Libby indicted - five counts

[Jedster]

[ QUOTE ]
It amazes me how some can't understand what's going on. Basically Fitz believes the underlying crime was committed but thinks that Libby's lying is preventing him from figuring out who to charge. This perjury charge is just the beginning of a long process. He didn't comment on anyone else but said that his investigation would continue. When Scooter realizes the trouble he is in I would not be surprised if he flips and future charges are brought against now unknown people or Rove.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, very good post. Also, he made it very clear that indicting someone for leaking classified information is something that needs to be taken very seriously for fear of turning the espionage act into the American equivalent of UK's Official Secrets act. I actually think Fitzgerald may have made a good move here by avoiding wading into that thorny issue yet at the same time making sure the public interest is represented by nailing the initial leaker's ass to the wall.

[ QUOTE ]
As for my assertion that they never offer solutions, only a litany of complaints I submit the fact that I can't find any information from the Dems on how to fix just about anything.

[/ QUOTE ]

Wow. I swear to god this sounds like you cut and pasted straight from a Hannity and Colmes or O'Reilly Factor transcript. If you honestly believe that the Dems (I am not a Dem, mind you) don't offer solutions and that you can't "find any information" you either are 1) Not looking anywhere 2) Are only looking to right-wing sources, or 3) You are unbiasedly looking but are a mentally retarded 8 year old orphan that needs nice parents to look over you and cradle you during times of confusion.

Quit regurgitating partisan bullshit you heard somewhere. If you want me to prove you completely wrong on not having solutions I absofuckinglutely will.

[giddyyup]

[ QUOTE ]
Yes, very good post

[/ QUOTE ]

Agreed, except that this:

[ QUOTE ]
Basically Fitz believes the underlying crime was committed but thinks that Libby's lying is preventing him from figuring out who to charge.

[/ QUOTE ]

While seemingly logical, is speculation. Fitzgerald did not say whether he believed a criminal "outing" occurred. While he found that conduct was taken that satisfied the act element of the statute ("outing" Plame), the lying and the cover up made it impossible to determine whether the perpetrator had criminal intent (knowledge or reckless disregard).

[Dotson]

Your post is right. Good clarification

[benfranklin]

[ QUOTE ]


So does anyone think that perhaps this verifies what the republicans have been saying all along that no crime was actually committed?

[/ QUOTE ]

The crime is that we have government officials on both sides of the political spectrum spending an inordinate amount of time engaged in petty politics, partisan bickering, dirty tricks, cover-ups, scheming, and legal battles.

These people are stealing tax money by not earning their salaries, and by wasting the time of lawyers, judges, etc., who could be doing real work if they weren't tied up with this crap.

[Jedster]

[ QUOTE ]
So does anyone think that perhaps this verifies what the republicans have been saying all along that no crime was actually committed?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes. Generally, five count indictments with penalties totalling 30 years mean the prosecutor believes no crime was actually committed.

[Felix_Nietsche]

I heard several troubling statements by Patrick Fitz.
(1) He made a long speech implying that Libby blew Valerie Plame's cover....YET....he did not have the evidence to charge him for this. But this did not stop him from painting Libby as guilty of blowing her cover. I think this stinks of grandstanding and he was over-the-top in implying this when NO ONE has been indicted for doing so. If he had evidence that a law was broken about revealing a covert CIA agents cover, THEN INDICT SOMEONE FOR DOING SO. If you don’t have the evidence to indict (much less prove), then ethically Fitz should have kept his mouth shut.

(2) He lectured the press of the dangers of blowing the cover of a CLASSIFIED CIA agent and that this hurts us all. All CIA employees are classified but not all COVERT. The law that Libby was being invested for was blowing the cover of a COVERT CIA agent. I think Fitz was being a little cute with his language and deceptive. What he failed to say was that she was NO LONGER covert and therefore the law did not apply.

(3) After extensive investigation, Libby is being charged for a lying about a crime that he did not commit. To go one step further, Fitz could not even find enough evidence to determine if even if a crime of a revealing a covert agent was even committed. Fitz has spent two years of tax payer’s money and he was running up against a deadline of the grand jury being dismissed and at the last moment he makes these charges. Something is rotten in Denmark….

(4) He failed to give closure to the investigation but did concede that the bulk of the investigative work was complete. I suspect he will take a crack at Libby to see if he will rat out others to avoid an indictment. This will not happen.


I don't know whether Libby tried to deceive the grand jury/prosecution or not. What I do know is that Libby left a million dollar law practice to take a $100K govt job. I do know is VERY strange that he would deliberately perjure himself while giving notes to the investigators that contradicted himself. To believe that he did this intentionally is to believe that an experience lawyer who was well versed in the laws of perjury and obstruction of justice would:
(1) Perjure himself.
(2) Give notes to the prosecution that contracted his own testimony.

