Naughty Scooter...

[SamSpade]

Originally Posted by 2ndAmendment

I think lying to a grand jury is perjury and is a crime all by itself.

Perjury is only a crime if the information is material to the case - as in, it could affect the outcome. Personally, I think lying to investigators about a non-crime is BS to begin with.

[Larry Gude (Premo)]

Originally Posted by SamSpade

I lived next door to a CIA worker when I was in high school. I have no idea what she did for them, but I learned about it when they came around asking questions (I presume) for her security clearance. *WE* knew who she worked for. Now, the *NSA*, at one time - THEY were the super-secret ones.

...but not really. If you know the family (old girl friend) you know what dad does...or at least who he works for.

[Larry Gude (Premo)]

Originally Posted by SamSpade

Actually, I've heard the opposite - that, if they can't get them on the outing, they'll get them on the obstruction part. See, I don't see how someone can CHARGE someone with obstruction without at least KNOWING what they obstructed.

Just *try* to charge someone with lying about something while having NO CLUE what the "truth" is. Doesn't work.

...is that that is why, fishing, Fitzy hit Scooter with so many counts. He can deal away a few of them to get Scooter to implicate Rove or Cheney.

Implicate them in what?

Blowing the cover of a CIA agent.

But Fitzy said, basically, that Scooter didn't do that, just that he lied about not doing that.

Wha?

Well, maybe it could be argued that Cheney/Rove actually outed her but he needs Scooter to implicate them.

And the whole thing should lie in whether or not it was common knowledge as to what she was.

Fitz has said it was not common knowledge.

Originally Posted by Dixie

From what I've read/heard, the obstruction charge is the reason no one has been charged with "outing". They haven't reached that conclusion because it is believed the truth is was blocked, hence the obstruction charge.

That's a lot of hooey from the prosecutor. The fact is that at the time of the "outing" this woman was an employee of the CIA, but not a covert operative. She had a CIA HQ Langley access decal on her car for crying out loud! In any case, the names of CIA employees are classified, just as the names of employees at most federal, state, and local government agencies (along with most private businesses) are. But the specific law in question does not cover the revealing that someone works at the CIA or any other agency, it deals with the outing of a covert agent working, or recently working, overseas, and Wilson's wife met none of that criteria. What the SP is referring to, IRT future investigations, is the expansion of the law to include outing of regular employees, but the law is very clearly written and there's no way he can bend or contort the law to meet this situation.

BTW, I think it's an excellent point to bring up background checks. I lived next to a guy in Mechanicsville for six years and never knew what he did for a living until an FBI background checker came around asking questions about him. She was a nice lady who told me all about why she was asking all these questions, and in making sure I didn't think he was being investigated for a crime she she in effect outed him to me. Maybe she can get indicted too.

When I lived near NSA I used to "out" people there all the time. I would go fishing at the lakes in Columbia and see guys with Navy haircuts. I would talk to them and tell them I used to be an AW, and they would say they were whatever, and I would ask them how duty at NSA was and they would get all defensive... like no one is supposed to know that the only Navy people in the area are a couple of recruiters and a bunch of crypto guys at NSA.

If "everybody" knew, if this was such common knowledge, why was an investigation even launched? Wasn't Bush the one who wanted to get to the bottom of it? Does that make him the only person in America who didn't know? Why didn't someone tell him it's no secret Mr. President, she was CIA and everyone knew about it. I can't believe that with all the intelligent people in this country, in that White House, that this investigation was launched for absolutely nothing, for something everybody knew. I have to believe there had to be something to it for it to go that far.

[vraiblonde]

Originally Posted by Dixie

If "everybody" knew, if this was such common knowledge, why was an investigation even launched?

Because you can launch an investigation about anything, just like you can sue someone for anything. Then it's up to the judge/jury to determine whether you're actually guilty of a crime.

They were talking last night on MSNBC and even the lib side speculated that the "lie" was simply something that Libby didn't remember correctly or got his facts messed up. Because think about it: why would you go to the trouble of lying when the truth will suffice? And by now it's common knowledge that Valerie Plame wasn't covert by any stretch of the imagination, so the MSNBC explanation makes sense.

Originally Posted by vraiblonde

Because you can launch an investigation about anything, just like you can sue someone for anything. Then it's up to the judge/jury to determine whether you're actually guilty of a crime.

