Reason Magazine
- reason.com
- reason.tv
- reason.org
- Donate
- Site Search:
Reason on Facebook
Reason on Twitter
Reason on YouTube
Reason RSSGet Reason E-mail Updates!
Manage your Reason e-mail list subscriptionsadvertisements
Libby on the Loose
President Cheney, er, Bush,
commutes Scooter Libby's jail sentence--the fine and probation
stand. All Republicans who actually have to run for re-election
again smile very, very tight, pained smiles at the news.
unbelievable|7.2.07 @ 6:32PM|#
unbelievable unbelievable unbelievable. worst news in a long time. how can anyone take what should be our government the least bit seriously when the connected and only the connected get such treatment? check the record to see how those truly deserving of clemency are rotting right now and contrast that with this swift get-off. rotten, evil work president cheney
|7.2.07 @ 6:33PM|#
Whether or not Libby should be serving time for his crimes, I just can't see how anything good comes from presidents pardoning/commuting the sentences of their own staff members. Even if we don't amend the Constitution to limit presidential powers, this should be one of those things that is Simply Not Done.
Randolph Carter|7.2.07 @ 6:35PM|#
Could a vicious leftist partisan please explain what Scooty scoot did? I haven't really followed this story at all, and I'd like to hear his crimes described in the worst possible terms so I can rile myself up properly.
thoreau|7.2.07 @ 6:38PM|#
I'm this close to going into the street with a torth and
shouting "Liberty, fraternity, and equality!"
Seriously. WHAT THE FUCK?!?!?!?!?!?
Tim Russert|7.2.07 @ 6:39PM|#
Randy, his crime was that he remembered something differently than I did. Back in Buffalo, that's a hangin' offense.
|7.2.07 @ 6:41PM|#
The Republican were falling all over themselves to have the
media leaks investigated a couple of years ago. They got one. They
would be crying foul if Libby was Pelosi's aide.
Bush went from saying he would fire anyone in his admin that was
invoved in leaking to the media, to prison is too harsh of a
penality for someone who lied and obstructed such an
investigation.
|7.2.07 @ 6:42PM|#
This is a poor decision. Commuting the sentence is going to piss
off everyone but Broder.
Polling indicates a large majority of the population things Scooter
shouldn't have been pardoned.
So Bush just irritated them some more. However, his die-hard base
is demanding at LEAST a pardon and probably the jailing of all
those "Democrats' (Fitzgerald, Walton, Comey, and I guess the three
judge panel) for their witchhunt. A commutation, especially one
that indicates a crime occured, doesn't make them happy.
To everyone else -- it's just sending the message that Paris's
problem was that she didn't have well-connected enough
friends.
A pardon is one thing, but just removing the jail sentence? Says
that jail is for suckers, not well-connected lawyers.
A pardon would have pleased at least his base. A commutation --
that says "he's guilty, but my friends don't go to jail".
Fluffy|7.2.07 @ 6:46PM|#
The Congress now has no choice but to brutalize every
administration representative that comes before them to testify on
literally any manner.
They can't "negotiate for testimony" or "enter consultations" or
anything of the kind, because on the basis of this commutation it
is now perfectly fair to assume that every last one of them is
perjuring themselves and committing obstruction and they're just
counting on the fact that if you're doing it for Bush those things
are no longer crimes.
Randolph Carter|7.2.07 @ 6:50PM|#
I get the flavor. And again, I am compelled to yell Fuck those d00dz!
|7.2.07 @ 6:51PM|#
Randolph,
I'm no vicious leftist partisan, but he was convicted of lying to
investigator(s). A bullshit crime? Probably, especially since the
investigation should have been over before Libby became
involved.
But I think a lot of the outrage you're going to find here is due
to the fact that there are shitloads of people rotting in federal
prison right now for bullshit crimes/overzealous prosecutions, and
you can bet your bottom dollar none of them are going to get
pardons or commutations.
|7.2.07 @ 6:52PM|#
Could a vicious leftist partisan please explain what Scooty
scoot did?
He obstructed the leak investigation and lied to investigators and
lied under oath (perjury).
I seem to remember a time when just one of those things (perjury)
were considered "high crimes and misdemeanors" by many in the
current "he did nothing wrong" choir.
Ah fun times -- apparently the whole "rule of law" schtick only
applies to Democrats
|7.2.07 @ 6:54PM|#
So much for my prediction he would do this on January 19, 2009. Although I was predicting a complete pardon, which may still happen then.
|7.2.07 @ 6:55PM|#
A pardon is one thing, but just removing the jail sentence?
Says that jail is for suckers, not well-connected
lawyers.
Agreed. At least with a pardon, one could argue that the whole
trial/prosecution was politically motivated (while ignoring that
the prosecutor was a fucking republican that was appointed by Bush
himself). But with this commutation, the Pres. is effectively
saying "Jail? that's for regular people. Sure he was guilty but I
don't think my friends should have to go to jail."
|7.2.07 @ 6:56PM|#
It's a disgrace!
All the things I said about the Clinton Administration, I say 'em
all again about Bush.
Dr. William Hurwitz, Prisoner |7.2.07 @ 6:57PM|#
"The reputation he gained through his years of public
service and professional work in the legal community is forever
damaged," Bush said. "His wife and young children have also
suffered immensely. He will remain on probation. The significant
fines imposed by the judge will remain in effect. The consequences
of his felony conviction on his former life as a lawyer, public
servant and private citizen will be long-lasting."
Well that would have sucked.
|7.2.07 @ 6:59PM|#
ChicagoTom,
How could Libby have obstructed a leak investigation that had
already found the source of the leak? I agree with you about this
commutation being BS, but the jury appears to have been made up of
fucktards.
Randy Carter\'s informant|7.2.07 @ 7:10PM|#
Randy,
Cheney's "team" (neocons, MI6, etc.) had forged documents about
Saddam buying nuclear material. Cheney went to the CIA a few dozen
times to browbeat them into agreeing Saddam was building nukes, but
CIA wouldn't budge.
Team Cheney then proceeded to try and smuggle nuclear material into
Iraq to "prove" their allegations.
