The Kafkaesque Libby Prosecution Continues

The American Thinker ^ | February 23rd, 2006 | Clarice Feldman

[Anti-Bubba182]

This piece discusses the defects in the case against Mr. Libby. There are many, centering on the fact that the underlying law that prompted the investigation was not broken.

[gondramB]

"Lewis “Scooter” Libby is defending himself against a flawed indictment that never should have been brought by Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald. A "

He's not really gonna defend himself is he? That's almost always a mistake, even if you are a lawyer.

[FormerACLUmember]

This is a brilliant analysis, well worth reading. The author slices and dices the sleazy Fitzgerald.

The whole indictment was a classic democrat party hatchet job, framing an innocent man. The media hystrionics were carefully orchestrated by the 'rat party.

[proxy_user]

Anyway, I don't think K. had a $5MM defense fund.

That might make a difference, even in a Kafka novel.

[Anti-Bubba182]

I remember when Lawrence O'Donnell was almost apoplectic announcing that it was Rove who broke Plame's "cover". Lord was he torqued!

He's still on MSNBC though. I guess they just wipe his chin, give him a shot of Thorozine and roll him out again...to their occasional embarrassment when he relapses.

[RedEyeJack]

Was Libby given a Miranda-Tempia warning before he was questioned? If so, what was he told he was suspected of committing? If he was not warned then is his testimony admissible? If he was warned what was he asked about the suspected crime.

Much of what we read implies that he was asked a lot of unconnected questions about a lot of his activities and the inconsistencies in his responses became fodder for the eventual perjury charges... Kafkaesque indeed.

[Anti-Bubba182]

The Libby indictment proves how easy it is for a prosecutor to get an indictment. If Fitzgerald had a chance to prove that Libby was guilty of violating the disclosure of a covert agents identity law, he certainly would have done so.

He he concluded that he could not prosecute under charges that prompted the original investigation he should have dropped the whole thing. Even on the perjury angle he does not have anything approaching DNA on the dress quality evidence.

[TheHound]

BTTT - Good Read.

[p23185]

The whole indictment was a classic democrat party hatchet job, framing an innocent man. The media hystrionics were carefully orchestrated by the 'rat party.

If the TV screen was a radio speaker I would swear I saw Randi "Skank" Rhodes spouting that crap!! "Oh Oh the horror of the evil Bush Admin".

[STARWISE]

Dong

[stinkerpot65]

Very similar to the Martha Stewart case.

[Anti-Bubba182]

Actually worse because the evidence is weaker and there is no underlying crime.

[PGalt]

Good article. Thanks for posting.

[Real Cynic No More]

There was discussion on Fox News tonight that Fitzgerald is refusing to provide information demonstrating that Plame's position at the CIA was classified. Several questions became apparent to me:

1. Does he not have evidence? His indictment apparently used the word "classified". If he has no evidence, is he guilty of perjury for a false certification of the indictment?

2. If he doesn't have evidence that Plame's role was classified, is he then guilty of fraud on the American people for not first investigating whether there was a crime committed?

3. If he committed fraud on the American people by attempting to entrap individuals to allegedly make false statements regarding a non-crime, is he guilty of squandering the taxpayers' money when an early finding might have revealed that no crime was committed?

4. Did he just drag this case on so he could have a low-stress, guaranteed paycheck for as long as he could make it last.

Inquiring minds, ie those who footed the bill for this farce, want to know.

[Real Cynic No More]

Fitzgerald charged Libby with making false statements to federal investigators,

Did Fitzgerald make false statements himself in the indictment when he certified that classified information was revealed to the public?

[SERKIT]

Does anyone have a link to the original CIA "complaint" that started this whole mess? Did the CIA go on record stating that Plame was (or was not) in an undercover/classified role? Doesn't the prosecutor need to examine the original complaint in order to go after a crime? Many of us in government have job classifications which does not mean our jobs are "classified" in the cloak-and-dagger sense. The more this roles out, the more it stinks.

[the Real fifi]

Libby is trying to get this in discovery and Fitzgerald is resisting turning it over.

[Oystir]

Unfortunately, this is a political hack piece and the author does not demonstrate any understanding of federal criminal law or process. Almost every sentence is a declaration, which is not based on our laws. While a jury may find Scooter not guilty, it is highly unlikely that the case will be dismissed.

Perjury is perjury; the circumstances of how it occurred are not that important - i.e., "I lied to protect my children." The press, talking heads and lawyers play games with the word "materiality," which may or may not be a necessity for Fitz to prove in court.

[Oystir]

"Actually worse because the evidence is weaker and there is no underlying crime."

Get with the american justice system. Lying under oath or lying to the FBI, while not under oath, is a crime in and of itself. There is no necessity to have an underlying crime. Ask Martha Stewart.

[Oystir]

This is a federal criminal case. What discovery do you think Libby is entitled? The law of the US is that there is essentially no discovery for Mr. Libby unless it is Brady material or his taped discussions.