And yet no one went to jail

By Edward Copeland 

Reliving the Valerie Plame affair in Fair Game, based on the books written by Plame herself and her husband Joe Wilson, if you didn't have any anger before over what the Bush White House did to a loyal CIA agent in the name of politics and a war they wanted no matter what the facts were, that old rage will well up once again. In Doug Liman's film, it comes up even more so because before we get to the events of the leak of Plame's covert status itself, we actually see what her job entailed and what the Bush politicos callously threw away for their own warped reasons and the cost it took in American lives, those of other intelligence sources and, of course, the truth. Still, no one who committed crimes (and crimes were committed) went to jail for their roles. It's outrageous and the film will make that outrage feel fresh again.

Naomi Watts stars as Plame and Sean Penn plays Wilson (in one of his least-mannered performances) and while many of the details of the film will be familiar to anyone who watched the episode unfold in the media, what makes director Doug Liman's film most interesting are the details that were left by the wayside.

Fair Game begins by showing us Plame at work for the agency, making frequent secret trips overseas making contacts and protecting sources in the battle against weapons proliferation. Her husband knows her real job, but her friends believe she works for a phony business service. Early on, at the behest of the Defense Department, her section gets contacted to check out stories on aluminum tubes supposedly sought by Saddam Hussein and the possibility that Saddam had tried to acquire yellowcake uranium from Niger.

Never mind that the aluminum tube story had been investigated and disputed long before since the equipment was horribly outdated and unacceptable for uranium enrichment, the Bush White House pressures the CIA to check it out again. As it happens, Wilson, the last American to meet Saddam face-to-face and someone who had strong contacts with high-ranking officials in Niger, is suggested as someone who could check out the African side of the story. Plame admits her husband's expertise in the area, but that's the extent of her involvement in his getting the assignment.

Wilson takes the trip to Niger and finds that it would be logistically impossible to remove that large an amount of yellowcake from the country without leaving physical or written evidence. He returns, issues his report that the story is a nonstarter and believes that it's the end of it. Unfortunately, the Bush gang, represented especially by the unctuous Scooter Libby (played to smarmy perfection by David Andrews) are ghouls who can't say no and, much to Wilson's surprise, President Bush says those 16 words that mean so much in his 2002 State of the Union speech about Saddam attempting to acquire quantities of uranium from Africa.

Just to be certain, Wilson calls a source of his to make certain that Bush isn't referring to a different African country than Niger, but no, that's the lie that's being spun, followed by the big p.r. push from Cheney, Rice and the gang about not letting the "smoking gun be a mushroom cloud." An outraged Wilson pens the infamous op-ed in The New York Times about what he didn't find in Niger and the White House declares war on him and his wife, including outing her identity as a CIA operative in Robert Novak's column, which still is a crime.

The rest of the story should be fairly familiar to anyone who followed it, but if you've forgotten some of the details, you are certain to get riled once again (and to question the wisdom of the Obama Administration letting sleeping liars sleep free for the crimes they committed).

Still, as well known as the tale is, Fair Game proves quite compelling thanks to a solid cast and Liman's solid direction. Of course, the true Bush believers will have no interest and partisans already will have been converted, but those who are fuzzy on the facts owe it to themselves to see this film. A little history never hurt anybody. 

(Cross-posted at Edward Copeland on Film.)

On the battlefield

By Mustang Bobby

Say what you will about former Vice President Dick Cheney, he takes care of his friends regardless of what they did or the consequences of their actions. I suppose that's an admirable quality, but it makes you wonder what's more important to him; keeping Scooter Libby employed and his legacy intact, or seeing justice done. Time magazine has a look into the final days of the Bush administration and the battle between Mr. Bush and Mr. Cheney over whether the president should pardon Mr. Libby.

Hours before they were to leave office after eight troubled years, George W. Bush and Richard B. Cheney had one final and painful piece of business to conclude. For over a month Cheney had been pleading, cajoling, even pestering Bush to pardon the Vice President's former chief of staff, I. Lewis (Scooter) Libby. Libby had been convicted nearly two years earlier of obstructing an investigation into the leak of a covert CIA officer's identity by senior White House officials. The Libby pardon, aides reported, had become something of a crusade for Cheney, who seemed prepared to push his nine-year-old relationship with Bush to the breaking point — and perhaps past it — over the fate of his former aide. "We don't want to leave anyone on the battlefield," Cheney argued.

