be very lenient,’ Mr. Giuliani said, when asked to comment on the sentence imposed Wednesday on Justice Francis X. Smith, the former Queens administrative judge” ( New York Times , September 11, 1987).
“A Boston police officer was sentenced late yesterday to 2 years and 10 months in prison after being convicted in federal court for perjury and obstruction of justice during a grand jury investigation of the unlawful beating of a fellow plain clothes police officer” ( Business Wire , September 30, 1998).
“Still insisting that he never took a payoff or tried to hide evidence, former East St. Louis Police Chief Ronald Matthews began serving 33 months in prison Monday after a judge sentenced him for obstruction of justice and perjury” ( St. Louis Dispatch , March 21, 2006).
“Prison sentence for perjury in a bankruptcy case: A federal judge today sentenced Douglas W. Cox, 44, to ten months in prison. In April, Cox admitted that, during a bankruptcy deposition, he testified falsely about the ownership of five vending machines” (U.S. Department of Justice Press Release, November 2006).
Clearly, Klein and other media defenders of Libby have it exactly backward: it is not uncommon for people to be punished for obstruction of justice and perjury. What is uncommon is for anyone to pay attention when it happens, let alone object on their behalf, because they typically are not people with powerful connections.
Klein’s indignation over Libby’s unfair treatment was echoed by many in the establishment media. The former Time editor in chief Norman Pearlstine wrote a book denouncing Fitzgerald’s investigation, while the New York Times columnist David Brooks condemned the prosecution in multiple venues as a “farce.”
But perhaps the most revealing pro-Libby defense came from the Washington Post ’s Richard Cohen, who—as we just saw—had gleefully celebrated the pardon bequeathed to his “Safeway buddy” Caspar Weinberger. Cohen’s June 2007 defense of Libby was a true tour de force of apologia, highlighting the function of our Beltway media stars when it comes to elite immunity. Grieving over what he considered the grave and tragic injustice brought down upon the newly convicted felon, Cohen unleashed a paragraph that perfectly captures how many establishment journalists view their role vis-à-vis top political leaders.
With the sentencing of I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby, Fitzgerald has apparently finished his work, which was, not to put too fine a point on it, to make a mountain out of a molehill. At the urging of the liberal press (especially The New York Times ), he was appointed to look into a run-of-the-mill leak and wound up prosecuting not the leaker—Richard Armitage of the State Department—but Libby, convicted in the end of lying. This is not an entirely trivial matter since government officials should not lie to grand juries, but neither should they be called to account for practicing the dark art of politics. As with sex or real estate, it is often best to keep the lights off.
Just as Klein did, Cohen managed to pack multiple falsehoods into his Libby defense. He told his readers, for instance, that a special prosecutor was appointed to investigate the Plame leak “at the urging of the liberal press,” and later on in the column he pinned the blame for Libby’s terrible plight on “antiwar sanctimony,” “an unpopular war,” “opponents of the Iraq war,” and “a vestigial Stalinist-era yearning for abasement.” Somehow, Cohen attributed Libby’s prosecution to left-wing culprits even though the investigation began when a complaint was filed by the CIA, proceeded when the Bush DOJ appointed a GOP prosecutor, and then ended when a Bush 43–appointed federal judge sentenced Libby to prison.
Cohen went on to chastise Fitzgerald for having been unfairly harsh in his investigation, especially for terrifying the famous journalists whom he subpoenaed to testify. Cohen protested:
“A Boston police officer was sentenced late yesterday to 2 years and 10 months in prison after being convicted in federal court for perjury and obstruction of justice during a grand jury investigation of the unlawful beating of a fellow plain clothes police officer” ( Business Wire , September 30, 1998).
“Still insisting that he never took a payoff or tried to hide evidence, former East St. Louis Police Chief Ronald Matthews began serving 33 months in prison Monday after a judge sentenced him for obstruction of justice and perjury” ( St. Louis Dispatch , March 21, 2006).
“Prison sentence for perjury in a bankruptcy case: A federal judge today sentenced Douglas W. Cox, 44, to ten months in prison. In April, Cox admitted that, during a bankruptcy deposition, he testified falsely about the ownership of five vending machines” (U.S. Department of Justice Press Release, November 2006).
Clearly, Klein and other media defenders of Libby have it exactly backward: it is not uncommon for people to be punished for obstruction of justice and perjury. What is uncommon is for anyone to pay attention when it happens, let alone object on their behalf, because they typically are not people with powerful connections.
Klein’s indignation over Libby’s unfair treatment was echoed by many in the establishment media. The former Time editor in chief Norman Pearlstine wrote a book denouncing Fitzgerald’s investigation, while the New York Times columnist David Brooks condemned the prosecution in multiple venues as a “farce.”
But perhaps the most revealing pro-Libby defense came from the Washington Post ’s Richard Cohen, who—as we just saw—had gleefully celebrated the pardon bequeathed to his “Safeway buddy” Caspar Weinberger. Cohen’s June 2007 defense of Libby was a true tour de force of apologia, highlighting the function of our Beltway media stars when it comes to elite immunity. Grieving over what he considered the grave and tragic injustice brought down upon the newly convicted felon, Cohen unleashed a paragraph that perfectly captures how many establishment journalists view their role vis-à-vis top political leaders.
With the sentencing of I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby, Fitzgerald has apparently finished his work, which was, not to put too fine a point on it, to make a mountain out of a molehill. At the urging of the liberal press (especially The New York Times ), he was appointed to look into a run-of-the-mill leak and wound up prosecuting not the leaker—Richard Armitage of the State Department—but Libby, convicted in the end of lying. This is not an entirely trivial matter since government officials should not lie to grand juries, but neither should they be called to account for practicing the dark art of politics. As with sex or real estate, it is often best to keep the lights off.
Just as Klein did, Cohen managed to pack multiple falsehoods into his Libby defense. He told his readers, for instance, that a special prosecutor was appointed to investigate the Plame leak “at the urging of the liberal press,” and later on in the column he pinned the blame for Libby’s terrible plight on “antiwar sanctimony,” “an unpopular war,” “opponents of the Iraq war,” and “a vestigial Stalinist-era yearning for abasement.” Somehow, Cohen attributed Libby’s prosecution to left-wing culprits even though the investigation began when a complaint was filed by the CIA, proceeded when the Bush DOJ appointed a GOP prosecutor, and then ended when a Bush 43–appointed federal judge sentenced Libby to prison.
Cohen went on to chastise Fitzgerald for having been unfairly harsh in his investigation, especially for terrifying the famous journalists whom he subpoenaed to testify. Cohen protested:
Similar Books
