Patrick Fitzgerald Rebuts Judy Miller in Statement on Libby Pardon

Update: I’ve got an op-ed in the NYT on the pardon this morning. It starts and ends this way:

“There is a cloud over the White House as to what happened. Don’t you think the F.B.I., the grand jury, the American people are entitled to a straight answer?”

With those words, uttered over a decade ago, Patrick Fitzgerald, a prosecutor appointed as special counsel to investigate whether the president and his closest aides had broken the rules of espionage for their own political gain, sealed the conviction of I. Lewis Libby Jr., known as Scooter, for obstructing his investigation into the White House.

[snip]

Mr. Trump’s pardon of Mr. Libby makes it crystal clear that he thinks even the crime of making the country less safe can be excused if done in the service of protecting the president. But it doesn’t mean the pardon will protect him.

In his statement on Scooter Libby’s pardon, Trump pointed to a purported retraction from Judy Miller to justify the pardon.

In 2015, one of the key witnesses against Mr. Libby recanted her testimony, stating publicly that she believes the prosecutor withheld relevant information from her during interviews that would have altered significantly what she said.  The next year, the District of Columbia Court of Appeals unanimously reinstated Mr. Libby to the bar, reauthorizing him to practice law.  The Court agreed with the District of Columbia Disciplinary Counsel, who stated that Mr. Libby had presented “credible evidence” in support of his innocence, including evidence that a key prosecution witness had “changed her recollection of the events in question.”

Fitz released his own statement on the pardon, which I’ve reproduced in full below. In it, he debunks both the substance of Judy’s claims about her retraction (basically, that Armitage leaked the information and no damage was done) and that her testimony was that central to the guilty verdict.

While the President has the constitutional power to pardon, the decision to do so in this case purports to be premised on the notion that Libby was an innocent man convicted on the basis of inaccurate testimony caused by the prosecution. That is false. There was no impropriety in the preparation of any witness, and we did not tell witnesses what to say or withhold any information that should have been disclosed. Mr. Libby’s conviction was based upon the testimony of multiple witnesses, including the grand jury testimony of Mr. Libby himself, as well as numerous documents.

Years ago I pointed out that Libby could have been convicted based solely on his own notes and David Addington’s testimony. What Judy’s testimony added was confirmation that Libby repeatedly provided details about Plame’s CIA status, which her retraction doesn’t affect.

And I’d add that Judy protected some of her other sources, and Cheney protected any journalists he spoke with. That’s the trick with obstruction — it prevents people from learning what really happened.


Fitzgerald statement

While the President has the constitutional power to pardon, the decision to do so in this case purports to be premised on the notion that Libby was an innocent man convicted on the basis of inaccurate testimony caused by the prosecution. That is false. There was no impropriety in the preparation of any witness, and we did not tell witnesses what to say or withhold any information that should have been disclosed. Mr. Libby’s conviction was based upon the testimony of multiple witnesses, including the grand jury testimony of Mr. Libby himself, as well as numerous documents.

I considered it an honor to work with the agents and prosecutors who conducted the investigation and trial with integrity and professionalism. Mr. Libby, represented by able counsel, received a fair trial before an exacting trial judge and a jury who found the facts clearly established that Libby committed the crimes he was charged with. That was true yesterday. It remains true today.

The issues at stake in this case were important. As was stated in a government sentencing memo more than a decade ago:

Mr. Libby, a high-ranking public official and experienced lawyer, lied repeatedly and blatantly about matters at the heart of a criminal investigation concerning the disclosure of a covert intelligence officer’s identity. He has shown no regret for his actions, which significantly impeded the investigation. Mr. Libby’s prosecution was based not upon politics but upon his own conduct, as well as upon a principle fundamental to preserving our judicial system’s independence from politics: that any witness, whatever his political affiliation, whatever his views on any policy or national issue, whether he works in the White House or drives a truck to earn a living, must tell the truth when he raises his hand and takes an oath in a judicial proceeding, or gives a statement to federal law enforcement officers. The judicial system has not corruptly mistreated Mr. Libby; Mr. Libby has been found by a jury of his peers to have corrupted the judicial system.

