* AnonLib: "According to Libby's testimony, he advised Cheney that he could not discuss the NIE with reporters because it was classified. Then, even after Cheney got specific authorization from the President, Libby felt compelled to seek legal advice from David Addington before leaking the information. Does that make any sense? Waas' sources (and common sense) tell us that this was not the first time Libby had been asked to leak classified information. So is this just an elaborate cover-your-ass story on Libby's part? What's going on here?"
* in response to this post, emptywheel commented:
"Of course Cheney knew that Libby had testified as such. The news had been revealed 10 days earlier, ReddHedd and I noted it, then the week before the shotting accident Waas published his "scoop" on it, followed by a Leonnig article, followed by a Shuster mischaracterization of the scoop, followed finally by a Jeffress rebuttal to Shuster.One interesting thing about that VandeHei article is that the headline "Disclosures Are Called Unrelated To Plame Case" on A1 highlights that they are really concerned about that part of the story. it's a shame they were late to the party, cos everyone now seems to think that the leaking was plame related.
Jeffress is working for Dick, as surely as he works for Libby (note the pushback yesterday to VandeHei). If Jeffress sees something, you can be sure Jim Baker and Bush and Cheney know it.
I was thinking when I read VandeHei that maybe we should put Dick under protective custody, because he might shoot someone again, given the past..."
No comments:
Post a Comment