Libby's sentance commuted

**Gawain of Orkeny** · 07-04-2007, 23:03

Libby was convicted by a jury. Think you know better than them?

On what charge? Did anyone get convicted of the original so called crime?

As for "no one was found guilty of the charges that started the investigation," ever heard the expression that it's not the crime, it's the coverup that gets you?

What cover up? Just for the sake of accuracy, please remember the following.

1. Valerie Plame-Wilson was NOT a covert CIA operative at the time she was "outed". Every bartender in Georgetown knew she was CIA because she told them all. Heck, she waited all the way to the third date to tell Joe she worked for the CIA. She was a desk jockey at Langley, not some deep-cover spook. She did not (and does not) meet the statutory definition and therefore could not be "outed".

2. Fitzgerald knew very early in the investigation who the original source was, and it wasn't Libby, Cheney, Rove or Bush. It was Richard Armitage, a Clinton appointee.

3. History has shown that Reagan was a lousy judge of judges. Several of his picks turned out to be ultra-liberal.

So what we have here is the ultimate political witch hunt. Fitzgerald knew very early on, long before even interviewing Libby or anyone else, that no crime had been committed and the identity of the original source. The investigation should have stopped right then and there. Fitzgerald simply kept going until he "got" someone on a pure process crime. Fitzgerald had some evidence excluded for purposes of trial that he then wanted included for purposes of sentencing. In other words, Libby got "Nifonged".

Libby was essentially convicted for having a different memory of events than Tim Russert (and it's been shown that Russert's account of events doesn't pan out).

**Tribesman** · 07-04-2007, 23:12

What cover up? Just for the sake of accuracy, please remember the following.

Would you like to make that following statement actually accurate before you advise people to remember things that are not factual

**Marshal Murat** · 07-04-2007, 23:26

Wall Street Journal Op.

Fitzgerald Doubles Down
Prosecutor asks for a sentence based on never-seen evidence.

Friday, June 1, 2007 12:01 a.m. EDT

I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby is due to be sentenced next week, and--just in time--Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald has decided this was a leak case after all. Last week he filed a brief with the court arguing that Mr. Libby should receive a prison sentence in line with crimes that neither he nor anyone else was ever accused of committing. If the court accepts Mr. Fitzgerald's logic, the sentence meted out in this fantastic case would at least double, to a minimum of 30 months. So it goes in a case brought by an unaccountable prosecutor now requesting an unreasonable penalty based on evidence he never introduced at trial. This is America?

Throughout Mr. Libby's prosecution, Mr. Fitzgerald insisted it made no difference to the case whether CIA officer Valerie Plame Wilson was undercover. At one pre-trial hearing, he went so far as to argue it would make no difference to the case "if [Ms. Wilson] turned out to be a postal driver mistaken for a CIA employee." He also objected to defense requests for documents concerning her status, insisting this was a perjury trial, not a trial about leaking classified information.

His stonewalling on this point before the trial led the defense to seek an instruction from the judge barring the prosecution from discussing the nature of Ms. Wilson's job at the CIA. But now that the time for sentencing has come, Mr. Fitzgerald has decided that Ms. Wilson's role is relevant after all..

**Watchman** · 07-05-2007, 00:00

Originally Posted by Wall Street Journal Op.

This is America?

Sure, unless there's something wrong with my map. So's Gitmo. Isn't it exciting to have such a varied, dynamic and multifaceted legal system ?

**KukriKhan** · 07-05-2007, 00:16

Originally Posted by Watchman

Sure, unless there's something wrong with my map. So's Gitmo. Isn't it exciting to have such a varied, dynamic and multifaceted legal system ?

So Gawain, since, according to you, the charges were based on false assumptions, the prosecutor was on a witch-hunt, the jury was stupid, and the judge was an automaton,

what is your take on POTUS only taking away the jail-time by commutation, rather than the full exoneration that a pardon would give? Is King George wrong too?