Valerie Plame's team @ CIA was in charge of nuclear
anti-proliferation, i.e., stopping nukes from getting into places
like Iraq. So they did.
Team Cheney then decided to destroy Team Plame by blowing her cover
and thereby the cover of about 100 other agents and their thousands
of informants. They did this by having people like Libby leak
Plame's name to people like New York Times' Judy Miller.
Then Proecutor Fitzgerald and a federal grand jury started
investigating Team Cheney, so Libby blatantly lied about
everything. The grand jury, Fitzgerald, the petit jury, and four
federal judges all agreed Libby should serve hard time for his
lies.
If Bush didn't pardon("commute") Libby, the only way Libby could
have avoided prison was to start telling the truth about Team
Cheney.
So he was pardoned.
Hope this helps.
Randolph Carter|7.2.07 @ 7:11PM|#
Who is this hurwitz I allow.... to hold dominion over me
this pain pill pusher I have hunted
he gave me relief
he gave me xanax
but really, I think that there will be a day of collective bridge
jumping over the war on drugs a la Javert
And must I now begin to doubt
Who never doubted all these years?
My heart is stone and still it trembles
The world I have known is lost in shadow.
|7.2.07 @ 7:14PM|#
ChicagoTom,
To be fair, Libby is not and should not be held quite to the same
standard as the POTUS. I thought Clinton should've resigned and
thought he was legitimately impeachable; however, I would've had a
problem with him doing time for his perjury. It's appropriate in
some cases, of course, but not in that one. In any case, presidents
should be unstained, like Caesar's wife. Which, I suppose, means
that I think Bush is probably impeachable, too, although for less
specific reasons (more for the totality of his presidency). Not
that the Democrats would dare attempt an impeachment without
something overwhelming--it would look too much like tit for
tat.
With Libby, the actual truth is almost impossible to get at, so
drowned has it become by waves and waves of partisan nonsense.
thoreau|7.2.07 @ 7:16PM|#
Not that the Democrats would dare attempt an impeachment
without something overwhelming--it would look too much like tit for
tat.
He admitted to violating FISA.
That's a crime of state, and we have a confession.
NP|7.2.07 @ 7:19PM|#
It's simply beyond me why anyone would pay so much attention to what was and remains pretty much a nonstory.
ktc2|7.2.07 @ 7:19PM|#
With all the forthcoming investigations of the Bush, Cheney, et al they HAD to let everyone know for sure that if they take the fall for "the team" they'll be okay in the end.
|7.2.07 @ 7:20PM|#
I for one thank Jesus that I live in a country where justice is
served instead of one of those godless heathen nations where the
law favors the innocent over the rich. -sarcasm-
Looks like the only one shooting off fireworks on wednesday will be
Libby. I hope he blows his stupid fingers off with a
firecracker.
|7.2.07 @ 7:20PM|#
I agree with you about this commutation being BS, but the
jury appears to have been made up of fucktards.
From what I read of the jury's interviews and statements, nothing
could be further from truth. They said they even kind of felt sorry
for the guy, but this classic "I didn't remember on Tuesday, I did
on Wednesday, and then forgot again on Friday," didn't wash. He
obviously (and I use the word in terms of what the jury felt the
evidence showed) was lying, saying different things to different
people on different days, and that it simply wasn't credible that
the non-truths were accidental. He lied, he got caught, he went
down. Again, to the jury, which is who I thought we were supposed
to trust in this country.
|7.2.07 @ 7:21PM|#
GWB hates republicans (at least those looking to get elected in
November) more than McCain.
Did they really think that splitting the baby (commutation vs
pardon) was going to make anyone happy?
Now he's pissed off:
1. everyone who is against the war and views the entire national
security apparatus as tainted AND
2. the hardcore Republicans who wanted a pardon.
This guy (GWB) continues to amaze with his total lack of political
savvy.
If I am missing something, please help me understand how this is
not another huge political weight around his neck.
GILMORE|7.2.07 @ 7:21PM|#
Randolph Carter | July 2, 2007, 6:35pm | #
Could a vicious leftist partisan please explain what Scooty scoot
did?
Im generally pretty conservative. He obstructed justice by
committing perjury. I believe in the rule of law. He should have
done the time.
iih|7.2.07 @ 7:23PM|#
This is very reminiscent of a dictatorial regime... In some
(actually many) parts of the world, there are heads of state (those
we call "dictators") who only pardon their corrupt own. Amazing! Is
this still the good old America?
By the way, if a government is so keen on being corrupt in its
internal politics/policy, do/should we expect them to be truthful
about their (oh, I mean, "our") foreign affairs? And, no, I am not
talking about Iraq or current mideast policy (we already uncovered
the truth about that), I am wondering about the current media hype
(especially Fox News, and all the right wing "conservative" crap,
who are backed by President Cheney, and his pet Georgy) about
future prospects in the Middle East -- especially vis-a-vis bombing
Iran and its potential consequences.
|7.2.07 @ 7:23PM|#
Pro Libertate, I do agree with you that the overall case has
been drowned in partisan nonsense.
I tried to follow the overall Plame case, going between David
Corn's blog and NRO's Corner, but I got lost after a few days of
"not-uh yeah-huh" between them. And that was the *actual* leak
case; this was just Libby's obstruction during the investigation,
which makes this even more impossible to follow.
iih|7.2.07 @ 7:26PM|#
Is it possible that Libby has threatened to strike back at the WH if Bush does not commute the sentence?
Ron Hardin|7.2.07 @ 7:27PM|#
Why didn't he commute the whole thing, is the question that
needs answering.
Clear vision compromised by PR flack advice.
|7.2.07 @ 7:27PM|#
... I just realized I can't remember Scooter's real first name..
does anybody remember it??
Oh my various deities, Bush's stupid pet names have become so
ingrained on the public conciousness that I can't even remember
this jerk's real name! ARGH!
This guy could probably get back into politics under his real name
if he could keep anyone from saying Scooter. Who'd recognize it?
"Oh Libby, are you related that that commuted guy? You look just
like him."
