Pardon for Libby would send the wrong message
Do you think that a pardon for Libby “would send a message that it’s OK to attempt to thwart the criminal justice system if you’re an important player in Washington”?
USATODAY-Ex-White House aide’s lies violated the law, impeded federal inquiry.
A federal jury had barely finished pronouncing former vice presidential aide Lewis “Scooter” Libby guilty of perjury and obstruction of justice in March when Republican loyalists began calling for President Bush to pardon him.
Now, with Libby’s stiff sentence this week, the chorus is singing again. In Tuesday night’s GOP presidential debate, Sen. Sam Brownback and Rep. Tom Tancredo endorsed a pardon for Libby; several other candidates said they’d consider it. The Wall Street Journal, National Review, Weekly Standard and other conservative voices joined the clamor.
….Pardoning Libby would send a message that it’s OK to attempt to thwart the criminal justice system if you’re an important player in Washington. Washington already sends enough messages of that sort…..
Libby should serve the maximum sentence for not only lying under oath, but mainly for the charge of obstruction of justice. Libby took the rap for his immediate superior, Dick Cheney, over the issue of cooking the intell via Douglas Feith and his newly created office (created by Cheney), called “Office of Special Projects”, that led this country into a false neo con war. One example was the Niger comments in W’s state of the union speech about uranium. Had Libby not obstructed, Cheney and his house of lies would have collapsed as the evidence was clear. Had Cheney been implicated, his plan and ability to bomb Iran would have been greatly diminished.
Thats the tragedic part, Cheney and his war machine can continue.
Absolutely Bush should pardon Libby. The message to the American people would be that our criminal justice system can be hijacked by those in high places to orchestrate political gaming. Your average citizen would not be subjected to such abuse of power over a process crime. It is an outrage that Fitz presents a sentencing opinion as if Libby was prosecuted for the crime of outing a covert agent and he was not. Everything about this case is an abuse of power and the American people are slowly but surely coming to that realization as more details are exposed.
Wilson’s niger details have been exposed as a fraud which means Cheney had nothing to hide.
Hoads
FROM USA TODAY
It’s true that the prosecution of Libby was, like other famous Washington investigations before it, about a coverup without an underlying crime. It’s also true that his sentence —30 months in prison and a $250,000 fine —seems somewhat harsh for a first-time, white-collar offender. Even so, he doesn’t deserve a presidential pardon and shouldn’t get one.
While the lead-up to the trial is complicated, what Libby did is not. Simply put, the jury found ample evidence that Vice President Cheney’s former chief of staff lied to federal agents and a grand jury investigating the leak of the identity of CIA officer Valerie Plame. Libby, a veteran lawyer and high-placed Washington official, certainly knew he was supposed to tell the truth. He had excellent legal counsel. The jurors found it inconceivable that he simply had a faulty memory about the events.
Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald likened Libby’s lies to throwing sand in the face of an umpire, obscuring the ump’s vision. And this was no ballgame. If people were allowed to lie to the FBI, prosecutors and grand jurors with impunity, investigating crimes would become impossible.
Pardoning Libby would send a message that it’s OK to attempt to thwart the criminal justice system if you’re an important player in Washington. Washington already sends enough messages of that sort.
A pardon would also say that people who work for the White House are above the law if they think they’re doing the president’s bidding, because the president could always let them off the hook.
Some of those calling for a pardon are being hypocritical. The same people who believed it was right to impeach President Clinton over lies about sex now say it was wrong to prosecute a White House official for lies about irresponsibly leaking a CIA officer’s name in a political fight.
American justice as we see by Paris is a one way street.Tell me is a dumb lie more harmful to America then the willing destruction of sensitive material? Sandy Berger walks the streets of America with the knowledge of what Clinton knew before 9/11. After all he admitted that he read and destroyed the documents and yet he hasnt been questioned by the party of ethics and never will because ethics is a one way street.
Thanks Mike, I didn’t get here in time to post the comparison.
PARDON LIBBY NOW!
And while he’s at it:
PARDON COMPEAN and RAMOS then invite them to the White House for a Rose Garden ceremony to present the Medal of Freedom (of course, it’s image was tarnished by Tenet, but these two Border Agents would help to return it to its proper status).
Sandy Berger should of done time. Yet it was Bush people that made that call. Aad that fact should make you wonder what he destoyed?
But that does not have anything to do with the libby case. Two wrongs do make a right!
Whoa Bart Im not saying what Libby did was right nor do I like the idea that Wilson has gotten off the hook because of Libby. I just think that its time for Americans to get off the pot and demand fairness in our courts and Congress. I want to know the truth. If heads need to roll lets not look at political affiliation lets look at the crime.
John,
You can rely on USA Today. Here’s WSJ
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB118109064998325832.html?mod=googlenews_wsj
“It bears repeating that although Judge Walton increased the sentence on grounds that Mr. Libby had obstructed an investigation into the leaking of classified information, neither he nor anyone else was ever accused of that supposed crime. Mr. Libby, ironically, was right to believe he was in no jeopardy for the conversations he had with reporters in June and July 2003. Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald has repeatedly said that Mr. Libby’s lies prevented the government from learning the truth in that investigation. But Mr. Fitzgerald’s version of the truth has now been ratified by a jury, and still there is no evidence of an underlying crime. If Mr. Libby had not tried so hard to reconstruct passing conversations with several journalists months after the fact, it’s hard to imagine he would be in his current position, staring down a 30-month sentence and $250,000 fine.”
No underlying crime. This was a perjury trap and an egrecious example of abuse of power. Actually, I would prefer Libby to proceed with appeal but only if his sentence is delayed until after appeals process because only then can the truth of this outrageous injustice come to light.
Hoads
What Libby did was wrong bottom line. It is time we hold public officials to hire standard not a lower one!
This is not about Democrats or Republicans it is about our Country!
And both Parties spend too much time protecting their person!
Bart
Why will Bush not pardon COMPEAN and RAMOS?
BECAUSE HE WANTS OPEN BORDERS!
What everyone is not fully realizing is what Libby covered up! How big were the crimes that got us into an unwinnable war? We all know he is protecting Cheney!
Had he not successfully obstructed, what would his sentence had been for his war crimes?
Liberal Don under his own admission so did Berger. The problem is what is Berger covering up? We know the who since he worked for Bill Clinton. Dont you think he needs to tell the why? BTW Berger will be able to go back into politics in 2008.Coincidence?
Was not Berger tried too? Just because you think the evidence is the same doesn’t make it so.
And anyone who thinks that Joe Wilson is guilty of anything then they have UFO’s in their head or are sorely out of touch with reality.
Ah Caroline with your witty degrading comments. So you believe that Berger should not have to tell America what documents were destroyed even though they may do more damage to Bush then Clinton?
John,
I have no idea why Bush hasn’t pardoned the two border agents. Has he pardoned anybody since they were tried and convicted? And how do you equate conviction of two border agents out of some 10,000 to him wanting open borders…that is ludicrous!
Reading the reports of their actions, do you know why they left out of their original report that gunshots were fired that day?
Mike,
Witty degrading coments merit a response with witty degrading comments.
Did Berger go before the courts? Or are you of the belief that all the courts are evil, a la Teri Schiavo?
Yes he went before the courts coped a plea then paid a minimum fee and picked garbage up along side roads for 100 hours.Then being a person of questionable integrity gave up his Legal right to practice law w/o contest because it would have meant a real trial and that would have meant the disclosure of what documents he destroyed. America loses in the failure to find out what those documents were. And as to Wilson read:
Nevertheless, it now appears that the person most responsible for the end of Ms. Plame’s CIA career is Mr. Wilson. Mr. Wilson chose to go public with an explosive charge, claiming — falsely, as it turned out — that he had debunked reports of Iraqi uranium-shopping in Niger and that his report had circulated to senior administration officials. He ought to have expected that both those officials and journalists such as Mr. Novak would ask why a retired ambassador would have been sent on such a mission and that the answer would point to his wife. He diverted responsibility from himself and his false charges by claiming that President Bush’s closest aides had engaged in an illegal conspiracy. It’s unfortunate that so many people took him seriously.
This is from a Washington Post article.
Berger plead out on charges far more serious than those trumped up againt Scooter.
———–
WASHINGTON (CNN) — Former National Security Adviser Sandy Berger was sentenced Thursday to community service and probation and fined $50,000 for illegally removing highly classified documents from the National Archives and intentionally destroying some of them.
Berger must perform 100 hours of community service and pay the fine as well as $6,905 for the administrative costs of his two-year probation, a district court judge ruled.
———
What if those documents destroyed by Bergular would have helped to thwart 9/11? Or maybe shed light on WMD in Iraq that would have given reason to avoid war thus saving thousands of lives? We’ll never know.
But at least Scooter is being punished for doing nothing to a nobody desk jockey.
There is something else that was under reported about this case and thats the reason Plame was at Langly.It was because was she outed by a Soviet spy and was assigned administrative duties.Again this doesnt make what Libby did right but it does throw light on if Plame was really all that covert.But the media sells sensationalism and whats more sensational then and outed covert agent.
So how “outed” was Plame and when? More importantly who cares? If she’s a spy you keep your mouth shut!!!! this came from the upper echelons of the White House!! Why do Republicans have to ride their talking points down to the ground? Plamegate, the Downing Street Memo, Project for the New American Century. It was all about seeing what they wanted to see in order to Invade Iraq. Let Scooter Libby STAY IN PRISON!!!!
(And REAL conservatives are furious about Sandy Berger)
bb,
You seem to suggest that the reason for the utter disaster in Iraq is because someone in the former administration destroyed some classified document.
The implications, of course, are that (a) there was no other copy of that document; (b) no one else knew what was in it (possible, if Mr Berger wrote it himself); and (c) that it was of earth-shattering importance.
All unproven.
What is proven is that the current Dubious malAdministration lied to the House, lied to the Senate, lied to the American people, lied to the UN and lied to our allies for the purpose of justifying an unprovoked military assault, destruction and occupation of another sovereign nation.
So, bb, what’s your definition of treason?
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Bill,
I agree that outing a covert agent is like being pregnant: yes or no, true or false, A or B.
Not “just a little bit.”
David O’ Rear,
Bush did not lie:
http://www.factcheck.org/article222.html
And, if you think he lied, then all these Democrats did too: http://www.freedomagenda.com/iraq/wmd_quotes.html
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hjgquIN4Rrw
Your record is broken.
Mike,
Accept the truth:
Joe Wilson is guility of nothing other than making the GOP and the Bush White House look like fools. This is the kind of stuff that proves to the rest of the country that the GOP is a bunch of conspiracy theorist.
Here’s the facts about Berger:
1. They were copies and the original disc is still in possession of the gov.
2. He was charged with a misdemeanor
From wiki:
After a long investigation, the lead prosecutor Noel Hillman, chief of the Justice Department’s Public Integrity Section, stated that Berger only removed classified copies of data stored on hard drives stored in the National Archives, and that no original material was destroyed.[21] His and the FBI’s opinion of the case initially led The Wall Street Journal to editorialize against the allegations.[22]
Another fact:
Scooter Libby was convicted on four felony counts
For those conservatives/republicans a felony is a more severe crime than a misdemeanor.
Caroline,
Did you hear about Lorena Bobbit?
She stabbed a guy.
The judge gave her a missed the weiner citation.
hoads,
Those dot com opinion articles aren’t real sources. You can do better than that. I’ve seen you.
Niger did not own any nuclear materials to sell to ANYONE.
Iraq has an uranium mine and more uranium already processed.
They didn’t need to buy any more.
