Posted on 10/28/2005 5:00:46 AM PDT by kcvl
Per Fox News...
But not very. And if his approach to classified information is that casual, he doesn't belong in the WH anyway.
Nope. We agree that Fitzgerald didn't think he could make a case that he intentionally did so.
Which, if all of the factual assertions in the indictment are true, shows a fair amount of restraint. If those assertions are true, then Libby told reporters the SAME information that he KNEW he couldn't talk about on a non-secure telephone line. It wouldn't take a crazed partisan prosecutor to put 2 and 2 together and conclude that this shows intent.
What classified information was disclosed?
Enjoying your give and take, but define "EVERYONE" for us?
Thanks
Look, show me the law where Fitz's could have charged Libby or anyone else for releasing classified info? The '82 law is specific...Fitz could not have charged anyone because he had no leg to stand legally, and he knows it.
We agree that Fitzgerald didn't think he could make a case that he intentionally did so.
Well hells bells, if Libby LIED about it and Fitz can prove he did it, he can certainly prove he released the "CLASSIED" info intentionally...You're wrong!
You can buy his BS, I won't he had NOTHING because the LAW is clear on Covert agents status and Plame wasn't one...and he knows it. The whole game revovled around outing a COVERT agent, "classified" is a smokescreen...
Lots of interesting ideas being thrown around. I do wonder though at the real seriousness of all this. She was indeed small potatoes, and not worth all this fuss, originally from Libby and friends, nor from the media, nor from the special prosecutor. But I am always amazed how it is the little things like this that bring people down, if indeed Libby goes down over this. I cannot tell you how many times in the military I have seen a high ranking General work his way to the top only to be booted for skimming $50 on an expense account or having a newfound zipper problem. Always makes you ask "what were they thinking"? Same for Libby---should have just stuck with going straight at Wilson. Having said all that, is this not the kind of thing that happens all day long with every administration and Congress? Just so much more important stuff is leaked by "unnamed" high officials and out of Congressional Committees it is amazing we think this one is so important. Regardless of all you arguments, is this not all a political garbage throwing contest and not worth our time UNLESS they are serious about stopping all Classified leaks from Washington DC--in which case both Rep and Demo Administrations and Congressmen on both sides--but especially Democratic who get away with it by the press-better watch out? I know James Carville and friends never did anything like what Libby is accused of doing---leaking Classified info to hurt a political opponent. Ha.
That Valerie Wilson was employed by the CIA. Just as it says in the indictment.
Sure. 'Everyone' is everyone described in the indictment who says they didn't tell Libby about Plame (Russert, Miller) as well as everyone who DID testify that Libby knew about Plame well before he talked to Russert (Ari Fleischer, Marc Grossman, Catherine Martin, whoever was on Marine Two, whichever 'aide' to Libby is referenced, and 'Official A'.
This is assuming that he lied in court. The quotes and accusations are cherry-picked and not given -- to my satisfaction -- full context. We will see.
BTW, we are witnessing a high-stakes game of chicken. Fitz threatens 30 years of jailtime (over this?). Libby shoots back that he will fight.
Both sides think the other doesn't want to go to court. Fitz' press conference made it clear that he doesn't.
In skimming the indictment, a few things struck me. One, Fitz referred to the sixteen words as "the sixteen words". That phrase is a Dem talking point and doesn't deserve to be in a formal court document. He really seems to be arguing the point of the left about the so-called sixteen words early in the timeline, characterizing articles from the New Republic, et al. in a sympathetic light.
A problem for Fitzgerald is that his own office leaked furiously these past two weeks. Schumer showed his hand and it's now clear he was told something.
Interesting that Joe Wilson is given such slack in the indictment: "Wilson stated that he believed, based on his understanding of government procedures, that the Office of the Vice President was advised of the results of his trip."