Seriously.. it's Peter right? Steve? John?
thoreau|7.2.07 @ 7:30PM|#
ktc2 | July 2, 2007, 7:19pm | #
With all the forthcoming investigations of the Bush, Cheney, et al they HAD to let everyone know for sure that if they take the fall for "the team" they'll be okay in the end.
Exactly.
iih|7.2.07 @ 7:35PM|#
ktc2, thoreau:
I disagree. If it was about "the team" their "circle of trust"
would encompass a wider "team". But it seems that this is a very
"small, special team", with something (or so many something"s") to
hide. A team, no matter how good, won't go that far. This is beyond
belief. So, I think it is really about covering up after
themselves.
|7.2.07 @ 7:44PM|#
This guy could probably get back into politics under his
real name
Nah, it's still says Libby Libby Libby on the label.
|7.2.07 @ 7:47PM|#
GILMORE, he wasn't under oath, so he didn't commit
perjury.
torrentprime,
Oh, I'm certain that he lied to investigators. The charge that I
have a problem with was that of obstructing an investigation. They
already knew that Armitage was the source of the leak, so how could
Libby have obstructed them?
cecil,
This is part of a pattern with GWB. In August 2001, he had people
from his base demanding that he ban federal funding for ESC
research, while others were demanding unrestricted funding for ESC
research. So, he compromised and set up the silly funding system we
have now. There was something of a political firestorm brewing on
both sides about the issue, but a month later Rudy's Favorite Day
threw that all out the window.
ktc2|7.2.07 @ 7:54PM|#
Ah you misunderstood "the team". Meaning Bush & Cheney (and
maybe a very few others). If this guy went to jail then all the
other bureacrats would be much more inclined to tell the truth in
the coming investigations.
Now they can just lie their ass off to protect "the team" (again,
meaning Bush & Cheney primarily) and not have to worry. They
know they aren't going to do any time, and probably in the end will
get a full pardon at the last moment.
I wouldn't worry about Scooter's future none. It's a safe bet that
he'll be rewarded for "falling on his sword" like a good little
henchman.
|7.2.07 @ 7:54PM|#
I thought the indictment made the case pretty clear.
http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/1028051plame1.html
It's about telling the truth when you're required to under law.
Context should not be relevent.
Guy Montag|7.2.07 @ 8:03PM|#
Yea, it is the greatest abuse by a president since Jimmy Carter commuted the sentence of G. Gordon Liddy. -sarcasm-
|7.2.07 @ 8:04PM|#
Falcc wrote: "I just realized I can't remember Scooter's real
first name.. does anybody remember it??"
He officially goes by "I. Lewis".
Randolph Carter|7.2.07 @ 8:07PM|#
just to be clear, I wasn't discounting Libby's guilt or the
badness of what Bush has done. I just wanted to hear it in the
worst possible terms so, as I said, I could get properly
angry.
I guess I'm just not surprised at this administration's malfeasance
anymore, so I need to hear it like something new and bad is
happening rather than just the same 'ol same 'ol bad stuff is
happening.
Bush should hop on getting his toadies in court for whatever they
might have against them, so he can pardon them while he's still
president.
Independent Voter|7.2.07 @ 8:10PM|#
If I am missing something, please help me understand how
this is not another huge political weight around his
neck.
Scooter Who?
Conservative Voter|7.2.07 @ 8:14PM|#
If I am missing something, please help me understand how
this is not another huge political weight around his
neck.
Bush really sucks he is a fucking liberal except for the War on
Terror. HaHaHa those Commie Kos Kids are gonna have a stroke over
the Libby sentence commutation. Go Bush! Fred Thompson in
'08!!!
jayef|7.2.07 @ 8:14PM|#
Randy Carter's informant,
Thanks for sharing with us the prosecutor's/Joe Wilson's theory of
the case. Needless to say . . . some of us just aren't buying.
\"Progressive\" voter|7.2.07 @ 8:17PM|#
If I am missing something, please help me understand how
this is not another huge political weight around his
neck.
Bush is Hitler!!!!!
No! He is WORSE!!!
OMFG! What have I done? Cheney and carnivore have caught me! With
that $20 I sent to Kucinich's campaign I'm going to Gitmo for sure.
I hope I don't denounce Obama when they waterboard me. Hillary!
Heeeeeeeeeelp!!!
whatever|7.2.07 @ 8:29PM|#
Jay,
"Some of you" are gullible morons. If you're going to open your
yap, do it in Iraq and inhale some DU. We don't need your
anti-American ranting here.
|7.2.07 @ 8:33PM|#
"GILMORE, he wasn't under oath, so he didn't commit
perjury."
I did not realize that crimethink was a legal expert or at the
trial. It struck me that Libby was tried by a competent judge, a
jury o fhis peers, had an excellent defense team, and the jury was
convinced BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT that he had, in fact, committed
perjury. None of you were there, and you simply don't know, yet you
make comments like that. Incredible...
|7.2.07 @ 8:34PM|#
I wonder if Libby is still appealling his conviction. I'm thinking this might not be over. I'm wondering if Bush is going to wait until Libby's appeals run out before he goes for the pardon.
|7.2.07 @ 8:35PM|#
I might add that the appellate court reviewed the case for obvious reversable errors and unanimously found none. I guess crimethink and the gang know more about whether someone committed perjury than these three judges, the jury, and the trial judge.
Randolph Carter|7.2.07 @ 8:40PM|#
wait, was it perjury or lying to a prosecutor a la Martha Stewart? Not that it changes much, but I'd have more sympathy if he wasn't under oath on the witness stand.
|7.2.07 @ 9:00PM|#
"After the verdict was read to the court, Denis Collins, a
member of the jury and a journalist who has written for The
Washington Post and other newspapers, spoke to the press ...
Collins described how after 10 days of deliberations, "What we came
up with from that was that Libby was told about Mrs. Wilson nine
times...We believed he did have a bad memory, but it seemed very
unlikely he would not remember about being told about Mrs. Wilson
so many times....Hard to believe he would remember on Tuesday and
forget on Thursday." Collins told the press "Well, as I said
before, I felt like it was a long, you know, haul to get this jury
done. And if Mr. Libby is pardoned, I would have no problem
with that." (Emphasis Added)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plame_affair
|7.2.07 @ 9:12PM|#
Bret-there are many, many high profile cases in which you can get a juror to say something like that. Why does Libby get commuted but not them? Anyone? Anyone?
|7.2.07 @ 9:14PM|#
If I were president I would have pardoned Libby too.
