I Present to You: Saint Libby

by emptywheel

Warning: Do not read this on a queasy or otherwise weak stomach.

Did I say we had reached the PR phase of this defense? Sure looks like it, from the job Comstock Team Libby did on the sentencing memorandum. Here's how it starts.

Distinguished public servant. Generous mentor. Selfless friend. Devoted father. This is the rich portrait of Mr. Libby that emerges from the descriptions of him in the more than 160 heartfelt letters submitted to the Court on his behalf. The letter writers, who range from administrative assistants to admirals, neighborhood friends to former colleagues, Democrats to Republicans, bear witness to Mr. Libby’s character and patriotism. As detailed below, Mr. Libby’s accomplishments in the State Department, the Defense Department, and the Office of the Vice President demonstrate his extraordinary commitment to public service. His dedication to promoting freedom abroad and keeping American citizens safe at home is beyond question. Mr. Libby has also earned a reputation for treating people fairly and kindly and comforting those who are distressed. He has avoided the Washington limelight to focus on nurturing his young children. Even those who disagree vociferously with policies he supported while serving in the government believe his conviction is not characteristic of the life he has led.[my emphasis]

"Beyond question"? Team Libby has taken that little universe of 160 letter-writers (fewer, I might repeat, than supported Abramoff) and used the to claim the man who helped Cheney dismantle our Constitution is a saint.

And meanwhile: any guesses? "Democrats to Republicans"? They do know about last year's primary in CT, don't they? And anyone know the admiralty well enough to guess the identity of that one? John Poindexter, maybe? The architect of Total Information Awareness? No mention, yet, of journalists or WaPo editors.

The mention of journalists doesn't come until later:

The letter writers come from many different periods in Mr. Libby’s life and from across the political spectrum. They are conservatives and liberals; career public servants and people working in journalism, medicine, and law; professional mentors and pro bono clients. They run the gamut from four-star generals and admirals to non-commissioned officers; renowned professors and cabinet officials to secretaries, law firm associates, and junior staffers. Mr. Libby has touched all of these people’s lives, and we rely on their letters to show what he is truly like.

Sooooo. I'm starting a pool to guess the journalist. Just Fred Hiatt? Or Judy too?

The renowned professors are probably Fukuyama and Bernard Lewis. The Four Star Generals? Guesses? And I'm sure there are a number of cabinet officials. Now I wish I had written my letter arguing the press ought to vet these people to expose their conflicts of interest.

And in case you didn't know, Scooter single-handedly brought democracy to Eastern Europe:

While at the Pentagon, Mr. Libby also helped to bring stability and democracy to Eastern Europe at the end of the Cold War. A former civilian military leader remembers, “I grew to admire his intellect and his wisdom during that remarkable period in which the Soviet empire, and ultimately the Soviet Union itself, disintegrated – a period in which both Scooter and I played important roles.”

[snip]

According to a retired colonel, Mr. Libby “worked tirelessly” to assist “the people of
Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union who were at the beginning of their emancipation from tyranny. In meetings with senior officials in the Soviet Union, Hungary, Poland, and elsewhere he was a strong advocate for the rule of law, civilian control of the military, and respect for human rights.”

Do you suppose anyone has told Saint Reagan he has been usurped?

The portrayal of Libby's work on the highly partisan Cox Committee--effectively a post-Iran-Contra attempt to blame Democrats for giving the Chinese nukes when in fact the Iran-Contra conspiracists seem to have, is equally, um, creative. And if you're wondering, Chris Cox does appear to be one of Libby's 160 admirers, celebrating him all the time as a paragon of bipartisan spirit.

Then there is the extended effort to paint Libby as open-minded, willing to listen to ideas contrary to his own. Like those of Joe Wilson, apparently. Or those of the large number of sane people who knew that the Iraq War was a disaster waiting to happen. It sure looks like he listened to them.

Libby's Own Personal Law

The memo is particularly cynical in its attempt to justify Libby be subject to his own private judicial system, different from that of anyone else. There's the attempt to invent reasons why it's okay for Libby to perjure and obstruct justice.

Under § 3553(a)(1), the Court must also analyze the “nature and circumstances” of the convicted offenses. Mr. Libby fully acknowledges that perjury, false statements, and obstruction of justice are serious crimes. We feel compelled to point out, however, that the circumstances that led to Mr. Libby’s conviction are unusual and perhaps unique. [my emphasis]

Notice the false remorse? Mr. Libby acknowledges that perjury, false statements, and obstruction are serious. That is, if other people commit them.

