The Libby Follies
So the White House asserted the desire to have the supervised release and probation stand for Scooter Libby, even though the law clearly denotes that such a sentence can only come after time has been served. Since all sides are in agreement and executive clemency is pretty absolute, it's likely that Judge Walton will rule that the probation can stand. Last week Jeralyn Merritt had some thoughts on what that probation can look like:
Let’s assume for the sake of argument that the Judge finds Libby can be put on supervised release even though his prison sentence was commuted. What does it mean for him? How does it affect his life?
It means he’s under the supervision of a probation officer and he has to follow rules and conditions set by the officer and the court. If he’s charged with violating these rules, he gets a hearing. If the Court finds at the hearing that he was in violation of the conditions, he is subject to having his supervised release revoked and being sent to jail. Or, the Judge could continue his supervised release but impose additional conditions, like home detention and electronic monitoring [...]
Libby’s terms of supervised release were set and announced by the Judge on the day he was sentenced. The Order is here (pdf). In addition to the general terms applicable to everyone, the Judge added two special conditions:
He shall maintain full-time employment, the circumstances of which shall be in the discretion of the Probation Department, subject to the court’s review.
He shall perform 400 hours of community service, “as approved and directed by the Probation Department.”
The standard conditions Libby will have to abide by include these:
the defendant shall not leave the judicial district without the permission of the court or probation officer;
the defendant shall report to the probation officer and shall submit a truthful and complete written report within the first five days of each month;
the defendant shall answer truthfully all inquiries by the probation officer and follow the instructions of the probation officer;
the defendant shall refrain from excessive use of alcohol and shall not purchase, possess, use, distribute, or administer any controlled substance or any paraphernalia related to any controlled substances, except as prescribed by a physician;
the defendant shall not associate with any persons engaged in criminal activity and shall not associate with any person convicted of a felony, unless granted permission to do so by the probation officer;
the defendant shall permit a probation officer to visit him or her at any time at home or elsewhere
the defendant shall provide access to any requested financial information.
As you can see, supervised release is no walk in the park. It’s a lot better than jail, but there are significant restrictions on your freedom.
Given that there was no penalty for breaking the law the first time, I don't expect much of a penalty if any of these rules were broken. But it's something that everyone should be keeping their eye on as Libby no doubt hits the lecture circuit to whine and cry about his awful treatment.
Meanwhile, the House and Senate are ramping up efforts to investigate the commutation. John Conyers will convene a hearing on Wednesday, with Joseph Wilson and a host of attorneys with experience in the pardon process, to see if established rules were broken in association with the Libby decision (short answer: yes). Meanwhile, the Senate is setting its sights higher:
The Senate Judiciary Committee may seek testimony from controversial prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald about the obstruction of justice case against vice presidential aide Lewis "Scooter" Libby, two senators said on Sunday.
Sen. Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania, the ranking Republican member of the committee, said he wanted to hear from Fitzgerald because, "I still haven't figured out what that case is all about." [...]
Sen. Patrick Leahy, the Vermont Democrat who chairs the Judiciary Committee, said that with Specter's blessing, Fitzgerald would likely be called.
"If he has no objection to Mr. Fitzgerald coming forward, I think you may very well see Mr. Fitzgerald before the Senate Judiciary Committee," Leahy said on the same CNN program.
Specter is lying through his teeth with the whole "no underlying crime" argument, lying to federal prosecutors is a crime in and of itself, and furthermore Libby's leaks and Armitage's (and Rove's and everyone else's in the excecutive and fourth branches) were concurrent and wide-reaching. AND, this came out in open court:
In his closing argument, Bill Jeffress (the DEFENSE lawyer) described the events surrounding Libby's July 8 meeting with Judy as a "secret mission" known only to Bush, Cheney, and Libby.
The prosecution has focused on this July 8th meeting with Judith Miller at the St. Regis Hotel. They said, could Mr. Libby, how, if he was so busy, did he have two hours to go out and have lunch with Ms. Miller on July 8th. The reason he took two hours to have lunch with Ms. Miller is that Mr. Libby understood that the Vice President of the United States had directed him to go meet with Ms. Miller and that the President, President Bush was behind it too.
[snip]
I mean this is basically a secret mission that three people in the world know, President Bush, Vice President Cheney and Scooter Libby. Because he goes and does what he is asked to do by the President and the Vice President and meets with her for two hours, suddenly they're trying to find something bad in that because, in Ms. Miller’s notes at the lunch, she’s got the word WINPAC. [my emphasis]
The President and Vice President directed Scooter Libby to meet Judith Miller and release her information that includes covert CIA agent Valerie Plame's identity, and there's no underlying crime? Mind you, that was the DEFENSE lawyer talking. There was other information in the classified NIE that was possibly leaked at that meeting as well, which Libby claims the Vice President declassified (for explicitly political reasons, mind you). But the nature of that declassification, indeed the nature of that meeting, was exactly what Libby lied about, claiming he only heard about Plame from Tim Russert. He was trying to cover up the details of a secret meeting, still not fully known, authorized by the President and the Vice President. He was throwing sand in the eyes of the umpire and deliberately obstructing the investigation at the highest levels.
Meanwhile, Rep. Robert Wexler is moving forward in the House with a motion to censure the President for his actions in commuting Libby's sentence. It's a feel-good measure, but Wexler is certainly being bold about it.
Finally, this is an all-timer of a quote, but not for the reason Fred Thompson thinks it is:
"If nothing else, we've apparently convinced the Clintons that it really is a bad thing to lie under oath."
So Fred Thompson just admitted that he spent a year of his life defending and raising money for a convicted felon named Scooter Libby, who he admits lied under oath. And he's proud of it. He is dumb as hell, isn't he?
Labels: CIA Leak Investigation, commuted sentence, Dick Cheney, Fred Thompson, George W. Bush, Judy Miller, Robert Wexler, Scooter Libby, supervised release, Valerie Plame






<< Home