Libby

Posted: Thursday, March 08, 2007 8:56 AM by Mark Murray
Filed Under: White House, Courts

In an interview with Univision, Bush indicated that there's no imminent pardon in the works for Libby, and that he will stay out of the matter until the legal process is complete. NBC's Kelly O'Donnell reports that according to the White House, Vice President Cheney remains a trusted aide and his advice remains valuable to Bush. Bush and Cheney have seen each other and spoken since the verdict on Tuesday, but no information has been provided about whether they discussed the outcome. And the White House continues to say that because an appeals process will begin, it cannot comment on the case.

Covering prominent conservatives' efforts to persuade Bush to pardon Libby, USA Today reports, "Speculation is so rampant that the futures trading site intrade.com is allowing people to bet on the likelihood of a Libby pardon by year's end… Bush has been stingy (or careful, as his spokesman puts it) with his clemency authority. He has granted 113 pardons in six years, compared with 396 by Clinton during his eight-year tenure and 393 by Ronald Reagan."

Bob Novak, whose 2003 column sparked the CIA leak controversy that led to Libby’s conviction, seems to suggest that Libby should receive a pardon. “Bush lost control of this issue when he permitted a special prosecutor to make decisions that, unlike going after a drug dealer or mafia kingpin, turned out to be inherently political. It would have taken courage for the president to have aborted this process. It would require even more courage for him to pardon Scooter Libby now, not while he is walking out of the White House in January 2009.”

"No one knows better than Libby how politically hazardous a pardon can be. Before he became Cheney's chief of staff, Libby served as an attorney for Marc Rich, the financier whose pardon by President Bill Clinton in the last hours of his administration provoked a storm of complaints. Now Libby finds himself in the same situation as his onetime client, hoping for a president's beneficence."

EMAIL THIS

Comments

Bush said he would fire anyone who leaked Plame's name to the media, then changed it to he'd fire anyone who broke the law. If he pardons Libby for this it would be tacit PROOF that The White House was involved in the leak, and the subsequent cover-up. Yeah, like Armitage did this all by himself, sure.

J. Merle Stanley, Westchester, NY (Sent Thursday, March 08, 2007 9:33 AM)

If he's counting on a President's beneficience, especially this President, his pardon is a lock. The only people who have benefitted from this President are those loyal to him, his favorite corporations, the wealthy, and those who have the illusion that things are better for them because they've been drinking a variation of Jim Jones kool-aid.

Robert Catalano, Salem, OR (Sent Thursday, March 08, 2007 9:58 AM)

I am hoping that shrub grants the pardon. It will insure a democrat sweep in 08 and many decades beyond, please shrub you are the decider, just do it, please please do it.

beaverdambob (Sent Thursday, March 08, 2007 9:58 AM)

I've changed my mind about him getting a sentence somewhere between Clinton and Berger. With the news of Denis Collins WaPoo journalist / Huffington Post writer / probably working on a new book about the case / neighbor & bar-b-q buddy of Tim Russert's being on the jury it should be a mistrial.

Dave. Tn (Sent Thursday, March 08, 2007 10:10 AM)

Dave, the defense had ample opportunity to 'weed" out anyone they found unacceptable. I am sure they knew the potential jurors history.Obviously, they found whomever you are talking about"acceptable".

Desmond (Sent Thursday, March 08, 2007 10:45 AM)

Beaver - I doubt the shrub would pardon him before the 08 elections, knowing how that will look to the voting public. High level administration official gets convicted of lying under oath and obstructing an investigation into a breach of national security, and he gets pardoned. Not exactly the way to win over those all-important swing voters. If there is a pardon, don't look for it until the day after the votes are cast.

Carrie, NW Iowa (Sent Thursday, March 08, 2007 11:02 AM)

Quite frankly I've found this Libby business very complicated, and a bit boring. Thankfully, Stephen Colbert explains it to me in this video: http://minor-ripper.blogspot.com/2007/03/stephen-colbert-explains-libby-verdict.html

minor ripper, new york, ny (Sent Thursday, March 08, 2007 11:12 AM)

Dave, the defense lawyers knew about Denis Collins'connections and picked him anyway. If you read his diary on Huffington Post you can see why: he comes off as very sympathetic to Libby, unawed by the celebrity of the journalists questioned, and not given to mulling over the deeper ramifications of the issues presented. From his discription of the deliberations, the rest of the jury asked the two hold outs to convince them to vote to accquit, rather than the reverse, and eventually, a consensus was reached without a whole lot of partisan drama. I think its clear Libby got a fair trial and at least one juror has said she's like to see him pardoned.