That statement rings true to this day. The President has the right to pardon Mr. Libby and Mr. Libby has been pardoned. But the facts have not changed.

I have made this statement in my personal capacity.

83 replies
  1. Avattoir says:

    Crikey, we’re risking total photonic reversal: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wyKQe_i9yyo

  2. SpaceLifeForm says:

    Facts? We ain’t got no facts! We don’t need no facts! I don’t have to show you any stinking facts!

    s/facts/badges/

    Or

    s/facts/badgers/

    • Dev Null says:

      Does anyone know sed these days?

      I’ve managed technical people who came up in a *nix environment …

      … who know neither sed nor awk.

      Might want to dial back the *nix affectations.

  3. earlofhuntingdon says:

    QED.

    Libby has remained a “victim” in the hearts of the rightwing elite. Possibly, it’s because his punishment hit too close to home. He is one of them: Phillips Andover, Yale magna, and Columbia Law School. A frequent top aide to GOP Beltway politicians, at the time of his prosecution, he was one of two top aides to Vice President Dick Cheney, widely considered a co-president to ne’er-do-well, not-too-competent Geo. W. Bush.

    When federal investigators came too close to his patron, Libby fell on his sword. He was indicted, tried, and convicted of five felonies, including perjury, obstruction and making false statements to federal investigators.

    He was about to spend 30 months in federal prison when the then president commuted his sentence. Libby avoided jail, but the choice of commutation rather than a pardon meant that jeopardy still attached to any statements he might make about other crimes and he could, therefore, continue to plead the Fifth.

    The symbolism of the Libby pardon for Mr. Trump’s closest advisers, Manafort, Cohen and others, could not be clearer, except that Mr. Trump has no loyalty and keeps no promises. Mr. Trump claims not to have known about Mr. Libby – he was allegedly dating Stormy and Karen at about the time of his trial, while his wife recovered from childbirth. But someone on his teams knows all about him.

    • Kathleen says:

      And the peasants out here are supposed to believe “no one is above the law”  total hooey.   Not difficult to understand why the American public has little to no faith in our judicial system.

      Commutation, pardon all ways for the self declared elite to avoid consequences for their crimes.

      Was Cheney required to testify?

      • Peterr says:

        Cheney was interviewed in pretrial depositions, as was Bush, and he was on the defense list of potential witnesses before the trial began. In the end, they did not call him to testify, but IIRC, Cheney did not object to being on the witness list.

  4. Kim Kaufman says:

    While Fitz statement says, “While the President has the constitutional power to pardon, the decision to do so in this case purports to be premised on the notion that Libby was an innocent man convicted on the basis of inaccurate testimony caused by the prosecution,” Trump is quoted in the right-now front page HuttPo piece on Joe Wilson (Joe Wilson Reacts To Scooter Libby Pardon: ‘Trump Is A Vile And Despicable Individual’).

    “I don’t know Mr. Libby, but for years I have heard that he has been treated unfairly,” Trump said in a statement Friday. “Hopefully, this full pardon will help rectify a very sad portion of his life.”

    Trump can’t even be bothered to pretend he knows or cares anything about Libby’s innocence. Now that’s sad.

  5. SomeCallMeTim says:

    “Trump can’t even be bothered to pretend he knows or cares anything about Libby’s innocence.”

    He just wants to wave an especially rigid middle finger to his enemies and the justice system.

  6. Rapier says:

    “Trump can’t even be bothered to pretend he knows or cares anything about Libby’s innocence.”

    Your missing the point. LIbby is a hero for lying in defense of his organization, Cheney’s VP office and the Party. A hero in the Rights eyes and admirable up and down the management ranks of every corporation in America. There is no possible higher duty or calling than loyalty to ones organization. Forget that law stuff. That’s for chumps.

    As for Comey’s obsession with theologically based ethics? Trump’s words about Comey speak for themselves. He holds such in the highest contempt. Now a Roy Cohen or this latest Cohen? That’s his kind of people. ( Who would bet against Trump having an immediate affinity for Michael Cohen because of his last name, and then Slavic tough guys? A friendship made in heaven)

    • orionATL says:

      now this is very interesting. didn’t need an israeli passport. just slipped in thru germany under open-borders rules. how come no reporter had that thought as a possibility before?

      thanks.