The amount of uranium alleged to have been sold to Iraq, would have taken at least six months to mine. That would have meant that both companies that mine and process Niger’s raw uranium ore, would have to stop all other actions for SIX FREAKEN MONTHS.
Half the annual supply of uranium produced by private companies in Niger sold to Saddam?????
And, you think that was kept secret???
Hey, Homer Simpson, what did you do at the uranium mine today?
“Oh, I made nuclear weapons for Sam Hussane … on my break while nobody was looking.”
RE: Berger and archives
In the few times I’ve been allowed access to original documents in an archive, none of them have been highly classified documents.
All of them were hand written documents that could not be replaced if I tried stealing them.
I was watched in a glass enclosed room. I was not allowed to even bring a pencil into the room. No paper. No jacket. No laptop. No camera. No pocket change.
I was not allowed to browse the originals.
I had to request the items that I wanted. The archive provided reasonable help for me.
Archives are kept under tight control. No body walks into a highly secured area and starts taking one of a kind CLASSIFIED DOCUMENTS OFF THE FLOOR.
The public and even professional researchers are not browsing around in pile of unorganized papers.
Mad Dog
I don’t care if Lorena Bobitt is a Democrat or Republican. SHE BROKE THE PENAL CODE!!!!
Well, that cuts it!
Mad Dog,
If you had bothered to look at the links, you will find that factcheck.org utilizing Senate Committee hearings, CIA report and the Butler Report concluded that indeed BUSH DID NOT LIE because the intelligence provided was not challenged by CIA or other intelligence and the Butler Report (U.K.) was deemed accurate and not based on forged Italian documents. Bush may have been wrong based upon the intelligence provided but he did not lie.
hoads,
The man lied.
He knew the 17 words used in the State of the Union were false.
Tenet and the CIA told him.
And, I don’t give a hoot about the conclusions of factcheck.org.
I check facts for a living.
No uranium being sold by Niger to Iraq. No nuclear program in Iraq.
MD
No reasonable person with unlimited access to world intelligence reports would have stated as fact, Iraq is making WMD in the massive amounts put forward by Bush et al.
At best, we had some very strong arguments for and against.
MD
From the Butler Report, page 104
The Iraqi response referred to above explained that,on 8 February 1999, Mr. Wissam
Al Zahawie,Iraq’s then Ambassador to the Holy See,as part of a trip to four African
countries,visited Niger as an envoy of the then President of Iraq to Mr. Ibrahim Bare,
the then President of Niger,in order to deliver an of•cial invitation for a visit to Iraq,
planned for 20 to 30 April 1999. (N.B. Mr. Bare passed away on 9 April 1999.)
According to the Iraqi information,no such presidential visit from Niger to Iraq took
place before 2003.
The Iraqi authorities provided the IAEA with excerpts from Mr. Al Zahawie’s travel
report to Niger. These excerpts support the above explanation by the Ambassador
regarding the purpose of his visit to Niger and do not contain any references to
discussions about uranium supply from Niger.
In order to further clarify the matter,the IAEA interviewed Mr. Al Zahawie on 12
February 2003. The information provided by the Ambassador about details about
his 1999 trip to Africa also supported the information obtained previously by the
Agency on this visit.
The demeanour of the Ambassador and the general tone of the
interview did not suggest that he was under particular pressure to hide or fabricate
information.
Mad Dog on the loose!
David,
Is that a good thing?
MD
Mad Dog,
It’s all about context:
BUTLER REPORT
(Page 123, Paragraph 499)
We conclude that…the statements on Iraqi attempts to buy uranium from Africa in the Government’s dossier, and by the Prime Minister in the House of Commons, were well-founded. By extension we conclude also that the statement in President Bush’s State of the Union Address of 28 January 2003 that: “The British Government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa” was well-founded.
Actually hoads it’s more than context.
Lord Butler fudged his bets better than a New York stock broker on ebay.
But, the IAEA did not.
