From Matt Apuzzo of the AP:
WASHINGTON - Former White House aide I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby cannot delay his 2 1/2-year prison term in the CIA leak case, a federal appeals court unanimously ruled Monday.
The decision is a dramatic setback for Libby, who likely will have to surrender to prison in weeks. The ruling puts pressure on President Bush, who has been sidestepping calls by Libby's allies to pardon the former chief of staff to Vice President Dick Cheney.
...
Libby believed he had a good chance of overturning the conviction on appeal and asked the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit to put the sentence on hold. In a two-sentence ruling, the court refused.
...
The decision leaves Libby with few legal options, the most likely being an appeal to Chief Justice John Roberts. Barring an intervention there, it seems only Bush could spare Libby prison time.
I have no idea what the timing of Supreme Court involvement would be. [A surprised Beldar thinks the odds of getting Supreme relief is "very, very remote".]
As to the ruling itself, I am officially surprised - I thought Libby's arguments on the constitutionality of the Fitzgerald appointment were at least close enough for a stay pending appeal, as did the Twelve Amigos who filed their amicus brief with the trial court.
As has been discussed previously, Bush has other options than a full pardon available to him. For example, Bush could commute Libby's sentence to a fine and probation; that would allow Libby to continue his legal appeals without going to jail (and keep open the possibility of an end-of-term full pardon).
MORE: If someone can find the judges' opinion or order, that would be lovely mildly interesting - apparently it is but one paragraph. I have not found it at the DC District Court website. Apparently
I support this war. I am now considered a criminal in the justice system. Lock me up with Libby!!
Posted by: ann | July 02, 2007 at 02:32 PM
Interesting opportunity for Bush to change the subject, get the nutroots into a nice frothy lather, mend a fence or two on his own side, etc.
I'd think about sending Cheney out to make the announcement, personally.
Posted by: Extraneus | July 02, 2007 at 02:35 PM
Link to Circuit Court Order
Posted by: cboldt | July 02, 2007 at 02:48 PM
No surprise really; now the question is, will Bush have the courage to step in, and act, as he should?
Posted by: Dale in Atlanta | July 02, 2007 at 02:49 PM
Sure, "surprised" is one word you could use.
Or you could observe the "randomly chosen lot" of 3 judges, found they could grab this ball, because it "related" to Judith Miller. Ho hum.
The other thing I notice is that the robe wonders WANT people to be terrified of them.
Well, you'd be terrified, if before the knife went in, you discovered your surgeon was incompetent! But fully credentialed, just the same, wouldn't ya?
SLOW NEWS DAY.
That's also worth notice-ing. Just because blokes go to law school, doesn't really make them smart.
There are very few good judges in this world.
And, I'd bet the "punt" of Libby to jail is also an attempt to bring Dubya out from hiding.
Is sending Libby to jail any different than watching a robed-wonder sending Paris Hilton to the hoosegow? The deputy district attorney, who got this "gift" happens to have a wife who also drove on a suspended license.
Most of the time the robed wonders think they can get away with almost anything. (Ah, except the dude who used a penis pump while seated at his bench. Was that a work accident waiting to happen, or what?)
No respect for the scum just because they wear robes. On par with the Cardinals' hats that covered up the rape of children.
You think most people hold our court system up to respect? Then you haven't met people who've received subpeonas to show up for jury duty. Get a clue.
Posted by: Carol_Herman | July 02, 2007 at 02:51 PM
Seems like a good time to note a recent column on the limits of the Presidential pardon power when persecuted by particular prosecutors[such alliteration!].
John Dean, someone who knows a little about investigations into White House misbehavior, has a new Findlaw column.
In it, he compares Libby's likely sentence with those given his former colleagues in the Nixon administration and warns that Libby could be further prosecuted under conspiracy statutes were he or Cheney to directly request a pardon.
Good stuff.
Dean's ruminations
Posted by: Walter | July 02, 2007 at 02:55 PM
Frankly, I find almost everything Dean writes balderdash and will skip is.
Beldar reminds that Roberts is the Justice who handles emergency appeals from the D C Circuit.
