Sentence Libby to serve 2 years as President like last convicted perjurer
By gamecock Posted in Law | Scooter Libby — Comments (48) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
Promoted from diaries by Mark I. and Jeff Emanuel
Today’s verdicts finding Scooter Libby guilty of perjury is a travesty of justice as was the whole prosecution. Libby was the Chief of Staff for Vice-President Dick Cheney before he was indicted for perjury.
From the decision to appoint a special prosecutor due solely to press demands on behalf of a CIA employee who long ago was “outed” by her Husband and D.C. cocktail parties through Special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald’s decision to set up Libby for today’s events after he learned that Libby was not guilty of outing a CIA agent and that the State Department’s Richard Armitage was the person that outed Joe Clinton-Kerry lackey Wilson’s wife, Valerie Plame. Wilson had named his wife in Who’s Who, but other than that and the cocktail parties, she was in deep cover. Right. She was also more than five years removed from security work that implicates the law protecting identities of agents.
Read on . . .
One also has to question the competence of Libby’s attorneys and the adequacy of the Judge’s instructions.
Regrettfully, statements by jurors concerning a “fall guy” call into question either the control the judge had over the jury, their compliance with instructions to avoid publicity and/or the decision not to sequester the jury in the first place.
In any event, should Libby lose his appeals, he should be sentenced the same as the last convicted perjurer, Bill Clinton.
Libby should pay a fine, lose his law license if he has one, and be President of the United States until the next president is inaugurated.
(Originally posted at The HinzSight Report and cross-posted at Race 4 2008. Links below)
Mike Gamecock DeVine @ The Charlotte Observer
"One man with courage makes a majority." - Andrew Jackson
The HinzSight Report
The Minority Report
Race 4 2008
Even if he did what he is convicted of, it is much less than Berger - so I suggest half the sentence. (Damn, this whole Libby trial has me infuriated)!
Formally known as Deagle... "Golf is a way of life..."
"cool cash" Jefferson, "dollars 4 defense" Murtha, "Vegas deal man" Reid, and of course the ring leaders of the crooked money club - Bill $ Hill aka Bonnie and Clyde.
====
"Enlightened statesmen will not always be at the helm." -- James Madison
Mike Gamecock DeVine @ The Charlotte Observer
"One man with courage makes a majority." - Andrew Jackson
being the best for appeal? Do you think they will fly?
grounds will be the jury instructions coupled with discovery denied the defense especialy given the juror's claim of fall guy. The lack of sequestration also is called into play and the fact that the jurors may not have followed the instructions to not consider the political events surrounding same.
more later this weekend when I do a longer legal analysis
Mike Gamecock DeVine @ The Charlotte Observer
"One man with courage makes a majority." - Andrew Jackson
As I understand it, the judge would allow no discussion of whether there was an underlying crime that Libby was trying to cover up. How can that not be appealable? If there was no underlying crime - as certainly seems to be the case - then did Libby have a motive to lie? If he didn't have a reason to lie, then does that make any claims of bad memory more believable?
Seems to me if that discussion was permitted, Fitz could have suggested that Libby might have thought that there was an underlying crime and therefore had reason to lie. But at least it seems like that all should have been part of the trial to me. (IANAL BTW)
then didn't let the defense call Andrea Mitchell who has said everyone knew who Plame was.
One problem the defense has is that they opened the door by referring to Libby as a fall guy in opening statement.
more later
Mike Gamecock DeVine @ The Charlotte Observer
"One man with courage makes a majority." - Andrew Jackson
...wasn't Clinton acquitted of perjury?
I think he ended up pleading no contest to some kind of contempt charge, he was fined and referred to the AK bar, and had his lisense suspended for a while (can't remember how long, but I am pretty certain he has it back now or could have it back).
but while former President Clinton porbably spent TIME in an Alaskan Bar, he never held a law license there. You probably meant to say AR...
Mike Gamecock DeVine @ The Charlotte Observer
"One man with courage makes a majority." - Andrew Jackson
While it think its kinda weak to charge a guy with perjury when you cannot find any evidence on the most serious charges, Mr. Libby shouldn't have lied. Maybe he's the most forgetful person in the country, or the most stupid. But I suspect he probably just plain lied. Give him the max.
You know that he hadn't committed any other crime. He knew he hadn't committed any crime. But who knows, he might have lied about not committing it, right? So give him the max.
That's as dumb as this entire Fitzmas pile of crap.
I meant what I said and I said what I meant. An elephant's faithful 100 percent.
People defending a guy that committed a crime and the accused lying when theres no reason to lie. If you don't like the laws, then have them changed.
There is nothing wrong with railing against a miscarriage of justice. Fitz knew Scooter wasn't the leaker when he took the job!!!! The fact that he got Scooter to say that he heard it here first, and that she said such and such, and that he didn't say that to so and so, while so and so said yes he did does not make him guilty of perjury.
And though this jury convicted him of perjury, it doesn't mean that he is guilty. Only that a bunch of brain dead DC Democrats can be fed a line of fall guy crap by a vindictive prosecutor and fall for it hook line and sinker. And that they don't care about justice, just sending a message. Fie on them all.
I meant what I said and I said what I meant. An elephant's faithful 100 percent.
It is the revulsion the lack of prosecutorial discretion--to be quite kind--engenders in this particular case. Compound that with an ineffectual, accomodating Republican Justice Department that normally doesn't care all that much about left-wing and Democratic leaks and national security breaches that actually represent threats to our nation (Berger, New York Times leaks from likely State Department hacks, and so forth), and this is the tipping point.
Fitzgerald grossly overreached. Many today here and elsewhere on the Right who claim not to see that reality will howl the loudest when the Left takes its next logical step and uses legal process to go after Bush, Cheney, or some other bigger fish over what amounts to policy change by prosecution.
Mike Gamecock DeVine @ The Charlotte Observer
"One man with courage makes a majority." - Andrew Jackson
But they dont speak to the "crime" in this case. If Libby didnt lie, then he wouldnt have been prosecuted. Arent we the party favoring personal responsibility? We should be blaming Libby for being so stupid.
Used against him? Also the jury was more than likley heavily biased. This did receive a little news coverage in the capitol after all.
______________________________
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777
Innocent people get charged and sometimes falsely convicted all the time. That's why we have an appeals process.
We live in a fallen world.
See Nifong at Duke.
Mike Gamecock DeVine @ The Charlotte Observer
"One man with courage makes a majority." - Andrew Jackson
The special prosecutor here decided to go after someone long after it was obvious the underlying offense had not been committed. Contrast with the current Justice Department, which opts not to go after those who commit the underlying offenses that represent actual breaches of national security. I'm in favor of both personal responsibility and a sense of proportion. Fitzgerald had neither.
I only hope the current Justice Department produces a few Democratic scalps for leaks of classified information in the next few months to bring a sense of proportion to this issue. I could care less about imprisoned liars although the sound of the wind howling through D.C. would be a comfort.
I hope they DO NOT go after democratic "scalps" to keep things in proportion. This would be further politicizing the legal system, which I am against. If there are crimes committed, especially ones pertaining to national security, then I fully support criminal charges.
It is time to show some proportion and take a few Democratic scalps if they are found to have leaked classified materials to the NYT. If lying is worthy of such prosecutorial zeal, I submit these offenses certainly require DOJ to go after the offenders and make certain they are punished accordingly.
But what about the obstruction charge? Thats the biggie that could carry 10 years.
Mike Gamecock DeVine @ The Charlotte Observer
"One man with courage makes a majority." - Andrew Jackson
Mike Gamecock DeVine @ The Charlotte Observer
"One man with courage makes a majority." - Andrew Jackson
Justice is the ideal; law is the instrument by which we attempt to achieve it. Sadly, law often fails. It failed tragically in the Libby case.
David Boies, who was Gore's lawyer during the 2000 Florida recount litigation, was on Hannity & Colmes tonight and said the case should never have been brought.
I couldn't agree more.
Let's root for the appeal.
I meant what I said and I said what I meant. An elephant's faithful 100 percent.
