Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Withdraw the Libby indictment {Wash Times Ed.)
Washington Times ^ | Nov 17, 2005 | editorial

Posted on 11/17/2005 2:49:48 AM PST by The Raven

Bob Woodward's just-released statement, suggesting that on June 27, 2003, he may have been the reporter who told Scooter Libby about Joseph Wilson's wife, blew a gigantic hole in Patrick Fitzgerald's recently unveiled indictment of the vice president's former chief of staff.

While that indictment did not charge Mr. Libby with outing a CIA covert operative, it alleged that he lied to investigators and the grand jury. As we have stated earlier on this page -- and unlike many conservative voices then -- we believe perjury is always a serious offense (even in a political setting). And if sufficient evidence exists to support a conviction, then Mr. Fitzgerald's indictment of Mr. Libby was fully warranted.

However, the heart of his perjury theory was predicated upon the proposition that Mr. Libby learned of Valerie Plame's identity from other government officials and not from NBC's Tim Russert, ...

--snip

However, given Mr. Woodward's account, which came to light after the Libby indictment was announced, that he met with Mr. Libby in his office -- armed with the list of questions, which explicitly referenced "yellowcake" and "Joe Wilson's wife" and may have shared this information during the interview -- it is entirely possible that Mr. Libby may have indeed heard about Mrs. Plame's employment from a reporter. ...

--snip Accordingly, Mr. Fitzgerald should do the right thing and promptly dismiss the indictment of Scooter Libby.

(Excerpt) Read more at washtimes.com ...


TOPICS: Editorial
KEYWORDS: cialeak; libby; woodward
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120 ... 201-208 next last
To: All
Reality Check: Fitzma is cancelled. The DEMS want "OUT" before any reporters are made to testify. Too many folks have said they knew about Flame. Fitz's statement that it wasn't universally known that Plame was an agent is a false premise.....Russia, Cuba, Woodward, Cooper, Miller, Pincus.

We're talking about an agent who outed herself on her third date to a man who had "too many wives and drugs". A woman who pondered before she told him...about all the money and time the CIA had spent on her.

I believe THAT secret outing was never told to the CIA and believe Joe considers himself to be another Lawrence of Arabia.

Joe's book was "worthless" without the addition of Valerie's outing. (He even said so.)That's what his July 6th article was about. It was inevitable that Valerie would be outed. Everyone knew. "Hire me: I'll come out", said Joe to the Dems".

A "friend", "Cooper's phone calls" and Voila....an attempt to take down Rove is born.

81 posted on 11/17/2005 5:11:50 AM PST by Sacajaweau (God Bless Our Troops!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: Cboldt

" A year? Your calendar is different from the one most of the US uses then."

Libby testified in March 2004. Many of the questions were about converstaions from June and July of 2003.


82 posted on 11/17/2005 5:12:08 AM PST by Sam Hill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies]

To: Cboldt

Of course you're not buying it. Liberals' only believe what suits their agenda.


83 posted on 11/17/2005 5:12:49 AM PST by counterpunch (~ Let O'Connor Go Home! ~)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies]

To: advance_copy
Fitzgerald's premise that Libby could not have learned about Plame from reporters is discredited by the Woodward revelation.

The indictment does not depend on that premise.

84 posted on 11/17/2005 5:12:58 AM PST by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies]

To: Sam Hill
Libby testified in March 2004.

That is not the only time he testified.

26. As part of the criminal investigation, LIBBY was interviewed by Special Agents of the FBI on or about October 14 and November 26, 2003, each time in the presence of his counsel. During these interviews, LIBBY stated to FBI Special Agents that: ...

85 posted on 11/17/2005 5:15:19 AM PST by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: counterpunch
Of course you're not buying it. Liberals' only believe what suits their agenda.

When you can't win with reason, resort to ad hominem.

86 posted on 11/17/2005 5:16:10 AM PST by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: meema
That would be perfect......For the Dems. But it doesn't get to the bottom of the matter. Just another Dem Plan that went awry...Kinda like Rathergate. It will just go away....

I have a feeling that that Federal Law for Protection of Sources is not going well.

87 posted on 11/17/2005 5:16:50 AM PST by Sacajaweau (God Bless Our Troops!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: counterpunch

Isn't it funny how we no longer hear how rare it is to prosecute for perjury. That was all we heard during the Clinton saga.

At the very least Libby should argue selective prosecution.

All this talk of Woodward at the very least should remind everyone that Mark Felt is considered a hero by the media and the rest of the establishment.