If I’m a smart successful lawyer that is going to perjure myself, I’m going to DESTROY MY PERSONAL NOTES that would contradict my sworn testimony. A more likely explanation is that his recollection of two-year-old conversations was faulty. JEEZ…..Don’t ask me about conversations that are TWO WEEKS old much less conversations that are two YEARS old.


Predictions:
*Libby that left a million dollar law practice to take a $100K govt job will be in court for the next several years.
*Karl Rove is pretty much exonerated of blowing the cover of a CIA agent. The standard of indicting someone is not high (HENCE the old joke that a prosecutor could indict a ham sandwich). Fitz conceded that the investigation portion is pretty much over but he will empanel another grand jury. He may think that he can persuade Libby to rat out others but I this will NOT happen.
*Libby is pissed. A faulty memory of conversations that are two years old will cost him a lot of time and money in court. He will no longer voluntarily cooperate with Fitz.
*The Dems will try to make political hay of this and as usually they will overplay their hand. Despite several attempts, Bush43 will not be affected. No one even heard of Libby before this. He is easily replaced.
*Indictments are a dime-a-dozen. Proving indictments are tough. Libby will get a smart defense attorney that will conduct a harsh cross examination and it will be revealed that certain members of the press will be caught lying to the grand jury (Judy Miller for one). The prosecution’s case will fall apart and Libby will be acquitted.
*Robert Novak source that started this feeding frenzy was neither Rove nor Libby. THIS WILL BE A HUGE REVELATION.

[AngryCola]

[ QUOTE ]
A faulty memory of conversations that are two years old

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, this isn't going to fly.

I find your post troubling.

[Nepa]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
A faulty memory of conversations that are two years old

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, this isn't going to fly.

I find your post troubling.

[/ QUOTE ]

Judge Bork said the same thing yesterday on Hannity. It was kinda funny because Sean kept trying to change the question after he didn't like the answer.

[Jedster]

[ QUOTE ]
I heard several troubling statements by Patrick Fitz.
(1) He made a long speech implying that Libby blew Valerie Plame's cover

[/ QUOTE ]

He didn't imply this. He stated it as fact.

[ QUOTE ]
The law that Libby was being invested for was blowing the cover of a COVERT CIA agent.

[/ QUOTE ]

If you actually listened, you know this isn't true. I won't explain, go figure it out for yourself if you're interested.

[ QUOTE ]
(3) After extensive investigation, Libby is being charged for a lying about a crime that he did not commit.

[/ QUOTE ]

You don't know that. But it's irrelevant whether he committed it or not.

[ QUOTE ]
(4) He failed to give closure to the investigation but did concede that the bulk of the investigative work was complete. I suspect he will take a crack at Libby to see if he will rat out others to avoid an indictment. This will not happen.

[/ QUOTE ]

Did Libby tell you this between the sheets last night?

[ QUOTE ]
What I do know is that Libby left a million dollar law practice defending Marc Rich to take a $100K govt job.

[/ QUOTE ]

FYP

[ QUOTE ]
I do know is VERY strange that he would deliberately perjure himself while giving notes to the investigators that contradicted himself. To believe that he did this intentionally is to believe that an experience lawyer who was well versed in the laws of perjury and obstruction of justice would:
(1) Perjure himself.
(2) Give notes to the prosecution that contracted his own testimony.

[/ QUOTE ]

It is strange. He must have thought reporters would not reveal their sources.

[ QUOTE ]
*Libby is pissed. A faulty memory of conversations that are two years old will cost him a lot of time and money in court. He will no longer voluntarily cooperate with Fitz.

[/ QUOTE ]

If he hadn't "voluntarily" made up a BS story he wouldn't be in this fix. For example, if he didn't lie and say that Tim Russert told him who Valeria Wilson was when he actually learned it from Cheney weeks earlier AND when Russert said the topic didn't come up, then he wouldn't be in trouble now.

[ QUOTE ]
*Indictments are a dime-a-dozen.

[/ QUOTE ]

Dimes must be worth a lot because this is the first indictment of a sitting WH aide in 130 years.

[ QUOTE ]
*Robert Novak source that started this feeding frenzy was neither Rove nor Libby. THIS WILL BE A HUGE REVELATION.

[/ QUOTE ]

Um, going back to the first point, Fitzgerald declared that Libby was the first to reveal to the press Valerie Wilson's identity, NOT whomever told Novak.

Felix, as always, you don't fail to amuse. Keep it up, good ol' boy! And please, middle that Tom DeLay bet. After all, we're all gamblers first, and political hacks second.