      • Rayne says:

        I am sure the Schengen area came up in reporting last year. The truth is the EU is ‘leaky’; an acquaintance flew into Italy and Malta last year, said the airport was so small at Malta no one checked passports. There was no check of passports traveling by water over the Adriatic. There are rivers like the Elbe and Danube which can be traversed into Prague even from the Black Sea. There were myriad ways Cohen could have traveled to Prague without anyone being the wiser. It’s tough to get around this when he just plain lied, though he should have been pressed non-stop by journalists until he gave up something about his trip besides “I wasn’t in Prague.”

        • JD12 says:

          The dossier alleges that Cohen, two Russians and several Eastern European hackers met at the Prague office of a Russian government-backed social and cultural organization, Rossotrudnichestvo.

          http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/politics-government/white-house/article208870264.html

          Maybe this hacker was one of the ones Cohen met. He was extradited from Prague recently, but he was arrested just two days before Obama publicly accused Russia of the hacking. Russia really tried fighting the extradition. They tried slapping charges on him and said they should get him instead.

          http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/politics-government/article207514139.html

          • greengiant says:

            Nikulin hacked Formspring in 2012, which Weiner pleaded guilty to using.  His extradition comes a few days after House Speaker Jack Ryan visited Prague.  Huh?

        • Bob Conyers says:

          wonkette.com, bless their hearts, was yelling “Schengen Schengen Schengen” last year, so I’m sure it had bubbled up in the media.

          Does anyone know how far along Buzzfeed’s defense had gotten in forcing Cohen to turn over evidence after he stupidly sued them? I’m curious if they turned around and told anything useful to Mueller.

  7. Kenneth Almquist says:

    The White House statement refers to Judith Miller as a “key witness,” but that appears to be a lie.

    The indictment included 5 counts. Judith Miller is only mentioned in count 1, which alleges that Libby lied about his conversations with Russert, Cooper, and Miller. At trial the government dropped the allegation that Libby lied about his conversations with Miller.

    Judging by the reporting I read on the trial, the cross examination of Miller was brutal. I don’t know why the government dropped the allegation that Libby lied to Miller, but I suspect that the government lawyers concluded that the jury didn’t find Miller a credible witness. So they decided to drop the allegation concerning Miller and focus on trying to get a conviction on count 1 by arguing that Libby had lied about the other two conversations.

    Edited to add: The comment software striped out the links from the above text.
    Here is a summary of the 5 counts: https://www.justice.gov/archive/osc/documents/libby_pr_28102005.pdf
    Here is the motion saying that the allegation that Libby lied about his conversation with Miller was dropped: http://noeasyanswer.blogspot.com/2007/02/libby-request-for-jury-instruction.html

      • Kenneth Almquist says:

        Thanks for posting the links.  In part 4, Jeffress asks a series of questions to make the point that Miller’s note reading “Wife works in bureau” didn’t show that Miller had been told she worked for the CIA.  Just because it took Miller a couple of years to realize that Jeffress had a point is no reason to suppose that the jury didn’t get it.

        In the following excerpt, “J” refers to Jeffress (defense attorney) and “M” refers to Miller:

        J Is it your understanding there are bureaus in CIA

        M I wouldn’t use that formulation

        J But there aren’t bureaus

        M Some people refer to Nonproliferation Bureau, occasionally some people say NP bureau. It’s sometimes called a division, a unit. normally when people say bureau they mean FBI, I was confused for a moment (laughs) and says I still am

        J State has bureaus.

        M There are many bureaus.

        J State, INR

        M I don’t know if they’re called bureaus.

        J shows her org chart for State, does that refresh recollection that there are many bureaus at State (goes through a few). Does that refresh recollection that State has bureau of NP. But there is no such bureau at CIA

        M I don’t know that specifically.

      • Frank Probst says:

        ^^^This.  Marcy was far and away the best commenter (and just straight up journalist–she and a group of others live-blogged the trial) on the Libby trial.  And the whole Plame affair in general.

         

        As for JudyJudyJudy, it’s worth remembering (It’s probably been pointed out, but I haven’t seen it yet.) that she was a “reporter”/stenographer working for The New York Times at that time.  And they shitcanned her when her behavior involving Scooter Libby (among others) came to light.

        • orionATL says:

          from memory,

          the nytimes paid off miller with a settlement after criticism of her exaggerated, hystrionic coverage of the weapons of mass destruction propaganda campaign run by cheney came in for persistent crriticism.

          miller’s “little tubes of terror” reporting about possible nuclear weapons and her reporting on getm, gas, biological warfare proved unfounded in importance, but was very useful to the cheney, bush, addington, libbey propaganda campaign.

          -my recollection is that an editor named matthew purdy was involved in miller’s stories (and is doing very well at the times these days), as was publisher arthur sulzberger, jr. who was deeply involved in miller’s reportorial fantasies.

          once again the the nytimes had been pwned.

  8. Avattoir says:

    It took Popes, Italian city-state banks and Catholic Europe over 2 centuries to burn thru the six major crusades.

    With no popes or even an official state religion, and only one city street’s worth of banksters, we’re close to tying the record in under 70 years!

  9. Avattoir says:

    Yesterday, April  the twelfth, twenty-eighteen—a date which will live in infamy—the homes and office of my personal attorney, Michael Cohen, were suddenly and deliberately searched by forces of the Deep State.

    It will be noted that the contents of the applications for these search warrants makes it obvious that they were deliberately planned many weeks even months ago.

    Therefore, as commander in chief of the armed forces of the United States of America, I have authorized them to bomb Dumbasskiss Damascus Syria, and I have directed that all measures be taken for my defense. But as always, the question is whether our whole nation will remember the character of the onslaught against me. 

    • Peterr says:

      The attack yesterday on the Michael Cohen’s apartment, home, and office has caused severe damage to the American empire. I regret to tell you that very many American dollars have been lost. In addition, Trump administration personnel have been reported targeted in the media between San Francisco and New York City.

      This is part of a larger picture. Over the last few weeks, the Deep State has also launched an attack against Paul Manafort.

      The Deep State forces attacked Rick Gates.

      The Deep State forces attacked Alex Van der Zwaan.

      The Deep State forces attacked George Papadapoulis.

      The Deep State forces attacked Michael Flynn.

      And the Deep State forces attacked thirteen Russian businessmen and three Russian companies.

      The Deep State has, therefore, undertaken a surprise offensive extending throughout the United States. The facts of the past few weeks speak for themselves. The people of the United States have already formed their opinions and well understand the implications to the very life and safety of our nation.

      • david sanger says:

        Actually, in our country prosecutors go before judges and present evidence and get search warrants before conducting searches.

        Not sure how it is where you are.

    • Trip says:

      Michael Cohen is our most prized national treasure. Let us mark this day of  infamy with a monument the size of Liberty, in the harbor, with a dedication in stone.

        • Trip says:

          Camouflage. That makes him invisible in his cigar smoking “social club”. The guy with a copy of the Post, leaning in, with “the Don” headline really seals the scene.

  10. matt says:

    And, to end the week… Trump joins Macron and May for some fireworks fun in Damascus… I’m glad they found the chemical weapons stockpiles and factories to precisely bomb, “carefully without contaminating civilians,” according to CNN.

      • Teddy says:

        When the bomber-in-chief tweets GET READY RUSSIA that’s a secret signal to Bossman Vlad to get his troops and gear outta the way, and make some room outta da way for Bashar’s troops and gear as well.

        Also, Boss got a two-hour reminder phone call before the USAns got told in the 9pm speech, so there’ that….

