Best Sentencing Idea Yet

Here is a creative sentencing suggestion for the Libby case: 

If [Sandy] Berger doesn't do time for his acts, then certainly, if Libby is convicted, his punishment should maybe be getting to kick Berger in the ass for 100 hours, or something to that effect.

Let's call that "community service".

HOUSEKEEPING:  As of 2 PM, the Libby jury is still out...

I am headed to the land of the uncertain ISP, so I am going dark for at least a few hours and perhaps until Sunday night.  However, there will be open threads over the weekend.

Comments

[Patrick]

Maybe if "we" (and by "we, I think I mean Libby) get a verdict, Clarice can open a "NOT GUILTY" thread.

Or something.

[ErnestAbe]

I don't understand the comparison to Sandy Berger. No one on the left defends his actions and critices his prosecutors. Are you saying that Fitzgerald's pursuit of Libby is equally valid?

[JSC]

Can't because the letter after his name is wrong.

Berger (D)
Libby (R)

Different set of rules.

[Karl]

Here's a hoot from today's WaPo on how Fitz's prosecution will be judged:

"The stakes are enormously high," said Robert Mintz, a former federal prosecutor and now a defense lawyer. If Fitzgerald loses this case, Mintz said, "some will say he lost his way in his search for truth, just another case of a prosecutor who sets off and thinks they can't come back unless they have a prosecution, no matter how trivial."

But several lawyers monitoring the trial as spectators say Fitzgerald has presented a compelling case that the government had a duty to bring.

Whether Fitz should have brought the case is not determined by whether he wins.

But the second part is funnier because the lawyer-spectators are nowhere to be found in this article. Not a single name. Not a single quote. They are more covert than Valerie Plame.

[Dale in Atlanta]

PS: in a sign that Dhimmitude is not that far down the pike in Britain; the Muslim Council of Britain, has British supporters in trying to implement Shari'a in British Public Schools!

Read this, and see if your Blood doesn't boil?

I'm sure the Jacobin Left, in this country, will soon be helphing the Jihadis push for the same thing!

Great....

http://www.express.co.uk/news_detail.html?sku=1264

[charles austin]

Whether Libby is found guilty or not, another goal has been achieved with this prosecution -- intimidating and instilling fear into anyone who dares to work for a Republican administration. How many exceptional, talented people just thought to themselves, "why would anyone risk having to defend yourself from an accusation like this?"

[clarice]

As I've said before, each and every appointee should have an agreement in writing that the president will never agree to the appointment of a special prosecutor no matter how loudly the leaky NYT or WaPo or lAt demands one.

[Sara (Squiggler)]

Who says 'George Bush lives in a bubble? Never ever misunderestimate our President. LOL

No Exact Timetable, President Says

Under increased pressure to announce an exit strategy from Iraq, President George W. Bush revealed plans today to bring U.S. troops home on the budget airlines JetBlue.

Mr. Bush received praise for his decision to withdraw American troops, but his choice of JetBlue to transport them raised more than a few eyebrows.

According to most official estimates, with its recent spate of scheduling problems and flight delays, JetBlue could take up to seven years to bring U.S. troops home, and possibly ten years in the event of inclement weather.

But at a press conference at the White House today, the president argued that the selection of Jet Blue was “crucial” to the success of his latest exit strategy.

“Setting an exact timetable for a withdrawal from Iraq would be playing right into the enemy’s hands,” Mr. Bush said. “By going with JetBlue, our enemy will have no idea when we’re leaving.”

To emphasizes his point, Mr. Bush added, “And neither will we.”

Across Iraq, U.S. GIs were hopeful that the news about JetBlue meant that they would be home by Christmas, or at least by Easter 2012.

At JetBlue headquarters in Forest Hills, New York, CEO David Neeleman said that it was “flattering” to be chosen to play such a critical role in President Bush’s new exit strategy, but wondered if his embattled airlines has what it takes to bring troops home from Iraq.

“We’re still having a hard time getting people home to Fort Myers,” Mr. Neeleman said.

http://www.borowitzreport.com/

[Christopher Fotos]

Folks, refresh my memory (since it comes up in that Post story). Re this passage:

Hannah, who said he was lucky to get a few minutes to talk to Libby, was supposed to help buttress Libby's argument that he had more important things to remember when he spoke to investigators than conversations with reporters.

With two quick questions, Fitzgerald drew Hannah to the week of July 6, 2003, when, the jurors had been told, Libby met for two hours with Times reporter Judith Miller to complain about Wilson.

"And so, if you look at what was going on . . . if he gave someone an hour or two during that week, it was something that Mr. Libby thought would be important, correct?"

Hannah paused, but had to agree: "With regard to me, yes."

Was there a discussion here at JOM about whether that discussion was large about Wilson vs. about the NIE?

[Sara (Squiggler)]

Chris, IIRC it was the NIE.

[Appalled Moderate]

I understand there are some dittoheads roaming about unfamiliar with JOM-world. JOM-world actually is a full-service weblog site, with frequent posts on economic matters, Iraq, and the frequent errors of the New York Times. But it is most famous for its reliably right-wing analysis of all aspects of the Plame case. The proprietor here is Tom Maguire, who is strongly GOP. The subsidiary proprietor is clarice, who has her own theories on the Plame case, and is not shy about sharing them.

JOM-world is enlivened by its feisty group of contributors, generally right wing, occasionally shading into moderate conservative. Anyone to the right of, say, Mitt Romney, is a bit of a rarity and is likely to be labelled a liberal by the keepers of the flame in the comments section. Generally, people are civil to one another, though, again, folks to the left of Mitt are gong to take some hits from multiple sources.

Generally, thought leaders here are clarice, cathyf, azaghal, cecil turner, jm hanes (and some others who I am forgetting). I tend towards polite debunking. Others who are useful debunkers include Anonymous Liberal, Jeff. Texas Toast is useful for a good Democratic party jab now and then. Mr. Maguire, the host, actually is a bit to the left of the majority of his posters.

There are also pit bulls, left and right. Best to ignore them. They tend to change their names frequently and make little sense. (Though a couple of the right wing pit bulls do retain their names) Teasing them will cause a long flame war that will just annoy everyone.

For funny posts, Hit and Run is the best bet. CAROL HERMAN is a little unusual, if your taste in blog commentary runs to that.

[Javani]

We'll see if they convict or not but in retrospect it was a mistake not to call Cheney.

Fitz in his closing used the WashPost article by Wilson and underlined by Cheney as some kind of super-duper secret/incriminating document, an insight the jury is supposed to be privileged to have seen.

Rather than an article simply noted by Cheney because it accuses him of lying and hiding information. So what, why wouldn't Cheney be interested in it? Why wouldn't Cheney be interested in correcting the record?

Yet the dominant narrative in the MSM insinuate any response to Wilson was ominous, which in turn revalidates the Wilson as Truth Teller narrative engendered by no less than Wilson himself.
This discourse may have an effect on the jury.

If there is a retrial Wells must insist on putting Joe Wilson on the stand. Fitz' closing shows its relevance.

[Christopher Fotos]

Thanks Sara. I just found JOM post where it's discussed.

[Sara (Squiggler)]

AM -- let's not forget we who are pro-military libertarians who are variously described as crazy, a freak, delusional, misinformed, underinformed, or in the case of one poster, too stupid to bother with anymore.

[ErnestAbe]

I agree with Charles Austin at 12:13pm.

There should be no investigations of anyone serving in a Republican administration.

[RichatUF]

sorry to be bored and OT (this waiting thing is crap)...

Dale in Atlanta above...

I'm sure the Jacobin Left, in this country, will soon be helphing the Jihadis push for the same thing!

Don't they are ready have imams go to the public schools to "teach" the kids about the shaha'da, the pillars of faith, etc in a block instructional program (I've heard it done here in FL;CA or OR had a case a while back)

RichatUF

//still waiting for verdict

[Appalled Moderate]

sorry sara for forgetting you. I have never described you that way.

[hit and run]

AM - you forgot the most important detail.

(oh and thanks for the mention)

The Women Are Hot!

[Appalled Moderate]

H&R

Ihaven't got my women of JOM Playboy in the mail yet. Is there a website?

[windansea]

SAN JOSE, Costa Rica (AP)—A tour bus of U.S. senior citizens defended themselves against a group of alleged muggers, sending two of them fleeing and killing a third in the Atlantic coast city of Limon, police said on Thursday.

One of the tourists - a retired member of the U.S. military aged about 70 - put assailant Warner Segura in a head lock and broke his clavicle after the 20-year-old and two other men armed with a knife and gun held up their tour bus Wednesday, said Luis Hernandez, the police chief of Limon, 80 miles east of San Jose.

The two other men fled when the 12 senior citizens started defending themselves. The tourists then drove Segura to the Red Cross where the man was declared dead.

[windansea]

no charges in above case...imagine if this happened in the US

[sammy small]

Re: Libby vs Bergler

The only way the WH passivity makes sense is that they believe the Libby charade was the Dem payback for the Clinton investigation and impeachment. Bergler is back to square one, where an eye for an eye politics will once again start.

I for one don't think GWB has any thing to lose by going after all suspected criminal activity. Let the shows begin anew.

[jwest]

Make it the Women of JOM Calendar.

February – Clarice in a mink bikini, going over some “briefs”

July – Sara in short-shorts washing her car in the California sun.

August – Carol in her slippers and shower cap arguing with that damn sprinkler.

[Sara (Squiggler)]

July – Sara in short-shorts washing her car in the California sun.

Well at least "in the sun." The packing has begun and hopefully I'll be on the road to Florida within the next 10 days to 2 weeks. Of course, since this is the first time in my long life I have no one else's needs to consider, who knows where I might end up. Well no one but my own, Cuddles Kitty's and Princess Puppy's needs.

Let the adventure begin.

[sbw]

AM: it is most famous for its reliably right-wing analysis of all aspects of the Plame case.

So tell me, AM. what is it about the analysis that makes it anything other than sensible?

The only reason some might label it right-wing is that they disagree with it... but then, mis-labeling something so they can discard it without consideration is what distinguishes much left-wing "analysis."

[PeterUK]

Appalled Moderate what,Left,Right,Extreme middle ?

[Sue]

sbw,

Isn't it obvious? Only right wingers don't suffer from BDS. ::grin::

[ErnestAbe]

WH passivity on Libby case?

I thought that the official WH spokesperson (the one funded by all of us taxpayers) made an official statement from the WH podium exonerating Libby. I think his name is McClellan. You may want to look it up.

I don't recall Bill Clinton's spokesperson making any similar claims on Berger's behalf.

[Sue]

Unless something happens quickly, we aren't going to have a verdict today.

[PeterUK]

"I don't recall Bill Clinton's spokesperson making any similar claims on Berger's behalf."

That is because Bill Clinton no longer had tax payer's money to spend.

[clarice]

And because they did it by manipulating the press coverage.
Clintonism 101

[ErnestAbe]

Nope, sorry PeterUK, but Bill Clinton does have a spokesperson. So that's not why.

[topsecretk9]

I don't recall Bill Clinton's spokesperson making any similar claims on Berger's behalf.

Ahem.

Law enforcement sources said archive staff members told FBI agents they saw Berger placing items in his jacket and pants, and one archive staffer told agents that Berger also placed something in his socks.

That latter allegation drew a sharp response from Berger associate and former White House lawyer Lanny Davis, who challenged any unnamed official who makes such an accusation to come forward publicly.

"I suggest that person is lying," he said. "And if that person has the guts, let's see who it is who made the comment that Sandy Berger stuffed something into his socks."

[PeterUK]

Yes? Perhaps he was to mean to pay him.Could be of course,Clinton simply regards his minions as expendable.

[Appalled Moderate]

sbw:

The theories subscribed to on this website with respect to Libby tend to be held by right-wingers. Lefties tand to like Fitz. Most of the rest of us aren't paying attention at this point.

Hence "right-wing", which I meant as a descriptive, rather than derogatory term.

[Rick Ballard]

Tops,

Another excellent example of the difference between just playin' dumb and just plain dumb. Tom needs to have the place sprayed for thread lice again.

[Sara (Squiggler)]

I thought all the brouhaha was over McClellan protecting Rove while "scapegoating" Libby by leaving him out of the statement?

[Bill in AZ]

TS - now watch Ernest start dragging the goalposts... you'd think libs would get tired after doing that all day.

[ErnestAbe]

I thought all the brouhaha was over McClellan protecting Rove while "scapegoating" Libby by leaving him out of the statement?

That was McClellan's initial statement. He subsequently exonerated Libby.

[sbw]

AM: The theories subscribed to on this website with respect to Libby tend to be held by right-wingers

Painting with a rather broad brush, aren't you? And to what end? Does it help understanding? If you think so, explain how?

I guess my point is that you don't seem to have a point. What good is the overgeneralization anyway?

[clarice]

Logical people who pay attention to the facts in this case and are not blinded by partisan views tend to support Libby here.

[bio mom]

Think that maybe the food at the courthouse is just too good?? Perhaps the jurors just don't want to give it up. Or since they seemed to bond with each other and with the judge etc. (remember Valentine's day) they are having separation anxiety??

Seriously, Whatever the verdict, I am glad that it will have been arrived at with diligence by the jury.

[topsecretk9]

When confronted, Mr. Berger lied. He told investigators he had mistakenly taken the documents and then disposed of them inadvertently afterward. In public statements on the matter he called the theft "an honest mistake." He declared his only intent had been to collect materials for testimony about the Clinton administration's counterterrorism policies for the September 11 Commission. At the time, Bill Clinton dismissed the matter with a chuckle. "The innocent explanation is the most likely one," Mr. Clinton told reporters in Colorado. "We were all laughing about it on the way over here."

[ErnestAbe]

Good point about Lanny Davis defending Berger.

But the main point remains that you just don't see the left-wing blogesphere attacking the prosecutor who went after Berger the way you see all the right-wing vitriol aimed at "Paddy" Fitzpatrick.

[clarice]

What about Lanny Davis and that neat stunt of dropping the bomb on a Friday before the convention and blaming it on the Administration, Ernest?
Did you miss that Clinton trick?
Odd, isn't it, that 15 seconds after that routine CIA referral hit the desk at the DoJ someone leaked it to Mitchell, but Berger was under investigation for a year and only his Clinton pals knew of it?(And the same folks at DoJ were handling both cases...For the DoJ lurker who keeps popping in, we are onto you.)

[Appalled Moderate]

clarice:

You could post that sentiment at firedoglake, and change only one word and (of course) your name.

Commentary on this case tends to track the ideological divide, with the apathetic middle generally remaining apathetic.

sbw -- do you just not like being labelled right wing?

[ErnestAbe]

And it is quite a different story when the offical White House spokesperson, speaking officially as the voice of the president (who also happens to be the nations prosecutor-in-chief, as man who controls the justice department), makes an official statement of exoneration on behalf of Libby -- a statement, in fact, written by Libby, as we learned in the trial.

[Patrick]

Mindless speculation: Nothing at 4:20 ET. If there's no verdict today, the Intrade odds go down. Likely by now they've taken at least one vote, early, to establish the jury baseline. By this point, with essentially one full day of easels and post-it notes, I would guess they've taken another. No verdict yet, let the fighting begin.

But what do I know?

[PeterUK]

sbw,
Appalled is simply marking the card for those who follow the Rush rush.

[clarice]

AM:"You could post that sentiment at firedoglake, and change only one word and (of course) your name. "

I could but I'd be laughing too hard at the absurdity to type.

[jwest]

AM,

You can’t be serious.

Any serious point presented on this site is discussed and debated with reason, facts and respect.

FDL is a cult where no dissent from the party line is tolerated. Period. Got It? (Hamshireze)

[topsecretk9]

you just don't see the left-wing blogesphere attacking the prosecutor who went after Berger the way you see all the right-wing vitriol aimed at "Paddy" Fitzpatrick.

Why should they?

A judge on Thursday ordered Sandy Berger, President Clinton’s national security adviser, to pay a $50,000 fine for illegally taking classified documents from the National Archives.

The punishment handed down by U.S. Magistrate Judge Deborah Robinson exceeded the $10,000 fine recommended by government lawyers. Under the deal, Berger avoids prison time but he must surrender access to classified government materials for three years.

“The court finds the fine is inadequate because it doesn’t reflect the seriousness of the offense,” Robinson said, as a grim-faced Berger stood silently.

Besides, leftist bloggers still give Berger a lot of love.

[royf]

ErnestAbe

Hell Clinton sent Burger to do his dirty work, Burger knew he had to fall on the sword.

"President Bill Clinton signed a letter authorizing former National Security Adviser Sandy Berger's access to classified documents that later came up missing, according to a newly released investigation report by the National Archives and Records Administration.

The NARA investigation report said Clinton signed an April 12, 2002, letter designating Berger – and another person whose named is redacted – as "agents on his behalf to review relevant NSC documents regarding Osama Bin Laden/Al Qaeda, Sudan and Presidential correspondence from or to (Sudanese President) Omar Bashir, contained in the Clinton Presidential records." A subsequent letter from a National Security Council official, May 14, 2002, said Berger repeatedly was briefed that "he was not allowed to remove any documentation from NARA."

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=53629

But here is what Clinton said

At the time, Bill Clinton dismissed the matter with a chuckle. "The innocent explanation is the most likely one," Mr. Clinton told reporters in Colorado. "We were all laughing about it on the way over here."

http://www.washtimes.com/op-ed/20050404-084700-5791r.htm

[topsecretk9]

And it is quite a different story when the offical White House spokesperson, speaking officially as the voice of the president

You mean like when Sid "smear merchant" Blumenthal told reports Monica was a nutty slutty stalking skank?

