Comments (52)

Rebel wrote on July 2, 2007 12:50 PM:

Will the decider pardon his felonious friends?

Stay tuned!

Anonymous wrote on July 2, 2007 12:52 PM:

Yippee! Score one for the good guys.

Fitz Fan wrote on July 2, 2007 12:53 PM:

Yippee! Score one for the good guys.

pkoso wrote on July 2, 2007 1:09 PM:

at this point...bush has nothing to lose in providing the pardon. i'll bet libby walks.

SickandTired wrote on July 2, 2007 1:10 PM:

Well let's see how W reacts to this. "Scooter you did a heckuva job and I think you should go free."
The Bush administration is on a downhill course to being the worst presidency of my lifetime. I'm 56 and I never thought I'd see a President make Jimmy Carter's term look good. W has done it in spades and it's really not even close. He's a emabarrassment to the country worldwide and now his own party is turning on him. I hope they put the sharp objects up in the White House. It must be depressing to be him.

Anonymous wrote on July 2, 2007 1:11 PM:

But perhaps Scooter might remember just a little bit more that could be of interest to Fitz? Becoming a cooperating witness could be the Get Out of Jail Free card he's been looking for. Time to think about it, fall guy.

SC face - as in FACE the music

Dennis wrote on July 2, 2007 1:11 PM:

Bet'cha he gets either a presidential pardon or a damned good job with Cheney and Haliburton when he gets out.

But he's not going to roll over on Bush/Cheney.

You don't have to be a blind conservative not to see it, just an ignorant one to deny it.

Noam Sane wrote on July 2, 2007 1:13 PM:

WaPo editorial decrying this is in the works as we speak. Go Fred Go!

jon wrote on July 2, 2007 1:14 PM:

Scooter better think about having a quiet word with Fitz. I bet a cooperating witness, central to an ongoing criminal conspiracy to commit treason, could find the Get Out of Jail Free card he's been looking for. Time to think long and hard about your options, fall guy.

SC free - freedom's just another word...

steve duncan wrote on July 2, 2007 1:18 PM:

Jailing may still be several weeks away. The end of Bush's term is January 20, 2009. With all the crap on Bush's plate I don't see a pardon happening. I figure Libby will cool his heels in a club-med facility until January 19th and then get a commutation. What's that, maybe 5 months sitting around reading, writing a multimillion dollar memoir, e-mailing friends and interviewing for jobs on various boards of directors in the defense, security and aerospace industries? Rough justice indeed.

stephen wrote on July 2, 2007 1:22 PM:

Richard Cohen preparing new articlw about how goofy the appeals court was and how they are sending a man to prison who didn't have anything to do with a crime that was never committed if you are talking about the crime that was alleged to have been committed that would have been proven if Libby hadn't lied and mislead the investigation in the first place but it was OK to tdo that say Libby buddies because well there really wasn't a crime and they should know because they didn't commit the crime because they said that no crime was committed so how can you lie about aything when no crime was committed in the first place?????

anon wrote on July 2, 2007 1:25 PM:

...a quiet word with Fitz...

Up side: Probably no jail.

Down side: No job in DC again, ever. No pardon for crimes already committed.

Assuming the pardon's assumed, and assuming Libby sees his actions as politics as usual, it seems to me Libby is smarter to keep his mouth shut.

stephen wrote on July 2, 2007 1:25 PM:

When you got nothin you got nothin to loose and say.... would you like tooooo ......make a DEEEEEEEEAAAAAAAALLLLLLLLLL!!!

How does it feel....
to be on your own...

with no direction home
a complete unknown

Like a rollin stone??

Captain Goto wrote on July 2, 2007 1:30 PM:

Wow. And the DC Circuit yet. Isn't that the one packed with Fed Society types?

"Law and Order!! Law and Order!!"

Security code: "crush". hehe.

60th Street wrote on July 2, 2007 1:31 PM:

I think Cheney will pardon him without question. Bush, of course, will do the signing.

code="square" as in "this is so not...."

tekel wrote on July 2, 2007 1:37 PM:

orange jumpsuit time. What I wouldn't give for an OJ-Simpson-Style car chase- Scooter driving the white bronco, Cheney in the passenger seat- they could get on the DC beltway and just keep going around, and around, and around....

