Posted on 10/19/2005 7:18:17 AM PDT by frankjr
Someone lied to the Grand Jury..
No question there was no crime. Wilson lied when he said he was sent to Niger by the VP. If any of the WH people lied to the GJ then they could face charges. Trouble is, so much has been made of this because the WH didn't come right out and call Wilson a liar when he published his yellow cake adventure story.
""At the end of the day," says the former intelligence official, "this could end up being a situation where there wasn't a crime until there was an investigation.""
So basically this article is an indirect way of saying that if there was a crime it's probably obstruction of justice or perjury or something like that.
That's how Martha Stewart got nailed.
But the former intelligence official warns that it is possible that just some parts of Wilson's findings were classified — say, specific sources he contacted whose identities have not been revealed. If that is case, the official argues, then Wilson did not violate any laws in his statements to the press (even those statements that were later found to be untrue).
It looks like it was a set-up by Wilson along these lines: He lies about his findings that were (orally) reported back to the CIA. In order for the WH to refute his lies, they will have to release confidential information. Or at least that is Wilson's hope.
Wilson's ploy goes awry when he is instead discredited by the nepotism issue of his hiring, and then later the report from the Senate Intelligence Committee. No classified info was leaked (as far as we know thus far), but Wilson tries to pin the "outing" of Plame on Rove as a reaction to his failed trap. It is now widely believed there was no crime committed in identifying his wife's involvement in his Niger assignment.
So, unless someone purgured themselves or obstructed justice during the inquiry, there will be no indictments.
All joking aside, it's rather funny to see a witch hunt end with no witches. Just a New York Times reporter with a big wart on her nose, a black cat, and a broom, but no real witches. The leftists are giddy with anticipation that Rove will be indicted. Watch for sales of razor blades and rat poison in the blue states to skyrocket in the next few days.
The media is going to look pretty foolish if there is no indictment.
Of course, the media looks pretty foolish anyway.
And how do you determine who lied? In any encounter, two people will have different views at what happened. I have no doubt there are dozens of inconsistancies between testimony. This whole thing is an indictment against the whole special prosecutor, which has just become an excsue to spend millions of dollars on every meaningless event.
To obstruct justice, would you not have to be blocking information about an illegal act that had been committed? If no crime was committed, how can one obstruct justice?
You could charge perjury for almost every contested court case but it's not done.
Seems to me the problem is with whoever made false statements or accused others of doing things it turns out they did not. If it's a crime to cover up a non-crime it certainly should be a crime to manufacture the same non-crime and cause the taxpayers to waste money persuing something that should never have been persued in the first place.
This is like punishing a child for supposedly knocking over a vase and breaking it but later learning that the vase was never broken. But in the course of finding that out the child doesn't co-operate with the vase "investigation" so the child gets punished anyway.
If Martha Stewart went to jail for lying to federal investigators for a crime she eventually was never convicted of what the hell happened to the people that lied to the same agency the investigators worked for that started the investigation in the first place? Why didn't they go to jail? Somebody lied when they said she committed a crime but it turns out she did not. Isn't that the same thing Martha went to jail for?
I hope that the bar for perjury is also sufficiently high. I'm not sure it is for "conspiracy".
It certainly does look that this is the most likely thing at this point... the question is who? Given Wilson has habitually lied for years, he would be a canidate, but of course he hasn't been called in front of the Grand Jury 3 or 4 times either... some somethings going on... but just what, who knows.
"To obstruct justice, would you not have to be blocking information about an illegal act that had been committed? If no crime was committed, how can one obstruct justice?"
As I understand it, you just have to lie during an investigation and sometimes you just have to omit information.
President Clinton is a perfect example.
If Fitzgerald indicts Karl Rove and "Scooter" Libby, he better have a damn good, airtight case. Because if he indicts the shaky way Ronnie Earle did with Tom Delay, he is going to look like a horse's butt, just as Earle does. The real culprit here is the MSM and Joe Wilson. Wilson should be in prison for treason!!!
If it's good enough for the President, it's good enough for his Cheif of Staff, the Veep's aides, and the Speaker of the House. Clinton, Delay, Rove, Scooter...
"It's not the crime, it's the cover-up." You'd think politicians would learn. But they never do.
That's how Martha Stewart got nailed.
But in Stewart's case, there was an underlying charge and indictment for insider trading. It's still up at the SEC website. So, in Martha's case, there was an allegation of crime (maybe, I don't know whether the insider trading case has been disposed of, or if so, how) before she lied to investigators.
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.