Reply #32: But, but , but - when you read the whole article this defense is

[stop the bleeding]

deconstructed and it looks like Libby's case is much different that North's

http://nationaljournal.com/about/njweekly/stories/2006/0209nj1.htm#

Please read the whole thing. North was a "pawn" Libby is not a "pawn" more like a knight as pointed out in H2Oman's post: Your Move


"It was a memorable and powerful moment when North told the jury that he was 'a pawn in a chess game played by giants,'" Treanor said.

~snip~

But most outside legal observers say that Libby, because he was himself such a high-ranking official, will most likely face a much more difficult time than North did in arguing that, in some of his activities, he was just carrying out orders from Cheney or other senior White House officials.

"A defendant can make a claim that he is just a victim of Washington politics or doing the bidding for someone else," said Richman, the former prosecutor, "But there may be limits to a jury's sympathy when that defendant himself was so high-ranking. Given Libby's position in the White House, the jury is less likely to view him as a sacrificial lamb than as a sacrificial ram."