Posted on 10/19/2005 5:13:50 PM PDT by blogblogginaway
Who cares if they were undercutting Wilson's criticism? That is not a crime. The Clinton White House did this all the time. Was it a crime for Hillary to consult with advisors when she pointed to a "vast right wing conspiracy"? This is errant nonsense. The only "crimes" that are likely to come out of this entire thing are perjury and obstruction of justice, if there's any evidence of either. I haven't seen any yet.
American society, or a large part of it, is afflicted with a case of the stupids, and the media seems to have caught a big case of it.
I think this was a decent article. Several leaks with minimal speculation (well minimal compared to the 'Cheney is resigning' crap).
This article seems consistent with what we have been hearing. It was leaked before that Rove said he had either heard directly or indirectly from journalists about Plame (Libby could be the indirectly). The fact that Rove and Libby talked about it a few days before the Novak article (7/14/03) is not surprising since Wilson had his article published in the NYT about a week earlier (7/6/03). I hope people in the WH were talking about it! Since Joe was claiming the Bush Admin manipulated intelligence. Joe provided no evidence except the story about his trip which the Senate Select committee ripped him apart on later. I would be surprised (and upset) if the WH didn't talk about it. Discussing with reporters the bogus claims of a critic is not illegal...I think it is called free speech. Now if someone can prove that the WH had classified info and leaked it to the press, then charge them, but nothing has come out so far to even indicate anything close to that.
Libby says he heard things from Russert. Russert says he never mentioned Plame or any covert status (but Russert does not say he did not say 'Wilson's wife works at the CIA').
Two staff talking in the hall about reporters questions is not a conspiracy.
The only thing this article does not go into further is this line: "Some evidence prosecutors have gathered conflicts with Libby's account." We have no idea what that refers to. It could be Russert or Miller. I am hoping it refers to Libby's first meeting with Miller on June 23rd. Mainly becuase Miller has said she does not think she heard "Flame" from Libby nor anything about covert status. And the second meeting contains "WINPAC" which as it turns out may be incorrect info. And Miller admits she did speak to others about Plame but she can't remember her sources. Wilson is going to rely on her at trial? Doubtful.
It looks like Rove is in the clear and Libby is still questionable (since I can't tell what conflict's the Prosecutor has with Libby). But even with Libby there does not appear to be a leak of classified info charge, it is more of a perjury or obstruction charge. But I would say that goes both ways. It could just as easily be one of the reporters who are charged with that (he said, she said).
Wilson's lies and CIA ties are another story for another Grand Jury.
After reading this story, about the nicest thing I can say is Solomon is an idiot. What "cover" was "blown" Johnny Boy? What "cover?" Right now, Libbies in the "media," the DemocRATS and this prosecutor are looking for something to indict somebody for. You can't "blow" the "cover" of a CIA desk jockey. Especially when everybody in the Liberal, elitist, social crowd knew Plame was employed by the CIA. This isn't working out for the Commie DemocRATS. All they can hope for is that somebody "lied" to the prosecutor or grand jury. It's the best they are going to get.
Excellent summary.
None of us know who if anyone will be indicted. However if you take the spun leaks that the MSM are perpetuating that indictments are forthcoming, ie: perjury, obstruction, espionage, I think it not unreasonable to conclude any of those charges could apply to those involved in this case outside of the White House.
Who said no one knows? ;)
If any of this really is from the Grand Jury someone should be in jail.
wonder if you will care when have of the white house staff is indicted
I think Joe Wilson has done a good enough job of discrediting himself. There would have been no need for the administration to interfere.
"Some evidence prosecutors have gathered conflicts with Russert's account."
Exactly. Plus from Miller's recent article, she admitted she spoke with others about Plame (but couldn't remember who). And supposedly one of Novak's sources was outside of the WH. So it is not so inconceivable that Russert heard it outside of the WH as well.
Could Fitzgerald get an indictment on just about anyone in this case? Probably yes. But is he convinced that he has a good chance of getting a conviction at trial? Probably no. And if he does not find any underlying crime (Intelligence or Espionage Act) is he really going to want to push secondary charges? Who knows?!?
"Wilson has done a good enough job of discrediting himself."
How true. The sad thing is the media is still depicting him as a whistle-blower and the WH manipulated intel. The media neglects to mention that the Senate Select report proved that Wilson was either wrong or lying.
If there is an indictment, maybe the defense lawyers will be able to start a discovery process. There are some aspects of Wilson's background which are odd.
For example, Ambassador Wilson is listed as an Adjunct Scholar with the Middle East Institute - which advocates for Saudi interests. The March 2002 issue of the Saudi-government weekly Ain al Yaqeen lists the Middle East Institute as an Islamic research institute supported by the Kingdom.
Wilson is listed as Strategic Advisor for Rock Creek Corporation. Rock Creek Corporation is listed on the Saudi webpage www.the-saudi.net/business-center/links-usa.htm as a firm doing business with Saudi Arabia. It would be interesting to find out what exactly Rock Creek Corporation does with respect to Saudi Arabia.
Wilson has spoken at press conferences given by anti-war organizations, such as Win Without War; and has given a keynote address to The Education for Peace in Iraq Center, a far-left group that opposed not only the U.S. military intervention in Iraq but also the sanctions and even the no-fly zones that protected hundreds of thousands of Iraqi Kurds and Shias from being slaughtered by Saddam.
The $64,000 question - Why would the CIA, in the middle of one shooting war (Afghanistan) and the run-up to what looked like and turned out to be another, deal with an inquiry from the White House on a sensitive national security matter by sending a retired, Bush-bashing diplomat with no investigative experience? Why did an Ambassador get this job? I don't think it's enough to say he got it only on the recommendation of his wife.
Even if they find him to be the one feeding information to reporters?
Rove and Libby both work in the White house. What right does that give them to talk to one another? (/sarcasm)
"Even if they find him to be the one feeding information to reporters?"
You're right, that is possible. We know he fed Kristof and Pincus in May and June. But about his trip, not his wife (or at least they didn't write about is wife and if he did, we don't know if they passed it on). The whole trip classified thing is confusing because it does not appear the CIA had Joe sign a confidentiality agreement (which is strange). So I have no idea what he could legally say or not say about his trip. But it could definitely be a problem for him (blabbing about trip or wife).
we believed all along that both Cooper and Miller knew Plame was CIA before talking to Rove/Libby - they were trying to set them up.
That's usually a good indicator that it would be wise to simply shut up, instead of annoying everyone else. How many do you think care that you don't care?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.