Comments on: Some Thoughts On The Libby Verdict

Bob Schieffer Wonders If The Verdict Was Worth The Trial In The CIA Lead Investigation

[clemenhagen1]

Another lie by the aptly named Ofer: You are zero for the truth in your posts.

"One of the questions that both Woodward and Novak had for Armitrage was 'Why was Joe Wilson sent by the CIA?' Armitrage answered that it was his wife who worked for the CIA who recommended him."

Why was Joe Wilson sent? Because Cheney was sweating the CIA to find out about the supposed purchases? Why were they after this? Because they knew there were documents (forged of course) that suggested such? Why was Joseph Wilson sent? He was the former ambassador of Niger AND also had been in the diplomatic corp in Iraq. Who else had his credentials in both countries? Why was it necessary to expose his wife, Plame, and her CIA front-company, Brewster-Jennings? That comes across as sheer and petty political vengeance, pure and simple. Treason too!

[clemenhagen1]

DECEPTION POSTED BY OFER: "I agree with you that Libby was CONVICTED OF PERJURY & OBSTRUCTION of justice. Those charges stemmed from the statements that he made to the Grand Jury and the FBI. But the reason why he was not even charged under the Intelligence Identies Protection Act, was that Fitzgerald had no evidence."

Why does a prosecutor pursue perjury? Because of obstruction of justice! Why pursue obstruction of justice? Because the obstruction of justice prevents the resolution of the central crime in question. Cheney orchestrated a campaign of petty revenge against Joseph Wilson for telling the truth about their lies for war. In the process, Cheney & Bush sent a message to the entire intelligence community: mess with our fabrications and fictions about this war and we will stop at nothing, including your families, to make you pay! Why perjury and obstruction of justice? Because Fitzgerald himself said the obstruction reached such a severe level he could not complete his investigation. Libby and other central players lied to the extent that the true crime got effectively covered up. To hear Republicans talk, that obstruction of justice should be rewarded because Fitzgerald could never prove the "underlying crime." Classic spin, but it's still treason.

[clemenhagen1]

OPFOR with another Talking Point Lie: "C) an individual, other than a United States citizen, whose past or present intelligence relationship to the United States is classified information and who is a present or former agent of, or a present or former informant or source of operational assistance to, an intelligence agency. This is why she does not qualify under the act. This is not a Repbulican talking point...this is the law in question"

Are you telling me that Brewster-Jennings, which was deliberately revealed IN PRINT by Novak at the behest of the administration did not fall under this act? Brewster-Jennings had relied on information provided by foreign nationals: none of them qualified as individuals "whose past or present intelligence relationship with the United States was classified information?" Are you kidding me here? How could they print the name of an active covert operation in the newspaper and not have serious collateral damage? Even if Plame wasn't covert (I disagree as she has been identified as a NOC - non-official cover), what justification do they have to out her? What possible gain, other than a war on our very intelligence community, were they seeking? Your lame justifications for these acts amount to nothing other than excuses for treason.

[clemenhagen1]

Bob, while I appeciate your candor as opposed to the outright lies of the right-wing in trying to dismiss the relevance of this case, I think you are being a bit too cautious when you say "we don't know" about the core issues of this case. Let us begin with one absolutely clear and irrefutable fact: Robert Novak exposed Brewster-Jennings, an active CIA front-company. Brewster-Jennings operated under the pretense of being an energy consulting firm when in fact they investigated issues related to weapons proliferation. With these facts not in dispute, the question becomes obvious: why would the administration knowingly and deliberately expose the identity of a covert CIA operation?

I can think of no other reason than to fire a shot-across-the-bow to the intelligence community? Can you come up with a more rational explanation than that? The administration had woven a web of lies, fabrications, and deceits to sell their war of choice. When Wilson publicly challenged the administration on one piece of their fiction they went on the offensive. This outting of Brewster-Jennings sent a clear message to the intelligence community: sound off about the truth and we will stop at nothing, including targeting your family, to destroy you. Anyone got a better interpretation than that? What possible other motive did they have to expose Brewster-Jennings?