         

    • harpie says:

      Here’s a really informative thread about the Syria Strikes-4/2018 [I got this from Laura Rozen] [Cheryl Rofer is also retweeting it.]:
      Tobias Schneider‏@tobiaschneider [Sweating the small wars at @GPPi ∙ National Security and Middle East Policy.]  The day after is for punditry. So below brief-ish thread with my observations about yesterday’s punitive strikes against the Assad regime:

    • harpie says:

      CherylRofer@CherylRofer‏ 
       

      I’m repeating what I’ve said many, many times, but it’s clear that reporters don’t want to learn it. So here goes again.
      1. Chlorine is in a different category in the Chemical Weapons Convention than nerve agents. It is essential for water purification, whereas the nerve agents are only for killing. 2. Chlorine is what is called a dual-use agent. Its possession cannot be prohibited. It can be produced much more easily than the nerve agents. Using it as a war gas is a war crime. 3. The strikes in Douma, to which last night’s strikes were a response, were with chlorine, perhaps with some Sarin. The latter has not been proved. 4. The facilities struck last night have more to do with nerve agents than with chlorine. Assad will continue to use chlorine as long as he feels he needs to. He is literally in an existential struggle./end

      Also : POTUS: Mission Accomplished!

      A perfectly executed strike last night. Thank you to France and the United Kingdom for their wisdom and the power of their fine Military. Could not have had a better result. Mission Accomplished!

       

      • matt says:

        What bothers me so much about CW propaganda is that it builds a “moral high ground” for Israel/US/France/UK so that the people start to be OK with a pedagogical “punishment” for the personified “bad men” (Assad & Putin)… and thus do not question the real motivations for the conflict in Syria- especially the motivations of their own Nation States.

        There are so many rational inconsistencies in the tactical and strategic benefit (there are none) for an occupying force to use CW that the media has resorted to creating an imaginary narrative about an evil man using the evil weapon… for no other reason than to terrorize “his own people.” …after the surrender and peaceful evacuation of rebel forces and their families from Eastern Ghouta in March.

        There is no moral high ground in this conflict with a dizzying array of State and non-State actors that has killed 400,000 and displaced 5 million inside Syria, and dispersed another 5 million into the broader Middle East and Europe.  As Doctors without Boarders pleads… the region needs more diplomacy, cooperation, and humanitarian aid… not more war.

  11. Bay State Librul says:

    Where would Fox News, Hannity, Sanders, et al… fit in this circle? Pence, the flatter in chief?

    “The Eight Circle of Hell is resided by the fraudulent. Dante and Virgil reach it on the back of Geryon, a flying monster with different natures, just like the fraudulent. This circle of Hell is divided into 10 Bolgias or stony ditches with bridges between them. In Bolgia 1, Dante sees panderers and seducer. In Bolgia 2 he finds flatterers. After crossing the bridge to Bolgia 3, he and Virgil see those who are guilty of simony. After crossing another bridge between the ditches to Bolgia 4, they find sorcerers and false prophets. In Bolgia 5 are housed corrupt politicians, in Bolgia 6 are hypocrites and in the remaining 4 ditches, Dante finds hypocrites (Bolgia 7), thieves (Bolgia 7), evil counselors and advisers (Bolgia 8), divisive individuals (Bolgia 9) and various falsifiers such as alchemists, perjurers and counterfeits (Bolgia 10).”

  12. Trip says:

    Has there been an occasion, in recent history, on even “left” TV channels (CNN/MSNBC), that the panel of military experts invited on (after strikes) to pontificate, where ONE of them goes against the grain of cheer-leading? Just one?

    I can’t recall. But there was a ton of “no way this is wagging the dog” justifications, yadda, yadda…yadda yadda yadda. Operation-Oh-Shit-The-Feds-Raided-Michael-Cohen Mission accomplished. It’s wall to wall coverage in saluting of the bombs. And how high does Wall Street open on Monday?

  13. earlofhuntingdon says:

    Beautifully written NYT opinion piece, btw.  Thanks very much.  The Times would be smart to replace Brooks with you.  Smarter, keener observer, better writer, not so nauseating.  It has lots of other creatures of the right to assuage the doubts of their would-be Murdoch and Koch supporters.

      • Trip says:

        Excellent job @Marcy!

        Your piece also reminds all that they can’t rewrite history, in a multitude of ways. Nicole Wallace, although she seems like a very nice woman, was trying to advance the idea that Bush, in his high tower of ethics, wouldn’t pardon Libby because of the seriousness of the crime (rather than not granting a full pardon in order to cover his or evil Dick’s butt). Further, as you argue, Trump isn’t going to swing the result of pardons that he wishes for, since the pardoned can’t plead the Fifth.

