>Not one thing on an actual national security crime being committed. By anyone. Why not?
The text of the indictment does make it clear that, in Fitz's opinion at least, Plame's identity was covert and not generally known at the time of the Novak "outing", so I'm don't think the answer is, "because no crime was committed". The indictment certainly implies that there was criminal release of national security information.
Fitz may be witholding that charge against Libby because:
A) Libby honestly didn't know because whomever told him Plame was CIA (i.e., "Official A") didn't say she was covert
B) He's holding it over Libby's head to get a plea deal (or it was already part of a plea/cooperation deal)
C) He's going after a bigger fish and leaving Libby uncharged on that front for leveage to get him to finger said bigger fish
OR some combinations of the above.
Current Events » in reply to What spin?
re: What spin?
The whole thread (37 posts)
- Almost 10:00AM in Washington...No Indictments... (n/t)
- 1:00PM in Washington...5 Indictments on Libby
- None so far on outing
- Here's some spin.
- re: You won't hear it from me.
- What spin?
- re: None so far on outing
- None so far on outing
- Gentlemen place your bets
- Keep an eye on Fitzgerald's web site starting now...
- Indictments doubtful before ELECTIONS
- An announcement is expected by noon that...
- 1:00PM in Washington...5 Indictments on Libby
