Will Cheney's Former Adviser Be Convicted in Perjury Trial?

[Rach3]

Perjury Trial Is Set to Begin for Former Cheney Adviser

WASHINGTON, Jan. 14 — I. Lewis Libby Jr., the former chief of staff to Vice President Dick Cheney, will go on trial on Tuesday, nearly three years after a C.I.A. operative’s name appeared in a newspaper column, setting off a major investigation of who leaked the name and why.

But neither Mr. Libby nor anyone else has been charged with disclosing the name, which might have violated a federal law protecting the identities of Central Intelligence Agency officers. Instead, he faces five felony counts that he lied to a grand jury and the F.B.I. agents investigating the leak.

The situation of Mr. Libby, who once worked at the highest reaches of government power in Washington and now faces the possibility of a long jail sentence, is a vivid example of what has become a contemporary capital cliché: “It’s not the crime but the cover-up” that often leads to legal problems for officials in high-profile investigations. The perjury and obstruction of justice charges against Mr. Libby stem not from the leak but from his behavior in the leak investigation.

Mr. Libby is charged with lying to a grand jury and the F.B.I. agents investigating the leak of the name of the C.I.A. officer, Valerie Wilson, who was known by her maiden name, Valerie Plame. Her name first appeared in a July 14, 2003, column by Robert D. Novak, saying that she worked at the C.I.A. and was married to Joseph C. Wilson IV, a former ambassador. Only days earlier, Mr. Wilson had written an article that was published on the Op-Ed page of The New York Times, charging that the administration twisted intelligence to build a case to invade Iraq.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/15/w...&en=3f7306b6311f26d6&ei=5094&partner=homepageAnd for an honest and sobering statement on the integrity of those in the white house:

Pressed about his former aide’s honesty, Mr. Cheney replied, “I believe he’s one of the more honest men I know.”

 

[Rach3]

Oops, the title should be "begins", not "beings". Stupid fingers!

 

[Astronuc]

Oops, the title should be "begins", not "beings".

and I thought you were referring to that crowd of lawyer media consultants who will hover about for the next several weeks filling the airwaves with babble.

 

[edward]

The trial has revealed some interesting tid bits about how the press was used. It must be confusing for the two sides, press and administration, to decide who is the manipulator and who is the manipulatee.

No one served up spicier morsels than Cathie Martin, Vice President Dick Cheney's former top press assistant . Martin described the craft of media manipulation -- under oath and in blunter terms than politicians like to hear in public.

Most of the techniques were candidly described: the uses of leaks and exclusives, when to hide in anonymity, which news medium was seen as more susceptible to control, and what timing was most propitious.

Even the rating of certain journalists as friends to favor and critics to shun -- a faint echo of the enemies list drawn up in Richard Nixon's White House more than 30 years ago

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/w...se_witness_details_art_of_media_manipulation/

 

[BobG]

Predictions on the verdict?

Seemed like a pretty weak defense to me. According to the defense, everything hinges on Hannah saying Libby had a terrible memory and whether Russert's or Libby's account of their conversation was the accurate account. Even if the Russert conversation is a push, I don't think that argument takes into account that just about every other witness remembered things differently than Libby did.

I'm expecting a guilty verdict.

 

[ray b]

guilty on 4 out of 5 counts