What did he do? He leaked knowingly leaked classified information in retaliation for being passed over for head of the FBI.

Just last month people were giving him awards. (One of which was personally presented by Judith Miller, before the NY Times realized she had double crossed them.)


88 posted on 11/17/2005 5:16:53 AM PST by Sam Hill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: Cboldt

That is not "testimony", insofar as Libby is not under oath, and has no obligation to assist the FBI.


89 posted on 11/17/2005 5:17:54 AM PST by Senator Bedfellow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies]

To: OldFriend

There is truly an "angel in the whirlwind."


90 posted on 11/17/2005 5:18:45 AM PST by Carolinamom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Cboldt

Read the indictment, hot shot. He was indicted for his testimony in March 2004:

"31. In or about March 2004, in the District of Columbia,

I. LEWIS LIBBY, also known as "SCOOTER LIBBY,"

defendant herein, did knowingly and corruptly endeavor to influence, obstruct and impede the due administration of justice, namely proceedings before Grand Jury 03-3, by misleading and deceiving the grand jury as to when, and the manner and means by which, LIBBY acquired and subsequently disclosed to the media information concerning the employment of Valerie Wilson by the CIA."


91 posted on 11/17/2005 5:19:14 AM PST by Sam Hill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies]

To: counterpunch
Well, we need a catchy slogan that highlights Fitzgerald's hypocrisy. It should point out that Fitzgerald failed to hold himself to the same standard of accuracy in his investigation that he held Libby to in his testimony.

So how do we phrase that concisely in a way that is easy to digest?

Perhaps Doug from Upland can do something along the lines of the wreck of the Patrick Fitzgerald (not my line)

92 posted on 11/17/2005 5:20:49 AM PST by dearolddad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Cboldt

The indictment does depend on that premise, as Fitzgerald asserts that reporters didn't know and could not have told Libby. This is why Fitzgerald charges that Libby didn't tell Cooper or Miller that he heard about Plame from reporters. Woodward shows Fitzgerald is wrong about that and that he does not have a case.


93 posted on 11/17/2005 5:22:30 AM PST by advance_copy (Stand for life, or nothing at all)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies]

To: Senator Bedfellow
That is not "testimony", insofar as Libby is not under oath, and has no obligation to assist the FBI.

Okay, but it's a argument of sophistry on your part to object to the term "testimony." Counts 2 and 3 of the indictment recite those dates and that testimony as the object of "false statement" offenses, which are a crime under 18 USC 1001(a)(2).

94 posted on 11/17/2005 5:22:42 AM PST by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies]

To: Sam Hill
Read the indictment, hot shot.

Ta ta, hot shot.

95 posted on 11/17/2005 5:23:54 AM PST by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies]

To: counterpunch
So how do we phrase that concisely in a way that is easy to digest?

The Wretch That Is Patrick Fitzgerald

</shameless self-promotion>

96 posted on 11/17/2005 5:24:35 AM PST by freedumb2003 (Let's tear down the observatory so we never get hit by a meteor again!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: dearolddad
Perhaps Doug from Upland can do something along the lines of the wreck of the Patrick Fitzgerald (not my line)

See 96

97 posted on 11/17/2005 5:25:50 AM PST by freedumb2003 (Let's tear down the observatory so we never get hit by a meteor again!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 92 | View Replies]

To: Cboldt

Yeah, it's the Martha Stewart offense - it was BS then, and it's BS now.


98 posted on 11/17/2005 5:25:58 AM PST by Senator Bedfellow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 94 | View Replies]

To: OldFriend

That's why I want there to be a trial. I want Libby's lawyer to question these people under oath. Then the public will see what a lying bunch of people these people are.Also, it will be fun to see them all turning on each other.


99 posted on 11/17/2005 5:27:07 AM PST by babydoll22 (If you stop growing as a person you live in your own private hell.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: The Raven

Again, WOW! I used to think I was smart, but I can't follow this at all, and am too lazy to read the indictment. I'm leaning toward thinking Libby lied, BUT.... He must NEVER EVER be convicted. EVER! If the dems want you convicted, if the party that put M. Moore in the Presidential Box at their convention, and the party of Alger Hiss, the commies, the VC, the Rosenbergs, the Clintons, and Roe V. Wade, and gun control, if THAT party wants you convicted, then in my eyes you (Libby) are an instant god, a hero, a saint, a man who must be showered with love, respect, and gold. Death to the dems and all their filthy, sub-human, scum-sucking, piece of filth allies.


100 posted on 11/17/2005 5:28:43 AM PST by RayStacy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120 ... 201-208 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson