Thoughts on Sentencing

Posted by dave
June 10, 2007

Dear God, you're a tool. A real f**king tool.

Posted by amberglow
June 10, 2007

Nonsense. Criminals belong in jail, even if they're part of the DC or Hollywood establishments. I'm happy to spend my tax money punishing criminals.

All Americans are. Either our laws apply to all, or they're useless. Libby is not the only person who should be in jail over this.

Posted by Joe Klein's Murdered Conscience
June 10, 2007

Think of all the tax dollars that were spent on the investigation because Libby wouldn't tell the truth.

Think of all of the tax dollars that were wasted when Brewster Jennings' cover was blown.

No, these things concern Joe not. What does concern Joe is that an elite white guy, someone kind of like him, might face some consequences for his actions.

That can never be allowed to happen.

Posted by amberglow
June 10, 2007

"I have a different feeling about Libby. His "perjury"--not telling the truth about which reporters he talked to--would never be considered significant enough to reach trial, much less sentencing, much less time in stir if he weren't Dick Cheney's hatchet man."

No--it's not "perjury", but perjury and obstruction of justice. It's not because he was Cheney's hatchet man, but because he obstructed an official legal investigation into the outing of a covert agent who worked on nuclear weapons, burning all of her contacts, and all of her cover firms and things, etc. Cheney has many hatchet men and women--they aren't all charged with crimes. Rove talked to Fitzgerald. Fleischer talked to Fitzgerald too--they were all hatchet men, but weren't charged. Do you understand why Libby was charged?

Posted by Anonymous
June 10, 2007

"Do we really want to spend our tax dollars to keep Scooter behind bars?"

Damn straight we do! And I'll personally take up a collection for Cheney and W. NO COST to the American people!

Posted by Facts Please
June 10, 2007

Joe states: His "perjury"--not telling the truth about which reporters he talked to--would never be considered significant enough to reach trial, much less sentencing, much less time in stir if he weren't Dick Cheney's hatchet man. Come on he lied under oath to a grand jury not about what reporterd he talked to but about outing a covert CIA agent. Why is perjury in quotes. I think Joe needs to find a dictionary and look up 'Perjury'. What a joke.

Posted by James, Los Angeles
June 10, 2007

No, you are wrong, Joe. I don't think you know what you are talking about. Firstly, it seems you have the details of Hilton's transgressions wrong, and obviously you know nothing about what is the norm in sentencing DUI-related probation violations in Los Angeles. I can assure you, Hilton got a very LIGHT sentence.

And as for your colleagues, the cozy white elite circles of the beltway, well, here's what they had to say about that:

~~
Former House Majority Leader Rep. Dick Armey (R-TX) – "But Mr. Speaker, perjury before a grand jury is not personal and it is not private. Obstruction of justice is not personal and it is not private. Abuse of the power of the greatest office in the world is not personal and it is not private." [ABC Special Report, 12/19/98]

Senator Arlen Specter (R-PA) – "Perjury and obstruction of justice are serious offenses which must not be tolerated by anyone in our society." [Washington Post, 2/12/99]

Senator Sam Brownback (R- KS) – "Perjury and obstruction of justice are crimes against the state. Perjury goes directly against the truth-finding function of the judicial branch of government." [Congressional Record, 2/12/99]

Senator John Kyl (R-AZ) – "...there can be no doubt that perjurious, false, and misleading statements made under oath in federal court proceedings are indeed impeachable offenses...John Jay, the first Chief Justice of the United States, said `there is no crime more extensively pernicious to society' than perjury, precisely because it `discolors and poisons the streams of justice.'" [Congressional Record, 2/12/99]

Senator Michael DeWine (R-OH) – "Obstruction of justice and perjury strike at the very heart of our system of justice...Perjury is also a very serious crime...The judiciary is designed to be a mechanism for finding the truth-so that justice can be done. Perjury perverts the judiciary, turning it into a mechanism that accepts lies-so that injustice may prevail." [Congressional Record, 2/12/99]

Senator Mitch McConnell (R-KY) – "I am completely and utterly perplexed by those who argue that perjury and obstruction of justice are not high crimes and misdemeanors...Perjury and obstruction hammer away at the twin pillars of our legal system: truth and justice." [Congressional Record, 2/12/99]

Senator George Voinovich (R-OH) – "As constitutional scholar Charles Cooper said, `The crimes of perjury and obstruction of justice, like the crimes of treason and bribery, are quintessentially offenses against our system of government, visiting injury immediately on society itself.'" [Congressional Record, 2/12/99]

Senator John Sununu (R-NH) – "These acts are not merely technical violations of federal law; they demonstrate a broad and consistent pattern of behavior designed to corrupt our system of due process. To withhold or delay swift and appropriate action would be to hold a single individual above the law; and, herein lies the tragic precedent which a vote against impeachment creates. A vote against impeachment holds a single individual to a unique standard, above all other citizens, and outside the boundaries of our judicial system." [Union Leader, Sununu Editorial; 12/13/98]

Rep. Henry Hyde (R-IL) – "So for my friends who think that perjury, lying and deceit are in some circumstances acceptable and undeserving of punishment I respectfully disagree." [House Judiciary Committee, 12/1/98]

Rep. Lindsay Graham (R-SC) – "It isn't polls that count, it's right and wrong...the evidence is overwhelming that these offenses occurred, the crime of perjury and obstruction of justice have traditionally been high crimes under our Constitutions." [Senate Impeachment Trial of President Clinton, 2/8/99]

Rep. J.D. Hayworth (R-AZ) – "Lying under oath is perjury, plain and simple," said Rep. J.D. Hayworth, R-Ariz. "Can you imagine what happens in court when you suddenly eliminate perjury, if you say you can make exceptions for perjury? . . . For me, it's just a very fundamental question." [Dallas Morning News, 10/11/98]

Rep. Steve Chabot (R - OH) – "It would be wrong for you to tell America's children that some lies are all right. It would be wrong to show the rest of the world that some of our laws don't really matter." [AP, 2/9/99]

Rep. Bob Ney (R-OH) – "By committing perjury, obstructing justice and corroding the rule of law that is the basis of a civil society"

Rep. Ralph Regula (R-OH) – "It's going to boil down to whether there's hard evidence of obstruction of justice. ... You can't eliminate a felony by just apologizing" [Akron Beacon-Journal, 9/12/98]

Rep. Jim Kolbe (R - AR) – "I believe there is ample evidence that felonious conduct -- and perjury is a felony -- falls well within the bounds of what our forefathers intended the phrase 'high crimes and misdemeanors' to include. [USA Today, 12/17/98]

Rep. Charles Taylor (R-NC) – "The seriousness of the charges - perjury, subornation of witnesses, obstruction of justice - strike at the heart of our basis of our Constitution, the rule of law." [Associated Press, 10/8/98]

Rep. John Mica (R-FL) – "If you commit perjury or obstruct justice, you will be held accountable. If you are a member of Congress or president . . . you will be held accountable. Even if you . . . do a thousand good deeds, you will be held accountable." [Orlando Sentinel, 12/20/98]

Rep. Howard Coble (R-NC) – "Unless a man is honest," said Coble, "we have no right to keep him in public life. It matters not how brilliant his capacity." Coble added, "It is not sex. It is indeed perjury. It is the lie." [News & Record, 12/19/98]

Sean Hannity – "Certainly, perjury is a felony, the last time I checked." [Fox, 9/10/98]

Former RNC Spokesman/ CNN Contributor Cliff May: "Bribery and perjury are equivalent crimes." [Fox, 1/18/99]

Ann Coulter – "Perjury? I think perjury's pretty important." [CNBC, 6/12/98]

Ann Coulter – "This is obstruction of justice, perjury, and false statements. This is completely a different matter now. It is much higher, much higher level, much bigger deal." [CNN, 1/27/98]
~~

Of course they are singing a different song these days, eh?

Posted by Anonymous
June 10, 2007

It is practically RAINING idiocy this lovely Sunday morning!

Posted by Robert ("Bob") Smith
June 10, 2007

Libby was convicted months ago. He's finally been sentenced to 30 months but so far remains free on appeal.

Even if he eventually serves time, he'll spend it playing tennis in a minimum-security, white-collar facility till Bush springs him and his tennis elbow as the president leaves office.

That's less than twenty months away.

So, as a practical matter, the clock is ticking.

Every day Scooter doesn't have to serve now is a day he'll never have to serve.

Posted by attaturk
June 10, 2007

Rich, Powerful WHITE people should be able to lie with impunity.

Especially when like Libby (but unlike Bill Clinton) they never admit to their lie or express remorse.

Two things that I. Lewis Libby hasn't done.

But he is a Rich, Powerful, White guy so how much responsibility for his own actions can we really expect?

Only the poor, the non-white, and the weak must face prison in our JUST society.

You may abhor the Klan rally Joe, but you don't have to show up to support the idea.

Posted by Anonymous
June 10, 2007

Between Kinsley's plea for leniency and this one, that makes two posts in the "Scooter got a bum rap" column.

Can't wait until we see the "Libby sentence is a refreshing reminder that no one is above the law" post.

Hahahahahahahahahahahahaha!

Posted by res ipsa loquitur
June 10, 2007

His "perjury"--not telling the truth about which report...

Why is the word "perjury" in quotation marks? Libby was indeed convicted of perjury -- two counts, actually.

Posted by attaturk
June 10, 2007

Joe,

Two counts of PERJURY

&

Two counts of OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE

Both of which you appear to know absolutely nothing about. The latter two get mentioned by hardly anyone.

Posted by amberglow
June 10, 2007

"... KLEIN: Well, what you're hearing is -- and what's been reported in "The New York Times" today is that she was a NOC.

And let me tell just you how serious this is. Aldridge Ames, the very famous American spy, is doing a life sentence right now for exposing NOCs. Now, the question is whether the people in the White House who allegedly exposed this operative knew that she was a NOC. That is going to be the focus of this investigation, because, if they did know, that makes this unbelievably serious.
ZAHN: I found it interesting your phraseology just now. You said people in the White House.

There are a number of reports this evening saying that there is one person being looked as the potential leaker. And that's Vice President Cheney's chief of staff, Scooter Libby? Can you confirm that?

KLEIN: Right.

Well, yes, Libby is one of the names that you hear most prominently around town. Libby and Karl Rove have been the names that have been out there. And I don't know if they are or not. But here's why people put it together with Libby. Libby is to Dick Cheney as Paul Wolfowitz is to Donald Rumsfeld. He is a very prominent neoconservative, who has -- I've heard and everybody knows -- been very upset with the CIA's performance leading up to Iraq.

And so, therefore, people are putting two and two together and getting 36. But his name is the one that's been around.

ZAHN: Did you get any better sense today on where this investigation is going? We heard a little bit yesterday about some of the details you reported about White House staffers being told they got to make darn sure their phone records are available to investigators, that their computers logs are available to investigators. Anything new on that front?

KLEIN: Well, I understand that the Justice Department has gone over to the CIA and informed them that a lot of those people are going to be subject to questioning as well, which means that an awful lot of people in Washington are having to hire lawyers tonight, which is really unfortunate, because there are very few names that are out there in play.

And the irony of this is that, right now, there are a bunch of journalists in Washington, at least six of them, who are protecting some very prominent people in the Bush White House.

ZAHN: It's a very odd position for a reporter to be in, isn't it?

KLEIN: Well, it's also, given the antipathy that the Bush White House has had for the press, it's particularly ironic. But it's the honor of journalists that is keeping this investigation in play.

And, at this point, with four or five names out there, I just can't imagine why the president of the United States doesn't call these people in and say, "Did you do it?" and get an answer and end it right here and now. This is very serious business. The president has in his power to end it.

(CROSSTALK)

ZAHN: And you know for a fact the president hasn't done that?

KLEIN: I don't know for a fact that he hasn't done that. But if he had done that and if it's true that these names are out there, this would be over." -- http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0310/02/pzn.00.html

Posted by Terrapin
June 10, 2007

Joe - We are not going to agree on this. From the very beginning of the post I think you are off-base. It is a weakness and an arrogance of your class to believe that any type of harsh sentencing is given to the wealthy and powerful in order to make an example of them. Sometime the punishment does indeed fit the crime.

amberglow is completely correct in the comment above. It is not merely 'perjury' but perjury and obstruction of justice. And the underlying crime was indeed serious.

Finally, making the argument for equivalence with the Clinton impeachment is specious at best. Only if you judge the Libby Scandal to be nothing more than a politically motivated attempt to overthrow a democratically elected president is there any chance of similarity. So here are the details, one last time:

Federalist Society lawyers found a former Clinton mistress, Paula Jones, who was willing to claim that she was sexually harrassed.

The lawyers used the powers of deposition to get Clinton under oath to ask him wide-ranging questions about just about everything - including his sexual history.

Clinton lied about an affair with Monica Lewinsky.

The Paula Jones lawsuit was thrown out of court because there had been no harrassment - no underlying crime. Jones' career was not harmed by her consensual affair with Clinton. Lewinsky's career was not harmed until the prosecutions became a public spectacle.

The entire thing was a 'perjury trap' and the major players have admitted it. It was an attempt at political assassination and the public wised up to it and prevented the Senate from convicting him. This is all part of the public record and there are numerous books on the subject. At this point it is important to note that nobody died, nobody's covert identity was exposed and national security was not weakened through the loss of intelligence assets which monitored Iran's nuclear weapons capability.