Phil wrote on July 2, 2007 1:38 PM:

Note, it's not unheard of to see a dissent, but generally appellate panel decisions are unanimous.

PurpleAvenger wrote on July 2, 2007 1:39 PM:

does anyone know which 3 judges made the decision? Were they Bush law & order type appointees . . .like the judge who sentenced Libby?

It's interesting how many on the right are so vehement about wanting strict compliance with the law & lengthy punishment for anyone who breaks it - until it becomes one of their own.

Barry Champlain wrote on July 2, 2007 1:42 PM:

The only remaining question is: how are Joe and Jane Sixpack going to take to the preznit, pardoning a felon who got all the justice neocon money could buy, and yet still had to go to prison?

My educated guess is: not too well.

So, will the next Democratic presidential candidate be bold enough to rile-up all the resulting outrage, and hang Bush on whomever runs on the R ticket?

My guess is that the GOP and the pundits will flog the talking point, "But you're not running against Bush!!" and the Dem candidate's team will bow to the pressure not to Go There.

Idiocy, if that happens. If Karl Rove were running the Dem presidential candidate's campaign, he'd MAKE the R candidate "run against Bush". Frustratingly, we on the D side are always too goddamned gracious, or something.

All this is to say that a pardon of Libby will go over in Middle America like the proverbial turd in the oft-mentioned punchbowl. And if the Dems have brains, they'll USE IT.

And, on a related topic, if this nation suffers yet another "terrorist attack", I don't think that a populace that's had most of its freedoms modified or removed, in the name of Security, is simply going to rally around the Daddy-In-Chief, one more time.

The reaction, I believe, will be more like, "Hey! You were supposed to be the only people who could PROTECT us!! WTF?!?"

Oh, the MSM will print its papers in red, white and blue, and the teevee will have a patriotic ribbon logo next to every crawl... but the rank-and-file will finally smell the rat (or the glove, or whatever). At this point, even a legit terrorist attack on American soil will be seen as a "false flag" operation, by more Americans than they've calculated. And these bastards will have no one to thank but themselves.

"...some of the people, some of the time".

Pastor Doodah wrote on July 2, 2007 1:44 PM:

Why weeks? He's guilty now. Why is he not in jail today?

Codeword: bent

Captian Crouton wrote on July 2, 2007 1:45 PM:

I think that the entirety of the argument of Libby and his supporters, including VICTORIA TOENSING was not even worthy of a 'first year law student.' I feel that irrespective of the conviction that harm was done to national security by revealing that Brewster Jennings provided cover for CIA personnel. The fact that the prosecution took a circuitous route to impose justice, in the process of 'obstructing justice' was fair and underscores the importance of not divulging national security means and methods.

If Scooter wants to be the fall guy that is fine with me. It was the right message to send a man whom lied to a Grand Jury and during the investigation into a breach of law in the offices of the Office of the President.

The reason Scooter is going to jail is simple, the POTUS stood idle and allowed this event to happen and did not himself censor and dismiss the individuals behind the leak when it was 'sold' to reporters.

The willingness to send a message to the Intel community that we will punish anyone whom disagrees with this White House, irrespective of facts, has been addressed.

I guess Scooter never imagined that he would be spending part of the New American Century behind bars.

Hector wrote on July 2, 2007 1:46 PM:

In commonw with, now, four federal judges I have no sympthathy for the argument that the underlying crime was never charged, let alone proven. If the lawyers working for Libby were unable to convince a single one of these judges that the evidence was other than "overwhelming", or that the appeal could present a "substantial question", I am comfortable concluding that under the law in its current state Libby has been correctly convicted. And although I don't have evidence other than the long chain of MSM newspaper articles on the undisputed actions of Cheney and others, I think that Libby is also culpable, with Cheney and others, of perpetrating far more serious crims under US and international law than the crime of which he has been convicted.
Having said all of that, I think that justice would actually be best served if he were pardoned, soon, by Bush AND IF that pardon unleashed a firestorm that makes the current "storm" blown up by Libby's supporters look like a spring zephyr. Two impeachments, followed by felony trials for the principals.

hell's kitchen wrote on July 2, 2007 1:51 PM:

You know, a normal person might begin to consider his long-term reputation and try to recover some integrity.

