Plame Gossip - The Libby Defense

There's a little bit of motion in the Libby case. Maybe better said motions as the Libby defense is attempting to extend their fishing expedition into what reporters may have known regarding Plame's covert status, and interestingly, where they learned that information, possibly outing several "high level government sources. " (NYTimes, WaPo, AP)

To me this seems a longshot defense, but I guess that's all they've got, seeing as the indictment is not about leaking Plame's name or status, but instead about lying to investigators and committing perjury in front of the grand jury.

These defense motions may aid the public image of Libby's guilt, as well as offering an opportunity for the defense to cross examine the moral paragons Woodward, Judy Miller, and maybe Andrea Mitchell, on the stand, but, quite frankly as to the perjury, it's a simple case. Libby lied to the grand jury about several conversations, and there are numerous witnesses, as well as other corraborating facts. It's a Libby said vs. he said, she said, he said, public records show, the investigation has found, etc. etc. The indictment was crafted to be very limited to Libby's lying and perjury, carefully written around the "underlying crime."

Three other more "out there" possibilities of this defense are 1. simply attempting to delay the trial verdict until after the 2006 midterms, 2. trying to establish a better footing before attempting to renegotiate a plea deal, or 3. trying to establish political cover to enable the President to issue a pardon down the line. No idea if any of these are applicable, I've just found it useful to list possibilities when looking at this case.