why does the Presidnet need "outside counsel"?

[Briar Rose 7457]

http://abcnews.go.com/wire/Politics/ap20040602_1773.html

WASHINGTON June 2, 2004 — President Bush has consulted an outside lawyer in case he needs to retain him in the grand jury investigation of who leaked the name of a covert CIA operative last year, the White House said Wednesday.
There was no indication that was a target of the leak investigation, but the president has decided that "in the event that he needs his advice," he would retain him," White House deputy Claire Buchan.

The attorney is Jim Sharp, she said, confirmed a report by CBS News.

"The president has said that everyone should cooperate in this matter and that would include himself," Buchan said.

She deflected questions about whether Bush had been asked to appear before a grand jury in the case.

 

[DawnCt1]

Wow Brier Rose, Thats an interesting question to ask after 8 years of Clinton. Clearly, it is reasonable to have counsel on retainer in the event that one is needed. The revelation of a CIA operative's identity is a criminal offense. There is an investigation. As you know, anyone can be charged with a crime, guilty or not and anyone who represents themselves has a fool for a lawyer.

 

[monkeyboy]

It's his right

 

[TinkBoo&ElliesMum]

Originally posted by DawnCt1
Wow Brier Rose, Thats an interesting question to ask after 8 years of Clinton. Clearly, it is reasonable to have counsel on retainer in the event that one is needed. The revelation of a CIA operative's identity is a criminal offense. There is an investigation. As you know, anyone can be charged with a crime, guilty or not and anyone who represents themselves has a fool for a lawyer.

But last time I checked no one died or could have died as a result of Clintons actions.

Clinton fooled around on his wife and lied about it (a common trend among men that cheat) Bush *may* have knowingly released the name of or has information on who did release the name of a CIA operative - an action that put her life in danger.

As for Bush, he's covering his tush. I also think Tenet is going to become the scapegoat for the Bush/Cheney administration now that he's stepping down.

Of course Clinton is the poster boy for corrupt politicians

 

[kbeverina]

Originally posted by TinkBoo&ElliesMum
But last time I checked no one died or could have died as a result of Clintons actions.

Clinton fooled around on his wife and lied about it (a common trend among men that cheat) Bush *may* have knowingly released the name of or has information on who did release the name of a CIA operative - an action that put her life in danger.

Actually, no one's life was in danger--Valerie Plame was outed over 10 years ago by Aldrich Ames.

 

[Briar Rose 7457]

http://www.capitolhillblue.com/artman/publish/article_4629.shtml

Witnesses told a federal grand jury President George W. Bush knew about, and took no action to stop, the release of a covert CIA operative's name to a journalist in an attempt to discredit her husband, a critic of administration policy in Iraq.

Their damning testimony has prompted Bush to contact an outside lawyer for legal advice because evidence increasingly points to his involvement in the leak of covert CIA operative Valerie Plame's name to syndicated columnist Robert Novak.

The move suggests the president anticipates being questioned by prosecutors. Sources say grand jury witnesses have implicated the President and his top advisor, Karl Rove.

 

[DawnCt1]

Originally posted by kbeverina
Actually, no one's life was in danger--Valerie Plame was outed over 10 years ago by Aldrich Ames.

It was also common knowledge around Washington and among the press corp.

 

[Philharmagik]

A question to those that may know because I don't. If the grand jusry indites (sp?) President Bush on this matter, Would that be an impeachable offense?

TIA, Phil

 

[peachgirl]

What I found amusing was his "explanation" of why he consulted an attorney. According to Bush himself, he sought the advice of attorney to find out if he needed the advice of an attorney.

It was also common knowledge around Washington and among the press corp.

Whether that's true or not doesn't matter. What happened was a federal offense. Anyone who might be implicated would be wise to get themselves a very good lawyer.

 

[bumcat]

But last time I checked no one died or could have died as a result of Clintons actions.
____________________________________________________


Someone could have choked to death.....

 

[dmadman43]

Originally posted by bumcat
But last time I checked no one died or could have died as a result of Clintons actions.
____________________________________________________


Someone could have choked to death.....

Staying up late watching the late night talk shows?

 

[dmadman43]

Originally posted by peachgirl
What I found amusing was his "explanation" of why he consulted an attorney. According to Bush himself, he sought the advice of attorney to find out if he needed the advice of an attorney.



Whether that's true or not doesn't matter. What happened was a federal offense. Anyone who might be implicated would be wise to get themselves a very good lawyer.

It would be a federal offense of Plume was a current operative. She wasn't. As Kbeverina said, this was old news. Any investigative reporter worth his salt would know this story well before it was "leaked". I also find it interesting that next up on the bash Bush book hit list is a tome from Wilson. Hmmm..wonder what he will "reveal"?

BTW, did you get permission from Leno to use that "joke"?

 

[Saffron]

Why is he seeking counsel now? Hmmmm.

Maybe he wants to make sure he ends up in the right place when he gets hauled off to Federal prison. He is a woman you know, he said so himself. "... a woman from Texas, just like myself." President Bush, May 27, 2004 !

 

[Briar Rose 7457]

I hear Cheney's talking to the best white collar defense firm in D.C.

 

[Briar Rose 7457]

one of my legal buddies sent me this:

The funny thing is that Cheney is using the same firm who represented both President Clinton in the impeachment hearing and Ollie North. Cheney is in good company.

See http://www.wc.com/practice.cfm?practice_ID=34&link=1

Examples of indicted or other public criminal matters handled by the firm include:

Representation of President William Jefferson Clinton - "Whitewater" investigation and impeachment proceedings.

United States v. North - Defense of former National Security Council staff member Oliver L. North in "Iran/Contra" Congressional hearings and trial; convictions vacated and/or reversed on appeal.

United States v. King - Successful defense of boxing promoter Don King on charges of tax evasion.

United States v. Hinckley - Successful defense of President Reagan's assailant, John Hinckley.
[/quotwe]

 

[Briar Rose 7457]

and my buddy also had this to say:

Just because freepers (posters on freerepublic.com think that the secret identity of Valerie Plame is well known does not make it so. If there was no secret, why then is the government wasting the time of a special prosecutor and a grand jury. They could avoid all of this expense just by talking to the freepers.

John Dean has a great article on Bush hiring a private or outside lawyer. See http://writ.news.findlaw.com/dean/20040604.html

On this subject, I spoke with an experienced former federal prosecutor who works in Washington, specializing in white collar criminal defense (but who does not know Sharp). That attorney told me that he is baffled by Bush's move - unless Bush has knowledge of the leak. "It would not seem that the President needs to consult personal counsel, thereby preserving the attorney-client privilege, if he has no knowledge about the leak," he told me.

What advice might Bush get from a private defense counsel? The lawyer I consulted opined that, "If he does have knowledge about the leak and does not plan to disclose it, the only good legaladvice would be to take the Fifth, rather than lie. The political fallout is a separate issue."

I raised the issue of whether the President might be able to invoke executive privilege as to this information. But the attorney I consulted - who is well versed in this area of law -- opined that "Neither 'outing' Plame, nor covering for the perpetrators would seem to fall within the scope of any executive privilege that I am aware of."
_____________

 

[kbeverina]

Originally posted by peachgirl
Whether that's true or not doesn't matter. What happened was a federal offense.

It does matter. It's not necessarily a federal offense to reveal the identity of a covert employee. Intent plays a big role. The statutes were written to protect covert employees and foreign sources against those who want to expose them for the express purpose of sabotaging operations.

Valerie Plame worked as a liaison in a high-profile unit. Her name was all over related paperwork. It's plausible and even probable that people didn't even know she was covert. Her immediate supervisor, the person she worked with in interagency meetings, was not covert. After being outed by Aldrich Ames, she remained on covert status only because of the career track she was on--all career trainees are covert.

Wilson claimed that the administration lied when they said Iraq sought to purchase yellowcake in Africa. He said that his report from his trip to Niger debunked that intelligence. Rice and Cheney countered by saying they never even saw his report (which, come to find out, Wilson never even wrote a report and his oral briefing contained references to Nigerien officials and businessmen who said that they believed Iraq was trying to buy yellowcake).

Wilson countered that Rice and Cheney had to have seen his report because they're the ones who sent him on the trip. Shortly after, Novak wrote his story. My theory is that Novak was trying to get to the bottom of the he said/she said between Wilson and Rice/Cheney and contacted some sources in the administration. They told him that it wasn't the vice president who sent Wilson, it was his wife, who works for the counterproliferation office, who arranged the trip.

If that source didn't know she was covert--no crime. If that source knew she was covert just from general knowledge, but didn't have specific access to classified info regarding her status--no crime. There are other criteria to be met as well, how long it had been since she served overseas, for example.

It makes absolutely no sense that his wife's employer was revealed for revenge or to intimidate others from coming forward or any other accusation that's been made. It's all political opportunity. Someone messed up when they were trying to dismiss Wilson's overinflated claims about the importance of his report and who knew because they sent him.

As for her employer being well-known, clearly it was if shortly after this began there were high-profile democrats writing on message boards that they knew she was agency. She told Vanity Fair that she had revealed to Wilson on their fourth date that she was undercover agency--this was while they were overseas. That's a huge breach. She should have been pulled home just for that.

 

[outstandinfarmer]

why does the Presidnet need "outside counsel"?

In case he forgets how to spell "president"

 

[DawnCt1]

Kbeverina, Thank you for a comprehensive and detailed post that should certainly clarify the situation for those who feel there was a conspiracy to punish "poor Joe". As an addendum, didn't he write a book and then have Vanity Fair do a photo shoot of his wife? Not that he is trying to capitalize on this of course.