How to shrink a sentence
It really does help to have friends in high places. Earlier this year, Scooter Libby was convicted of perjury and obstruction in Federal Court, and sentenced to 30 months in jail and a $250,000 fine. Today, President Bush commuted his sentence so that Mr. Libby does not even need to spend one night in jail. The Republican establishment is applauding President Bush's actions. Sadly, many people in the Republican Party think that Scooter Libby's perjury was no big deal, since they believe that he was the target of a political witchhunt. Of course, many Democrats feel that President Clinton's perjury was no big deal either, since it was about an embarrasing sex act.
Unfortunately, perjury is a very serious issue, because it undermines the integrity of our judicial system. Too bad that the politicians in DC just don't get it.
Unfortunately, perjury is a very serious issue, because it undermines the integrity of our judicial system. Too bad that the politicians in DC just don't get it.
posted by David at 7/02/2007 11:26:00 PM
3 Comments:
Dave, are you aware of what Libby said that was considered to be perjury?
He said (in effect), "I don't remember -- I'll have to consult my notes".
He had already given his notes to the prosecutor, and was not allowed to consult them.
The prosecutor argued that, because the information was in the notes, Libby must have been lying about not remembering the info -- thereby committing perjury and hindering the investigation.
Libby is likely to win on appeal. However, the judge said Libby would have to stay in jail during the appeals process -- which is atypical in such cases. All Bush did was remove the prison bit (one of 4 parts of Libby's sentence -- the other 3 parts are still in effect).
Perjury is very serious. This wasn't perjury. Further, since the prosecutor already knew the source of the Plame information [ Armitage ], and that Plame was not covert at the time -- knew that there had been no crime committed... so what investigation was allegedly being hindered?
So, to summarize:
1. When asked for his notes, Libby complied.
2. When asked a question, rather than answer incorrectly when he didn't remember, Libby said he'd have to check his notes -- and wasn't allowed to.
Since when is that perjury or obstruction?
I actually do not have an opinion on whether Mr. Libby should have been convicted. I do not believe that I am informed enough on the facts of the case to make one. However, a group of jurors sat through the testimony, reviewed the evidence, and unanimously found him guilty. Perjury cases are extremely hard to prove, and so I find it interesting that the jury found the evidence compelling enough to convict him.
Based on this decision by the United States Court of Appeals, a three person panel of the Court determined that Libby's appeal does not appear to raise a substantial question of law. As a result, it is unclear as to whether he is likely to win his appeal or not.
I do have concerns that Mr. Fitzgerald strayed from his original mandate. It seems to be a common theme that special prosecutors stray far from their purpose. As much as I approved Mr. Starr's methodical handling of the Whitewater case, I believe that the final outcome of the case had very little to do with his original mission. In the same way, the conviction of Mr. Libby is a long way from determining who leaked Ms. Plame's name to the media.
...and of course the double standard when it comes to commuting sentences. Once again, Dems can do whatever they want and nobody cares. As soon as a Republican does it, all hell breaks loose.
I'm so sick of politics.
Post a Comment
<< Home