I mean it wouldn't have been a priority. I would have pardoned
Corey Maye first and a bunch of other people.
But I would have pardoned him.
Alice Bowie|7.2.07 @ 9:30PM|#
I saw we pardon
-- Paris Hilton
-- Scott Peterson
-- That Nigger that got a Blowjob in Georgia
-- And all those who have ever lied in court
***Especially ... Slick Willie
Alice Bowie, Jr.|7.2.07 @ 9:32PM|#
I say we pardon
-- Paris Hilton
-- Scott Peterson
-- That Nigger that got a Blowjob in Georgia
-- And all those who have ever lied in court
***Especially ... Slick Willie
|7.2.07 @ 9:33PM|#
And pray tell, kwais, since you were not at the trial, did not hear all the evidence produced, have little or no legal training (unlike the four judges who passed on the conviction and sentence), what, oh legal master, convinces you this man was worthy of a pardon?
|7.2.07 @ 9:34PM|#
Well, I can't say that I'm in the least bit surprised. But I'm
just dying to read what the National Review and the Weekly Standard
will have to say about this. As if I don't already know...
*cue a Sousa march here*
|7.2.07 @ 9:42PM|#
Ken,
It seems a lot of people with a lot of legal training are
prosecuting people that shouldn't be prosecuted. And convicting
people that shouldn't be convicted.
Also, how do you know what legal training I have or what I have
heard or not heard?
Alice Bowie|7.2.07 @ 9:44PM|#
Ur righit Kwais
in the words of the great Pol Pot
"better to Kill an innocent man...Then let a guilty man run
free"
|7.2.07 @ 9:51PM|#
"And pray tell, kwais, since you were not at the trial, did not
hear all the evidence produced, have little or no legal training
(unlike the four judges who passed on the conviction and sentence),
what, oh legal master, convinces you this man was worthy of a
pardon?"
Praytell oh master what convinces you that he wasn't, especially
considering that you have no access to any of the materials
avaialable to the President? Oh, I forget, he is a Republican and
needs to be sent to jail for that sin alone. He must of done
something, he is a Republican right Ken?
No one gives a shit about this except for conservatives, with whom
Bush needs to mend fences with after his insane amnesty bill and
Democratic partisian nutcases who wouldn't vote for him anyway.
Overall, this will be a small positive for the Republicans.
|7.2.07 @ 10:04PM|#
crimethink writes: "How could Libby have obstructed a leak
investigation that had already found the source of the leak?
"
What makes you think there was only one source?
And if it was only Armitage, why the hell was Libby lying,
repeatedly, for months?
What was Libby covering up?
|7.2.07 @ 10:12PM|#
"And if it was only Armitage, why the hell was Libby lying,
repeatedly, for months?"
Maybe he wasn't. Maybe both he and the reporters in question both
misremembered the conversations in their own way but the reporters
came off as more beleiveable so the jurors convicted him because of
that? There is nothing that says a jury verdict always reaches the
right facts. Juries convict innocent people all the time.
Libertarians are normally sensitive to that fact, except when it
involves a Republican, in which case they join they lynch mob along
with everyone else.
GILMORE|7.2.07 @ 10:16PM|#
Oh, I forget, he is a Republican and needs to be sent to
jail for that sin alone
As far as I know that was not what a grand jury actually based
their decision on. It had something to do with lying about
something to federal prosecutors. Or do you know something they
didnt?
GILMORE|7.2.07 @ 10:19PM|#
except when it involves a Republican
funny john, you're the only one who seems to see this as
'politically motivated'. Was the justice department scheming to
undermine its own administration? you seem to want to give this guy
a pass *because* he's a republican. As one myself, i'd expect a
higher standard, rather than the kind of equivocation you are
spouting. You sound like a clintonite circa... blowjob era
|7.2.07 @ 10:22PM|#
"As far as I know that was not what a grand jury actually based
their decision on. It had something to do with lying about
something to federal prosecutors. Or do you know something they
didnt?"
That might be a good point except that when other people are
convicted by juries, Reason rightly views the verdicts with
skepticism where warrented. When it is Libby or a Republican, the
jury verdict becomes the Gospel truth and the Reasonites join the
lynch mob pitchforks in hand. Everyone assumes the guy didn't
deserve commutation, but they would never assume such a thing about
anyone else. Why? He is a Republican and the Reasonites being human
are just as suseptable to hypocrisy as anyone else. Somehow,
Libertarians claiming to be big law and order types doesn't even
pass the laugh test.
|7.2.07 @ 10:24PM|#
"funny john, you're the only one who seems to see this as
'politically motivated'."
Frankly, I don't know. Maybe Libby does deserve to go to jail. I
honestly don't have much of an opinion. What I find funny is that
Reason, a magazine that never saw a jury verdict or a prosecutor
that wasn't worthy of questioning, is all of the sudden claiming
the sancitity of a jury verdict and the solmenity of a prosecutor.
Get the fuck out of here on that. Reason only discovered its love
of prosecutors because someone they don't like is the defendent.
Their whole take on it is pretty pathetic.
Alice Bowie|7.2.07 @ 10:25PM|#
Actually John ,
The fact that Libby was screwed...and didn't really get a fair
shake w/ the justice system...Means he did get a fair
trial...B-cause no one ever does get a fair trial.
someone once said, "The US Justice systems works great...as long as
YOU are not involved"
|7.2.07 @ 10:34PM|#
from a cursory glance, Libby got caught up in something where
other people should have been punished (very cursory glance), but I
still feel this will not stop Bush's points from dropping further
as it is perceived as a pardon for political reasons.
To be honest, Mr. Fitzgerald was a douche.
|7.2.07 @ 10:35PM|#
Funny how no one doubts that Corey Maye got a raw deal from a
prosecutor, a jury, and the appellate courts, but Scooter's
conviction was pure beyond all doubt.
