Oh, beware the Scooter Libby misdirection. . . .
I'm sure all know that yesterday the president commuted the prison sentence of I. Lewis Scooter Libby. *** Edited 7/7/07- all the press coverage of the commutation I have read makes me more convinced of my original armchair analysis.***
The major media narrative of course is that Bush 'split the difference' by not outright pardoning Libby. This is bullshit. Bush commuted the sentence, instead of granting an outright pardon, because it insures the case stays in a legal posture that is favorable to . . . . Bush. Because of the commuted sentence, but valid (for now) conviction Mr. Libby may continue to assert his 5th amendment right to remain silent.
That means he can continue stonewalling everybody about what went on back in the summer of 2003.
I'll explain this in greater detail.-
Had Libby been pardoned, he would have no 5th amendment right because as the recipient of a pardon he could not incriminate himself. One has a fifth amendment right to prevent self-incrimination, after a pardon- or a grant of immunity- one cannot incriminate oneself. Since the case has gone away, or the testimony is immunized, the individual may be questioned and may be forced to bear witness against himself. Any lawyer questioning Libby could haul him in front of a judge and the judge would give him the option of either testifying or facing contempt. Therefore he would be forced to answer questions or choose to perjure himself again.
With the case in the legal posture it is in right now, Libby may assert a fifth amendment right. He has been convicted, but he is appealing the conviction and trying to get a new trial. With the possibility of the new trial out there- self-incrimination is a (theoretically) real possibility. If Libby invokes the fifth (absent a grant of immunity that Fitzgerald probably will not give him) he may be forced to answer questions.
Should Libby be called before congress, he can invoke the fifth.
Should Libby be deposed in the Wilson's suit against Dick Cheney, He can invoke the fifth.
Should Fitzgerald or a new prosecutor look at this again, Libby can invoke the fifth.
Fitzgerald made an analogy that Libby's perjury and lying to investigators was akin to throwing sand in the umpire's face when the umpire was trying to call a ball or a strike. George Bush is continuing to insure that the umpire here remains blind to the lawlessness of his administration.
The major media narrative of course is that Bush 'split the difference' by not outright pardoning Libby. This is bullshit. Bush commuted the sentence, instead of granting an outright pardon, because it insures the case stays in a legal posture that is favorable to . . . . Bush. Because of the commuted sentence, but valid (for now) conviction Mr. Libby may continue to assert his 5th amendment right to remain silent.
That means he can continue stonewalling everybody about what went on back in the summer of 2003.
I'll explain this in greater detail.-
Had Libby been pardoned, he would have no 5th amendment right because as the recipient of a pardon he could not incriminate himself. One has a fifth amendment right to prevent self-incrimination, after a pardon- or a grant of immunity- one cannot incriminate oneself. Since the case has gone away, or the testimony is immunized, the individual may be questioned and may be forced to bear witness against himself. Any lawyer questioning Libby could haul him in front of a judge and the judge would give him the option of either testifying or facing contempt. Therefore he would be forced to answer questions or choose to perjure himself again.
With the case in the legal posture it is in right now, Libby may assert a fifth amendment right. He has been convicted, but he is appealing the conviction and trying to get a new trial. With the possibility of the new trial out there- self-incrimination is a (theoretically) real possibility. If Libby invokes the fifth (absent a grant of immunity that Fitzgerald probably will not give him) he may be forced to answer questions.
Should Libby be called before congress, he can invoke the fifth.
Should Libby be deposed in the Wilson's suit against Dick Cheney, He can invoke the fifth.
Should Fitzgerald or a new prosecutor look at this again, Libby can invoke the fifth.
Fitzgerald made an analogy that Libby's perjury and lying to investigators was akin to throwing sand in the umpire's face when the umpire was trying to call a ball or a strike. George Bush is continuing to insure that the umpire here remains blind to the lawlessness of his administration.