        Also, insanely tone-deaf, is Trump pardoning a convicted perjurer and leaker, while simultaneously losing his shit on twitter about Comey being “a liar and leaker”.  How does the cult reconcile this?

  14. Willis Warren says:

    Serious question, Marcy/bmaz/random lawyers.  Now that Libby is pardoned, let’s say the dems wave takes the house/Senate and ultimately the Presidency.  Could they FORCE Libby to testify about Bush/Cheney outing Plame?  are those crimes still prosecutable in any way or has the statute of limitations run out?

     

  15. harpie says:

    CNN Politics The FBI seized recordings between Trump’s lawyer and Stormy Daniels’ former lawyer, a source tells CNN Gloria Borger: My Reporting shows that the law enforcement may not have to piece together conversations. They can listen in.

     

  16. aubrey mcfate says:

    I’m glad to see emptywheel getting recognized by the NYT. It’s just a shame it has to be a result of so much wreckage over the past two decades, not just the last two years.
    The fact that emptywheel is a given a prestigious forum to tell the truth doesn’t detract from the fact that most of our establishment journalists seem to be still apologists for Libby, or at least have some residual impulse to genuflect to the authority of the Bush people. For example, when asked by MSNBC the other night by Lawrence O’Donnell what he thought about it, that weasel Nick Kristof was okay with it, as was someone else on the panel (a prosecutor, notably, was not, not at all). Even an act of pardon-dangling doesn’t put a full-fledged member of the neocon establishment on the outs — forget condemning him for obstructing justice in attempts to hit an act of retaliation against an intelligence agent in efforts to cover up the lies behind our epochal invasion. Remember that the consensus last decade among opinionators (particularly in the Post) was that Fitzgerald was “Javert”. It’s a reason to be leery of the Rubins, Frums, Boots et al so eloquently denouncing Trump.
    The resurfacing of Libby reminds me of a personal anecdote, an episode that will help me live with my conscience in later years. Aside from once having had the chance to loudly harangue Donald Rumsfeld at a bus stop, I also ran across Judith Miller after her whole contretemps. It was on Massachusetts Avenue, in front of the Ghandi statue, ironically enough. She was on her was to some soiree with the press at the Cosmo Club. At the time, just like now, I had an unceasing, vituperative discourse in my head against all of them, so I was ready when she appeared like a malign apparition. I had the chance to a look directly at her, meet eyes for a few moments, smile, and say, loudly, “Thanks for the Iraq war.” Her face curdled over, and I sent her on her way with, “It always amazes me that you people show your faces in public among decent people.” Now John Bolton is the NSA. Plus ca change.

    • Avattoir says:

      wtf?

      Either I’m reading this wrong, or you’ve just posted a calumny by bait & switch.

      Maybe I need more coffee (or someone does).

      • aubrey mcfate says:

        You’re simply an idiot. I can’t even figure out what kind of misinterpretation you’ve attached to my comments.

  17. earlofhuntingdon says:

    I find it hilarious when law ‘n order Republicans scream about the “break-in” at Michael Cohen’s home, office and sleeping-cum-meeting room at a swank hotel in NYC. It’s not like they were five former CIA operatives burgling the DNC at the Watergate in the middle of the night. That was a break-in.

    The FBI did not break in, it executed search warrants. They probably even knocked first. And that was after convincing top brass at the FBI and Main Justice and a federal magistrate that it had probable cause and reason to believe the president’s lawyer and fixer might destroy vital evidence if they just asked him for the materials.

    Those whinging Republicans should go on a few meet and greets with local SWAT teams when they execute search warrants – battering rams and automatic weapons at the ready – across the country for non-violent offenses. Now that’s something to complain about.

    • aubrey mcfate says:

      I suspect you don’t literally find this hilarious. Trump just called the FBI “a den of thieves.” He is just the apotheosis of the Republican Party’s capacity for pathological lies. Unless they all go to jail, the ratchet will not go down. Going by the simple rule of thumb that Republicans, per Goebbels, always accuse their opponents of what they themselves are guilty of, we will see a future iteration of Republican power in which they really do send DOJ to knock down the doors of “Democrat” lawyers with SWAT teams.