But almost everyone associated with this administration seems to be in la-la land, so I have no real hope that Libby is going to cooperate with Fitz. I'll be surprised if he doesn't get a pardon from the chimp (how prophetic that name has turned out to be!) because I'm sure that truthful testimony would put some more players behind bars and might even remove the hindrance to impeachment.

EH wrote on July 2, 2007 1:52 PM:

Hector: That's a big load of wishful thinking. Too much for a Monday morning.

Hector wrote on July 2, 2007 1:54 PM:

PurpleAvenger asks, "does anyone know which 3 judges made the decision? Were they Bush law & order type appointees . . .like the judge who sentenced Libby?"

According to Reuters, "The ruling was issued by all three members of the appeals court panel. Judges David Sentelle and Karen LeCraft Henderson were appointed by Republican presidents while Judge David Tatel was appointed by a Democratic president."

chimp wrote on July 2, 2007 1:56 PM:

I don't think the president will pardon Libby. He's at 26 percent and dropping. Impeachment is that much more likely, especially when it looks like the white house is covering up. If Cheney were to be impeached, all Fitzgerald's evidence would come in. I suspect that the vice president would rather resign than face the prospect of mounting up a defense against a senate trial, especially knowing that evidence brought up there could be used in a criminal indictment afterward.

Hector wrote on July 2, 2007 1:57 PM:

PurpleAvenger asks, "does anyone know which 3 judges made the decision? Were they Bush law & order type appointees . . .like the judge who sentenced Libby?"

According to Reuters, "The ruling was issued by all three members of the appeals court panel. Judges David Sentelle and Karen LeCraft Henderson were appointed by Republican presidents while Judge David Tatel was appointed by a Democratic president."

Biggus Diggus wrote on July 2, 2007 1:58 PM:

Oh they'll pardon him one Friday afternoon before a holiday weekend or if terrorists strike US soil again. They will take care of him to show others holding dark secrets that they are untouchable.

Just a matter of time. Big time pardon coming. You watch.

Billy Pilgrim wrote on July 2, 2007 2:02 PM:

The best possible outcome would be for GWB to pardon Libby now. That would propel his approval rating into the teens or possibly even single digits, giving Congress the impetus it is looking for to commence impeachment proceedings.

pj in jesusland wrote on July 2, 2007 2:12 PM:

Libby gets 2 1/2 years for lying and obstruction in a matter involving national security while former Alabama Governor Siegelman gets seven years for bribery.

Based on just the sentences meted out, it appears we hold Democrats up to higher standards than Republicans. Seven years for curruption, only 2 and one-half years for enabling treason.

I'll bet Karl Rove and Dick Cheney didn't write letters to the federal judge in Montgomery asking for leniency. Hell, Rove was the one who pushed for prosecuting Siegelman in the first place. I wonder if Bush will pardon Siegelman when he pardons Libby?

JNagarya wrote on July 2, 2007 2:30 PM:

at this point...bush has nothing to lose in providing the pardon. i'll bet libby walks.

Posted by: pkoso
Date: July 2, 2007 1:09 PM

Bushit has everything to lose: he is currently defying subpoenas, which is in itself illegal in view of the fact that his "Executive Privilege" argument has already been rejected by the court/s.

Anne wrote on July 2, 2007 2:33 PM:

Bet right about now, Libby would give pretty much anything for one of those "activist" judges...

rb6 wrote on July 2, 2007 2:34 PM:

Once you've been convicted and sentenced, it's too late to become a cooperating witness. It won't change anything at this point. Just in case it ever becomes relevant for anyone you know, the time to cooperate is early on. Waiting is a big mistake.

parrot wrote on July 2, 2007 2:39 PM:

Maybe the parole board will give him a break if he testifies against "the fourth branch", rather than sticking to the intertwined roots of our troubles.

jeffgee wrote on July 2, 2007 2:43 PM:

Maybe conservatives will call for the elimination of the DC Court of Appeals the way they wanted to eliminate the 9th in San Francisco when that court ruled in ways that displeased them.

