Scooter Libby: Is the Pardon out of Bond, Smiley or Stalin?

While the world is looking at America, France and UK and their military moves on Syria, President Trump has pardoned Lewis “Scooter” Libby. Who is this man? In politics memories are short but he was Dick Cheney’s Chief of Staff, a man who fell on his sword for his boss. Libby was convicted of four felonies including obstruction of justice and perjury. In 2007, he was sentenced to 30 months in prison and fined $250,000.

Last week, The Washington Post predicted the pardon would happen. I am trying to understand why. To start, you need to understand the facts of the case but be warned that it’s as tortuous as Reagan’s Iran/Contra affair, when the Israelis acted as brokers to sell US arms to Iran in exchange for release of hostages and dollars, with the latter transferred to the Contras in direct contravention of an Act of Congress.

So, to Mr. Libby. In 2002, Valerie Plame, a covert CIA officer, sent a memo to her superiors in which she queried the wisdom of engaging her husband, former diplomat Joseph C. Wilson, as a CIA operative for a mission to Niger. However, the US government wanted to him to use his contacts and confirm claims that Iraq had purchased and imported uranium from Niger. President Bush had alleged that Saddam Hussein was seeking significant quantities of uranium from Africa, prior to the 2003 invasion of Iraq, and that Iraq held weapons of mass destruction. (WMD.) Wilson travelled to Niger and subsequently published an op-ed piece in The New York Times, querying that any such transaction with Iraq had taken place and that it was unlikely that Iraq was storing WMD, thus undermining the President and the administration.

A week after Wilson's op-ed was published, Robert Novak published a column in The Post which mentioned claims from ‘two senior administration officials’ that Valerie Plame had suggested sending her husband to carry out the mission. Subsequently, Novak confirmed he had learned of Plame's employment, which was classified information, from State Department official Richard Armitage. It was suggested that Armitage and another official had leaked the information as political retribution for Wilson's article. The other official was Karl Rove but he was not prosecuted for the leak.

The outing of a CIA operative is extremely serious. It put the lives of Plame’s colleagues stationed abroad as well as their informants in peril. The scandal led to a criminal investigation; no one was ever charged for the leak itself. However, Scooter Libby was convicted of lying to investigators. His prison sentence was ultimately commuted by President Bush but his fine remained.

In the closing arguments of Libby's trial, defense lawyer Ted Wells told the jury "The government in its questioning really tried to put a cloud over Vice President Cheney...And the clear suggestion by the questions were, well, maybe there was some kind of skullduggery, some kind of scheme between Libby and the Vice President going on in private, but that's unfair." Prosecution lawyer, Patrick Fitzgerald, responded to this assertion by telling the jury, "You know what? We'll talk straight.

There is a cloud over the Vice President. He sent Libby off to meet with New York Times reporter, Judith Miller. At that meeting, the defendant talked about Joe Wilson’s wife. We didn't put that cloud there. That cloud remains because the defendant obstructed justice and lied about what happened.” The clear implication was that Cheney knew everything and used Libby as a shield. Interestingly, Cheney lobbied Bush aggressively for a pardon for Libby, and Bush’s original refusal was said to have caused a strain in the relationship between the two men. To the former Vice President and others in his orbit, Libby’s conviction was the product of an overzealous special prosecutor and a liberal Washington jury. Well they would say that, wouldn’t they?

I need to ask why President Trump has granted the pardon. Does he want to deliver a message that it’s acceptable to lie to a grand jury to protect political superiors because you will get a full pardon? In the light of the avalanche falling on him with Mueller, Stormy Daniels and the like, is he preparing grounds to pardon himself?

What Mr. Trump said was: “I don’t know Mr. Libby,” Trump said in a statement, “but for years I have heard that he has been treated unfairly. Hopefully, this full pardon will help rectify a very sad portion of his life.” But he was convicted of four felonies including obstruction of justice and perjury. How was he treated unfairly? He had the best legal representation. The outing of Valerie Plame was unconscionable and done out of spite.

Where are the ethics? Where is justice? Is this pardon not the action of a dictator? The President has signaled before that he has power and inclination to reward those who stay loyal. Last year, he pardoned Joe Arpaio, the ex-sheriff of Arizona, who had been convicted of criminal contempt of court for defying an order of a federal judge to stop racial profiling of Latinos. The pardon had a rare and unusual aspect. It was delivered before Arpaio’s sentencing.

There is a connection here to James Comey, the former FBI director fired by Trump. Attorney General John Ashcroft recused himself from the Plame affair. Ashcroft’s deputy was James Comey who appointed Patrick Fitzgerald as special counsel. It was Fitzgerald who had Libby convicted. Comey has just published his own book which is highly critical of the President, who, Comey said in an interview, is morally unfit to be President. So not much love lost there.

There are millions of Americans languishing in jail, convicted for non-violent crimes. Some will have had unfair trials. They are likely to be poor and black or Latino. Surely you might consider pardons for them too. But, unlike most of your predecessors, you granted no pardons last Christmas. Where are you on this, Mr. Trump?