And what of the lying antics of Mr. Wilson? The fool is so partisan he can't even see straight.

What a joke -- thank God Libby's sentence was commuted, and hopefully, pardoned too. As usual, the loony left is blowing smoke up their own arse.

I think that the commutation was to leave the possibility of reversal on appeal open. Had he been pardoned, the possibility of an appeal would have been wiped out.

But... but... but... no other case can be compared to Scooter! Jim the lefty said so! He said we can't compare all of Clinton's pardons either!

President Bush let the only person convicted for lying about the Iraq war,
Scooter Libby, go free," said Eli Pariser, Executive Director of MoveOn.org

One would not have to read any further to know how partisan and idiotic this person has to be. Scooter Libby in no way was convicted of lying about the Iraq war. Not even close.

In reading the comments over the last 24 hours it is more than apparent that the left, the progressives, the liberals and the Democrats are so consumed with hate, vengeance and pay back that they have earned the name "Defarge Democrats", reminiscent of the Jacobin crazy created by Dickens.

And what of the lying antics of Mr. Wilson? The fool is so partisan he can't even see straight.

And let's also not forget of the lying antics of one Valerie Plame Wilson and her three different versions of how her husband was recommended for the job in the first place. Why haven't we seen her called back to the witness stand to explain herself?

JR, it surprises you that MoveOn is clueless?

Paris Hilton served more time than Sandy Berger.

Paris Hilton served more time than Bill Clinton did for his perjury.

I feel like I've served hard tome since June 2003 just for having this monumental and utterly pointless waste of a case shoved down my throat for the last 4 f-ing years by the media....

Only difference is that I wasn't somebody's prison bitch.

/snark off

The appropriate comparison might not be to Paris Hilton, but to Victor Rita.

spin it anyway you want...maintain the illusion that Bush and Republicans stand for what they did under Reagan...but when Republicans lose Merle Haggard...Republicans have lost America
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RR_V7tR2Cww

Actually, many of us have lamented that Bush is no Reagan. I guess since we haven't sunk into the depths of BDS like you, NO-GO, that doesn't count.

so...folks are saying people like Berger and Clinton did not go to jail neither should scooter...
Who was it that commuted their sentences?
...and let's say(for pretend) they were convicted convicted in Federal Court and did not serve...

Is it your position that in Federal Court's people convicted of Federal offenses...should not go to prison because Clinton and Berger did not go?

Did you ever get a speeding ticket and try to use the defense" Your honor cars were going faster than me." ...Did it ever work?

I'd do Paris Hilton. I've had my tetanus shot.

This Victor Rita?
http://howappealing.law.com/Rita2007.pdf

Did you ever get a speeding ticket and try to use the defense" Your honor cars were going faster than me." ...Did it ever work?

God's honest truth, yes, I did. And I won. My argument: While moving with the speed of traffic, and when it was clear and obvious that other cars were passing me--including while being tailed by the officer (he was a lane to the right and behind me)--the officer unfairly singled me out and gave me a speeding ticket (68 in a 60).

Sort of like going after Scooter Libby while Richard Armitage goes blazing by Scooter, guilty as sin, in the fast lane....

When do we get to see the civil suits against Lyin' Joe Wilson and the super-secret spy Valerie Plame? Talk about hilarious.....

What's all the more amazing about this statement is that's it's coming from an organization that was founded on the belief that President Bill Clinton is above the law. Remember what "Moveon" meant at it's conception? "Move on" from investigating Bill Clinton's criminal actions.

That's the Victor Rita.

For a comparison, you can look here:
http://sentencing.typepad.com/sentencing_law_and_policy/2007/03/comparing_lewis.html

The lefties wouldn't know a law if it hit them in the face. This reaction of theirs is just all bluster and no bite. Does anyone care about this but us? No. Good for GW. Great for Scooter. ww

Speakin' of Sandy Ber[ger]ler...

... funny I fail to remember the left up in arms when it was Bush's justice dept that gave him a plea deal that included no jail time.

I'd do Paris Hilton. I've had my tetanus shot.

Heh. That may not be good enough.

Actually, I'd be more worried about herpes and chlamydia.