Posted by: clarice | July 02, 2007 at 02:58 PM
good stuff
... in an ironical sense, bien sur.
Posted by: Walter | July 02, 2007 at 02:58 PM
Feh. The notion that Fitzgerald could prosecute Cheney for asking Bush for a pardon for Libby seems like just a *bit* of a strtch.
Posted by: Charlie (Colorado) | July 02, 2007 at 03:00 PM
As someone else mentioned, this surely renders obvious the joining of Patel, et al to the conspiracy against Dick Cheney. How soon is it to begin disbarment proceedings against Fitzgerald and the rest of them?
Posted by: manys | July 02, 2007 at 03:02 PM
Holy Cow. Where do I go to get my eight minutes back after reading that hogwash from Dean. That's a scary kind of stupid.
Posted by: epphan | July 02, 2007 at 03:10 PM
Lucianne headline only--third doctor arrested in UK plot.
Wow, that's some NHS!
Posted by: clarice | July 02, 2007 at 03:13 PM
Wow, that's some NHS!
yep, Michael Moore should go there and have his stomach stapled.
Posted by: windansea | July 02, 2007 at 03:16 PM
Moore would be denied windansea.
Those doctors aren't allowed to touch pork.
Posted by: danking | July 02, 2007 at 03:24 PM
Anybody get the latest US Magazine?
Posted by: manys | July 02, 2007 at 03:26 PM
Well, you'd be terrified, if before the knife went in, you discovered your surgeon was incompetent! But fully credentialed, just the same, wouldn't ya?
I'd be even more scared if I found out my neurosurgeon doctor is a terrorist car bomber.
Posted by: Pal2Pal (Sara) | July 02, 2007 at 03:28 PM
I shouldn't be surprised nor should I be depressed over this decision. I am both. How can the constitutionality of the SC's appointment not be a close question? It's primarily, if not entirely, a question of law, which means the appellate court owes the lower court no deference. There is no precedent or authority directly on point (because no one has EVER been appointed in the same manner as Fitzgerald, with the same sweeping powers, with the same lack of supervision, and in defiance of established regulations) and strong, cogent arguments can be made on both sides of the question. Is not this the dictionary example of a "close question"? How, then, did this panel conclude the appeal provided no close questions?
Again, I should not be surprised, depressed, or upset, but I am, now, all three. I think I'll stop writing before I add enraged to the list.
Posted by: David Walser | July 02, 2007 at 03:32 PM
On this day in history:
1788 - It was announced in the U.S. Congress that the new Constitution had been ratified by the required nine states, the ninth being New Hampshire.
Note: 12 years from 1776 to 1788, yet we expect Iraq to have accomplished everything in 4 years. It took us 12 years just to get our Constitution in place, let alone a government in place under that Constitution.
And how many people think our Constitution would get ratified today? Never happen.
Posted by: Pal2Pal (Sara) | July 02, 2007 at 03:37 PM
My biggest surprise is that judges ruled that it's OK to jail reporters over perjury charges.
Wonderful precedence...
Posted by: danking | July 02, 2007 at 03:38 PM
Like every other ruling in this case the ultimate judgment is flawed and wrongly decided. I now believe this is their way of making an example of Libby and that now he is the scapegoat. All other attempts to get back at the Bush administration have failed so they are pinning the tail on Libby. They want to achieve a direct on cheney but he has out manuevered them from the start. This case is not based on the merits at any point. it is a partisan exercise and an over power play. Of course right now President bush can trump them and I hope he does. Their futile attempt to get Gonzalez has blown up in their faces. They continue to show their true partisan hack colors which accounts for their abysmal ratings.A travesty of justice is occurring right under our noses.
Posted by: maryrose | July 02, 2007 at 03:41 PM
Where is Hit?
I am now a cynic.
I need a drink!
I need a laugh.
I Blame Bush!!!!!