The battlefield metaphor is interesting, seeing as how Mr. Cheney managed five deferments during the Vietnam war, citing "other priorities," and it's also an insight as to how he views the way things work in Washington; as a war rather than the give and take of politics and policy.

What comes through in this article is Mr. Cheney's obsession with shaping the legacy of the administration he steered, either overtly or behind the scenes, into the war in Iraq and making sure that anyone who dared to challenge him was dealt with swiftly and ruthlessly. It also shows that he and his supporters have a rather flexible definition of what is pardonable and what isn't. Ten years ago the Republicans and the right wingers drove the Congress and Senate to impeach and put on trial President Bill Clinton for doing exactly the same thing that Mr. Libby was convicted of: lying to a grand jury. The nation could not stand it if someone in the White House lied about getting a blow job. But after the Libby conviction, the righties' meme was that it was a "technicality" and that lying under oath was no big deal. (In a perverse way, some commentators blamed Mr. Clinton for Mr. Libby's plight; it a president could get away with it, why couldn't he?) The irony is so thick you can stand a spoon up in it.

The facts of the Libby case are pretty well known: someone in the White House leaked the name of CIA agent Valerie Plame to Robert Novack as part of the retaliation for her husband writing an op-ed piece in the New York Times that called into question the veracity of one of President Bush's reasons for going to war in Iraq. The trail led to the White House; specifically to the office of the vice president and Karl Rove. When Mr. Libby was questioned by a grand jury about his role in the leak, he lied to them. He was put on trial for perjury and convicted in March 2007. Several months later when he was sentenced, the president commuted his sentence, but did not grant him a pardon. This demand for exoneration became a cause celebre among the conservatives: Scooter was being punished for doing his job of keeping the evil lefties from ruining their war. But, to his credit, President Bush did not feel that Mr. Libby had met the criterion of earning a pardon; he didn't admit to his guilt, he didn't show remorse, and he hadn't served time -- something the president took care of with his commutation. Having ridden into office on the coattails of the Marc Rich pardon kerfuffle by President Clinton, even Mr. Bush saw the double standard staring him in the face. On the last weekend in the White House, Mr. Bush decided that Mr. Libby didn't deserve a pardon.

He called Jim Sharp, his personal attorney in the Plame case, who had been present when he was interviewed by Fitzgerald in 2004. Sharp was known in Washington as one of the best lawyers nobody knew. A savvy raconteur from Oklahoma who had represented a long list of colorful clients — from Nixon pal Charles G. (Bebe) Rebozo to Sammy Sosa — Sharp had worked quietly for the President for a while before anyone even knew about it. In the meantime, the two men had become friends, spending hours chatting over cigars and near beer. On the Sunday before he left office, Bush invited Sharp to the executive mansion for a farewell cigar.

While packing boxes in the upstairs residence, according to his associates, Bush noted that he was again under pressure from Cheney to pardon Libby. He characterized Cheney as a friend and a good Vice President but said his pardon request had little internal support. If the presidential staff were polled, the result would be 100 to 1 against a pardon, Bush joked. Then he turned to Sharp. "What's the bottom line here? Did this guy lie or not?"

The lawyer, who had followed the case very closely, replied affirmatively.

Bush indicated that he had already come to that conclusion too.

"O.K., that's it," Bush said.

To this day Mr. Cheney still carries his torch for Mr. Libby; in response to the Time article, he released a statement:

Scooter Libby is an innocent man who was the victim of a severe miscarriage of justice. He was not the source of the leak of Valerie Plame's name. Former Deputy Secretary of State, Rich Armitage, leaked the name and hid that fact from most of his colleagues, including the President. Mr. Libby is an honorable man and a faithful public servant who served the President, the Vice President and the nation with distinction for many years. He deserved a presidential pardon.

This would all be rather ordinary were it not for the fact that it points out that Mr. Cheney's priority in the matter wasn't whether or not an agent of the CIA was compromised, whether or not the country knew the truth about the lies being told to get us into a war that has killed thousands of soldiers and civilians and decimated our honor and fortune, or whether or not Mr. Libby received a fair trial and justice was done. All that mattered was that his friend was able to work as a lawyer again and that his reputation was somehow restored by the stroke of the president's pen. Even President Bush, who had the most to gain or lose by the outcome of the Libby/Plame case, felt that justice had been done, that Mr. Libby was guilty and without remorse, and that he was doing the right thing -- finally -- by standing up to Mr. Cheney. (It also makes you wonder why Mr. Cheney is so determined to clear Mr. Libby. It's almost as if there was some really compelling reason to keep him happy... and silent.) It's also a little tragic that the one time when Mr. Bush went against the advice and strong persuasion of Mr. Cheney, its outcome was less than consequential; what if he had said no to the war in Iraq? There are a lot of people still left out on that battlefield.

(Cross-posted from Bark Bark Woof Woof.)

The truth is too funny to be told

By Capt. Fogg

So, Mr. Corleone, what kind of hat were you wearing the night Mr. Brazzi was shot?

Objection your honor! Answering that question would subject my client to ridicule.

Somehow that was something I would never expect to hear in a courtroom -- until today. To be sure I've never attended law school, and some idiotic defense may have escaped my notice, but our president has been to law school and yet he seems to be comfortable supporting a comical defense raised by the comical Bush administration.

U.S. District Judge Emmet G. Sullivan was apparently as surprised as I was to hear the Obama administration's lawyers insist that former Dick Cheney's statements to a special prosecutor about Valerie Plame need to be kept secret -- are you ready for this? -- because it might make people laugh on The Daily Show.

I don't want a future vice president to say, I'm not going to cooperate with you because I don't want to be fodder for "The Daily Show,"

said Justice Department attorney Jeffrey Smith. His position being that he doesn't want to become a fact-finder for political enemies.

Of course, it's interesting to speculate that the more enemies a politician has made, the more immune he would be to prosecution should this defense become precedent and the less honesty he would owe to his constituents, but I'm so baffled and confused by this position and the Justice Department that is now supporting it that I'll let you speculate upon the future of justice in America. Just don't laugh too hard, you might embarrass a protected personage.

What Happened

By Capt. Fogg

What a revelation! Scott McClellan, the guy who used to stand in front of reporters and the minority of Americans not watching Britney and Anna Nicole and "da game" and spout lies, has now revealed that he told us a lie - unwittingly, of course. It wasn't his fault that he failed to check the facts. He wasn't paid to question; he was paid to sneer dismissively at reporters who did.

Scott has a book coming out in April, titled What Happened.

"So I stood at the White House briefing room podium in front of the glare of the klieg lights for the better part of two weeks and publicly exonerated two of the senior-most aides in the White House: Karl Rove and Scooter Libby. There was one problem. It was not true."

And guess what Scott, you didn't win the Kyrgyzstan Lottery either and the guy trying to get his millions out of Nigeria isn't any more honest than your ex-boss -- and of course there's been a lot of blood under the bridge because of the crime family you covered up for. I don't mean to be cruel, but it's your turn to be sneered at. I really hope you don't make any more money from it than OJ did from If I Did It and I hope you soon get to hear the current mouthpiece defame you with the same sneer and condescension as you used from the same podium you told your lies from.

(Cross-posted from Human Voices.)

Reaction to the News (11/21/07)

By Michael J.W. Stickings

Here are some interesting stories you might want to check out:

1) San Francisco Chronicle: "California Secretary of State Debra Bowen sued a Nebraska voting machine company on Monday, seeking fines and reimbursements of nearly $15 million from the firm for allegedly selling nearly 1,000 uncertified machines to San Francisco and four other counties."

pse·phol·o·gy (sē-fŏl'ə-jē) n.

The study of political elections.

[Greek psēphos, pebble, ballot (from the ancient Greeks' use of pebbles for voting) + –LOGY.]

Yes, that's how the Greeks voted, by dropping pebbles into urns. The modern equivalent is the paper ballot and the ballot box. And what's wrong with that? There's something to be said for marking an X next to the candidate of your choice, is there not? This is one case, I would argue, where technology has not made our lives any better. The count may be quicker (and, arguably, more accurate, assuming no funny business, which is not something it is wise to assume) with voting machines, but consider what we give up as voters and what the democratic process itself loses in abandoning the older, and ultimately more fulfilling, method of voting.

**********

2) TPM Muckraker: "The Center for Public Integrity's brand-new report on Iraq contracting, Windfalls of War II, identifies at least $20 billion in contract money that has gone to non-U.S. companies that it cannot identify."

War is hell. War profiteering is eternal.

This war just keeps getting better and better, eh?

**********

3) SCOTUSblog: "After a hiatus of 68 years, the Supreme Court on Tuesday agreed to rule on the meaning of the Second Amendment — the hotly contested part of the Constitution that guarantees "a right to keep and bear arms." Not since 1939 has the Court heard a case directly testing the Amendment's scope -- and there is a debate about whether it actually decided anything in that earlier ruling. In a sense, the Court may well be writing on a clean slate if, in the end, it decides the ultimate question: does the Second Amendment guarantee an individual right to have a gun for private use, or does it only guarantee a collective right to have guns in an organized military force such as a state National Guard unit?"

Who am I to disagree with Balkin? "I predict that the Court will hold (1) that the 2nd amendment protects an individual right, (2) that this right applies against laws in federal territories like the District of Columbia, (3) that a relatively deferential standard of reasonableness applies, and (4) that, even under this relatively deferential statute at least one part of the D.C. gun control law is unconstitutional. That is to say, I predict a decision that tries to split the difference and is aimed roughly at the middle of public opinion, even if not the exact center."

In other words, the fight will continue, with crazy gunmongers claiming a right to own anything and everything and fare more sensible people arguing that compromise is desirable. As for me, I would prefer to have the Second Amendment struck down altogether.

(See also The New York Times and The Washington Post.)

**********

4) Examiner: "Former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay may not be in a leadership position on Capitol Hill anymore, but that doesn't mean he can't weigh in on the current GOP leadership.DeLay told Yeas & Nays that Republicans in Congress are "looking for something to believe in" and "they're not getting it out of this Republican leadership... The leadership just isn't getting it."

By "getting it," I assume The Hammer means leading sex-obsessed crusades against the opposition, gerrymandering electoral districts for partisan purposes, promoting violence against judges, befriending and working with disgraced lobbyists, turning K Street into an organ of the GOP, and vice versa, taking money from Russian oil interests, misusing federal agencies, violating campaign finance laws...

**********

And last, but certainly not least:

5) MSNBC: "Former White House press secretary Scott McClellan blames President Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney for efforts to mislead the public about the role of White House aides in leaking the identity of a CIA operative."

Big news, but hardly surprising. It was Bush and Cheney and Rove and Libby and Card -- all of them pushing the lie and lying to Scotty McC.

Olbermann responds. See Crooks and Liars. (And see also Benen, who asks the right questions.)

**********

That's it for now. More posts to come.

Good night, everyone.

Left off Medal of Freedom recipient list, Libby said to be "crushed"

Cheney said to be furious, threatens to expose Shadow Presidency if pardon doesn't come through

By J. Thomas Duffy

Sources tell The Garlic this morning that there are new, hostile divisions deep inside the White House.

I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, commuted from his felony conviction in the Plame Leak Case, was said to be "despondent and crushed" after seeing the list of Medal of Freedom recipients released by the President yesterday.

Libby, according to a West Wing staffer, called Vice President Dick Cheney, and in tears, expressed his disappointment to his former boss, of not being awarded one.

Cheney was said to be furious, reacting angrily and threatened to expose the Shadow Presidency he has been conducting.

Cheney reportedly called the President, "barking at him" and demanded to know, if Libby was not receiving a Medal of Freedom award, when was his pardon coming through.

"We were sure Scooter was going to get one." whined Mary Matalin (Editor's Note: Whining is Ms. Matalins' natural way of speaking), a Libby friend and former colleague, as well as one of the chief fundraisers for Libby's defense.

"I mean, he gave one to Tenet, for God sakes!"

When asked for comment, White House Press Secretary Dana Perino indicated she didn't know anything about the Medal of Freedom awards, or how the list was developed.

"However," she added, "I believe that there are certain health benefits to not receiving one."

Libby is, reportedly, in talks with the Fox News Network as to developing a new show, tentatively titled "Are You Smarter Than a Convicted, But Commuted, Former White House Official?"

Bonus Scooter Links

Libby Trial Update - The Scooter and Cheney Show Theme Song

Top Ten Cloves: Reasons Tim Russert Didn't Ask Scooter Libby About Joe Wilson and His Wife

Miller To Leave 'Times' With Movie Deal In Hand; Signs On To Star In Memento Sequel; Not Sure If She Will Continue Freelancing For Bush Admn.

