Plame's Lawsuit Dismissed

According to a federal judge, Bush administration officials had the right to leak her name:

U.S. District Judge John D. Bates dismissed the case on jurisdictional grounds and said he would not express an opinion on the constitutional arguments. Bates dismissed the case against all defendants: Cheney, White House political adviser Karl Rove, former White House aide I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby and former Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage.

Plame's attorneys had said the lawsuit would be an uphill battle. Public officials are normally immune from such lawsuits filed in connection with their jobs.

While Bates did not address the constitutional questions, he seemed to side with administration officials who said they were acting within their job duties. Plame had argued that what they did was illegal and outside the scope of their government jobs.

"The alleged means by which defendants chose to rebut Mr. Wilson's comments and attack his credibility may have been highly unsavory, " Bates wrote. "But there can be no serious dispute that the act of rebutting public criticism, such as that levied by Mr. Wilson against the Bush administration's handling of prewar foreign intelligence, by speaking with members of the press is within the scope of defendants' duties as high-level Executive Branch officials."

"Unsavory" isn't the word for it.

No word yet on whether Wilson and Plame will appeal this decision.

Update: Melanie Sloan, lawyer for Plame and Wilson, stated on Hardball that she intends to appeal.

Update: Novak Justifies Outing Plame and Sources

He also says in his book that if given the chance, he’d print her name again. “I broke no law and endangered no intelligence operation,” Novak writes. This morning, he added he felt “disappointed in the journalism profession” for its reaction to his printing Plame Wilson’s name. “I thought we stuck together in things like this. I guess that wasn’t the case.”

Wexler to File Resolution to Censure Bush

Via the congressman's site:

(Washington, D.C.) Congressman Robert Wexler (D-FL) has drafted and will file a Congressional resolution censuring President George W. Bush for his egregious and politically motivated commutation of Scooter Libby's prison sentence. The censure resolution, which is attached below, will be formally introduced in the House of Representatives on Tuesday July 10, 2007 when Congress reconvenes from the 4th of July recess.

You can read the text of the resolution on Wexler's site.

Here's the last "whereas":

Whereas in commuting Mr. Libby’s sentence, President Bush has finally and unalterably breached any remaining shred of trust that he had left with the American people and rewarded political loyalty while flouting the rule of law: Now, therefore let be it --

Resolved, That the United States Congress does hereby censure George W. Bush, President of the United States, and does condemn his decision to commute the portion of Mr. Libby’s sentence that required him to spend thirty months in prison, his unconscionable abuse of his authority with regard to the deceitful chain of events concerning the falsifying intelligence on Iraqi nuclear capabilities and the exaggeration of the threat posed by Iraq, his involvement in the clear political retaliation against former Ambassador and Ms. Wilson, and his decision to reward the perjury of Mr. Libby, which effectively protected President Bush, Vice President Cheney, and other Administration officials from further scrutiny.

This comes on the heels of the announcement that the judiciary committee will hold "a full committee hearing next week titled, “The Use and Misuse of Presidential Clemency Power for Executive Branch Officials.”

Now, I don't know why it's taken Libby's sentence commutation to finally push the Dems into doing something to punish this pResident considering there are so many crimes they should be impeaching him for, but it's about damn time.

And, as a sidenote:

Before the holiday, U.S. District Judge Reggie Walton asked lawyers on both sides of the Lewis "Scooter" Libby case to submit briefs outlining their positions as to whether the former White House aide should still be required to spend two years on probation now that President Bush has decided to overturn his 30-month prison sentence.

"Strictly construed, the statute authorizing the imposition of supervised release indicates that such release should occur only after the defendant has already served a term of imprisonment," Walton wrote Tuesday.

So, even though Bush said Libby would be on probation (after admittedly not consulting with experts on these issues in his justice department) the only punishment Libby may actually "suffer" is the fine he paid today.

Censure via wiki:

Censure is a procedure for publicly reprimanding a public official for inappropriate behavior. When the President is censured, it serves merely as a condemnation and has no direct effect on the validity of presidency, nor are there any other particular legal consequences. Unlike impeachment, censure has no basis in the Constitution, or in the rules of the Senate and House of Representatives. It derives from the formal condemnation of either congressional body of their own members.