Okay! Now I believe I have seen every possible comparison to the Scooter Libby case except for the one that I see as most interesting. That would be the comparison of Fitzgerald vs Nifong. In both cases I see a runaway prosecuter motivated by partison politics.

Thoughts? Discuss.

Funny, I don't recall Berger being sentenced to 3 years in jail the way Libby was.

How is Berger relevant again? It seems you're using Bush's terrible judgment (to not prosecute Berger) to justify his terrible judgment (to grant clemency to Libby).

It's tantamount to arguing that Bush is just an idiot, therefore his continued idiocy is justified.

When do we get to see the civil suits against Lyin' Joe Wilson and the super-secret spy Valerie Plame? Talk about hilarious.....

I may be mistaken but I think Wilson/Plame have already filed a complaint against Libby.

If Libby wins on appeal that civil suit could get interesting. Even if he doesn't win, I look forward to Joe and Val being deposed under oath. At a minimum, Joe will be exposed on the record as the prevaricator he is, and Val can explain all three of Joe's hiring scenarios.

Only Paris Hilton has served more time than Bill Clinton OR Sandy Burglar. When is "There's Top Secret documents in my pants" Burglar going to take that Lie Detector Test that was part of his agreement?

I'd do Bill Clinton, but I'm afraid of what I'd catch from him.

I'd do Paris Hilton. I've had my tetanus shot.

Posted by: Bill Clinton at July 3, 2007 04:36 PM

The real question is, has she had her tetanus shot. And would she be smart enough to demand a health certificate declaring him free of STD's?

Notice whose been missing since the Libby deal. he he I believe they go by the color "blue".

Richard Armitage leaked Plame's name not Lewis Libby

Are you daft, Kim? Libby wasn't convicted of leaking Plame's name. Read the papers.

Paris Hilton only served time after she had violated her probation twice. If she hadn't been the self-absorbed, vacuous twit she is, she might not have even had to do that. But, when you arrive at court late, try to blame it on somebody else, the judge probably takes a dim view of your plight.

I feel pretty safe in saying that the last thing the LA County Sheriff and jail wanted was the circus that was inevitable when Hilton went to the lockup. If she had just acted contrite and humble, she might have even avoided the jail time after her violations.

She's a shallow twit. America's fascination with her speaks more poorly about them than it does about her.

If Libby wins on appeal that civil suit could get interesting. Even if he doesn't win, I look forward to Joe and Val being deposed under oath.

Which is why it won't happen. My prediction is that "Lyin'" Joe Wilson and his sooper sekrit spy wife Valerie "007" Plame will quietly drop their suit during discovery.

I don't think they'd be stupid or brazen enough to try to perjure their way through deposition. So I think what they'll do is scuttle the ship and head for the life raft. Libby's got nothing to fear from these lying buffoons.

Kim, do you have anything but the Tu quoque fallacy to fall back on?

Send checks and money to:

http://www.scooterlibby.com/

O'Muse

I don't think they'd be stupid or brazen enough to try to perjure their way through deposition. So I think what they'll do is scuttle the ship and head for the life raft. Libby's got nothing to fear from these lying buffoons.

I agree. The big question is how. They will have maintain the pretense through 2008. I predict suicide by lawyer...filing a bogus brief that will kill the case but allow them to clain that the fix was in.

It's time for MoveOn to move on to things that are serious.

How can one compare libby with burger? Burger was convicted by a judge and given a penalty and he paid it, he even was remorseful, end of story.

I agree nehmeiah...it is time we all address
http://icasualties.org/oif/

There is nothing else that effects our nation more than this...

No matter the political postures of the Republicans or Democrats...no matter our own individual hopes and fears...our own ideologies...

How many more years?
How many more tears?
to death
a family member who is a troop
is selected...
and all any candidate cares about

is

"How can I be elected."

Meanwhile
mothers are cryin'
about sons and daughters dyin'
to Moveon or Rush
it does not matter
just their agendas
that their egos count..
as each day...the causalities mount...

Paris Hilton, the forgettable name. Until, of course , someone brings it up again. Eh, so it is.