Posted by: ann | July 02, 2007 at 03:47 PM
This is a terrible system, and it's the conservative Congress of the mid-1980s who are to blame. A convicted felon (Libby, an unlucky pothead, a SOX violator) first asks the judge who presided over his or her trial for bail relief during the appeal. Uh, no, says the judge. No, I didn't violate your constitutional rights, thank you very much.
Then the defendant takes the case to a three-judge emergency appellate panel, who make their ruling based on a quick sketch of the defendants' appeals case; with the law telling them they should err on the side of denying bail.
Ever since Michael Dukakis' wipeout, our country has not had a political party dedicated to civil liberties as the term used to be understood. When Gov. Bill Clinton executed a retarded man during his 1992 campaign, he was sending a signal to the Democratic party that it was time to drop this civil liberties crap, it's a Willie-Horton loser. Since then, the Democrats have joined the Republicans in searching for amendments to the constitution they can ignore for political gain.
It would be ironic, but very desirable, if the Libby case caused the Republican party and conservatives to take up the cause of civil liberties. There are ample reasons for them to do that beyond Libby. The prosecutorial branch of the government has simply gone off the rails, and the judiciary isn't doing enough to steer them back.
Posted by: Vail Beach | July 02, 2007 at 03:57 PM
So, what in the case they cited in the decision? or was that discussed already. I'm sorry, I stay way behind unless it's troll-propelled, then I stay away.
We can expect no opinion, I take it. sigh. I do hope bush intervenes, but my hopes are dwindling. I agree, they have not been able to get Cheney or eeevil Rove, or even get close to Bush, so Libby it is.
Another casualty of the Iraq war. Like Ollie North, his sacrifice is one that is not honored.
Posted by: SunnyDay | July 02, 2007 at 04:12 PM
The UK Times reports that the third doctor was arrested. His family says it was because he was using the cell phone of one of the men the police are looking for. How can that be? The only "evidence" that Atta was not meeting with Iraqi intel in Prague when the Czechs say he was is--ta da--someone used his cell phone in Fla at the time of the meeting.
Posted by: clarice | July 02, 2007 at 04:16 PM
If I were a Jewish patient in the NHS system I would be worried that a "Asian" doctor would turn me into another failed surgery statistic.
Sort of the slow bleed rather than the final solution.
Posted by: SlimGuy | July 02, 2007 at 04:25 PM
My advice to Mr Libby,Scoot,Venezuela beckons,write the book,make the movie,should recoup you legal fees on the book deal alone.Shake hands with Hugo,don't swap spit,you could make Attorney General in any Democrat administration.
Posted by: PeterUK. | July 02, 2007 at 04:27 PM
Clarice
Yeah like Atta had this really cool new Iphone rather than a freebie throw away from some provider that his room mate used to call a 1-900 hot date hunny line.
Sure he couldn't have had a backup cellphone or three that was directly hardwired to a cave in the mountains for a code word talk scam update that sounded like something totally innocent.
Posted by: SlimGuy | July 02, 2007 at 04:29 PM
-- How can the constitutionality of the SC's appointment not be a close question? It's primarily, if not entirely, a question of law, which means the appellate court owes the lower court no deference. There is no precedent or authority directly on point (because no one has EVER been appointed in the same manner as Fitzgerald, with the same sweeping powers, with the same lack of supervision, and in defiance of established regulations) and strong, cogent arguments can be made on both sides of the question. Is not this the dictionary example of a "close question"? How, then, did this panel conclude the appeal provided no close questions? --
Either the panel saw the bottom legal issue differently from the way you see it (i.e., whether or not there are strong cogent arguments on both sides of the issues Libby raised in his filings), or they acted in an outcome-driven fashion for unstated motives. The decision shows no indication of deference to Walton.
Posted by: cboldt | July 02, 2007 at 04:30 PM
Joe Wilson and his very important beard say that you all are an accessory to a crime for wanting a Libby pardon - and so I guess is an accessory to a crime Bill Clinton, dem donor Denise Rich among others and even Libby for pardoning Marc Rich
http://thinkprogress.org/2007/07/02/joe-wilson-libby-pardon/
Posted by: topsecretk9 | July 02, 2007 at 04:31 PM
Today the WaPo reported Waxman was bitching that Rove should not have had his security clearance renewed because of his role in Plame. I think the otherside is getting increasingly tiresome and preposterous.
