|
Banned
|
Scooter Libby, "fallen Soldier", or "Hit Man" for Criminal Presidency ?
Watch the video.....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=shFPZ...smemo%2Ecom%2F
did MSNBC's David Schuster fairly treat the author of the oped piece below?
Isn't the exchange shown on the video, what the divide on this forum and the divide in America, is about? Even after the trial where Scooter Libby was represented by a multi million dollar legal team of eleven lawyers, and the jury verdict, the author, FOUAD AJAMI, is not convinced that Libby is guilty of anything. He views this as solely a political struggle between the CIA and the proponents of the invasion of Iraq.
I'd imagine that if Libby had burned down Plame's house and was apprehended by police in Plame's yard with an empty gasoline can and a Zippo lighter in his hand and a receipt for the gasoline in his pocket, FOUAD AJAMI (and some posters here...) would argue that Libby was not an arsonist, because Plame and her husband, Wilson...."knew what they were doing"....when Wilson decided to "go public" with his accusations against the Bush administration.
There will be no admission that Libby and Cheney did something far worse, than burn down Plame's house....they intentionally outed her...during a time of war....but, apparently, in their tiny, insular world, at least 26 percent of Americans believe that this was not a crime....Wilson and Plame "had it coming". The folks who cling to this belief, call themselves, Americans...
Quote:
http://www.opinionjournal.com/editor...l?id=110010185
Fallen Soldier
Mr. President, do not leave this man behind.
BY FOUAD AJAMI
Friday, June 8, 2007 12:01 a.m.
Mr. President, some weeks ago, I wrote a letter of appeal, a character reference, to Judge Reggie B. Walton, urging leniency for I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby. Scooter, I said, has seen the undoing of his world, but he comes before a "just court in a just and decent country." I was joined by men and women of greater acclaim in our public life, but the petitions were in vain. Now the legal process has played out, Judge Walton has issued a harsh prison term of 30 months, and what will rescue this honorable man is the power of pardon that is exclusively yours.
This case has been, from the start, about the Iraq war and its legitimacy. Judge Walton came to it late; before him were laid bare the technical and narrowly legalistic matters of it. But you possess a greater knowledge of this case, a keen sense of the man caught up in this storm, and of the great contest and tensions that swirl around the Iraq war. To Scooter's detractors, and yours, it was the "sin" of that devoted public servant that he believed in the nobility of this war, that he did not trim his sails, and that he didn't duck when the war lost its luster.
In "The Soldier's Creed," there is a particularly compelling principle: "I will never leave a fallen comrade." This is a cherished belief, and it has been so since soldiers and chroniclers and philosophers thought about wars and great, common endeavors. Across time and space, cultures, each in its own way, have given voice to this most basic of beliefs. They have done it, we know, to give heart to those who embark on a common mission, to give them confidence that they will not be given up under duress. A process that yields up Scooter Libby to a zealous prosecutor is justice gone awry.
Mr. President, the one defining mark of your own moral outlook is the distinction between friend and foe, a refusal to be lulled into moral and political compromises. Your critics have made much of this and have seen it as self-righteousness and moral absolutism, but this has guided you through the great, divisive issues faced by our country over these last, searing years. Scooter Libby was a soldier in your--our--war in Iraq, he was chief of staff to a vice president who had become a lightning rod to the war's critics. He didn't sit around the councils of power only to make the rounds in Georgetown's salons insinuating that this was not his war all along. He didn't claim this war when it promised an easy victory only to desert it when it stalled in the alleyways of Fallujah and Baghdad and in the twilight world of Arab politics. You are not a lawyer, Mr. President, nor is the vast populace out there. The men and women who entrusted you with the presidency, I dare say, are hard pressed to understand why former Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage, who was the admitted leaker of Mrs. Wilson's identity to columnist Robert Novak, has the comforts of home and freedom and privilege while Scooter Libby faces the dreaded prospect of imprisonment.