Letters Cast Light on Cheney's Inner Circle; Dozens of Prominent Figures and Insiders Praise Libby as Fundamentally Decent










"We were sure Scooter was going to get one," whined Mary Matalin. "I mean, he gave one to Tenet, for God sakes!"

(Cross-posted at The Garlic.)

What did you expect?

By Capt. Fogg

Look out kid
They keep it all hid
Better jump down a manhole
Light yourself a candle
Don’t wear sandals
Try to avoid the scandals

Judge John D. Bates helped Kenn Starr go after Bill Clinton. Judge John D. Bates allowed Dick Cheney to keep his secrets about the Energy Task Force and is now a close associate of Chief Justice Roberts. What did you expect?

Wasn't he just the man to dismiss Valerie Plame's suit against the White House gang over their use of executive powers in a private vendetta against her husband?

They keep it all hid. They have all the bases covered. Look out kid.

(Cross-posted at Human Voices.)

"I'm aware of the fact that perhaps somebody in the administration did disclose the name of that person ..."

By J. Thomas Duffy

This may have to become a new, reoccurring feature

No shit, Dick Tracy!

It was Iraqi Iraqi Mid-Term Progress Report Day (Report Card Day comes in September), and, most likely, both the Bush Grindhouse and the Iraqi Government (well, whatever they are; Perhaps, if you have seen the movie 'Le Roi de Coeur' - King of Hearts - we can understand how the Iraqis modeled their parliament) were burning the phone lines, to get their stories straight.

It sure seems like the policy is "Well keep standing up, while they sit down".

In his press conference this morning, to crow about the possible, and slightly below 50%, positive marks, The Decider/The Commander/The Shakespeare Guy, answering the one and only question about his Quid Pro Quo bailing out of convicted felon, former Advisor to the President and Vice President Chief of Staff, I. Lewis 'Scooter" Libby, engaged in this startling response;

Q If I could just switch subjects for a second to another big decision you made recently, which was in the Scooter Libby case.

THE PRESIDENT: Yes.

Q You spoke very soberly and seriously in your statement about how you weighed different legal questions in coming to your decision on that commutation. But one issue that you did not address was the issue of the morality of your most senior advisors leaking the name of a confidential intelligence operator. Now that the case is over -- it's not something you've ever spoken to -- can you say whether you're at all disappointed in the behavior of those senior advisors? And have you communicated that disappointment to them in any way?

THE PRESIDENT: Michael, I -- first of all, the Scooter Libby decision was, I thought, a fair and balanced decision. Secondly, I haven't spent a lot of time talking about the testimony that people throughout my administration were forced to give as a result of the special prosecutor. I didn't ask them during the time and I haven't asked them since.

I'm aware of the fact that perhaps somebody in the administration did disclose the name of that person, and I've often thought about what would have happened had that person come forth and said, I did it. Would we have had this, you know, endless hours of investigation and a lot of money being spent on this matter? But it's been a tough issue for a lot of people in the White House, and it's run its course and now we're going to move on.

Quick, someone call the Webster Dictionary folks, and have them insert Bush's picture under the words;

Clueless
In Denial
Head Up One's Ass

Secondly, I haven't spent a lot of time talking about the testimony that people throughout my administration were forced to give as a result of the special prosecutor. I didn't ask them during the time and I haven't asked them since.

What the hell is this?

Is he inferring that Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald, somehow, in some way, coerced the testimony and statements implicating Cheney and Rove, and possible, himself?

Was he confusing Fitzgerald's method of conducting a lawful and legal investigation, following established U.S. laws and procedures, with the methods he has approved for interogationg prisoners at Gitmo and Abu Ghraib?

Does he believe that the "people throughout my administration" were tortured by Fitzgerald, therefore, the testimony they offered is unreliable and not to be believed?

" ... that perhaps somebody in the administration did disclose the name of that person ..."

Again, this in not some inanimate object.

We pointed out before that there was a real victim, a real person, that suffered terrible consequences as a result of "somebody in the administration did disclose the name of that person ..."

"That person" is Valerie Plame, now former, covert CIA Agent, exposed, thanks to Bush, Cheney, Libby and Rove.

