Thursday, October 20, 2005

Rove + Libby = ?

An AP report (here) discusses various conflicts in the testimony of Karl Rove and I. Lewis Libby that indicates Libby may have contacted reporters about the status of Valerie Plame as a CIA operative and not the other way around.  Rove also testified that he may have learned about Plame from Libby, although as with everything else in this investigation, the recollection is hazy, at best.

Almost like the pieces of a giant puzzle, the information coming together points to some serious inconsistencies in the testimony of Libby, the chief of staff to Vice President Cheney, about his contacts with the press and the source of his knowledge of Plame.  Whether they are enough to pull together into an indictment for false statements, perjury, or obstruction is a different matter, however.  While contradictory statements are wonderful for cross-examining a witness, proving a person lied (as opposed to being nonresponsive) in the grand jury is much more difficult. "Might" and "may have" do not make for the types of falsehoods usually prosecuted. As more information leaks out about the grand jury testimony of witnesses, I wonder whether claims of prosecutorial violation of the secrecy requirements of Rule 6(e) will surface. (ph)

                                                                                              

UPDATE:  An extensive Washington Post story (here) discusses the role of various administration officials in the investigation. (ph)

http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/whitecollarcrime_blog/2005/10/rove_libby_.html

Grand Jury, Investigations, Media | Permalink

TrackBack URL for this entry:

http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341bfae553ef00d8352124f053ef

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Rove + Libby = ?: