Here's why cheney is NOT in trouble:

[Francine Frensky]

1. Read today's news article carefully and you see clearly it says that for cheney to discuss national security issues with his chief of staff (Libbey) is not a crime. The article also states that the crime here is that Libbey may have obstructed justice (with held info from grand jury). So this "leak" (planted of course) is telling the world to get ready for an obstruction charge against Libbey.

2. While many here would call cheney's discussion with Libbey treason, it has been pointed out here many times that treason charges are extremely hard to make. The ultimate defense is simply this: "in my best judgement, this was a necessary conversation for national security purposes". End of story, no prosecutor can get past that line.

3. Fitzgerald is a republican and you are really crazy if you think he would dare take out bush or cheney. Those are the hands that feed him. He's going to be in enough trouble (remember, all these republicans socialize and do business together -- the man's gotta feed his family for the next 30 years) when he gets either Libbey or Rove on obstruction charges. But no way does he put his career, and basically his life, on the line over any higher charge.

Read today's planted leak again. bush and cheney will walk away scott free.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

1. Link! Don't tease. There are tens of thousands of articles in a day.

[rooboy]

2. Sorry, but you're wrong.

First of all, last I heard, Fitzgerald was a registered independent, who no record of EVER being partisan in doing his job. He does have a reputation for being thorough and honest to a fault, however.

And secondly, Cheney's problem is that he appears to have lied UNDER OATH to the grand jury. Even if he wasn't under oath and simply lied to FBI investigators, that is still a felony. Dick's in big trouble.

[wtbymark]

20. Fitz WAS an independent

until it became an official party - now he is registered as "non-partisan"

[Rhiannon12866]

39. He wasn't under oath, but it's still a crime. n/t

[Zen Democrat]

40. The New York Times says Cheney testified under oath.

[Rhiannon12866]

44. Last night, on CNN, they said he wasn't under oath, but this was still

a crime, in case anybody was wondering.:-( But I believe you... and the Times. I'll look it up.:shrug:

on edit: Yup, you're right. Found the article and the Times reported this today. I just hope he pays for all the lies he's told, both to Fitzgerald and to the American public.:grr:

Link:
Cheney Told Aide of C.I.A. Officer, Lawyers Report

<snip>
Lawyers involved in the case said they had no indication that Mr. Fitzgerald was considering charging Mr. Cheney with wrongdoing. Mr. Cheney was interviewed under oath by Mr. Fitzgerald last year. It is not known what the vice president told Mr. Fitzgerald about the conversation with Mr. Libby or when Mr. Fitzgerald first learned of it.
<snip>

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/10/25/politics/25leak.html?th&emc=th

[DoYouEverWonder]

3. Keep dreaming

They all lied and presented false testimony to a Grand Jury. Remember Martha Stewart? She went to jail for lying to the FBI.

This goes all the way to the top and nothing can get in the way of this Grand Jury's decisions at this point.

[Maddy McCall]

4. Hopefully, H20 Man will show up and explain this better than I can.

It's about conspiracy and intent.

[Verve]

9. Exactly! Conspiracy theory is purportedly easy to prove.

Cheney and Libby were known to work close together. If Libby and Rove get charged, so does Cheney. (Libby's note to Judy...the roots are connected, they turn in clusters.)

And, BTW, Fitzgerald is a bachelor who is married to his job. The articles on him make him out to be a true morale person who goes after justice regardless of whom he is prosecuting. He also is unaffiliated with any political party. (He once registered as an independent but then changed to unaffiliated when he found out independent was a party.)

[Quakerfriend]

5. Sorry, but I will have to disagree with you.

I think Cheney is being set up for conspiring to expose Plame.

[Just Me]

6. Conspiracy, my friend. Conspiracy.

Not just one, either.

[rateyes]

7. Why does everyone assume that the conversation

between Cheney and Libby was not criminal? Not everyone in the White House has the same kind of security clearance. There are different levels of "secrecy" depending on what kind of clearance one has. If Cheney shared classified info. that Libby was unauhtorized to see, Cheney is guilty of a breach of the Espionage Act. USC 18, Sec. 792, 793, & 794.