Oooh! Awesome!

http://www.scooterperjury.com/

Thanks for posting that, Hugh! That means that Libby won't have to pay his own fines either!

So, let's see:

- not serving one day in jail: check
- not paying one dime of his own fine: check
- still convicted of perjury 3 times, and obstructed justice, by a jury and a Republican judge appointed by Bush: check
- cover up for the Bush administration: just about complete

Awesome! So glad to see you all stand up for justice, accountability and personal responsibility.

"And the voice whispered in my ear: 'send Joe, Valerie, send Joe', and so I wrote that memo. With my agent training, I remember it like it was yesterday; and so you can see it was not me who proposed Joe, it was the voice. Who? Heck, it could have been the Cat in the Hat for all I know."

And she was promoted then, for again producing false and misleading advice from a mysterious source. "Only the CIA has harnessed the ability to put incompetent political hacks to such use", a spokesman said earlier today.

And so here we are, at last, with the annual quiz:

1)Who would make the best CIA agent?

a)Fruit fly
b)Cat in the Hat
c)Paris Hilton
d)Valerie Plame

2)Who has the best credibility?

a)Fruit fly
b)Cat in the Hat
c)Paris Hilton
d)Valerie Plame

3)Who has the highest IQ?

a)Fruit fly
b)Cat in the Hat
c)Paris Hilton
d)Valerie Plame

4)If you had valuable secret info, who would you give it up to?

a)Fruit fly
b)Cat in the Hat
c)Paris Hilton
d)Valerie Plame

Jim:

Awesome! So glad to see you all stand up for justice, accountability and personal responsibility.

So that means you will start a campaign attempting to get the justice department to haul in Berger to take the lie detector test that was part of the plea deal?

In the interest of fairness of course.

Right Jim?

Robert the Original

Letter A to all.

Unless the fruit fly speaks Arabic.

marc,

The Berger deal is finished. He was convicted and charged before a judge. What more do you want?

Russ
The Berger deal is finished. He was convicted and charged before a judge. What more do you want?

Good point. The Berger "DEAL" is finished, and shame on George Bush. So is the Clinton impeachment. So are the Clinton Pardon auctions. So is the subourning of perjury by Russert. The silence of the coward Armitage. What more do we want? We want to her in full throated cry the righteous indignation of a partisan press that has remained silent while those that carry their water go unscathed while they yelp for hanging of Libby.

"What more do you want?" Justice! and a just punnishment.

What do you want? You want your criminal democrats to get away will every lie and crime they commit, obviously.

His sentence is still not done.
He must take the Lie Detector Test so we can know exactly everything he destroyed then and in the past.

"I may be mistaken but I think Wilson/Plame have already filed a complaint against Libby.
If Libby wins on appeal that civil suit could get interesting_Hugh S"

Plame-Wilsons have filed a civil suit against Libby. Libby's commutation allows him to continue his own legal appeal AND plead the 5th in the civil case against him. That seems to be the method to Bush's apparent madness. Helps Libby.

Of course, no other deposed persons (Cheney, Rove, Feith) will be able to exercise such a privelidge so the beat goes on and will get louder in various sections. Don't you KNOW Cheney will squawk claiming split reed or stuck valve.

Meanwhile, the neocon talking points are being demolished and it's only been 24 hours. The Clinton Did It defense on TV (blogs, who cares?) is leaving Everyone Else's tits in the wringer.
A good day. A good long-term meme! Helps Ron Paul, too!

A homespun wit, in answer to the media's (and mine) question of why Bush (breaking his Friday night Bad News Dump precedent) announced such a controversial decision on a Monday, said:

"Because that peckerwood probably thought Monday was the 3rd!"

Get it? He thought Tuesday was the holiday instead of Wednesday! Funny as hell! (Reminds me of HW's price of milk revelation)

bryanD

AND plead the 5th in the civil case against him. That seems to be the method to Bush's apparent madness. Helps Libby

We could argue this all night and I won't. I think Libby relishes a civil suit; that is his preferred and familiar domain. It is certainly not the familiar ground of the plaintiffs.

My prediction is that even if Libby fails on appeal he will severely compromise the credibility of the plaintiffs in a civil trial.

