Please explain: WHY did Libby LIE about his source??

[Sparkly]

Do I have this right? Libby lied about where he got the info on Plame, saying reporters like Russert told him, when it fact it was Cheney (or "classified sources")? (What are "classified sources?")

But I'm hearing it wasn't illegal for Cheney to tell Libby about Plame. If that's true, then why did Libby lie about it?

I'm confused. :dunce:

[MadisonProgressive]

1. 24 dollar question

What is he trying to hide??? That's why he's getting obstruction of justice because the guy is hiding something. If we knew the whole truth the entire cabal would be indicted.

[Pepper32]

26. I agree.

Libby has fallen on his sword and taken one for the team hoping Bush will pardon him.

Now Bush has to decide what to do. Because if he doesn't pardon him, Libby WILL start talking to save his own ass.

Unless he doesn't mind doing 30 years with Bubba.

[MadisonProgressive]

41. Or unless he has an unfortunate 'accident' first...

[complain jane]

2. Good question. I'd like to know the same thing.

I don't think the "brilliant and talented" Libby would perjur himself unless he thought something needed concealing.

[benddem]

3. Libby committed a crime

by telling anyone Plame's identity. When you have top secret clearance you are by law not allowed to pass classified information. He lied initially cause he thought the investigation would be handled by Ashcroft...and just go away. When Ashcroft recused himself he was stuck.
Neither he nor Rove thought anything would come of the investigations.

[Sparkly]

5. But why didn't he say Cheney told him, if that's the case?

And if there was no illegality in that?

[Francine Frensky]

47. Because if he tells the truth he goes to jail

he knows that he has broken a law by conspiring with Rove to relay the name of a covert operative to the press. So he lies to cover it up.

Clearly, Libby is taking the fall for the following: bush, cheney, and rove.

[Zen Democrat]

4. Because they were covering the SMEAR. The vindictiveness.

The official policy of going after critics by destroying them. That's what was going on. They were trying to convince the press that Wilson criticisms of the march to war and fake WMD claims were not "clean".

It's about an evil methodology.

[MidwestTransplant]

8. Right and it was during election time

as somebody on another thread mentioned, they didn't want this info to come out during the campaign.

[stepnw1f]

6. That's Why Fitz Got an Extension

That's primarily the reason. But I know he is looking everywhere.

This guy is focused.

[Canuckistanian]

11. He got an extension? Got a link?

Sorry, I'm just getting home....

[Pepper32]

16. Here

This grand jury's term has expired by statute; it could not be extended. But it's in ordinary course to keep a grand jury open to consider other matters, and that's what we will be doing
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/10/28/politics/28text-fitz.html?pagewanted=all

[Pepper32]

7. Well

It's not illegal based on the intent. Perhaps Libby knows that Cheney had ill intentions because they were in on it together?

He's protecting Cheney, it's the only explanation that makes sense.

[WiseButAngrySara]

9. He blamed reporters because he thought that they could argue to not

give up Libby as their source. He lied to cover-up crimes of Cheney (or Rove or B*)

[johnnydrama]

15. crime

it's not a crime for Cheney to tell libby about Plame. They both have the proper clearance.

It's a crime for Libby to tell anybody without clearance, which would be all the reporters he talked to.

Libby was worried about the big charge of outing a CIA agent.

If he could make people believe that the reporters were the ones that told him, or that everybody knew she was undercover, he could try to get out from under it.

Cooper, Miller etc...reported that Plame was a CIA agent. Records show that Libby talked to them multiple times.

So, he had to lie and say that he talked to them, but they already knew it, so he wasn't actually divulging classified info.

Didn't work.

[MADem]

50. That's it--he counted on the reporters invoking their confidentiality

of a source, and figured the special prosecutor would not push it as far or as hard as he did. He also figured that the reporters would all go to jail, but at the end of the day, when they were advised that Scooter was saying that THEY were the ratfinks, they decided that truth was the more important thing in all this. Who wants to go to jail to protect a LYING bastard?

It is one thing to protect a source, it is entirely different when that source is accusing you of saying stuff you never said.