Much ink has been spilled on this case, and its moral and legal absurdity is more evident by the day. Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald could not, and would not, decide whether this was a case about outing an undercover agent, or a plain case of perjury and obstruction of justice. He had the best of possible worlds: He presented this case as one of perjury, insisted that the undercover status of Valerie Plame Wilson was of no consequence, then shifted grounds to introduce the Intelligence Identities Protection Act at a latter phase in the proceedings. The "covertness" of Mrs. Wilson was never convincingly and fully established. Even Judge Walton himself was not sure of her employment status. So the recollections of Scooter Libby clashed with those of journalist Tim Russert? Surely, we don't end an honorable career in public service and haul a man off to prison on that thinnest of reeds.
A war raged in the inner councils of your administration. The Department of State and the CIA let it be known that they were on the side of the angels, that they harbored great doubts about this expedition into Iraq, that they were "multilateralists" at heart, but that they had lost the war to Vice President Dick Cheney and to the "hawks" around him. In the midst of this, Scooter Libby worked tirelessly and quietly to prosecute and explain and defend this war. He accepted the logic of the Iraq war, the great surprises we met in the course of this war.
He was never a triumphalist. The man I got to know in the aftermath of 9/11, the man you know so much better, was stoical about our causes in the Arab-Islamic world. He was a man of great depth. He knew moral complexity (his remarkably lyrical novel, "The Apprentice," bears witness to an eye for human folly and disappointment) but he stuck to your agenda and to this war. He was not steeped in the ways of the Arabs, but he sought out, tirelessly, all that could be ascertained about the radicalisms threatening our country. From my vantage point as an interpreter of Arab and Islamic matters, I could testify to his great curiosity and relentless devotion. He was keen to understand the winds at play in the Islamic world. This legal process thus removed from the higher ranks of our national security a man of real abilities and insight.
The Schadenfreude of your political detractors over the Libby verdict lays bare the essence of this case: an indictment of the Iraq war itself. The critics of the war shall grant you no reprieve if you let Scooter Libby do prison time. They will see his imprisonment as additional proof that this has been a war of folly from the outset.
At the beginning of this ordeal, it would have been the proper thing to acknowledge that this case rested on a political difference over the prosecution of the war, that Valerie Plame Wilson and Joseph Wilson were protagonists in a struggle over the conflict. It was then, it should be recalled, that you, Mr. President, said that any of your staff caught up in that case "would no longer work in my administration." And it was then that the Justice Department stepped out of the way to let a special prosecutor launch an investigation that would, by necessity, have to vindicate itself. The better part of wisdom was to see the matter for what it was--a policy difference over the war, a matter that should never have been criminalized.
The prosecutor, and the jury and the judge, had before them a case that purported to stand alone, a trial of one man's memory and recollections. But you have before you what they and the rest of us don't--a memory of the passions and the panic, and the certitude, which gave rise to the war. And a sense, I am confident, of the quiet and selfless man who sat in the outer circle when your cabinet deliberated over our country's choices in Iraq, and in those burning grounds of the Arab-Islamic world. Scooter Libby was there for the beginning of that campaign. He can't be left behind as a casualty of a war our country had once proudly claimed as its own.
<h3>Mr. Ajami, the 2006 Bradley Prize recipient</h3>, teaches at the School of Advanced International Studies at the Johns Hopkins University.
|
Did you ever envision a day would come when the act of obstructing an investigation into who did the outing to the public, of the identity and job description of a 20 year CIA manager who was working on WMD intelligence analysis, during a time of war, would be dismissed so lightly, by a small army of folks who call themselves, "conservatives"?
Quote:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...2005Feb17.html
For Bradley Prize Winners, A Conservative Celebration
By Jennifer Frey
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, February 17, 2005; Page C01
....The awards are funded by the Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation, which, according to its mission statement, is devoted to "strengthening American democratic capitalism and the institutions, principles and values that sustain and nurture it."
