|
Miller's Lawyer Says Aide Faces 'Problem' in CIA Probe by Lost at 1:01 am EDT, Oct 17, 2005 |
In mid-September, with Miller having been in jail for more than two months, further negotiations involving Fitzgerald, Tate and Miller's lawyers, including Bennett, took place. The result was the Sept. 15 letter from Libby to Miller, in which he again told her that he wanted her to testify. But the letter included this sentence: "The public report of every other reporter's testimony makes clear that they did not discuss Ms. Plame's name or identity with me." Bennett said the sentence "was a very stupid thing to put in a letter," and though he would notsay it was another possible attempt to steer her testimony, "it was a close call and she was troubled by it." According to Miller's first-person account, Fitzgerald asked during her grand jury testimony about Libby's letter. Miller said, "This portion of the letter had surprised me, because it might be perceived as an effort by Mr. Libby to suggest that I, too, would say that we had not discussed Ms. Plame's identity." But she added that "my notes suggested that we had discussed her job."
So... Rove AND Libby were talking about this CIA agent being an agent... but its only a crime if they willfully harmed the USA by doing so? |
|
RE: Miller's Lawyer Says Aide Faces 'Problem' in CIA Probe by Mike the Usurper at 1:19 am EDT, Oct 17, 2005 |
Jello wrote: So... Rove AND Libby were talking about this CIA agent being an agent... but its only a crime if they willfully harmed the USA by doing so?
No. There are multiple laws involved here. First is the one that people keep talking about which is the one involving exposing a cover agent. Under that law, they might not be in touble. Under the espionage act however, there's no question they're in violation, but, that's a law broken on an almost daily basis, especially uner this administration which has more than tripled the number of classified documents. The real problems are perjury, obstruction of justice, withholding information from a grand jury (all of which are illegal) and betrayal of the public faith, which as far as I know is not, but in the end is more serious (see Richard Nixon). |
|
|
|