Libby sentenced to 30 months in prison

[clambake]

If he doesn't pardon him, then he must be worrying about the whispering and watercooler talk. Maybe vanity is kicking in.

[ChumpDumper]

I personally blame the Bush-appointed prosecutor for filing the charges and the Bush-appointed judge for sentencing Scooter.

[clambake]

I personally blame the Bush-appointed prosecutor for filing the charges and the Bush-appointed judge for sentencing Scooter.

That's funny. I'm upset as well.

[ChumpDumper]

Goddam activist partisan hacks.

[Yonivore]

I'd like to believe that, but all I say was political revenge in the Libby case.

1) Case was to find the leak.
2) Leak was found to be Richard Armitage early on, yet investigations continued.
3) Libby was indicted and convicted for what could really be misspoken words and a poor recollection.

I believe they didn't stop because Armitage was a critic of president Bush's invasion. They wanted to find someone close to president Bush or vice president Cheney as a political attack, not justice.

Pretty bad to resort to convicting an innocent man of an ordeal over his word taken as lies. What is this countries justice coming to? Pretty bad when the liberals use the justice system as a political weapon.

I'm having a little difficulty understanding all the surprise and angst over Libby's sentencing. A duly cons uted jury heard the evidence in front of a judge. Libby and his lawyers presented their defense. That jury found that Libby committed perjury and obstruction of justice. That's the way the criminal-justice system works in this country.

A 30-month sentence for obstruction of justice and perjury is not out of line, especially for multiple counts. Both are serious crimes against the rule of law, and should be punished accordingly.

Whether or not I think Libby deserves a pardon or was railroaded by an overzealous prosecutor is immaterial. A jury convicted Libby, and they followed the case better than anyone. I'm going to accept the result of the justice system and respect that decision.

Libby has plenty of opportunity to appeal the decision. If it's wrong, it will likely be overturned.

And, finally, if George Bush wants to pardon Libby, I don't see a problem with that, either. That's part of due process as well, and it's a political decision for George Bush. I think it would be a political mistake to offer one before the appeals run out. There are extenuating cir stances that warrant consideration of a pardon -- but that doesn't mean that Libby should have gotten a pass from the judge after the convictions. (It certainly would be a more supportable pardon than most of those granted by Clinton at the end of his term.)

If you support the rule of law, then this sentencing was a foregone conclusion. He was convicted weeks ago, and people who get convicted on these charges get sentenced to prison time, especially those who work in the executive branch of our federal government. I really do fail to see the reason for all the current hysteria over this sentencing.

[DarkReign]

I'm having a little difficulty understanding all the surprise and angst over Libby's sentencing. A duly cons uted jury heard the evidence in front of a judge. Libby and his lawyers presented their defense. That jury found that Libby committed perjury and obstruction of justice. That's the way the criminal-justice system works in this country.

A 30-month sentence for obstruction of justice and perjury is not out of line, especially for multiple counts. Both are serious crimes against the rule of law, and should be punished accordingly.

Whether or not I think Libby deserves a pardon or was railroaded by an overzealous prosecutor is immaterial. A jury convicted Libby, and they followed the case better than anyone. I'm going to accept the result of the justice system and respect that decision.

Libby has plenty of opportunity to appeal the decision. If it's wrong, it will likely be overturned.

And, finally, if George Bush wants to pardon Libby, I don't see a problem with that, either. That's part of due process as well, and it's a political decision for George Bush. I think it would be a political mistake to offer one before the appeals run out. There are extenuating cir stances that warrant consideration of a pardon -- but that doesn't mean that Libby should have gotten a pass from the judge after the convictions. (It certainly would be a more supportable pardon than most of those granted by Clinton at the end of his term.)

If you support the rule of law, then this sentencing was a foregone conclusion. He was convicted weeks ago, and people who get convicted on these charges get sentenced to prison time, especially those who work in the executive branch of our federal government. I really do fail to see the reason for all the current hysteria over this sentencing.

Oh

My

Dear

GOD!

IMPARTIALITY POLICE!! ALERT! ALERT!

[Yonivore]

Oh

My

Dear

GOD!

IMPARTIALITY POLICE!! ALERT! ALERT!

Don't faint, I still think it was an abusive and pointless investigation (of Libby) by Fitzgerald and that Libby was wrongly prosecuted not because he is innocent but because no one else in the whole affair was prosecuted for crimes that ostensibly exceeded those of Libby -- presuming the underlying premise of the investigation had, in fact, been true -- related to the unlawful disclosure of the iden y of a superty-duper secret agent. And, while I'm still in favor of a pardon, should it come to that, there is another reasonable alternative being floated.