Only if you believe that Patrick Fitzgerald pursued this investigation beyond the seriousness of the underlying crime for the sole purpose of unseating an elected member of the Executive Branch - only then does your statement make any sense.

So please please please rethink your position on this. At least let me see that you are capable of rethinking it even if you do not actually change your mind. Show me that you see some of these differences. Show me something.

Posted by sy
June 10, 2007

Jackass:

Anonymous is correct - stupidity abounds today.

Paris violated the terms of her probation. She thought, because she is a faux celebrity, the constraints of her restricted freedom were voluntary. Her confinement has been modify to correct her view.

Libby's conviction for perjury, obstruction of justice, etc. exists because of OVERWHELMING EVIDENCE. Some of your friends, and enemies, at the CIA and FBI are absolutely adamant that Libby do every minute of his sentence. Armitage and Rove might have very well faced similar sentences but for their come to Jesus moments. Libby was not likewise inclined.

You are a fool.

Posted by JGabriel
June 10, 2007

Joe Klein @ Top: "But jail time? Do we really want to spend our tax dollars keeping Scooter Libby behind bars?"

Yes. It's important to jail people who betray their oath of office and endanger national security assets -- such as assets working against the proliferation of WMD's.

Your comments, Joe, remind me of Fouad Ajami's WSJ editorial comparing Libby to a 'fallen soldier' and urging President Bush to pardon him.

Well, if Libby is a 'soldier' in the war (in Iraq? on Terror?), then so was Valerie Wilson.

Which means Libby isn't so much the 'fallen' soldier as he is the one who stabbed a fellow soldier in the back, left her bleeding on the ground, and posted a sign next to her saying 'Desecrate This U.S. Corpse'.

Or, if you prefer, a more accurate analogy might be the soldier who leaks and publicizes information about an ongoing secret military operation. Then names the people involved and their home addresses.

With that reasoning in mind, Libby should be court-martialed, at the very least. Jail time is not only appropriate, but necessary.

.

Posted by James, Los Angeles
June 10, 2007

"But jail time? Do we really want to spend our tax dollars keeping Scooter Libby behind bars?"

Uh, yes. And more of it. Especially considering that the underlying crime, the investigation of which his obstruction of justice actually obstructed, carried far greater penalties than a mere 30 months in a cushy country club "prison" playing golf and tennis with his fellow Bushies on the seashore. Penalties on the order of Aldrich Ames and Jonathon Pollard.

I'll trade 30 Libby's for one Cheney, though. C'mon Scooter bay-bee, start singing!

Posted by amberglow
June 10, 2007

I'll repeat one part of that--

"And let me tell just you how serious this is. Aldridge Ames, the very famous American spy, is doing a life sentence right now for exposing NOCs. Now, the question is whether the people in the White House who allegedly exposed this operative knew that she was a NOC. That is going to be the focus of this investigation, because, if they did know, that makes this unbelievably serious."

Hmmmm...

Posted by lampwick
June 10, 2007

Ooff! More low-hanging fruit for Atrios...

I'm finding it hard to distinguish what you're saying here from the general claim that no 'celebrity' should go to jail, since a) it's likely the case that they're being made an example of, and b) as potentially productive citizens, they should be in the outside world, doing community service.

But of course as celebrities they're usually rich, and able to afford the country's best lawyers, get former Supreme Court nominees to write them letters of support, etc...

How about we say this: no African-American males should go to jail because a) judges and juries are merely making examples of them, and b) as potentially productive citizens, they should be out doing community service.

In short: either get rid of jails; or send all convicted criminals to them, without exception.

Posted by JJ
June 10, 2007

Joe, you're just baiting us now.

The least you could do is discuss the merits of Fitzgerald's case. The way you talk it sounds like Libby and company were guilty of selling ice cream without a license. Don't you think the stakes and the crimes involved rose to a wee bit higher level than what you let on?

And I've driven by club fed before. I've got just three words: boo freakin hoo.

Posted by patroclus
June 10, 2007

So, according to Joe Klein, the multiple counts of perjury and obstruction of justice, for which Libby was unanimously convicted, and relentlessly excoriated from the judge's bench, have now become merely "perjury" (which should never have been prosecuted). I suppose John Wayne Gacy is now only guilty of "murder;" and Cunningham and Ney are only guilty of "bribery."

In Joe Klein's version of English, if one merely places quotation marks around the word allegedly describing the crime, all sins are washed away and the perp is granted entry into the kingdom of heaven.

Posted by Mr.Murder
June 10, 2007

Soon as Libby is freed on appeal, he will go on a quest to right the wrongs of injustice, and help OJ find who killed Nicole...

Posted by steve simels
June 10, 2007

Once again, why are we even arguing with Joe?

He remains the same large idiot who has yet to apologize for (a)writing "Primary Colors" under the craven pseudonym Anonymous (still the most odious betrayal since Judas) and (b)writing a NYMAgazine cover story screaming that the release of Spike Lee's "Do the Right Thing" was going to incite race riots.

JOe's opinions on anything are, frankly, a joke. Not to be taken seriously by anyone with an IQ above that of a garden slug.

Posted by CMike
June 10, 2007

Joe,

Explain this to me. How many convenience store clerks have you heard of who talk to, or instruct others to talk to, several reporters about anything relating to classified matters? How many convenience store clerks have top level security clearances which gives them access to information about the identity of covert CIA officers?

Your point seems to be that non-celebrities, or at least non-high ranking government officials, do not get caught up in abusing national security information therefore Scooter Libby should get a pass.

Posted by trifecta
June 10, 2007

Dreadful Joe. Just dreadful.

Brewster-Jennings ring a bell? Lying to federal investigators in the hopes that the journalists would not be forced to testify.

Yeah, no big deal. So, what ever happened to Brewster-Jennings Joe?

It's no big deal right? Even from you this is just awful.

Posted by Anonymous
June 10, 2007

Joe Klein: Jackass. Hee-haw.

Posted by Whispers
June 10, 2007

Scooter Libby isn't going to jail because he's a celebrity. Scooter Libby is only a celebrity because he's going to jail. The parallels to the Hilton case are flimsy at best. Libby is only the latest of a generation of Republican operatives who have felt empowered to simply stonewall any legal investigation into the tactics used at the highest levels of the Republican party, with the assurance that, somewhere along the way, any repercussions in criminal court will be defused. Nixon, Weinberger, all the Iran-Contra people, and a generation of GOP leaders have made hay simply ignoring the law of the United States and doing whatever they felt like doing.

If I may say so, Mr. Klein, you have a remarkably cavalier attitude towards the public disclosure of the identity of an undercover CIA operative. And you actually buy into the Libby/Cheney defense that the administration heard about Plame's employment from reporters? You do know that there is absolutely no evidence supporting this ludicrous explanation of the sequence of events, right?

