Fitzgerald Investigation of Leak of Identity of CIA Agent

Fred Thompson is a major supporter of Irwin Libby, heading a fund-raising effort for the latter's defense. It may be argued that the money is to keep Libby quiet until the pardon comes through.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/06/01/opinion/main2874369.shtml

0 Replies

Libby's bid for leniency hits snag

By MATT APUZZO, Associated Press Writer
3 minutes ago

Former White House aide I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby's hopes of avoiding prison in the CIA leak case began to dim Tuesday as a federal judge ruled he could face a longer sentence because the investigation he obstructed was so serious.

Libby, the former chief of staff to Vice President Dick Cheney, is the highest-ranking official convicted of a crime since the Iran Contra affair.

"No one was ever charged. Nobody ever pleaded guilty," attorney William Jeffress said. "The government did not establish the existence of an offense."

U.S. District Judge Reggie B. Walton didn't accept that. By that reasoning, Walton said, 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," said Walton, who has a reputation as a tough sentencing judge. "It's one thing if you obstruct a petty larceny. It's another thing if you obstruct a murder investigation."

Walton's preliminary ruling doesn't necessarily foretell Libby's sentence. But it does make it harder for Libby's attorneys to argue for no jail time because it raises the seriousness of his offense.

The obstruction of justice charges should deserve no less than three years in prison on such a serious case as outing a CIA agent.

0 Replies

That is not what he was convicted of, imposter. Nobody outed anyone as far as we know so far. The crime has never been established to have occured.

0 Replies

okie wrote:

That is not what he was convicted of, imposter. Nobody outed anyone as far as we know so far. The crime has never been established to have occured.

Oh, it has been established that Plame was outed by members of the WH; it has only not been established if it was done intentionally.

This has not been established due to Libby's obstruction of Justice. So, he should not expect a lenient sentence for such a crime.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

BBB
Scooter Libbey was sentenced to 30 months in prison and a $250,000 fine.

BBB

0 Replies

Out pending appeal though.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

waiting for bail decision

Cycloptichorn wrote:

Out pending appeal though.
Cycloptichorn

Judge decision re allowing Libby bail instead of immediate prison awaited.

BBB

0 Replies

Okay, bail decision will be next tues or weds.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

Letters From Famous Trying To Keep Scooter Libby Out of jail
Smoking Gun Publishes Letters From the Famous Trying To Keep Scooter Libby Out of Jail
By E&P Staff
Published: June 05, 2007

The Smoking Gun published online today letters from well-known Washington figures, ranging from Donald Rumsfeld to James Carville, who tried -- in vain, it turns out -- to keep Lewis "Scooter" Libby from getting a lengthy jail term in the CIA leak case.

Libby today got a sentence of 30 months plus a stiff fine, with the judge stating that evidence of his guilt on perjury, obstruction of justice and other charges was "overwhelming."

His lawyers had tried to keep the letters private but the judge ordered them released. They are from, among others, Henry Kissinger, Richard Perle, John Bolton, Douglas Feith and Gen. Peter Pace. Leon Wieseltier, longtime literary editor of The New Republic, declares, "About his character I would put my own hand on the Bible."

The letters can be found at TheSmokingGun.com
http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003594094

0 Replies

Joseph C. Wilson IV, Plame's husband, said a pardon would be improper. "My view of this is that given the supervisory-subordinate relationship that existed between Cheney, the president and Libby, they should recuse themselves," he said. "It's Ethics 101."

0 Replies

If Libby doesn't pay any consequence, our government will further go down the corruption tube. Just because he "served our country" has no bearing on his lying to the FBI and jury. Those should be serious crimes; look at what happened to Bill Clinton? The GOP spent over $50 million dollars to investigate a personal sexual, consenting, act, but they now want Libby to go free. What a farce!

0 Replies

Advocate wrote:

Joseph C. Wilson IV, Plame's husband, said a pardon would be improper. "My view of this is that given the supervisory-subordinate relationship that existed between Cheney, the president and Libby, they should recuse themselves," he said. "It's Ethics 101."

Since when has ethics been a consideration in any decisions made by the Bush White House?

0 Replies

Ethics has never been a consideration for the Bush White House. But it may do some good to point out to the public that Bush and others should recuse themselves in this matter.

