More Cheney Lies

While I don't agree with everything it says, an op-ed in today's WaPo raises a few questions in respect to the trial, which I prefer to call the Treason Trial, that are valid.

The writer contends that Fitzgerald should be charging others besides Libby. I agree. I think that Dick Cheney should be charged for trying to avoid truth being told by attacks on Wilson which include naming his wife as a covert agent. This is not what the author wants, but she makes points that I agree with such as;

In November 2005 Armitage released Woodward from their confidentiality agreement -- but only to tell Fitzgerald, not the rest of us, how he had learned of Plame's identity.

· Armitage attributed his more than three years of silence to Fitzgerald's request that he not discuss the matter with anyone. But Fitzgerald was not appointed until Dec. 30, 2003, three months after Armitage now says he realized that he was Novak's source.

No suprises that members of the White House staff are lying. But that they are not being prosecuted is a problem for me. The former Reagan staffer, who by being associated with the regime that traded arms to the Contras illegally to overturn the elected government in Central America while illegally occupying Costa Rica, and aided Iranian elements that were fighting for dominance there, is legally challenged anyway. But her contention here is just wrong;

So here are my own personal bills of indictment:

* * *

THIS GRAND JURY CHARGES PATRICK J. FITZERALD with ignoring the fact that there was no basis for a criminal investigation from the day he was appointed, with handling some witnesses with kid gloves and banging on others with a mallet, with engaging in past contretemps with certain individuals that might have influenced his pursuit of their liberty, and with misleading the public in a news conference because . . . well, just because. To wit:

· On Dec. 30, 2003, the day Fitzgerald was appointed special counsel, he should have known (all he had to do was ask the CIA) that Plame was not covert, knowledge that should have stopped the investigation right there. The law prohibiting disclosure of a covert agent's identity requires that the person have a foreign assignment at the time or have had one within five years of the disclosure, that the government be taking affirmative steps to conceal the government relationship, and for the discloser to have actual knowledge of the covert status.

We know that Ms. Plame left her positiion as covert agent after being exposed. This administration continues to assert that she was not covert when that disclosure was made. If that were the case, there would be no case. The Grand Jury would by now have been dismissed if no treason had been committed. However, it has not been.

Some wonder why the WaPo continues to publish incorrect information. If you don't know it by now, this makes controversy that gives Ooomph to the news that results. Also, you can pay the WaPo to publish your incorrect information. Yep, they take money to publish op-eds. I haven't inquired and don't know about this one but I would be surprised if money hadn't changed hands.

And I no longer buy the weekly WaPo that I subscribed to for years. It keeps being sent to me for free. Desperate, fellas?