To begin with, Mr. Libby was convicted for lying to the FBI and the grand jury, which were both investigating the possible improper disclosure of Valerie Wilson’s CIA employment to reporters, primarily Robert Novak. Mr. Libby, of course, was not Mr. Novak’s source. As discussed more fully in our Guidelines memo, there is no evidence that Mr. Libby committed any underlying crime. And, no evidence suggests that he learned that Ms. Wilson’s status was covert or classified before her identity was publicly disclosed. Accordingly, there is no basis for concluding (even in the absence of formal charges) that Mr. Libby did anything unlawful when he discussed Ms. Wilson with any reporter prior to July 14, 2003.

More broadly, no one was ever charged with improperly disclosing Ms. Wilson’s identity and to this day it is unclear, if not highly doubtful, that any improper (much less illegal) disclosure was made by any government official. Therefore, this is the rare case where the statements by the defendant that were found to be false did not cover up any underlying crime.

Okay, this is where I stopped laughing and started throwing books. Now I know how Debra Bonamici feels. This is someone who had a security clearance. Someone who, even if he did it accidentally (which defies all the evidence) outed a CIA NOC.

Then there's another false show of not-remorse.

We do not mean to suggest that the absence of an underlying offense excuses obstruction and perjury. Rather, we believe it is appropriate for the Court to consider that Mr. Libby was not covering up any illegal activity when deciding how severely he should be punished. The government’s own motive theory suggests that Mr. Libby made false statements not because he did anything illegal in June or July of 2003, but because he allegedly feared (albeit mistakenly) in October 2003 that his prior statements to reporters might have been wrongful.

Um, no. Simply, no. That is not the theory of motive I heard Team USA present. It is a gross, disgusting distortion.

The Mitigating Factors

And here is where all that schmoozing of the Probation Office comes into play. The PSR lists the following as mitigating factors:

(1) Mr. Libby’s outstanding record of public service and prior good works; (2) collateral employment consequences for Mr. Libby, including the expected loss of his license to practice law; and (3) the improbability of any future criminal conduct by Mr. Libby.

They don't actually argue these cases very compellingly, they just say they apply in spades. Even they, though, must have believed the PSR's suggestion that Libby's legal expenses was over the top, because somehow that didn't make their memo.

How About the Wilson's Punishment?

Then there's the section where Team Libby lays out the punishment Libby has already endured, mostly at the hand of the press (wisely, Team Libby does not this time blame bloggers). I do look forward to hearing what Joe and Valerie have to say about poor Libby's treatment at the hand of the public:

The offenses here are serious ones. Nevertheless, as the Court metes out “just punishment,” we urge the Court not to overlook the punishment Mr. Libby has already received, and stands to receive in the future, as a result of his convictions. Mr. Libby’s felony convictions make it unlikely that he will ever work in government or practice law again, and his notoriety will also hinder his future job prospects. He and his family have endured crushing public humiliation as a result of unceasing press coverage. The media commentary about Mr. Libby has often been particularly unfair. Although he did not “out” Ms. Wilson, Mr. Libby has been continually blamed with leaking or orchestrating the leak of her identity. As the evidence at trial showed, as far back as September 2003, reporters were insinuating that Mr. Libby was the leaker. Indeed, based on such false assumptions, Mr. Libby has been repeatedly and wrongfully accused by some people of serious crimes including treason. The burden of relentless and unfair media coverage has fallen heaviest on Mr. Libby’s young children, and imprisonment would separate him from them at a particularly formative time in their lives.

Better yet, I look forward to hearing what Sidney Blumenthal has to say about it. He's got a much richer vocabulary for this kind of tripe.

Libby's Proposed Sentence

Team Libby asks Judge Walton to throw out the sentencing guidelines so he can sentence this mythical Saint Scooter.

Here, that focus means that we respectfully urge the Court to sentence Mr. Libby on the basis of the portrait of him presented in the Presentence Investigation Report (“PSR”) and in the letters submitted on his behalf, rather than on the basis of some incomplete or distorted picture.

So here's what Team Libby proposes for outing a CIA NOC, lying about it, and serving as a firewall for your boss.

On the unique facts of this case, and the unique contributions of this man, we believe that under 18 U.S.C. § 3553, a non-Guidelines sentence of probation is warranted.

Though later in the document, they reveal the Probation Office recommended 15-21 months.

The Vice President

I think in several ways, Team Libby probably has badly overplayed their hand (and I keep hearing Jane's voice in my head talking about how Libby forces his lawyers to do stupid things because he feels he is righteous). First, it appears that many of the letters are a tribute to Libby as a member of Dick's team, and not just Libby as Libby. There must be at least 10 current and former OVP employees who wrote letters in Libby's support. And at least one of them ties Libby's sainthood to Dick's.

This is a testimony to his devotion to our nation and the Vice President.

And from the descriptions of the letter-writers, the crowd on which Team Libby hangs its appeal appears to be precisely the kind of Neocon orgy we all expected it would be.