So that means you will start a campaign attempting to get the justice department to haul in Berger to take the lie detector test that was part of the plea deal?

In the interest of fairness of course.

Right Jim?

OK, sure!

As long as Libby also has to take a lie detector test.

Deal?

We want to her in full throated cry the righteous indignation of a partisan press that has remained silent while those that carry their water go unscathed while they yelp for hanging of Libby.

And we definitely don't want one single member of the Bush administration who's kept silentm, to be scathed. After all, they're - well - they're the Bush administration!

After all, Armitage is the designated patsy. Nothing to see here.

Actually, I'll go one step further:

Berger has to take the test, if Libby has to go to jail.

There. They're both doing what the courts originally ordered.

That's what you want too, right Marc? Justice, fairness and full personal accountability?

nogo postal:

Is it your position that in Federal Court's people convicted of Federal offenses...should not go to prison because Clinton and Berger did not go?

I believe the point is equal treatment under the law. If Berger's crimes didn't warrant prison time, why did Libby's perjury warrant 30 months ? Either there were mitigating circumstances in Berger's case (which I haven't seen) or the two convictions resulted in disparate sentences, IMO.

Well, _Mike_ , Libby's multiple perjury and obstruction of justice rated that...because that's what the Bush-appointed judge ordered.

Well, jim, simply because it was a 'Bush-appointed' judge doesn't reconcile the two disparate sentences... which gets back to the point of equal treatment under the law.

As long as Libby also has to take a lie detector test.

Deal?

If I could make this deal happen, I would, without hesitation.

Libby's "perjury" consisted entirely of him having a different memory than other witnesses Fitzgerald chose to believe. Perhaps he should have taken a cue from Hillary "I don't recall" Clinton, but that's all water under the bridge now.

So yeah, bring on Berger and Libby both, light 'em up on the polygraph and let the chips fall where they may.

OK, sure. Though Libby being convicted on 3 counts and obstruction of justice, sentenced by a Bush-appointed judge, and lose an appeal by 2 other Bush-appointed judges, makes me pretty sure he wasn't telling the truth.

But whatev. A shame we'll never know.

Well _Mike_ , since we're dealing with two entirely separate crimes, of course the sentences will be disparate.

Typical sentences for first offenses are 15-21 months, and are also at the discretion of the judge.

Here's some information, from that more carefree, simpler time, when I naively somehow thought that the Bush Administration wouldn't act ***this*** blatantly -

http://writ.news.findlaw.com/lazarus/20070607.html

So if Bush had reduced the sentence to 20 months, or 15 months, or even 8 months, that would be cushy but crazy.

But for Bush to just remove any jail time at all, is completely out of step with established law, and basically shows Bush's total contempt for it.

Above should read, "Typical sentences for perjury first-time offenses are 15-21 months."

Thanks for posting that, Hugh! That means that Libby won't have to pay his own fines either!

Jim
An unequivocal response to this question would be instructive for you and all of us:

Who/What is the paying for the Plame /Libby defense/civil prosecution?

jim:

Well _Mike_ , since we're dealing with two entirely separate crimes, of course the sentences will be disparate.

My god, jim, your grasp of the obvious is astounding. The point is that Berger's crime was of a more serious nature and resulted in a significantly lesser sentence.

The base offense level, using the 1998 Federal sentencing guidelines, for Berger's crimes was 30, given the documents were top secret, and resulted in no prison time.

The based offense level, using the same guidelines, level for Libby's crimes was 12 and resulted in a 30 month sentence.

www.ussc.gov/1998guid/2m3_4.htm

Well, Hugh, that link you posted went to the donation page for Scooter Libby.

Why did you post that, if you didn't want people to donate to his legal defense fund?

For the rest, I imagine taxpayers paid for Ftizgerald to prove Libby guilty on 3 of 4 counts, to then have this sentence commuted by Bush...taxpayers are paying Bush's salary also, so that's a wash there, too...

But I would Wilson & Plame are paying for their own civil suit. Which Libby will probably pay his own costs to defend against.

Well, Hugh, that link you posted went to the donation page for Scooter Libby.