Translated, that means the Bradley Foundation has long been a big financial supporter of conservative think tanks and thinkers. As Will put it, the Bradley Foundation is "so important to leavening the political argument in this country." ....
|
<h3>Background:</h3>
Quote:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...013000178.html
Reporter's Account Hurts Libby Defense
Miller Testifies of White House Aide's Unmasking of Agent
By Carol D. Leonnig and Amy Goldstein
Washington Post Staff Writers
Wednesday, January 31, 2007; Page A01
.....Deliberately and sometimes defensively offering her account in Libby's perjury trial, Miller told the jury that "a very irritated and angry" <h2>Libby told her in a confidential conversation on June 23, 2003, that the wife of a prominent critic of the Iraq war worked at the CIA. Libby had told investigators he believed he first learned that information from another journalist nearly three weeks later -- the assertion at the core of the charges against him........</h2>
.....Miller testified that Libby, then the chief of staff to Vice President Cheney, shared this information as they talked alone in his office in the Eisenhower Executive Office Building and that he complained that the CIA and a former ambassador were unfairly trying to blame the White House for using faulty intelligence to justify the invasion of Iraq. <h2>He then mentioned that the wife of the ambassador, Joseph C. Wilson IV, worked at a bureau of the CIA.....</h2>
|
Unofficial transcript of Fitzgerald's questioning of Miller, at Libby's trial, to further explain preceding WaPo reporting.....
Quote:
http://www.firedoglake.com/2007/01/3...live-judy-one/
Libby Live: Judy One
By: emptywheel
.........Fitzgerald: Did there come a time when you met with Libby
<h2>Miller: In OEOB, June 23. (Voice waivers)</h2>
M Mr. Libby appeared agitated and frustrated and angry
F HOw could you tell
M He's a lowkey and controlled guy, what he said made me think I was correct. He was concerned that CIA was beginning to backpdal to distance self from unequivocal estimates it provided before the war through a "perverted war of leaks."
F Did the topic of Joseph Wilson come up
F What do you recall was said
M His office had learned that he had been sent overseas, initially referred to as clandestine guy. VP had asked about a report in Winter 2002, in Africa, CIA hd sent Mr Wilson out to investigate claim.
F Was Libby saying VP sent WIlson
M the contrary. He said that VP did not know that Mr Wilson had been sent.
2:29
F What he said about Winter 2002 and how it related to trip.
M There had been reports, a report had gone up to the Hill indicating that Iraq hunting for uranium in Niger. VP had asked about those reporters, agency had taken upon itself to find out more. In the beginning he referred to Wilson as clandestine guy.
<h2>F Mr. Wilson's wife (voice not in great shape)
M Yes, when he was discussing intell reporting, he said his wife (referring to Wilson) worked in the bureau
F What did you understand bureau to mean</h2>
M I was a little unsure, My understanding was FBI, <h2>but the context it was clear he was referring to CIA
F Any particular bureau?
M I thought he was using bureau to refer to Nonproliferation burea, but I wasn't sure.</h2>
F How did you write it in notes
M In parentheses. He had mentioned it as an aside or because I was puzzled by it. I put a question mark about it.
F Why
M I can't be sure.
F any other discussion.
Sidebar.
Judy slouches, looks at lawyers.
2:32
Big eyes, looking forward.
F Any other conversation about pres and WH and CIA?
M Yes, Mr Libby seemed really unhappy and irritated abotu the fact that he accused CIA of leaking info that would distance agency from earlier estimates. He said that nobody had ever come to WH from CIA and said Mr. Pres, this is not correct, this is not right. He thought if CIA had such doubts they should have shared them
F relevance to Wilson
M People were beginning to focus on Wilson, but Wilson was a ruse, an irrelevance
F Did you cover the area you were assigned to.
Walton Was he using Wilson's name
M First as a clandestine guy, then began talking about Joe Wilson by name
F Returning to conversation about the wife working in bureau, did he indicate whether he had heard it from reporters
M NO
F Op-ed?
M Yes. I was surprised by it. Because it was first time that someone who had purported to be part of collection mechanism, first time someone was publicly alleging that admin had lied or distorted info about WMD. It was a serious charge. Second thing that surprised me, I wondered how the CIA would have permitted him to write such an article attacking the president.
Now speaking with her hands.
M Or excuse me sir–or whether it had approved it.
F You met with Libby again
M July 8 at St Regis, in dining room. Mr Libby's choice. About 2 hours.
F Did Libby have papers
M piece of paper in pocket
F Single or more than one
M DOn't remember. Libby was frustrated, quietly agitated. more wideranging discussion about intell that admin had collected and Powell presentation.