It'll be fairly easy for Team USA to get up and point out that all of this hagiography, written at the hand of OVP employees who work directly for the guy who most benefits from leniency for Libby, is unconvincing at best.

And, finally, if you're not already crying, contemplate this:

For the same reason, the public does not need to be protected from him.

Comments

[emptywheel]

Actually, I wonder if the journalist was Tom Friedman.

[watertiger]

They forgot to mention how many boxes of Girl Scout cookies he bought every year.

Yeeeeesh.

[JL]

How about Russert. That would be the icing on the cake.

[emptywheel]

Oh watertiger, this shit would be like putty in your hands--let me know when your post is up!!

JL

Well, Dick Cheney controls Russert, so it is a possibility... Though I suspect Russert and Judy didn't submit any letters out of sense of decorum, havign tried to protect the Administartion for so long on this issue.

[JGabriel]

Team Libby: "The letter writers come from many different periods in Mr. Libby’s life and from across the political spectrum. They are conservatives and liberals; career public servants and people working in journalism, medicine, and law; professional mentors and pro bono clients."

"people working in journalism"?

Why not just say "jounalists"?

I'm assuming this means that there are no letters from reporters. Most likely it means someone (or someones) working as a senior editor or columnist.

So, Fred Hiatt is a good guess. Kate O'Beirne might be another. Or maybe George Will. Really, it could be any of the pro-Libby TV pundits or newspaper columnists.

But Tom Friedman? Did I miss something? I don't remember him commenting on Libby or the Plame case at all. Explainy?

[Jim E.]

"We do not mean to suggest that the absence of an underlying offense excuses obstruction and perjury."

Huh. I thought that was one of the 'wingers main talking points.

[JGabriel]

EW: "Well, Dick Cheney controls Russert, so it is a possibility... Though I suspect Russert and Judy didn't submit any letters out of sense of decorum, having tried to protect the Administartion for so long on this issue."

Right. I suspect we can exclude Woodward from the list of possibilities for the same reason.

Although that too would be poetically ironic.

[pseudonymous in nc]

Journalists? A Kristol, a Kagan, a Podhoretz, a Frum. Oh, and does Daddy Carlson count? (I want to know the distinction between 'people working in journalism' and 'journalists', and would probably be tickled by it, along the lines of 'what do you call a guy who hangs out with musicians?')

It would be extremely funny if Tucker Faye was one of the letter-writers, since he's steadfastly avoided declaring a potential conflict of interest.

[Petrocelli]

... and that he will continue to work to protect the children ... oh wait, someone else is using that line ...

[Petrocelli]

... and that he will continue to work to protect the children ... oh wait, someone else is using that line ...

[Petrocelli]

... and that he will continue to work to protect the children ... oh wait, someone else is using that line ...

[Petrocelli]

ATTN: MODS - please remove 2 of the 3 posts above as well as this one ... sorry, I don't know how this happened ...

[JGabriel]

Hi, children! Can you find the oxymoron?

"A former civilian military leader..."

Hmm, last time I checked, a military leader was someone in the *military* chain of command. The only 'civilian' military leader is the President.

I'm assuming President Clusterfuck didn't send a letter on Libby's behalf.

[desertwind]

Oh, man. Marcy, did you read Jeralyn's read? Based on what she's figuring the PRS came up with:

My prediction at this juncture: The Government loses on its sentencing arguments for heavier guideline calculations, the Court finds at least one departure ground and Libby gets a split sentence of 10 months, with 5 spent in prison and 5 on home detention.

http://www.talkleft.com/story/2007/5/31/21232/8074

[P J Evans]

What, they didn't quote Shrub saying that whoever leaked Valerie's identity would be fired ... well, no longer part of his administration ... um, beaten with a wet noodle and, uhh, sent to bed with no dessert .... (I bet no one even asked Shrub for a letter for Scooter.)

[JGabriel]

Team Libby: "Mr. Libby’s felony convictions make it unlikely that he will ever work in government or practice law again, and his notoriety will also hinder his future job prospects."

Two words: Elliot Abrams.

[Markinsanfran]

"For the same reason, the public does not need to be protected from him."

We desperately need to be protected from him, in that he must be so humiliated and villified by the sentence that he can never serve in a position of pubic trust ever again.

[Albert Fall]

Did Julius and Ethel Rosenberg write in?

Treason, treason, and more treason.

The sooner the words "treason" and "Libby" are made synonymous, the sooner the Dems can start campaigning effectively against this malignant, corrupt, self-righteous and self-justifying broken Republican party that puts its interests ahead of those of the country.

Do I sound like this topic makes me a little cranky?