They were talking last night on MSNBC and even the lib side speculated that the "lie" was simply something that Libby didn't remember correctly or got his facts messed up. Because think about it: why would you go to the trouble of lying when the truth will suffice? And by now it's common knowledge that Valerie Plame wasn't covert by any stretch of the imagination, so the MSNBC explanation makes sense.

George Tenet requested the initial investigation asking that the Justice Department look into the allegation that an administration official leaked the identify of an agent. Go figure this, it was George Tenet that supposedly told Cheney but I guess he could based on the fact that they were both cleared. The Justice Department asked the WH counsel to preserve evidence and Gonzales allowed an overnight delay. Still don't get that one having been on the receiving end of an investigation of mishandling of classified info. The Justice Department launched a full investigation and subpoenaed records from AF1. So our Justice Department wasn't intelligent enough to determine what was common knowledge? I don't believe that. You know how I feel about Bush but even he wanted to get to the bottom of it. Maybe I'll eat my words later but for now....I think there's something rotting in Washington.

Originally Posted by Dixie

If "everybody" knew, if this was such common knowledge, why was an investigation even launched? Wasn't Bush the one who wanted to get to the bottom of it? Does that make him the only person in America who didn't know? Why didn't someone tell him it's no secret Mr. President, she was CIA and everyone knew about it. I can't believe that with all the intelligent people in this country, in that White House, that this investigation was launched for absolutely nothing, for something everybody knew. I have to believe there had to be something to it for it to go that far.

The true core issue is rarely discussed and has nothing do with Bush. Upon his return from Niger, Wilson made statements to the press that he had been sent there at the request of Dick Cheney, which came as a surprise to Cheney. Cheney, via Libby, made inquiries to the CIA to find out who had ordered this trip and why. This effort was not taken to discredit Wilson's report or his wife, but to repudiate Wilson's claims that Cheney had sent him. The un-named CIA rep in the indictment called Libby and Cheney and told them that Wilson's wife, an employee at the CIA, had sent him. At this point the Democrats were trying to make a lot of political hay by playing up the "fact" that Cheney had sent Wilson, thereby meaning there was a split between Cheney and Bush. That was why Rove got involved and called Cooper and told him not to get "too far out", meaning put very much emphasis on this story as it was false.

When Plan A failed, and the Bush/Cheney split failed to materialize, the Dems started yacking about Wilson's wife being "outed" based on a story by Bob Novak. Why this story, and not those of Cooper? Because Novak mistakenly used the words "agency operative on weapons of mass destruction", meaning she worked at the CIA in a branch that deals with WMDs, not that she was a covert operative out risking life and limb in the field. The laughability of this charge is revealed by Wilson and his wife both agreeing to appear in a Vanity Fair photo spread after the story broke.

The issue that the SP says is still in the air is about if Rove or Libby knew they were purposefully outing a covert agent, which would mean that they were told she was a covert agent by the contact at the CIA, which is pretty inconceiveable that they would have been told that as she wasn't a covert operative while working at headquarters.

And I wouldn't get "too far out" on the everyone knew issue. I didn't know she worked at the CIA. But I think it's fair to say that it was common knowledge to anyone who cared that she worked at the CIA. I don't think it's fair to make judgements based on what neighbors know. I've lived in my house for over a year and have no idea what any of my neighbors do, nor do I care.

[vraiblonde]

Originally Posted by Dixie

So our Justice Department wasn't intelligent enough to determine what was common knowledge? I don't believe that.

And what do you suppose might have happened if Justice had just said, "BFD. Everyone knows that." and refused to look into it?

#### would have hit the fan, that's what.

But I will tell you one thing: Dick Cheney is an old political warhorse. The only thing I DON'T believe, not for one second, is that he jeopardized his career and reputation for something stupid. And I find it hard to believe Libby or Rove made a mistake like that, either.

So what probably happened is what the pundits are saying and what Bruzilla just wrote.

[otter]

2008 presidential candidate Hillary Clinton is blasting former top White House aide Lewis Libby for allegedly lying to investigators, saying his decision to leak CIA employee Valerie Plame's name to the press was "simply reprehensible."

"Taking such action for political purposes is simply reprehensible and should never be tolerated," Clinton complains in a statement posted to her web site.