Not surprisingly, Scooter Libby was found guilty of four of the five counts facing him.
This show trial was not about Libby and whether he "outed" Valerie Plame. In fact, he was acquitted of making false statements, but convicted of lying to FBI agents, obstructing justice, and perjury. How one can not make false statements but be convicted of lying to FBI agents is a new one.
Sadly, this witch hunt has been about Fitzgerald's inability to indict anyone higher in the administration. I hope President Bush pardons Libby.
What others are saying:
Blue Crab Boulevard points out that those cheering today's verdict should think hard about the implications of prosecuting someone when the underlying crime has never been proven.
The droolers at the Carpetbagger Report cry that Libby might get pardoned (I hope so) and, as usual, get their facts wrong:
Have White House critics been vindicated?
You better believe it. Dick Cheney’s office became, to borrow a phrase, a “criminal enterprise.” They orchestrated a smear, leaked classified information, put an undercover CIA agent at risk, lied about it, and broke the law. For an already-failed presidency, today’s verdict inches Bush a bit closer to the “worst ever” top spot.
Not to confuse these guys with facts, but there was no leak (the executive can't "leak" classified information. When he publicizes it, it is, by definition, no longer classified). It's never been proved that Plame was a covert agent. Not only that, but Libby wasn't Novak's source for the column. Richard Armitage--no friend of this administration--was the source, yet he wasn't indicted. The truth is that Fitzgerald was hellbent on indicting a high-ranking person in the administration--Karl Rove, Dick Cheney, or the President himself--and he came away with meaningless convictions against a guy no one heard of. Good going!
Captain Ed says the whole thing shows why special prosecutors are so abusive.
This brings to a close a three-year odyssey in which the only crime supposedly committed turned out not to be one at all, where the perpetrator was discovered before the current special prosecutor ever got the case, and the only person to face charges is someone who never leaked any information at all. It's about par for the course for special prosecutors, who have become a bane on our system of justice, operating without oversight and with no limitations, working until they find charges to file even -- as in this case -- no underlying crime was committed.
Not to say that Libby should have been let off the hook, if he indeed lied to investigators and the grand jury, as this jury concluded he did. Regardless of the pettiness of the probe, people cannot be allowed to lie to the police or under oath at hearings and trials. It undermines our system of justice even more than out-of-control special prosecutors.
Of course, I made this same argument in 1998, when Bill Clinton committed perjury during another court case. I notice that his defenders at the time now want to string up not just Libby, but also Dick Cheney, despite (a) Cheney breaking no laws, and (b) their formerly cavalier attitude towards perjury -- which Cheney never committed. Why would they want to impeach Cheney for not committing perjury, when they fought the impeachment of Bill Clinton after he indisputably committed perjury? (He pled guilty to it, in case some don't recall.)
Don't expect the moonbats to accept the idea that Cheney didn't commit perjury. The same people who think the government blew up the World Trade Center and that the 2004 and 2000 elections were stolen aren't going to give up their most cherished belief.
|