That's because I want people to give him money to defend himself. Clear?

Why did you post that, if you didn't want people to donate to his legal defense fund?

I posted it because I WANTED PEOPLE TO GIVE HIM MONEY. Clear?

For the rest, I imagine taxpayers paid for Ftizgerald to prove Libby guilty on 3 of 4 counts, to then have this sentence commuted by Bush...taxpayers are paying Bush's salary also, so that's a wash there, too...

No

But I would Wilson & Plame are paying for their own civil suit. Which Libby will probably pay his own costs to defend against.

Wilson & Plame are paying for their own civil suit

I want you to focus on that point. I want you to tell me who is paying their legal fees.

We will know where Libby is getting funding for his legal fees from the Justice Department because he is a convicted felon. He has very few privacy rights.

I want you to publish on this blog who is paying for the Wilson/Plame case.

That's because I want people to give him money to defend himself. Clear?

OK then. That's what I thought in the first place.

You want Libby to not have to pay one dime of his own money, after being convicted of obstructing justice and perjuring himself 3 times, and being sentenced by a Bush-appointed judge, and losing an appeal before 2 other Republican judges.

Check. Moving on, then.

I want you to publish on this blog who is paying for the Wilson/Plame case.

Why don't you dig it up and publish it? I'm not the only one who can work Google here.

He has very few privacy rights.

True.

He could have kept those rights, had he chosen to tell the truth and not obstruct justice. But, that bird has flown...

jim writes: "But for Bush to just remove any jail time at all, is completely out of step with established law, and basically shows Bush's total contempt for it."

The Constitution provides for the pardon and communtation power, so your comment jim makes absolutely no sense at all.

Above should read, "Typical sentences for perjury first-time offenses are 15-21 months."

Where, was this "perjury is a serious offense" crowd when they assured us that it was basically a non-crime under Clinton?

And, unlike Libby, Clinton's perjury is EASILY provable.
-=Mike

Robin, that there is a law which says Bush can commute the sentence, doesn't change the fact that Bush acted out of step with established law in terms of sentencing.

And as such, this shows Bush's contempt for established sentencing guidelines, for violating the law; which shows how little Bush respects the law.

And Poor George, who cringes at excessive sentences, as Governor Goofus, "Bush mimicked what he claimed was the condemned woman's [Carla Faye Tucker] message to him. "With pursed lips in mock desperation, [Bush said]: 'Please don't kill me.'"

jim, you repetition makes no more sense than before. The Constitution grants the President to power to pardon and commute sentences. The Constitution envisions cases where the President could decide that convictions or sentences are unjust in his own subjective view and gives him the power to act. That power can't be used w/o the President "acting out of step" - but its a Constitutional power so your whine just is incoherent.

jim:

doesn't change the fact that Bush acted out of step with established law in terms of sentencing.

What percentage of pardon/commuted sentences do you believe are in 'step with establish law in terms of sentencing' ? A pardon/commuted sentence, by definition, goes against sentencing guidelines.

Wilson & Plame are paying for their own civil suit

HORSESHIT!!!

Just how frickin' CLUELESS are you?

That would be the comparison of Fitzgerald vs Nifong. In both cases I see a runaway prosecuter motivated by partison politics.

With Nifong, I certainly agree, and he has started to get what he deserves. It's hard to call Fitzgerald a partisan. He was appointed by the Bush administration, he's not a Democrat and he's not running for office, so that accusation seems to evaporate rather quickly. I always love the "this guy did something I didn't like, therefore he is partisan" school of thought.

Additionally, Nifong's case fell to pieces and it was revealed that he broke the law in trying to make it work. Fitzgerald not only broke no laws (at least I can't think of any), he made his case well enough to get a conviction. It seems your comparison has many more differences than similarities.

More horseshit from Jim:

doesn't change the fact that Bush acted out of step with established law in terms of sentencing.

Read it and weep asshat:

In every criminal case, the Probation Office makes a recommendation to the Court as to its view of the appropriate Guidelines range. In Libby's case, the Probation Office calculated his offense severity at the level typically used for perjury and obstruction of justice, the crimes for which Libby was convicted. When combined with Libby's first-offense status, this level of severity yielded a sentencing range of 15-21 months. So, readers may wonder, why was Libby sentenced to 30?