“The investigation was centred on documents provided by a number of States that
pointed to an agreement between Niger and Iraq for the sale of uranium to Iraq
between 1999 and 2001. The IAEA has discussed these reports with the
Governments of Iraq and Niger, both of which have denied that any such activity took
place. For its part, Iraq has provided the IAEA with a comprehensive explanation of
its relations with Niger, and has described a visit by an Iraqi official to a number of
African countries, including Niger, in February 1999,which Iraq thought might have
given rise to the reports. The IAEA was able to review correspondence coming from
various bodies of the Government of Niger, and to compare the form, format,
contents and signatures of that correspondence with those of the alleged
procurement-related documentation. Based on thorough analysis, the IAEA has
concluded, with the concurrence of outside experts, that these documents, which
formed the basis for the reports of recent uranium transactions between Iraq and
Niger, are in fact not authentic. We have therefore concluded that these specifc
allegations are unfounded.
[IAEA GOV/INF/2003/10 Annex of 7 March 2003]
A quote also included in the Butler report.
Just a side note, how come we know who traveled where and when in detail, but we believe massive amounts of WMD escaped undetected from Iraq?
MD
Paragraph 500
“We also note that, because the intelligence evidence was inconclusive, neither the
Government’s dossier nor the Prime Minister went on to say that a deal between the
Governments of Iraq and Niger for the supply of uranium had been signed, or uranium
shipped.”
The intelligence evidence was inconclusive….
In early 1999, Iraqi officials visited a number of African countries, including Niger. The
visit2 was detected by intelligence, and some details were subsequently confirmed by
Iraq. The purpose of the visit was not immediately known. But uranium ore accounts for
almost three-quarters of Niger’s exports. Putting this together with past Iraqi purchases
of uranium ore from Niger, the limitations faced by the Iraq regime on access to indigenous uranium ore and other evidence of Iraq seeking to restart its nuclear programme, the JIC judged that Iraqi purchase of uranium ore could have been the subject of discussions and noted in an assessment in December 2000 that:
. . . unconfirmed intelligence indicates Iraqi interest in acquiring uranium.
Inconclusive
unconfirmed
and then:
We have been told that it was not until early 2003 that the British Government became
aware that the US (and other states) had received from a journalistic source a number of
documents alleged to cover the Iraqi procurement of uranium from Niger. Those
documents were passed to the IAEA, which in its update report to the United Nations
Security Council in March 2003 determined that the papers were forgeries:
Journalistic sources provided forgeries to the USA and other states…..
hoads,
I think you and I can disagree on this issue.
The aluminum tubes … all the machinery needed to process raw ore … the technology to move from yellowcake into something resembling fissionable material.
Lord Butler left the door open for several interpretations.
Never at any point does he says, We have confirmed intelligence that Saddam recieved fissionable material from Africa.
What is Lord Butler saying?
“Our reasons were good enough for me personally.”
Exactly what happens if Lord Butler says, “It was all a lie?”
Being a Lord of England, could he say that IF he found it to be true knowing the consequences included the fall of his government?
And, paragraph 503 pretty much rips the curtain away.
It contains the continueing assumption that since 75% of Nigers exports are uranium, Iraq was trying to get uranium.
The Lord ignores Niger’s discovery of oil during the same period.
From the bloody wikipedia… how low can I go?
Niger has oil potential. In 1992, the Djado permit was awarded to Hunt Oil, and in 2003 the Tenere permit was awarded to the China National Petroleum Company. An ExxonMobil-Petronas joint venture now holds the sole rights to the Agadem block, north of Lake Chad, and oil exploration is ongoing.
Might it be that oil and the UN Oil for Food program was on the agenda?
Niger is the poorest country in the world.
Not a highly likely scenario for Saddam. But, Saddam never was predictable to the US intelligence services, eh?
The US intelligence “community” never saw the Kuwait invasion coming.
The US intelligence “community” never thought Saddam was so afraid of the US post Desert Storm that they obeyed the orders to destroy WMD….
Wrong, wrong, and now…. 100% percent right??
Actually, wrong three times in a row.