[SlavesandBulldozers]

10. Because it was illegal for Libby to tell others.

And he told others.

That's why Libby lied about it.

[Sparkly]

13. Right, but how does that relate to a problem with who told him? nt

[SlavesandBulldozers]

21. oh im sorry

i'm stupid. totally misread the question.

I think that Libby didn't foresee that his alibi ("oh I got it from Russert, everybody knew"), that he was going to use to save his own ass, would become provably false - or even pursued.

I think they've been drinking their own kool-aid as their sole form of sustenance.

[Igel]

42. But for that we have to assume Libby would believe

that either Russert would psychically confirm his story, or that nobody would ever bother to ask Russert.

Both were foolish things to believe.

It's possible he produced the story on the fly. Hence foolishness produced by desperation. But then the real foolishness is maintaining the story: if, at a later date, he had just said, 'You know, I goofed--this is how it actually happened ...' he'd have gotten a sour expression from Fitzgerald, and more questions, but it would have been essentially ignored.

Something approaching my definition would have included at least one other person participating in it. Maybe Rove did until the last minute, but Libby's tale has so many holes in it ...

I'm curious as to what Fitzgerald's going to allege his motivation was.

[Burried News]

12. Supposed he found out from the guys who keep tabs on Vanunu?

MANY dark forces - said David Kelly to Judy Miller. Maybe he thought Judy could help him get a message to MANY dark forces?

There are lots of possibilities but I think to make complete sense of things you have to consider the role of intelligence agencies outside the CIA.

Who would want to blow the cover of Brewster Jennings and why?

NeoConservatives - by the CONfusion will you know them. You didn't get confused without help.

[goodhue]

14. That is the question that I wish the media would fixate on.

Clearly he was covering up for a possible crime that he felt he or others may have committed in outing Plame as CIA agent. But the lies were so blatant. Was he being stupid, scared or strategic?

[Blue-Jay]

17. Because he's a fucking liar.

[tgnyc]

18. Because under Libby's story, neither he, nor Cheney, nor the reporters

has done anything wrong. Since he is authorized to have the info, the reporters can't get blasted for passing it on to him. Everybody would be in the clear.

[Sparkly]

20. That would make sense of "the reporters already knew"

... "I got it from the reporters."

Was he trying to implicate the CIA?

If it was a way to shield himself (as the source TO reporters rather than the recipient FROM reporters), I can't imagine how he thought he'd get away with that.

[shance]

38. Its was one of most publicized assaults on anyone who stood in their way.

Thats the bottom line. Its the only way this Administration and most Republicans can stay in power because they have become so disliked. They have to cheat and/or intimidate anyone who tries to oppose their agenda.

They cannot lead by fairness, respect or ethics. For the past five years they have used intimidation, lies and brute force to steamroll their way into lands like Afghanistan and Iraq.

Their message to anyone who dared derail Iraq and their Middle East invasion, was of course outing Valerie Plame.

It was in many ways a smart, albeit disgustingly vile, move by Cheney. He could once again retreat to his dark shadowy bunker and escape scrutiny or critism after once again batting the hornet's nest.

Cheney probably should have bought that beekeepers suit, or shall I say "extra armor". Joe Wilson, God bless him, was not going to take this deal sitting down.

[DefenseLawyer]

19. They all lied initially

because they viewed this as a political problem, and not a real serious one at that. And how does Karl Rove handle a political problem? That's right, he lies, smears and deflects. These clowns didn't think that initial FBI investigation was going anywhere so they blew it off. At that point the die was cast and when it heated up they were stuck.

[the_spectator]

22. Fitz told us! To "kick sand in the umpire's eyes" - to obstruct justice.

Take a look at Fitzgerald's answer to the 1st question he took after his statement today. Look at the baseball analogy Fitz made: we know WH people told reports that Joe Wilson's wife worked for the CIA. That's the pitcher hitting the batter on the head. Which could be an accident, slipped out of his hands (Told about Plame by accident SIMPLY by the intent to say "we didn't send Joe to Niger.") It could have been trying to hit the guy on the back, or maybe just brush him back off the plate -- a plot and a plan to get at Joe Wilson, something like that. Something middling. Did they know she was a covert operative? AND, the WORST case - trying to hit the head - would be doing it to get at Joe BY revealing his wife's covert status, destroying any covert career she has, and even, yes, SCARING Wilson because maybe his wife will be at ACTUAL PHYSICAL RISK because of the revelation.