Fitzgerald, IMHO, is set for life in his job, if he wants it. If the Repigs fire him for doing his job, as Nixon did with the special prosecutor investigating him, the next one to lose his job is *.

[Ready4Change]

21. Does Libby have a clearance? What level?

If Libby was adequately cleared, then Cheney might be off the hook (depending on the content of their conversation, if that's known.)

If Libby is NOT adequately cleared, Cheney is nabbed.

[rateyes]

26. I don't know...

but, I still believe that Cheney is guilty of conspiracy...For some reason Cheney felt the need to share that information with Libby. And, it's more than likely that he did that in an effort to get Valerie Plame's name to reporters. Section 792 of The Espionage Act says (and, I'm paraphrasing) that anyone who knows that classified information was shared with an unauthorized person and remains silent about it--does not come clean about knowing it--is also guilty of espionage and gets the same penalty as the person who disclosed the info to an unauthorized person.

If Fitz does his job the way he is supposed to do it, Cheney is indicted for a violation of the espionage act, and conspiracy to identify a covert agent. Again, IMHO.

[Ready4Change]

29. I agree. Just wondering about proof.

I'm positive Cheney had a hand in this. I'm just impatient waiting for Fitz to publish results and trying to connect what few dots we have. With this note of a Libby/Cheney conversation we know Cheney mentioned Plame to Libby. If we knew Libby had inadequate clearance, that nabs Cheney right there.

Otherwise, from this one bit of evidence, we'd need to know the content of this or later conversations in order to pin Cheney with conspiracy charges. In other words, did Cheney and Libby discuss and plan on exposing Plames identity? If they have conversational content, again Cheney is nabbed.

Lastly, if Cheney testified to Fitz, the GJ, FBI etc (under oath or not) that he never discussed Plame with Libby, then he may be nabbed for perjury and/or obstruction of justice. (Not clear on how oath/non oath would affect those charges.)

[rateyes]

31. I hear you. Cheney is guilty...

just wonder if he's cutting a deal, or what. If he's indicted, he's resigning, and IMHO, * gives him a pardon. If that happens then look for VP Rice---But, her confirmation hearing will be "contentious" to say the least---all her lies will be exposed, too. I personally hope that the GJ indicts the whole cabal.

[NNN0LHI]

8. Gosh but that would still mean Cheney knew a crime was committed long ago

Wouldn't his being silent on this crime that was committed for all this time mean he was in on the conspiracy to cover it up?

Don

[HereSince1628]

10. Do you really think the details of the story is the important story?

The important story seems to be that the Cheney team is falling apart and turning against its own. It's apparently becoming every man for himself among Cheney and his circle of top aides.

In that environment, Fitzgerald really does have a chance to get information that he can use.

[Spurt]

11. Republican?

What makes you think he is a repub?

He is not registered with any party.

[Dunvegan]

12. Fitzgerald is not registered either as R or D, and is single.

Francine Frensky wrote:

"3. Fitzgerald is a republican and you are really crazy if you think he would dare take out bush or cheney. Those are the hands that feed him. He's going to be in enough trouble (remember, all these republicans socialize and do business together -- the man's gotta feed his family for the next 30 years) when he gets either Libbey or Rove on obstruction charges. But no way does he put his career, and basically his life, on the line over any higher charge."

Fitz is a bachelor and is neither registered as a Republican or a Democrat. He seems to all who know him to be rather apolitical.

Work seems to keep him company rather than a family, and his party seems to be the Truth and Justice Party.

Party on, Fitz....

[Lerkfish]

13. If I wanted to read the latest Right Wing talking points, I'd go to Drudge

no thank you to bringing it here.

[MoonRiver]

16. The desperation is really showing.

Whatever the "source" was in the OP, it was about as pathetic as any I've seen. Even the surface facts were bald faced lies. Same ole, same ole.

[seemslikeadream]

14. CHENEY LIED TO FITZGERALD

THAT'S THE CRIME. WHETHER HE WAS UNDER OATH OR NOT


http://firedoglake.blogspot.com/

[Connie_Corleone]

15. BINGO!

Perjury and obstruction of justice...at the very least. I would throw in conspiracy also.

