Cover-Up Issue Is Seen as Focus in Leak Inquiry - NYT

[Quixote1818]

By DAVID JOHNSTON
Published: October 21, 2005
WASHINGTON, Oct. 20 - As he weighs whether to bring criminal charges in the C.I.A. leak case, Patrick J. Fitzgerald, the special counsel, is focusing on whether Karl Rove, the senior White House adviser, and I. Lewis Libby Jr., chief of staff for Vice President Dick Cheney, sought to conceal their actions and mislead prosecutors, lawyers involved in the case said Thursday.

Among the charges that Mr. Fitzgerald is considering are perjury, obstruction of justice and false statement - counts that suggest the prosecutor may believe the evidence presented in a 22-month grand jury inquiry shows that the two White House aides sought to cover up their actions, the lawyers said.

Mr. Rove and Mr. Libby have been advised that they may be in serious legal jeopardy, the lawyers said, but only this week has Mr. Fitzgerald begun to narrow the possible charges. The prosecutor has said he will not make up his mind about any charges until next week, government officials say.

With the term of the grand jury expiring in one week, though, some lawyers in the case said they were persuaded that Mr. Fitzgerald had all but made up his mind to seek indictments. None of the lawyers would speak on the record, citing the prosecutor's requests not to talk about the case.

Continued at:

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/10/21/politics/21leak.html?adxnnl=1&adxnnlx=1129867648-yIW6LPNxmZ22K6opHNIw9Q

[BuyingThyme]

1. All we have to figure out for whom Rove and Libby work,

and we'll know who's behind all of this.

[Quixote1818]

2. Are you suggesting that James Dobson is the leaker?

:puffpiece: :rofl:

[Mme. Defarge]

3. Getting warmer here.

Thanks for the post.

[Burning Water]

4. Cover up!? That;'s

ALL they have on them?? That's outrageous!! These men committed treason, and they're just going to charge them with a cover-up??? Beam me up, Scotty!!

[Quixote1818]

5. It may be hard to prove they "knowingly" outed Plame

Everyone on the planet will know they did but proving it is almost impossible unless someoe spills the beans. Fritz knows where his case against them is the strongest and thats what he is going to focus on.

The cover-up is what nailed Nixon as well.

[Burning Water]

6. Martha didn't

commit a crime until she was investigated, throw her in jail, anyway?

Is punishment, vengeance, against these men what we really want? Or would we rather have their crimes out in the light of day? It seems to me that justice requires, not just the punishment, but either an acknowledgment by the guilty that they were wrong, or evidence that convinces any fair-minded person, regardless of their individual biases. That's what I want.

Besides, even if the technique of finding contradiction in a person's testimony, then charging them with perjury, or lying to a law officer is being used against the bad guys, now; how long to you suspect it will be before this technique is used against the good guys? You or me, for instance.

In summary, if they are not charged with the crimes originally investigated, I consider this investigation a failure, with no proof that we can present to the public that they did their treasonous deeds. Yes, the PR value of, say Rove, being indicted might be vast. And taking him and his counsel from the Bushco regime might be a worthwhile thing to do. But, the PR value might be negative to us, also. The Republicans will be shouting witchhunt, and the public might believe it. And the Repukes have plenty of capable political operatives on the bench. Believe it.

I guess what I'm clumsily trying to say is that, IMO, this is one of those cases where half-a-loaf is not better than no bread.