Then Fitz starts talking about "what was going on in the dugout" to try to say, THE MAIN INVESTIGATION for underlying crimes has to look at things like people's history with each other, what people were saying, etc. etc. -- WAS this guy likely going for the head or not? And Scooter Fibby SUCCEEDED during the investigation to be kicking sand in the umpire's eyes so he can't see things, gain evidence in the course of a time-line of an ongoing Grand Jury investigation.

Fibby lied to kick sand. And he SUCCEEDED, Fitz seems to say, by delaying or wild-goose-chasing at the crucial moment. And THAT'S why Fitz DID charge Fibby with all these things. What's the "underlying crime" in a way? It's that BECAUSE of Fibby's perjury and obstruction and false statements, the REAL "underlying crime" couldn't be properly charged on anyone!

[Pepper32]

27. Bingo!!

You get it. Libby has obstructed justice and prevented Fitz from indicting the real (for the lack of a better word)criminals.

Now we get to see how strong Libby will remain. :popcorn:

I wonder if Libby will suddenly have a plane accident or commit suicide in a motel?

Then we will never know.

[grasswire]

23. He lied about the process...

....so that the underlying crimes could not be discerned. Fitzgerald explained it. Libby "kicked sand" in the eyes of the investigators so they could not investigate the underlying matters.

MSNBC pundits had it tonight. He lied about process so that the substantive charges could not be investigated.

[Inland]

25. Indeed, getting it from reporters is the ONLY fact that clears all in WH

Getting it from someone else simply leads to another question, namely, why, why were you and X discussing Valerie Plame, did you discuss giving her name to reporters, what did you understand her role at CIA to be. More questions, more investigations, etc.

I don't know the answers to those questions, but Libby didn't want them asked, in order to end the investigation.

[the_spectator]

28. Ooh! Beat you by 2 minutes! (see post 22 above)

Great minds think alike, I guess! :hi:
But does this mean that basically, Bush won - again?

[aint_no_life_nowhere]

48. That's an EXTREMELY IMPORTANT point in all of this

Without that "substantive charge" that you mention, there's no conspiracy. If the only crimes consist of one individual's obstruction of the process involving his own isolated investigation then it's hard to bring others in. If it's hard to bring others in, it's impossible to get them to "turn" by putting pressure on them. All a conspiracy requires is an act of any kind in furtherance of the conspiracy. Making a phone call to a Reporter on behalf of Libby by his White House Assistant might have been enough to bring that Assistant in to Fitzgerald's office and scare him with a potential conspiracy charge. Heads could have generally fallen in the White House if a substantive crime had been established through a charge of conspiracy. Fitzgerald for some reason intentionally chose not to at least charge a substantive crime. A more aggressive prosecutor would have done so, if for the mere reason to try allege conspiracy and bring in other players who might have started talking.

If Patrick Fitzgerald had chosen to prosecute under the Espionage Act of 1917, all he would have had to prove is:

(1) possession of
(2) information
(3) relating to the national defense
(4) which the person possessing it has reason to believe could be used to damage the United States or aid a foreign nation and
(5) wilful communication of that information to
(6) a person not entitled to receive it.

Reckless communication of classified information would have been sufficient to charge him. Proof of Libby's knowledge of Plame's covert status would not have been necessary. I'm not sure why Fitzgerald disfavors prosecution under the Espionage Act when it applies to this situation and would have opened up an effective means to charge others of conspiracy to engage in a substantive crime. Instead, all we have are crimes of process by Libby which involve one individual's trangressions but no conspiracy to commit a larger underlying crime.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

24. Pure hubris. They think that they can do anything.

They've gotten away with so much they convinced themselves that they're invulnerable.

[SlavesandBulldozers]

35. hubris.

definitely that.

[SlavesandBulldozers]

36. hubris.

definitely that.