Armitrage was the source, no one questions that. But he wasn't a
sexy target, so the investigation marched on - investigating what
at that point wasn't even a crime. At least Clinton was
investigated for lying about a civilly actionable offense. This was
a "lie" about nothing.
|7.2.07 @ 10:42PM|#
Libby is an angel compared to some of the scumbags that Slick
Willey pardoned completely.
But then they were Democratics so that's OK.
|7.2.07 @ 10:42PM|#
I would like to thank everyone who is trying to explain what
Libby did exactly. Like Randolph, I haven't been following this
case very closely. (1) I don't have time to follow every government
scandal du jour, and (2) as someone else pointed out, this case has
been obfuscated by partisan yap-flapping from Day One, and I
quickly lost interest in following this particular case.
Even scanning this particular thread, I have seen it stated
that:
1) Libby lied while under oath, therefore committing perjury.
That's all I need to hear.
Except I have also seen it stated that:
2) He was not under oath, and therefore did not commit
perjury.
Only:
3) But he was in fact convicted of perjury, by a jury, so he must
have been guilty.
Except:
4) Innocent people get convicted all the time. Juries are sometimes
stupid, and often misled or misdirected. Obviously, this absolves
Libby ...
And apparently nobody was actually in attendance at
Libby's trial, and therefore nobody can tell whether he is guilty
or not.
Therefore, on balance, I am provisionally outraged, but I am
holding back on some of my fury until I obtain a clearer
understanding.
|7.2.07 @ 10:44PM|#
juris,
It's also funny that Corey Maye will spend the rest of his life in
prison while Scooter walks free.
|7.2.07 @ 10:47PM|#
Stevo,
Every recitation I had heard had emphasized lying to investigator
& obstruction. However, he was also apparently convicted of two
counts of lying to a grand jury, when he was presumably under
oath.
Ken is being a jerkface with his "pray tell"
looking-down-thru-the-glasses attitude, but I was indeed
mistaken.
|7.2.07 @ 10:48PM|#
It's also funny that Corey Maye will spend the rest of his
life in prison while Scooter walks free.
Only funny in a the-cosmos-loves-irony kind of way. I doubt that
even Scooter would chuckle at Corey's expense.
|7.2.07 @ 10:48PM|#
Of course, Bush couldn't pardon Maye anyway because he wasn't convicted of a federal crime, so substitute Dr. Hurwitz.
|7.2.07 @ 10:52PM|#
juris,
I wasn't trying to say it was ha-ha funny, I was pointing out how
horrid your trying to link the two cases was. The levels of
injustice are not even comparable, and that disparity is compounded
by Bush's commutation of Libby.
|7.2.07 @ 10:57PM|#
KenK,
I don't think it's fair to compare Clinton's and Bush's pardoning
record until Bush's term is over. He may well be laying the plans
for pardoning scumbags on 1/19/2009.
I think the wisest course of action for him to take would be to
pardon Cheney, Gonzo, Rice, and Rove on 1/18, and resign so that
Cheney can pardon him the next day. But IANAL.
|7.2.07 @ 10:59PM|#
The other day people were getting worked up about the prison
population and non-violent offenders...
Could a vicious leftist partisan please explain what Scooty
scoot did?
Chris Hitchens
explains:
"If Scooter Libby goes to jail, it will be because he made a
telephone call to Tim Russert and because Tim Russert has a
different recollection of the conversation."
|7.2.07 @ 11:01PM|#
Count one was for obstruction of justice.
Count two was for making false statements to the FBI
Count three was for making false statements to the FBI
Count four was for perjury, knowingly making false statements to a
grand jury.
Count five was for perjury, knowingly making false statements to a
grand jury.
Twice was other oath, twice for false statement to FBI.
|7.2.07 @ 11:02PM|#
I was pointing out how horrid your trying to link the two
cases was.
Actually someone else brought Maye up before me.
Would it have been better if I said Mumia instead of Corey Maye?
Except of course I think Corey Maye was justified in what he did -
and he still got fvcked over.
|7.2.07 @ 11:08PM|#
I'll be a goat here and say that neither Libby nor Clinton
should have gotten into legal trouble, but it's a much closer case
than most people have presented it.
1. Clinton. Impeachment really isn't "criminal" in the DA sense of
the term, although the Framers intended it to be based on criminal
conduct. He lied in a deposition about a sexual relationship other
than the one that was the subject of the lawsuit. Perjury means
lying under oath, either in court, in front of a grand jury, or
here, in a deposition, about a MATERIAL fact in the case. There is
a really excellent argument that Monica was not legally relevant to
Paula Jones and that the evidence wouldn't have been admitted in a
trial. (My own take, from experience, is that depositions in cases
like the Paula Jones one are about 75% falsehoods, but not on the
actual stuff important to the case.) On the other hand, Clinton was
the President, and the Pres really ought to be held to a standard
higher than the average clod trying to get her husband to sign over
the house in the divorce. And just for the hell of it, I think
Nixon clearly should have been removed from office. Much below
Nixon, however, is open to question.
If I remember correctly, Libby had his unfortunate memory lapse in
front of a grand jury. Now, exactly like the Martha Stewart case,
there wasn't an underlying crime. I have always thought that if
there's no crime to conceal, there should not be an issue of
obstruction of justice. Lying to investigators because you're
embarrassed or want to impress your boss or because you're a
political hack is certainly immoral, but probably not illegal. And
if Libby's boss had been say, Nueces County Sheriff, this never
would have been an issue.
That said, I think this was completely politically tone-deaf. Like
everyone upthread said, this is just "losers go to jail." Also,
given Bush's history as Governor down here, where he never commuted
a single sentence or pardoned so much as a jaywalker, it looks
really, really bad. To give you all an example, the Tulia
prosecutions happened in the late 90's. The problems with those
cases were covered in Texas Monthly before the 2000 election, but
Bush never even considered pardons. Knowing his history, all this
says to me is "jail is for people who don't have important
friends."
|7.2.07 @ 11:08PM|#
"I think the wisest course of action for him to take would be to
pardon Cheney, Gonzo, Rice, and Rove on 1/18, and resign so that
Cheney can pardon him the next day."
