Posted on 11/17/2005 5:10:51 AM PST by veronica
November 17, 2005 -- CALL it "Deep Throat 2." The CIA-leak probe is in big trouble because superstar reporter and Watergate hero Bob Woodward has emerged as a surprise witness for the defense — potentially undermining the case against ex-White House aide Scooter Libby.
Woodward yesterday revealed that he's told prosecutors he could be the first reporter to learn from a Bush administration source that Iraq war critic Joe Wilson's wife worked as a CIA analyst — but Libby wasn't his new "Deep Throat."
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
That's nice, except Libby isn't charged with leaking the information, but rather, he was charged with lying to prosecutors and the DA about something that wasn't a crime in the first place. The fact that someone else might have leaked the name is irrelevant.
I agree.
I don't see the significance of Woodward claiming he got the same information from another administration source.
Uh wrong this puts cyclops fitz's timeline all wrong and Libby's defense attorneys will have a field day pointing that out.
Fitzgerals isn't so stupid as to realize the American people will be up in arms over perjury charges to a case that is really a non-case. If there was no leak, then, how can Libby be indicted for lying? All it comes down to is a case about a person getting the dates wrong. It's too obvious that Libby didn't out anyone, so why would he cover-up something that never existed in the first place?
But does this mean that Woodward is participating in a plan to bring down another person who is even higher?
This stinks.
In all honesty, Woodward is the poster boy of the left.
The left is salivating in hopes that Woodward got the information from Rove. However, this is tempered by the fact that, if nothing else, Woodward will protect his sources.
I think it speaks to the fact that Libby's recollections might honestly be muddled, that he didn't lie under oath, and that this whole case in fact is a muddle. And to evoke an old quote, where does Libby go to get his reputation back? Not just among Democrats and the MSM, but others who have attacked him viciously?
Then how did he lie when the media knew before anyone in Libby's office knew. It means he could well have learned about her from a reporter first.
Oh I agree with you on that issue, but the "muddled recollection defense" is compelling even without Woodward's latest revelation.
I believe Rove's lawyers have unequivocally denied that he is Woodward's source. Also, Rove has been very visible lately. Common sense tells me that he doesn't expect to be indicted, which is why he feels comfortable back in the spotlight.
Woodward states that He "may" have told Libby about Plame. That woyld serve to at least cast doubt on the assertion that Libby lied about where he heard of Plame and her "job"
Chris Matthews was deeply, deeply disappointed last night on Screwball.
Facts are irrelevant to this witch hunt.
Persistently overlooked is Libby's decision to independently inquire of the CIA and obtaining of authoritative knowledge, in adavance of conversations with reporters, and in advance of his statements and testimony.
Woodward also says he may have told Libby the name, but can't remember if he did. So we drag the most famous reporter to court have him say he can't recall and he may be mistaken. Then ask if he thinks he should be charged for perjury. Everyone laughs and then the jury realizes that's the same thing Libby is being accused of, so they won't convict him.
True for Libby, but we should also remember the other part of Woodward's story--that he supposedly heard about Plame from another "highly placed" official in the admin. What official? Are they gunning for Rove again, or have they set their sites on Cheney now? I don't trust this development at all.
That was my thoughts too. And he can say he made a mistake thinking it was Tiny Tim when in reality it was Woodward.
What concerns me is as follows.
Based on the indictment, I think Fitz will also use a number of documents and telephone calls that show Libby contacting the CIA et.al. to get the information on Plame. I think Fitz will say that Libby should have told investigators how he found out about Plame through Libby's own investigation rather than telling investigators that he had heard it from a news reporter.
Just my thoughts. I just hope Libby's defence team can utterly destroy this Fitz case.
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.