CHENEY CHENEY CHENEY. Many of us have long thought that the most interesting aspect of Scooter Libby's trial would be what it disclosed about how Libby's conduct in June-July 2003 working to discredit Joe Wilson was coordinated with his boss, Vice President Cheney. A nice piece in the Post over the weekend catalogs all the evidence the trial has so far revealed about how central Cheney was to the effort to push back against Wilson: "[T]he unanswered question hanging over Libby's trial is, did the vice president's former chief of staff decide to leak that disparaging information on his own?"
We are going to hear much more about this today when the prosecution plays for the jury seven or eight hours of Libby's grand jury testimony, in the course of which Libby testified that Cheney told him he wanted "to get everything out." We will also probably see introduced into evidence Cheney's copy of Wilson's op-ed, on which Cheney wrote notes indicating his knowledge of Plame's CIA employment and raising precisely the charge of nepotism against Wilson that was used that week to try to discredit Wilson's mission.Bring together Cheney's notes and the news revealed on Thursday -- that Libby told the FBI that he and Cheney may have discussed disclosing information about Plame to reporters on July 12, 2003, during a media strategy session right before Libby blew her cover with Matt Cooper of TIME (for the first time) and Judith Miller (for the third) -- and you can add me to the list of observers who are skeptical that the defense will follow through on its declared intention of calling Cheney to the stand. Cheney, who was questioned in the investigation some time in spring 2004, may simply have told investigators he couldn't remember much of anything. So it's that he himself would be on the legal hook. And it's hard to imagine Cheney's public standing getting much lower. But it's hard to imagine that a skillful cross-examination wouldn't bring out Cheney's own role in the matter in a way that would damage Libby's defense.
On the other hand, Cheney's testimony seems to be crucial to the defense's effort to substantiate the surprising claim it made in its opening that in the fall of 2003 the White House was determined to throw Libby under the bus on the Plame matter in order to save Karl Rove. The judge observed on Thursday that he has seen little evidence to back up that claim so far -- though of course the defense hasn't even begun to argue its case, which it should do this week, after Fitzgerald concludes with star witness Tim Russert. But what else does the defense have beyond Cheney's (and possibly Libby's) testimony? Is there someone in the White House who will testify that indeed there was a concerted effort to sacrifice Libby for Rove? If not, the defense may feel compelled to call Cheney and take its chances with his cross examination.
Meanwhile, Judge Reggie Walton has ruled that the actual audio recording of Libby testifying before the grand jury, and not just the transcripts, will be released to the public -- which should happen at the end of the day today, or tomorrow at the latest.
--Jeff Lomonaco
