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 ...
I think you’re right. ~S
Then Nifong Fitzy!
How about a pardon for the 2 cops in prison for shooting that Mexican illegal alien / drug smuggling turd
Is there a mechanism that would permit him to be free pending appeal other than for the sentencing judge to agree, or to have his order to report stayed by a higher court?
My words are in caps and parentheses.
Damn right it should’ve been allowed .. it goes right to her boss, Russert’s testimony. To believe that Mitchell wouldn’t pass along this gossip to her boss is sheer lunacy. The jaws were locked of Russert, Mitchell and Gregory .. and a stealth conspiracy is what I suspect occurred. I despise them and Fitz AND Walton .. none of them have the professional integrity of a gnat.
I;m with you on this starwise. Furthermore, recall that Fat Dim Russert filed a false affidavit, with the knowledge of Fitzy, and Judge Walton was OK with that (he didn’t throw out the evidence...). Walton also allowed Fitzy to enter into evidence news papers articles that were found in a file of one of Libby’s aides for .....”state of mind evidence” but not for truth. So the judge allowed inference after inference after inference evidence from the prosecutor, but stated that the defendent could not question Mrs. Greenspan because her testimony would have led to inference, after inference after inference.
The double standard applyed by Judge Walton leaves us to only one conclusion — he was rooting for Fitzy and allowed Fitzy to go wild in the courtroom while hamstringing Team Libby.
The whole case was a disgrace, I hope the appeals court tell s LIbby you are free on bail, and then when the whole case is heard on appeal the apellets tell Libby......the verdict is overturned due to the outrageous behavior of the prosecutor and the lower court judge. Then, Fitzy gets frogmarched out of the court room straight to jail (HA! in my dreams).
My dreams, too ... ;)