[Walt Starr]

35. Actually, lying to a federal officer and obstruction

I know, but the distinction is important.

[Midlodemocrat]

18. Ding, ding, ding. We have a winner.

The crime is the lie. I hope Fitz takes every single fucking one of them out.

[mmonk]

17. I disagree

[KharmaTrain]

19. It May Boil Down To A Wink & A Nod...

Any indictment...be it to the cleaning lady who may have found a memo and gave it to Judy Miller (now watch that whopper get picked up from here and make the rounds...LOL) is a good thing, it does something we haven't had before...a means to force accountability.

Any investigation that means compelling testimony about leaking Plame's identity and the root causes will inevitably lead back to the same people over and over and over again.

Yes, it might not have been a crime for Chenney to discuss Plame with Libby under the guise of "national security", but if Chenney instructs Libby or someone else...or is connected with the ordering of someone to deliberately out a CIA agent, that's all Mr. Fitzgerald cares about and that's how this investigation has gone and will continue to go.

Even if there were criminal indictments to Chenney, it's foolish to think he'd ever stand a trial. Be assured there are the usual cadre of high-paid GOOP lawyers loaded with tons of Constitutional challenges and legal technicalities that will drag this thing on for a long, long time.

[Spurt]

23. I'm not so sure ...

...they will want to drag this out over time. They will not want it resurfacing in 2006, and even less so in 2008.
I think if there is dirt laid on them, they will want to do some quick laundry and then bury the matter.

[KharmaTrain]

28. Easier Said Than Done

Once this jumps into a courtroom, it gets personal. We're already seeing it...Rove vs. Libby vs. Chenney...all covering their asses and this is sure to continue even if any of them escape indictment and subordinate are charged instead.

Yes, in theory the party wants to do a quick cleaning here. I'm sure there's already a PR offensive in the White House playbooks (Kenny Mehlmann and Ed Gillespie at the "controls) to distance boooosh from this mess. The corporate media has deliberately allowed him distance and will continue to do so...and indirectly this will limited political damage to Repugnicans in the 2006 elections.

That's not where their problems are gonna come from. The House scandals are just starting to come to light as well. DeLay is phase one...Hurricane Abramoff looks headed for landfall sometime next year and that will blow open the Repugnican fundraising and slush funds that will smear a lot of Congressional and Senate Repugnicans.

That's the Democrats dilema...so many scandals...where to start?

[Spurt]

30. You are of course correct...

...in that there is plenty else to fill the laundry basket.
A full basket of dirty stuff gets to smell worse over time - hence I believe some washing is unavoidable.

You said...
"That's the Democrats dilema...so many scandals...where to start?"
Yes, exquisite isn't it.

[cynatnite]

22. Why Cheney is in A LOT of TROUBLE...

1)We don't know what Cheney told Fitz. If it was the truth, then yeah, Cheney probably won't get indicted, but given the timeline and varying statements of Cheney, I say his being honest with Fitz is a fantasy, at best.

2)Treason is what Cheney and others deserve, but many here already know how tough that one would be and how unlikely. Others who don't know...well, we'll educate them :)

3)Fitz used to be a registered republican. He's now an independent. No one, on either side, has dissed Fitz in any way...least not that I've heard. It's widely accepted he is thorough and will get the job done no matter what happens.

It's too early to tell if they'll walk away. Even if indictments come down and they aren't on the list, that's not to say they won't get away with the crimes they committed. In fact, I'd say it's only the beginning.

[meg]

24. Having clearance does NOT mean

that you can discuss any and all information or data. There is a need-to-know component. Did Scooter have a need to know that Wilson's wife worked for the CIA? Did Scooter need to know that fact in order to punish Wilson?

If Scooter needed to know in order to evaluate Wilson's report, maybe. But there is no valid need-to-know in order to punish Wilson.

Hummm. Maybe the Rove and Libby spin that they weren't out to punish Wilson should be interpreted in the need-to-know light.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

25. No one ever really proved Nixon knew about Watergate.

Somehow, I feel like that's relevant information here.