Posted by: clarice | July 02, 2007 at 04:43 PM
Don't you hate it when your cell phone isn't working?
Breitbart:
"
View larger image
The attempted London car bombings were meant to be detonated by calls to mobile phones in the two vehicles, but failed for technical reasons, the Evening Standard reported Monday.
The calls made on the phones allowed police to trace those behind the failed attacks last Friday, the London daily evening newspaper said, without giving sources.
The phones were meant to set off blasts when they were called, but the devices failed to detonate the mixture of gas canisters and nails in the two Mercedes cars parked in London's entertainment district.
The bombers twice called the car outside the "Tiger Tiger" nightclub on Haymarket off Piccadilly Circus and the one in nearby Cockspur Street off Trafalgar Square four times, it added. "
Posted by: clarice | July 02, 2007 at 04:46 PM
TM: As to the ruling itself, I am officially surprised...
anduril: I am officially blown away.
Posted by: anduril | July 02, 2007 at 04:49 PM
Does anyone think it odd that this denial is not listed on the DCCofA website? Or is this normal?
Posted by: Pal2Pal (Sara) | July 02, 2007 at 04:59 PM
One of the doctor arrested Bilal Abdulla was ans Iraqi who graduated in Baghdad in 2004.In times gone by he could have been hanged,it will be interesting to compare the legal process in this case with that meted out to Mr Libby.
Any bets on exculpatory articles appearing in the left media any time now.
The other man is a Palestinian with a Jordanian passport.
Posted by: PeterUK. | July 02, 2007 at 05:07 PM
They've arrested (or detained) an eighth person in an undisclosed country "overseas" - said to be a doctor.
Also - yuppy designer dunderhead terrorist kills 9 wounding more including 7 Spanish tourists in successful car bomb NON EVENT.
Posted by: topsecretk9 | July 02, 2007 at 05:19 PM
I understand these were the PELOSI bombers, alot of smoke, but in the end got nothing done.
Posted by: Poppy | July 02, 2007 at 05:21 PM
On the Yemeni car bomb by "yuppie" terrorists that killed 9...Larry Johnson had this to say...
Posted by: topsecretk9 | July 02, 2007 at 05:23 PM
I'm too pissed off to comment on Libby. As for the bombing MD's, it seems to me they have a lot more bad things at their disposal than car bombs. Why aren't they stealing drugs and poisoning the water system, or leaving a trail of anthrax along their way? It's odd.
Posted by: Jane | July 02, 2007 at 05:23 PM
Fox reporting that 5 doctors are now being held in the UK bombings.
Posted by: Jane | July 02, 2007 at 05:37 PM
Sky News is reporting that FIVE doctors are being held in the British terror plot.
PUK, don't go to the doctor.
Posted by: Pal2Pal (Sara) | July 02, 2007 at 05:37 PM
Sky News now reporting FIVE doctors have been arrested in connection with the UK bombing plot.
Posted by: clarice | July 02, 2007 at 05:37 PM
I wonder what the total numbers of doctors involved might be?
Posted by: Rick Ballard | July 02, 2007 at 05:38 PM
I wonder what the total numbers of doctors involved might be?
Even one is too many. The involvement of these doctors is far more terrorizing, in my eyes, than an isolated car bomb going off.
Posted by: Pal2Pal (Sara) | July 02, 2007 at 05:40 PM
I thought Micheal Moore only had great things to say about the British free, all you can eat, top notch, health care system.
Why are the importing all these third world doctors?
Posted by: Poppy | July 02, 2007 at 05:43 PM
Bush commuting Libby's sentence. Breaking news
Posted by: Pal2Pal (Sara) | July 02, 2007 at 05:45 PM
Fox reporting that President Bush is commuting Libby's sentence in a matter of minutes!
Posted by: Jane | July 02, 2007 at 05:45 PM
I am so bloody glad. And I'm absolutely convinced it was my email - not.
Posted by: Jane | July 02, 2007 at 05:46 PM
BUSH!!!
Posted by: Elliott | July 02, 2007 at 05:46 PM
CBS too.
Posted by: anduril | July 02, 2007 at 05:46 PM
JANE'S EMAIL!!!
Posted by: Elliott | July 02, 2007 at 05:47 PM
If one wanted to fast track terrorists into the UK the best way to be would be infiltrate them as medical staff? The NHS,for reasons too labyrinthine to go into here,has a shortage of doctors.
It should be no surprise that these men were educated,look at some of the 9/11 attackers.
There were a fair number of Phds in the Waffen SS,Heydrich was said to be a cultured man,education is no guide,after all most of the MSM have journalism degrees.
Posted by: PeterUK. | July 02, 2007 at 05:47 PM
WOOOHOOOO!!!!!!
My husband just called to tell me the news. I can't believe he did it.
Posted by: Sue | July 02, 2007 at 05:47 PM
Will commute the prison time--he has to pay fine and serve probation--will be announced in minutes!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Posted by: clarice | July 02, 2007 at 05:47 PM
Drudge...Bush spares Libby from prison.
Posted by: Sue | July 02, 2007 at 05:48 PM
Apparently that top notch British healthcare has been in the business of importing terrorists to inprove patient care...how precious...
Medical care practitioners: a necessary import?
To help patients get treated more quickly, Britain's health service wants to hire .....
http://student.bmj.com/issues/06/09/news/314.php
One has to wonder why they can't find quilified Brits to take the jobs....maybe its that government wage.....
Posted by: Poppy | July 02, 2007 at 05:49 PM
End of judicial action - cheaper to pay the fine than it is to litigate further.
Posted by: cboldt | July 02, 2007 at 05:49 PM
Someone go into the swamp and report back.
Posted by: Sue | July 02, 2007 at 05:49 PM
May I congratulate you on having such a President as George Bush.
Cancel the flight Scooter.
Posted by: PeterUK. | July 02, 2007 at 05:50 PM
*** Either the panel saw the bottom legal issue differently from the way you see it (i.e., whether or not there are strong cogent arguments on both sides of the issues Libby raised in his filings), or they acted in an outcome-driven fashion for unstated motives. The decision shows no indication of deference to Walton. ***
cboldt:
You indicate three reasons and eliminate one. Which of the remaining two do you think it is?
Posted by: Holly | July 02, 2007 at 05:50 PM
This is wonderful news! Jane's emails and my prayers! (Only half kidding.)
It is good news for Libby and for Bush. Keeps Libby out of jail and Bush needed to win back some approval from is base after the immigration fiasco.
Posted by: centralcal | July 02, 2007 at 05:51 PM
I am glad that Bush finally stepped in to commute Libby's sentence allowing Libby to go through his appeals process.
Posted by: lurker9876 | July 02, 2007 at 05:51 PM
I'm so happy. Jim Engle--Pres has already signed the papers.
Posted by: clarice | July 02, 2007 at 05:51 PM
Other than substituting commutation for pardon, I think this was accurate.
Posted by: cboldt | July 02, 2007 at 05:52 PM
Something about Bush leaving Libby two years of probation and fine.
Good.
Posted by: lurker9876 | July 02, 2007 at 05:52 PM
Bush COMMUTES, Libby free at last.
chch16 needs resuscitation......
Posted by: Poppy | July 02, 2007 at 05:53 PM
Will someone report on Matthews' head exploding????
Posted by: clarice | July 02, 2007 at 05:53 PM
There is no reason to appeal - and in fact, there is a downside risk to doing so, besides the cost. He could (probably would) lose the appeal.
Posted by: cboldt | July 02, 2007 at 05:53 PM
President Bush is brilliant with this move. Everyone gets something AND he announces the decision after a weekend of terror threats and wall to wall news reporting that even our doctors might be terrorists.
Posted by: Pal2Pal (Sara) | July 02, 2007 at 05:55 PM
Emails and prayers do work!!! Hear's to the President and Vice-President!! Break out the champagne!!
Posted by: glasater | July 02, 2007 at 05:55 PM
Fitzgerald has now been supervised.
Posted by: topsecretk9 | July 02, 2007 at 05:55 PM
Where is Hit?
We all need to celebrate!!
We need a toast!
I am not cynical!!
I LOVE BUSH!!!
Posted by: ann | July 02, 2007 at 05:56 PM
Gibson or somebody said that Bush will get a lot of bashing from the media but will please the Conservatives.
Oh, what a relief!
Shame Libby still has to pay that fine but no prison time is great for an innocent man.
One of the articles at memeorandum claims that Libby's arguments were weak.
Let's hope Bush will stand by Meirs and Taylor as well as not honor those stupid subponeas.
Think Bush had made a gross error back in year 2003 with his "no leak" comments.
Posted by: lurker9876 | July 02, 2007 at 05:57 PM
Translated bottom line: Libby was found guilty by a jury of his "peers" (I suppose his defense fund would actually be his peers) and bailed out by the President of the US (his boss) after a panel of judges found (absolutely) no reason for appeal - contrary to most all comentary here.
Another reason to reflect upon all the damage this incompetent Administration (and its loyal supporters) has done to our country over the past years on this Independence Day.
Posted by: kim | July 02, 2007 at 05:58 PM
Gonna' be interesting to see how Fitzgerald responds to this.
He's not finished up his work.
If Bush had the smarts to replace Gonzales, his successor would have had one free swing to request (ahem) that Fitzgerald close up shop. But Gonzales doesn't have the cache to make such a move.
The most dangerous place in D.C. will be any spot between a television camera and Chuckie Schumer.
Well, especially dangerous.
Man, Chuckie will be in fine form tomorrow. Lord almighty, if bloviating were an Olympic event, he'd be a one person East German women's swim team. No drugs needed.
SMG
Posted by: SMGalbraith | July 02, 2007 at 05:58 PM
Rick Lowry was making scathing comments about Joe Wilson and Fitzgerald.
Posted by: lurker9876 | July 02, 2007 at 05:58 PM
I agree with ann! Where is H&R?
Posted by: centralcal | July 02, 2007 at 05:59 PM
Hahaha!
Bush said Libby's sentence was excessive!
Posted by: lurker9876 | July 02, 2007 at 05:59 PM
Didn't Bush move to protect (executive privilege) Clinton's pardon files - seems to me the pant peeing over subpoenas and the pardon issue done done.
Posted by: topsecretk9 | July 02, 2007 at 05:59 PM
topsecret, what do you mean?
Bush decided that Fitz needed to be supervised?
Posted by: lurker9876 | July 02, 2007 at 06:02 PM
The pipe dream of adhering to the principle that the pursuit of justice requires truthful testimony
it also requires ethical prosecutors
Do you think Fitz was ethical in this prosecution?
Posted by: windansea | July 02, 2007 at 06:03 PM
Angle is reporting that the statement says the President feels the sentence was "excessive" even though he respects the process that led to the conviction.
Posted by: Pal2Pal (Sara) | July 02, 2007 at 06:03 PM
From the President's statement, posted at Hot Air:
Posted by: Elliott | July 02, 2007 at 06:04 PM
Lurker - fitz argued his actions could be "supervised' via the public record and the President has the authority to remove him - I was being facetious.
Posted by: topsecretk9 | July 02, 2007 at 06:04 PM
"He could (probably would) lose the appeal."
Cboldt,
First - thanks for your work in maintaining a usable archive. I appreciate the effort involved.
Second - I don't understand the downside with a commutation in his pocket. The sentence can't be reimposed if he loses so the "risk" is the cost of the appeal. I believe that disbarment is mandatory with a commuted sentence so there is a livelihood factor involved should he decide to proceed. If he has the dough - why not appeal?
Posted by: Rick Ballard | July 02, 2007 at 06:04 PM
I doubt that anything short of a public hanging would satisfy Chuck or Kim, though I must point out even the claimed offense pales before the Burger offense which resulted in far less than this now commuted sentence does.
Posted by: clarice | July 02, 2007 at 06:06 PM
here is the presidents statement - now he should move to declassify FLAMES file.
http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=ZjlkNWMwM2IxMDJlZDdkMDg5YzIyYTliMTc5MjAyZjI=
Posted by: topsecretk9 | July 02, 2007 at 06:07 PM
"Gibson or somebody said that Bush will get a lot of bashing from the media"
Oh no!! Please, tell me no. After all the good press he has received, NOW they're going to turn on him?? Hard to swallow. Really. I can't believe it, tell me you're kidding.
I hope he does appeal it - all he has to lose is money. Some things are worth more than money.
Posted by: SunnyDay | July 02, 2007 at 06:08 PM
This just in: Chris Matthews and Keith Olbermann have driven a Mercedes into the side of the Capitol Building.
Details to follow.
SMG
Posted by: SMGalbraith | July 02, 2007 at 06:09 PM
clarice-
Will someone report on Matthews' head exploding????
I will volunteer to watch Softball with Chrissy. I do it because I like all of you and would not want anyone else to suffer
RichatUF
Posted by: RichatUF | July 02, 2007 at 06:10 PM
Hah.
Now let's get a law that thee will be no more Special Prosecutors forever.
Posted by: Maybeex | July 02, 2007 at 06:10 PM
damn
tags->preview
Posted by: RichatUF | July 02, 2007 at 06:10 PM
Posted by: Maybeex | July 02, 2007 at 06:10 PM
President's statement (AP):
[quote]The United States Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit today rejected Lewis Libby's request to remain free on bail while pursuing his appeals for the serious convictions of perjury and obstruction of justice. As a result, Mr. Libby will be required to turn himself over to the Bureau of Prisons to begin serving his prison sentence.
I have said throughout this process that it would not be appropriate to comment or intervene in this case until Mr. Libby's appeals have been exhausted. But with the denial of bail being upheld and incarceration imminent, I believe it is now important to react to that decision.
From the very beginning of the investigation into the leaking of Valerie Plame's name, I made it clear to the White House staff and anyone serving in my administration that I expected full cooperation with the Justice Department. Dozens of White House staff and administration officials dutifully cooperated.
After the investigation was under way, the Justice Department appointed United States Attorney for the Northern District of Illinois Patrick Fitzgerald as a special counsel in charge of the case. Mr. Fitzgerald is a highly qualified, professional prosecutor who carried out his responsibilities as charged.
This case has generated significant commentary and debate. Critics of the investigation have argued that a special counsel should not have been appointed, nor should the investigation have been pursued after the Justice Department learned who leaked Ms. Plame's name to columnist Robert Novak. Furthermore, the critics point out that neither Mr. Libby nor anyone else has been charged with violating the Intelligence Identities Protection Act or the Espionage Act, which were the original subjects of the investigation. Finally, critics say the punishment does not fit the crime: Mr. Libby was a first-time offender with years of exceptional public service and was handed a harsh sentence based in part on allegations never presented to the jury.
Others point out that a jury of citizens weighed all the evidence and listened to all the testimony and found Mr. Libby guilty of perjury and obstructing justice. They argue, correctly, that our entire system of justice relies on people telling the truth. And if a person does not tell the truth, particularly if he serves in government and holds the public trust, he must be held accountable. They say that had Mr. Libby only told the truth, he would have never been indicted in the first place.
Both critics and defenders of this investigation have made important points. I have made my own evaluation. In preparing for the decision I am announcing today, I have carefully weighed these arguments and the circumstances surrounding this case.
Mr. Libby was sentenced to 30 months of prison, two years of probation and a $250,000 fine. In making the sentencing decision, the district court rejected the advice of the probation office, which recommended a lesser sentence and the consideration of factors that could have led to a sentence of home confinement or probation.
I respect the jury's verdict. But I have concluded that the prison sentence given to Mr. Libby is excessive. Therefore, I am commuting the portion of Mr. Libby's sentence that required him to spend 30 months in prison.
My decision to commute his prison sentence leaves in place a harsh punishment for Mr. Libby. The reputation he gained through his years of public service and professional work in the legal community is forever damaged. His wife and young children have also suffered immensely. He will remain on probation. The significant fines imposed by the judge will remain in effect. The consequences of his felony conviction on his former life as a lawyer, public servant and private citizen will be long-lasting.
The Constitution gives the president the power of clemency to be used when he deems it to be warranted. It is my judgment that a commutation of the prison term in Mr. Libby's case is an appropriate exercise of this power.[/quote]
Posted by: clarice | July 02, 2007 at 06:11 PM
Based on Bush's comment about Libby's sentence being excessive, wonder if this sounds like Walton is being put on notice?
Bush decided that he should believe in the verdict by the jury panel.
Libby should continue with the appeal process if he has the money to do so.
But Libby will at least be making probably far more money working in the private industry. Libby is working for Heritage Foundation, right?
Posted by: lurker9876 | July 02, 2007 at 06:12 PM
Its seems that the President already had this in mind and that there was no way he was going to let Libby go to jail. Its good that John Roberts was not put in a position to have to act. Now perhaps Gonzales will grow a pair and shut down Fitzgerald and send him back to Chicago work on his political career.
Posted by: BobS | July 02, 2007 at 06:12 PM
Independence Day does have a new meaning this year! Libby is Free!!
GOD BLESS BUSH
Posted by: ann | July 02, 2007 at 06:13 PM
Libby was working for a FOundation but they had to let him go when he was convicted. It wasn't Heritage. Momentarily I cannot recall it's name.
I expect he'll write a book; get a decent position and never get near political office again--as indeed no sensible person should.
Posted by: clarice | July 02, 2007 at 06:14 PM
A. I bet the NBC lawyers are smiling
B. I hope Bush fires Fitzgerald just on general principles. Put Chainsaw Al Dunlap in charge of Justice for a couple of months
RichatUF
Posted by: RichatUF | July 02, 2007 at 06:14 PM
2 Bush Appointees say question neither close nor raises substantial question
but the Criminal Bush, recognizing that Libby blocked his own lying and criminal activity removed his prison sentence. He also recognized that many white aristocrats who are traitors, like Libby are pussies who can't do their very small amount of time.
Libby remains disbared. His stinking ass has been replaced in the White House by two other stinking asses.
Armitage leaking has no bearing on the traitorous act that Libby took instructions from the Criminal Cheney and leaked a CIA agent's identity to Matt Cooper and the Lying Scumbag and Fired Scumbag Judy Miller.
Maybe whatever publication allows the anemic vocabulary of your Queen Goddess Clarice who does not seem to be able to write articulately or well will hire Judy Miller, but no one else will.
Onto the criminal contempt of Bush and Cheney by Congress.
White aristocratic pussies who are traitors apparently aren't supposed to do their time.
Let's make it clear. The 3 judge panel with two Republican apointees was unaminmous. The question was neither close nor warantting appeal.
Libby can still try to appeal his conviction--including his probation, the fine, and his conviction of obstruction and purgery.
The millions of dollars spent on Wells and Robbins has yielded no victory, and as I said many times, Robbins' briefs were pathetic and the 3 judge panel agreed with me.
This will be an additional issue of course in the taking of the White House in 2008 by any of 4 democratic candidates who can stomp the lobbying Thompson family, should Thompson grow a pair to run.
Romney will be easily beaten, and it looks like Bloomberg is going to take a lot of votes from either of them. The rest of the clowns don't stand a chance for the Republican nomination. To date the only data Thompson has provided, is his lobbying of his close friends for money. Criminal Bush's statement scolds Libby for doing the same kind of lying that he and Cheney do every day. I do not have the Criminal Bush's statement yet. Maybe you can fly so-called attorney Clarice to Kinneybunkport or she can just sayshay over to the West Wing to get it.
Posted by: chch16 | July 02, 2007 at 06:15 PM
Schumer issued some weasely statement on "equal justice under the law".
Posted by: clarice | July 02, 2007 at 06:16 PM