If the Dems can't even manage to find a majority to support this slap on the wrist censure, they might as well pack their bags and sit out the rest of their terms at home.

Don't hold your breath on this one though. The Dems refused to get behind Feingold's call to censure Bush over the illegal wiretapping last year - a crime he admitted to.

Feingold, defending his censure plan today on Fox News, said: “I’m amazed at Democrats, cowering with this president’s numbers so low. The administration just has to raise the specter of the war and the Democrats run and hide…too many Democrats are going to do the same thing they did in 2000 and 2004. In the face of this, they’ll say we’d better just focus on domestic issues…[Democrats shouldn’t] cower to the argument, that whatever you do, if you question administration, you’re helping the terrorists.”

Well Russ, they're still doing it. Having the majority hasn't changed a damn thing.

Related: The Center for American Progress has more about Libby's commutation.
 

Video: Libby's Commutation - The Snow Job

Do you ever ask yourself, Tony, just when you'll finally be sick and tired of all of the lying you do on this administration's behalf?

Via Hardball:

Q Was the President scared that if Scooter Libby went to jail that he might then talk about some secrets in the White House that would damage the President?

MR. SNOW: No, he thought it was an improper punishment. He thought it was an excessive punishment and, therefore, the proper way to do this was to go ahead and leave intact this -- again, the President's getting pounded on the right because he didn't do a full pardon. The idea is -- but the point of this is that you do not engage in these acts for symbolic or political reasons. You don't do it to make other people happy and say, boy, you showed it to so-and-so. The point here is to do what is consistent with the dictates of justice.

Q So politics did not play into this decision at all?

MR. SNOW: That is correct.

Sure, Tony.

Q And also, let me ask you this. The President and other White House press secretaries would not touch this question of Joe Wilson during the height of the investigation. I'm going to ask you now, since the President is now basically saying this is over and he's done what he's done -- Joe Wilson asked for an apology for the American people because of the situation. Is the White House now willing to give the American people --

MR. SNOW: I'm not going to get into --

Q Why not?

MR. SNOW: Because --

Q Why not? It's over now. You didn't want to talk about it then. Let's talk about it now. Do you think the American people are owed something because of the breach?

MR. SNOW: Number one, there is still considerable controversy about the facts of the case, including Joe Wilson's veracity. Number two, there is also --

Q What's in question about his veracity? Detail that, please.

MR. SNOW: There is also -- just, very quickly, you take a look at the Senate reports, his characterization of who sent him over and what he told people when he was in Niger is at direct odds with what he attempted to tell the American public.

Q That has nothing to do with leaking the name of --

MR. SNOW: I'm just --

Q She's making a good point.

MR. SNOW: I'm answering her question, which she raised --

Q But she's making a good point.

Q You're arguing a different case.

MR. SNOW: No, I'm arguing --

Q The apology that the American people may want -- some may want --

MR. SNOW: I understand.

Q -- has to do with the fact that the White House allowed for a breach. And doesn't Libby owe the President an apology?

MR. SNOW: Again, I'm not -- this is -- number one, I believe the investigation found that the White House was not the source of the breach. Number two, the President has said that it is --

Q But it's part of the Bush administration.

MR. SNOW: -- the President has said it is inappropriate to have such breaches, and has apologized for them. So beyond that --

Q When did he apologize?

MR. SNOW: I think he said to the American people -- gave an apology, but --

Q Tony, one point that is not in dispute is that Karl Rove was involved in the leak, in some way he was involved. He talked to at least two reporters who ended up publishing this information. In 2004, the President said -- he didn't talk about convictions or anything -- he said he would fire anyone in this White House who was involved in the leak. We now know Karl Rove was involved; he did not fire him.

MR. SNOW: There are two things to note. We have also said that we do not -- we are not going to make comments in detail until the legal process is over. And it is not; there is still an appeal through --

Q You just put out a two-page statement. He commented --

Q Wait a minute, he just put out this statement, and it's it's over.

Q He commented -- how could you not --

Q Yes, he's commented now, so that's a big -- we can shoot holes in that statement.

MR. SNOW: No, on follow-on issues like this that still may have bearing and an issue that may return to trial, I'm not going to comment on it.

Q How can you stand there with a straight face and say that this is not a political act? What he did was inherently political.