[Appalled Moderate]

j west:

Here's what Clarice said:

Logical people who pay attention to the facts in this case and are not blinded by partisan views tend to support Libby here.

Here are possible one word variations:

Logical people who pay attention to the facts in this case and are not blinded by partisan views tend to support Fitz here.

Logical people who pay attention to the facts in this case and are not blinded by partisan views tend to oppose Libby here.

[PeterUK]

"But the main point remains that you just don't see the left-wing blogesphere attacking the prosecutor who went after Berger the way you see all the right-wing vitriol aimed at "Paddy" Fitzpatrick."

But my weren't they cheering for old "Paddy",he was going to indict everyone from the Arch Angel Gabriel down. Bush,Cheney,Rove,poor Libby was the poor relation,were to be dragged from the White House in chains,the drumbeat of "Fitzmas" was incessant.The Left were having orgasms of vicarious vengeance,the Left is all vitriol all the time.

[ErnestAbe]

Besides, leftist bloggers still give Berger a lot of love.

I have read thousands and thousands of posts all over the blogesphere, left, right and center. And I can't recall ever seeing any defense of Berger's actions. Certainly not during and after the prosecution.

Please set me straight, if I missed something.

How can you compare this to the way Fitzgerald is treated here and elsewhere?

[Gary Maxwell]

AM

Isnt that two words for the change? Must be the bean counter in me. But you cant count.

[jwest]

AM,

Unless any of those statements were preceded by a sycophantic fawning tribute to the brilliance of Jane Hamsher, they would be immediately struck down by FDL’s army of comment screeners.

(We only need to kiss TM’s ring occasionally.)

[Appalled Moderate]

Abe:

really, the comparison does not work, as Berger plead guilty, and there is no question of fact about whether there was actually an underlying crime.

[sbw]

AM: sbw -- do you just not like being labelled right wing?

No. I don't suffer gladly people acting foolishly. I mean, really, what is the substance of your remark? It's shallowness institutionalized.

[ErnestAbe]

PeterUK, true the left has cheered Libby's prosecution and the right has cheered Berger's.

The difference is that the left did not attack Berger's prosecutor.

[Sara (Squiggler)]

Apples and Oranges -- Berger is the perp, Fitzgerald the prosecutor.

[RichatUF]

sorry to be OT again, but saw something on Drudge

60 minutes show

Appeal for Redress and Astroturfing

see here

pass it around

Can Dewey Canyon and Winter Soldier be that far behind...I'm thinking on Monday some of those guys will be tossing their medals over the White House fence....

RichatUF

[clarice]

Abe, as I said they never knew there was an investigation until Berger leaked it after the deal was made.

[PeterUK]

"I have read thousands and thousands of posts all over the blogesphere, left, right and center. And I can't recall ever seeing any defense of Berger's actions. Certainly not during and after the prosecution."

Prove it.

[Sue]

I laugh at how badly the left wants Bush/Cheney. So bad they are willing to ignore the following from their beloved Saint Patrick:

I will state up front that I firmly believe that the Patriot Act contained the single most important – and necessary – change in American law as it effects national security over the last decade, and that is section 218, which played a critical role in ending the artificial“wall” between intelligence and law enforcement personnel. As a prosecutor who has worked on terrorism matters for over ten years now, I thank you on behalf of federal prosecutors, FBI agents and the public for that long overdue change that has made America safer.

He supports, nay, he doesn't just support he passionately advocated for the most hated reform by the Bush administration. ::grin::

[Appalled Moderate]

Rick:

You are wedded to a track changes paradigm, which count the removal of a word as one change, and the substitution of another word instead of the removed word as a second change.

[michaelt]

The left didn't need to attack "Berger's prosecutor" you lunkhead - Berger got a slap on the wrist.

Have Condi commit that crime and get the same punishment, and think what the lefty blogs would've said.

[AMDG]

AM Says
"Here's what Clarice said:

Logical people who pay attention to the facts in this case and are not blinded by partisan views tend to support Libby here.

Here are possible one word variations:

Logical people who pay attention to the facts in this case and are not blinded by partisan views tend to support Fitz here.

Logical people who pay attention to the facts in this case and are not blinded by partisan views tend to oppose Libby here."

AMDG Observes:
However, if you actually view the facts as seen by the jury:

1. Based on their testimony, either Fleischer's or Russert's testimony is impeached.

2. Russert's testimony is impeached by the FBI report where he admits it is possible Sevret Agent Girl was discussed

3. Cooper's notes.

How does one look at these and not have reasonable doubt?

[Rick Ballard]

sbw,

How would you rate Apuzzo's reporting on the trial to date? I think he has done a reasonably good job and he seems to be able to keep the AP editor's hands (those would all be left hands) off his work.

[clarice]

View the evidence thru a Che T-shirt?

[PeterUK]

"PeterUK, true the left has cheered Libby's prosecution and the right has cheered Berger's.

The difference is that the left did not attack Berger's prosecutor."

The difference is,Libby hasn't even been found guilty of anything as yet,to the left simply being a Republican is enough to pronounce guilt.

The other difference is that the MSM,the military wing of the Democrat party, buried the Berger story so deep and hung the Libby one so high.

[topsecretk9]

ErnestAbe

The left didn't denounce Berger either and if you recall during the ABC dustup were referring to Berger's renewed esteem on matters of national security.

But if your feeling bad for Fitzgerald, I am sure you among all the democrats sending love letters and support to Ken Starr.

[Rick Ballard]

AM,

Take that point up with Gary as he was the one who wrote the comment.

[Walter]

If Libby faced a $10-50K fine and temporary loss of his security clearance, I wouldn't be here.

Just wouldn't matter.