[JGabriel]

Jeralyn (quoted by desertwind): "My prediction at this juncture: The Government loses on its sentencing arguments for heavier guideline calculations, the Court finds at least one departure ground and Libby gets a split sentence of 10 months, with 5 spent in prison and 5 on home detention."

I like Jeralyn's writing and insights quite a lot, but she does tend to be biased towards the defense in just about every situation.

So we probably shouldn't put too much credence in this prediction. Remember, Jeralyn expected Libby to be convicted on only one or two counts.

My guess is that the best Libby can hope for is a year and a day (shortest sentence eligible for parole) plus remaining free on bond during appeals. More likely he'll get about 32-33 months. I expect Walton will probably look for a way to combine something in the high sentencing range Team USA requeseted, with the earliest possibility of parole in that range.

[emptywheel]

desertwind

Yes, and she's probably right to be conservative.

Though I will say two things. First, it sounds like the PSR is not just pro-Libby, but really badly written. I say that bc they don't cite legal precedent for key diversions from guidelines, and bc they actually appear to have recommended a downward revision bc Libby had such big legal fees. In other words, there's a distinct possibility Reggie will look askance at the report. Further, they seem to have a poor understanding of the case (such as the claims about investigating perjury) which Reggie does not have.

That, and the Defense's entire sentencing memorandum depends on those letters. Reggie has already said he might not consider them at all. That's why I think the many references to OVP are problematic for Libby. BC it could get Team Libby's entire argument thrown out.

[bmaz]

Oh my. I don't even know where to start here; and my head still hurts from contemplating the cross-reference linkage issue. I guess I picked a bad week to quit sniffing glue.

"For the same reason, the public does not need to be protected from him." Well, that is highly debatable, but clearly our top WMD anti-proliferation covert spys do need protection from him.

[emptywheel]

Oh, and one more thing: remember that no one is making a case integrating the sentencing letters written in opposition to Lbby. Not sure how Reggie will use those (he may just ignore all letters), but those are one thumb on the scale that we cannot see any evidence of yet.

[Frank Probst]

"...there is no evidence that Mr. Libby committed any underlying crime."

Are you fucking kidding me? Judy Miller and Matt Cooper both testified that Libby betrayed Valerie Plame's identity to them. Ari Fleischer (who would have presumably been cleared to receive the information) testified that Libby told him that Plame worked at the CIA but did not mention that the information was classified. That's evidence of an IIPA violation or two. I will immediately concede that it does not prove the crime beyond a reasonable doubt, but it's flat-out bullshit to say that there's no evidence of any underlying crime. There's plenty. It just wasn't enough for a conviction.

[Albert Fall]

I echo the frustrated earlier commentary on this site about how the CIA has acknowledged Plame's covert status now, when it might play into sentencing, but not during the investigation when such a revelation might have affected the willingness of the key players to lie and obstruct justice, and might have affected the 2004 election outcome.

From what I am reading, the covert status could give the judge grounds for some enhancements upward under the guidelines. If he used the experience of John Sirica as a guide, he would move the sentence up and see what he could shake loose about the underlying crime.

WH is ineffective in many areas, but they excel at PR campaigns and controlling the news cycle, and with Libby they are bringing their "A" game. They are working Iraq pretty hard right not too (Iraq is Korea?), but the evil flying monkeys at Rove's shop have clearly worked the Libby case pretty hard, and from the letter writing, called in plenty of favors.

It's too late for the thought now, but I wish we had hooked up PayPal to wager an over/under on the Libby sentence as a fundraiser for EW.

Many, many thanks for your work here and FDL.

[morinao]

Without Mr. Libby’s leadership in building alliances with former Eastern Bloc countries, writes one admiral, he “could not have fully succeeded as Commander in Chief of Allied Forces Southern Europe in Bosnia and with the ‘Partnership for Peace Alliance’ under NATO.”

The Partnership for Peace Alliance was set up in 1994-95, so this could be four-star admiral Leighton Smith, who was Commander in Chief of Allied Forces Southern Europe at the time. Smith was rumored to have retired early because of disagreements with how the Clinton administration was running military operations in Bosnia.

While at the Pentagon, Mr. Libby also helped to bring stability and democracy to Eastern Europe at the end of the Cold War. A former civilian military leader remembers, “I grew to admire his intellect and his wisdom during that remarkable period in which the Soviet empire, and ultimately the Soviet Union itself, disintegrated – a period in which both Scooter and I played important roles.”

A "former civilian military leader" at the end of the Cold War would presumably refer to either the President or Secretary of Defense in the Bush I Administration. Poppy Bush is too self-effacing to toot his own horn so blatantly in a letter of reference for someone else, so I'm guessing this is Dick Cheney.

His counsel was respected by senior participants in those meetings, who were grappling with new threats to national defense and great uncertainty. According to a former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff,...

General Richard Myers.