[esmunro]

Bob, you are mis-informed or are deliberately mis-informing your audience on two important points. First, you state that it has not be shown that Ms Plame was undercover, however, that was a fact submitted into evidence by Mr. Fitzgerald (copies are on his website!). The defense submitted no evidence that the Administration de-classified that fact. Second, you claim that the sole purpose of the special prosecutor was to identify the source of the leak. Yet you ignore the prosecutor's claim that he was like an umpire getting sand kicked in his face while he was attempting to establish the facts. Americans like me used to hold you in esteem, however, now that we get the real news from outside the CBS/ABC/CNN/FOX corporatocracy, you and CBS are nothing more than schills for the administration.

[opfor311]

jabberwock11,

I encourage you to follow the link and read the entire text from the U.S. Code.

I agree with you that Libby was convicted of purjury and obstruction of justice. Those charges stemmed from the statements that he made to the Grand Jury and the FBI. But the reason why he was not even charged under the Intelligence Identies Protection Act, was that Fitzgerald had no evidence that Libby or anyone else had violated it.

That's why Fitzgerald has gone back to his day job.

[opfor311]

dallison7:

"If it was not an act of revenge, why did it happen? Be careful when you answer... if you answer."

It's pretty simple. When they were confronted with Wilson's editorial in the NYT, they reponded to them. One of the questions that both Woodward and Novak had for Armitrage was 'Why was Joe Wilson sent by the CIA?' Armitrage answered that it was his wife who worked for the CIA who recommended him.

By the way, it was not the Administration who lied. From the Washington Post, July 10th, 2004:

"Wilson's assertions -- both about what he found in Niger and what the Bush administration did with the information -- were undermined yesterday in a bipartisan Senate intelligence committee report.

The panel found that Wilson's report, rather than debunking intelligence about purported uranium sales to Iraq, as he has said, bolstered the case for most intelligence analysts. And contrary to Wilson's assertions and even the government's previous statements, the CIA did not tell the White House it had qualms about the reliability of the Africa intelligence that made its way into 16 fateful words in President Bush's January 2003 State of the Union address.

Yesterday's report said that whether Iraq sought to buy lightly enriched "yellowcake" uranium from Niger is one of the few bits of prewar intelligence that remains an open question. Much of the rest of the intelligence suggesting a buildup of weapons of mass destruction was unfounded, the report said."

[jabberwock11]

Opfor311, Posting a small piece of text out of some law is not the end all of the discussion. I would rather hear lawyers argue it out before making up my mind on this. In any case it doesn%u2019t really matter since Libby was convicted of perjury and obstruction. Bush will pardon him sooner or later anyway so I%u2019m sure he will walk.

[rbfain]

It was really bad that 11 people found him gulity. They should be in jail, not Libby. Better yet BUSH should be in jail.

[joecwilson]

Karl Rove escaped jail and so did Cheney. The real question is why Bush and Cheney still refuse to comment on this case to explain why this happened. The secrecy will not prevail and someone will squeal after they are out of office. It's too bad that Bush has two more years to twist in the wind. He is irrelevant and his government would have fallen in just about every other western democracy. No one has any confidence in this group. More harm has been done to this country than all of Nixon's efforts to undermine our Constitution and democracy. Karl Rove's involvement in the firing of prosecutors is just coming out. Too bad he will not be joining Scooter in prison.

[opfor311]

Folks,

Before you go off half-cocked please read the following:
http://www.fas.org/irp/offdocs/laws/iipa.html

This is the text of the law in question concerning Ms. Plame.