MR. SNOW: It was political in the sense that, as President, he has the authority to do this, but on the other hand --

Q Yes, he chose to do it for this person.

MR. SNOW: On the other hand, if you're doing the weathervane thing, you probably, depending on which constituency you wanted to make happy, you would have done something differently. I am telling you that this President approaches these very carefully as a matter of principle. And the key considerations were, let's figure out what we think is appropriate -- what he thinks is appropriate, in terms of punishment, and let's also do it in a way that does not do violence, but, in fact, shows respect for a system of justice -- not going in and overthrowing the hard work and the verdict of a duly constituted jury. That, to me, demonstrates just the opposite of political consideration. This is an attempt to try to figure out a principled way of dealing with what he thought was a thorny issue.

A "thorny" political issue, Tony.

And if Bush has "principles", I'd sure like to see them. What a farce.
 

Breaking: The Dems Locate Their Spine

Apparently, it was stashed in a congressional closet somewhere. It's in rough shape from severe atrophy, but they're going to try to use it anyway.

Breaking via CNN: The House Judiciary committee has announced that it will investigate Bush's clemency power as it relates to his commutation of Libby's sentence.

developing...as they say...

Update from The Gavel:

House Judiciary Committee to Address Presidential Clemency Power

(Washington, DC)- Today, House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers, Jr. announced that he will be holding a full committee hearing next week titled, “The Use and Misuse of Presidential Clemency Power for Executive Branch Officials.” The hearing will be held next Wednesday, July 11, at 10:15 am in the committee’s hearing room, 2141 Rayburn House Office Building.

“In light of yesterday’s announcement by the President that he was commuting the prison sentence for Scooter Libby, it is imperative that Congress look into presidential authority to grant clemency, and how such power may be abused,” Conyers said. “Taken to its extreme, the use of such authority could completely circumvent the law enforcement process and prevent credible efforts to investigate wrongdoing in the executive branch.”

Who: The House Judiciary Committee

Witnesses, TBA

What: “The Use and Misuse of Presidential Clemency Power for Executive Branch Officials”

When: Wednesday, July 11, 2007, 10:15 am

Where: 2141 Rayburn House Office Building

Well, that sounds rather genteel. I guess we'll see what happens. Send that spine for physio in the meantime.
 

Robert Novak: Still Pushing the "no underlying crime" Meme

Novak in today's Chicago Sun- Times:

The unique aspect of the Libby conviction was that there was no underlying crime whose prosecution he is accused of obstructing. Fitzgerald determined that no federal statute was broken when then-Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage revealed that Valerie Plame Wilson, the wife of Bush critic Joseph Wilson, worked for the CIA. But Fitzgerald prosecuted Libby for allegedly not telling the truth in the course of the investigation.

Well, that's a handy little Bushco apologist talking point, but here's the reality beyond that statement:

Since a federal grand jury indicted Libby in October 2005, numerous media figures have stated that the nature of the charges against him prove that special counsel Patrick J. Fitzgerald's investigation of the CIA leak case found that no underlying crime had been committed. But this assertion ignores Fitzgerald's explanation that Libby's obstructions prevented him -- and the grand jury -- from determining whether the alleged leak violated federal law.

Libby's lying obstructed justice. That's what people like Novak (as Jon Stewart calls him - the douchebag of liberty) don't seem to care about. Why should they? It's not their lives that were ruined and since they're not covert agents they don't have to worry about being outed by this criminal administration - possibly having their lives placed in danger. Covert CIA agents are "fair game", after all.

No. The only thing that matters to these apologists is that one of their own was caught and convicted and in their minds, that's simply beyond the pale. Nothing but a full pardon will do.

Here's where the disconnect between the rule of law and reality lies: "...conviction was seen by conservatives as part of the bitter assault on the Bush administration, targeting Cheney in particular."

Libby's conviction should be seen by any normal-thinking person as the punishment one gets for breaking the law because that's exactly what he did. It's the White House that has played politics with this case since day one - not the judicial system or those who wanted justice for Plame's outing. So if conservatives aren't happy today that their president didn't pardon Libby, too damn bad.