      • earlofhuntingdon says:

        Actually, it might have been figurative, or the opposite of what I meant. I’ll have to iron that out. I agree with the notion that the GOP’s most often used strategy is to project their own worst behavior onto their opponents.  If deflects their guilty knowledge.

          • Avattoir says:

            Who’s ” ’em “? As I read “Aubrey Mcfate”, that commenter pleads that jailing something like 60 million people is “essential”.

            Plus I read that commenter’s IMMEDIATELY PRIOR comment in each of its literal construction (in end, an ATTACK on Plame) and the appearance of its devising (a set-up to a sneak attack).

            (Admittedly, I’m still waiting on coffee reinforcements.)

            • aubrey mcfate says:

              Yes, get some more coffee. After you reread my comments to figure out who it is I want locked up, read your own ungrammatical (“…in each of its literal construction…”… huh?), incoherent insults again, too, to see how out of line you are.

            • harpie says:

              Avattoir,
              My own “’em” was meant to refer to all those who’s “strategy is to project their own worst behavior onto their opponents”…ie: Hillary Clinton.

  18. aubrey mcfate says:

    An open question: is tonight the Saturday Night Massacre redux? Yesterday, Friday the 13th, seemed so appropriate for it. He’s got the fog machine of war going. I’m just hoping Trump’s paralysis continues long enough for Mueller to at least to publicly give pardons the name of obstruction, if not lay down more indictments. I’m not looking forward to participating in the civil unrest that will result, no matter how much of a tonic it might be.

    • Avattoir says:

      What is the matter with your brain, that it simply is unable to accept that RICO is not a base crime, does not ease any part of the jobs of investigators and govenment prosecutors, serves no public utility beyond one shot at a scammy sting that aimed to fleece the wooliest of NFL franchise owners and certainly scared the beejeebers out of at least some of them? You’ve been referred the classic Popehat extended explainer, it’s been consistently and repeatedly pointed out to you that it’s nothing like you apparently imagine (and even that image is between irresolvably mooshy and utterly insubstantial). Do you think it’s somehow WITTY to keep raising it?

  19. JacobLadder says:

    Did I miss the article here about the IG report that just came out, confirming that Andy McCabe is both a serial liar and a leaker? Or is that kind of news too counter-narrative to mention? Plenty on Scooter Libby of course. What a shock.

    • bmaz says:

      Jerky trolls like you do not determine our content choices. Never have, and never will. You want to discuss the IG report, go start your own blog. You are truly nothing but a crank and a troll. The next time you cruise in with troll bullshit, I will bounce you. Get lost.

  20. matt says:

    From the Atlantic:

    “Although the report delivers a harsh assessment of McCabe, a longtime target of President Trump, it also undermines the narrative of McCabe as an anti-Trump partisan who sought to harm the president’s 2016 campaign.”

    And, this has nothing to do with Scooter Libby- there is no defense for what he and Cheney did.  If you think so, please explain.

     

  21. Rugger9 says:

    Since the IG report on McCabe is the product of the palace, one can’t really give it any credibility until McCabe responds to it. It was “produced” for the purpose of firing McCabe in accordance with the Kaiser’s wishes by a brown-nosing toady of Sessions’ DOJ. That is important to remember.

  22. Douglas Levene says:

    Libby didn’t leak Plame’s name. The leaker was Richard Armitage, who worked for Colin Powell as Deputy Secretary of State. Armitage has admitted publicly that he was the leaker. http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/09/08/leak.armitage/. This fact was known to Fitzgerald before he launched his jihad against Libby, but Fitzgerald nonetheless never prosecuted Armitage and instead chose to go after Libby. These are all incontestable facts. So tell me again why you think it was a mistake to pardon Libby?

    • bmaz says:

      You are completely full of shit, and have wandered into the worst place possible to pitch that nonsense. First off, the hostess here, Marcy Wheeler, published a definitive book putting that horse manure to the lie it is. But, secondly, the principals here have been around and on the Libby/Plame leak case since long before the trial. In short, you came to the wrong place to pitch your lie.

Comments are closed.