It's the overcharging of crimes and the zealous pursuit of a conviction on those charges that makes the matter relevant.

That and the free tutorial on criminal practice.

[Cecil Turner]

He subsequently exonerated Libby.

Well, almost:

Q Scott, earlier this week you told us that neither Karl Rove, Elliot Abrams nor Lewis Libby disclosed any classified information with regard to the leak. I wondered if you could tell us more specifically whether any of them told any reporter that Valerie Plame worked for the CIA?

MR. McCLELLAN: Those individuals -- I talked -- I spoke with those individuals, as I pointed out, and those individuals assured me they were not involved in this. And that's where it stands.

Q So none of them told any reporter that Valerie Plame worked for the CIA?

MR. McCLELLAN: They assured me that they were not involved in this.

Q Can I follow up on that?

Q They were not involved in what?

MR. McCLELLAN: The leaking of classified information.

Apparently correct, as far as it goes. Didn't answer the one question, though, did he?

. . . a statement, in fact, written by Libby, as we learned in the trial.

The statement is the same as the one drafted by Libby? Seems to me that one went more along the lines of:

I've talked to Libby.
I said it was ridiculous about Karl
and it is ridiculous about Libby
Libby was not the source of the Novak story.
And he did not leak classified information.

(The earlier statement by McClellan is here for those who want to contrast and compare.)

[Appalled Moderate]

sbw:

And your counter argument is...? If the term "right-wing" does not work, what does work? "Seekers of truth and justice" "Republicans" "A bi-partisan coalition" "Conservatives", "wingnuts"?

If you don't like my earlier post, which had a intentionally satiric tone to it, that's your biz. But you are being more than a touch pedantic, dont you think?

[Pofarmer]

The difference is that the left did not attack Berger's prosecutor.

There was actually, like, a case there, with witnesses and everything? Yes?

There's no way to see Berger as a political persecution.

The difference between Berger and Libby? Berger actually did steal documents and obstruct to protect a higher up.

[AMDG]

Ernest Abe says:
"PeterUK, true the left has cheered Libby's prosecution and the right has cheered Berger's.

The difference is that the left did not attack Berger's prosecutor."

AMDG Observes:
Notice how Abe neglects to mention the left's treatment of Ken Starr - treatment that was intitiated and directed by the White House.

Imagine the wailing and knashing of teeth if there were daily conference calls between Bush administration officials and various hacks and pundits (Richard Bent Peniste, we hardly knoew ye!) devising strategy and spreading talking points on how to attack Javert.

BTW, Abe, the left did not attack Berger;s prosecuter because the prosecuter was in the tank for Berger.

[ErnestAbe]

Yes, Sue at 1:40, precisely!

We leftists with serious cases of BDS know that Fitzpatrick is no raging liberal. He is loved because he is seen as a fair-minded crusader for truth, justice and the American way. Quite simply, we see him as doing his job.

[Pofarmer]

Berger got a slap on the wrist.

It was more like a light massage.

[Pofarmer]

He is loved because he is seen as a fair-minded crusader for truth, justice and the American way. Quite simply, we see him as doing his job.

I suppose his closing rebuttal was "just doing his job"?

BDS Takes one to know one.

[Dwilkers]

HOUSEKEEPING: As of 2 PM, the Libby jury is still out...

I started to post the other day that if the jury stays out for more than 10 hours or so that will mean they're in a knock down drag out fight.

I've been on 3 federal juries (2 criminal and 1 civil) and IMO there is no way they couldn't have worked it out in the first 8 hours of deliberations.

They're locked up.

I just hope that whoever is holding out for Libby has folded their hands in their lap and is ready to sit there until hell freezes over.

These charges were not proven IMO, and nobody should be subject to going to prison over this farce.

[Patrick]

AMDG,
I have asked Pete, Martin, Semantic Leo and Cycletichorn (I forgot his exact name) the same question, and never got a straight answer. I'm beginning to think there isn't one short of "I hate George Bush," but I'm still waiting to be convinced otherwise. But I'm no longer holding my breath.

[boris]

If the term "right-wing" does not work, what does work?

Conservative, classic liberal, right.

Seems the left doesn't get called left-wing as much. Perhaps it's percetpion that calling us "right" is too presumtive of "correct".

[PeterUK]

Pofarmer,
There was enough money on ice to pay Berger's fine.

[Sara (Squiggler)]

AM -- the problem I have with your post is in trying to put a political slant on a court proceeding, by either side. Justice should be blind to politics. Granted hard to do when the complainant (Wilson/Plame) and the prosecutor are both so politically invested.

I came here to JOM some time after the presser when I couldn't make sense of the charges. I found others here who were trying to figure out those same charges and working their way through what was known at the time. I've seen theories change as new info became available, until it became clear to all but a few, that there is no sense to be made of something that starts from an invalid premise.

[AMDG]

Ernest,

How do you not putting Armitage, Mitchell, Russert, etc. before the grand jury with "doing his job".

Javert started with his conclusion. He then cherry picked the facts that supported that conclusion.

If he were doing his job he would have sought all the facts and then made a conclusion.

The only reason the left supports him is that is fact free conclusion si the same as their faact free conclusion.

[Sue]

We leftists with serious cases of BDS know that Fitzpatrick is no raging liberal.

Of course you know that. The WaPo told you he was an enigma. I doubt many of you realize just how much an enigma he really is. And I doubt even more you had any idea he was so passionate about supporting the Patriot Act.

[Patrick]

Dwilkers,
Thanks for the insight. You may be mistaken, however, assuming that the "holdout" is holding out for not guilty.
Now how's that for optimism?

[ErnestAbe]

Good points. Thanks for the civil discussion. I hope you all have a great weekend.

It is a beautiful, sunny, snowy day here in the mountains of NY.

[Sue]

I've got an idea, ErnestAbe, go over to FDL and drop that bombshell in there. Then report back here.

