Posted on 02/25/2007 11:51:02 AM PST by RussP
But we aren't talking about a defense attorney, are we?
We're talking about the Prosecutor's Prosecutor, right?
Surely, he wouldn't be playing games with the jury, would he?
bookmarked and bumped
Playing games with the jury? Are you just making stuff up? What kind of games do you think he is playing? Mind control to cause a juror to go seek out information in the press?
There is no way that OVP didn't know exactly what her status was - all they had to do was ask. Libby had all necessary clearances.
If her job wasn't classified, can you think of any reason why Libby would've AGREED in the CIPA proceedings that her status would not be a part of the trial? Why in the world wouldn't they demand that it be admitted?
Why, restarting deliberations, of course. Why would he want to delay proceedings for another 2.5 days or more? Justice delayed is justice denied, you know.
"The SP is accountable to the judge, his superiors at DOJ, the bar, all kinds of folks."
Only in the grossest sense. He is given very wide latitude. A perjury charge is a classic example of a charge that can virtually *always* be made. Whether someone lied or just had an innocent lapse of memory is obviously difficult to establish. Hence Fitz can always claim to have acted in good faith.
"There is no way that OVP didn't know exactly what her status was - all they had to do was ask. Libby had all necessary clearances."
That's baloney. Yes, of course they could have *found out* her official status, but they had no reason initially to even guess that she was *undercover." Do you think they should have investigated her status before they even mentioned her name? Bull****.
My article apparently sailed completely over your head. I suggest you read it again, because the issue of Plame's covert status is a farce. Even if she was technically "undercover," she was useless for covert work for several reasons, including the fact that she was married to a high-visibility public figure. It just doesn't work that way, and if you can't figure that out you are either extremely naive or just pretending to be.
No, I'm not saying they knew beforehand, though I think they certainly could've. I'm saying that, in defending against the charges, or responding to the investigation, there is no way they wouldn't know exactly what her status was. If she was overt, can you think of any reason in the world why they would agree not to bring that into a trial?
"So you think she could've been "technically undercover" but not really undercover?"
Absolutely. Have you ever dealt with a bureaucracy?
"If she was overt, can you think of any reason in the world why they would agree not to bring that into a trial?"
I don't know who agreed to what. My understanding was that the pinhead judge made Plame's status off limits.
You are aware, I hope, that neither Libby nor anyone else is being charged with "outing" Plame. As an excercize, why don't you explain to me why that is so. Could it possibly be that she really *wasn't* "undercover"?
WRT prosecution for 'outing' - intent is an element. It seems plain that the reason Armitage didn't get charges with anything is that he came off as a big doofus who didn't know her status. Should he have checked it out? Sure. But that's not criminal - it would only involve revocation of clearance. I think, if she wasn't covert under IIPA, the same explanation applies wrt revealing classified info under Espionage Act - there must be proof of intent to release classified info. That would've been the biggest hurdle for any prosecution of those crimes.
I've already agreed that Plame's status may have technically been "covert," but I also explained why that is irrelevant. If Libby's lawyers stipulated what her technical classification was, so what? If someone sticks a name tag on you that says "pink elephant," that doesn't make you a pink elephant, but it would be silly to argue that you are not wearing a tag that says such.
You just don't seem to want to face the obvious. Plame had worked openly at CIA headquarters for some period of time, perhaps over 5 years. She got a job for her unqualified husband to do an investigation for the CIA, yet he was not required to sign a standard NDA. He went public in a *big* way, with an editorial in the NYT accusing the President of lying to start a war. How in the f***ing world you think her identity could have possibly been kept secret during all that is beyond me. It's almost as if I told you not to think of a pink elephant.
If you're not just pulling my leg, you've fallen for a transparent scam that would be funny if someone weren't facing jail time. The only real question here is whether the Plame "outing" was a planned setup from the start or whether it fell into the Left's lap due to brain-dead media coverage. I lean toward the latter. How about you?
The thing I find odd about the vehement attacks on the prosecution is that Libby is not the only one who initially didn't come completely clean with the GJ. They let Rove come back 4 times to clarify the things he "forgot" and "misremembered" - and didn't charge him with anything. Libby testified multiple times, but refused to own up to what the other evidence showed were flaws in his own story. I think if he had done what Rove did and said, "ya know, your right, I must've had those conversations. But I didn't think it was classified, yadayadayada" he probably wouldn't have been charged.
To really understand the absurdity of the Libby case, I suggest you read one of the linked articles in my article. It is by John Podhoretz:
http://frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=26861
Excerpt:
So let's review. No crime was committed, according to Fitzgerald, in the publication of Valerie Plame Wilson's name.
No crime was committed, according to Fitzgerald, by the actions of two government officials who revealed Valerie Plame Wilson's name to Novak.
No crime was committed, according to Fitzgerald, by the White House press secretary who actually and actively tried to spoon-feed the name to three journalists.
Scooter Libby, by contrast, spoke to a reporter who didn't publish a story with Valerie Plame Wilson's name in it. She went to jail for 85 days. Now Fitzgerald wants to send Libby to jail too - on the basis of dimly remembered conversations and indecipherable chicken scratches.
So why did this series of conversations end up being the subject of a criminal investigation? Don't ask. Really. The jury's not even supposed to think about Valerie Plame Wilson's status - whether covert, classified, non-covert, non-classified or whatever. Honestly. That's what the judge ruled.
Ladies and gentlemen, I give you the Crime Without a Cause.
"There is no way that OVP didn't know exactly what her status was - all they had to do was ask. Libby had all necessary clearances."
OK, I'm probably beating this thing to death, but I just want to make one more point here. The Vice President is not responsible for keeping track of who is and is not "covert" at the CIA. The CIA is supposed to be responsible for keeping the identity of their covert agents secret. In Plame's case, they clearly failed in that responsibility. And blaming the VP for knowing what was generally known about her in Washington social circles is ridiculous.
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.