One of the prime examples of that cranky apologist mind set appears in today's Wall Street Journal. Just look at this stunning piece of revisionist history:

President Bush's commutation late yesterday afternoon of the prison sentence of I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby will at least spare his former aide from 2 1/2 years in prison. But by failing to issue a full pardon, Mr. Bush is evading responsibility for the role his Administration played in letting the Plame affair build into fiasco and, ultimately, this personal tragedy.

Mr. Libby will have to pay a fine of $250,000 and serve two years probation. This reflects the leniency that was previously recommended by the federal probation office but was rejected by Judge Reggie Walton in his vindictive sentence.

These columns have had cause to defend the Bush Presidency from what we've seen as often meritless or exaggerated partisan attacks, notably over national security and the Iraq war. This, however, will stand as a dark moment in this Administration's history. Joe Wilson's original, false accusation about pre-war intelligence metastasized into the issue of who "outed" his wife, Valerie Plame, as an intelligence officer. As the event unfolded, it fell to Mr. Libby to defend the Administration against Mr. Wilson's original charge, with little public assistance or support from the likes of Condoleezza Rice, Colin Powell or Stephen Hadley.

In no small part because of these profiles in non-courage, it was Mr. Libby who found himself caught up in prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald's hunt for the Plame leaker, which he and his masters at Justice knew from Day One to be State Department official Richard Armitage. As Mr. Fitzgerald's obsessive exercise ground forward, Mr. Libby got caught in a perjury net that we continue to believe trapped an innocent man who lost track of what he said, when he said it, and to whom.

Libby as the victim - as if he had absolutely no responsibility to tell the truth. It just doesn't get any more disgustingly nauseating than that.

Libby is not innocent. He lied and obstructed justice. Even Bush defended the jury's verdict today:

Q Mr. President, are you willing to rule out that you will eventually pardon Scooter Libby?

THE PRESIDENT: First of all, I had to make a very difficult decision. I weighed this decision carefully. I thought that the jury verdict should stand. I felt the punishment was severe, so I made a decision that would commute his sentence, but leave in place a serious fine and probation. As to the future, I rule nothing in or nothing out.

Q Mr. President, federal sentencing guidelines call for jail time in these kinds of cases of perjury and obstruction of justice. Why do you feel otherwise, and are you worried that this decision sends a signal that you won't go to jail if you lie to the FBI?

THE PRESIDENT: I took this decision very seriously on Mr. Libby. I considered his background, his service to the country, as well as the jury verdict. I felt like the jury verdict ought to stand, and I felt like some of the punishments that the judge determined were adequate should stand. But I felt like the 30-month sentencing was severe; made a judgment, a considered judgment that I believe is the right decision to make in this case, and I stand by it.

What is there left to say about people like that WSJ editorialist and Robert Novak who are so desperate to believe in their own fairy tales about this case that they cannot admit the truth? Or maybe that fact is exactly it: Libby couldn't tell the truth and neither can they. In Libby then, they have found a kindred spirit - a kindred lying spirit.

It's telling that the WSJ defended Bush's illegal war in Iraq yet decided to blow a gasket just because Libby wasn't pardoned. What more do you need to know about its editorial board than that?
 

Video: Joe Wilson Speaks to Keith Olbermann About Libby's Pardon

Wilson calls the administration "corrupt to the core".

You can read Patrick Fitzgerald's statement here.

And here's John Dean's analysis of some of the legal questions:


 

Breaking: Bush Commutes Libby's Prison Term

Just coming in via BBC News...Bush has commuted Scooter Libby's jail sentence but he'll still have to pay the fine and be on probation.

Checking for a news story link now...

Update via Bloomberg:

July 2 (Bloomberg) -- President George W. Bush commuted Lewis ``Scooter'' Libby's prison term in the CIA leak case, saying the 2 1/2 year prison term was ``excessive.''

Libby, 56, was convicted of lying to investigators probing the 2003 leak of CIA official Valerie Plame's identity. Backers of Libby, former chief of staff to Vice President Dick Cheney, had argued for a pardon. Bush acted after a U.S. appellate court today refused to let Libby stay out of prison during his appeal.

``My decision to commute his prison sentence leaves in place a harsh punishment for Mr. Libby,'' Bush said in a statement. ``The consequences of his felony conviction on his former life as a lawyer, public servant, and private citizen will be long- lasting.''