Bill Otis is a career prosecutor, and served as member of the Attorney General's Advisory Committee on the Sentencing Guidelines under both parties. As a special counsel to the first President Bush, he worked on issues relating to the pardon of Casper Weinberger.

In an op-ed in today's Washington Post Otis argues that Bush should not pardon Scooter Libby, but that his sentence is excessive and should be commuted. Specifically, the prison term should be eliminated and Libby should pay the fine.

Bill Otis opposes a pardon because he wants to uphold the "fundamental rule of law that the grand jury is en led to every man's evidence." However, the sentence seems quite excessive. As he notes:

This was an unusually harsh sentence for a first offender convicted of a nonviolent and non-drug-related crime. Sandy Berger, national security adviser to President Bill Clinton, was not sentenced to prison for sneaking do ents out of the National Archives, destroying them and then lying to investigators. For his actions, Berger received no jail time, a fine one-fifth of that imposed on Libby and 100 hours of community service.

Moreover:

[Libby] is by no stretch a danger to the community, as "danger" is commonly understood. He did not commit his crime out of greed or personal malice. Nor is his life one that bespeaks a criminal turn of mind. To the contrary, as letters to the court on his behalf overwhelmingly established, he has been a contributor to his community and his country.

In my view, the fact that Libby's process crime seems to have occurred during a senseless and arguably abusive process -- the special prosecutor already knew the answer to the question he was supposed to be investigating -- would, when coupled with Libby's service to the country, support a pardon should Bush decide to grant one. However, this suggested "middle ground" also has much to recommend it.

[ChumpDumper]

In an op-ed in today's Washington Post

"Special counsel for Bush's daddy thinks Libby should get off easy."

[Nbadan]

Libby was the only exec prosecuted in this case because most of the adminstration took the Reagan defense on the stand and were never called to the rug by our lame-ass M$M. The pieces of the puzzle are all out there pointing back to the office of the V.P. but the lazy M$M can't be expected to actually do their job this decade and do a little work putting all the pieces together.

[Yonivore]

Libby was the only exec prosecuted in this case because most of the adminstration took the Reagan defense on the stand and were never called to the rug by our lame-ass M$M. The pieces of the puzzle are all out there pointing back to the office of the V.P. but the lazy M$M can't be expected to actually do their job this decade and do a little work putting all the pieces together.

Fitzgerald knew, before he even questioned Libby that Armitage was the culprit.

Plus, there were people outside the administration that were complicit in the alleged crime. Most in the media.

Why weren't any of these people prosecuted?

[clambake]

Fitzgerald knew, before he even questioned Libby that Armitage was the culprit.

Plus, there were people outside the administration that were complicit in the alleged crime. Most in the media.

Why weren't any of these people prosecuted?

Libbys defense team were the ones that tried to implicate the media (and failed). I recall a court brief filed just a few weeks ago that Fitzgerald refers to her as "covert agent Valerie Plame Wilson".

She stated in her testimony before congress that she was "a covert agent of the CIA". This was backed up by a statement read at the hearing and approved by CIA director Michael Hayden. Why would Hayden back that up if it weren't true?

Has anyone seen the footage of a 1999 speech before the CIA given by Bush senior? He said he had nothing but contempt and anger for those who betray the trust by exposing names and sources. He called them the most insidious of traitors.

[DarkReign]

Don't faint, I still think it was an abusive and pointless investigation (of Libby) by Fitzgerald and that Libby was wrongly prosecuted not because he is innocent but because no one else in the whole affair was prosecuted for crimes that ostensibly exceeded those of Libby -- presuming the underlying premise of the investigation had, in fact, been true -- related to the unlawful disclosure of the iden y of a superty-duper secret agent. And, while I'm still in favor of a pardon, should it come to that, there is another reasonable alternative being floated.

Bill Otis is a career prosecutor, and served as member of the Attorney General's Advisory Committee on the Sentencing Guidelines under both parties. As a special counsel to the first President Bush, he worked on issues relating to the pardon of Casper Weinberger.

In an op-ed in today's Washington Post Otis argues that Bush should not pardon Scooter Libby, but that his sentence is excessive and should be commuted. Specifically, the prison term should be eliminated and Libby should pay the fine.

