Posted on 10/29/2005 3:10:01 AM PDT by YaYa123
I used that phrase as shorthand to indicate a violation of 50 USC 421.
50 USC 421 <- Crime of revealing covert agent
50 USC 426 <- Definitions
okay, thanks.
If the prosecutor knew or must have known going in that no crime had been committed (and there would be no crime if a necessary element was wholly incapable of being satisfied) then any indictment or prosecution, even a derivative indictment or prosecution for an offense such as obstruction of justice or perjury, would be subject to dismissal for abuse of process and prosecutorial misconduct. This would also give rise to a civil claim for wrongful or malicious prosecution and perhaps a constitutional claim against the prosecutor personally for denying the accused of due process under color of law.
Do you see any other crime that "caused" the investigation, other than the illegal revelation of the identity of a person whose identity was protected by law?
Not to. beat. dead. horse. But if Plame's id was not protected (because she was not covert within the meaning of the law), seems like that's a necessary element that could never be met.
sorry- I be bad today with not turning off italics -
Well then, that begs the question, if this guy was so bad, as you suggest, why in hell was he on the inner circle of this White House?
Does the indictment cite that letter?
Fitzgerald has a reputation for being exceedingly bright and conscientious, and it is hard for me to believe he would go off half-cocked let alone with malicious intent to trap Libby in an invented crime. But we'll see how Libby's defense counsel shapes up his case.
I can more easily see Ronnie Earle getting his pinhead caught in a "malicious prosecution" vise.
If I see you walking down the street today, it won't matter what people say, I will not conclude that you were murdered yesterday. Likewise if Plame-Wilsonan was not an overseas, covert agent within the 5 years prior to the revelation that she worked at CIA headquarters in Virginia, it really doesn't matter what else you prove - you can't prove that discussing her relationship with Amb. Wilson, the CIA, or the King of Siam violated the law against outting overseas covert agents.Which is why, when the notice came to the Justice Department, Attorney General Ashcroft should not have recused himself until he had at least gotten a preliminary finding that the law might have been broken. And beyond that I will argue that even if the law was, technically, broken there should have been consideration of whether it was substantively malicious or reckless, on the one hand, or whether it was entrapment of WH officials being deliberately baited by the CIA into "violating the law."
It appears that the latter was the case but Ashcroft, undoubtedly with the agreement of the president, wimped out and allowed an attempted legal/PR coup against the administration to proceed. To the detriment not only of this administration but of the American people and specifically of any administration which is not in cahoots with the conspiracy two of whose facets are "objective journalism" and "the Democratic Party."
Libby was a student of Wolfowitz and an asst. Dep. Secr. Defense under the elder GHW Bush...a pro-Israel neocon hawk leading the charge against Hussein back in 1990...he was in 1990 a convenient way for Pres GHW Bush to reach out to Democrats regarding that war...because he was one of them.
In short, he got in because he was a legacy. Now he's out.
Good riddance.
Those talking heads are playing up the drama on cable TV. Yes, I suppose Libby is technically accused of crimes that carry MAXIMUM penalties that add up to 30 years. However, msNBC's Dan Abrams (who I trust very much on legal issues) was explaining that Libby at most would face just a few years in jail - if that.
Often, sentences are served at the same time as one another and are cut down significantly for first-time offenders because of sentencing guidelines. If you're confident that Fitzgerald is doing such a horrible thing, I would expect Libby to request a trial by JUDGE instead of JURY if that's possible, considering this case is in the liberal stranglehold of the District of Columbia. A pardon from Bush is also a possibility even if Libby is convicted.
I feel sorry for Libby and his family because I think he probably just went into panic mode and thought he had to lie about stuff that probably wasn't a crime. But every single person out there needs to take this as a lesson: If you ever get called to testify under oath, either tell the truth or don't say anything at all. To do otherwise is to harm a legitimate investigation and put yourself in legal jeopardy at the same time.
I watched the presser, and I didn't come away from it thinking that anybody committed any crimes that they weren't indicted for, so I don't know what you're talking about.
Bush's Justice Department or Attorney General's office appointed Fitzgerald. And Bush is saying this is a serious matter. And Bush isn't taking issue with Fitzgerald's decision.
I never heard him do that. He may have said it was classified info, but there's apparently not a criminal charge that covers that. That's what I understood from the presser, anyway.
Why did he go out of his way to not say if Plame was covert? And why did he not clear the names of the rest of the people he hauled into his inquisition?
The covert issue is a good question, but that still wouldn't excuse anybody from committing perjury or obstructing justice in the investigation. He's not going to clear anybody while the investigation is still open.
What's so freakin' difficult about going into the grand jury and either telling the truth or saying you don't recall? That seems pretty simple to me. I'm amazed at the number of FReepers who are willing to give Libby a pass even if he lied to a grand jury. A lie is a lie. It's a crime. It's the law. If you don't like it, go do something to change the law (although I will oppose you). Don't blame Fitzgerald for trying to enforce the law.
Did I say that? No, I said he was basically accusing him of a crime he didn't charge. You know "the outing a covert agent". But he used the term classified. If you missed that part go back and listen, because I am not the only one who has said they heard just that. And 2 people recused them self from this case so you can't really say it is Bush's justice department.
If you have evidence of those crimes, please forward that evidence to Bush's Justice Department. I would think they'd want to prosecute.
If Libby fights this in court, and I hope he does, he will win.
Looks like he will fight it. I wish him the best, and I hope he indeed can raise reasonable doubt. However, what I've been saying is that Fitzgerald strikes me as an impressive prosecutor. I would love for Libby to prove me wrong or to poke holes in the case. I'd prefer our jail cells be used to lock up violent criminals instead of White House aides who went too far in trying to discredit critics.
Well, it apparently was classified info from all the news reports I've seen, so Fitzgerald was correct if that's the case. Again, if you have any evidence of misconduct by Fitzgerald, by all means forward it to Alberto Gonzales. I just don't see it.
And 2 people recused them self from this case so you can't really say it is Bush's justice department.
The Attorney General's office of the Bush Administration appointed Fitzgerald. They chose him. And Bush isn't opposing him. That speaks volumes. If I had to guess from Bush's statement the other day, I'd say Bush is both sad for Libby and mad at Libby.
You didn't?
He may have said it was classified info, but there's apparently not a criminal charge that covers that.
I thought you said you never heard him do that? Make up your mind already.
I think in the end...we will see that Libby might be a bit absent-minded and gave some wrong dates and info at the beginning of this whole mess. And of course, none of this connects the dots back to ole Valerie and Joe. Scooter just plain screwed up in his meeting with the grand jury. My guess is that the most that he will get is 12 months in jail. And as for the great Valarie and Joe episode...forgotten by April of 2006. The media won't be able to cook anything else out of this episode, and they will have to move on.
Do what? You go from you didn't see him accusing anyone of crimes he didn't charge to this? I just got a hour back for daylight saving time, but wasted part of it on this. I should have just went to sleep.
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.