The National Journal is reporting that former Vice Presidential aide I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby testified before the Fitzgerald grand jury "that he had been 'authorized' by Cheney and other White House "superiors" in the summer of 2003 to disclose classified information to journalists to defend the Bush administration's use of prewar intelligence in making the case to go to war with Iraq."
This "authorization" is expected to be at least part of the basis for his defense, although disclosing information from the National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) seems distinct from the October 2005 charge of lying to the grand jury about conversations with reporters. Libby was indicted by the Fitzgerald grand jury on five charges: false statements, obstruction of justice and perjury. If convicted on all counts, the maximum penalty would be 30 years in prision and $1.25 million in fines.
Court records from 31 January indicate he will also plead "I forgot."
Mr. Libby will show that, in the constant rush of more pressing matters, any errors he made in FBI interviews or grand jury testimony, months after the conversations, were the result of confusion, mistake, faulty memory, rather than a willful intent to deceive.
However, Libby consistently told the same story over the course of several interviews conducted over the course of months.
This disclosure comes amid arguments over pre-trial evidence requested by the defense team. Libby is seeking access to classified information that Fitzgerald contends is "irrelevant to whether Libby lied to the grand jury about conversations with reporters." US District Court Judge Reggie Walton is expected to rule within two weeks.
Ollie North Redux
The National Journal suggests the defense is similar to that used by Oliver North, a National Security Council official in the Reagan administration. North implemented the "arms for hostages" deal known as "The Iran-Contra Affair." According to the Journal, Libby's defense team includes John D. Cline, who was a defense attorney for North.
Cline uses a technique called greymail when defending clients: "Claim you need access to loads of classified information in order to mount a defense--more than might truly be necessary." Hope the government caves, rather than release the classified information.
Article comments
1 - Bennett
Dave Nalle will be along shortly to note that the comma you missed in sentence 33 indicates that you are willing to twist or erroneously report the story in order to further your "bush hating" agenda.
The rest of us thank you for the story and the links.
2 - Dave Nalle
No, the comma she missed indicates that the devil stands behind her whispering in her ear.
As for the story, it sounds legit. I'd like it better if it were confirmed by a source other than the National Journal which offers the bizarre combination of being generally left-leaning and basically corporate shills.
Dave
3 - Kathy
Dave -- then read the story and follow the links. Or look at GoogleNews. There were at least three separate (ie, not wire) stories. I cite all of them.
The articles are referencing PUBLIC COURT-FILED documents. I cited the National Journal first because it was the first I read -- I first published this as two graphs; later I read/poke around more and expanded it. That's when I posted it here.
I didn't realize that the Ollie North defense was in large part "wear them down."
What comma?
4 - Scott Butki
Kathy - Great article. When I heard this news I thought about writing something but you've managed to say everything I wanted to say
and then some.
The graymail strategy is a very intriguing one. Do you think it will succeed?
5 - Mark Saleski
doesn't matter. cheney still has several layers of teflon left to go.
6 - Scott Butki
Is that the same teflon Reagan used to use?
7 - Mark Saleski
pretty much.
8 - Nancy
Indeed: neither Cheney nor Bush will suffer the disgrace & legal charges they deserve, because by the time a special prosecutor got around to filing charges, they'll both be out of office anyway; additionally, Cheney's heart condition will ensure that he never has to answer for any of his malicious deeds while in office, since his lawyers will plead his putative ill-health, even tho he's been declared fit by his doctors.
I doubt it surprises anyone except BushCo's most fervent believers, that Cheney (& probably Bush) are neck-deep implicated in this whole smear campaign; anybody who would hire & keep on a maggot like Rove obviously isn't too nice about their sense of ethics and/or fair play and/or honor.
9 - Dave Nalle
Kathy, at the time I responded the National Journal article and a Reuters piece drawn directly from it were the only ones on Google News.
Dave
10 - [MR]Chip
I wonder who those "other White House superiors" are...
11 - kathy
Not true, since I used Google news to write my piece. Which was published _before_ you commented.
12 - kathy
Not a lawyer and not gonna play one on the web. ;-)
Seriously, I don't know. I do know that superficially they look like very different cases/charges. North was actually charged with a crime other than obstruction of justice. Libby's crimes relate strictly to his testimony before the grand jury - he is not being charged with breaking the espionage act, for example.
13 - Scott Butki
Thanks for answering.
Well, the ACLU won a few points in my book when they defended Ollie North and shut up a few people who said they always represent liberals.
Wouldn't it be great if the ACLU represented Libby or Cheney?