It might not seem so wise if he doesn't make it back to Crawford
safely.
|7.2.07 @ 11:09PM|#
The Libby case and Martha Stewart case both confirm that it is
really stupid to say anything at all to any government agent.
Just STFU and let your lawyer deal with any and all
inquiries.
JUST. SAY. NOTHING.
EVER.
Just remember that the government agent can lie to you with
impunity but if you make a single mistake in remembering anything
they can trow your arse in jail.
|7.2.07 @ 11:10PM|#
TrickyVic-
OK, as far as I can tell, Libby was convicted on Count 2 and/or 3.
Is that correct?
|7.2.07 @ 11:14PM|#
KenK,
That's probably good advice, but Scooter "misremembered" several
times, speaking to investigators, grand juries, etc
Alice Bowie|7.2.07 @ 11:16PM|#
I can't Agree MORE KenK
--It is really STUPID NOT TO exercise ones 1st amendment right to
say nothing. Even BETTER than THAT...It's better to say that you
DON'T recollect. B-cause if instructed by a JUDGE to answer the
QUESTION. I DON'T remember right NOW...is an answer...and no one
can charge u with PURJURY.
Alice Bowie|7.2.07 @ 11:17PM|#
If it's Good enough for Ronald Reagan...It's good enough for everyone
|7.2.07 @ 11:17PM|#
Question for the crowd: if more members of the Bush admin get
convicted of stuff, and he starts handing out pardons by the
bucketload, should he be impeached?
Technically he hasn't committed a crime by pardoning anyone.
|7.2.07 @ 11:20PM|#
"Praytell oh master what convinces you that he wasn't,
especially considering that you have no access to any of the
materials avaialable to the President? Oh, I forget, he is a
Republican and needs to be sent to jail for that sin alone. He must
of done something, he is a Republican right Ken?" See, I am not the
one second geussing the unanimous opinion of twelve citizens who
sat in the courtroom for days hearing BOTH the prosecutors charges
and the "exculpatory" claims that Libby defenders wave around that
they probably got from wikipedia. But see, then they heard a
rebuttal of those claims from the pros, and a rebuttal, etc., and
when all was said and done they all said, shit, this guy is guilty.
Then the judge, who could vacate a crazy jury decicion, said hey,
this is proper. Then a unanimous decision was reached by a panel of
judges that this was properly done. After this careful factfinding
(and the judicial branch is the one designed for factfinding btw)
you are going to propose that Bush knew better? Get a grip.
"What I find funny is that Reason, a magazine that never saw a jury
verdict or a prosecutor that wasn't worthy of questioning, is all
of the sudden claiming the sancitity of a jury verdict and the
solmenity of a prosecutor." While I am a Reason subscriber I don't
represent them and vice versa, but noone in this nation is
convicted by the prosecutor alone. A jury and a judge have to sign
on, and then there are appeals. And Libby lost big time in all
those arenas. I'll trust the judicial branch in factfinding all day
over the executive (of which the prosecutor is a member).
|7.2.07 @ 11:21PM|#
You can't impeach the guy for being the most incompetent president of the modern era. Let's just admit that we aren't a very intelligent country, and let it go at that. Don't forget: we RE-Elected a terrible, dishonest ideologue. We get what we deserve. It isn't about Democrat or Republican. It's about our colossally stupid nation that can't even remember as far back as Vietnam.
|7.2.07 @ 11:23PM|#
And a point of grammar to be clarified: If one uses the
strikeout function, can the "er" construct also be
used? Isn't that redundant?
iih|7.2.07 @ 11:27PM|#
Very well put by The Nation:
"The president who led the nation into a disastrous war in Iraq by
peddling false statements and misrepresentations has come to the
rescue of a White House aide convicted of lying by commuting his
sentence. Before the ink was dry on today's court order denying
Scooter Libby's latest appeal--a motion to allow him to stay out of
jail while he was challenging his conviction--George W. Bush
commuted Libby's sentence."
ktc2 (if you're still around):
Agree. Thanks.
soulrebel|7.2.07 @ 11:44PM|#
Lamar, he stole both elections. we never voted him in. as far as the libby thing, complete and utter bullshit. bush needs to be hog tied and beaten. of course the democrats won't do anything, because they really don't care.
|7.2.07 @ 11:56PM|#
I think part of hte Reason and HR reaction comes also from the normal decrying of hypocrisy. After all, the GOP screamed bloody hell over Clinton's perjury and his pardons, and they also claim to be the law and order never pardon party (rmember Mitt Romney's comments on pardoning recently, to the effect that he was proud not to have pradoned ANYONE. But when its one of their brothas, well, all bets are of...
|7.3.07 @ 12:02AM|#
Oh, come, come soul rebel. I never voted for the guy, but like
my soccer coach used to say to us: a tie is a loss. You can blame
it on the ref, or cheating, or whatever, but the fact is that we
didn't score more goals. In the election, at least 2000, we had
about 50% of the country gung-ho to elect an incompetent leader. I
would say "unproven" but he was already a proven failure as a
businessman, and only marginally successful as a governor in a weak
governor system. In 2004 we had people (the basis of my stupid
nation claim) that argued that an incompetent person who believed
as they do was better than a competent person with whom they
disagreed. Even to this day you'll find righties arguing about John
Kerry's incompetence, as if he had a chance to show it in the oval
office.
We're a Christian nation, and the Christian faith requires people
to believe in shit that never happened and it also requires them to
choose, based on faith, between black or white solutions. Other
nations have founded their christian beliefs on metaphors, but
Americans are literalists. So if I say that I believe in family
values, there can't be two candidates who are family values.
We're not in trouble because of our system. We're in trouble
because of our stupidity. Now that I'm a southerner again, I can
say that.
|7.3.07 @ 12:28AM|#
I am not that bothered by the pardon, as Libby was the fall guy for Dick Cheney. I felt sorry for him all along, in this regard. How many others in this Administration are not paying the price at all for doing the same thing?
|7.3.07 @ 1:12AM|#
iih writes:
Is it possible that Libby has threatened to strike back at the WH
if Bush does not commute the sentence?