The problem isn't that Scooter Libby "forgot which reporters he talked to", it's that he pretended that he received information from reporters when any sentient being can see that the far more likely explanation is that he received the information from his boss.

It is not a coincidence that Libby works for the Vice President! Indeed, that is a central part of the story! By your bizarre logic, anybody who is famous and works in the top circles of powerful should be somehow beyond the reach of the law, because power implies fame. How can you write a post that is so obtuse?

Posted by spinoza
June 10, 2007

I am no fan of jails. But why hasn't Joe Klein made the same argument for other poorer convicts? Why is Scotter Libby special? Might it have to do with his station in the world?

Posted by Snow
June 10, 2007

What kind of journalist are you?

"This 'perjury' case only exists because of his celebrity--just as the ridiculous 'perjury' case against Bill Clinton, which ballooned into the fantastically stupid and destructive impeachment proceedings."

This perjury case is significant. If only for the fact that it was not a perjury case so much as an obstruction of justice case.

Or maybe you think it is just a coincidence that there is a new star on the Wall at CIA HQ.

Posted by spinoza
June 10, 2007

Two counts of PERJURY
&
Two counts of OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE
Both of which you appear to know absolutely nothing about. The latter two get mentioned by hardly anyone.

from attatuk above. So good I thought it needed repeating. Since when was lying to a federal grand jury a minor offense, especially as regards national security? If Scooter Libby were Bill Clinton, Klein would screaming for him to be impaled.

Posted by JGabriel
June 10, 2007

Let's get one more talking point out of the way. Liby was NOT 'just a fall guy'.

Libby first learned of Valerie Wilson's CIA status from Dick Cheney. Libby almost certainly propagated that information on Cheney's orders, but let's not forget that it was *Libby* who did the propagation. All roads in the leak lead to Libby.

Rove probably first learned of Wilson's CIA status from Libby.

Armitage learned of Wilson's status from an e-mail generated by Libby's requests, at the very least. Though I wouldn't be surprised to learn that Armitage got a heads up from Libby first, either specifically about Wilson's status or just to look for the memo Libby had requested.

Novak learned of Wilson's status from Rove and Armitage, each of whom learned it -- whether directly or indirectly -- from Libby.

Ari Fleischer learned of Wilson's CIA status from Libby. As did Condi Rice.

Matt Cooper's sources for Wilson's status were Rove -- who learned it either directly or indirectly from Libby -- and Libby himself.

Judy Miller learned of Wilson's status from Libby.

Bob Woodward learned of Wilson's status from Armitage -- who learned by way of Libby.

While Fitzgerald might not have been able to indict Libby on the most relevant charge -- IIPA violation -- there is no doubt that Fitzgerald prosecuted the man most guilty (outside of Cheney) for the leak and widespread dissemination of Valerie Wilson's status as a CIA agent.

Libby was the person most responsible for the dissemination of Valerie Wilson's CIA affiliation. And it was only Libby's *Obstruction of Justice* that prevented Cheney from being indicted or impeached in the matter.

So enough with the 'Libby was just a fall guy' or 'Libby just committed perjury' talking points. Libby deserves every second of the prison sentence he received for Obstruction of Justice, and more.

Posted by amberglow
June 10, 2007

"In Joe Klein's version of English, if one merely places quotation marks around the word allegedly describing the crime, all sins are washed away and the perp is granted entry into the kingdom of heaven."

Joe Klein practices "journalism" and "punditry". He's a "columnist" and shares his "knowledge" and "analysis" with millions of readers each week. ; >

Posted by Jim
June 10, 2007

O Lord. Klein has out-Kleined himself yet again. He posts six impossible things before breakfast.

Others have torn your new one to a decent size, let me just add:

His celebrity? How many people outside of the Beltway knew who I Scooter was before he was indicted?

Just demonstrates how far up Sally Quinn's skirt Joe's head is.

Posted by attaturk
June 10, 2007

Joe,

When Libby gets released from jail, what say you and Victoria Toensing drive up to pick him up?

Posted by steve simels
June 10, 2007

I'll repeat:

In what way is Joe's opinon on this or any other issue more informed or valid than that of an unemployed truck driver thinking about phoning the Rush Limbaugh show?

I mean, seriously.

Posted by Hopeful in NJ
June 10, 2007

Mr. Klein --

You seem to have an excellent opportunity here to review your methodology (what atrios would call "wankishness") free of involvement of the right-wing noise machine. Nothing you wrote about Paris Hilton is accurate -- you don't even know what her crime was -- yet you feel free comfortable in judging the situation, largely by repeating things said elsewhere also without factual basis. [As the comments above note, the same is true of Libby, but no doubt you are too personally involved to reflect on it.] Why not do some actual "investigating" -- even if only with google -- before jumping in?

Posted by spinoza
June 10, 2007

In what way is Joe's opinon on this or any other issue more informed or valid than that of an unemployed truck driver thinking about phoning the Rush Limbaugh show?

Joe prefers spreckles behind the tastee freeze?

Posted by Jim
June 10, 2007

I'm fine, btw, with I. Scooter serving out his sentence scrubbing bedpans at a military hospital. I'd even prefer it. But can we stop pretending:
A) he didn't knowingly commit a crime
B) there is any comparison between Patrick Fitzgeral and Kenneth Starr? That's the most idiotic, a-historical, insiderist spin I've ever seen on this blog, even with Armey's week-o'blather taken into account.

Posted by Billy B
June 10, 2007

Mr. Klein is attempting to be the next David Broder with the both of them parroting republic talking points.

If Broder is the 'Dean', then Mr. Klein can be "Deano".

If we can scare up Desi and Billy we can have a reunion...

Posted by Mr.Murder
June 10, 2007

In fairness to unemployed truck drivers, the ones I know have either served in military, worked relief for Katrina(employed since), or have gone to school and found better wages at the time in the new industry(Hank quit one class shy of DJ certification and saw more shows on the road driving than he would of at any Clear Channel hellhole...) plus they usually follow politics better than Klein.

Truckers don't need interns to write opinion pieces for them.

Posted by padcrasher
June 10, 2007

Wow! Making excuses for perjury and obstruction of justice in the White House? As the Judge said, it is immaterial what the underlying charge is. You don't lie. Holy crap do you not understand how grave it is for the Office of the President to lie to the DOJ?

It's shameful the media thinks you speak for the left. You're horrible.

Posted by steve simels
June 10, 2007

It's shameful the media thinks you speak for the left. You're horrible.

Exactly the point.

LIke Joe's rant about how Michael Moore going to Gitmo was embarassing crazy leftie irresponsibility and beyond the pale.

What an utter tool.

