President Donald Trump has been relentlessly attacking former FBI Director James Comey on Twitter. CNN’s Jake Tapper called out the president for what he perceived to be hypocrisy over pardoning ex-Dick Cheney aide Scooter Libby but, ended up lying himself.
Calling @Comey a “proven LEAKER & LIAR” while you’re about to pardon Scooter Libby, who leaked the identity of a covert CIA employee and was convicted for lying about it to the FBI — well, that’s quite a thing.
— Jake Tapper (@jaketapper) April 13, 2018
Every one in D.C. knows the true leaker in the case was Richard Armitage – even the Special Counsel appointed to prosecute the leak. Fact is, Mr. Libby was NEVER prosecuted for leaking the name. Mr. Libby was charged with obstruction of justice and perjury. Shame on Jake Tapper. Mr. Libby has never denied the seriousness of the offenses for which he was convicted and one of the chief witnesses in the case against Mr. Libby has recanted her testimony.
Special counsel Patrick Fitzgerald was appointed by his friend James Comey, then deputy attorney general. From the start, Mr. Fitzgerald knew that the critical “leak” to Novak had come from then-Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage. He nevertheless commenced an extensive investigation to “discover” what had happened.
The charges against Mr. Libby were based on his description of various conversations he had with journalists at the time, including the New York Times’s Judith Miller. Based on notes she had made containing the word “bureau” in association with Ms. Plame’s job, Ms. Miller became the only reporter to testify that Mr. Libby had discussed Ms. Plame’s CIA connection with her. Mr. Fitzgerald called her testimony “critical” in his closing argument to the jury, which found Mr. Libby guilty on four of five counts.
But Ms. Miller later realized her testimony had been mistaken. Ms. Plame published a memoir in late 2007, months after Libby’s trial. In Ms. Miller’s 2015 book, “A Reporter’s Story,” she writes that one particular point in Ms. Plame’s account immediately caught her eye: Ms. Plame’s CIA “cover” had been as an employee of a State Department bureau. Mr. Libby would have known the CIA has “divisions,” not “bureaus.” He could not, therefore, have been the person who revealed Ms. Plame’s CIA connection to Ms. Miller.
Ms. Miller did not recognize her mistake when preparing her trial testimony, because she did not know that Ms. Plame had a State Department cover. Had she known, she would not have claimed she and Mr. Libby had discussed Ms. Plame’s CIA status. But Mr. Fitzgerald knew, and Ms. Miller believes he deliberately led her away from the truth.
All this means that Mr. Libby was telling the truth about his conversations with Ms. Miller, and that he did not deliberately mislead Mr. Fitzgerald’s grand jury or the FBI. For her part, Ms. Miller had not lied at Mr. Libby’s trial; she had given false testimony in good faith. “With the information about Plame’s cover that Fitzgerald had withheld, it was hard not to conclude that my testimony had been wrong,” she writes. “Had I helped convict an innocent man?”
Read more at this link.