Amy B Portland, ME (Sent Thursday, March 08, 2007 11:17 AM)

I am sure Scooter got promised something for being thrown under the bus, whether a pardon or a big $$ job. will the real wizard now come from behind the curtain..nah ..

stix66 (Sent Thursday, March 08, 2007 11:23 AM)

Dubya is saving his last two hundred pardons for himself and a hundred and ninety nine of his trusted co-conspirators.

Steve Turner Cedar Falls Iowa (Sent Thursday, March 08, 2007 11:38 AM)

Libby was one of Marc Rich's lawyers. HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

Lee Steele, Mountain View (Sent Thursday, March 08, 2007 11:41 AM)

Well Folks I think pardon discussions are not looking at the calendar. It will easily take over a year for any leagl appeal process to move and even if he looses that appeal the timing will be such that a presidential pardon as a Christmas 2008 gift will happpen just before Mr Libby is scheduled to report to prison. which is "AFTER" the election and therefore imune to public reaction at the ballot box. This administration has no motive to admit a pardon is in the works before then. You can call this a prediction if you want but I'd call it money in the bank

Just A Working Stiff, middle america (Sent Thursday, March 08, 2007 11:55 AM)

Talking heads play out the scenarion this way. If Libby looses on appeal, case will go to the Supreme Court.Said case may then be decided pretty close to December 2008. If he looses at the Supreme Court level also, Bush would then be in a position to pardon him as he leaves office.

Desmond (Sent Thursday, March 08, 2007 12:07 PM)

Even people who have been LOYAL to the president have suffered. I just wonder when they will finally realize they have been duped. Libby is probably going to figure it out real fast. I do, however, agree that a pardon would be a fabulous thing for the democrats in 08', but I am not sure if Bush will tread into those waters.

MM (Sent Thursday, March 08, 2007 12:23 PM)

Of course good old boy "Scooter" going to get a "Pardon" but they all knew "who outed V. Plame". That was intended to show Joe Wilson don't mess with Bush & Cheney. They sucked Tim Russert into this fiasco, J. Miller went willing along w/R. Novak. M. Cooper?. It's plain & simmple master-minded by Carl Rove. George Bush has been a mess ever since he claimed the presidency, will continue to be so, until he is out of office. I've no sympathy for "Libby" he is in the game too and if you run with the "Big Boys" suck it up. That's why he looks likes he does he know it all gonna work out for him in the end, it was pre-ordained. "Wake Up America" we've been bamboozeld again.

Ivory Williams Dayton, OH (Sent Thursday, March 08, 2007 12:36 PM)

As much as I wanted Libby to be found guilty, I'd have no problem with him receiving a pardon because he was just following orders. It's unfortunate that the person responsible (Cheney) was not held accountable, and I wonder if Libbey regrets being so loyal to this incompetent administration.

Jamie, Elmwood Park, IL (Sent Thursday, March 08, 2007 12:39 PM)

Bush acted as though he didn't know who betrayed Valerie Palme's CIA identity. He said he wanted to fine out who did. But Dick Cheney, his Vice President knew, Ari Fleisher, his press secretary knew, Richard Armitage, the 2nd ranking person in the State Dept knew, and Karl Rove, his closest confident knew. They were all involved in outing a CIA agent. How could George Bush not have known ? He's either lying (again) or the most incompetent President ever (or probably both). Why would the White House staff work so hard to discredit/punish Joseph Wilson. The only creditable reason is that Wilson was revealing that the Bush Admin was lying about Iraq and WMDs. The Bush regime was afraid of being exposed...... Case closed......Romney/Coulter '08, the dream Republican ticket..