[xray s]

29. Why Scooter lied...Fitz let us know today

PATRICK FITZGERALD: "I would have wished nothing better that, when the subpoenas were issued in August 2004, witnesses testified then, and we would have been here in October 2004 instead of October 2005."

[AntiFascist]

30. As a fan of West Wing...

it seems that when administration officials share leaked info. it could indicate conspiracy. The political consequences are important from a legal point of view.

[sandnsea]

31. Cheney & Libby = Conspiracy

Conspiracy to disclose the classified identity of a CIA operative. Why? Because a forged document had been discovered, the forged document that Hadley had bucked the CIA on and used to put the 16 words into the SOTU. Utter incompetence and proof that it was NOT the CIA who fucked up the war intelligence, but WHIG, the White House itself. IF this had come out before the election it would have changed everything.

[peacetalksforall]

32. I believe they (Rove and Libby) purposely scattered many calls to

make it look like 'everyone knew" (about Plame). They played a game of planting the 'everyone knew' rhetoric. They were getting it ready to be a 'talking point' that they could ask all the pundits to burp up. As they did.

I want to know about Feitz. He was in the CIA and may have had top clearance within the CIA, but did he have top clearance to tell Libby? Or would he have told Cheney direct?

We must look into Feitz/ Bolton/ and all the others right wing CIA agents.

Whatever - we have received a lesson in ultra arrogance. It is apparent that they believed they would never get caught. They played loose with their jobs - jobs granted them by the Supreme Court of the United States on December 12, 2000.

[NoSheep]

33. Without reading the rest..I think I've got it.

Libby lied to the grand jury because he was asked who told the press that Plame was an agent. (HE told the press and that stands to violate laws restricting the outing of a covert agent). so....remember: Lying to the American public is not a crime. ( Monkey boy does it every day!) He was questioned by the prosecutor (the case has been ongoing for 2 yrs) and he said he didn't know who said what or where or when. Turns out he did! Obstruction of justice, perjury.

He lied to protect himself (or Cheney, et al) because it is a crime to reveal an agent's identity. He is being prosecuted now because he lied to the prosecutor when asked about the events.

[distantearlywarning]

34. Very good question.

And I think the media should be asking it.

[catzies]

37. Maybe falling on his sword to protect his boss?

Why do they make me think of Burns and Smithers? :D

[Maddy McCall]

39. Because he was trying to protect Cheney, and he was too stupid to...

know that Cheney discussing Plame with him was not illegal.

He didn't want to draw Cheney into the mud of the investigation.

[DistressedAmerican]

40. He Assumed Illegality (A Reasonable Assumption). Covered Up For Dick.

Simple really.

[johnnydrama]

43. yup

They wanted to screw Wilson, but not get caught.

That's why with each call to a reporter they said that they had heard that she worked for the CIA from someone else.

So now all of a sudden, even though they just called 6 reporters, those reporters think it's common knowledge.

[Jim__]

44. My guess is it wasn't illegal for Cheney to tell Libby, but ...

if cheney told libby that it was classified; then it was illegal for libby to pass it on to reporters. If libby heard it from reporters; then it wasn't illegal for him to pass it on.

[Sparkly]

45. Ah, that could make sense...

If it's already been leaked, is it illegal to continue leaking it? :shrug: If not, "everybody already knew) could be an attempt at a defense...

[Jim__]

46. It's illegal to leak classified information.

But, libby claimed he didn't even know if what Russert told him was true; so passing on info that he doesn't know is classified (technically it's still illegal - he has a responsibility to know); but, the fact that he was passing on "gossip" would be a mitigating circumstance. And, under the particular law that is usually cited - the one about revealing a CIA agent's name - you have to know the agent is covert and that the government is actively trying to conceal the identity.

[July]

52. I've read the argument that it would be illegal to continue leaking,

and that the proper response to questions about classified info would be "I can neither confirm nor deny."

[flyarm]

49. keep it out of courts or indictments oct 2004 election, election!!

to keep it off the front pages of the papers and news a month before elections!

thank judy judy judy as well!

fly

[cassiepriam]

51. I agree his lies don't make sense.