Posted on 10/28/2005 10:29:03 PM PDT by Diddle E. Squat
A number of observations tonight from people who know and follow the CIA leak case:
The first is that they view the indictment against Lewis Libby as very strong. One source called it "as clear-cut an indictment" as one would ever see, and the consensus is that Libby is in serious trouble. If Libby lied as much as Fitzgerald accuses him of lying, the sources say, then Libby acted in an astonishingly reckless way.
The observers also suspect that Fitzgerald has some strong but as yet unrevealed evidence to support the centerpiece of his perjury charge against Libby, that is, Libby's testimony to the grand jury about his conversation with NBC's Tim Russert on July 10, 2003, in which Libby swore that it was Russert who told him that Valerie Wilson worked for the CIA:
"Mr. Russert said to me, did you know that Ambassador Wilson's wife, or his wife, works at the CIA? And I said, no, I don't know that. And then he said, yeah – yes, all the reporters know it. And I said, again, I don't know that. I just wanted to be clear that I wasn't confirming anything for him on this. And you know, I was struck by what he was saying in that he thought it was an important fact, but I didn't ask him anymore about it because I didn't want to be digging in on him, and he then moved on and finished the conversation, something like that."
What is striking about the indictment, observers say, is that Fitzgerald does not say simply that Russert has another recollection. Instead, the indictment says:
In truth and fact, as Libby well knew when he gave this testimony, it was false in that: a. Russert did not ask Libby if Libby knew that Wilson’s wife worked for the CIA, nor did he tell Libby that all the reporters knew it; and b. At the time of this conversation, Libby was well aware that Wilson’s wife worked at the CIA...
In another place in the indictment, Fitzgerald states flatly that "Russert did not ask Libby if Libby knew that Wilson's wife worked for the CIA, nor did he tell Libby that all the reporters knew it." That sort of definitiveness has led the observers to suspect that Fitzgerald has some sort of evidence that clearly supports Russert's account of the conversation.
In addition, the observers are unanimously appalled by the performance of Libby's lawyer, Joseph Tate. This is something that has been discussed for quite a while now -- at least since Libby's infamous "the aspens will already be turning" letter to Judith Miller. What lawyer, they ask, would have allowed his client to write and send such a letter -- clearly raising suspicions that Libby was trying to influence testimony and possibly obstruct the investigation? Now, Libby is said to be in the market for a good criminal defense lawyer. If he had done that earlier, the observers say, he might not be in the trouble he is in now.
Another consensus opinion is the cautious belief that Karl Rove might not, ultimately, face any charges. Rove is not mentioned by name in the Libby indictment, and only once by a pseudonym -- "Official A." Although the indictment is not about Rove, the observers get the sense that Rove emerges as a far less important player in the whole affair than Libby; it was Libby, for example, and apparently not Rove, who got in touch with the CIA and the State Department about the Wilson matter. In addition, word is that Rove made some sort of presentation to Fitzgerald in the last days of the investigation that made Fitzgerald less inclined to take action against Rove. What that involved is is not clear.
And finally, many observers of the investigation marvel at what is still not known after nearly two years of probing. Who leaked the story to Robert Novak? What, precisely, was Valerie Wilson's status at the CIA at the time Novak's column revealed her identity? Fitzgerald presumably knows the answers to those questions. But, at least so far, he isn't saying.
Employment status (pick as many as are appropriate):
If she was covert under the definition of 50 USC 421, Fizt would have charged a violation. All the elements of disclosure by Libby are alleged in the indictment.
One theme that Fitz aimed to paint, cause by inference if you will, is that Plame was covert.
The indictment does not assert that, nor does it present any facts that would support such an assertion.
If Libby is a Democrat & friend of the liberal media elites, why are they so giddy at his indictment? Do they think he is going to testify against Cheney? I'm somewhat skeptical, because Libby was such a strong supporter of Bush's foreign policy. This is very interesting information, though.
Isn't it kind'a early to be 'drinkin hard-liquor?
The only way I'd believe Russert didn't lie is if Fitzgerald has a tape of the conversation between Russert and Libbey. Notes don't cut it in my book.
Definition of HYPOCRYCY: A liar calling another man a liar
HUMMMM LOOKS LIKE THE MSM MISSED THIS LITTLE FACTOID. I have always wondered why Russert would PERSONALLY call Libby. Now we know , he was one of them.
So I don't think this is the discrepancy that many claim.
I agree with York. I think Libby is in a lot of trouble, and he better have some "October surprises" in his notes that the investigators have not seen.
The question is why was LL so darned insistent on giving a detailed story to the prosecutor? You NEVER do that. You say, "It may have been, but I don't recall." "Perhaps, it was TR, but I don't know." Pull a Clinton.
Well, he's already written a book, so the only thing left for him to do is: Go to Disney World, or run for public office.
I have worked with "classified" material before. That doesn't mean that no one knows where I work---it means I can't talk about what I worked on ON THAT PARTICULAR ASSIGNMENT.
I don't think the special prosecutor is confused, or avoiding a question. I think he's being very careful to further entrap Libby, and LL better watch it. He's in heap big trouble.
No, apparently it is LL's own NOTEBOOKS, which are even more damning.
Or both from the CIA.
Huh...thanks for digging out this clip...seems logical to me that Libby damaged himself if this has nothing to do with Plame (covert CIA agent My Ass)
One can contrast this with Clinton's behavior, which did involve real criminal behavior.
Do not for a minute think that Fitzy doesn't understand these subtleties. I think the guy is phenomenally well-prepared, and in details he reminds me of Starr. He knows that merely revealing that Plame was involved in a "classified" assignment (whatever she was doing), whether "COVERT OR NOT" was a crime.
Libby "outed" Plame the way anyone who said that Liberace was a homosexual in the Seventies would have "outed" Liberace.
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.