Regarding Scooter Libby: how can someone be charged with obstructing justice when no crime had been committed?

Question

Obstructing justice means hindering the investigation or prosecution of a crime. But there was no crime.

The prosecutor knew his first day on the job the leak wasn't a crime. The leaker was Richard Armitage. So for two years, Fitzgerald investigated nothing.

Answer 1

There was a crime, a CIA agent was outed. Libby was just the unfortunate person that happened to be working for Cheney and Rove. They needed somebody to take the fall.

Answer 2

Revealing the name of an CIA agent is a crime. By the head of the CIA himself who testified that Plame was working as a undercover CIA agent. Libby knew of the leak, knew who did the leak, participated in the spreading of the leak, and participated in the attempted cover up of who authorized the leak. Then in his sworn testimony before the FBI investigation he lied (hence the obstruction of justice charge), then before Congress he lied again about his knowing of the leak and where it was authorized (pretty obvious it came from Cheney). That is two felonies at least. I was not surprised with his commuted sentence and I think he will end up getting a full pardon just prior to Bush leaving office. That was the deal all along for Libby. Take the blame, keep your mouth shut, protect Cheney, Rove, and Bush and in return we'll make sure if convicted you'll do no time.

Answer 3

The Libby trial reminded me of the show trials held in the Soviet Union in the Stalin era. Made up charges, for made up crimes, with confessions obtained for political reasons. Libby had no chance of a fair trial in DC, too Many liberals looking to drag Cheney or Rove into the docket. Libby becomes only the second person on my memory to be convicted for lieing about a crime that was never committed( M Stewart being the first) I was disappointed that Bush did not offer a full pardon, but that may come latter

Answer 4

This is from Wikipedia - search on Richard Armitage - NOT FROM "FOX NOISE CHANNEL" - gad, STOP with the partisan vitriol. It's just SO knee-jerk. Look up some facts yourself before calling names and advocating impeachment.
Sheesh.

Excerpt from Wikipedia:
_______________________________________________
Armitage has also reportedly been a cooperative and key witness in the investigation.[15] According to The Washington Note, Armitage has testified before the grand jury three times.[16]

On August 29, 2006 Neil A. Lewis of The New York Times reported that Armitage was the "initial and primary source" for columnist Robert Novak's July 14, 2003 article, which named Valerie Plame as a CIA "operative" and which triggered the CIA leak investigation.[17] On August 30, 2006, CNN reported that Armitage had been confirmed "by sources" as leaking Ms. Wilson's CIA role in a "casual conversation" with Robert Novak.[18] The New York Times, quoting people "familiar with his actions", reported that Armitage was unaware of Ms. Wilson's undercover status when he spoke to Novak.[19]

The Times claims that White House counsel Alberto Gonzales was informed that Armitage was involved on October 2, 2003, but asked not to be told details. Patrick Fitzgerald began his grand jury investigation three months later knowing Armitage was a leaker (as did Attorney General John Ashcroft before turning over the investigation).

Nonetheless, on March 6, 2007 a jury convicted Libby of "obstruction of justice, giving false statements to the F.B.I. and perjuring himself, charges embodied in four of the five counts of the indictment".[20]

Fitzgerald has issued no statement about Armitage's involvement, and as of August 2006, the CIA leak investigation remains open.

On September 7, 2006, Armitage admitted to being the source in the CIA leak.[21] Armitage claims that Fitzgerald had originally asked him not to discuss publicly his role in the matter, but that on September 5 Armitage asked Fitzgerald if he could reveal his role to the public, and Fitzgerald consented.[21]
_______________________________________________

The really important part here to understand is "Patrick Fitzgerald began his grand jury investigation **** three **** months **** later **** knowing Armitage was a leaker (as did Attorney General John Ashcroft before turning over the investigation)."

If there is any political agenda-following and party-targeting going on here, it's being done by Patrick Fitzgerald who pursued a bogus grand jury investigation and withheld from the Grand Jury the confirmed identity of the source of the leak.

Valery Plame was not the victim of a crime, as she was not an active agent-under-cover at the time of the "outing", nor had she been for some time. The crime was perpetrated by Fitzgerald in his pursuit of someone NOT involved in what he was "investigating".

He should be disbarred and prosecuted just like Mike Nifong for what he did.


So, Celada b and Nick F - - just what was being investigated if Fitzgerald ALREADY KNEW WHO LEAKED THE NAME before he launched the "investigation"?????????

Quit drinking the Democrat's cool-aid and form an opinion on facts.

Answer 5

He was convicted of perjury... Question is why didn't the special prosecutor go after Armitage, which ousted the CIA agent... Funny how he was convicted of the same thing as Clinton, received 30mos. in jail, a fine and community service... What was Clinton's sentence.... Oh yea, there wasn't one... Bush should have pardoned Libby..

Answer 6

Libby's mistake was not exactly repeating something he said several years ago... that had nothing to do with the Plame Outing.
And for those of you who say outing the CIA Agent was the crime... do you pay attention to reality? Richard Armitage of the State Department leaked Plame's name. The White House had absolutely nothing to do with it.
Libby is the unfortunate victim of a Media driven witch-hunt.

Answer 7

Welcome to the World of Dirty Politics. The story is long and convoluted, but the "case" rests on a PR person for the CIA suddenly becoming "covert" when necessary for Political backstabbing. Scooter made the mistake of answering questions, probably thinking this was an investigation, rather than a Witch Hunt, his "crime" may have been an honest error; but he was the only person they could get any mud to stick to.
Start your reading here, there's more:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/21/AR2007032101788.html

Answer 8

revealing the identity of an agent IS a crime, it's treason. ESPECIALLY BECAUSE IT WAS DONE FOR POLITICAL VENGANCE. Valerie Flame's husband was reporting reality based facts and like most christains Bush chose to follow what he wanted to believe.

Answer 9

You misunderstand obstruction.

If there is an investigation, you're put under oath, and you lie... that's perjury. The outcome of the investigation doesn't matter.

Answer 10

You need to stop watching the FOX NOISE NETWORK, then maybe you can post something intelligent.

There WAS a crime... it was covered up by the Bush group, but it WILL come out... at Bush's IMPEACHMENT.