Libby would not have been indicted if he just admitted that he told reporters about Plame, but didn’t know she was covert. Obviously he was protecting his boss from political embarrassment and deeper questions about whether Cheney had based his rationale for the invasion partially on forged documents.

In someone in Small town USA had come to the attention of the administration, you can bet they would immediately find out all there is to know about that person, including the favorite brand of totthpaste. But a CIA agent remains a mystery?
Tht’s a truly amazing conclusion in itself.

I’m, at the very least, hedging my bets, because of Fitzgerald’s final statement. He referred to the VP’s office as being central to the dissemination of information so as to discredit the Wildons.
If the VP acts independently, with people like Armitage out of the loop, that’s a problem of a different sort. But if people like Armitage truly didn’t know, then they should have found out before blabbing about it. That would have been the responsible thing to do in a case hitting headlines day after day after day.

I don’t know what happened. Under the circumstances, I find the suspicions natural and understandable, however.

First of all, many of those leaks were in response to questions from reporters. IIRC Rove was asked if Plame worked at the CIA and if she suggested Wilson for the trip.

And when you think about it, all these administration leakers are more indicative of it NOT being criminal activity. Do you really believe that if they KNEW leaking her name was a crime that they’d all have done it so cavalierly with no plausible deniability? No, they would have used proxies at the very least. I seriously doubt Rove, or any of the others, is dumb enough to engage in such a blatant criminal conspiracy knowing they would be caught. After all, if outing her was the intent, and they knew she was covert, then once she WAS outed (and the crime was there for all to see), then they would have known there would be an investigation leading right back to them. They didn’t do anything to hide their “criminal” activity – why?

Really, all evidence indicates they did not know she was a covert agent. What they did was wrong and unethical (and to Armitage’s credit, he’s apologized and taken responsibility many times), but it was not a crime.

His Mob prosecution happened when underlings flipped on the Mob bosses, it didn’t happen with Libby, Rove and McClellan. Without a smoking gun or physical evidence somebody needed to squeal.

In this case no dress or bloody glove…

The fact that there was no one indicted for blowing Plame’s cover doesn’t mean the Bush Administration acted in good faith. I think, in fact, just the opposite was true. They were, as you put it, out to “get Wilson”.

That’s why they were investigated.

A high-ranking member of the Bush Administration was convicted of obstructing the investigation. Then, before he spent a single day in jail, he was pardoned by the President.

The whole thing stinks.

As I stated, there is zero evidence to indicate anyone knew she was covert – including Armitage. And the transcripts and audio recordings of Armitage and various reporters referred to her as an “analyst;” and Armitage has referred to internal emails which refer to her as “analyst.” We don’t have access to the emails, but if Armitage is lying about them, he could be prosecuted for it. As for why he waited, from a story broken at that time:

Armitage, whose admission was first reported by CBS News Thursday, said he cooperated fully with Fitzgerald’s investigation. He was never a target of the investigation and did not hire a lawyer. He agreed to speak to reporters after Fitzgerald released him from a promise of confidentiality.

Armitage said he considered coming forward late last month when a flurry of news reports identified him as the leak. But he said he did not want to be accused of trying to get the story out during the summer’s slow news cycle.

There’s no doubt the administration was out to get Wilson and discredit him, but there’s simply zero credible evidence beyond allegation that outing Plame was either intentional or a conspiracy.

I have no illusions that I’ll shake you from your silly obsession. I just laugh.

Poor Valerie. She’ll just have to settle for being rich & famous.

It all revolves around the concept of intent, Even if a lieaker were third or fourth in line, if his intent was to reveal the identity of a covert agent, that’s aginst the law.

IMO, it smells to high heaven that Armitage took so long to come forward. Doesn’t he read the papers?
Again, though, it all depends on the ability, or lack of ti. to prove intent.

The wilsons were a target before his op-ed, BTW, at least there was great interest and dismay over them in the VP’s office from the moment Wilson’t trip was arranged.

Unlwss truth serum were utilized, this will remain beyond the capability of the law to put to final rest.

For McClellan to claim being surprised is either downright mendacious or he shouldn’t leave home to play in Washington.

It’s the same thing regarding truth vs. the law. The two words are not synonyms, and Fitzgerald (an honest man, IMO) could only uncover what was available under the law. Whether that could ever have also been the same as the truth is highly doubtful, since the law requires proof if intent, as well as action, and intent is a nebulous thing to pin down.. Not being able to uncover more than Fitzgerald did is proff of neither guilt nor innocence. It’s merely as far as the law could go.

Libby’s pardon, though, besmirched even the role of the law and was an insult to the process, no matter how narrow it’s possibilities for approaching truth were.

The WH, along with right wing media allies formed a stonewall to prevent Fitzgerald from getting to the real truth, and put out misinformation about the Wilsons to deflect blame from their own culpability for the breach of our national security.

I need to dig up a couple of good sources, but seems there never was any Fitzmas for the Left and a sense of Fitzgerald as a “traitor” on the Right. The truth is in the middle, Fitz as a hardworking legal technocrat who did a limited investigation.

Conscience clearing? No, utterly self-serving. Can you say big, fat book contract?

Yes, he’s following a long Washington insider tradition, sadly. See also: Tenet, George.

Its a continuing pattern with members of this administration- they admit to the malfeasance of others when it is too late to make any real difference and when they can cash in on the “shocking relevations”. Anyone who was really paying attention during the CIA leak should not be shocked by this- as Bush never lived up to his promises to conduct an internal investigation into the leak or get rid of anyone who was found to be associated with the leak.

The WH, along with right wing media allies formed a stonewall to prevent Fitzgerald from getting to the real truth, and put out misinformation about the Wilsons to deflect blame from their own culpability for the breach of our national security.

If Fitzgerald truly wanted to get beyond the cloud of sand that Libby put in the way of the investigation, he should have interviewed Cheney UNDER OATH. As it is, justice was cheated.

http://ajliebling.blogspot.com/2007/11/scott-mcclellans-script-tease.html