I do not think it would be fair at all to treat Mr. Libby like the philandering liar Mr. Clinton. Remember, Mr. Clinton is still consigned to being married to a certain senator. I would certainly not wish that fate on Mr. Libby.
Mike Gamecock DeVine @ The Charlotte Observer
"One man with courage makes a majority." - Andrew Jackson
as we now know that he dumped National Archive material in a dumpster does that not open him to perjury charges, which I think would not be double jeopardy as they are separate from the original charges and disposition.
Suitable and even handed outrage is welcome from those on the left who value honesty and transparency in government and who are not locked up every night in a padded cell.
"a man's admiration for absolute government is proportinate to the contempt he feels for those around him". Tocqueville
himself in open court at his sentencing. You raise a good point about double jeopardy since certainly the in-court statements were false and couldn't be construed as part of any plea agreement; it is shakier regarding the lies he told the federal agents, but still possible to prosecute there if those crimes were not part of his sweetheart deal.
My beef here is with more than the typical left-wing hypocrisy and Democratic dissembling. The GOP runs this DOJ, and the plea itself, let alone no follow up into other potential crimes not covered by double jeopardy, is unforgivable.
Fitz knows there is no underlying crime.
Libby knows there is no underlying crime.
Libby knows people will be brought in to testify as to their knowledge of his actions. Ergo, if he lies to the Grand Jury, some contradictory assertion will likely come to light, exacerbating the whole affair (i.e. probability is high he’ll get caught). Telling the truth, on the other hand, defuses the whole affair, as there is no underlying crime.
To find him guilty, it seems to me, the jury had to believe that he was deliberately lying (as opposed to just NOT accurately remembering - there was after all, no semen-stained dress to forensically prove the possible lie). If he was doing that, there should logically be a reason.
A palpable reason would be to cover his tracks after having lied to federal investigators so he wasn’t sunsequently charged with obstruction of justice. Only, since there was no underlying crime, there should have been no reason to deliberately mislead federal investigators to begin-with either.
Another possible reason would have been just to protect his reputation from incidental slur by folks who thought there was something there that actually wasn’t there. If Libby was running for office, you might argue some validity to this reasoning, as candidates tend to do everything they can to put themselves in the best possible public light. I find it hard to believe, however, that a ‘behind-the-scenes’ guy like Libby would risk ten years in prison to avoid having people infer that there must have been something wrong, and they just couldn’t find it. They are going to say that anyway… convicted or not (only since he was convicted, they will infer that he was covering up for someone).
Which brings us to the third possible reason Libby might obstruct justice. It may have been to cover the tracks of someone in higher places who was actually responsible for the crime (to fall on his sword for the higher-up, as it were). This of course implies a much greater scope to this whole affair than just figuring out who outed Valerie Plame, since, once again, outing Plame was not a crime, and DOJ knew the answers to that and related questions before the investigation that found Libby guilty of obstruction of justice even began, as Armitage had (quite honorably) come forward and told all.
It therefore seems to me that the jury essentially convicted Libby because they had to feel he was covering for someone higher-up who had committed a crime that had not been (and has not been) discerned….. but which could have happened though we don’t have any hint of what it may have been if it had, in fact, happened.
So in other words, Libby was really convicted of failure to actively participate in a witch hunt.
I think I have it now.
Mike Gamecock DeVine @ The Charlotte Observer
"One man with courage makes a majority." - Andrew Jackson
"It therefore seems to me that the jury essentially convicted Libby because they had to feel he was covering for someone higher-up who had committed a crime that had not been (and has not been) discerned….. but which could have happened though we don’t have any hint of what it may have been if it had, in fact, happened."
And we won't know what happened until Scooter the Mob Lawyer Who is Afraid to Go to Jail spills all the dirty secrets about Cheney--according to the Leftie paranoids, that is. The jury and its media cheerleaders, never considering the possibility that there is nothing for Libby to reveal, seem to think that Cheney and Bush are praying that he will keep quiet until he can be taken care of with a pardon. Once again, the MSM template is going to leave them open to shock and surprise as this story continues. Not that this will stop them from shoehorning events into that template.