The persons that leaked her name, exposed her, blowing her covert cover include;

• Dick Cheney
• Scooter Libby
• Karl Rove
• Ari Fleischer
• Ricard Armitage
• Robert Novak
• Matthew Cooper
• Judy Miller
  

Wake the fuck up there The Decider/The Commander/The Shakespeare Guy.

You'll be getting us thinking. Talk like this will have us adding, derisively, "Sherlock Holmes Guy" to you and your self-produced moniker list.

Bonus Links

Glenn Greenwald - Excerpt from Chapter 4 of A Tragic Legacy: How a Good vs. Evil Mentality Destroyed the Bush Presidency

Garlictorial: Happy 4th of July ... Okay, It May Be Down To This .... Citizen's Arrest!

Bonus Links II

Crooks and Liars - Bush blames Saddam for the US attack of Iraq and says: “there is a war fatigue in America”




















Cross Posted at The Garlic

"In that moment, Mr. Bush, you ceased to be the President of the United States"

By Michael J.W. Stickings

On this Fourth of July, I can think of nothing better to post than these words from Keith Olbermann. They are truly awesome:

We enveloped our President in 2001.And those who did not believe he should have been elected—indeed those who did not believe he had been elected—willingly lowered their voices and assented to the sacred oath of non-partisanship.

And George W. Bush took our assent, and re-configured it, and honed it, and shaped it to a razor-sharp point and stabbed this nation in the back with it.

Were there any remaining lingering doubt otherwise, or any remaining lingering hope, it ended yesterday when Mr. Bush commuted the prison sentence of one of his own staffers.

Did so even before the appeals process was complete; did so without as much as a courtesy consultation with the Department of Justice; did so despite what James Madison—at the Constitutional Convention—said about impeaching any president who pardoned or sheltered those who had committed crimes “advised by” that president; did so without the slightest concern that even the most detached of citizens must look at the chain of events and wonder: To what degree was Mr. Libby told: break the law however you wish—the President will keep you out of prison?

In that moment, Mr. Bush, you broke that fundamental com-pact between yourself and the majority of this nation’s citizens—the ones who did not cast votes for you. In that moment, Mr. Bush, you ceased to be the President of the United States. In that moment, Mr. Bush, you became merely the President of a rabid and irresponsible corner of the Republican Party. And this is too important a time, Sir, to have a commander-in-chief who puts party over nation.

*****

It is nearly July 4th, Mr. Bush, the commemoration of the moment we Americans decided that rather than live under a King who made up the laws, or erased them, or ignored them—or commuted the sentences of those rightly convicted under them—we would force our independence, and regain our sacred freedoms.

We of this time—and our leaders in Congress, of both parties—must now live up to those standards which echo through our history: Pressure, negotiate, impeach—get you, Mr. Bush, and Mr. Cheney, two men who are now perilous to our Democracy, away from its helm.

For you, Mr. Bush, and for Mr. Cheney, there is a lesser task. You need merely achieve a very low threshold indeed. Display just that iota of patriotism which Richard Nixon showed, on August 9th, 1974.

Resign.

And give us someone—anyone—about whom all of us might yet be able to quote John Wayne, and say, “I didn’t vote for him, but he’s my president, and I hope he does a good job.

Please read the whole thing. And please watch the video, which you can find at MSNBC (link above), or at Crooks and Liars, or at Think Progress.

It is immensely powerful. And he is absolutely right.

Dubya commutes Scooter's sentence

By Edward Copeland

I guess the latest appeals court ruling saying that Scooter should stay in jail while he appeals was too much for the Idiot-in-Chief and he's commuted his sentence, but didn't pardon him. The alert just moving from AP says:

WASHINGTON -- President Bush spared former White House aide I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby from a 2 1/2-year prison term on Monday, issuing an order that commutes his sentence.

Bush left intact a $250,000 fine and two years probation for Libby, according to a senior White House official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because the decision had not been announced.

Bush's move came hours after a federal appeals panel ruled Libby could not delay his prison term in the CIA leak case. That decision put the pressure on the president, who had been sidestepping calls by Libby's allies to pardon the former chief of staff to Vice President Dick Cheney.

**********

Update: Everyone who's pissed off, put up your hand. (For more, see CNN and ABC, as well as Firedoglake.)

From Bush's statement: "I respect the jury’s verdict. But I have concluded that the prison sentence given to Mr. Libby is excessive." I realize that the president has the power to do this, but how is this respecting the justice system?

-- MJWS