Posted by steve simels
June 10, 2007

It's shameful the media thinks you speak for the left. You're horrible.

Exactly the point.

LIke Joe's rant about how Michael Moore going to Gitmo was embarassing crazy leftie irresponsibility and beyond the pale.

What an utter tool.

Posted by nemo
June 10, 2007

I won't even get to the Libby part in this post. You have some serious factual mistakes in the Paris Hilton part, that make her violations sound a lot less serious than they are in reality.

In reality, after the DUI, she was again pulled not once, but twice for driving without a license. The second time was especially bad. She was charged with:

1. Driving without a license;
2. Driving 70 MPH in a 35 MPH zone;
3. Driving with her headlights off after dark;
4. Failure to enroll in a court-ordered alcohol education program.

Those are multiple extremely serious violations of the terms of probation for her original DUI conviction. You left out all of that, and trivialized her actions after her original DUI. You don't even seem to know the most elementary facts of the case, which are easy to find in your own magazine.

The average person really would go to jail for doing what Paris Hilton did. You're trivializing Libby's perjury just as badly, but that's material for another post.

Posted by James, Los Angeles
June 10, 2007

"Only the little people do time."
- "Leona" Joe Klein

Posted by Roger
June 10, 2007

Good lord! For a smart guy, you sure can be stupid some times.

What universe do you live in where perjury and obstruction of justice in the investigation of what amounts to treason would never make it to trial let alone result in jail time?

Maybe you should go live there and stop wrecking the universe the rest of us have to live in Joe.

Posted by amberglow
June 10, 2007

"Forget Scooter Libby. He's hung out to dry. Much too complicated for Bush to pardon him now. Yes, the Republican base wants it, but a pardon always admits guilt, and that's something that the Bush people cannot, never have, and will never do.

But Bush has too much in common with Paris Hilton -- too much natural sympathy with her to let her twist in the wind or languish in a Los Angeles jail. He should pardon her if he acts on his principles and his past behavior. Like Paris he moves from one folly and misadventure to another without regard to the consequences, never suffering remorse or understanding the consequences of his acts. The Los Angeles police calls such folks 51/50's -- armed and dangerous mental cases who can injure themselves or others. But we call them news makers or Republican presidents. ..." -- http://www.huffingtonpost.com/sherman-yellen/why-bush-should-pardon-pa_b_51433.html

Posted by Anonymous
June 10, 2007

After reading this blog regularly, I've come to certain conclusions:

Joe is an utter liar and completely in the pocket of the Repblican power structure. He is a brainless scribe who will parrot whatever he is asked to say. He is without ethics or a healthy respect for for the truth.

He posts the odd anti-Bush post once in a while for a single reason: it helps him keep the track record he needs so he can be trotted out by the power-that-be as a Democrat or a person from the "left." But he doesn't even believe those paltry few critical pieces he posts. Those are simply part a calculated strategy directed at discrediting the left wing through the majority of his output. No one but an idiot would believe what Klein says, but that's the demographic that still purchases Time.

Time Warner is a cyncial megacorporation wedded to corporate interests. It maintains this blog simply to bait left-winger and progressives who would disregard its output entirely, were they not given the outlet here to excoriate the fools on Time's staff. This is the only stream of income they can hope to get from the informed sector of the public.

A hard rain is going to fall, eventually. Scores will be settled.

Posted by Aaron
June 10, 2007

All Joe Klein is trying to say here is that he thinks continually breaking the law is OK for famous people.

What's so bad about that?

Posted by spinoza
June 10, 2007

Now, I just loved the trial. It confirmed some reporting I'd done a few years ago: that the Bush administration was far more interested in spinning the war than fighting it in June 2003, when the Joe Wilson imbroglio absorbed the vice president--but, that very same month, Bush, Cheney et al did absolutely NOTHING in response to a CIA briefing that we were now facing a classic guerrilla insurgency in Iraq. The Libby trial brought needed public attention to the criminal negligence of the Bush White House.

1942 Joe Klein: Now I just loved the holocaust. It comfirmed some reporting I'd done that the thousand year reich was far more interest in spinning the Jewish thing and the war. In fact, the last time I had a beer with Hitler he told me all about this.

Posted by JGabriel
June 10, 2007

Sherman Yellen (quoted by amberglow): "Forget Scooter Libby. He's hung out to dry. Much too complicated for Bush to pardon him now. Yes, the Republican base wants it, but a pardon always admits guilt, and that's something that the Bush people cannot, never have, and will never do."

The pardon chorus is just a charade. When Bush comes out and commutes Libby's sentence, all the centrist pundits will hail it as an 'appropriate middle-ground' between pardon and Libby serving his sentence.

They'll neglect to note, however, that commutation will preserve Libby's ability to cite the 5th Amendment in a way that a pardon does not.

Pundits, Bush, Cheney, OVP, Libby -- everyone wins! Except the American people of course, but who cares about them?

Posted by amberglow
June 10, 2007

"All Joe Klein is trying to say here is that he thinks continually breaking the law is OK for famous people.

What's so bad about that?"

posted by OJ Simpson? ; >

JGabriel--i think it'll be a pardon tho, and Libby's appeals will eat up the time between now and the end of Bush's term when he pardons him.

What's most pathetic about Klein and all of this is how terribly damaged the press was by everything that came out during the trial, and how this now by Klein and so many others calling for either a pardon or no jail time just further damages their credibility entirely. They are all now just writing and speaking for and to each other and themselves and cowardly officials in DC--there's never been a time i don't think when so many in the media have been so disconnected from what people think and care about.

Posted by Mike M.
June 10, 2007

I guess I have the opposite take. Leniency for Paris because though she can be used to set an example, she's also young and will likely outgrow such behavior.

On Libby -- while I agree that a lot of these perjury and obstruction charges are trumped up and pursued by prosecutors who can't convict on real crimes, he's just different than Hilton. It's not the fame, it's the power. Libby had the power to wreck lives and he used that power. More "normal" less known, less powerful people get caught up in obstruction charges all the time. You don't see major national figures trying to influence the judge for them. Because of the power Libby had, he had a higher obligation towards perfect behavior.

I rather like your idea about forcing him to work at Walter Reed. But, he could do so in an orange jumpsuit on a work furlough just as easily.

Posted by sean samis
June 10, 2007

Joe,

Lewis Libby's "perjury" would never have been considered significant enough to reach trial nor sentencing except that the underlying crime involves treasonous behaviour--if not actual treason. Libby's "perjury" obstructed the investigation of this crime, making him, in effect if not in law, an accomplice after the fact (aiding the guilty in their evasion of capture and trial). And all this happened in a time of War. That, and the fact he was a close advisor of the Vice President makes his punishment all the more necessary.

This perjury case exists because it involves treason in time of war by high government officials.

