LoungeMachine
04-07-2006, 09:30 PM
Fitzgerald Aims to Show
An Organized Plan Led
To Leak of CIA Agent's Name
By ANNE MARIE SQUEO
April 8, 2006
WASHINGTON -- The special prosecutor trying the case against former vice presidential chief of staff I. Lewis Libby will try to show that the leaking of a CIA agent's name grew out of a highly organized administration effort that commanded high-level attention, a court filing this week shows.
Pretrial filings by Mr. Libby's defense team indicate they intend to argue that any misstatements made in Mr. Libby's testimony to investigators and a grand jury were innocent mistakes because of his focus on more pressing national-security issues. They are seeking a wide array of classified and sensitive information they say is necessary for trial, including secret daily intelligence briefings given to the president.
This week's filing by Patrick Fitzgerald, the special prosecutor, was intended to convince the judge to deny the defense's latest request for information. In doing so, the prosecutor also attacked Mr. Libby's bad-memory defense by introducing new information about the attention -- including by President Bush -- placed on responding to Joseph Wilson, a former ambassador and critic of the Iraq war.
Lawyers say in a high-profile legal battle like this, where the judge already has warned both sides not to try their case in public, pretrial motions become a critical element in the public-relations campaign.
"Mr. Libby's defense, as we understand it, is that because of his 24-7 national-security responsibilities, he just forgot his conversations with reporters," says Scott Fredericksen, a Washington defense attorney and former prosecutor. "And what Mr. Fitzgerald is telling the judge here is that Mr. Libby was expressly authorized to go have these conversations with reporters by the vice president and authorized to release classified information by the president. That is a unique situation and not very forgettable."
For instance, Mr. Fitzgerald cites the express permission by the president to disclose certain elements of a highly classified report about Iraq to a New York Times reporter. While the president has broad latitude to declassify information, the government's filing quotes Mr. Libby's grand-jury testimony as saying such an authorization was "unique in his recollection."
On Friday, the White House didn't challenge the assertion that Mr. Bush declassified intelligence information to counter war critics. White House spokesman Scott McClellan spent nearly an hour drawing a distinction between the leaking of information judged to be "in the public interest" and the willful disclosure of information that could endanger national security.
At issue are portions of the previously classified National Intelligence Estimate the White House made public on July 18, 2003 -- some ten days after prosecutors allege Mr. Libby discussed the information with a New York Times reporter. In that conversation, Mr. Libby also disclosed the identity of Mr. Wilson's wife, Valerie Plame, a Central Intelligence Agency official, according to his indictment. (Leaking the identity of a covert official can be a crime, but Mr. Libby isn't charged with that violation.)
There is no suggestion by Mr. Fitzgerald that either President Bush or Vice President Cheney told Mr. Libby to leak her name. Mr. McClellan dismissed as "crass politics" the suggestion from some Democrats that Mr. Bush sanctioned or engaged in a scheme to disclose sensitive information that would presumably include releasing Ms. Plame's identity.
The case against Mr. Libby, who is charged with five counts of lying and obstructing a federal investigation, isn't expected to go to trial until next January at the earliest. He has pleaded not guilty.
Mr. Fitzgerald alleges Mr. Libby took the lead in disputing Mr. Wilson's claims, and in doing so disclosed Ms. Plame's identity to reporters. Thus, the government alleges, he sought to cover up his role in Ms. Plame's unveiling by lying under oath and trying to obstruct the investigation.
--Christopher Cooper contributed to this article.
Write to Anne Marie Squeo at annemarie.squeo@wsj.com
An Organized Plan Led
To Leak of CIA Agent's Name
By ANNE MARIE SQUEO
April 8, 2006
WASHINGTON -- The special prosecutor trying the case against former vice presidential chief of staff I. Lewis Libby will try to show that the leaking of a CIA agent's name grew out of a highly organized administration effort that commanded high-level attention, a court filing this week shows.
Pretrial filings by Mr. Libby's defense team indicate they intend to argue that any misstatements made in Mr. Libby's testimony to investigators and a grand jury were innocent mistakes because of his focus on more pressing national-security issues. They are seeking a wide array of classified and sensitive information they say is necessary for trial, including secret daily intelligence briefings given to the president.
This week's filing by Patrick Fitzgerald, the special prosecutor, was intended to convince the judge to deny the defense's latest request for information. In doing so, the prosecutor also attacked Mr. Libby's bad-memory defense by introducing new information about the attention -- including by President Bush -- placed on responding to Joseph Wilson, a former ambassador and critic of the Iraq war.
Lawyers say in a high-profile legal battle like this, where the judge already has warned both sides not to try their case in public, pretrial motions become a critical element in the public-relations campaign.
"Mr. Libby's defense, as we understand it, is that because of his 24-7 national-security responsibilities, he just forgot his conversations with reporters," says Scott Fredericksen, a Washington defense attorney and former prosecutor. "And what Mr. Fitzgerald is telling the judge here is that Mr. Libby was expressly authorized to go have these conversations with reporters by the vice president and authorized to release classified information by the president. That is a unique situation and not very forgettable."
For instance, Mr. Fitzgerald cites the express permission by the president to disclose certain elements of a highly classified report about Iraq to a New York Times reporter. While the president has broad latitude to declassify information, the government's filing quotes Mr. Libby's grand-jury testimony as saying such an authorization was "unique in his recollection."
On Friday, the White House didn't challenge the assertion that Mr. Bush declassified intelligence information to counter war critics. White House spokesman Scott McClellan spent nearly an hour drawing a distinction between the leaking of information judged to be "in the public interest" and the willful disclosure of information that could endanger national security.
At issue are portions of the previously classified National Intelligence Estimate the White House made public on July 18, 2003 -- some ten days after prosecutors allege Mr. Libby discussed the information with a New York Times reporter. In that conversation, Mr. Libby also disclosed the identity of Mr. Wilson's wife, Valerie Plame, a Central Intelligence Agency official, according to his indictment. (Leaking the identity of a covert official can be a crime, but Mr. Libby isn't charged with that violation.)
There is no suggestion by Mr. Fitzgerald that either President Bush or Vice President Cheney told Mr. Libby to leak her name. Mr. McClellan dismissed as "crass politics" the suggestion from some Democrats that Mr. Bush sanctioned or engaged in a scheme to disclose sensitive information that would presumably include releasing Ms. Plame's identity.
The case against Mr. Libby, who is charged with five counts of lying and obstructing a federal investigation, isn't expected to go to trial until next January at the earliest. He has pleaded not guilty.
Mr. Fitzgerald alleges Mr. Libby took the lead in disputing Mr. Wilson's claims, and in doing so disclosed Ms. Plame's identity to reporters. Thus, the government alleges, he sought to cover up his role in Ms. Plame's unveiling by lying under oath and trying to obstruct the investigation.
--Christopher Cooper contributed to this article.
Write to Anne Marie Squeo at annemarie.squeo@wsj.com