Sierra, San Francisco (Sent Thursday, March 08, 2007 12:44 PM)

If you haven't read it yet, read the Isikoff article from Newsweek.com about Bush's stated position on pardons. The DOJ has fairly clear guidelines about who should be eligible for a pardon. Presidents can choose to ignore them, but Bush has stated as recently as last month that he intends to follow them. Of course, that most likely indicates that he will do the opposite, based on his track record. I'm not sure where to put this next comment, so I'll throw it in here. I wonder what purpose is served by the nick names and insulting terms that are used by some posters on here. Using terms like 'RepubliCANTS' and 'DUMBocrats' adds nothing substantive to your argument and only serves to lower the level of discourse in this forum. I'm not pointing to anyone specifically, but just hoping that this forum can stay somewhere above the level of debate that you can hear any day on AM talk radio.

James, downstate Illinois (Sent Thursday, March 08, 2007 12:47 PM)

Well Desmond let's hope you never end up in court with a jury member who is friends with a key witness against you & also has an vested interest in a guilty verdict. Doubt a not guilty verdict would sell very many books.

Dave, Tn (Sent Thursday, March 08, 2007 1:32 PM)

If Mr. Libby feels that any of the jurors was improperly selected, he can fire M. Wells, his attorney and hire a new lawyer. Mr. Wells is one of the best attorneys mooney can buy.

Desmond (Sent Thursday, March 08, 2007 2:44 PM)

"I'm Your Puppet."-James and Bobby Purify

Still Crazy After All These Years (Sent Thursday, March 08, 2007 3:12 PM)

Dave - Desmond is right. Lawyers have the right to question and reject prospective jurors, and I'm sure Libby had a compentent lawyer. He's one, himself. Any potential juror with a "vested interest in a guilty verdict" that wasn't rejected is just not credible. If you know, Libby's lawyer would have known, especially with the unlimited resources of the VPs office behind him.

Lee Steele, Mountain View (Sent Thursday, March 08, 2007 3:15 PM)

"One of the best money can buy" could be said about anyone in DC on both sides of the isle, and the media. Let's throw them all out and replace them with accountants, with comedians as speakers for each party. Just need to decide what the parties would be called. It would make c-span more interesting.

Dave, Tn (Sent Thursday, March 08, 2007 3:20 PM)

Jamie- Libby may have been following orders about leaking Plame, but he and Cheney tag-teamed each other in making the case to invade Iraq. As an attorney he was well aware that he was breaking the law by leaking Plame's name. If he and Cheney were so concerned with our national security, why out an agent that dealt with WMD proliferation in the ME? Libby also wrote the speech that Colin Powell gave at the UN, containing flawed intel. BTW, Libby was the atty that got Marc Rich off--- engineered the Clinton pardon- so he's no babe-in-the-woods. Small world, isn't it?

kim, Crofton, MD (Sent Thursday, March 08, 2007 3:39 PM)

Dave - how about the "HeeHaw" party and the "Flapping Ears" party?

Lee Steele Mountain View (Sent Thursday, March 08, 2007 3:41 PM)

Dave, Mr. Libby hired Mr. Wells.It was his choice. I will assume that Mr. Libby thought he was hiring a more than competent lawyer.And I will also assume that all the people who gave money to pay for his trial (private donors), gave him a lot of advice on who to hire. If Mr. Libby feels that the best jury was not provided for him, he should fire Mr. Wells before his appeals trial.I am sure all the donors who will be paying for that trial will give him the necessary advice. As for me, if for some reason, I ever had to go to trial, I would not have all the best advice money could buy. I would have to settle for the best advice I could obtain based on the mazimum credit limit on my credit card.

Desmond (Sent Thursday, March 08, 2007 4:14 PM)

Libby drank the 'aid and clicked his boots. He and all of the other staff members of this regime, have gone into their work with eyes wide open. They all knew what they were stepping into. They're all adults (okay, I concede, many are). What strikes me is that this trial was only about the denials Libby made to the Feds and to the Grand Jury. It was NOT about getting at the truth as to who outed Ms. Plame. IF Cheney had testified, he may have had to claim "The 5th". Instead, he was sent on tour. As Sierra mentioned, the logical flow of this whole sordid affair leads to the Oval Office. (Sierra, we can only hope you were being sarcastic in your Romney-Coulter ticket.) Libby deserved the guilty verdict and it is now up to Bush to make the next move. If he pardons Libby, Pandora's Box is wide open. And, if he lets the case go its own natural way, he has issues with all sorts of testimony coming out in a new trial, which was never hit upon in the first one. So, Bush is potentially screwed in either scenario. Gee, that's too bad (I'm being sarcastic).