My thoughts exactly. It's not what we know, it's what's going on
behind the scenes that we don't know.. and knowing how secretive
this administration is, I bet the truth is probably uglier than we
think.
|7.3.07 @ 2:31AM|#
You all may think that Libby got off scot-free, but consider
this: would any of you want to forever be known by the name
"Scooter"?
;-)
|7.3.07 @ 2:31AM|#
Is it possible that GWB commuted the sentence rather than giving
Libby a pardon so that Libby can take the Fifth when called back
before congress rather than allowing us to find out what really
happened with Rove, Cheney, et al.
MMMMM- Couldst be.
|7.3.07 @ 5:44AM|#
I am not that bothered by the pardon, as Libby was the fall
guy for Dick Cheney. I felt sorry for him all along, in this
regard.
Why would you feel sorry for someone who willingly took a bullet
for someone else? For Libby there was no downside to this -- he
takes the fall and is either pardoned or does a paltry 30 months of
"hard" time in a country-club prison. In either case, he is then
feted on the political Right as a wounded Hero and rewarded with a
comfy position at AEI or some other think tank with a six- to
seven-figure salary and five-figure speaking engagements.
Save your sorrow for someone who deserves it, not for a
well-connected elite who played the roll of a tragic sacrifice in
this bit of political theater.
|7.3.07 @ 7:48AM|#
would any of you want to forever be known by the name "Scooter"?
This is the real reason for the commutation of jail time. You can
do OK as a 'Scooter' outside prison. Inside, not so much.
Fluffy|7.3.07 @ 8:00AM|#
John -
Hey, Patrick Fitzgerald may be a dick. I'm perfectly happy to
concede that.
But when the heat was on the Bush administration politically they
made a big show of appointing Fitzgerald and their spokespeople
made all the "right" noises about how seriously they regarded the
investigation and how critical it was.
They were, yet again, lying.
The Libby saga is just a small and relatively minor thread in a
tapestry of deception by an administration that has never for one
moment stopped evading oversight in order to seek political
advantage or to protect itself from political damage. The Libby
thing is relevant because it reveals once again that nearly every
decision this administration makes is made in the name of
obstruction of oversight and evasion of accountability.
I would be happy to see Libby walk if it weren't for the fact that
the White House is busily demonstrating its contempt of
Congressional subpoenas at the same time. I'd be happy enough to
let the man go if it weren't for the fact that the way the
administration authored the Military Commissions Act to my eyes
constitutes a confession that they know about war crimes and are
determined to hide them and protect war criminals. I'd be happy
enough to let Libby go if the administration hadn't set up a
parallel email system and then mysteriously lost all the emails.
Etcetera.
Gilbert Martin|7.3.07 @ 8:02AM|#
"Tim Russert | July 2, 2007, 6:39pm | #
Randy, his crime was that he remembered something differently than
I did. Back in Buffalo, that's a hangin' offense."
Yes, that's the way your buddy, neighbor and fellow journalist who
was somehow allowed to be on the jury thought about it.
The whole thing was a political show trial to begin with. The
leaker, Armitage, was already known by the prosecutor.
Libby was singled out for persecution - not prosecution. Armitage
was never charged with anything. Valerie Plame, who lied under oath
about whose idea it was to send her husband to Niger was never
charged with anything. Her husband Joe who lied about what he saw
and did when he went to Niger was never charged with
anything.
When Sandy Berger can steal documents from the national archives
and get off with a slap on the wrist, I'd say it's quite proper for
Bush to pardon Libby for what amounts to nothing more than a ginned
up political lynching.
JohnD|7.3.07 @ 8:48AM|#
Clinton pardoned ( not commuted) 466 real criminals. Everything
from bank robbers, drug dealers and embezzelers. Most of the
pardons were bought and paid for.
Carter pardoned over 560.
Libby did not technically commit a crime.
Deal with it, morons
iih|7.3.07 @ 8:54AM|#
I was surprised to see how many so-called "conservatives" on the blogs are actually supporting GWB in his decision. There is something about the attitude of these people (those hiding under the conservative banner though they are really a bunch of hacks) that seems to relish on the "in-your-face" attitude. And GWB is certainly catering to them both on the domestic front (versus all the rationalists, pragmatists, and liberals), as well as on the foreign affairs front (vis-a-vis the Iraq war, the war on terror, mideast policy, etc). "Conservative" talk radio hosts are delighted with GWB, too, since he is providing all the material to fire up the "in-your-face" masses.
Fluffy|7.3.07 @ 9:03AM|#
I'd rather see 560 bank robbers pardoned than see an executive
branch staffer pardoned for a crime in connection with an
administration policy.
The pardon power is a necessary and good one. Its only downside is
its vast potential for misuse in the hands of a corrupt or
dishonorable President. In theory, if the President is willing to
use the power to its full potential, an administration could commit
literally any crime or engage in literally any conspiracy and
escape punishment if the chief executive is willing to simply
pardon everyone. The only remedy then would be impeachment, and the
President could simply widen the reach of his conspiracy to
frustrate the impeachment attempt.
We're getting a little tiny baby taste of what such an
administration would look like now with this commutation. 560 bank
robbers on the street doesn't really threaten the republic with
anything but a marginal increase in crime. The abuse of the pardon
power as a tool to achieve executive branch supremacy threatens the
republic very much indeed.
GILMORE|7.3.07 @ 9:21AM|#
e're in trouble because of our stupidity
Word up!
Great piece here
http://www.cantrip.org/stupidity.html
GILMORE|7.3.07 @ 9:28AM|#
JohnD | July 3, 2007, 8:48am | #
Clinton pardoned ( not commuted) 466 real criminals....Carter
pardoned over 560....
There's such a big difference between democrats and republicans,
right>? The republicans are the *ethical* ones... :) Yawn.
GILMORE|7.3.07 @ 9:40AM|#
it's also probably germaine to point out that GWB approved the
execution of 152 people in his tenure as Texas govenor.
Late bloomer?
|7.3.07 @ 9:44AM|#
For three years, we've been hearing "Plame wasn't a covert CIA
employee, she didn't go overseas" as the excuse for why this was a
non-crime that should never have been investigated. Now that that
lie has been definitively disproven, do we see even the slightest
reappraisal from the partisan wingnuts who spent those years
repeating it?
