Libby, Libby, Libby on the Label, Label, Label
Scooter Who? Is he heir to the Libby’s food fortune? Is there a Libby’s food fortune? Is he related to “Skeeter” and is his wife named Tish? Did they frogmarch him out of the White House? Was his office even in the White House? What did he lie about repeatedly and to whom and for what reason? Lots of questions, serious and otherwise, but the most important only hinge on Scooter because he happens to be the latest case.
I understand the importance of not lying to grand juries. I understand slightly less the idea that it should be a crime to not lie to investigators when you aren’t under oath. I’d tend to think of that as actually being not merely not a crime, but a constitutionally protected activity (Amendments I and V).
I’m also concerned that if you have to tell an investigator or a grand jury that you were the one who gave information to a reporter “on background” that it kind of defeats the whole point of giving that information “on background” in the first place. How does the press system function if reporters know they will be forced to reveal their sources and sources know they will be prosecuted for not revealing themselves? Perhaps the whole idea of giving information when you aren’t willing to put your name on it is wrong in the first place, but if so that issue really ought to be dealt with head on and not through some backdoor method.
I could give a fig for anyone so steeped in East Coast Ivy as to be called “Scooter”, but this latest volley in the war on free expression is cause for concern far beyond the White House and New England country clubs.
He says Libby is trying to make it appear that he was at the tail end of a chain of phone calls. But Fitzgerald says Libby was, in fact, at the beginning of that chain — and that he repeatedly lied about it under oath.