Is Lewis Libby essentially a political prisoner?

[Built_To_Last]

And so, should President Bush listen to the ‘concerns’ of some the letter writing former officials involved in foreign policy and the defense establishment, some quite prominent, and consider pardoning Libby? – As advocated in the linked article?

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=OTAzZWQ4Y2U1MTY0YzIyMjQ3NTUxYmZlY2IyMWY4ODc=

…Although he tried mightily, prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald never found enough evidence to charge Libby or anyone else with violating the Intelligence Identities Protection Act or the Espionage Act in the CIA-leak affair… And finally, the discrepancies between Libby’s grand-jury testimony and that of the journalists who contradicted him can be explained by differences in memory, and should not have resulted in perjury and obstruction-of-justice charges against Libby. Anyone who watched Libby’s trial knows it was a parade of conflicting memories, and reasonable people could disagree with the jury’s verdict…

**…Now, however, we have a new reason to call on President Bush to pardon Libby: Fitzgerald’s deplorable behavior in the days leading up to the sentencing. In pre-sentencing legal arguments, it became clear that Fitzgerald wanted the judge to sentence Libby, who had been found guilty of process crimes, as if he had instead been convicted of those more serious underlying allegations that formed the basis of the CIA-leak investigation. Fitzgerald ignored the fact that he had never brought charges under the Intelligence Identities Protection Act or the Espionage Act, and wrote that the grand jury “obtained substantial evidence indicating that one or both of the statutes may have been violated.” He asked Judge Reggie Walton to treat Libby as if it had been proven that such crimes occurred.

The problem was that Fitzgerald not only did not charge Libby or anyone else with those underlying crimes, he never even offered any evidence in court that those crimes, as carefully defined by the statutes involved, ever happened…**

[Hentor_the_Barbarian]

Sure, in the sense that he committed a crime for which he was convicted in the service of a crime for which he wasn’t.

So, no, not in the sense that any typical person usually uses the term “political prisoner.”

Of course Bush will pardon him. It’s not a crime if it’s done by a Republican to fight off legitimate criticism of the Bush administration. No harm, no foul.

[Built_To_Last]

@Hentor the Barbarian

Sure, in the sense that he committed a crime for which he was convicted in the service of a crime for which he wasn’t.

So, no, not in the sense that any typical person usually uses the term “political prisoner.”

Of course Bush will pardon him. It’s not a crime if it’s done by a Republican to fight off legitimate criticism of the Bush administration. No harm, no foul.

On the political aspect of this – do you think this compares well to Sandy Berger and the stealing of classified documents from the National Archives?

[ElvisL1ves]

I’m enjoying the Bushies’ argument that “He was convicted of lying, but in a case in which no indictment was ever brought”!

Right, because his obstruction was *what * prevented that from happening. :rolleyes:

[Squink]

Fitzgerald’s deplorable behavior in the days leading up to the sentencing.

Ohh, the TRAGEDY!

[Built_To_Last]

@ElvisL1ves

I’m enjoying the Bushies’ argument that “He was convicted of lying, but in a case in which no indictment was ever brought”!

Right, because his obstruction was *what * prevented that from happening. :rolleyes:

Are you saying that no crime was proved because of lies – and as such it’s OK to assume that in a charge of perjury is a valid one related to that unproved charge - and based on conflicting testimony at that?

[RickJay]

@Hentor the Barbarian

Of course Bush will pardon him. It’s not a crime if it’s done by a Republican to fight off legitimate criticism of the Bush administration. No harm, no foul.

Not until the day before he leaves office, and if this had happened in 2003 he’d have let Libby rot in jail for his entire term. Bush doesn’t give a shit about Scooter Libby, he uses and throws away people’s lives like Kleenex.

[Gadarene]

Are you saying that no crime was proved because of lies – and as such it’s OK to assume that in a charge of perjury is a valid one related to that unproved charge - and based on conflicting testimony at that?

I’m guessing it’s okay to assume that charges of perjury, obstruction of justice, and false statements are valid ones because, y’know, he was convicted by a jury on those counts. Are you saying that you know better than the jury?

[ElvisL1ves]

@Built To Last

Are you saying that no crime was proved because of lies

Yes, which is why the charge matters.

and as such it’s OK to assume that in a charge of perjury is a valid one related to that unproved charge - and based on conflicting testimony at that?

Could you kindly rephrase that into comprehensibly grammatical form?

