?

[steve sturm]

With trackback not working (at least for me), here's my thoughts on the indictment...

Maybe I'm reading it wrong, but it seems as if Libby is being charged for telling the grand jury that he lied to Miller, Cooper and Russert... to me, Libby's testimony refers to what he told the reporters, not to any representation he made to the grand jury about when he learned of Plame's name/job.

And can Fitzgerald really be planning on having the MSM as his star witnesses?

[JM Hanes]

PR Sullivan --

The prosecutor did not admit that "no crime had been committed in naming Valerie as CIA." The central point of the Fitz indictment is that false statements & perjury on Libby's part obstructed his investigation into the crime at issue. That's why the investigation is not over and also why it may never result in further indictments even if the fundamental crime did, indeed, occur. These are not frivolous charges, they are pivotal to the administration of justice.

[Syl]

John

Well said.

[Gary Maxwell]

Lets not forget that we have yet to hear Mr. Libby's side of the story. I am sure we will. Now if he sticks to his story its his word against a couple of reporters. It might be very interesting on what a suburban Virginia jury might decide about who to believe.

And those that said Libby will serve jail time. Not a chance. His lawyers can string this out for awhile and then the trial takes awhile and finally an appeal. And then President Bush in his last few months in office grants Lewis Libby a pardon on a day that the press is looking for someother BS.

[windansea]

we need a new name for this

Plamegate or CIAleak don't work anymore

Libbygate

Fitzgate

investigationgate

Liegate

memorygate

MSMgate

[JC]

And it looks like the "senior CIA official" could have been Frederick Fleitz, currently John Bolton's Chief of Staff - and most likely a neocon believer, especially since Bolton is the likely Undersecretary (which he was at the time I believe) that is mentioned in the indictment, as ANOTHER person to relay the information about Valerie Wilson.