| May 2012 | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| S | M | T | W | T | F | S |
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | ||
| 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 |
| 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 |
| 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 |
| 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | ||
Lewis "Scooter" Libby has been sentenced to 30 months in jail, and nobody has a good answer as to why:
Libby was convicted of perjury and obstruction of justice for lying to FBI agents and grand jurors about his role in revealing the identity of CIA officer Valerie Plame to reporters in 2003.
Notice he isn't convicted of revealing the identity of CIA officer Valerie Plame. That's because he didn't do it. The person who did that identified himself - it was Richard Armitage, former Deputy Secretary of State. No, Libby isn't convicted of lying about something he allegedly did. He is convicted of lying about something that he didn't do. And by lying, is meant, he made a misstatement of fact, which could easily be due to a lapse in memory about something that took place years ago, in 2003.
The name of the formerly covert officer was leaked to reporters in 2003 after her husband, former Ambassador Joseph Wilson, began criticizing the Bush administration's war policies.
Special prosecutor Fitzpatrick argued for a prison term, saying, "Why did he lie? People lie when they do something wrong. He knew what the investigation was about."
"Something wrong?" What's Fitzgerald talking about? He knows Armitage, not Libby, leaked Plame's name. Fitzgerald couldn't even make a court case that Libby had leaked Plame's name.
In morning hearings, Libby's defense team argued that it was unfair to increase the sentence simply because the investigation was serious.
"No one was ever charged. Nobody ever pleaded guilty," attorney William Jeffress said. "The government did not establish the existence of an offense."
Bingo.
[U.S. District Judge Reggie B.] Walton disagreed, saying that by that reasoning, witnesses benefit if they aggressively obstruct investigations so prosecutors can't make their case.
"I just can't buy in on that being good social policy," Walton said. "It's one thing if you obstruct a petty larceny. It's another thing if you obstruct a murder investigation."
Walton's decision will have the opposite of the effect he intends. Instead of promoting cooperation between civilians and authorities who are investigating something, he is showing that it's dangerous to say anything to them, because a lapse in memory can be absurdly construed as evidence of lying.
Walton is showing that the only safe thing to do when talking to authorities who are investigating something, is to clam up and call your lawyer.
And the kicker is that Joe Wilson, whose allegations started all this, has just been rebuked by the Senate for his deceptions.
WASHINGTON -- In a rare rebuke of a public official by name, the Senate Select Intelligence Committee has issued a scathing report blasting former Ambassador Joseph Wilson IV.
The report claims Wilson misled the public and the intelligence committee about his trip to Niger in 2002 on behalf of the CIA to investigate claims that Iraq was seeking to purchase uranium in Africa.
...Perhaps the most damning conclusion of the Senate report has been known for nearly three years, but has remained classified until now. In the initial July 2004 report, the Senate committee reported that the intelligence community "used or cleared the Niger-Iraq uranium intelligence fifteen times before the President's State of the Union address and four times after, saying in several papers that Iraq was 'vigorously pursuing uranium from Africa.'"
Despite that finding, Democrats led by Michigan Sen. Carl Levin blasted President Bush for the "16 words" in the January 2003 speech that described Iraq's efforts to acquire uranium from Africa, calling them an effort to "cherry-pick" intelligence and to "mislead" the country and the world in a "rush to war."
Walton's decision is a travesty of justice that dishonors him, falsely convicts a good man, and does great harm to the ability of our citizens to safely cooperate with authorities who are conducting investigations.
6-7-07: P.S. Evidently it wasn't a crime to reveal Plame's name, since Armitage, who admitted doing it, hasn't been convicted of any crime.
#1
#2Question: What kind of man lets his friend go to jail for a crime he committed?
Answer: Dick Cheney (if you can call that a man)
#3#1, #2 - to make your arguments, you both have to state things that the court did not find to be true:
Ok, so he helped Cheney out a covert CIA agent during war time, but BIG FRIGGIN’ DEAL!
Cheney wasn't found to have outed a covert CIA agent, and neither was Libby. Armitage did that, and evidently it wasn't even a crime, since the court didn't convict him of anything.
This is outrageous! Yes, Libby obstructed justice and made false statements under oath, but where is the crime?! As far as I can see all Libby did was lie under oath about something meaningless! Bush is right, this is nothing but political theater! Ok, so he helped Cheney out a covert CIA agent during war time, but BIG FRIGGIN’ DEAL! Call me old-fashioned, but no one should go to jail for that! Bush should do the honorable thing and pardon him at once! Let’s put country before party!!