[Rick Ballard]

Dwilkers,

It's every bit as likely that there's a lefty sitting there, fingers in their ears and eyes shut, shouting "I can't hear you." Either is satisfactory to me.

[AMDG]

"How do you not "

Sorry, should be "How do you reconcile not putting . . . "

[sbw]

Rick: How would you rate Apuzzo's reporting on the trial to date?

I have written to our AP state bureau chief to compliment Apuzzo's reports (not Sniffen's, however). I told the bureau chief that since I regularly slam AP's reporting (Jamil Hussein, for instance) that I should take the time to give kudos when deserved.

[Pofarmer]

You may be mistaken, however, assuming that the "holdout" is holding out for not guilty.

I like it.

ErnestAbe.

Hope you're enjoying the snow. We just got rid of ours in MO. Now we just got mud.

[centralcal]

per fdl - jury sent home for day

[Sue]

Jury gone home for the day. Back Monday.

We already sort of knew but it has been confirmed.

[PeterUK]

"We leftists with serious cases of BDS know that Fitzpatrick is no raging liberal. He is loved because he is seen as a fair-minded crusader for truth, justice and the American way."

OK,who's spoofing? We all know socialism isn't the "American Way".

[royf]

Patrick

Well it looks like you can add ErnestAbe to the list of posters on the left which won't answer your question about Clintons personal assassination squad.

[sbw]

AM: If the term "right-wing" does not work, what does work?

If the label neither applies nor serves, don't clutter the air.

AM: If you don't like my earlier post, which had a intentionally satiric tone to it, that's your biz. But you are being more than a touch pedantic, dont you think?

Any satiric tone was not obvious. Pendantic? Hah!

[Sue]

I’m not surprised, from FDL’s descriptions and the materials requested, they sound like a very deliberative group of intelligent jurors, intent on making sure that they get all the evidence straight before rendering a verdict. This could be awhile.

I brought this post over here from FDL. It is the one post I want to see again if Libby is acquitted. ::grin::

[clarice]

sbw, you will be intrested to learn per Dutson that Apuzzo was significant in getting the media bloggers in and he was willing to share everything he knew about the case w/ everyone. I found that out when he called and I praised Apuzzo to the skies. He's a fine reporter and a gentleman, too boot. He may have been the only one in the gaggle w/ a right to look down on the amateurs and he was about the only one who supported us.

[Appalled Moderate]

Sara:

Problem is that it simply isn't factual to say that the theories (particularly the ones involving Fitz's appointment) here are propounded by people other than those who are on the right -- right wing.

The problem, of course, is that the prosecution got tied up with folks feelings about Iraq, which, frankly is not fair either to Libby or Fitz. Fitz just looks to me like the average prosecutor gone overboard in search for a big score, rather than some Leftist Avenger. Libby looks like a pretty average guy who may have shaded his story (or may not) to keep himself out of trouble.

[ErnestAbe]

royf, what question?

I gotta go, but what question did I fail to respond to? Why did you aske after you thought I left? Now that you knkow I am sticking around for a few more minutes, could you please ask me the question. Thanks.

[miriam]

firedoglake is reporting that the jury has left for the day with no verdict yet.

[John A. Fleming]

AM: its reliably right-wing analysis of all aspects of the Plame case.

SBW: what is it about the analysis that makes it anything other than sensible?

AM: The theories subscribed to on this website with respect to Libby tend to be held by right-wingers. Lefties tand to like Fitz. [snip] Hence "right-wing", which I meant as a descriptive, rather than derogatory term.

Sorry, AM, I gotta disagree. You've been called out. Might as well admit it.

Analysis is a search for the essential truths of a matter. Calling it right or left wing immediately discounts it as a blinkered search, with the preferred outcome already known, where only the facts that support the conclusion are considered, i.e. right/left wing analysis = bogus analysis. Because right/left wing implies preferred partisan outcomes. Because we have all seen the sordid spectacle of unprincipled partisans who argue one way, then the opposite, depending on the situation, e.g. invade Bosnia w/o Congress approval is good/bad, invade Iraq with it is good/bad.

I come here because the signal-to-noise ratio is high. I learn stuff here. And it's civil. At fdl et al, not so much. Here, I perceive the emphasis is on facts, not RightThink.

[clarice]

AM, if so, that's because we've read the constitution.

[Pofarmer]

The problem, of course, is that the prosecution got tied up with folks feelings about Iraq, which, frankly is not fair either to Libby or Fitz.

And who's fault was that? For a hint, look at Fitz's close.

[royf]

ErnestAbe

read AMDG at 1:49 and Patrick at 1:51

[boris]

average prosecutor gone overboard in search for a big score, rather than some Leftist Avenger

Leftist Avenger? Is that a deliberate straw dummy?

Just because the left is cheering the prosecution doesn't make Fitz a leftist himself. With all of the posts on this subject here lets see you back that up.

Clearly the guy has BDS.

[PeterUK]

"Libby looks like a pretty average guy who may have shaded his story (or may not) to keep himself out of trouble."

What trouble? Libby certainly didn't need the job,as a lawyer all he knew all had to do was say "I don't remember exactly".Remember "Paddy" already knew Libby wasn't the leaker,more likely Libby had a WTF moment.

[windansea]

Former Clinton aide David Gergen, who worked with Berger in the White House, was interviewed on NBC's "Today" show Tuesday and said of Berger's actions, "I think it's more innocent than it looks."

“It’s interesting timing,” Clinton said in Denver at a autograph session for his book “My Life.” Berger was national security adviser for all of Clinton’s second term.

John Podesta, Clinton’s White House chief of staff, was more blunt. “I think a lot of people are skeptical that this wasn’t engineered by people some place in the government,” he said Wednesday.

The timing of this leak suggests that the White House is more concerned about protecting its political hide than hearing what the commission has to say about strengthening our security,” the Kerry campaign said in a political memo distributed by email.

[sbw]

Clarice: He's a fine reporter and a gentleman, too boot.

Quality is refreshing wherever you find it.

I find quality here. Unfortunately, I find it missing on some other blogs that shall remain nameless -- a flaw I attribute that insecurity on their parts.

[Appalled Moderate]

John and Others:

I'll stick to right-wing as a descriptive term, thanks. If you take it as an insult, there's not much I can do. I was not using it to denigrate anyone's thought process. I didn't realize using the term woud hurt anyone's feelings or needlessly annoy sbw. I think of folks who are to the left of the center of gravity here, I am the only one who has said I think there's reasonable doubt in this case.

[Pofarmer]

John A Fleming

I think you were right. If it was obvious from the evidence that Libby were guilty, I, personally, wouldn't have any problem with it. Most conservatives want to do the right thing. Unfortunately, liberals love to use that against us.

[Sara (Squiggler)]

I was on a jury that ended up hanging 6 to 6. After 4 days of deliberation, we sent a message to the judge that we were deadlocked. We were all called back to the courtroom, given a tough talking to and sent back to deliberate some more. The next day, after another 8 hours of deliberation, we again sent a note to the judge that we were still deadlocked, with no movement by either side. We were called back to the courtroom one more time and this time the judge went off at us and literally screamed something about the case being black and white and that we were not doing our job if we couldn't come to a verdict. He then read some kind of legal charge to us (I forget the name of it) and told us to go back to deliberations and he didn't want to hear from us again without a verdict.

At the end of the 6th day, we rebelled and sent another note to the judge that we were at 6 to 6 and that was where we were stopping. The judge went apoplectic and before calling a mistrial he called us lazy, stupid, and disgusting. I was not the only one on that jury who left the courthouse in tears that day.

Later I read in the paper that our trial was actually a retrial of the defendant and that the first jury had also hung, 11 to 1. It made the judge's actions all the more reprehensible in my eyes as our 6 to 6 was a better result than the first time at 11 to 1.

It was a death penalty case and definitely not black and white. I still think that judge should have been de-benched. We worked hard and took our responsibility seriously and to be threatened by the judge was just wrong, especially when our decision was going to make a life or death difference.

[PeterUK]

Actually,I find Appalled Moderate's statements to be impugning the professional ethics of the lawyers who post here.
The forensic analysis of this case has been extremely thorough,in my view the legal team has been sterling in its pursuit of the truth.

[Appalled Moderate]

OK guys. Find a left-wing/moderate lawyer posting here who believes not only that Libby has reasonable doubt on his side, but is actually innocent.

[Patrick]

Ernest ABe:
I've been asking the questions about finding Libby guilty based on Miller's shopping bag archives, her inability to recall which sources she was protecting while doing 85 days in jail, and Cooper's poor notes, and failure to mention "the wife" to his boss after his talk with Libby and Eckenrode's note that Russert stated he could "not rule out" that he mentioned the wife to Libby.

Basically, how do those facts, admitted, in the record fail to produce reasonable doubt? But wait, there's more. Martin admits missing portions of Libby's call to cooper, and states that far from Libby being focused on it, she had to "nag" him to make the call. And Grenier's evolving memory.

And, finally, for Showcase Showdown: what evidence did Fitz show that the Wife was the focus of conversations from these 9 witnesses, rather than a small piece of information to which Libby reacted barely, if at all?

For the record, I'm willing, but unlikely to be convinced. But facts and evidence would. I just don't see it.

[PeterUK]

"OK guys. Find a left-wing/moderate lawyer posting here who believes not only that Libby has reasonable doubt on his side, but is actually innocent."

Ah the old leftist setting homework gambit,you find one Appalled.

[sbw]

AM, you are welcome to wear whatever colored glasses you want when you read what is written here. John A. Fleming made a good point, which you choose not to see.

Fair enough. It is your loss if your conclusion causes you to discount the value of what is offered here.

I only offered you insight and the opportunity to remove some scales from your eyes. Whether you do or not is up to you.

You didn't denigrate thought processes, you misinterpreted them. And I'm not annoyed. Disappointed, not annoyed.

[Rick Ballard]

Peter,

Libby wasn't even a true political player. His involvement stemmed from the fact that WH communications was in disarray due to Matalin's departure and Fleischer's imminent departure. Cathie Martin was in so far over her head that it was pitch black. Fleischer was cleaning out his desk and preparing to cash in on his experience. Bartlett dropped the ball so badly that he was actually 'catching up' (reading the INR memo) on the plane the day after Munchausen's column. Both Libby and Rove were drafted to fill a very real void and Libby had minimal experience in the type of pushback required.

It was Bartlett's job to catch the Munchausen column on Saturday and have an adequate response prepared for dissemination by Monday AM. It was Rove's job to vet the response on a political basis and perform the political push. Bartlett (and probably the President) could not even corral Tenet who was deeply committed to covering both the CIA and his own ass. Condi wasn't even in the loop and Powell and Armitage were off playing their own came.

It was the best political play of the entire NYT/Kerry campaign - very well scheduled and planned and also well executed. Munchausen was tipped early to Armitage's nepotism rebuttal and Corn was primed with the IIPA nonsense.

If Bartlett had been fully on game it would have been as big a squib as everything else about the NYT/Kerry fiasco. He wasn't, so Libby got the bill.

[Appalled Moderate]

I'm not looking to disprove my own thesis, Peter. That's your job (if you choose to accept it). I her a lot of grouching about "right-wing" but don't see much evidence the other way.

[ErnestAbe]

royf, here is my quick response to AMDG at 1:49.

It seems you are asking me to compare Patrick Fitzgerald and Ken Starr. You won't be surprised to learn that I think they are like completely different stories.

I believe Ken Starr was a very political person who went WAY too far. Even Richard Scaife, (who spent $2.4M investigating the charges that led to Starr's appointment) is having a serious rethinking about the whole vaste right-wing conspiracy that nearly brought down the Clintons.

I don't think that Ken Starr will be well-regarded by future historians. In any case, to me he always seemed like a very political figure, who leaked incessantly and unnecessarily revealed all kinds of lurid details to inflame the public.

Now, there seem to be many here who think that Fitz is a loose cannon, or an egomaniac, etc. But as a regular reader at FDL and DailyKos, I can tell you that he is not regarded as a leftwing crusador. Far from it. His career has shown him to be a crusador against corruption (among Democrats and Republicans).

Many here seem to think that he overstepped in this closing, but I think he simply went through the door openned by the defense. If he went to far, then Libby has as good a defense as money can buy, and he defense had every opportunity to object. That's how the system works. It is sad for Libby that, as Maid Marion reported, the defense was oddly slow to respond to Fitzpatrick.

I hope that answered your question. If not, the answer will have to wait for another time.

Have a nice weekend.

[Patrick]

For the record, I don't find AM's comments particularly objectionable. He used a generalization of JOM as "rightwing." Generalizations will always get someone mad, but they serve a purpose, and few commenters would call themselves "leftwing." Whether politics colors our analysis, I doubt it. Most opinions here are supported by a pretty good set of admitted facts. Much of the speculation can be colored by preconceived notions, but that is the nature of speculation. I find the argument here far more fact oriented and civil that at fdl. Some lefties come over itching for a fight, and stir the pot, but most responses tend to be good natured. Usually.

[Sara (Squiggler)]

AM -- as one who was recently told on JOM to take it to Daily Kos, I take exception to the right-wing label as strenuously as I take exception to the insult of being even jokingly related to anything on the Kos site.

[clarice]

EA--thank for putting together all that drivel about Starr so we can ignore it in a single tranche.
Show me one credible source that Starr leaked anything. To be sure the Clintonistas made that claim often and loudly. Court investigation of those charges as I recall always absolved him of those charges.
He was called a prurient snoop for going into the sex charges, but he tried to have all that assigned to someone else and the three judge panel which supervised him refused to allow him to do so.
Starr was much maligned.
And then there is the slander stirred up by Sid Blumenthal who stood on the courthouse steps and lied thru his ass about what had occurred in the gj knowing Starr could not respond and defend the process.
You deserve to be led by these grifters because you are so gullible. The rest of America deserves better.

[Appalled Moderate]

Sara:

Hey, I got banned off of Kevin Drum's site for some reason I don't understand, so I do feel your pain.

If I did not feel there was a general intellectual honesty among the posters here and the host, I wouldn't be bothering with you.

[boris]

Calling the site right-wing is even less accurate than calling yourself moderate.

[sbw]

AM, forget the labels. Take the nuggets of understanding you find here and apply them to making more sense of the world you live in.

Or you can treat it all as a grand game, until events turn round on you and you discover too late that it is not.

[PeterUK]

It's not a thesis Appalled,it's propaganda,has been since your first post.

[Paul]

A bit OT...

According to the National Business Review, Bush wins another battle.

[Cecil Turner]

Just because the left is cheering the prosecution doesn't make Fitz a leftist himself.

Well, I dunno what to call him, but he's clearly decided to throw in his lot with those who are on the wrong side in the war. "Defeatist" is probably a better term, but "leftist" works as a more commonly accepted label (and the groups are practically indistinguishable in any event). The fact that he apparently believes "chilling a whistleblower" (whom he tacitly admits is wrong, and that the OVP talking points are correct) is more important than discrediting what amounts to enemy propaganda in wartime is frankly astonishing, indefensible, and wrong. His methods (ignoring the actual leaker for a tangentially involved person with some actual responsibilities) are recklessly inept and morally bankrupt.

But as a regular reader at FDL and DailyKos, I can tell you that he is not regarded as a leftwing crusador.

Gee, what a shock, the guy who claimed to be a conservative is actually a flaming liberal. (And, just to be clear, I rather like flaming liberals looking for an argument . . . I just detest liars.) Speaking just for myself, don't let the door . . .

On point, it's a bit hard to feature those at FDL and DKOS regarding anyone as "leftwing" . . . just as I consider very few to be truly "rightwing."

[PeterUK]

"In any case, to me he always seemed like a very political figure, who leaked incessantly and unnecessarily revealed all kinds of lurid details to inflame the public."

Just like Fitz did in his presser.
Just like Fitz did in his closing to the jury,despite the judge having said the outing of Plame was not the issue.

[Sara (Squiggler)]

AM -- first let me say, I did understand your original point.

I think people come here for many many reasons. Some just love a good mystery and who leaked provided that. Some love the legal twists and turns and find them fascinating to follow and debate. Some took a look and thought Libby was getting a raw deal and found a home where they could express those sentiments without being banned or ridiculed. Some, and I include myself reluctantly in this category, never trust a prosecutor and believe they should have their feet held to the fire and be made to prove their case. And some probably didn't like America's past time being besmirched the way Fitz did in his presser. Some things should be off limits, even for a prosecutor whose oversight is by newspaper articles.

[PeterUK]

Patrick,
Why did Appalled bring up the subject on a thread about sentencing?

[Appalled Moderate]

boris:

Oh puh-leez. If you prefer "staunch Republican or staunch "anti-Democrat", go with that. But, until you surprise me with an appeal for gun control or socialized medicine, or a post supporting the President on immigration, you are certainly one of my "right wingers"

sbw:

I honestly don't understand your problem. The beliefs of the posters here, on the Plame case, as well as other issues, tends to be predominently right of center. The posters are more likely than not to think National Review is more correct than the New Republic. There are exceptions, as always, but not many.

Peter:

Right wing is propaganda? I assume, then, that you don't use the term left-wing ever, for fear of offending.

[Gary Maxwell]

The thing I always found most amusing is a guy who has the word Moderate in his moniker who is continually spouting the lefty talking points. What is anyone to the right of Jim Jeffords a right winger? That might explain the improper use of moderate, as in a paradigm shift.

ErnestAbe

Thanks I might have to work this weekend but I always try to enjoy myself.

As to your answer the question was in reg