Posted on 11/22/2005 3:35:25 PM PST by smoothsailing
IMO, this is just another case of throwing enough mud around so that some of it is bound to stick. Libby got caught up in an investigation that should never have been run. He cooperated all the way through. Bush didn't claim Executive Privelege. Everyone played it straight and this is what Fitzgerald thinks is a major bust.
Fitzgerald, serously dude, this is not Capone and company or even Clinton and company. Even honest people can get fowled up. After all the millions you've spent, you may get a guy for forgetting years old conversations. That plaque should look great on your wall, if you haven't any common decency at all.
So the "peoples right to know" trumps all other considerations except in the case where it interferes with a reporters book deal.
Not really, Woodward also said that he told Fitzgerald he may have mentioned Plame working for the CIA when he talked with Libby. That means that Libby stating he learned of Plame from "journalists" could be accurate.
Remember, this investigation has been going on for quite some time and Woody didn't testify until last week. Sure he told the truth now, but where was he years ago? He let the media skewer Libby and Bush's aide (drawing a total blank at the moment) for months without so much as a whisper in their defense.
He may have even showed up on talk shows discussing the subject as it relates to the inconsequential infractions of the Clinton White House.
Carl Rove...
Geez, brain fart!
Right and he said last night he had gotten clearances "from the start" from his sources. so there was no reason whatsoever for him to hide in the shadows.
Exactly. IMO he's toast.
txrangerette said: "However, Woodward knew it for some time in advance of all of this. So it does show that this info was "out there" quite early on in the game. In that sense it might show something important - for instance that Libby COULD HAVE heard it from SOME reporter early on - but it does not by itself exonerate Libby from the charge that he lied about from whom he FIRST heard of Plame and Wilson."
Cheney wasn't the first one Libby heard this from. If the information was "out there" Libby conceivably could have been simply trying to confirm a media rumor using official sources. But if this were the explanation, one would think he would have told Fitzgerald that. The most puzzling thing is his claiming to have heard the rumor specifically from Russert, which Russert denies. So either Russert flat-out lied (which would not have been smart, since for all he knew, there was some sort of WH taping system that recorded his conversation) or Libby lied (equally unsmart, leaving the question of why a lawyer as smart as Libby would do this) or Libby was mistaken and heard it from some other MSM reporter. I presume that a good lawyer could considerably muddy the water by reminding the jury of the latter possibility. Of course, in DC, even this line of defense might not raise sufficient "reasonable doubts."
With Libby being Indicted for saying he learned of Plame from journalists this is indeed good news.
I would imagine Wells will push for a dismissal or a speedy trial.
Now there you go applying logic again ;-)
He didn't have any idea who said what to the grand jury did he ? But facts never get in the way of a good news story or so I've noticed.
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.