http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/10/31/earlyshow/main996280.shtml
- - -
I wish I had more time than to post and run tonight on this subject.
I still fully intend to debunk the 'top 9 lies' post of Eds, and
comment comprehensively on the Fitzpatrick investigation.
But I thought I'd share this fly in the ointment for the prosecution
with you for starters. :)
The truth is, this is a he said, he said, she said case, and while
it's clear Libby was trying to give himself wiggle room but ended up
painting himself in a corner, there was NO underlying crime---the
"outing" was not a crime, and as far as I know, there's no law against
discrediting an opponent. Central to Wilson's initial credibility was
the assertion that he was sent by Cheney's office. This was patently
false, as was his later denial that his wife had anything to do with
his selection.
Anybody but me find it just a little odd that the CIA, eager to
protect Plame's identity, would select her husband on a mission
without a confidentiality agreement, let him write an op ed piece sure
to put him in the sites of the White House's PR team, and then let
Novak use her name in his article (he asked, remember! And they
shrugged like it was no big deal!), ...if she was in a critical covert
operative in a sensitive position?
This whole thing was a political stunt to manufacture just such a
political crisis. Unfortunately Libby was too clever by half in
engaging the people who were trying to undermine official policy at
Langley, and they snagged him with his own grand jury testimony. For
that he deserves to fry, but rest assured, there's more to this story
than the 'evil Bush White House outs a CIA operative'---indeed that
part of it isn't even true.
More soon...
- Bob
©2005 Bob Calco |