I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby deserves to be stood in front of a wall and shot for treason; as would his co-conspirators if they are convicted. His 30 months of jail are a slap on the wrist, but he must at least get *that*! The cost of keeping him in jail is of no concern, the Rule of Law doesn't come free.

sean s.

Posted by dave
June 10, 2007

"What universe do you live in where perjury and obstruction of justice in the investigation of what amounts to treason would never make it to trial let alone result in jail time?"

Joke, you can respond to this - or any of the other nearly-unanimous opinions taking you to task for this idiotic post - any fucking time now.

Posted by linda
June 10, 2007

Joe having seen so many speaking up for 'poor Libby' decides to get in the line for party favor.

Dershowitz and other law profs--maybe a major endowment for a chair in their name into perpetuity.

Bork--supplemental pension while waiting for the settlement from the Yale Club.

Most has already been discussed in previous threads.

Can we skip the Clinton oranges to apple comparisons?

The whole Libby thing and its underlying crimes only matter if you care about your country and protecting those who risk their lives to protect it.

The Paris thing only has meaning if you've been a victim of a drunk or otherwise impaired driver or a 'mental problem' like the folks at VT or the folks that are daily victimized by the addicted and mentally ill left untreated and cruising.

Posted by amberglow
June 10, 2007

DUI kills thousands and thousands every year tho, Mike, and she was repeatedly violating the law by continuing to drive with a suspended license, even after caught more than once. This wasn't a first offence, but more like 3 strikes. Even Lindsay Lohan and the other Hollywood messes don't drive themselves--they use drivers and bodyguards.

Libby and the rest of them who spread the Plame info probably got people killed too, i think--all the contacts of Plame all over the world were put at great risk by the revealing of Plame's cover firm and other details.

Posted by Cynical Bostonian
June 10, 2007

A conviction for lying and obstruction of justice, by a Republican prosecutor, and a sentence meted out by a Bush appointed judge, doesn't become nothing because obnoxious elites like David Broder and Joe Klein don their smoking jackets and sip brandy and declare it so.

All you ever need to know about how intellectually dishonest and phony Joe Klein is can be found in this drivel.

Posted by padcrasher
June 10, 2007

I really blame Time. They know Klein doesn't speak for the left. Polls show most people are in favor of prison for Libby. The resident "liberal" here can't even bring himself stand up for the rule of law, much less comment on how corrupt this Administration in almost every Department. Yet he sympathizes with Cheney's go-to-boy, Libby. I fantasize about Glenn Greenwald being on staff here and ripping apart every single falsehood and double standard coming from Klein. He'd do it using facts, sourced, and Klein's own words. Klein would quit in disgrace.

Posted by Eric
June 10, 2007

"I have a different feeling about Libby. His "perjury"--not telling the truth about which reporters he talked to--would never be considered significant enough to reach trial, much less sentencing, much less time in stir if he weren't Dick Cheney's hatchet man."

Deep Thinking Serious Journalist Joe Klein is at it again -- ill-informed, lazy, unwilling to do the most basic research before rushing half-baked conclusions into print. Does Joe have any idea what the trial was about or what the evidence showed? Evidently not. But the facts don't matter -- Joe's "feeling" is in charge of "reporting it out" again.

Just how pathetic does this have to get before editors at TIME start caring about the quality of Joe's journamalism?

Posted by Joe Klein's conscience
June 10, 2007

Mr. Klein,
Re: Paris Hilton, if it was some orthodonist's kid, they would probably have called for a cab or a limo. They might have had an ounce of shame.

Re: Scooter Libby, have you read Marcy Wheeler's book? Do you ever read FireDogLake? Are you writing stuff like this post because you know it will inspire more people to be mean to you? To call you out on your foolishness? It used to be called a self-fulfilling prophecy. By the way, do you have any comments on the esteemed faux-centrist Lieberman's TV appearance this morning?

Posted by Joe Klein's conscience
June 10, 2007

Mr. Klein,
I forgot to add, did you see Judge Walton's comment in regards to the amicius brief filed on Thursday?

Posted by David N Fox
June 10, 2007

I followed the trial and read the transcripts. At no point, other thanking the Court staff, did Libby ever express contrition. He could have done si after the verdict was handed down. But his legal team had the appeal in mind so want to tough it out. I think the Judge's comments about the Bork & Co submission is apropos. Take the time and help all those others charged with the same offences as Libby and then you will be taken seriously.

Posted by amberglow
June 10, 2007

"Ladies and gentlemen, I ask you:
What sort of amorality does it take to ignore the fact that:

1) Dick Cheney outed Valerie Plame in a fit of pique over her husband’s column “What I Didn’t Find In Niger”, and:
2) Outing Valerie Plame not only destroyed her career, but obliterated the far-flung network of Middle Eastern and Iraqi field operatives and contacts she had spent years - decades - nurturing? And does anyone think that the field operatives in Iraq, once Cheney made sure the whole world knew that Valerie Plame was an undercover CIA agent, escaped the notice of the local Sunni insurgents?
..." -- http://phoenixwoman.wordpress.com/2007/06/09/david-broder-is-a-rapist/

About Broder, but goes just as well for Klein.

Posted by GDAEman
June 10, 2007

Funny how the vast majority of comments disagree with Joe Klein, not just on this piece but in general.

Joe's bosses at Time Magazine probably think Joe does a good job creating debate, and wouldn't want a blogger with whom everyone agrees... that wouldn't be interesting.

Actually, it would be interesting, but dangerous to the establishment, of which Time Magazine is part. Imagine a blogger questioning the consolidation of wealth enabled by laws that are illegitimate due to false testimony by administration officials, and corrupted electoral and lobbying practices. Readers might actually agree.

Then imagine the Times blogger suggesting coordinated action to change the establishment (organizing). Oh. Can't go there. So, Joe gets to keep his job and continue the farce of "healthy debate." In time, this farce will fall of its own weight.

Posted by amberglow
June 10, 2007

and a very smart thing in the comments there--Libby himself knew it was a serious crime, and that why he lied repeatedly.

Posted by DonB
June 10, 2007

Joe Klein,

It is really amazing how the entire Broderville has come to Libby's defense.

In the months leading up to the trial Washington Post editorial page wrote one editorial after another trashing the Wilsons and suggesting that Valerie Plame was not covert. In the days leading up to the verdict they published Libby friendly opeds, hoping to influence the jury. Since the verdict they have been trying to minimize the crime and lobbying for a pardon.

Remember, these are the same people who tried to overthrow a democratically elected president for lying about his sex life, involving a civil case. Now with Libby convicted in a criminal case for lying and obstructing the investigation about outing a CIA agent they go out of their ways to dismiss is as no big deal.