The jury thinks something is being covered up because Libbys defense team made the decision to imply that in the trial. His defense team basically made the case for the prosecution inadvertantly. If Libby was the "fall guy", then there must be someone behind everything right?
...was tried tentatively at the beginning of the trial and never really pursued. This is probably because the defense had nothing to back up the contention that Libby was set up as the "fall guy". Instead of concluding "there's no there there", the Cheney/Rove-obsessed prosecution, jury and MSM see thorough fingerprint-wiping as the reason for the lack of evidence of a coverup. Even if Libby had never claimed he was the fall guy, Denis Collins would have still popped up with "where's Rove?" after the verdict, because nothing else fits the "must be someone behind everything" template.
motion and appeal in combatting Fitgerald's closing. It does not effect, and even enhances Libb's chances re the jury instructions and the denial of discovery against NBC news and refusal to allow Andrea Mitchell to be called as a defendant.
Mike Gamecock DeVine @ The Charlotte Observer
"One man with courage makes a majority." - Andrew Jackson
I surely have never liked doing it, and I got on with my life more quickly.
A good spanking always got my attention, for a while, at least.
Being a whiner is simply not a productive way for me to spend my time. And I view those who chortled before but whine now as faux participants in the future of this great country.
If you can't help, DON'T HARM.
Mike Gamecock DeVine @ The Charlotte Observer
"One man with courage makes a majority." - Andrew Jackson
...something with poison in it, I think; with poison in it, but attractive to the eye and soothing to the smell! Heh, heh, heh, heh, heh, heh, heh!"
As long as we are comparing crimes, prosecutions and non prosecutions of government officials, it makes sense to re-read the final report of another independent counsel, the one assigned to investigate "Whitewater."
Recall that Whitewater was the name of a real estate development in which Bill Clinton and the current frontrunner for the Democratic Presidential nomination invested. Funding for the development came in part from Madison Guarantee, an Arkansas savings and loan.
The report identifies Arkansas thrifts as among the most troubled. “The proportional clean-up costs imposed on the American taxpayer by failed savings and loans like Madison Guarantee were among the nation’s highest. Arkansas had the third highest ratio of resolution costs to savings and loan assets at resolution, or percentage of bail out costs funded by the American taxpayer that could not be recovered through the failed institution’s own assets, exceeded only by failed institutions in Guam and Texas.
It also states:
L. William Seidman, a former chairman of both the FDIC and the RTC, said that “fraud had been found in sixty percent of the failed institutions, and that in half of those, it had been the main element in the institution’s demise. Phony appraisals, self-dealing, loans to family and associates, kickbacks and payoffs were rife.”
A link to the report is here:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/onpolitics/transcripts/whitewater_0...
So, a bank was looted, according to the special prosecutor in part because of conditions listed above.
In addition to investing in a deal funded at least in part by the bank, the current Democratic front runner was also, as memory serves, counsel to Madison Guarantee.
One entire part of the report covers "The Discovery and Removal of Documents from Vincent W. Foster Jr.'s Office".
Another section of the report deals with:
"THE WHITE HOUSE'S NON-COMPLIANCE WITH SUBPOENA REQUESTS FOR ELECTRONICALLY MAINTAINED DOCUMENTS"
A good strategy at this point would be to compare, item by item, the costs/damage to the nation of the Sandy Berger crime (theft of security documents from government archives), of the looting of Madison Guarantee, and of the non-issues in the Scooter Libby trial.
Incidentally, has betting begun on the position likely to be awarded Fitz should the Democrats win the White House in 08? Probably any one he wants.
Mike Gamecock DeVine @ The Charlotte Observer
"One man with courage makes a majority." - Andrew Jackson
and give him the same sentece as a man who actually threatened and breached national security, Sandy Berger. He did probation for a misdemeanor after he stole and destroyed original classified documents from the National Archives that were critical into the inquiry about 9/11.
Other than the unwarranted tragedy visited upon Libby, I have little sympathy for this Administration because it has failed to pursue and prosecute those like Berger and the NYT leakers who are true threats to our national security. But that's for a blog tomorrow or as soon as I can cool down a bit.