AP Mocks Possible Libby Defense
From the Associated Press via Yahoo!News:
WASHINGTON - The lawyer for Vice President Dick Cheney's former top aide is outlining a possible criminal defense that is a time-honored tradition in Washington scandals: A busy official immersed in important duties cannot reasonably be expected to remember details of long-ago conversations.This story will undoubtedly cause hoots of derision in the Lefty camp. Having once been interrogated by a former FBI agent and his partner regarding suspected union activity while in federal employ (they were on the wrong track, but that's a different story that I'm not at liberty to discuss), I can speak to some of the techniques possibly used. I can't tell you if these are standard FBI interrogation techniques, but people usually revert to their training, even when in new positions.
First and throughout, they attempted to bring the power of their authority and position to bear. This was not a friendly chat, it was confrontational to the point of being abusive. The object was intimidation; truth through fear. Things like standing while I remained seated and deliberately invading my space. Some "good cop, bad cop", played to the hilt and beyond (I actually believe the "bad cop" had a personal dislike for me, and that he was surprised that I wasn't visibly rattled by it). The questioning was deliberately repetitious and punctuated by interruptions and changes of subject in order to see if my answers changed. Some questions were combative, questioning my loyalties. Question:"Oh, now you're trying to put it on [name of another employee]. Response: "There isn't anything to 'put' on anyone." The "bad cop" kept telling me that he didn't "...buy it."As soon as the "interview" began I knew instinctively that showing any fear to these men would be as dangerous as showing it to a snarling dog. My interrogation lasted only about 45 minutes, yet I was shaky and more than ready for a smoke once I'd left that room and those men behind. This was one of the most intense experiences of my life. The point is this - I didn't come out of that interview unscathed simply because I was innocent. I came out alright because I maintained rigid self control, I was being questioned on events that had occured the previous week (so they were fresh in my mind), I didn't allow the interrogators to rattle me, and...oh yeah, I was innocent. I don't know the circumstances of Libby's interviews with FBI agents, but I would not be willing to dismiss out of hand any claims from him that he was confused or misspoke. Most of this post is taken from a longer post about the Fitzgerald press conference at The Dread Pundit Bluto.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at October 29, 2005 12:09 PM
Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at October 29, 2005 12:17 PM
Posted by: jesusland joe at October 29, 2005 02:04 PM
Posted by: john Ryan at October 29, 2005 03:43 PM
Scooter's training is as a lawyer, no? He could revert to the definition of perjury and obstruction.
Posted by: actus at October 29, 2005 03:45 PM
Posted by: Rubyeyes at October 29, 2005 03:53 PM
Posted by: sandpiper at October 29, 2005 05:38 PM
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at October 29, 2005 06:54 PM
It's the liberal cunard. One set of rules for me and another set for everyone else. It's called hypocrisy!
Posted by: jesusland joe at October 29, 2005 07:46 PM
Perhaps "at this point in time, I can't recollect" predates the Clinton Administration, but the Clintons certainly perfected the term, now didn't they?
Posted by: jesusland joe at October 29, 2005 07:50 PM
Posted by: jesusland joe at October 29, 2005 08:35 PM
We don't know exactly what it was that Libby "didn't recollect", or what he may have "recalled incorrectly" or if he flat out lied. Rubyeyes, you said yourself, "Why lie?" Why indeed.
You have already convicted him based only on what you've been told. That's fine. You're not on the court or jury. I'd like to think that if you were, you'd be more open minded.
I say let them do their job. They felt they had enough evidence to indict, but they don't convict at the same time for a reason. I'll accept what ever comes down the pipe because I trust our system even if the whole story stinks to high heaven. It stinks as much as Delay's indictment, and I don't even particularly like Delay. No one here is outright claiming his innocence. They're simply saying not to convict him yet.
I'd also like to know why Miller didn't write the story that SHOULD have been written. The bigger story surrounding this makes Plame's identity look like child's play. If Miller had done the job that she's sworn to do, this would have taken another direction and she'd be up for a Pulitzer.
The CIA and FBI (many long timers in the DoD as well) are fighting two huge, HUGE, issues right now and they're looking worse than ever. They dropped the ball in 2000 and again in 2002 and have engaged in covering up their ineptitude ever since. They're the one's who have compromised our national security to the point that Plame looks like a bimbo starlet who has unwittingly wandered onto the stage.
The Democrats should be going after much bigger fish than Rove, Libby or Delay if they want to re-establish credibility. But they're too partisan to do that.
Posted by: Oyster at October 30, 2005 05:56 AM
We prefer when they go after homosexuals.
Posted by: actus at October 30, 2005 09:38 AM
I don't prefer that they do anything. What I do prefer is that they be stopped in any way possible before they destroy the civilized World.
Posted by: jesusland joe at October 30, 2005 03:24 PM
They seem to be doing a good job of getting us to show how uncivilized we can be. So yes, that must be stopped.
Posted by: actus at October 30, 2005 08:36 PM
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at October 30, 2005 09:59 PM
I've been arguing lately that it is a nasty choice I have. I'd just rather the two groups that agree on one thing -- hating me -- picked somewhere else other than where I live -- large, liberal, east coast cities -- to have their final war.
Frankly I'd prefer that they hang and behead each other to their heart's content
Posted by: actus at October 31, 2005 10:02 AM
Processing 0.0, elapsed 0.0053 seconds.
15 queries taking 0.0032 seconds, 25 records returned.
Page size 15 kb.
Powered by Minx 0.7 alpha.