Lying like a rug

So Scooter Libby has been indicted (PDF file on that last link, but it's the indictment proper: you'll want to read it anyway, because I'm going to be making reference to it frequently hereafter). No big surprise there, but we'll come back to Scooter in a minute.

Unca Karl, on the other hand, is still twisting in the wind. (And, if you want my private opinion, figuring out just exactly how many beans he'll have to spill in order to (a) avoid significant prison time, and (b) avoid burning every last bridge he has with anyone who might still want to hire him once he gets out of prison--or pardon him to keep him from having to go there in the first place.) From the WaPo story linked above, and from other snippets floating around Blogistan, it would appear that Patrick Fitzgerald ain't done yet by a long shot. He's still talking to people and trying to piece things together. So I think Right Blogistan can forget about getting this mess over with in a weekend news cycle, and they'd best hunker down for a long winter of discontent. One can only hope that we'll come out of it, Watergate-like, in the spring, when the vice president is sent up the river and the preznit resigns. Hopefully Fat Denny will have been impeached or un-elected by then, too, for the trifecta.

But back to facts (or at least allegations: this is the reality-based community, after all, and we must be careful of things like that). Scooter Libby should never have been allowed to resign: Cheney should have fired his ass as soon as Fitzgerald stopped reading the indictment. Ultimately, I doubt it will make that much difference: Libby's days as a person of power and prestige are as over and done with as Valerie Plame's days as a covert asset for the CIA--another story you can read at the WaPo, by the by.

Having read through the 22 pages of the indictment, a number of things leapt out at me. The first and most obvious is the sentiment expressed in the title of this post: Scooter Libby was lying like a rug to that grand jury. (There's also a sentence in the indictment, one of the allegedly false statements he made in his testimony, that should easily qualify for the Bulwer-Lytton Fiction Contest, at least if they're willing to waive the requirement that the prose be fictional in nature. On second thought, if it's proven he was lying at the time, it actually would be fictional, so never mind!)

A couple of things struck me in paragraph 5, which states: "On or about June 5, 2003, a number of classified documents from the CIA were faxed to the Office of the Vice President to the personal attention of LIBBY and another person in the Office of the Vice President." Faxed? What the fuck? I know, secure line, blah, blah, blah--but come on! If I had a dime for every misdirected fax that's come across the machine at the office, I could have retired long ago. With classified documents--and especially when they refer to anything having to do with the Operations Directorate--you send them by messenger. Better yet, make anybody who wants to look at them come and do it on-site. I'm also curious to know who this "other person" might be. Darth Cheney, perhaps?

There's virtually no way Libby's going to get out of the perjury or false statements charges, at least if the evidence as alleged in the indictment holds up in court. Despite claiming under oath in his grand-jury testimony that he was not aware of Plame's identity or her work for the CIA, he wrote in Joe Wilson's name by hand on the CIA documents faxed over from the CIA on June 9. So clearly he knew who had made the trip in question, and that there was a CIA involvement.

The first smoking gun comes in points 13 and 14. On or about 19 June, 2003, Libby tells his principal deputy that he can't talk about the CIA involvement in Wilson's trip because "there would be complications at the CIA" if he did, and that he "could not discuss the matter on a non-secure telephone line." That right there indicates he knew that he was dealing with classified material. And yet on or about 23 June, 2003, Libby met with St. Judith. "In discussing the CIA's handling of Wilson's trip to Niger, LIBBY informed [Miller] that Wilson's wife might work at a bureau of the CIA." Oops. He repeated that information (I guess Judy is pretty doggone dumb, or else just a really bad reporter. Or maybe both.) in conversations with Miller on 8 July and 12 July 2003 (points 17 and 24, respectively). Double and triple oops.

The second smoking gun is in points 23 and 26b: did Libby, or did he not, tell Matt Cooper that he knew Plame was CIA. The third is in points 17, 24, and 26c: did Libby, or did he not, tell Judy Miller about Plame's being CIA. Libby swore before the grand jury that he did not. Cooper's and Miller's testimony suggests otherwise.

It's immaterial (to me, at least) that Libby appears not to have violated either the espionage act or the intelligence personnel identities act (whatever the official names are: you know the ones I mean). The charges against Libby are substantial and serious, and warrant a significant penalty. And before my brethren and sistren in Right Blogistan get too far down the "oh, it's only perjury!" road, I would recommend they step away from their keyboards or microphones and carefully check their files from the years 1993 through 1998 unless they want to look like complete tools. If perjury before a grand jury was serious enough to impeach a sitting president, it's certainly serious enough to send a senior White House staffer to jail.

Comments

[Bryan]

Libby actually did violate the espionage act, but to prove that charge Fitzgerald would have to enter classified documents into evidence and the charge is only good for an additional 10 years and/or $10K, so there is not a lot to show for the exposure of classified information.

There is a secure telephone system and secure fax machines that can be used for some classified. That is not a violation.

Fitzgerald has found a way to punish one of the guilty without further cost to national security.

Nice.

[Michael]

Oh, I'm sure they have secure phone lines and all that. But there's no way to make them idiot-proof. Just this morning I had a telephone call at my office. I identified myself and said "Chemistry and Biochemistry," and the woman on the other end of the line sayd "Is this Tangles Hair Salon?" Seems she'd swapped an 8 and a 3.

That was an annoyance. But imagine if she'd been faxing over a covert operations plan--and sent it to a pizza parlor in Sverdlovsk by mistake.

[Mustang Bobby]

Bryan makes a good point re: security, and I think Fitzgerald didn't overreach on purpose. If it slightly disappoints us that Rove is still -- for the moment -- free, it's better than having him indicted now and then get sprung when the judge throws out the charge based on the inevitable habeus corpus filing by the defense, or worse, is acquitted at trial. His best stance was not to be greedy.

[Bryan]

Michael, you can't make that kind of mistake with the secure system and if you tapped the line you would essentially hear static. You'll have to accept that because I won't go any deeper into it. The system works and it is monitored for weaknesses constantly.

The problems occur when people don't use it, but that doesn't happen to and from the CIA without a lot of questions from guys in cheap suits magically appearing.

Politicians and political appointees don't like the system, but it works.

[Michael]

If you say so, Bryan. But in my experience every time we think we've idiot-proofed some system, somebody comes up with a better (worse) grade of idiot.