Bill Otis opposes a pardon because he wants to uphold the "fundamental rule of law that the grand jury is en led to every man's evidence." However, the sentence seems quite excessive. As he notes:


Moreover:


In my view, the fact that Libby's process crime seems to have occurred during a senseless and arguably abusive process -- the special prosecutor already knew the answer to the question he was supposed to be investigating -- would, when coupled with Libby's service to the country, support a pardon should Bush decide to grant one. However, this suggested "middle ground" also has much to recommend it.

Well, youre certainly en led to your opinion and you may just end up being right. I was just giving you props for seeing the forest for the trees, instead of being a political hack.

[xrayzebra]

Libby was the only exec prosecuted in this case because most of the adminstration took the Reagan defense on the stand and were never called to the rug by our lame-ass M$M. The pieces of the puzzle are all out there pointing back to the office of the V.P. but the lazy M$M can't be expected to actually do their job this decade and do a little work putting all the pieces together.

Dan, remember NO CRIME WAS
COMMITTED. Got it.

[Yonivore]

Libbys defense team were the ones that tried to implicate the media (and failed). I recall a court brief filed just a few weeks ago that Fitzgerald refers to her as "covert agent Valerie Plame Wilson".

She stated in her testimony before congress that she was "a covert agent of the CIA". This was backed up by a statement read at the hearing and approved by CIA director Michael Hayden. Why would Hayden back that up if it weren't true?

Has anyone seen the footage of a 1999 speech before the CIA given by Bush senior? He said he had nothing but contempt and anger for those who betray the trust by exposing names and sources. He called them the most insidious of traitors.

So, that still begs the question, why wasn't Armitage prosecuted? Libby didn't reveal her name.

[Yonivore]

Well, youre certainly en led to your opinion and you may just end up being right. I was just giving you props for seeing the forest for the trees, instead of being a political hack.

Thanks.

[George Gervin's Afro]

Dan, remember NO CRIME WAS
COMMITTED. Got it.

uh ray isn't obstructing justice still a crime? lying under oath is something many of those on the right were outraged when slick willy was in office. i guess since this a republican then it's ok.

[clambake]

So, that still begs the question, why wasn't Armitage prosecuted? Libby didn't reveal her name.

Some people are more expendable than others. I'm sure there was a backroom discussion. I'll bet Libby understands that, now.

[Yonivore]

Some people are more expendable than others. I'm sure there was a backroom discussion. I'll bet Libby understands that, now.

So, this had nothing to do with justice then.

I'm back to saying Fitzgerald engaged in an abusive prosecution of Libby because, since he had already solved the underlying question of who revealed Plame's name, there was no reason to question Libby in the first place.

[clambake]

So, this had nothing to do with justice then.

I'm back to saying Fitzgerald engaged in an abusive prosecution of Libby because, since he had already solved the underlying question of who revealed Plame's name, there was no reason to question Libby in the first place.

You don't hear any outrage from the administration. It's clear that this decision has been approved. I think it sheds light on what we don't know.

[Yonivore]

You don't hear any outrage from the administration. It's clear that this decision has been approved. I think it sheds light on what we don't know.

So, now, you're claiming Fitzgerald was a pawn for Darth Cheney?

C'mon, there is absolutely no right response from the adminstration on this matter and you know it. Silence is the most sensible option.

Anyway, the administration has left the door open to a pardon. That's not insignificant.

[clambake]

So, now, you're claiming Fitzgerald was a pawn for Darth Cheney?

Never said that. Some animals eat their cubs.

C'mon, there is absolutely no right response from the adminstration on this matter and you know it. Silence is the most sensible option.

If they had a right response, I'm sure they'd state it. A little credibility would be a welcome change.

Anyway, the administration has left the door open to a pardon. That's not insignificant.

What is so significant about something that everybody expects to happen?

[ChumpDumper]

Let's not be disingenuous here. There were multiple leaks that needed to be investigated. Fitzgerald did what law and order types claim they want from a prosecutor.

Scooter has a JD from Columbia. He knew what he was getting into.

[Oh, Gee!!]

If Bush does pardon Libby, will that action save his law license?

[ChumpDumper]

Doubtful.

Libby can spend the rest of his life writing books, giving speeches, teaching Neocon 101 at UC and commenting for Fox News.

Mourn not for Scooter.

[Oh, Gee!!]

He could be Dean of the Law School at Liberty U.