home

Will Libby Exercise His Right to a Trial?

by TChris

The NY Times describes how, “in its clear, cold language, [the Libby indictment] lifts a veil on how aggressively Mr. Cheney's office drove the rationale against Saddam Hussein and then fought to discredit the Iraq war's critics.” The indictment offers a peek, but the full scope of Cheney’s involvement in Libby’s indicted wrongdoing remains an unanswered question.

It is Libby’s right to be presumed innocent until proof beyond a reasonable doubt overcomes that presumption in the minds of twelve jurors. Would Libby exercise his right to a trial, knowing that Fitzgerald might call Cheney as a witness to events described in the indictment (pdf)? And knowing that Karl Rove, Official A, will testify against him? Does Libby want to subject Cheney and Rove to cross-examination?

Fitzgerald won’t write a report, and the Republican controlled legislature isn’t likely to indulge an investigation that would replicate Fitzgerald’s. If Libby doesn’t go to trial, and if Fitzgerald charges no others, few facts beyond those alleged in the indictment may enter the public record. If the true story comes out only in conversations with reporters, the administration will blame a liberal press and could succeed in containing much of the damage that full, public exposure of the facts would bring.

Libby knows this. That's why I still agree with this post's prediction that Libby will fall on his sword. Libby has every right to a trial, but how likely is he to make Cheney and Rove witnesses in a trial that could destroy the administration?

< Saturday Open Thread | Sourcing Karl Rove's Latest Version >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort: