I Have a Question - Why Would Libby / Rove Wave the Agreement?

I don't understand, if Rove did do it, and we all know he did. Why would Libby openly "wave" the "Agreement"?

Does he think that He can get Karl off, or that Fits will not really pull the trigger.

What do you guys think, I am a little confused with the bigger pic!

I think she'll say, I made it all up. She's finished anyway. The criminals will get away.

Oh, that will go over very, very well with the grand jury. If she did that, she might as well just go ahead and check herself right back into that fed prison because that's exactly where she will end up. Federal perjury charges are on the way. 18-24 months in the slammer for her.

1. Pressure from Fitz
2. Other evidence found by Fitz
3. They decided with Roberts in, they can get by with more.
4. They struck a deal and she will name some innocent "little guy"
5. This is all a dream and sometime soon, someone is going to wake me up.
6. Delay was the reason she stayed quiet she no longer feels he is a threat.

No clue, really.

not just outright lying but skirting the truth. Conveniently failing memories or mental fuzziness. "Cannot recall what journalists told them about Plame." Maybe they didn't count on Fitz tracking down and getting testimony of journalists to check on the stories. Once in, kinda late to back out of testimony already given.

He's up to his ass in this deal. Any attempt to pardon will trigger a Constitutional Crisis. He'd be toast faster than you can say, "We're not going to get into playing the blame game."

At that point, game theory would tell you to agree to the waiver, since it paints you in a better light, rather than having the story get out that you stonewalled the investigation and Judy blabbed anyway.

Think about it. It's making a virtue of necessity. All this is implicit in the ridiculous "reaffirm" language. Judy came to Libby with an offer he could not refuse: either waive, and have that as a minor benefit, or don't waive, and look like a stonewaller (and possibly open yourself up to an additional obstruction charge, depending on what Judy has to say about agreements of confidentiality), in addition to her testiminoy. What would YOU do in such circumstancesa. I think the answer is obvious. You'd waive. You have no other reasonable option. Judy wanted out, and was scared of additional charges, so she put the screws to Libby, and he took the only possible out, as damaging as that is.

He didn't visit for altruistic reasons I'm sure. I think Judy told him, either get that waiver or I'll spill without it.

was probably to synchronize the lies. Now think they are on the page with the same lies to spill to the Grand Jury, so no need to spend more time in jail.

say or do to get out of it.They are going down.

They do in detective novels anyway. :P

nt

The handwriting is on the wall and people are covering their asses. IMO

From a great E&P article. The important part is about her possibly winning the right not to implicate others (Bolton, Rove) in her testimony to Fitzgerald.

<snip>

She was released after she and her lawyers met at the jail with Patrick J. Fitzgerald, the prosecutor in the case, to discuss her testimony, the Times revealed. As part of the agreement, one of Miller's attorneys, Robert Bennett, gave Fitzgerald edited versions of notes taken by Miller about her conversations with Libby, the Times said.

One lawyer involved in the case told the Washington Post today that Miller's attorneys reached an agreement with Fitzgerald that may confine prosecutors' questions to her chats with Libby. Under one scenario, Miller won the right to not implicate others she may have talked to about Plame.

It's even possible that it was Fitzgerald who ultimately "cracked," eager to produce indictments but with the grand jury session wrapping up without Miller's key testimony on Libby. Or, on the contrary, Miller might have finally blinked, fearing that the prosecutor would extend the life of the grand jury, leaving her behind bars for many more months.

It may become clear within a week whether Fitzgerald gets those indictments, or has negotiated any plea bargains.

<snip>

http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1001219261

and that they are arrogant enough to believe that if they let it out they can "manage it" - mitigate damage and keep doing as they darn well please.