It's hard for me to believe that Libby got where he is taking shortcuts with the truth. Why would he commit perjury? Did he expect that Cheney and Tenet would also commit perjury? Did they? Did Libby lie to his attorney? Or is his attorney incompetent?
Many of the reports I have read treat the questioning before the grand jury as if every question is an opportunity for redefining what the meaning of "is" is.
My expectation is that an examination into this matter would have included asking Libby details about any conversation with Cheney about Wilson, Plame, or yellowcake from Niger. If the topic of "who sent Wilson to Niger" was discussed? If so, who was it? How was this person described? By their relationship to Wilson? By their relationship with the CIA? By their status as a covert agent with the CIA? By their married name? By their unmarried name? By the nature of the work they did for the CIA?
I, for one, believe that Miller lied when she stated that she couldn't remember who provided the name "Flame" to her. Her public statement that she had a "deal" that she would not be asked about sources other than Libby is contradicted by her statement that she was asked who provided the name "Flame" and she answered.
When a witness says "I can't recall", that is an opportunity for asking many, many more questions. It is not the case that the examiner just shrugs and says, "Too bad. Let's just forget about it, then".
The examiner could ask Miller if she remembered writing the name down? If not, is it possible that someone else wrote it down? Did anyone else have access to her notebooks? Where was this notebood kept during the time that the notation could have been made? Is the notation made in Miller's handwriting? Is it a different pen or pencil from the rest of the notes? Does Miller recall if she made the notation at the moment the name was mentioned or did she make note of it later? Was she on the telephone at the time she made the notation? Does she recall thinking that the name "Flame" was unusual? Had she ever met anybody else named "Flame"?
Are there any other examples in her notes of adding information after a phone call which was not supplied during the phone call? What was the nature of the information added. Did she routinely get information from a research service to be later added to notes of phone calls?
How did she go about retrieving the notes of the call with Libby? Was it ready to hand when she made the additional notation? Did she read through the notes before or after making the additional notation?
It takes a gutsy liar to sit through all of that and claim "I don't recall" for every single question.
Libby would have to have planned to suffer the same consequences if he attempted to flat out lie about what he knew and how he knew it.
The lesson of Watergate is best summarized by the fact that over 60 people were convicted of crimes.
Those are all excellent questions.
All we really know about the case it what gets reported (and spun) from leaks to reporters, and there seems to be a fundamental inconsistency between the reports that Rove and Libby told the grand jury that they learned about Plame's CIA status from reporters (with perhaps Rove learning about it from Libby), and the notion that Libby instead learned about Plame's CIA status from Cheney.
Smart people have done bone-headed things before, and I hope this is not the case with Libby.
"It takes a gutsy liar to sit through all of that and claim "I don't recall" for every single question."
Reminds me of Hillary Clinton and the Rose Law Firm records when she stestified beore the grand jury. Of course she got away with it.