Archive for March, 2007

From the Web: Libby verdict and its impact

As Internet users dissect the guilty verdicts in the “Scooter” Libby trial, Kevin Drum at Political Animal echoed many bloggers when he wrote “my faith in the American justice system has been restored.” At Redstate, “Erick” noted that “the media is speculating that this might embolden Peter Fitzgerald to now investigate others,” but he suspects that will not be the case.

“It’s hard to understand why Libby’s testimony was so out of step with that of the other Executive Branch witnesses,” said Powerline  “At the end of the day, imperfect memory seemed as good an explanation as any. But the jury didn’t see it that way.”

Jonathan R. at GOPBloggers says Libby should be spared jail because his crime was no worse than Bill Clinton’s perjury. “Having a different memory about whom you spoke to about what and when than some reporters is no worse crime than Clinton or (Sandy) Berger committed.”

Andrew Sullivan at The Daily Dish says the case was really about whether the Bush administration deliberately misled the nation about intelligence before the Iraq war. “The risks Cheney took to attack Wilson, the insane over-reaction that otherwise very smart men in this administration engaged in to rebut a relatively trivial issue: all this bespeaks the fact they were terrified that the full details of their pre-war WMD knowledge would come out.”
 
What do you think are the implications and consequences of the verdicts? Send a comment.

A pardon for Libby?

Expect a pardon, said several posts on Balloon Juice. One comment on truthdig.com echoed the expectation, writing that Bush will pardon him on his way out the White House door. The Political Pit Bull also ponders if there will be a presidential pardon.

The Democratic Party website carried the full statement from party Chairman Howard Dean, where he said President Bush “should pledge not to pardon Scooter Libby”

Editorials weigh in

The Chicago Tribune on Wednesday – home of Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald – isn’t satisfied with the reach of the investigation. “Americans deserve… [t]he full story of why top administration officials got so needlessly overwrought about a former ambassador’s allegations,” the editorial rumbled.

In Washington D.C., the leading editorial in The Washington Post warned the “conviction should send a message to this and future administrations about the dangers of attempting to block official investigations.” The Washington Times concluded “it seems clear that Libby held back information of importance to the investigation… and that is true despite the fact that Mr. Fitzgerald just as clearly debased his office in his pursuit of a defendant to justify the money he misspent looking for a crime.”

Ed’s note: This post was updated to include newspaper editorials