The president's action means that Libby's conviction still stands and he is still required to pay the $250,000 fine ordered by a federal judge.

And let's not forget what Libby was convicted of:

Libby was convicted of obstructing justice, perjury and making false statements. He resigned as Cheney's chief of staff upon being indicted in 2005.

Libby was found guilty of lying to Federal Bureau of Investigation agents and a grand jury probing whether the Bush administration deliberately leaked Plame's identity to retaliate against her husband, Joseph Wilson. In a New York Times column on July 6, 2003, Wilson accused the government of twisting intelligence to justify the invasion of Iraq earlier that year.

Yet his prison term was seen as "excessive"? If Joe Average had been guilty of those crimes and received the same lax sentence does anyone honestly think Bush would give a flying fart? Not bloody likely.

So Libby will still be a convicted felon. Big bloody deal. I'm sure he'll find a cushy Washington consulting job in no time flat while raking in the millions to pay his relative pittance of a fine.

It's obvious that none of these administration criminals will ever be brought to justice. They'll all just sail off into the sunset waving and smiling while leaving the rest of the world to clean up the horrendous mess they've left behind. Every damn one of them belongs in jail.

Update: The announcement to commute Libby's sentence followed the news on Monday that Libby's bid for bail was denied. You can read Bush's statement here. He even revisits the particulars of the case and makes himself the ultimate judge and jury.

Shorter Bush version: This administration has absolutely no respect for the law and spits on the legal process repeatedly when it doesn't get exactly what it wants.
 

Libby Sentenced to 30 Months in Jail

CNN is reporting that Lewis "Scooter" Libby has been sentenced to 30 months in jail for perjury and obstructing justice in the Valerie Plame case. At least one of the Bush administration criminals will have to do some time in prison...

The New York Times has more:

"People who occupy these types of positions, where they have the welfare and security of nation in their hands, have a special obligation to not do anything that might create a problem," U.S. District Judge Reggie B. Walton said.
[...]
Walton fined Libby $250,000 and placed him on probation for two years following his release from prison. Walton did not immediately address whether Libby could remain free pending appeal.

With letters of support from several former military commanders and White House and State Department officials, Libby asked for no jail time. His supporters cited a government career in which Libby helped win the Cold War and the first Gulf War.

"He has fallen from public grace," defense attorney Theodore Wells said. "It is a tragic fall, a tragic fall."

He didn't "fall from grace". He jumped.

The Washington Post notes:

In the weeks before today's sentencing, admirers and detractors of Libby sent Walton more than 150 letters recommending leniency or a harsh prison term. Walton today releasedthe [sic] letters, which come from high-ranking government officials and ordinary citizens. Among the current and former officials are former defense secretary Donald Rumsfeld, former secretary of state Henry A. Kissinger, and Marine General Peter Pace, chairman of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff.

It's appropriate for an active duty member of the military to involve himself in this case? Interesting, considering the Pentagon's crackdown on antiwar vets who go public. I guess as long as you're on Bushco's side of the political divide, it's okay to use your military creds to voice your opinions.

Update: The Smoking Gun has copies of the "love letters" (character references) submitted by Libby's supporters.
 

Libby: Guilty

Via the WaPo:

A federal jury today convicted I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby of lying about his role in the leak of an undercover CIA officer's identity, finding the vice president's former chief of staff guilty of two counts of perjury, one count of making false statements and one count of obstruction of justice, while acquitting him of single count of lying to the FBI.

Under federal sentencing guidlines, Libby faces a probable prison term of 1 1/2 to three years when he is sentenced by U.S. District Judge Reggie B. Walton June 5.

As to why it took the jury such a long time to reach their verdicts, one juror who spoke to the press outside the courtroom (on CNN) explained that they thoroughly dissected all of the testimony carefully for each charge to ensure that they did their jobs properly. (paraphrasing)

Libby's lawyers want a new trial but a) what's the point since b) Bush will probably just pardon Libby anyway.

It's about time someone related to this leak was found guilty of something.

Joe Wilson will be on the Larry King Live show this evening.

Here's a Joe Wilson flashback:



Update: Media Matters launches a preemptive strike against media myths and falsehoods that are sure to crop up once again in the discussion of the Libby case.

Update: Think Progress has the video of Fitzgerald speaking to the press following the verdicts.