And, unlike Libby, Clinton's perjury is EASILY provable.

No, Mike SC- actually Clinton was not charged with perjury.

Hey, don't blame me. I'm just telling you reality. Clinton was not charged with perjury, and was found innocent of it both by the judge in the case, and letter by the Congress.

Look it up if you don't believe me.

Hey Marc butt-chapeau. Here's your answer:

http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1182416748444

"Supreme Court Sets Rules for 'Reasonable' Prison Sentences"

Appeals courts that review prison terms imposed by trial judges may deem them reasonable if they fall within federal sentencing guidelines adopted in the mid-1980s, the high court said.

The justices upheld a 33-month sentence given to Victor Rita for perjury and making false statements. Rita is a 25-year military veteran and former civilian federal employee.

And a first-time offender, and a man whose dedicated his lifetime to serving America - just the same sort of arguments made in the Libby case.

I guess this guy just hadn't covered up for powerful friends in the White House. His mistake. He goes up the river while Libby's free without a day.

That seem fair to you?

What percentage of pardon/commuted sentences do you believe are in 'step with establish law in terms of sentencing' ? A pardon/commuted sentence, by definition, goes against sentencing guidelines.

A pardon basically removes all punishment. A commutation removes punishment. Neither has to go against sentencing guidelines. And neither has to violate other principles, assuming there actually is a strong and honorable rationale.

But in the rationale for getting Libby off, Bush said specifically that the sentence was too harsh. Which goes against everything else the Bush administration has ever pushed for, in prosecution and in appointment of judges.

Here's what Bush did:

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/04/washington/04commute.html?_r=2&hp&oref=slogin&oref=slogin

In commuting I. Lewis Libby Jr.'s 30-month prison sentence on Monday, President Bush drew on the same array of arguments about the federal sentencing system often made by defense lawyers -- and routinely and strenuously opposed by his own Justice Department.

Critics of the system have a long list of complaints. Sentences, they say, are too harsh. Judges are allowed to take account of facts not proven to the jury. The defendant's positive contributions are ignored, as is the collateral damage that imprisonment causes the families involved.

On Monday, Mr. Bush made use of every element of that critique in a detailed statement setting out his reasons for commuting Mr. Libby's sentence -- handing an unexpected gift to defense lawyers around the country, who scrambled to make use of the president's arguments in their own cases.

Isn't that great? Now a whole new bunch of convicted criminals will get off, thanks to Bush's favoritism towards his felon buddy.

Given the administration's tough stand on sentencing, the president's arguments left experts in sentencing law scratching their heads.

BUt why are they scratching their heads? We all know the real deal. Come on, let's just admit it. Libby got off because he's guilty with powerful friends. Who he went to jail covering up for. Which makes all of this especially ironic because:

"The Bush administration, in some sense following the leads of three previous administrations, has repeatedly supported a federal sentencing system that is distinctly disrespectful of the very arguments that Bush has put forward in cutting Libby a break," said Douglas A. Berman, a law professor at Ohio State University who writes the blog Sentencing Law and Policy.

The board of Pardon and Paroles recommended, after hearing the mitigating factors that house detainment or probation would be sufficient. That is the guideline GW used. Within his rights. No matter what. Can't be changed. Completed. Done. Finished. In one week, old news.

I do not expect Jim and his sick ilk to post comments when his verdict is overturned. ww

The board of Pardon and Paroles recommended, after hearing the mitigating factors that house detainment or probation would be sufficient. That is the guideline GW used.

From USA Today:

Probation officers recommended Libby serve 15-21 months. Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald recommended more than 30 months. Libby's attorneys asked for probation.


Walton accepted Fitzgerald's interpretation of the law, which said Libby should be sentenced more harshly because of the seriousness of the investigation he obstructed.


The 2 1/2 years handed Libby was much like the sentences given others convicted in obstruction cases. Federal court records indicate that 382 people were convicted for obstruction of justice over the past two years. Three of four were sent to prison. The average prison term was 64 months, more than five years. The largest group of defendants drew prison terms ranging from 13 months to 31 months.


