September 16, 2006
Is Plamegate Really Settled? Posted by Fredric Smoler at 03:30 PM EST Has “the White House” been completely exonerated? Karl Rove was not charged with a crime, which is not quite the same thing. Exonerate means to be freed of blame, failure to charge may mean something less. Still, it is unjust to expect Karl Rove to prove a negative, and we can certainly surmise that Fitzgerald did not think he could meet the burden of proof. Then again, I am told—by prosecutors—that good prosecutors raise the bar on the burden of proof when they are dealing with political appointees of elected officials, when there are suggestions, even unjust suggestions, that prosecutors are “criminalizing politics.” So a prosecutor who takes his burden of proof very seriously is possibly more likely to be blackguarded than one who carelessly, capriciously, even maliciously seeks indictments. As a matter of law and logic, Wilson’s op-ed piece could be a tissue of lies, and there could simultaneously be a conspiracy to intimidate future whistleblowers by outing this possible liar’s CIA-employee spouse. Also, it may be that people sought to punish Wilson by outing his wife without breaking the law as written. That would not make their actions, if they so acted, the actions of honorable men. Was Richard Armitage “the leaker”? Novak has always claimed there were two leakers. The other leaker appears to have been Libby. Fitzgerald knew, early on, the identity of the first leaker. It may have taken a while to identify the other. When that identification was made, assume that the leak was not itself a crime. So what? John Steele Gordon noted that Libby is under indictment for “lying about a crime that had never taken place.” But that alleged lying might well be perjury and obstruction of justice, and prosecutors tend to take such things seriously. Such lying is sometimes itself a crime. Under some circumstances—for example, when the lie concerns sexual irregularities—a majority of Americans may have some sympathy for the liar. I am not sure that a lie under the circumstances in which Libby is charged with having lied will evoke as much prurient interest, but neither do I think they will evoke as much sympathy. By the way, I don’t assume that Libby is guilty of a crime. Libby deserves the presumption of innocence. And Fitzgerald deserves the presumption that he has acted with competence, and in good faith.
|