It just goes to show how utterly corrupt the Broderville crowd is. Their moral hypocricy is breathtaking. These are the same people who are always lecturing us about the "rule of law" and the evils of moral relativism.

Posted by amberglow
June 10, 2007

GDAEman, what's weird is that even with falling readership and revenue, they still think it's worth it to pay Klein to repeat the same stuff everyone else is saying. He's never out front with anything at all, but always chimes in only after a consensus has been reached in DC, and the Washington Post has already made their positions known.

Posted by Carneyvore
June 10, 2007

I remember when I was involved in the federal judiciary, we gave some no-name guy from Idaho a 40 year sentence under the guidelines for selling meth. It's a good thing that was a no-name guy. As Joe so rightly pointed out, if Paris Hilton or Scooter Libby had been convicted of that they would have been sentenced to death or probably dismembered limb by limb.

Posted by x_00
June 10, 2007

Joe,

I cannot believe Time Magazine pays you to write!

Libby is a traitor who should be going to jail for life, right next to Ames and Hanson.

He was spared a life sentence because:
1. he obstructed justice (convicted)
2. perjured himself (convicted)
3. and the Bush administration did not cooperate

Ask yourself four questions.

How many of Ms Plame's colleagues were exposed?

How many of Ms Plame's agents were compromised?

How many of her colleagues agents were compromised?

How many compromised agents were killed?

Read this: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/08/AR2007060802478.html?hpid=opinionsbox1

When you are finished reading--please retire.

Posted by linda
June 10, 2007

I'm going to repeat something that I posted several threads ago about the 'born-again Nixons', slightly rewritten:

While Hoover was a vacuum that sucked, Nixons is a drug-resistant virus.

Posted by DonB
June 10, 2007

BTW, we saw a replay of this with Casper Weinberger indictment. The entire Brorderville applauded Poppy for pardoning Weinberger. Why? Richard Cohen explained it best. He wrote a column saying he and Weinberger shopped at the same supermarket. Translation; Weinberger is part of the Establishment, a member of our exclusive club, he is one of us.

No wonder Joe Klein and David Broder hate the Internet and the bloggers. The bloggers expose their corruption and moral hypocricy.

Posted by mz
June 10, 2007

According to LA sentencing standards, Paris Hilton got a reasonable sentence. And her getting out of jail may have had something to do with the contribution that her grandfather made to the Sheriff's re-election campaign.

Joe's mendacious mis-statement of the facts in Hilton's case is actually a perfect metaphor for how completely and willfully wrong he is on Libby. A very serious crime, with very serious consequences for national security, could not be prosecuted because of Libby's obstruction of justice. He was given multiple opportunities to stop obstructing justice, he chose not to. He chose to protect Cheney and the Republican Party over the country, the law, and national security. He got off scandalously lightly.

It's sad to see someone so morally bankrupt and intellectually corrupt, and apparently so unaware of it.

Posted by arch stanton
June 10, 2007

Joke...do you know Scooter? How many times have you broken bred w/ him? How many times have you been to his home?

"I have a different feeling about Libby. His "perjury"--not telling the truth about which reporters he talked to--would never be considered significant enough to reach trial, much less sentencing, much less time in stir if he weren't Dick Cheney's hatchet man."

Of course this wouldn't have happened if he weren't Darth's hatchet man you idiot...he wouldn't have had access. You are not even following the basic laws of reason now Joke. They convict bank presidents who embezzle not because they are bank presidents, but because they had ACCESS to the cash and used it to enrich themselves.

Joke, can you point us to any article you have written in which you say the same thing about drug addicts or shop lifters who receive long prison sentences? Or is it only your rich and influential cocktail buddies who deserve compassion? Or are you just a confused old man just paychecking and throwing together a bunch of nonsense to make deadline?

"Sentence Libby to community service--at Walter Reed Hospital, where he can spend his days comtemplating the broken victims of his ideological arrogance.

There is someone who should visit Reed to comtemplate the broken victims of Scooter Libby's ideological arrogance and the media's irresponsibility. That person is you Joke.

Posted by arch stanton
June 10, 2007

"This is a really tough decision. War may well be the right decision at this point. In fact, I think it--it's--it-it probably is." When Tim Russert presses Klein on why he thinks Iraq is "the right war," Klein responds, "Because sooner or later, this guy has to be taken out. Saddam has -- Saddam Hussein has to be taken out... The message has to be sent because if it isn't sent now, if we don't do this now, it empowers every would-be Saddam out there and every would-be terrorist out there."

-Joke Line, six months AFTER he claims he came out against the war in an article about Al Gore in Salon.

Posted by DonB
June 10, 2007

If today's Washington Post had been in existence during Watergate Nixon would have survived and been treated as a hero by editorial page.

You really have to ask yourself why Joe Klein/David Broder/WP editorial page don't concern themselves with people held at Gitmo? People without access to Libby's fancy lawyers? People who don't get public trials? or appeals? Or people rendered in secret CIA prisons?

How come nobody in Broderville is lobbying on their behalf? Is it because Libby is a member of the Establishment and people being tortured in secret prisons are not?

The rot and corruption of the Broderville crowd is sickening.

Posted by DonB
June 10, 2007

"Joe is an utter liar and completely in the pocket of the Repblican power structure"

Joe Klein is a liar completely in the pocket of the Establishment. Since the GOP is the dominant power in the ruling Establishment he carries water for the GOP. He knows who is signing his paycheck and he is not going to bite the hand that feeds him.

Posted by mz
June 10, 2007

"I have a different feeling about Libby."

Are you trying to make a parody of Stephen Colbert? You do realize he is a parody already?

You are in complete contradiction of the facts, but no matter. You feel!

Truthiness in all its splendor.

Posted by arch stanton
June 10, 2007

Just to set the record straight re Paris Hilton,whom I am no fan of:
LA County is not like any place else when it comes to how much time someone would actually spend in custody. Being released after 2 or 3 days for a 23 days sentence is about right, in fact if it was REALLY overcrowded, they would have done a book and release and be out of there in a few hours. This was a judge who is probably up for re-election and did what any scared politician does, he gave the rampaging mob what they wanted.

Posted by mz
June 10, 2007

Joe Klein on Time's Swampland, 6/10/2007:

"Sentence Libby to community service--at Walter Reed Hospital, where he can spend his days comtemplating the broken victims of his ideological arrogance."

Joe Klein on Tim Russert, 2/22/2003:

"This is a really tough decision. War may well be the right decision at this point. In fact, I think it--it's--it--it probably is."

It's your war too, Joe.

3,500 dead and 25,000 wounded Americans, hundreds of thousands of dead Iraqis, a brutal fundamentalist Shia dictatorship (instead of a brutal secular dictatorship) now all but inevitable, and al-Queda gaining strength from each additional day we occupy Iraq.

It's your catastrophe and your broken victims too, Joe.

