[Mb-civic] Libby May Have Tried to Mask Cheney's Role - Washington Post

[William Swiggard]

Libby May Have Tried to Mask Cheney's Role

By Carol D. Leonnig and Jim VandeHei
Washington Post Staff Writers
Sunday, November 13, 2005; Page A06

In the opening days of the CIA leak investigation in early October 2003, 
FBI agents working the case already had in their possession a wealth of 
valuable evidence. There were White House phone and visitor logs, which 
clearly documented the administration's contacts with reporters.

And they had something that law enforcement officials would later 
describe as their "guidebook" for the opening phase of the 
investigation: the daily, diary-like notes compiled by I. Lewis 
"Scooter" Libby, then Vice President Cheney's chief of staff, that 
chronicled crucial events inside the White House in the weeks before the 
identity of CIA operative Valerie Plame was publicly disclosed.

The investigators had much of this information before they sat down with 
Libby on Oct. 14, 2003, and first heard from him what prosecutors now 
allege was a demonstrably false version of what happened. Libby said 
that, when he told other reporters about the CIA operative and her 
marriage to Iraq war critic Joseph C. Wilson IV, he believed he had 
first learned the information from Tim Russert of NBC News and was 
merely passing along journalistic hearsay. This was an explanation made 
dubious by Libby's own notes, which showed that he previously had 
learned about Plame from his boss, Cheney.

In the aftermath of Libby's recent five-count indictment, this curious 
sequence raises a question of motives that hangs over the investigation: 
Why would an experienced lawyer and government official such as Libby 
leave himself so exposed to prosecutor Patrick J. Fitzgerald?

Libby, according to Fitzgerald's indictment, gave a false story to 
agents and, later, to a grand jury, even though he knew investigators 
had his notes, and presumably knew that several of his White House 
colleagues had already provided testimony and documentary evidence that 
would undercut his own story. And his interviews with the FBI in October 
and two appearances before the grand jury in March 2004 came at a time 
when there were increasingly clear signs that some of the reporters with 
whom Libby discussed Plame could soon be freed to testify -- and provide 
starkly different and damning accounts to the prosecutor.

To critics, the timing suggests an attempt to obscure Cheney's role, and 
possibly his legal culpability. The vice president is shown by the 
indictment to be aware of and interested in Plame and her CIA status 
long before her cover was blown. Even some White House aides privately 
wonder whether Libby was seeking to protect Cheney from political 
embarrassment. One of them noted with resignation, "Obviously, the 
indictment speaks for itself."

In addition, Cheney also advised Libby on a media strategy to counter 
Plame's husband, former ambassador Wilson, according to a person 
familiar with the case.

"This story doesn't end with Scooter Libby's indictment," said Senate 
Minority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.), giving voice to widespread 
Democratic hopes about the outcome of Fitzgerald's case. "A lot more 
questions need to be answered by the White House about the actions of 
[Cheney] and his staff."

But to Libby's defenders, the timing of Libby's alleged lies supports 
his claims of innocence. They say it would be supremely illogical for an 
intelligent and highly experienced lawyer to mislead the FBI or grand 
jury if he knew the jurors had evidence that would expose his 
falsehoods. Libby, they say, is guilty of nothing more than a foggy 
memory and recollections that differ, however dramatically, from those 
of several witnesses in the nearly two-year-old investigation.

"People have different memories," said lawyer Victoria Toensing, a 
Justice Department official in the Reagan administration. She said the 
fact that Fitzgerald did not indict on the crime he set out to 
investigate -- illegal disclosure of classified evidence -- supports the 
conclusion that no such crime took place. Fitzgerald has said he could 
not make such a determination because his inquiry was obstructed by 
Libby's deceptions.

Even if Fitzgerald shows beyond a reasonable doubt that Libby's version 
of events is wrong, he also must prove the former Cheney aide lied on 
purpose. But many lawyers and several White House aides said the case 
against Libby appears strong -- and has the potential to embarrass other 
administration officials if it goes to trial.

The case was prompted by Plame's name being publicized by columnist 
Robert D. Novak on July 14, 2003. Eight days earlier, Wilson had 
publicly criticized the Bush administration for allegedly twisting 
intelligence to justify the Iraq war. Wilson and his allies claimed Bush 
officials publicly identified Plame as payback for his dissent.

(continued)...
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/11/12/AR2005111201085.html
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.islandlists.com/pipermail/mb-civic/attachments/20051113/410e3579/attachment.htm