Flashback: Scooter Libby on Larry King 2002

[ignatzmouse]

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0202/16/lklw.00.html

February 16th, 2002 (discussing Enron, a year and a half before the Plame disclosure)

LIBBY: And I think he (Cheney) would rather chew off his right arm than do anything to violate the prerogatives of that place.

But he also feels strongly about the White House and Constitutional rights and obligations and duties of the presidency, and protecting those.

And this is a case where he firmly believes -- believes to the point where, when he talks about it, his eyes get a little bluer -- that for the presidency to operate properly, it needs to be able to have confidential communications.

And that's part of what our forefathers set up when they set up two co-equal branches of government.

The courts have looked at issues like this, and they have decided that there are certain communications and certain roles that are distinct and that should be protected.

Reporters claim a privilege to protect their sources, not just what they said, but who said it. Why? Because we, in everyday common sense, believe that there are some people who won't come forward and tell you exactly what they think if either their identity or the content would be known.

(snip)

LIBBY: The vice president has certain constitutional prerogatives.

[Emit]

1. Kick to the top for more discussion on it. n/t

[ignatzmouse]

2. Prior Policy

Well it tells me that there was a germ of using reporters for calculated disclosure within the administration well before the leak. It was likely discussed as a strategy between Cheney, Libby, Rove, and others and perhaps used to counter other situations that arose. The feeling was we're doubly protected behind the Office and the reporter's non-disclosure pact. The idea reoccurred with Wilson/Plame because it was already part of their modus operandi.