Pardon Libby

American Spectator ^ | 6-21-07 | R. Emmett Tyrrell, Jr.

[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.

*snip*

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."

*snip*

Well, thought I, the jury will sort things out. Unfortunately the brute prevailed, faulty logic and all.

[AmericaUnited]

I pardon at this point would be a huge mistake. Libby would forever be tagged as GUILTY. A respite from any jail time would be perfect, while his appeal is decided. He stands a very good chance of winning on appeal.

[AmericaUnited]

The only way a pardon would be good at this point is if the judge does not let him remain free pending the appeal.

A respite would let him stay out of jail pending the appeal.

[Savage Beast]

Yes. I agree with everything you say. Your explanation about pardoning Libby makes sense. And you're right--if that's what Bush is expecting, it is stupid.

I'm fed up with Bush too. I would vote for him again--today--if he ran against Gore, Clinton, Kerry--any of the Democrats--but if his refusal to close the Border and halt Illegal Immigration leads to serious catastrophe, I won't be able to say that.

[Savage Beast]

But why put him through all this? And where is that Bush loyalty?

[Savage Beast]

Okay. That makes sense.

[Savage Beast]

Aren’t there similarities between Libby’s prosecution and the Duke lacrosse players’ prosecution? Could the outcomes be similar?

[Savage Beast]

From what I’ve seen of Chertoff he wins the Bush Freakshow Prize.

[AmericaUnited]

If a person at that level and with that access to excellent legal services can be convicted in a case where no crime was committed in the first place and then be incarcerated before even his first level of appeal then what chance do you and I stand?

Actually, if it was you or I, since we're not 'trophy scalps', we would not have even been indicted. FitzFong/Comfy had a personal vendetta against Libby.

[Constitutional Patriot]

“Everyone from the prosecutor,the Judge ,the Jury were under the shadow of the DNC who cooked up this scheme.”

A preview of the American legal system once the democrat party is entirely in control. Criminalization of political differences. Stalin is looking up through the flames and smiling at this.

[saganite]

I suspect he will get pardoned but if Libby has excellent grounds for getting the verdict overturnd wouldn’t you rather that happen? Can you imagine what a slap in the face of Fitz and his persecution, I mean prosecution, that would be? A tremendous victory for the administration as well. If the pardon is issued before the appeal Bush will face the standard drubbing in the press and the aura of the conviction will always hang over Libby. I think it’s worth the wait.

[Savage Beast]

I think you’re right. ~S

[Ditter]

When the RNC calls me later today to ask for a donation (and they will) along with telling them to pass a message to GWB telling him NO AMNESTY, I am going to include PARDON LIBBY!

[Grampa Dave]

Pardon Libby!

Then Nifong Fitzy!

[SERE_DOC]

IMHO screw Libby and all the other crooks in DC

How about a pardon for the 2 cops in prison for shooting that Mexican illegal alien / drug smuggling turd

[jwpjr]

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?

[Steve_Seattle]

I'm not sure whose words you were quoting in your post (Fitz's?), but the argument about Mitchell's testimony requiring the jurors to make a series of "speculative inferences" is hooey. Fitz's own closing remarks were a series of speculative inferences that departed from the actual testimony and evidence.

Mitchell's testimony should have been allowed, not as proof that Plame's identity was widely known, but that the CLAIM had been made by an associate of Russert. And, yes, they should have admitted into evidence her later denial. While not conclusive, this touches on the credibility of Russert and Mitchell.

[Steve_Seattle]

"Russert clearly remembered first reading about Mrs. Wilson in the Novak column. “I said, Wow, look at this, this is really significant, this is big,” he testified."

I'm convinced that Russert is wrong about this. Ari Fleischer and several reporters testified that the news about Plame was not initially considered particularly significant, an interesting sidelight, but immaterial to Wilson's basic claims.

Plame's role only became a big deal AFTER reporters and Wilson concocted the "outing" theory, and hence raised the possibility that a deliberate crime had been committed in revealing her identity.

So I think Russert is projecting a later realization back into his first reading of the Novak story. Based on what else we know of his memory, I think this is highly likely.

[STARWISE]

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.

[Laverne]

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).

[STARWISE]

My dreams, too ... ;)