Looking Glass Liars

Looking Glass Liars


Justin asks about Libby’s prison sentence – “Did he deserve it?” Commenters to the post disagree along partisan talking points. Last night Wolf Blitzer made the question a campaign issue in the Republican debate:

MR. BLITZER: So yes or no, would you pardon him?
MR. GIULIANI:“…and ultimately, there was no underlying crime involved.”
MR. ROMNEY: “…in this case, you have a prosecutor who clearly abused prosecutorial discretion by going after somebody when he already knew that the source of the leak was Richard Armitage. ”
SEN. BROWNBACK: “Yes. The basic crime here didn’t happen.”

What nonsense. Consider these quotes from two special prosecutors in two high profile investigations into high ranking members of the executive branch of government.

“Any lie under oath is serious. Any prosecutor will tell you… we cannot tolerate perjury. The truth is what drives our judicial system. If people do not come forward and tell the truth, we have no hope of making the judicial system work. If someone knowingly tells a lie under oath during any investigation, it is every prosecutor’s duty to respond by investigating and proving that if you can. That is a serious matter in any case. It is obvious it is a serious matter here in a case here where there is a national security investigation. The nature of any person telling a lie under oath to a grand jury is a serious problem. Having a high level official do that under oath under a national security investigation is something can never be acceptable. And that just made it mandatory that we pursue it. “ -Patrick Fitzgerald – Press Conference after verdict – March 6, 2007

“The whole idea of equal justice under law means that you’ve got to play by the rules. It has nothing to do with the underlying subject matter. You just tell the truth. “Lying under oath, and encouraging lies under oath, does go to the very heart and soul of what courts do. And if we say we don’t care, let’s forget about courts and we’ll just have other ways of figuring out how to handle disputes,” he said. “There is no excuse for perjury — never, never, never,” he said. “There is truth, and the truth demands respect.”Ken Starr -Time Interview – Nov. 25, 1998

I agree with both prosecutors and both prosecutions. I don’t care which political party they are in. If a high-ranking official lies under oath, you take that official to the wall. No one is above the law. No one has the option of lying under oath without paying the consequences.

The identical rationale was used for impeaching Bill Clinton and prosecuting Scooter Libby. Clinton lied under oath during an investigation. He was impeached for lying under oath in an investigation into a blowjob. Libby was tried and convicted for lying under oath in an investigation about the leak of the identity of a CIA operative. It is completely irrelevant if the underlying reason for the lie under oath was a crime or not a crime. The blowjob was also not a crime. Clinton was still impeached for the lie about the blowjob. It is true that Cheney authorizing the public identification of Plame as a CIA operative was not a crime. It was not a crime since the President gave Cheney the authorization to disclose any secret information he deemed neccessary. No matter that his reason was to cover his ass politically and hide his role in selling the war to the American public under false pretenses. It was still not illegal. Just like Clinton’s blow job was not illegal. But the lies under oath are another matter.

Libby is guilty. He perjured himself. He lied. No one else is going be convicted because Libby is taking the fall for others in the administration. Does he deserve it? Is he really a criminal? I don’t think he is a bad guy. He is loyal and he thinks he is being a patriot by protecting Cheney. I feel sorry for him. But he made a choice. He chose to protect the Vice President and probably Karl Rove’s political ass, while keeping the American people in the dark about what really happened. You can admire his misguided loyalty to the people he worked for, but he owed that loyalty to the American people. He made that choice.

As a consequence he might spend a year in jail for that choice, before Bush pardons him on the way out of office. So it goes. He deserves it.

Excerpted from a post on Divided We Stand. United We Fall

  • Joshua

    Spot-on. Of course, standing behind your own fellow party members isn’t exactly new under the sun. The Dems rallied around Clinton during his investigation/impeachment.

  • http://westanddivided.blogspot.com/ mw

    Too true. In the original post on DWSUWF, I called this the partisan hypocrite test. If you supported both prosecutions or opposed both prosecutions, you pass the test. But if you found that one was justified and the other was not … the diagnosis is obvious.

  • http://www.donklephant.com Justin Gardner

    LOVE the title of the post. Sums it all up very appropriately.

  • http://www.warning1938alert.ytmnd.com Jimmy the Dhimmi

    I agree. Don’t pardon him. You said this though:

    The blowjob was also not a crime. Clinton was still impeached for the lie about the blowjob.

    Do you think Clinton should have been found guilty of perjury, removed from office and put in jail for 10 months?

  • http://westanddivided.blogspot.com/ mw

    Actually I never said don’t pardon him. I said I expect him to be pardoned after he has served a year or so as Bush leaves office, and I am fine with that. My issue is with the argument that lack of a proven underlying crime is sufficient cause for a prosecutor to disregard perjury.

    Fair question though.

    My thoughts:

    The Libby trial followed the proscribed process for a official at his level. He was indicted, and put on trial by a jury of his peers, where he was found guilty and sentenced.

    I could be wrong about this, but I do not think a sitting President can be indicted and tried except after being removed via the impeachment process first. As such Clinton’s prosecution followed the only proscribed process for an offiical at his level, – impeachment and a trial in the senate, where his offense was not found to rise to the level of “High Crimes and Misdemeanors” sufficiently to convict him and remove him from office. If he had been removed from office and subsequently convicted in a trial, sure – he should have done some time.

    If Libby and been found not guilty, I would have been good with that too.

  • http://nykrindc.blogspot.com nykrindc

    Agree with you on both counts. Bill and Libby both deserved what they got.

  • ed pefferman

    Scooter Libby should be shot as a traitor, not jailed as a lier. His boss, ElDuce should be shot along with his, or perhaps hung from a lamp post.

  • http://iris.ca/iris07/frames.html CoolGlasses

    A reporter affected to trials (spent all his days in courtrooms) once said one day : I’ve spent my entire life in courtrooms and I can tell you there is no justice in our laws. The system seems to be engineered to help rich people getting out.