Post-Gazette Editorial – 3/8/07

This page was last updated on March 8, 2007.

Libby’s guilt: The case doesn’t get justice for the central offense; Editorial; Pittsburgh Post-Gazette; March 8, 2007.

In my critique of a previous editorial on this topic I wrote, “With this editorial, the PG demonstrates it is in denial. This is what happens when you suffer from Bush Derangement Syndrome (BDS). The PG had visions of Watergate and those dreams are dashed for now.” The PG continues the denial – and the lies – with this editorial and a column by Dan Simpson of January 31, 2007.

The PG published a bunch of Plamegate editorials dating back to 2003. I wrote critiques on only several of the more recent pieces. They were “Dump Rove,” “Above the law,” “Civil justice,” and “Another twist.”

I’ve addressed most of the BS in this editorial in my critiques of the aforementioned editorials and column. As a result, I’ll try not to repeat myself too much below.

Even the reliably liberal and anti-Bush Washington Post (“End of an Affair,” 9/1/06; “The Libby Verdict,” 3/7/07) concedes the story trying to be spun by the PG is BS.

Below is a detailed critique of the subject editorial.

“I. Lewis ‘Scooter’ Libby, former chief of staff of Vice President Dick Cheney, was found guilty Tuesday of obstruction of justice, perjury and one count of lying to the FBI. There are a number of remarkable aspects to the 14-day trial and the verdict.

“1. The chief of staff of the vice president of the United States was found guilty of having committed felonies while in that position at the White House.

“2. No one was charged and, according to Special Prosecutor Patrick J. Fitzgerald, no one will be charged with any violations of the act that prompted the whole affair -- the revelation to the media by senior White House and Department of State officials of the identity of a CIA agent, in apparent violation of the Intelligence Identities Protection Act.”

[RWC] The PG knows no one was charged with violating the cited law because the law wasn’t violated. As I noted in a previous critique, “36 news-related organizations” filed a brief with the U.S. Supreme Court asserting “There Is Ample Evidence On The Public Record To Cast Considerable Doubt That A Crime Has Been Committed.”

“3. It is generally predicted that Mr. Libby will receive a light sentence, although he could, in principle, be sentenced to up to 25 years in prison for the crimes of which he was found guilty.

“4. Neither the public nor the media have ever focused on the fact that the career of the CIA agent, Valerie Plame, was destroyed by senior administration officials because of an act of her husband -- writing a newspaper opinion piece that put the lie to part of President Bush’s 2003 State of the Union speech. Ms. Plame and her husband have filed a civil suit against Mr. Cheney.”

[RWC] The PG knows the “newspaper opinion piece that put the lie to part of President Bush’s 2003 State of the Union speech” was itself nothing but one lie after another. As noted by The Washington Post, “A bipartisan investigation by the Senate intelligence committee subsequently established that all of these claims were false.” I covered this in more detail in my critique of “Another twist.”

As a reminder, let’s review the “part of President Bush’s 2003 State of the Union speech” the PG claims was a lie. President Bush said, “The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa.” The British Butler Report (2004) on this subject stated, “We conclude also that the statement in President Bush’s State of the Union Address … was well-founded.” Further, the “Report on the U.S Intelligence Community’s Prewar Intelligence Assessments on Iraq” (2004) by the U.S. Senate Select Committee on Intelligence concluded (Conclusion 13) Joe Wilson’s debriefing in 2002 bolstered the CIA’s belief that Iraq tried to buy uranium in Niger.

“5. Mr. Libby will request a new trial. Failing that, he will appeal the results of this one. Failing that, following precedent, there is reason to believe that Mr. Bush will pardon him.

“6. Mr. Libby’s trial was postponed by a politically cooperative special prosecutor to start in January of this year, after the 2006 elections, even though the crimes he was ultimately convicted of took place in mid-2003.”

[RWC] “A politically cooperative special prosecutor?” This is the same guy who continues to misrepresent what happened. This is the same guy who conducted an investigation despite the fact the Department of Justice – and thus Mr. Fitzgerald – knew who disclosed Mrs. Wilson’s role to the press even before the special prosecutor was appointed. It was during this investigation of a non-crime – and after the DOJ already knew the “leaker’s” identity – Mr. Libby allegedly lied. That’s right; a man has been convicted of four felonies during the investigation of a non-crime.

“7. The trial, a well-choreographed pas de deux between the prosecution and the defense, contrasted radically with the treatment of America’s prisoners at Guantanamo Bay, who are deprived of habeas corpus and other legal protections, not to mention what took place at Abu Ghraib, all of it under the same administration.”

[RWC] So Mr. Libby, a U.S. citizen with years of government service, should be treated the same as murdering terrorists captured on the battlefield? This is a look into the mind of people with BDS.

“All in all, it is probably better for the country that Mr. Libby was found guilty of lying and obstruction of justice on four of five counts, rather than having been set free, given the gravity of the Valerie Plame case.

“At the same time, the fact is that some very senior U.S. government officials clearly broke the law protecting America’s intelligence officers overseas and their contacts, with impunity. That is a very bad precedent for the future effectiveness of the country’s overseas intelligence effort, at a time when it is required to play a critical role for America in the face of multiple threats.”

[RWC] As noted above and in previous critiques, the cited law was not broken. Despite all the misrepresentations made by Mr. Fitzgerald, he never asserted Mrs. Wilson was a covert agent, and Mrs. Wilson had to be a covert agent within the previous five years for the law to apply to her. She was not. As a reminder, when Mr. Novak called the CIA to confirm Mrs. Wilson’s employment, the CIA spokesman confirmed her employment and made no attempt to have Mr. Novak not mention Mrs. Wilson in his column. If Mrs. Wilson had been covert, the CIA would have tried to convince Mr. Novak not to mention her name.

Whose name didn’t we read in this editorial? That’s right, Richard Armitage. If you recall, Mr. Armitage was the person who got this all started by telling columnist Bob Novak – and Bob Woodward – that Joe Wilson’s wife worked for the CIA and recommended him for the Niger trip.

Why didn’t the editorial jump on Mr. Armitage, who was Deputy Secretary of State when he spoke to Messrs. Novak and Woodward? Because Mr. Armitage opposed the U.S. action against Iraq and thus doesn’t fit the conspiracy BS the PG is so desperately trying to sell.