Captain Nemo wrote on July 2, 2007 2:55 PM:

The Scooter Libby case is a distraction.

The wholesale destruction of the Constitution of the United States is the real issue. Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Gonzales, Rove are guilty of high crimes, treason, war crimes, war profiteering.

Patriots should stay focused on building the case for impeachment.

Austin Cooper wrote on July 2, 2007 2:56 PM:

Poor, poor lil' Scooter.

I'm so disappointed. It's enough to give you the apoplexy. Well -- That Little Man in the White House will just have to pardon the boy, now, won't he?

JimPortlandOR wrote on July 2, 2007 3:12 PM:

Bush would have to violate long-standing Pardon Guidelines established by the Justice Dept. to set Scooter free. For instance, the rules say a pardon can't be considered within five (5) years of conviction. There are other limits as well. Here are the DOJ guidelines. (in left column)

code: narrow - possibilities for scooter's immediate pardon.

206Bones wrote on July 2, 2007 3:14 PM:

Quietly into the Pages of History?

I believe that the fate of the Bush Administration players will most likely be decided by the the next President.

If we imagine a new President coming into office having to choose between a new direction for all Americans as opposed to years and years of divisive litigation, the outcome that Ted Sorensen envisions can't be dismissed.

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2007/0707.Sorensen

Sorensen's imagined speech contains this paragraph:

"During these last several years, our nation has been bitterly divided and deceived by illicit actions in high places, by violations of federal, constitutional, and international law. I do not favor further widening the nation’s wounds, now or next year, through continuous investigations, indictments, and impeachments. I am confident that history will hold these malefactors accountable for their deeds, and the country will move on."

I think it would be interesting to ask the candidates now whether they hold justice or starting with a clean slate to be more in the national interest.

JimPortlandOR wrote on July 2, 2007 3:15 PM:

Bush would have to violate long-standing Pardon Guidelines established by the Justice Dept. to set Scooter free. For instance, the rules say a pardon can't be considered within five (5) years of conviction. There are other limits as well. Here are the DOJ guidelines. (in left column)

Jane wrote on July 2, 2007 3:33 PM:

Ted Sorenson's imaginary speech quoted below could have been written for President Gerald Ford.

"During these last several years, our nation has been bitterly divided and deceived by illicit actions in high places, by violations of federal, constitutional, and international law. I do not favor further widening the nation’s wounds, now or next year, through continuous investigations, indictments, and impeachments. I am confident that history will hold these malefactors accountable for their deeds, and the country will move on."

Worked so well didn't it. A real deterrent.

Anon wrote on July 2, 2007 3:33 PM:

Am I the only person who was annoyed by SickAndTired's comment "I never thought I'd see a President make Jimmy Carter's term look good"?

I always thought Carter was done in by bad publicity--the "Playboy" interview, the attack bunny--and, of course, by the Iranian hostage situation, which was a thorny situation in all sorts of ways.

But these things make Carter some sort of ultimate presidential travesty only recently overtaken by Bush?

I would think Carter is beaten in the awfulness sweepstakes by Reagan and Nixon. Reagan was a patronizing clown, stringing everyone along with his phony I'm-just-an-old-grandfather schtick. Most people ate it up, but it made me sick that he was our president. Foul, greedy, poor-hating, polluter-friendly policies all dressed up with a smarmy wink and a thumbs-up sign.

And then of course Nixon was wildly dishonest, attempting a small-scale version of the criminal enterprise that is our present White House.

And Carter beats these people? HUH??

Joe D. Grinder wrote on July 2, 2007 3:34 PM:

"...What's that, maybe 5 months sitting around reading, writing a multimillion dollar memoir, e-mailing friends and interviewing for jobs on various boards of directors in the defense, security and aerospace industries?"

