The Crossed Pond

So, the verdict’s been rendered. 30 months in prison for Scooter Libby. The appeal is likely to be swift, and not successful. The verdict wasn’t really in much doubt. You can read the indictment here.

Already, there is plenty of Republican outcry about the verdict, which I’m not going to bother with because we’ve heard it all before. Ed Morrissey of Captain’s Quarters reminds me of why I read CQ in the first place and rightfully both recaps the objections to Libby’s treatment, and summarily dismisses them, which is exactly what they deserve. Worth reading in particular are his updates, in response to a swell of reader criticism, but I’ll take this as the money quote:

Regardless of the ludicrous nature of a three-year investigation where the perpetrator never got charged with the initial suspected crime, Libby got what he deserved, having lied to investigators and the grand jury. People cannot commit perjury to block an investigation and expect to simply walk away from it. A jury concluded that Libby did exactly that, and the sentence is commensurate with the crime.

Will the conviction survive on appeal? Likely it will. Again, the special-counsel investigation got out of control, like just about every special-counsel investigation that preceded it. That doesn’t give Libby the right to commit perjury and obstruct justice.

A lot of people were very unhappy with the whole Plame-leak prosecution affair. I happen to not be one of them; in my mind, outing a covert CIA agent in the process of conducting a political hit job (justified or no) is serious business, and should be investigated harshly and thoroughly. But that’s besides the point. The ONLY salient issue to today is what happens when, in the process of investigating thoroughly, a witness lies and obstructs justice.

And the ONLY reasonable answer to that if you care one whit for the rule of law is: throw the book at them.

Whether it’s Clinton lying about Monica Lewinsky, or Libby lying about Joe Wilson, it doesn’t matter. You don’t get the luxury of “deciding” when it’s okay to lie to federal prosecutors. Your opinions on the merits of the case being investigated don’t somehow create some legal and moral vortex/loophole through which you can slide right through. Any member of that jury sentencing Libby rightly would not care one whit about the Wilson/Plame affair, except insofar as Scooter Libby lied and obstructed justice in the process of confounding it. If there is a case that Libby was NOT in fact guilty of those crimes, I haven’t heard it. I’m sure the jury did, though. And then promptly sided against it.

The Republican talking points on this matter are simply vapid and incoherent, and emblematic of a party out-of-control that would shut the nation down for a year investigating the crime when it was against Clinton (justified then too, by the way), and then scream holy hell when the same crime is committed by one of their own. Shame on the people who call themselves conservatives and yet espouse to the high heavens that partisanship is apparently an extenuating circumstance worthy of negating perjury and obstruction of justice. And yeah Fred Thompson, I’m looking at you.

Adam has been particularly lucid on this point. And Morrissey is too, when he sums it up thusly:

If you support the rule of law, then this sentencing was a foregone conclusion.

You can’t say it any better than that.