[David_Simmons]

@Built To Last

On the political aspect of this – do you think this compares well to Sandy Berger and the stealing of classified documents from the National Archives?

I hear this a lot and it’s a load of horse manure. Each case stands on its own. Maybe Berger should have been hanged, drawn, and quartered. What does that have to do with Libby?

[Little_Nemo]

To answer the title question; no, Lewis Libby is not a political prisoner. He was not imprisoned because of his political beliefs. He was convicted of specific actions that were against existing laws.

Did political motives exist? Almost certainly. Libby probably had political motives in mind when he committing his crime and Fitzgerald probably had political motives in mind when he investigated it. But the crime existed and a judge and jury found him guilty of it.

[Frostillicus]

@Built To Last

On the political aspect of this – do you think this compares well to Sandy Berger and the stealing of classified documents from the National Archives?

You violated one of the cardinal rules of right-wing nutdom. You forgot to refer to him as Sandy Burglar. Rookie mistake.

[Gadarene]

David Simmons:

Each case stands on its own. Maybe Berger should have been hanged, drawn, and quartered. What does that have to do with Libby?

Well, if the same judge sentenced them both, then he’s clearly a hypocrite, intellectually inconsistent, or a partisan lapdog.

Did the same judge sentence them both, Built To Last? Why don’t you go check. I’ll wait right here.

[Zoe]

Who here posting seriously doubts that Libby lied to the investigators?

[ElvisL1ves]

@Built To Last

On the political aspect of this – do you think this compares well to Sandy Berger and the stealing of classified documents from the National Archives?

You tell us.

[Squink]

@ElvisL1ves

Could you kindly rephrase that into comprehensibly grammatical form?

I think he’s trying to bring up the legal theory that administration officials can do no wrong; as described here:
Judge Told Leak Was Part of ‘Policy Dispute’

The lawyers said any conversations Cheney and the officials had about Plame with one another or with reporters were part of their normal duties because they were discussing foreign policy and engaging in an appropriate “policy dispute.” Cheney’s attorney went further, arguing that Cheney is legally akin to the president because of his unique government role and has absolute immunity from any lawsuit.

U.S. District Judge John D. Bates asked: “So you’re arguing there is nothing – absolutely nothing – these officials could have said to reporters that would have been beyond the scope of their employment,” whether the statements were true or false?

“That’s true, Your Honor. Mr. Wilson was criticizing government policy,” said Jeffrey S. Bucholtz, deputy assistant attorney general for the Justice Department’s civil division. “These officials were responding to that criticism.”

Cheney et al being above the law, there is by definition no crime they could have committed, so Libby could not have obstructed anything at all.

Of course, that’s all total horseshit, but it does seem to be the way that the folks who like to see CIA agents exposed are trying to defend Mr. Libby.

[David_Simmons]

@Gadarene

Well, if the same judge sentenced them both, then he’s clearly a hypocrite, intellectually inconsistent, or a partisan lapdog.

Well, they were different cases, involving different laws, different evidence, different circumstances and so on, so I don’t think I agree with this.

Sentences are, or at least should be, handed down according what the law says the punishment for the offense should be, not what you gave another person who violated a different law a few years ago.

According to what I heard the sentence for these ioffenses, perjury and obstruction of justice, is from 30 to 37 months. Libby was convicted by a jury that actually heard the evidence. They didn’t read about it in the Washington Times or hear about it on the O’Reilly Factor and they decided that the government had proved its case.

Who could ask for anything more?

[David_Simmons]

@Little Nemo

… Fitzgerald probably had political motives in mind when he investigated it.

It would be strange if Fitzgeral was out to get Libby for political reasons. He wasappointed by GW on the recommendation of a Republican senator from Illinois and confirmed by a Republican Senate. He was selected as Special Prosecutor by a Republican Deputy Attorney General. It’s true that that Deputy, James Comey, has since had some severe problems with the activities of the administration but Fitzgerarald was selected long before that arose. Comey could have selected Fitzgerald because they were together in the office of the US Attorney in New York.

Yeah, Fitzgerald was out to get the Republican administration.

[bouv]

Homer: I was a political prisoner!
Marge: How were you a political prisoner?
Homer: I kicked a giant mouse in the butt, do I have to spell it out for you?

[Little_Nemo]

I kicked a giant mouse in the butt, do I have to spell it out for you?

He wasn’t imprisoned but my brother-in-law has been permanantly banned from Chuckie Cheese for this same crime.