And why wasnt Cheney for that matter or why didnt Libby testify after falsely telling the judge and the jury that he would. The judge only allowed certain evidence in because Libby's lawyer said Libby was going to testify. He was visably pissed when Libby did not testify after making the assertion that he would. The jury was also disappointed because Libbys DEM lawyer implied he would testify in the opening statement.
Why would Cheney be? He had nothing to do with accusing Libby of lying. It was said he lied to the FBI, but the agent who took the testimony wasn't there nor were his notes. So, what happened to face your accusers?
Libby TOLD the judge he would testify? Are you sure of that? Do you perhaps mean that his LAWYER told the judge that?
Let's see, perhaps I can follow your thinking here. Libby is guilty because Cheney didn't testify. What was Cheney supposed to testify about? He wasn't at the interview with the FBI agent, nor was he in the grand jury room, so Cheney had nothing to do with Libby being in court.
Now you also think Libby "falsely" told the judge he would testify. Now if only it wasn't for that pesky little constitutional thingy then maybe you guys could have FORCED him to testify.
if the defense believes that the prosecution has not made their case, the defense doesn't have to testify