You missed: obligatory Fellowship at the Heritage Foundation; talk-radio host gig; speaking tour sponsored by The Fedeeralist Scoiety; "commentator/consultant" for Fox News; PR man for The Carlyle Group.

nellieh wrote on July 2, 2007 3:42 PM:

SCOOTER LIBBY!!!! COME ON DOWN!!!! My apologies to the court of appeals. I thought they had them in their pockets. Also, I have been mistaking Judge Sentelle for Judge Silberman. Isn't Sentelle the Judge that met with Senators to decide on Starr as Prosecutor?
Security code: jewel. Libby should be ready to give up the family jewel. Either to Fitz or Bubba.

ds wrote on July 2, 2007 4:03 PM:

Denial still runs deep here. Libby does not talk and does not see a day in jail. "DOJ guidelines" for an admin that doesn't follow the US Constitution, Statutes or its own exec. orders?

What more would you need to understand that?

Pardon in 14 days is the high/low.

ds wrote on July 2, 2007 4:09 PM:

Denial still runs deep here. Libby does not talk and does not see a day in jail. "DOJ guidelines" for an admin that doesn't follow the US Constitution, Statutes or its own exec. orders?

What more would you need to understand that?

Pardon in 14 days is the high/low.

Toss these crooks wrote on July 2, 2007 4:17 PM:

Go ahead and pardon the Scootster. That will remove any remaining question about an obstruction of justice charge and will just feed Leahy and Co. with more resolve.

Maybe that's the straw that puts impeachment back on the table with the necessary votes

Michael Stevens wrote on July 2, 2007 4:37 PM:

If Bush pardons or commutes Libby's sentence, I think Bush would lose another 5% or 6% of his already dismal approval ratings. He'd be a 23 percenter, and might stay there for the rest of his term.

A pardon or commutation would directly tie Bush to one of the few scandals Bush has thus far avoided. It would also convince many Americans that Bush believes in one set of laws for the masses, and another for his cronies.

Most Americans need little convincing that Bush is incompetent, hard headed, and out of touch. But the polling doesn't yet show that most Americans believe Bush to be corrupt. I think an immediate Libby pardon would immediately convince a huge percentage of Americans of Bush's corruption. This is no small thing; corruption was second only to the war as the most important issue in the '06 exit polls.

A Republican administration that the public believes has incompantly run the war while being throughly corrupt would be nothing but good for the Democrats in the 2008 elections.

I, like many here would very much like to see Libby do the time for his crimes. And I'll be throughly outraged if Libby is pardoned, but I'll shed no tears. Because an immediate pardon of Libby could result in quite a large payoff for the Democrats.

Most of the Republican Presidential candidates have supported a pardon of Libby. Imagine the eventual nominee being asked why a pardoned Libby wasn't yet on his staff? I think a Libby pardon would be the gift that keeps on giving.

Glenn Becker wrote on July 2, 2007 5:00 PM:

No wonder Bush wants no oaths and no transcripts if his people talk to Congress. Telling the truth has become a missing gene among Republicans, going back to when Bush refused to testify under oath to the 9/11 commission. When Bush pardons Libby--the only way to make sure he doesn't seek a sentence reduction by telling the truth about Cheney--it will confirm the Republicans as the party of perjury and perfidy.

Delia wrote on July 2, 2007 5:01 PM:

"Am I the only person who was annoyed by SickAndTired's comment "I never thought I'd see a President make Jimmy Carter's term look good"?"

No, you're not the only one. You're quite right. Carter suffered from a certain amount of the bad press flak that's dogged dems in curiously increasing amounts since that time. He never got proper credit for his accomplishments, and the right wing drive to canonize St. Ronnie, in part at his expense, has swept a whole lot of crap under the rug.

RW wrote on July 2, 2007 5:39 PM:

Maybe someone might come to his prison and tell him the story of the Romans like Tom did in Godfather II, so his family is permanently taken care of.

My guess is that if Libby is not pardoned immediately, he will crack and turn State's evidence which is what we are all hoping for, although he is a convicted perjurer and will not make for great witness.

Actually I am wondering what the real stories will be when they are actually told when this Administration is actually done.

anon wrote on July 2, 2007 5:57 PM:

...if Libby is not pardoned immediately...

Like this afternoon, apparently.