Skip to comments.Pardon Libby
Posted on 06/22/2007 5:45:36 PM PDT by STARWISE
I find myself in unusual company, and I am always so careful about the company I keep. Nonetheless, here I am arguing on the same side as Washington Post columnist and ritualistic liberal Richard Cohen and Christopher Hitchens.
At least Hitchens, a columnist for Vanity Fair and Slate, is an independent man of the left. Yet here I am on their side arguing for leniency for Vice President Richard Cheney's former chief of staff, Scooter Libby.
Having been found guilty of lying under oath, he is about to be sent to prison before his appeal is considered. In fact his prosecutor, Patrick Fitzgerald, has urged he be sent to prison immediately because of his failure to express remorse; though if he were to express remorse what grounds would he have for an appeal?
Fitzgerald is what is called a "tough" prosecutor. I would call him something else, either a failed logician or a brute.
Yet we doubt that Libby lied. In fact, I have long doubted that Libby is stupid enough to tell the particular lie that he has been found guilty of. It meant he lied about a long-ago telephone call with the journalist Tim Russert. What is more, it meant that Libby assumed Russert would somehow pick up on the lie and repeat it when asked about the conversation in court, thus making himself a perjurer.
What actually happened is that Russert remembered the conversation differently, said so in court, and cooked Libby's goose. As Hitchens puts it, "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."
Well, thought I, the jury will sort things out. Unfortunately the brute prevailed, faulty logic and all.
(Excerpt) Read more at spectator.org ...
She's since retracted it after her remarks seemingly implicated her NBC colleague Tim Russert. The prosecution also does not want Mitchell to testify as Clarice Feldman notes:
Yet Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald is fighting hard to make sure reporter Andrea Mitchell's testimony is not heard, and is asking the jury to buy some highly implausible notions about a key FBI interview with NBC's Washington Bureau Chief Tim Russert.
The prosecution is still trying hard to keep Andrea Mitchell from being called as a defense witness. In a pleading Friday, the defense is trying just as hard to get court permission to call her. The prosecution argues that the defense cannot call a witness just to impeach her, and the defense says that is not their only reason to call her, that she has other evidence to provide, and that a fair trial cannot be had without her being called and questioned by the defense."
I suspect karma will be Hell for these charlatans... and, FatTimmy: how DO you sleep at night?
Why hasn’t Bush pardoned Libby?
Maybe he doesnt want to hurt his chances at reelection oh, wait never mind.
because he is George the Wuss (GW)
Fits filed his response to Libby’s petition to the Ct of Appeals this afternoon. It is here http://thenexthurrah.typepad.com/the_next_hurrah/files/070622_govt_reply.pdf
Every day that passes without a pardon is just one more reason I’ll never send a dollar to the GOP.
while he is at it, how about the other Libby, G. Gordon, Chuck Colson, and any one else that tweaks the left....
Here’s a question.. if you are gonna pardon a guy, why wait until after the government has spent millions prosecuting him and he has spent millions defending himslef? Why not just pardon him up front?
G. Gordon Liddy....
I believe you have to be convicted to be pardoned?
Well, at least it wasn't a Mexican drug runner whose word they took over an American Border Patrol agent's word.
One could argue the prudence of allowing our system of justice to officially play out fully, and that a defendant have every opportunity to pursue the system’s remedies to clear his name until every legal recourse is exhausted.
A totally irrelevant analogy, and disingenuous immigration insertion.
Well is so, that answers my question!
I think it’s because that he is hoping that by not pardoning Libby it will provide some kind of “closure” on the whole stupid Palme affair.
He hopes, and I think in vain, that by giving them Libby they will stop harrassing him with other spurious investigations and he will be able to spend the rest of his presidency in relative peace.
A pardon, he reasons, will infuriate the dems again and they will redouble their efforts to drag down any other member of the administration they can sink their teeth into.
But that’s stupid. Nothing he could do short of suicide on the White House lawn would satisfy the dems. He should realize that by now.
Oh heck — I just don’t know anymore. I am so disgusted with Bush these days, on so many levels, I have given up on the idea that any good at all will come from the remainder of this administration.
The conviction of Scooter Libby proves that Justice does not live in a DC Court. Everyone from the prosecutor,the Judge ,the Jury were under the shadow of the DNC who cooked up this scheme.
If I were Mr. Bush , Fitzgerald would be explaining why he tossed away millions of dollars on this farce.
No. Ford pardoned Nixon before any charges were filed.
I would normally agree with that, but the fact that this judge has decided to incarcerate Libby during the appeals process is an outrage and purely vindictive. Libby is neither a flight risk nor a threat to others. Bush should pardon him now. Otherwise, I would agree that the appeal process should be allowed to play out.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.