Vicious Rants of an Angry Yellow Man

Last week Scooter Libby was convicted of obstruction of justice. I have been trying to read about this case and even though it is more clear now than a few months ago when I wrote about this, I am still confused about some issues. Ultimately, it appears that nobody is being prosecuted for committing the crime of exposing a CIA agent but that one person is guilty of a coverup. It seems to me that we always have trouble convicting people of "real crimes". In the end we justify the expenses of the prosecution by pinning something minor in comparison on somebody.

A few months ago I wondered why Robert Novak was not in jail since he is the one that put Valerie Plame's name in print and thus outing her. Why did we jail Judith Miller when she was not the one who revealed Plame? After this conviction I still wonder about this. Novak apparently told the prosecutor that it was Richard Armitage, deputy sec. of state, who told him about Plame. Armitage was not prosecuted because he claimed that he did not know that Plame's identity was classified. Karl Rove might have also talked to Novak about this. Anyways, it seems to me, that government officials should have known that an identity of a CIA agent should NEVER be disclosed. It may be that they were not intentionally trying to destroy her but they are still responsible for what happened. The same with Novak. Just because someone gives you information it doesn't absolve you of responsibility of deciding whether it is appropriate to put it in the paper.

Libby obviously lied. But why? The people he talked to never wrote about Plame before Novak did. So Libby was never responsible for outing Plame. If he did not lie, there was no problem for him. Was he covering for Cheney? It does not look like the prosecution can prove that. So why go through this whole charade? Now the best way for him to stay out of jail is getting a pardon from Bush. Ironically, Libby represented Marc Rich who was pardoned by Clinton. It was a pardon that drew lots of criticism and rightly so. Now Libby may need the same type of controversial pardon by Bush who had strongly criticized Clinton's pardon of Rich.

From Richard Nixon to Bill Clinton to now Libby, didn't anyone learn that it is not the original crime but the coverup that gets you into big trouble? Nixon would have not gotten much trouble if he didn't try to coverup. The Clintons may have done some illegal dealings with Whitewater but the prosecution could not convict and wasted tax payers money in going after the Lewinsy scandal. Clinton could have saved himself a lot of trouble by telling the truth about Lewinsky. Even Al Capone may not have gone to jail if he just paid his taxes. Real justice is usually not done. I don't think it was done here.