Just a couple of comments.

First, regarding the possibility of a commutation of Libby’s sentence. If there is a commutation, and the next President is not a Republican, the next President might want to consider issuing a full pardon to Libby so that he loses his 5th amendment rights. Wouldn’t that be ironic– a Democratic president issuing a full pardon to Libby?

Next, regarding the letters submitted to the Court in support of Libby prior to sentencing. Someone commented about the possibility that the letters might be used in the civil suit. Those letters will not be admissible in the civil suit if it ever proceeds to trial. But if the case ever proceeds to the discovery phase, it may be that plaintiff’s counsel will attempt to depose some of the people who submitted letters in support of Libby. I have not read any of those letters, but it sounds like there is a glaring inconsistency between the picture painted by the letters and the picture which defense counsel tried to paint in their efforts to obtain an acquittal.

Third, regarding the supportive letters from people like Gen. Pace, who did not know Libby. Those of you who are criminal defense attorneys should, in appropriate cases, send Gen. Pace (and others like him) requesting that he write a supportiveletter to the Court for your client prior to your client’s sentencing hearing. Send a copy of the request to someone here at FDL, who can keep track of these requests and can comment on Pace’s refusal to honor the requests. If done on a nationwide basis in white collar criminal cases, it should not take long to make a nice story about why Pace (and others like him) only seem to honor requests for people like Scooter Libby.

i like the way your mind works – esp the 3rd point!

FDL and TPM !!! fitz !!!

CHS-

Excellent post!
U made me laugh = FFFH..hehehe.

I also liked the dig at the end,

“…George Bush would be confirming publicly the one thing that he has been trying so hard to conceal…from himself: that he does not run things, Dick Cheney does.“

What a kick in the crotch to the boy who would be king!

First, regarding the possibility of a commutation of Libby’s sentence. If there is a commutation, and the next President is not a Republican, the next President might want to consider issuing a full pardon to Libby so that he loses his 5th amendment rights. Wouldn’t that be ironic– a Democratic president issuing a full pardon to Libby?

Next, regarding the letters submitted to the Court in support of Libby prior to sentencing. Someone commented about the possibility that the letters might be used in the civil suit. Those letters will not be admissible in the civil suit if it ever proceeds to trial. But if the case ever proceeds to the discovery phase, it may be that plaintiff’s counsel will attempt to depose some of the people who submitted letters in support of Libby. I have not read any of those letters, but it sounds like there is a glaring inconsistency between the picture painted by the letters and the picture which defense counsel tried to paint in their efforts to obtain an acquittal.

Third, regarding the supportive letters from people like Gen. Pace, who did not know Libby. Those of you who are criminal defense attorneys should, in appropriate cases, send Gen. Pace (and others like him) requesting that he write a supportiveletter to the Court for your client prior to your client’s sentencing hearing. Send a copy of the request to someone here at FDL, who can keep track of these requests and can comment on Pace’s refusal to honor the requests. If done on a nationwide basis in white collar criminal cases, it should not take long to make a nice story about why Pace (and others like him) only seem to honor requests for people like Scooter Libby.

folks should also take notice that Fitz often refers to the Espionage Act rather than IIPA at times in this case.

Ah, but the Espionage Act has an even more difficult-to-meet state-of-mind element. For an Espionage Act prosecution, one needs proof that the action was done “with the intent to harm the United States.”

In any event, for a whole bunch of reasons, the 1917 Espionage Act (a product of America’s Red Scare No. 2) really shouldn’t be stretched to pick up any revelation of classified information. The text doesn’t support such a reading (and if the 1917 law alrady dealt with the subject matter, query why Congress would have felt the need to enact the IIPA many decades later), and broad use of the Espionage Act really would chill whistleblowing (imagine, say, an Espionage Act prosecution for James Risen’s reporting).

You know, commuting Libby’s sentence while not outright pardoning him WOULD be diabolically clever – he gets the get-out-of-jail-free card without losing his 5th amendment rights – and cannot be forced to testify against the rest of the usual suspects.

Not that I believe anything about Bush but communting the sentence now with a full pardon later is the way it will likely go. The appeal on the conviction would still continue and then if that fails, a full pardon.

Even if the Democrats win in 2008 and call Libby in to testify after his pardon, he will not remember anything. He can’t be indicted for being non responsive. Maybe he can be held in contempt. Look he’s a lowlife as well as the rest of these Yalies and preppies who comprise the executive branch

He’s toast or should I say a french fry.