February 27, 2006


A CIA Leak Trial Without the CIA Leak (Byron York, 2/27/06, National Review)

CIA leak prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald argued at a hearing Friday that, as far as the perjury charges against former Cheney chief of staff Lewis Libby are concerned, it does not matter whether or not Valerie Wilson was a covert CIA agent when she was mentioned in the famous Robert Novak column of July 14, 2003. "We're trying a perjury case," Fitzgerald told Judge Reggie Walton. Even if Plame had never worked for the CIA at all, Fitzgerald continued — even if she had been simply mistaken for a CIA agent — the charges against Libby would still stand. In addition, Fitzgerald said, he does not intend to offer "any proof of actual damage" caused by the disclosure of Wilson's identity.

All they ever had to do was tell the truth, but Mr. Libby apparently didn't.

Posted by Orrin Judd at February 27, 2006 3:00 PM

So Fitz is all but admitting there was no 'there' there.

Now can we please go after NSA eavesdrop leakers to the NYT? And if not why not?

Posted by: Gideon at February 27, 2006 3:59 PM

The underreported story here seems to be that this is the end of Fitzmas, the left's certainty that Fitzgerald was going to deliver them Karl Rove and Dick Cheney's heads on a pole.

It is (barely) possible for me to imagine that a prosecutor would make there statements just before indicting others for outing her covert identity, but it seems highly unlikely.

Do our prosecuting friends have a take?

Posted by: David Cohen at February 27, 2006 6:17 PM


The suggested case against Rove is similarly for lying during the investigation, not for outing Plame.

Posted by: oj at February 27, 2006 6:23 PM

The Fitzmas fantasy has always been an indictment for conspiracy to leak Plame's job as part of a coordinated dirty tricks campaign against her brave, truth-telling whistleblowing husband. I read this as Fitz saying that that's not going to happen.

Posted by: David Cohen at February 27, 2006 11:26 PM

You would think by now the big media folks, especially the ones with people involved in the probe, would have figured out it's in their best interests if Fitzgerald gets his way in the case against Libby. It killed any hope they or the left may have of a Fitzmas, but by focusing the case solely on a perjury charge, it keeps the media people from being questioned far more closely about who their sources were and how far in the past they knew about Plame's CIA connections.

Posted by: John` at February 27, 2006 11:38 PM

I think Libby was also indicted for obstuction of justice? Without an underlying crime, can one obstruct?

Posted by: Bob at February 28, 2006 11:39 AM

Sure, you're not allowed to lie to the feds. Getting a conviction could be near impossible.

Posted by: oj at February 28, 2006 11:47 AM


Listed below are links to weblogs that reference LOOK MA, NO LEAK::

» Judge withholds official's identity from Libby from Unpartisan.com Political News and Blog Aggregator
Former White House aide I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, charged with perjury in the CIA leak case, cannot [Read More]