High Broderism

Remember, David Broder is part of the liberal media:

Despite the absence of any underlying crime, Fitzgerald filed charges against Libby for denying to the FBI and the grand jury that he had discussed the Wilson case with reporters. Libby was convicted on the testimony of reporters from NBC, the New York Times and Time magazine — a further provocation to conservatives.

I think they have a point. This whole controversy is a sideshow — engineered partly by the publicity-seeking former ambassador Joseph Wilson and his wife and heightened by the hunger in parts of Washington to “get” Rove for something or other.

Like other special prosecutors before him, Fitzgerald got caught up in the excitement of the case and pursued Libby relentlessly, well beyond the time that was reasonable.

That's right. There was no underlying charge .... at least none that can be proven because Libby obstructed justice!!! (and continues to as firewall in chief)

Now to be fair. I can understand how Broder might question the whole Libby prosecution. After all, Libby never even got a blow job!

Update: Does Broder read the Washington Post? Carol Leonnig has done the reporting on Libby and has done a thoroughly credible job. She writes today about the "Five Myths About Scooter and the Slammer". Care to guess which myths those would be?

3. Libby didn't leak Plame's identity.

Oh, brother, am I tired of this one. Libby wasn't charged with the crime of knowingly leaking classified information about Plame; he was charged with lying to investigators. But the overwhelming weight of the evidence at the trial -- including reporters' notes of their interviews with Libby -- showed that Libby had indeed leaked classified information about Plame's identity, even though that wasn't what put him in the dock. The jury agreed that Libby lied when he said that he'd been telling reporters only what other reporters had told him about Plame's role at the CIA.

What is unclear is whether Libby knew she was a covert CIA agent at the time he discussed her with reporters -- a key point in determining whether this was an illegal leak. But Walton said that Libby "had a unique and special obligation" to keep such secrets, well, secret.

I know using google or researching stuff for a op-ed piece is a lot to ask of the Washington weenie crowd. But couldn't he just read his own paper? I'm sure they get copies free.

Update: Rick Perlstein explains to us how Broder, the "dean" of the Washington journalists, has been a wanker since 1972.