Libby: It was Bush that Outed Plame. Bushies: Yawn... Say, what's for lunch ?

NOW I understand why Fitz could not go after the leaker. The Prez is above the law as it turns out. Bush disclosing top secrets for petty reasons is "no crime". What a bunch of weasels the GOP turned into -- law LIVE FROM...Court Filing: Scooter Libby Testifies Bush Authorized Intel Leak; Immigration Bill Close; Representative Cynthia McKinney ApologizesAired April 6, 2006 - 13:58 ETTHIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.FREDRICKA WHITFIELD, CNN ANCHOR: Let's get an update now on a developing story. It involves the long-running controversy over U.S. intelligence leaks on Iraq. Court papers made public today revealed that a former aide to Vice President Dick Cheney testified that Cheney told him he was authorized by President Bush to leak sensitive intelligence information.The former aide, Lewis "Scooter" Libby, was Vice President Dick Cheney's chief of staff. Libby has since been charged with perjury, obstruction of justice and lying to FBI agents who were investigating the 2003 disclosure of a CIA agent's identity. That CIA agent is married to a prominent critic of White House intelligence claims used to justify the war in Iraq.Let's take a moment now to examine the political fallout of this developing story. Our senior political analyst, Bill Schneider, joins me now from Washington.Good to see you, Bill.WILLIAM SCHNEIDER, CNN SR. POLITICAL ANALYST: Good to see you, Fred.WHITFIELD: All right. So we heard from Jeffrey Toobin earlier, our legal analyst, telling us that this really is less of a legal issue and more of a political one; namely, because the president is authorized to declassify information whenever he wants. So if that's the case, why in the world have we gotten to this point of Scooter Libby in court, testifying before the grand jury, facing perjury and other charges.SCHNEIDER: Well, Scooter Libby obviously was trying to get off the hook by saying it was the president himself who authorized the leak of this information, which means he declassified the information, passed the word to the vice president that he wanted it leaked to the press just before Mr. Libby met with a "New York Times" reporter.That's not a crime if the president has declassified the information, again, according to the legal experts. But it does raise some serious political questions, and that question is about the president's political credibility.You may remember, a year after the meeting with "The New York Times" reporter, the president -- this was in June 2004 -- the president said he would fire anyone in his administration shown to have leaked information about the identity of that CIA agent.Now, I hasten to add, there's no indication from the testimony summarized by the special prosecutor that the name of the CIA agent was ever leaked, but the president said he would fire anyone involved in that leak. And then later he amended that statement the next year and said, "If someone committed a crime they will no longer work in my administration."And, of course, legal experts have said that the president's declassification amounted to -- the president's authorization amounted to a declassification, so it wasn't a crime. But it is a real question about political credibility; namely, when is a leak not a leak?WHITFIELD: Right. So if no crime -- and the prosecutor is even indicating that -- well, is not really saying whether a crime or whether no crime was committed, but we've heard it from the legal analysts, no crime, as you put it. So what does the president owe the American public, if anything, in terms of an explanation of how we have even gotten to this point and what does this mean from this day forward for his presidency or for his credibility? SCHNEIDER: I think is it very damaging for the president to be seen here to have come out after his political enemies by authorizing -- no crime -- by authorizing the leak of classified information from the National Intelligence Estimate.Again, we don't know what classified information that was, it's only described in the special prosecutor's report as certain information, key judgments of the National Intelligence Estimate, relevant portions that were aimed at discrediting the published views of Ambassador Wilson, who criticized the administration's intelligence-gathering efforts.He was out to get his political enemy, to discredit Joe Wilson. And he did it by authorizing intelligence information to be leaked. I think most Americans would say that's a very dangerous and very foolish thing to do.WHITFIELD: So, the old issue of legality was a topic of conversation, or at least exchange, on Capitol Hill with U.S. Attorney General Gonzales and New York Congressman Jerrold Nadler. Your President is guilty of outing a top agent. For political reasons. High Treason, the one they send lesser mortals to a firing squad. Yet you do nothing bushwhacked GOPpies... Sigh... I give up, you can have whatever is left of the America you destroyed -- law

Read more at transcripts.cnn.com/TRA...


Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home