"This is sort of a standard sentence in that situation," said defense attorney Mark H. Tuohey. "Call it what you want, but that's what it is. This was not some out-of-the-blue-sentence."

The only guidelines GW Bush follows are the one's he makes up himself. You CAN make up your own guidelines when you're a lying, fraudulant, morally-void scumbag like he is. And anyone who feels the rule of law is flexible depending on your take on the argument is a fool.

Enjoy your hypocracy, scumbags.

jim...
your arguments are lame.

why is the FACT that scooter was Marc Rich's attorney, when Clinton pardoned him, avoiding more prosecutorial action from then NYC-area federal prosecutor Fitzgerald?

do you think ol' Fitz might have had a personal vendetta against Scooter from the get-go?
that FACT is one of the few 'makes-sense' explanations of why Scooter was singled out, why the investigation went forward when it was over before it started! (duh, fitz knew armitage was leaker, and that said 'leak' was not a crime. he knew this from day one, long before any grand jury was convened.) so why the witch hunt? Was Scooter in Fitz's sights all along? makes sense.

the lack of honesty in this discussion from the left is just downright evil. poison. sick. immature.

why is the FACT that scooter was Marc Rich's attorney, when Clinton pardoned him, avoiding more prosecutorial action from then NYC-area federal prosecutor Fitzgerald?

Marc Rich was indicted in 1983 by Rudy Guiliani. Fitzgerald became Assistant US Attorney in 1988. At that point, the case was basically on hold, while Rich had fled to Switzerland. Why do you think it makes sense that Fitzgerald held a grudge againt Libby for that case, which he had little personal investment in? Seems like a pretty tenuous connection, except for a true conspiracy theorist.

It seems slightly more logical that Libby's statements that contradicted other witnesses testimony singled him out for perjury and obstruction of justice charges.

According to Jim, "lying under oath" is a crime. So Clinton committed a crime.

http://wizbangblog.com/2007/07/03/is-libbys-commuted-prison-sentence-enough.php#606534

The hyprocritical dishonesty of the progressive left is beyond paroday.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2007/07/libbys_punishment_worse_than_t.html

"Scooter" Libby will serve as much time in prison for lying under oath to a federal grand jury as Bill Clinton served for lying under oath to a federal grand jury.

If GW Bush did nothing, Jim and Hansel2 would say Bush is a moronic, arrogant, stupid, inept, war criminal who needs to be impeached. If GW Bush commutes Libby's sentence, then Jim and Hansel2 would say the same thing. See how the liberals made it so no one listens to them? USA reported. Read the report Hansel2. Also, Jim, Cisneros, the highest ranking official convicted in the history of the country was PARDONED by your brother in arms Clintoon. ww

so, even admitting to knowing rich's attorney was scooter, and the US DA at the time trying to prosecute him (on hold or no, he was on the wanted list-- that doesn't sound like 'on hold' to me) was fitz, it still is only a'tenuous conncection'. right. fitz ain't human! he's got no emotions at all! (that's what you're asking us to believe)
well, i guess it depends on what "is" means.

and, there were MANY other contradictory statements made from ALL the witnesses. why weren't any of them prosecuted?

and, MOST OF ALL, why did the investigation go forward when fitz knew who leaked, and the leak was not a crime? THAT, you can't answer. so sorry, truth upside your head!

it is just so easier to say "bush lied"... blah blah blah.

Jim, as another example of your gullability, Rita was not a first time offender. Rita had a criminal history and so was not equivalent to Libby. Reports to the contrary are false, but reading the court opinion reveals this to the careful reader.

Another difference is that Rita was convicted of perjury in a matter involving an actual crime, unlike Libby.

