Posted on 06/07/2007 12:28:23 PM PDT by The Blitherer
Scooter Libby was sentenced on Tuesday to thirty months in jail and a $250,000 fine. And I can’t much stand the bloodsports of American politics anymore.
At the time of his conviction, I wrote a small essay about my friendship with Scooter—others knew him better, but we had a genuine literary friendship, free from the politics that infects too much conversation in America these days. And I, along with many others, wrote a letter to the sentencing judge pleading for mercy. Bill Kristol has perhaps the strongest reaction to this week’s imposition of an enormous sentence. And Kristol’s furious indictment of President Bush for his failure to act seems exactly right.
But, then, why should the president act, when even much of the conservative press seems willing to forget the man who is Scooter Libby. Here, for instance, is the reaction on the webpages of National Review: “Libby? Heck, he’ll be all right, and a taste of low life might educate him some.” Rich? Ramesh? Jonah? Jay? Kathryn? Kate? Are any of you reading what your writers are saying? This is vile.
I was so angry and hurt that I thought I would write that I would never read National Review again. But it isn’t true. The world is too small not to continue to know the magazine, to read it, and to interact with it.
Still, this much is true: From the moment Scooter Libby was indicted, all the way down to this moment of his sentencing, I have judged the character of many acquaintances in the worlds of writers, public intellectuals, and conservative politicians—their courage and their trustworthiness—by a simple measure: whether or not they stood up for Scooter Libby.
The person who could write that line for National Review—“Libby? Heck, he’ll be all right, and a taste of low life might educate him some”—may be an interesting writer, and we might find that he’s a fun person to spend a little time with. But we also know now that he is not trustworthy when trust really matters, and we know that he is not brave.
“For little guys like Compean and Ramos, though, jail time is a life killer. No 100K directorships for them. They were disgracefully treated by an administration that often seems to want the approval of the Mexican narco-elites more than the respect & admiration of its own citizens. They should get pardons.”
The whole point in a nutshell had nothing to do with Scooter and everything to do with the less known who are less connected and thus less protected.
Commuting the sentence would leave Libby with a criminal record — a serious problem for someone who is a lawyer by profession. And if Libby doesn’t want the President to do the political damage that would very likely result from a pre-election pardon, then the President shouldn’t do that either. It’s quite likely that there’s been a behind the scenes agreement that Libby will be pardoned after the election.
Libby’s lawyers are now trying to get the judge to allow him to remain free on bond pending an appeal. Appeals take a long, long time, especially when many of the people involved want it to take a long time (in this case, more than they want to win). If they lose on that, he still has 2 months before he has to report to some “country club” prison. That leaves a maximum of 15 months in prison before the election. These guys have thought through the options and are going to do what’s best. We’re not necessarily in a position to see right now what’s best or why. A drawn-out appeal process could well stretch through the next 17 months, so if they win the on the bond request, that could end up meaning no prison, no pre-election pardon, and no criminal record for Libby even if loses the appeal (because he’ll get a post-election pardon), and possibly a win on appeal and no need for a politically awkward pardon at any time. As long as those possibilities are still on the table, I see no reason why Bush should feel pressure to issue a pardon right now (which would instantly eliminate the possibility of Libby’s conviction being overturned on appeal, which may be something Libby still very much wants to try for). It’s not like Libby’s being marched off to prison as we speak, and it’s not like he’s having to pay the mounting legal bills himself.
I havae spent a great number of years defending the president in exactly the way you are doing here. But like the little guy in the Swiffer commercial says, “I think it’s over”. He has no more markers to call in. This amnesty thing is the end.
It’s not a personal thing. I don’t feel a need to “defend the President” on any matter. And I have zero sympathy for his immigration law proposals (though I face the fact that nothing is going to significantly slow illegal immigration except dismantling our welfare state and employment regulatory structure, and President Bush has no power to make that happen, and neither does anyone else at this point). However, for the reasons stated in my previous post, it would make no sense to pardon Libby at this juncture.
IF Libby is asking the President to keep him from having to spend any time in prison, and IF his lawyers’ attempts to keep him free on bond pending appeal fail, THEN it would make sense for the President to give him a pre-election pardon. And IF Libby stays out pending appeal AND the appeal is still not decided in his favor by the day before the President leaves office, THEN it would make sense for the President to issue a pardon IF Libby wants it. But until all the “ifs” are settled, it wouldn’t make sense to issue a pardon, and we really have no reason to believe that Libby would welcome a pardon at this point. FReepers know a lot, but we don’t know everything :-)
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.