Of course we don't.
Oh, and btw, it has also been definitively proven that there were
multiple leakers, acting in concernt - Rove was the original source
for Matt Cooper, Libby for other reporters. We don't actually have
a "only the first guy through the door gets charged" doctrine in
our legal system.
Guy Montag|7.3.07 @ 10:16AM|#
Wow, this is getting rich.
I suppose id Radley were questioned by a cop about what kind of car
he was driving, during a bank robbery that never happened, and said
Dodge instead of Saab, you guys would want him to get 30 months
too. You know, since the hypothetical jury convicted him.
|7.3.07 @ 10:20AM|#
IIRC, the people Clinton pardoned had already served their terms in prison. Indeed, Bush's DOJ has a pardon policy stating that a person must already have served their sentence before applying a pardon. To paraphrase Bush, "Exceptions were made."
|7.3.07 @ 10:23AM|#
And, as I said before, it's not fair to compare Clinton's
last-day-in-office pardons to this. Bush will have a lot of
last-day-in-office pardons himself, you wait and see.
That is, assuming Bush allows himself to be removed from office
without bloodshed, an assumption my tinfoil underwear is not
allowing me to entirely make.
|7.3.07 @ 10:25AM|#
At what point do Bush supporters start to think "Hey, this guy it just screwing us, abusing the powers of office with no oversight, for his own personal gain."
|7.3.07 @ 10:30AM|#
"Libby did not technically commit a crime."
Sigh, yes JohnD, during his long trial where he was ably
represented by high price lawyers, the claim that he "did not
technically commit a crime" was never brought and refuted. And it
slipped right past the appeallate court too, huh? They certainly
don't look into technical matters in those places, but you oh
mighty Dean of Criminal Law, failed to let the crucial issues get
past your steel trap of a mined...
|7.3.07 @ 10:39AM|#
You can spot the partisans pretty easily. On today's NYT op-ed
page, David Brooks starts his apologia by describing 'a strutting
little peacock with the unimaginative name of Joe Wilson'.
Unimaginative name? WTF is that? Is this
what passes for intelligent discourse?
If he weren't so busy strutting he could have imagined himself a
cool name like, I dunno, David Brooks? Then none of this would have
happened!
|7.3.07 @ 11:33AM|#
You said it Doctor Duck, that is some strange phrasing from a man who knows his bread is buttered by being in with the conservative click (his current job is "token conservative). I must though cry fowl at your pun on the name of my favorite Marvel Supervillian, Doctor Doom.
|7.3.07 @ 12:30PM|#
I'm certain that he lied to investigators. The charge that I
have a problem with was that of obstructing an investigation. They
already knew that Armitage was the source of the leak, so how could
Libby have obstructed them?
Lying to investigators and other attempted forms of preventing the
truth from coming out constitute, on their own, obstruction of
justice. Sometimes it's the attempt that matters, not the success
of the attempt.
|7.3.07 @ 12:44PM|#
How come Fitzgerald gets a pass from all this B.S.? The whole investigation crumbles on the lie of ONE man? How could there not have been other avenues to persue to determine the REAL PERPETRATOR of this 'heinous' crome? Either Fitz is grossly incompetant or he's covering up for somebody (Armitage?).
|7.3.07 @ 12:56PM|#
doubled-calm down, hug your GW Bush plush toy, and eat some freedom fries...Fitzgerald has never convincly been accused of hiding exculpatory evidence like Nifong or the like..It's Ok my friend, Republicans too do wrong things...
|7.3.07 @ 1:07PM|#
But Ken , the real leaker is still out there , doesn't that bother you? Or is 'justice' just a canard with which to seem concerned with the national security that was 'lost'?
iih|7.3.07 @ 1:38PM|#
doubled:
True, the real leaker is out there, but if a jury finds scooter
guilty then he's got to go to prison. Period. Pardons are
acceptable only in shady cases, but in this case it is slam dunk.
GWB had no good reason to commute the sentence.
Naively speaking, may be scooter being in prison would have put
more pressure on people and to result in more leaks, especially as
to who told about Plame in the first place.
By the way, someone pointed out that Paris Hilton spent more jail
time for drunk driving (which *could have* killed someone), while
scooter's lie is related to an entire war that resulted in
thousands of people dying, both American soldiers and innocent
Iraqis. Outrageous.
|7.3.07 @ 4:14PM|#
doubled,
The White House conspired to leak Plame's name, they couldn't have
conspired to cover up the crime?
Fitzgerald is either incompetant or corrupt because the most
powerful men on the planet worked together to cover each others'
asses?
|7.3.07 @ 8:45PM|#
Guilty on counts one (obstruction), four and five (Perjury). And
either two or three. He was aquitted on one count of false
statements to the FBI.
The whole "must investigate the leaks" line we where hearing a
couple of years ago was nothing but a diversion by those actually
leaking.
|7.3.07 @ 11:51PM|#
joe sez "The White House conspired to leak Plame's name, they
couldn't have conspired to cover up the crime?"
Armitrage was never on the same page as the White House - was his
coughing up Plame [first] just a coincidence? Or he is really a
super-secret-Rove triple agent?
As to the "crime"; no one has been charged with, let alone
convicted of, outing a covert agent. And again, Armitrage would be
the leading candidate (closely followed by the CIA press rep that
confirmed Plame's employment with the agency).
Funny how Hitchens sees this for what it is. There are lefties that
don't suffer from BDS.
|7.3.07 @ 11:56PM|#
Guilty on counts one (obstruction)
I'm not a lawyer, but can you really obstruct justice when a crime
hasn't even been committed?
four and five (Perjury)
Grand Jury testimony I presume against what other people recalled.
I guess that jury never saw Rashomon.
He was aquitted on one count of false statements to the
FBI
Now that's funny, since there were two counts. I guess the jury
went Solomon-esque.
Do recall that it took 10 days to reach this verdict, and from what
I recall of juror comments afterwards, there appeared to be some
horse-trading in the jury room.
Site comments/questions:
Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:
(310) 367-6109
Editorial & Production Offices:
3415 S. Sepulveda Blvd.
Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90034
(310) 391-2245