Note the following:
The term "covert agent" means%u2014

(A) a present or retired officer or employee of an intelligence agency or a present or retired member of the Armed Forces assigned to duty with an intelligence agency%u2014
(i) whose identity as such an officer, employee, or member is classified information, and
(ii) who is serving outside the United States or has within the last five years served outside the United States; or
(B) a United States citizen whose intelligence relationship to the United States is classified information, and%u2014
(i) who resides and acts outside the United States as an agent of, or informant or source of operational assistance to, an intelligence agency, or
(ii) who is at the time of the disclosure acting as an agent of, or informant to, the foreign counterintelligence or foreign counterterrorism components of the Federal Bureau of Investigation; or
(C) an individual, other than a United States citizen, whose past or present intelligence relationship to the United States is classified information and who is a present or former agent of, or a present or former informant or source of operational assistance to, an intelligence agency.

This is why she does not qualify under the act.

This is not a Repbulican talking point...this is the law in question.

[neojoker]

Yes it was worth it. Now we know for sure that something is very ugly and dirty at the top. We have gotten a good whiff of it, with this side show.

[mechadavef]

Posted by SamTheTVCat-

*** Cheney has no authority to declassify anyone or anything. He's the Vice President, not the director of the CIA.
Cheney's legal duties include ONLY:

1. Waiting to succeed to the presidency.
2. Presiding over the Senate, where he may cast a tie-breaking vote.

The VP does not possess exectutive authority over anyone in the exectutive branch, whatever vainglorious delusions *** Cheney entertains.

[johnshaft4]

The whole Bush administration is continuing criminal enterprise that must be shut down pursuant to the RICO racketeering statutes with vigorous individual prosecutions. Another Christain/Zionist organization exposed for criminal con artists they really are...

[mechadavef]

Bob said,
"Did any of that ever happen? Was a law actually broken? If the prosecutor found such evidence, he must not have found much because no charge was ever filed. We don't even know if she was a secret agent covered by that law.

Nor will we ever."

***, Bob! Wake up and smell the coffee! Of course Plame was a secret agent covered by that law! Why else was a special prosecutor appointed? Why was there an investigation, if Plame's identity was not disclosed?

As far as whether or not Libby or anyone else is guilty of breaking that law, the perjury and obstruction of justice by members of the Bush administration has prevented the truth from getting out.

Libby lied under oath to federal law enforcement officers in order to cover up the crime. That is why he was prosecuted, that is why he was convicted. The fact that the Bush administration's criminal stonewalling has foiled the original investigation does not discredit the investigation and its steep cost should be blamed on the very people who obstructed it.

I'm getting sick and tired of "journalists" like Schieffer covering for Bush's failings.

[jbinthe757]

potty mouth..humancitizen!

[dallison7]

opfor311

I have read your gleeful explanations of the various elements of this case, and I understand that you are on a mission to defend the honor of any republican who may be tainted by this. I did not, however, read anything in all of your ramblings about the reason this crime took place. (and yes, I know you will say there was no crime, that is one of the current talking points of the republican party) If we accept your assertion that 'this' member of the administration, and not 'that' member of the admisistration was the one quilty of this deed, we are still left with the question 'why'. Don't you find it curious that this agent was outed after her husband made public one of the Bush administration's lies? If it was not an act of revenge, why did it happen? Be careful when you answer... if you answer. The American people are on to this administration now. No one believes the old story about how her name and job desctiption 'just casually came up in a conversation about Joe Wilson'.

[samthetvcat]

(Part 4 - omg! lol)

But I guess the difference between Enron and Bush/Cheney is that Ken Lay didn't have the authority to get his buddies off the hook through a pardon.

[samthetvcat]

PS Bob - sinister intent is often only pursued if prosecutors are able to get an insider to turn. Perhaps Fitzgerald was hoping Libby would cut a deal (?) I'm not sure, but I think this is what prosecutors did with Enron - started with the little fish and then worked up their Ken Lay, Jeffery Skilling, etc.

[samthetvcat]

oops - when I said 'ought to see' I guess I meant 'will likely see' :)