"on hold or no, he was on the wanted list-- that doesn't sound like 'on hold' to me"
When Fitzgerald came into the New York US Attorney's office in 1988, the investigation into Rich had been conducted and the indictment issued. The attorney's work was essentially done from that perspective. Of course, from the FBI's perspective, this was an active case, and they were trying to bring him to the US to face charges, but I'm not sure where Fitzgerald was helping that effort. Perhaps his office was filing extradition papers, but after 5 years, even that has probably played itself out. Do you actually have a single filing, motion, bit of research, etc. that was done by Fitzgerald in association with the Marc Rich case? Do you have any evidence that he was connected with this case at all other than the fact that he worked in the office where Guiliani handled the investigation? If so I'd love to see it. If not, how can you possibly jump to Fitzgerald had such extreme emotional connection with that case and nailed Libby because he simply represented Marc Rich?

there were MANY other contradictory statements made from ALL the witnesses. why weren't any of them prosecuted?
Prosecutors take up perjury/obstruction charges when they feel that they're provable, they were deliberate, and they affected the investigation. Libby's lying met all those criteria. Apparently, none of the contradictions by others did. If you have some specific examples, we could discuss those and speculate on why Fitzgerald should or should not have reached those conclusions. As for Libby, the successful prosecution and sentencing seem to bear out that he chose correctly on that one.

why did the investigation go forward when fitz knew who leaked, and the leak was not a crime? THAT, you can't answer. so sorry, truth upside your head!
Usually, it's customary to ask a question and not get an answer before concluding that it can't be answered. For someone with your active imagination, I'd expect a bit more optimism on what can and can't be answered.

Instead of giving my opinions on this, I'll refer an expert on this case and the decisions made regarding the prosecution, US Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald. Let's see what he had to say about this prosecution, why it was pursued, and what the evidence showed about Libby:

"Mr. Libby did not tell the truth to the system. And when someone doesn't tell the truth to the system, everyone suffers. The legal system suffers because we don't know what the actual facts are. And, frankly, lots of other people suffer since, when you don't know what the truth is, people draw all sorts of conclusions ... Mr. Libby, by lying and obstructing justice, harmed the system. And that was something serious. And that's the point we made to the jury, and obviously the jury agreed factually."

"I also want to take away from the notion that somehow we should take an obstruction charge less seriously than a leak charge. This is a very serious matter and compromising national security information is a very serious matter. But the need to get to the bottom of what happened and whether national security was compromised by inadvertence, by recklessness, by maliciousness is extremely important. We need to know the truth. And anyone who would go into a grand jury and lie, obstruct and impede the investigation has committed a serious crime."

"I think people might not understand this. We, as prosecutors and FBI agents, have to deal with false statements, obstruction of justice and perjury all the time. The Department of Justice charges those statutes all the time. When I was in New York working as a prosecutor, we brought those cases because we realized that the truth is the engine of our judicial system. And if you compromise the truth, the whole process is lost."

"If these facts are true, if we were to walk away from this and not charge obstruction of justice and perjury, we might as well just hand in our jobs. Because our jobs, the criminal justice system, is to make sure people tell us the truth. And when it's a high-level official and a very sensitive investigation, it is a very, very serious matter that no one should take lightly."

If you want a really, really full explanation from Fitzgerald, I recommend this transcript.

it is just so easier to say "bush lied"
I don't believe I've mentioned Bush here, much less claimed that he lied. I can certainly say that Libby lied, seeing that it was proven in a court of law beyond a reasonable doubt. For you, it's easier to make up bizarre conspiracy theories than accept simple, obvious explanations.

Rita was not a first time offender. Rita had a criminal history and so was not equivalent to Libby.

Robin, Rita's other offenses were not related to perjury or obstruction of justice. Therefore those other offenses were not taken into consideration into his sentencing.

Thus Rita makes a perfect example of what standard sentences for the kinds of offenses committed by Libby currently are.

Thus Rita makes a perfect example of what standard sentences for the kinds of offenses committed by Libby currently are.
------------------------------------------------
Libby serves as much jail time for lying under oath as Clinton for lying under oath.

Obviously Sandy Berger got away with much less for stealing classified information related to national security.

Liberal hypocrisy is in full display again. We haven't even talked about Clinton 's pardongate yet.

Jim, you are again misrepresenting the Rita case, obviously you haven't read it. Rita had been convicted on perjury in the past and therefore did have a previous criminal history unlike Libby. The reason that they were not considered for sentencing guideline purposes was not that they were unrelated - you can't get even that right.