[FreedomAngel82]

27. Fitzgearld is NOT a republican!

Good grief. And anyways: prove he is one. I have yet to see any type of proof he is a republican. And that doesn't mean shit anyways. Tell that to the GOP in Illnois when their mayor and governor got indicted by Fitzgearld.

[Beetwasher]

32. What A Steaming Load Of CRAP! READ THIS and THEN Say That

http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/archives/001026.html

[Walt Starr]

33. Man, are you ever wrong!

1) That's a news article. You have no clue what Fitzgerald has in the way of evidence. The leak for that story did not come from fitzgerald's office. Only Fitzgerald can say whther or not Cheney is in deep caca.

2) Treason is not what these people are going to be charged with. Get over the Treason rhetoric, it ain't happening. Treason is extremely difficult to prove to the standards of the constitution which is why laws against sedition and espionage, not to mention terrorism, have been enacted.

3) Fitzgerald is reistered with no political affiliation whatsoever. He's an Independent.

[stepnw1f]

34. You Funny (nt)

[annabanana]

36. Hit 'n Run.....eom

[Cooley Hurd]

37. After an impassioned original post, no reply from the original poster...

Stinky. Very stinky...

[Catrina]

38. Wrong

because all we know is that someone told the prosecutor that Libby had notes of a meeting he had with Cheney (wasn't Wurmser present also?). Who told the prosecutor about the notes?

If it was Cheney, then Cheney is off the hook, imo, sort of.

Sort of, because as a person with the security clearance he had, once he saw that the information he shared with Libby that day, had been responsible for the outing of a NOC and her network, he was required by law to report it.

In fact, we sort of know he did nothing to stop the outing because Novak wrote another article two weeks later outing Brewster Jennings!! That tells us that no one was trying to stop this crime from happening, and now we know where the info came from.

But who told Fitzpatrick about Libby's notes, and when? We don't know that either. Maybe it was Wurmser or Hannah or Hadley to whom Libby may have shown them, when the conspiracy was being plotted.

The main question is, why was Cheney interested in Valerie Plame, weeks before anyone knew anything about her or her husband? Why, since we know now he had checked her and Wilson out, did he not go to the country and apologize for the wrong intelligence about Uranium and nuclear bombs etc.? Why was he not furious at those who fed him and Bush the information? Did he fire anyone? No, he did none of that, so it's safe to assume why he was so interested in Valerie Plame.

There are so many possibilities and we know none of them. But we now have gone beyond the next to highest layer of those who were involved all the way to the top.

The Right is trying to say that Fitz' office leaked this information. I believe it was probably Libby's lawyer, or Wurmser's maybe, knowing that the whole sorry mess is about to unfold, and they want to diminish the shock to the American people before the indictments come down.

Imo, Cheney is in big trouble ~ he did not report it or try to stop it. His intentions are obvious, his actions, or non-action raise considerable suspicion that he was part of the conspiracy. And if it was not Cheney who revealed the conversation to the prosecutor and lied to the him, that is another charge.

We don't know what Wurmser and Hannah have told the prosecutor about conversations with Cheney, or Mary Matelin, or any of the WHIG group.

Btw, Tenet supposedly does not remember giving the information to Cheney.

[Norquist Nemesis]

41. As far as you Fitzgerald theory, you're waayyyy off

He's not a partisan hack in any way, shape, or form when it comes to investigating and prosecuting crimes. He was like a dog with a bone when it came to pinning charges onto our former GOP Governor here in Illinois. It took a lot of time and patience, but he came through with indictments. Ryan is now in the process of trying to save his ass from years in the pokey and it's not looking too good.

[Catherine Vincent]

42. I agree. Way off on Fitzgerald.

He's independent from Independent.:)

[Bake]

43. Fitz has no career worries

Even if he were to terminally piss off the Pukes, he has no career worries. With his experience and reputation, he could easily easily easily go to any major law firm in the country and make ten times what he's making as a US Attorney. Alternately, he could easily win election as a judge in Illinois (or any other state should he choose to relocate).

Bake, Esq.