Scooter's perjury and obstruction was connected to a very serious crime (identifying a classified covert CIA spy). In contrast, Clinton's perjury was related to having consensual sex with a 24-year old woman, which is not a crime.

0 Replies

cicerone imposter wrote:

If Libby doesn't pay any consequence, our government will further go down the corruption tube. Just because he "served our country" has no bearing on his lying to the FBI and jury. Those should be serious crimes; look at what happened to Bill Clinton? The GOP spent over $50 million dollars to investigate a personal sexual, consenting, act, but they now want Libby to go free. What a farce!

Not to rehash old ground,but didnt Bill lie to the grand jury also?
I dont remember the left saying that he should be prosecuted and sent to jail.

Why the different standard now?

0 Replies

MM, what Libby did was a hell of a lot more serious. He impeded the investigation of those who outed a spy. Clinton lied about a bj.

0 Replies

mysteryman wrote:

cicerone imposter wrote:
If Libby doesn't pay any consequence, our government will further go down the corruption tube. Just because he "served our country" has no bearing on his lying to the FBI and jury. Those should be serious crimes; look at what happened to Bill Clinton? The GOP spent over $50 million dollars to investigate a personal sexual, consenting, act, but they now want Libby to go free. What a farce!

Not to rehash old ground,but didnt Bill lie to the grand jury also?
I dont remember the left saying that he should be prosecuted and sent to jail.

Why the different standard now?

Last time I checked there wasn't enough evidence to even charge Clinton let alone convict him. Even you have to know the differnce between being accused without an indictment and a conviction in a court of law.

0 Replies

mysteryman wrote:

cicerone imposter wrote:
If Libby doesn't pay any consequence, our government will further go down the corruption tube. Just because he "served our country" has no bearing on his lying to the FBI and jury. Those should be serious crimes; look at what happened to Bill Clinton? The GOP spent over $50 million dollars to investigate a personal sexual, consenting, act, but they now want Libby to go free. What a farce!

Not to rehash old ground,but didnt Bill lie to the grand jury also?
I dont remember the left saying that he should be prosecuted and sent to jail.

Why the different standard now?

There is not a different standard, Clinton did not commit perjury or obstruction of justice.

0 Replies

parados wrote:

mysteryman wrote:
cicerone imposter wrote:
If Libby doesn't pay any consequence, our government will further go down the corruption tube. Just because he "served our country" has no bearing on his lying to the FBI and jury. Those should be serious crimes; look at what happened to Bill Clinton? The GOP spent over $50 million dollars to investigate a personal sexual, consenting, act, but they now want Libby to go free. What a farce!

Not to rehash old ground,but didnt Bill lie to the grand jury also?
I dont remember the left saying that he should be prosecuted and sent to jail.

Why the different standard now?

Last time I checked there wasn't enough evidence to even charge Clinton let alone convict him. Even you have to know the differnce between being accused without an indictment and a conviction in a court of law.

Clinton may have lied, but his playing loose with the truth did not even come close to meeting the threshold of perjury.

0 Replies

Roxxxanne, Some people see all crimes as equal when the real crime was perpetrated by a neocon(perjury) vs a liberal(sex). They keep bringing up Clinton when defending one of their "own." They're hopeless.
[size=7]That's the reason I don't bother answering mm[/size].

0 Replies

Most of the Republican candidates have this case tabbed perfectly. As Romney said, the prosecutor likely overstepped his authority by pursuing a case long after the original leaker was known, Richard Armitage, and when no charges or interest were even pursued against Armitage, thus indicating the apparent absence of any crime in this case. His likely conclusion as was most of the Republicans, is obviously one of a travesty of justice, way too much time spent on a case that had nothing to it. This is what many of us have been pointing out ever since this stupid case was ever initiated. I liked Guiliani's answer when he said his answer deserved more than a yes or no, because a good man's career and family have been destroyed by an overzealous, unwarranted, and misdirected investigation into a crime that was not a crime. My description of the candidates answers are in my words as I recall them. In summary, many people are ticked off at this whole politically motivated case. People see it for what it is.

0 Replies

Fitzgerald Investigation of Leak of Identity of CIA Agent

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know