F June 23 ground rules:
M Off the record
F At beginning of July 8
M No discussion at beginning of specific attributions
F Mr Wilson was discussed, did ground rules remain same
<h3>M Ground rules changed. Libby said, when we shifted into alleged efforts to acquire uranium, he wanted to be identified on deeper background and I think he said something like Former Hill staffer
F had you ever been asked by him before to treat him as Former Hill staffer
M No
F demeanor?
M Equally frustrated and unhappy</h3>
F what discussed. [Judy uncomfortable]
M SAid plenty of info before Powell presentation was given, supporting Iraq hunting uranium, it had been shown that IRaq HAD acquired uranium in Africa, prior to 1st gulf war, in 80s IAEA stated taht Iraq had acquired, after that several different reports that Iraq in market again for uranium. 2 reports, for a long-term arrangement for large quantities, and then a shorter term amount, then referred to anohter report, a third report, the arrival of a delegation in 1999 this delegation was seeking a broader trade relationship, since Niger only had one export, officials had concluded that Iraq was interested in uranium, Author of this report was Joe Wilson. The report had gone up to the Hill. Talking about info provided to Hill, which had prompted VP questions.
<h2>F Did he indicate who provided this report
M CIA
F Discussion about Mr. Wilson's wife on this occasion.
M Two streams of reporting on uranium and efforst by Iraq to aquire uranium, first stream reports like Wilson, –then made an aside, Wilson's wife works at WINPAC Weapons Intelligence Nonproliferation and Arms Control, specifically focused on WMD.
F Before June 23, had you ever heard that Wilson's wife worked at CIA/
M Not before that meeting
F On July 8, any new info
M WINPAC was new
F Any discussion of covert or non-covert?
M Not that I remember no, No discussion whether she was classified or non-classified.
F Any discussion of learnign this from other newspaper reporters.
F discussion about NIE </h2>
M Defended NIE, based on reporting from many different sources He said classified version even stronger, it was not at all equivocal. Said if anything classified was stronger
F Any qualificatoin, any place where a doubt would be expressed
M Yes, didn't know classified or unclassified, said INR had expressed doubts about uranium hunting, alleged uranium hunting activities, had been included in appendix. What he was saying was that these doubts not prominently featured. He said policy makers had not seen them
F Did you take notes, anything particular about process
Obejction sustained
F Pen or pencil
M Used pen. The pen didn't work
2:46
F Did you talk to other people
M I think I did, as soon as I remember learning about Wilson's wife
M I don't remember who, I consulted my notes, references by initials and names, not tied to any interview in any notebook, can't remember whether it was before or after info became public.
F Did you speak to him again
M Wanted follow-up. We agreed to speak on phone, I recall less about that meeting. The first time Libby called me I was getting into a taxi, I couldn't take notes, Didn't want to talk in a taxi, spoke from home in Sag Harbor
F Did you take notes, have you reviewed those notes, clear memory of conversation
M Not very clearly–
F what do you remember
M I remember telling him that I didn't think I was going to write a story about it, the NYT wasn't interested in pursuing Plame story. We talked about retraction of 16 words. It was more following up on other two conversations. Don't have specific memory of other things
F saw Libby in person
M In Jackson Hole WY, at a rodeo, I went with my husband. This figure approached me, began talking to me, it became time to introduce husband, it became clearer I didn't know who it was. Judy, you don't know who this is, sunglasses, black t-shirt, cowboy boots. I had never seen him in any thing but a suit. Just some banter about meeting in Aspen. Meeting of Aspen startegy group. Topic had been lack of WMD in Iraq.
F A subpoena, what did you do in response
M I decided to fight the subpoena
F Where, who
M Judge Hogan, we lost effort to quash subpoena, we appealed, Federal Appellate court, our appeal was rejected, appealed to SCOTUS, SCOTUS declined to hear case. I returned to Hogan's chambers, he ordered me to comply, I told him I did not have a waiver from my source that I believed was person. I was held in contempt.....
|
Last edited by host; 07-07-2007 at 11:11 AM..
|
07-07-2007, 10:40 AM
