From TalkLeft.com:
Why do I think there's at least an immunized witness? First, there almost always is in cases like this. Second, Patrick Fitzgerald says as much in his Response to Libby's tendered jury instructions:
The government proposed that the Court give 15 additional D.C. Form Instructions: .... 2.23 (Testimony of Immunized Witness) (if applicable);
Other possibilities, in my mind, include Ari Fleischer, Marc Grossman and John Hannah.
As to the instruction, it reads:
Form Instruction 2.23 TESTIMONY OF IMMUNIZED WITNESS
[Instruction 2.225 in 1978 Edition]
You have heard evidence that [name of witness] has received immunity. What this means is that the testimony of the witness may not be used against him/her in any criminal case. You should consider whether such testimony may be colored in such a way as to further the witness' own interest, for a witness who realizes that s/he may [obtain his/her own freedom] [receive a benefit] [avoid prosecution] by incriminating another may have a motive to lie. However, you may also consider that the witness is under the same obligation to tell the truth as is any other witness, because the grant of immunity does not protect him/her against a prosecution for perjury or false statement, should s/he lie under oath.
The testimony of a witness as to whom immunity has been granted should be received with caution and scrutinized with care. You should give the testimony such weight as in your judgment it is fairly entitled to receive.
What is interesting is this article in 2005 on Raw Story written by Jason Leopold and Larisa Alexandrovna:
A senior aide to Vice President Dick Cheney is cooperating with special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald in the outing of CIA agent Valerie Plame Wilson, sources close to the investigation say.
Individuals familiar with Fitzgerald’s case tell RAW STORY that John Hannah, a senior national security aide on loan to Vice President Dick Cheney from the offices of then-Under Secretary of State for Arms Control and International Security Affairs, John Bolton, was named as a target of Fitzgerald’s probe. They say he was told in recent weeks that he could face imminent indictment for his role in leaking Plame-Wilson’s name to reporters unless he cooperated with the investigation.
Others close to the probe say that if Hannah is cooperating with the special prosecutor then he was likely going to be charged as a co-conspirator and may have cut a deal.
3 comments:
Who do you think will get immunity?
Ha Ha! You are ask me of all people? I don't thinl like Fitz but I will give it my best shot. From reading about the players directly or indirectly involved in the CIA Leak case, I thought at first that it would be Armitage because he did go to Fitz in the beginning of the case. But, he was more gossiping and said Plame worked as a WMD manager. Then, I switched to Marc Grossman because of the timeline involved in the case. He did tell Irve about Plame and Grossman does work with Powell and Armitage. I know bloggers had mention Ari Fleicher. But, from rereading all of the filings and some of Leopold's articles, I really have to say John Hannah. He was mentioned in Wilson's book. And I also think Hannah is one of the 9 John Does being sued by the Wilsons. And he was involved in the earlier stages of the plot against Wilson..
Don't take my word for it. I could be way off base on this one...
I think the person was at the meeting with the group that planned the attack on Wilson. He is not well known to the public by name but is was a loyal GOP. My pick is Hannah.
Post a Comment