And that's only right and just. All Libby did was momentarily stall an investigation. No lives were threatened by his lying. Paris Hilton drove recklessly while drunk, endangering lives.
Nope, that had already happened, when Valerie Plame's identity was leaked. It not only endangered her and her husband and their twin daughters, but also every single contact and informant and spy she had working for her, and also every agent who was using the same business she was for their cover.
What you're doing is mixing up the crime which he was convicted of - a very minor, harmless one - with the crime for which there was not enough evidence to prosecute him. It is not illegal to "leak" CIA personnel information the Vice President of the United States. Which other officials did he leak it to? I don't recall any, but I have not been following every detail.
I suspect that if you ever ask a prosecuting attorney how serious obstruction of justice is, they might not agree with you that it's a "minor, harmless" crime.
How closely did you follow the trial? If you haven't read it already, firedoglake.com had people there liveblogging the testimony, including a lawyer and a psychologist--you might find it very interesting. It was so exhaustive all the "normal" media were using them as a resource. During the trial it was made clear exactly how the office of the vice president found out about Ms. Plame and what they did with the information, and that it was indeed a crime. (If it wasn't, the FBI wouldn't have a task force investigating it ... which they still do, btw.) There's also a book called Anatomy of Deceit by Marcy Wheeler which was exhaustively researched and has the whole story about how the leak happened.
Oh, one of the officials Libby leaked to was Ari Fleischer (without telling him the information was classified) who then leaked it to several reporters.
This particular type of classified information was supposed to be handled even more carefully than normal--it wasn't just that it could only be told to people who had clearance; they also had to have demonstrated need-to-know. As Cheney's National Security expert, Libby was required to sign papers stating that he understands the proper handling of all types of classified information and would comply.
I suspect that the main reason no one was charged with the leak itself is because there's an administration claim that Plame's identity was declassified (either by the President or by the Vice President with delegated authority) "on the fly", which means they're claiming they have the authority to classify or declassify information without going through the required process. Prosecuting a leak charge would require proving that the "on the fly" claim is unconstitutional, and I suspect Fitz is still gathering evidence on that point. He's known as a real pit-bull prosecutor who starts with the small stuff and works his way up to the big guys.
BTW, administration toadies *did* try to stop the prosecution--remember all those US Attorneys who got fired? Patrick Fitzgerald's name was put on that list, while he was investigating this. I suspect that someone realized it would look really bad if he was fired, though, because he still has the job.
As for the testimony thing--if Libby had been fully pardoned rather than just having his sentence commuted, accepting the pardon would require him to (a) de facto admit his guilt, and (b) give up his fifth amendment rights in regards to that specific matter. The fifth amendment says you can't be forced to incriminate yourself; well, if you can't be prosecuted, there's no way to incriminate yourself, and thus if you're pardoned you *can* be forced to testify about it. (Lawyers I trust to know their stuff have said this is the case, and I believe the Department of Justice says the same thing.)
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
zaluzianskya and ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png)
skylark_photos
no subject
Date: 2007-07-04 05:37 am (UTC)Nope, that had already happened, when Valerie Plame's identity was leaked. It not only endangered her and her husband and their twin daughters, but also every single contact and informant and spy she had working for her, and also every agent who was using the same business she was for their cover.
What you're doing is mixing up the crime which he was convicted of - a very minor, harmless one - with the crime for which there was not enough evidence to prosecute him. It is not illegal to "leak" CIA personnel information the Vice President of the United States. Which other officials did he leak it to? I don't recall any, but I have not been following every detail.
I suspect that if you ever ask a prosecuting attorney how serious obstruction of justice is, they might not agree with you that it's a "minor, harmless" crime.
How closely did you follow the trial? If you haven't read it already, firedoglake.com had people there liveblogging the testimony, including a lawyer and a psychologist--you might find it very interesting. It was so exhaustive all the "normal" media were using them as a resource. During the trial it was made clear exactly how the office of the vice president found out about Ms. Plame and what they did with the information, and that it was indeed a crime. (If it wasn't, the FBI wouldn't have a task force investigating it ... which they still do, btw.) There's also a book called Anatomy of Deceit by Marcy Wheeler which was exhaustively researched and has the whole story about how the leak happened.
Oh, one of the officials Libby leaked to was Ari Fleischer (without telling him the information was classified) who then leaked it to several reporters.
This particular type of classified information was supposed to be handled even more carefully than normal--it wasn't just that it could only be told to people who had clearance; they also had to have demonstrated need-to-know. As Cheney's National Security expert, Libby was required to sign papers stating that he understands the proper handling of all types of classified information and would comply.
I suspect that the main reason no one was charged with the leak itself is because there's an administration claim that Plame's identity was declassified (either by the President or by the Vice President with delegated authority) "on the fly", which means they're claiming they have the authority to classify or declassify information without going through the required process. Prosecuting a leak charge would require proving that the "on the fly" claim is unconstitutional, and I suspect Fitz is still gathering evidence on that point. He's known as a real pit-bull prosecutor who starts with the small stuff and works his way up to the big guys.
BTW, administration toadies *did* try to stop the prosecution--remember all those US Attorneys who got fired? Patrick Fitzgerald's name was put on that list, while he was investigating this. I suspect that someone realized it would look really bad if he was fired, though, because he still has the job.
As for the testimony thing--if Libby had been fully pardoned rather than just having his sentence commuted, accepting the pardon would require him to (a) de facto admit his guilt, and (b) give up his fifth amendment rights in regards to that specific matter. The fifth amendment says you can't be forced to incriminate yourself; well, if you can't be prosecuted, there's no way to incriminate yourself, and thus if you're pardoned you *can* be forced to testify about it. (Lawyers I trust to know their stuff have said this is the case, and I believe the Department of Justice says the same thing.)