Posted by wagonjak
June 10, 2007

Geez Joe-everytime I think you're back on track after a good blog you post some crap like this and disappoint me again!

Libby lied to a Grand Jury and to Federal Prosecuters to cover up the extent of the White House involvement in the Plame leak. These are SERIOUS CRIMES and should be treated as such. PERIOD.

Even mentioning Scooter and Paris in the same sentence shows how clueless you can be...one crime was serious but on a personal level, the other on the national and international level that is still affecting the security of this country.

Sorry about your tender feelings toward the Scooter, it must be awful to have a crush on such a lying, bullying criminal...maybe you can visit him in jail and bring him some cookies.

Posted by p_lukasiak
June 10, 2007

Joe is lying once again....

"His "perjury"--not telling the truth about which reporters he talked to..."

Flat out false. Libby's perjury (and obstruction) charges were not related to "which reporters he talked to", but where he claimed he got his information from. Libby claimed his information came from Russert, and that when he told Miller and confirmed it to Cooper that he made certain he told them that he'd only heard about it from other reporters.

"would never be considered significant enough to reach trial, much less sentencing, much less time in stir if he weren't Dick Cheney's hatchet man."

complete BS. This case concerned national security, and Libby's lies had a direct bearing on Fitzgerald being able to complete his investigation. While "perjury" that is not germaine to the investigation is generally not prosceuted (i.e. claiming a lower golf handicap under oath) it is prosecuted when it has a direct bearing on the case.

"This "perjury" case only exists because of his celebrity--just as the ridiculous "perjury" case against Bill Clinton, which ballooned into the fantastically stupid and destructive impeachment proceedings. "

More lies. Joe apparently thinks that people commit perjury and obstruction of justice all the time and it gets ignored. It doesn't. USUALLY what happens is that someone who lies under oath is confronted with the evidence that they are lying, and suddenly their memory improves (see: Rove, Karl) and they avoid prosecution for perjury and obstruction.

And comparing this case to what happened to Clinton is the sign of an absolute idiot.

Ken Starr was one of the most unscrupulous prosecutors ever -- he personally leaked information from the grand jury to the press, as did member of his "team". He jumped at the chance to get Bush in a perjury trap on a charge that had NOTHING to do with the case he was investigating.

Patrick Fitzgerald and his team was leakproof. They scrupulously avoided widening the investigation into other crimes, though they doubtless had evidence of other criminal activity.

I personally believe that Fitz thinks that Libby was guilty of the IIPA violation --- there is a great deal of circumstantial evidence that points to that conclusion (like the fact that Libby was told BY HIS BOSS that VPW worked for the covert operations branch of the CIA -- CPD.)

But Fitz is an ethical prosecutor -- he doesn't indict unless he feels certain he can get a conviction, and even if he had evidence that Libby knew that VPW was covert, given that any trial on IIPA charges would be greatly complicated by the defense's (legitimate, under due process) demands for detailed information regarding CIA sources and methods that the CIA (rightfully) would have refused to disclose -- and that charge would have had to be dropped.

Of course, Joe never showed the slightest degree of interest in the trial itself -- and the evidence presented at trial. He prefers to talk out his butt.

My impression is that Joe is the kind of guy who thinks that wearing a hat in front of the class makes him another "Dean" like Broder -- he doesn't realize that his hat is a cone with the word "Dunce" on it.

Posted by Hoplite
June 10, 2007

The central message here is that, when Bush pardons Libby, he can count on the Broder/Klein set to provide the maximum amount of cover for him as possible. It's the same cover he got during the 2000 campaign, when they lied about the effect his tax proposals would have on the budget and income distribution, derided any attempts to criticize his plans to privatize social security as fearmongering, squashed criticism of his plans to invade Iraq as "unserious," and so on. The semiotics of it are quite public and brazen.

Posted by Anonymous
June 10, 2007

2 1/2 years is a very tough sentence for what he did -- I was expecting a year. But he not only lied, but he forced the government to try him on slam dunk evidence. He likely could have gotten off much more lightly if he pleaded

Posted by DonB
June 10, 2007

"This "perjury" case only exists because of his celebrity--just as the ridiculous "perjury" case against Bill Clinton, which ballooned into the fantastically stupid and destructive impeachment proceedings. "

Another lie from Joe Klein.

He is comparing apples and oranges. Lets educate him;

* Starr was a movement conservative with a long list of conflicts of interest picked by a right wing 3 judge panel to replace a true "independent counsel". Fitzgerald was a republican prosecutor picked by Bush's own justice dept.

* Starr had almost accepted the job to be Paula Jones lawyer. He never let go of that case throughout his Whitewater witchunt. Paula Jones inner circle was who's who of Starr's friends and associates. Starr worked with them to set a perjury trap in a CIVIL case where the issue was ruled by judge as immaterial to the case. Fitzgerald had no such conflict of interest. There was no perjury trap. It was a CRIMINAL case.

* There was no underlying crime in the Clinton case. Getting bj's is not a crime. There WAS an underlying crime in the Libby case. The crime of outing a CIA agent. Libby obstructed the investigation so that the prosecutor could not get to the bottom of it.

* We know why Clinton lied; to cover up a non criminal conduct out of personal embrassasment. We still don't know why Libby lied.

I can go on and on. It won't make a difference for moral hypocrites like Joe Klein and David Broder.

Posted by DonB
June 10, 2007

One other difference between Starr and Fitzgerald.

Starr lost 3 out of 4 court case. That is 25% success rate.

Fitzgerald had one court case. He won. 100% success rate.

Posted by Zippy
June 10, 2007

Terrapin's comment sums up the situation, and my thinking, nicely.

Posted by superfly
June 10, 2007

I think Joe is still drunk from last night's cocktail and weenie party.

Joe, you are just ridiculous today.

Posted by Independent
June 10, 2007

(1) The Bush administration uses lies (the Niger forgery, aluminum tubes) and half truths to scare the nation witless and take it to war.
(2) Cheney and Libby use Russert and Miller (among others)as media dupes to spread the lies.
(3) Joe Wilson exposes one part of the campaign of lies.
(4) Cheney and Libby apparently conspire to intimidate Joe Wilson by outing his CIA covert agent wife.
(5) Fitzgerald, at CIA's request, investigates the outing.
(6) Libby lies repeatedly to the grand jury to cover up the role of the administration. Fitzgerald cannot pursue his original investigation because of Libby's obstruction.
(7) Libby is found guilty of perjury and obstruction of justice.
(8) Joe Klein does a "mea culpa" to his readers vowing never again to let any administration get away with what this one has done.
(9) Joe Klein pleads for clemency for Libby!

Posted by thenekkidtruth
June 10, 2007

A soft-on-white-collar-crime stance that will go a long way towards draining th