Can we add to the Plame trial myths that there was no underlying crime?
Today's Washington Post has the five myths of the Plame case
The first myth
Valerie Plame wasn't a covert operative
they rightly responds "Wrong. She was." (Unfortunately the media took too long to properly put that myth to rest)
The third myth
Libby didn't leak Plame's identity
They rightly respond he did, however they go on to say;
What is unclear is whether Libby knew she was a covert CIA agent at the time he discussed her with reporters -- a key point in determining whether this was an illegal leak.
Ugh...
Becasue the media meme is that it is "unclear" whether Libby knew Plame was covert allows Broder to argue that no underlying crime was committed and paint Fitzgerald as a rabid runaway prosecutor.
Despite the absence of any underlying crime...This whole controversy is a sideshow -- engineered partly by the publicity-seeking former ambassador Joseph Wilson and his wife and heightened by the hunger in parts of Washington to "get" Rove for something or other.
Like other special prosecutors before him, Fitzgerald got caught up in the excitement of the case and pursued Libby relentlessly, well beyond the time that was reasonable.
<a</p>
In order to be convicted under the Identities Protection Act, which everyone agrees is a crime, you must knowingly out a covert agent. We know that Plame was covert so all that is left is the "knowingly" part.
The smoking gun that Cheney knew Plame was covert and was intentionally trying to leak to the press her identity, was his hand written notes on Wilson's NYT op ed.
Have they done this thing before?
Send an Ambassador to answer questions?
Do we usually send people out pro bono to work for us?
Or did his wife send him out on a junkett?
Much of the media has passed his notes off as questions Cheney wanted answered himself, but Cheney knew the answers to these questions, instead he was constructing a series of questions that could be asked of reporters that would lead them to Valerie Plame's occupation and identity without explicity stating Wilson's covert wife recommended him for the trip.
This one piece of evidence shows Cheney's intent to leak a covert operative's name while trying to protect themselves from prosecution under the identities protection Act.
Why would Cheney write deceptive questions instead of just saying Plame recommended him for the job, if he really didn't know whether she was covert? It's simple, he did know.
All Fitzgerald would need to convict Cheney under the Identities Protection Act is for Libby to honestly testify why Cheney wanted Plame's name leaked, how he was supposed to leak her name, and why it had to be done in a deceptive way.
There is an underlying crime.