Nick, Ohio (Sent Thursday, March 08, 2007 4:19 PM)

RE: James, Downstate IL - The pardoning guidelines can be found here: http://www.usdoj.gov/pardon/clemency.htm#pardon. Officially a person is required to wait for five years after a prison term has been COMPLETED and should not apply for clemency if they are on parol or supervised release. I am not sure if these are guidelines or rules (big difference) but it would make a pardon for Libby that much less likely. Thanks James for reminding me that the procedures for most federal processes are available with a quick web search. Also, it should be pointed out that accepting a pardon has an de facto admission of guilt associated with it. So, I don't know if that is a very good idea for an administration that is already trying to cover its bases on ethics charges to be taking a stand that de facto says, "Sure he's guilty but we're going to let him go."

John Doe, The Peanut Gallery (Sent Thursday, March 08, 2007 4:27 PM)

From what I know about the court process, when the jury is being picked each side has automatic passes on a certain number of jurors without any cause. Juror tampering isn't a feasible option for an appeal on this case mainly because of this. What I am a little confused about is that I don't know the exact reason they are giving for an appeal. I didn't think that you could appeal a verdict just because you didn't like the outcome. Also, why isn't he spending the time between now and his appeal in jail. Any other Joe schmoe would be sitting in a cell waiting for the appeals process to go through. And justice for all right??

MM (Sent Thursday, March 08, 2007 4:50 PM)

The appeals process would be based on technical evidence. As an example, how the judge allowed or did not allow evidence, and his instructions during the course of the trial.As for being allowed to go free, I am sure there is a reason. Any lawyers out there to helpus out on that? He has not been sentenced yet. I believe that is set for June 5th.

Desmond (Sent Thursday, March 08, 2007 6:14 PM)

Kim,I agree with you; my "pardon" comment was only to emphasize how the "big boys" get away with everything without any accountability. I agree that Libby was guilty, knew what he was doing, but he is the only one paying the price. I'm pretty sure that even if he is pardoned, he still loses his license to practice law and is still considered a convicted felon.

Jamie, Elmwood Park, IL (Sent Thursday, March 08, 2007 6:44 PM)

Still. ...u 1 musical dude...the soundtrack of FR.

Steve Turner Cedar Falls Iowa (Sent Thursday, March 08, 2007 7:10 PM)

Yes, Nick.... I was being a LITTLE sarcastice about Romney/Coulter ;->. Still, that ticket would be wildy popular at the Conservative Political Action Conference. ....FYI, the "Bad Reporter" in the SF Chronicle predicts that Libby will serve time in prison and while serving time convert to Islam......Let us hope

Sierra, San Francisco (Sent Thursday, March 08, 2007 7:43 PM)

Steve,both right.

Still Crazy After All These Years (Sent Friday, March 09, 2007 7:32 AM)

I'm pleased that everyone is on the same page about this topic. Let President Bush exercise his pardon, so this White House can be exposed to the real goings on at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. This has been an ill fated presidency from the start. This is what happens when you're dishonest from the start it will end badly. Let's elect someone who is intelligent next time? America deserves better than this!! but I did have a professor in college tell us, that you get the kind of President you deserve. Where is "Darth Vader" when we need him?

Ivory Dayton, OH (Sent Friday, March 09, 2007 11:41 AM)

SEND A COMMENT

PLEASE READ: All comments must be approved before appearing in the thread; time and space constraints prevent all comments from appearing. We will only approve comments that are directly related to the blog, use appropriate language and are not attacking the comments of others.

Message (please, no HTML tags. Web addresses will be hyperlinked):

Your name, city and state (John Doe, Seattle, Wash.):

Your e-mail address (jdoe@msnbc.com):

Your website (it's okay if you don't have one):

Remember me? (We'll keep it private) Remember me?

TRACKBACKS

Trackbacks are links to weblogs that reference this post. Like comments, trackbacks do not appear until approved by us. The trackback URL for this post is: http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/trackback.aspx?PostID=84740