Good News for Sirhan Sirhan
Charlie’s last mugshot (PD)
Too bad Charlie Manson died last year. Otherwise, it looks like he’d have a great chance at a Donald Trump pardon. A Friday the Thirteenth special from Trump.
Today, President Donald J. Trump issued an Executive Grant of Clemency (Full Pardon) to I. “Scooter” Lewis Libby, former Chief of Staff to Vice President Richard Cheney, for convictions stemming from a 2007 trial.
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….
* This was disgraced ‘journalist’ Judith Miller, who went from her firing by the New York Times to happily toeing the Faux Nooz company line as a paid GOPagandist. This is, significantly, not noted, along with the little notion that she was merely one of EIGHT witnesses whose testimony convicted Scooter before a unanimous jury of his peers.
But who expects facts from the Trump Beige House?
Also, Sarah Huckabee Sanders called James Comey a “liar,” as did Trump in a tweet.
Both of these comments had the virtue of being … well, consider this: Trump and Huckabee Sanders just called somebody a “liar.” And Trump pardoned a convicted leaker, after inveighing almost daily against leaks.
Worse, he inveighs against WHITE HOUSE leaks, and Scooter Libby was a WHITE HOUSE leaker.
Who seriously harmed our war against unsecured nukes by “outing” a CIA undercover officer tasked with securing those nukes.
The stench of hypocrisy is overwhelming.
Get upwind as fast as your burning nostrils will allow.
And then we can go back to watching the Beige House “drain the swamp” some more.
But this ought to give great comfort to Sirhan Sirhan. His number may be up next.
It wouldn’t be at all inconsistent for this gang.
UPDATE: Patrick Fitzgerald was the Special Counsel who prosecuted Libby. Here is his complete statement:
PATRICK 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.