Skip to comments.CIA says Libby defense could disrupt intelligence
Posted on 03/07/2006 1:44:11 PM PST by Cboldt
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The CIA would have a hard time advising President George W. Bush on security threats if a judge forced it to provide all documents sought by a former vice presidential aide accused of perjury, the agency said in a court filing made public on Tuesday.
Lewis "Scooter" Libby is charged with lying to the FBI and a grand jury during an investigation into who disclosed the identity of CIA operative Valerie Plame to news reporters in 2003 after her husband accused the Bush administration of twisting intelligence in the run-up to the invasion of Iraq.
Libby is seeking access to nearly a year's worth of intelligence briefs to prove that he was preoccupied with national-security matters during that time period and thus could not accurately remember his conversations with reporters and government officials.
CIA information review officer Marilyn Dorn said agency officials would have a harder time keeping Bush up to date on security threats if a judge ordered them to dig up classified material sought by Libby.
"The job would divert their precious time and effort away from their primary task: preparing breaking intelligence for the president's immediate attention," Dorn wrote.
Libby's lawyers have told Judge Reggie Walton that the CIA could easily produce the intelligence summaries to help him make his case.
But Dorn said that the CIA would require up to nine months to reassemble the reports because they contain information from many different sources based on questions that Libby asked briefers.
Because of the highly sensitive nature of the material, only those officials who prepare the reports have enough security clearance to handle the task, she said.
"The CIA would be forced to divert the limited analytic resources of the president's professional intelligence staff to time-consuming and painstaking research and analysis to determine exactly what information was provided to and received from the defendant in connection with his morning intelligence briefing," Dorn wrote.
Even a more narrowly targeted request would require three months to assemble, she said.
Libby is scheduled to stand trial in January 2007.
I can't find a reliable location for source documents, such as the CIA affidavit referenced here. Any leads on such a location would be much appreciated.
CIA is definitely trying to cover up somthing - maybe that the leaker is within the CIA?
The CIA is immediately using the "Washington Monument" defense. i.e there's something they don't like, so they pick the highest profile item and say they can't do it.
If Libby was charged with spying, or treason, maybe even if he was charged with leaking classified information, I would say that the government could prosecute while withholding information.
but he's charged with what? Perjury, obstruction of justice? If they say he lied, he's damn well entitled to any information that could show that he wasn't.
This was a fake prosecution to begin with, and if the judge had any integrity he would throw it out.
Yeah. They've got dozens of operations against the administration that are being imperiled by Libby.
Sorry, it doesn't fly. Libby cannot be charged with something and then denied the alibis he needs to prove his innocence by when they are the VERY SUBJECT of the investigation itself.
All Libby has to do is mention Edwin Wilson.
My sentiments also.
He should be given the same treatment Clinton got for the same offenses....let off the hook, and enjoyment of a 60%+ approval rating.
Presumably the CIA had enough evidence to make a referral to the Justice Department. Let's just start with that, and get the people who put the referral together to appear in court under oath.
U.S. District Judge Reggie Walton ... hasn't ruled on Libby's request for copies of 275 daily briefings from May 6, 2003, through March 24, 2004. ...
It would take only three months for the CIA to prepare written summaries of topics presented during all the morning briefings during that period, Dorn said. Such summaries wouldn't be adequate for Libby's defense, his lawyers said today.
``Such summaries will likely not contain the information Mr. Libby needs to refresh his recollection and to explain to the jury his state of mind,'' they said.
When was he charged with lying to the FBI? I thought it was just the grand jury? No?
No. The 5 count indictment from October has 2 counts of false statement.
Those are the charges of lying to the FBI.
Was in the CIA. I still bet on Tenet being the original "leaker" to Novak and Woodward.
Translation: Some people in the CIA don't want their rogue operations against the Bush Administration exposed.
This goes back to the key question: Why in the world was there an investigation into mentioning the name of an "operative" at the CIA?
I never knew this was a crime.
This is silly. The briefings are the briefings. They already have been produced and documented. It should take but the pushing of a button to reconstruct them.
Where the h*** is Porter Goss? God help us if this is how slowly the CIA operates.
Didn't the CIA start all of this by referring the so called leak by Novak to the Justice Dept? Seems to me they've got no one to blame but themselves. They made a referral over a non-issue, and can now accept the consequences.
Isn't that his exact legal strategy? If he isn't allowed to defend himslf, the case must be thrown out, right?
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.