Why would Scooter Libby Lie?: Can Anyone Answer this Question?

It is roughly twenty four hours since I first heard of the indictments to be handed down concerning Scooter Libby. The same question continues to haunt me: why in hell would he lie? What could he possibly gain by doing so? Libby is not an idiot. On the contrary, he is a well educated attorney who has probably earned millions of dollars over his lifetime. The man would have known he was under no risk of being convicted on the alleged “outing” of Valerie Plame. I can only conclude that he didn’t consciously try to deceive. Libby simply does not possess a perfect tape recorder memory. How many of us do? I also agree with those who point out the difficulty of obtaining a conviction in a court of law. Indeed, only one dissenting member of the jury is sufficient to make it impossible. Libby’s criminal defense lawyer will repeatedly remind the jury that his client had no reason to deceive. I can only speak for myself, but I would never vote to convict.

In the final analysis, Patrick Fitzgerald’s labors are essentially a waste of time---and taxpayer dollars. One suspects that this overly zealous prosecutor lacked the common sense to know when to put a stop to the proceedings. Fitzgerald wanted to go out of his way to prove his independence from the White House. His assignment should have ended immediately after realizing no law was initially broken. The rest of this nonsense has been similar to a witch hunt. And yes, it seems like Fitzgerald's may have listened too closely to the screaming jackals comprising the MSM. I am greatly irritated by Fitzgerald’s sole public concern for the safety of CIA employees. Why isn’t he also upset by Valerie Plame’s apparent attempt to harm the Bush administration? Are members of the CIA given a free pass to slime those they disagree with? Does this mean that one is powerless to protect themselves without jeopardizing their freedom?