I'm not even convinced of the "facts" established in the timeline. Read the indictment PDF here. Libby is accused of lying about being the leaker to Russert, of lying about not being the leaker to Cooper, and I'm not sure of what he's accused of vis-a-vis Miller. Read #32 and #33 in the first indictment. Also, Fitzgerald is very sloppy in what he considers to be a lie. For example, Fitz called all of this a lie:
. . . . And then he said, you know, did you know that this – excuse me, did you know that Ambassador Wilson's wife works at the CIA? And I was a little taken aback by that. I remember being taken aback by it. And I said – he may have said a little more but that was – he said that. And I said, no, I don't know that. And I said, no, I don't know that intentionally because I didn't want him to take anything I was saying as in any way confirming what he said, because at that point in time I did not recall that I had ever known, and I thought this is something that he was telling me that I was first learning. And so I said, no, I don't know that because I want to be very careful not to confirm it for him, so that he didn't take my statement as confirmation for him.
But the stuff that I bolded is the only thing that could be proven false. The rest of it is only contradicted by the word of Russert. So you have to assume Russert is right.
Fitzgerald has a case here, IMHO, but a weaker one than is in the indictment (which is usually the case). I'd say 80% of the charges are that Libby must be lying because the reporters must be telling the truth. Cooper and Miller will be bad witnesses because of their previous public lies and Fitzgerald's press conference was a mess. Discovery will bring up the Who's Who article and others who hung out at cocktail parties with the Wilsons. I'd say Fitzgerald fears court far more than Libby, but now he's stuck. He has to get something. Now he's taking a risk: Will Libby make a deal?
Just a conjecture. It doesn't pass Occam's test, but I think it passes yours.
Chapter and verse from the indictment, please.
He knew he did wrong (I'm not saying here he violated IIPA - but revealing classified info to reporters for political reasons is WRONG.
Are you Ronnie Earle? Ronnie Earle puts people in jail not because they did anything illegal but because he believed what they did was WRONG.
It is clear that, at least by sometime in January 2004 -- and probably much earlier -- Fitzgerald knew this law had not been violated. Plame was not a "covert" agent but a bureaucrat working at CIA headquarters. Instead of closing shop, however, Fitzgerald sought an expansion of his mandate and has now charged offenses that grew entirely out of the investigation itself.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/10/28/AR2005102801771_pf.html
The talk of 30 year sentencing is certainly beyond the pale. It shows Fitz is vindictive (and he used the word vindicated himself).
IF Libby does get sentenced I wouldn't be surprised to see a pardon SOMETIME before the administration leaves.
The best defense is a good offense. Can anyone give me a quick list (names, places, dates) where Rat Congressmen have disclosed the names of agents in the field (some of whom DID die)?
I know it has happened in the past (disclosure) and would like to throw it back in their face. Ms. Plame was not undercover and what's more, may have been serving an agenda contrary to the administration in deciding to send her husband on the fact finding mission.
Libby shoulnd't make a deal. How many non-communists personally had their careers ruined by Sen. McCarthy? This is far worse; Libby is being branded a traitor. By Michael Moore types! HA!
It is a partisan attack on a man and I would hope that the grievous wrong that is being done here would merit a Presidential pardon if he is convicted and harshly punished.
This is a case about a leak, which was not found to be criminal, and has turned into a case about making misstatements to the Grand Jury (whether deliberate or accidental). Meanwhile the secret Grand Jury proceedings have been leaked to the media with no visible effort being made to determine who is making the illegal leaks.
The left is cheering over this. Wonder if they like how much this media circus is costing the government.
Second, I didn't say he should go to jail for 'doing wrong.' I said his knowledge that he had 'done wrong' was a reason for lying about it.
Libby is accused of lying about being the leaker to Russert, of lying about not being the leaker to Cooper, and I'm not sure of what he's accused of vis-a-vis Miller. Read #32 and #33 in the first indictment.
I think Fitz' deal will be such a joke that Libby will almost be forced to take it. The 5 counts are over the top, repetitive and unnecessary. His procedure in all this was bizarre. His press conference was strange. He doesn't want to go to trial. Wilson, Cooper and Miller will be awful witnesses.
Why shouldn't we defend him? As far as I'm concerned he is innocent up until he is found guilty. I don't believe for a minute that is going to happen...
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.