Libby Defense May Highlight Infighting

[cal04]

Lawyers for Vice President Dick Cheney's former top aide are suggesting they may delve deeply at his criminal trial into infighting among the White House, the CIA and the State Department over pre-Iraq war intelligence failures.
New legal documents raise the potential that I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby's trial could turn into a political embarrassment for the Bush administration by focusing on whether the White House manipulated intelligence to justify the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq.

In a court filing late Friday night, Libby's legal team said that in June and July 2003, the status of covert CIA officer
Valerie Plame was at most a peripheral issue to "the finger-pointing that went on within the executive branch about who was to blame" for the failure to find weapons of mass destruction.

"If the jury learns this background information" about finger-pointing, "and also understands Mr. Libby's additional focus on urgent national security matters, the jury will more easily appreciate how Mr. Libby may have forgotten or misremembered ... snippets of conversation" about Plame's status, the defense lawyers said.

Cheney's former chief of staff was indicted Oct. 28 on five counts of perjury, obstruction and lying to the
FBI about how he learned of Plame's CIA employment and what he told reporters about her.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060318/ap_on_go_pr_wh/cia_leak

[Missy Vixen]

1. This isn't a defense

>In a court filing late Friday night, Libby's legal team said that in June and July 2003, the status of covert CIA officer Valerie Plame was at most a peripheral issue to "the finger-pointing that went on within the executive branch about who was to blame" for the failure to find weapons of mass destruction.<

It's a distraction. Also, it seems that Libby's now decided to throw some people under the bus.

I'll be interested to read what others think. The information coming out about this filing leads me to believe they got nothin'.

Julie

[UrbScotty]

2. That's why they don't want the trial until 2007 (nt)

[JWS]

16. Well, if the Dems don't stomp the hell out of the Repugs

in 2008, anyways, having the trial in 2007 would almost guarantee it.

[Lasher]

3. I believe there's an understatement here.

"...could turn into a political embarrassment for the Bush administration by focusing on whether the White House manipulated intelligence to justify the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq." Embarrassment?

How about, "...could lead to impeachment and imprisonment of Bush and other Administration officials by exposing the lies they told to deceive Americans into supporting the invasion of Iraq."

Edit: Trickle, trickle, trickle. Keep those news updates coming so Americans won't forget between now and November what a rotten bunch of traitors this cartel is.

[many a good man]

7. And how!

It must have been quite "embarassing" for Milosovic to find himself in that cell in The Hague.

[SammyBlue]

4. And the house of cards slowly falls to the ground! eom

[Independent_Liberal]

13. Look out! The poo poo is gonna fly very fast!

:D

[DirtyDawg]

5. The trouble with fall guys....

....is that once those that have been designated as such - particularly the first one on the list - realize that they weren't nearly as well-positioned, and important to the process as they had thought that they were - or that their 'bosses' had assured them that they were - they get pissed off and figure they ain't gonna, in fact, go down by themselves. This is the fundamental element of human nature that allows cop and prosecutor TV shows to solve their cases within the hour. In real life it may take a little longer, but in the end - unless you're an absolute fanatic like G. Gordon - they do pull the house down around them. It's clear that Libby is gonna fight this as long as he can, but if Mr. Fitzgerald is as good as Mr. McCoy on 'Law and Order'...he'll have the whole sorry lot of them in the hoosegow - or at least indicted - by election day this November.

[Catherine Vincent]

6. "...over pre-Iraq war intelligence failures."

Didn't my man Fitzgerald said to not look at the Libby indictment as a vindication/condemnation/ or neutraliality for the Iraq war?

[Missy Vixen]

8. For those who want to read it again,

here's the press conference link.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/10/28/AR2005102801340.html

My gut feeling from the two articles about yesterday's hearing? They got nothin'. Nothing at all. They're going to bury the Special Counsel's office in a blizzard of paper till the trial next January, but Libby's raison d' etre right now is to throw others under the bus.

IMHO, YMMV.
Julie

[Seedersandleechers]

9. Sounds a lot like a threat to me....

[Shipwack]

11. You beat me to it, KCd...

That's not a defense, it's a cry for help... as in "Help! Pardon me or I sing like a finalist on American Idol*!"

I'll be surprised if he gets convicted of anything, only because of the possibility of a lame duck president's pardon.


*i.e. not necessarily well, but with enthusiasm and lots of media coverage...

[worldgonekrazy]

12. That was my take as well

Libby's lawyer is basically telling the Bush Administration that they better do everything they can to sabotage the trial or Libby will be forced to look out for #1.

[JWS]

15. Bush pisses me off all the time...

But pardoning Libby so he keeps his mouth shut would just about push me to insanity.

[Divine Discontent]

10. I wish DEMOCRATS would actually back us on this!

<The NEWSWEEK poll shows that only 5 percent of Republicans would support impeaching Bush, while 94 percent would not. Among Democrats, almost half (49 percent) support impeachment, while 48 percent oppose it.>

So, this is how America feels though! So, if they show that the WHITE HOUSE MANIPULATED BAD INTEL ON IRAQ WMD, will America actually demand accountability and that someone be tried? More than just the apparent liberal half of Democrats who've had enough and want him OUT!?


www.cafepress.com/bushhurts

[JWS]

14. Oh shit...

this is going to be messy.

[Ino]

17. I'm confused

If there was finger-pointing within the executive branch about who was to blame for failure to find WMDs -- that makes it sound like they really expected to find some.

Whereas "manipulating the intelligence" has always implied (at least to me) that they KNEW there weren't WMDs, but cherry-picked items to make it seem as though there were.

Could it be that this Libby defense is ALSO meant to throw off claims that BushCo lied us into a war? I find it hard to believe Cheney has abandoned Libby and would allow him to squeal. Especially since abandoning Michael Brown didn't turn out so well for them.

[Trevelyan]

18. Why is DU ignoring the WORLD WIDE PROTESTS OF BUSH'S

WAR?
Great photos when you click AOL's top story today despite headline:

Associated Press Writer Sue Leeman contributed to this report from London.

People attend a demonstration in central Tokyo to demand the withdrawal of U.S....

Several thousands in Australia march to seek an end to the Australian military...

Pakistani workers hold burning British and U.S. flags during a protest...

A London protester walks across 100,000 red dots, representing the people believed ...

A demonstrator joins an anti-war rally in Athens, Greece...

A Turkish demonstrator weeps as the others chant slogans while...

Do you think war protests are effective?
Yes 61%
No 39%

Do you feel strongly enough about the Iraq war to demonstrate?

Yes, against it 60%
Yes, in support of the war 20%
No 19%

Total Votes: 13,022

http://articles.news.aol.com/news/article.adp?id=20060317152809990008

Iraq War Protests Attract Fewer People (Fewer than what?? Number of photos doesn't match the headline :evilgrin: )
By SUE LEEMAN, AP :evilgrin: