ah yes, scooter and paris…where is the justice in these horrific sentences? a conundrum, indeed.
what would
do?
it would appear, at least to william otis anyway, that there is a third option…wait for it…
Scooter Libby should not be pardoned. [collective GASP!] But his punishment — 30 months in prison, two years’ probation and a $250,000 fine — is excessive. President Bush should commute the sentence by eliminating the jail term while preserving the fine.
that’s the sound of the latest trial balloon going up. just a little corrective spin to provide the proper perspective for phase l, of the let’s save poor scooter campaign.
more below…
otis still manages a shot at the entire process, fitzgerald in particular, but couches it in orwellian inspired cushions of respect for the fundamental rule of law…
There is a legal principle at stake in this case greater than either Libby or the politics of the moment. It is a fundamental rule of law that the grand jury is entitled to every man’s evidence. The grand jury cannot survive as the essential truth-finding tool it is if witnesses can lie with impunity. True, Libby committed a “process crime” — that is, so far as has been established in court or even alleged by the prosecutor, he committed no crime until after the government initiated its investigation of the underlying act (namely, the revelation of Valerie Plame’s CIA employment). But for obvious reasons it is not for grand jury witnesses to determine when an investigation is legitimate. As the Supreme Court has noted, there are many ways to challenge questions one believes the government should not be asking, but “lying is not one of them.”
U.S. District Judge Reggie Walton noted that there was ample evidence that Libby intentionally lied. Jurors took care (they did not convict on all counts), and the evidence before them makes it hard to believe that Libby’s misstatements were merely a product of poor memory or confusion. The case was proved, and the conviction should not simply be wiped away.
Yet the sentence is another matter. Neither vindication of the rule of law nor any other aspect of the public interest requires that Libby go to prison.
well, there it is….“there’s nothing that requires that libby go to prison”…from there he proceeds to attempt to conflate the nonviolent, non drug related conviction of scooter to the penaltiy handed down to former national security advisor sandy berger, ignoring the underlying reality that bergers actions, while illegal and ill advised, do not rise to the level of destruction, death, and dishonour for hundreds of thousands….nay, millions of people, that libby’s do.
in an attempt to speak to the higher power of forgiveness he closes with one of the lamest constructs imaginable…
To pardon Scooter Libby would not be consistent with the imperative that the mechanisms of law be able to demand, and receive, the truth. But to leave the sentence undisturbed would be an injustice to a person who, though guilty in this instance, is not what most people would, or should, think of as a criminal. Commutation offers a middle ground. Unlike a pardon, commuting the prison sentence would not erase the conviction. It would leave Libby with the disabilities of a convicted felon — no small matter for a lawyer and public figure. But commutation would alleviate the harshest, and unnecessary, aspects of the sentence. A partial commutation would send the message that we insist on being truthful, but in the name of a justice that still cares about individual circumstances, we will not insist on being vindictive.
how is this likely to play out?
walton has yet to rule on the appeals bond, and given his statements to date, is, imo, unlikely to do so in libby’s favour. l expect that he will remand scoots to custody, providing the trigger for the commutation. at that point l would expect that the sentence will be commuted, and the fine reduced or voided, or some variation, with a pardon [phase ll] to be issued as a parting gesture for his dedicated public service.
alternately, should he, walton, rule that he can remain free on bond, l would posit that no action from BushCo™ will be forthcoming, as the appeals process will carry the issue through the time remaining for this administration, thus clearing the way for an out the door pardon in jan 2009.
either way, scooter never sees the inside of a jail, and gets a cushy position at a reich wing think tank.
this has all the earmarks of a winner…pit the hard right, unapologetic, no crime, no time crowd against the lefts’ hang’em high contingent, part in the middle….voila…justus, or what passes for it, in the new world order.
we now return you to your regularly scheduled programming…
as for paris, well:
Perhaps the judge knew what he was doing after all. The jailed heiress Paris Hilton has decided that she is going to stop acting dumb because it is “no longer cute”.
[..]
Asked how she is now she has been sent back, Hilton replied: “I used to act dumb. That act is no longer cute.
clik images for info
what say ye?
