home

Libby's Judge is a Tough Sentencer

By Jeralyn, Section Lewis Libby Indictment
Posted on Thu Nov 03, 2005 at 08:18:00 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

The New York Times profiles Judge Reggie Walton who will preside over the Lewis Libby trial and quotes a fellow judge on the D.C. district court as saying he's a tough sentencer:

Judge Walton, a former prosecutor who handled many cases involving drugs and street crimes early in his career, is known for handing down tough sentences.

"You're always going to get a fair trial with him," Judge Lamberth said, "but if you're convicted, he's going to ensure you do adequate time to reflect the crime."

< DeLay Filing: Fox News Paid Travel Expenses | Singapore's Retiring Hangman and His Next Victim >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Libby's Judge is a Tough Sentencer | 20 comments (20 topical)
    Re: Libby's Judge is a Tough Sentencer (none / 0) (#17)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:35 PM EST
    Dear JP, This appears to be an investigation in progress rather than a settled matter. So you ideas are simply . . . ideas. With that mind, let us recall that Fiztgerald made a lengthy baseball analogy about Libby's performance which prevented Fitzgerald from determining a number of questions of interest. In short . . .he LIED. Why did he lie MIGHT we all ask? Your psuedo-intellectual posturings and aggressives posts aside, Libby faces some serious counts with fairly detailed evidence and Rove may remain in jeopardy. You are more concerned with pursuing some phony agenda rather than giving a hoot about this place we call home. Thanks so much for listening.

    Re: Libby's Judge is a Tough Sentencer (none / 0) (#18)
    by squeaky on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:37 PM EST
    JP-Waste of time? 490 words of no content is a waste of space. All I asked were two simple questions. Have you read the indictment? Have you read the press release? Still no answer. Your implied answer shows that if you did do your reading not much registered.
    This is the last time I will respond to you
    Is that a promise?

    Re: Libby's Judge is a Tough Sentencer (none / 0) (#19)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:38 PM EST
    Just a small correction...Royce Lamberth, the judge cited in your story, is a U.S. District Court judge in the District of Columbia, not a judge on the D.C. Circuit.

    Re: Libby's Judge is a Tough Sentencer (none / 0) (#20)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:38 PM EST
    Thanks, I'll fix that.

    Re: Libby's Judge is a Tough Sentencer (none / 0) (#1)
    by Peter G on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:44 PM EST
    I wonder what his properly-computed federal sentencing guidelines would come out to, if Libby were convicted of everything charged in the indictment?

    Re: Libby's Judge is a Tough Sentencer (none / 0) (#2)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:44 PM EST
    Peter, why don't you calculate them for us?

    Re: Libby's Judge is a Tough Sentencer (none / 0) (#3)
    by cpinva on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:45 PM EST
    how do you properly punish someone who, for perceived political gain, put the nation's security at risk? in the bad old days, he would have been hanged as a spy. fortunately, for all of us, i don't believe venality is a capital crime. were that the case, that 73 year-old grandfather in singapore might have more work than he could possibly handle

    Re: Libby's Judge is a Tough Sentencer (none / 0) (#4)
    by jen on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:45 PM EST
    Why doesn't he just go Judge Shopping like DeLay??

    Re: Libby's Judge is a Tough Sentencer (none / 0) (#5)
    by desertswine on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:45 PM EST
    I don't see why Irving doesn't get the same treatment Jose Padilla's getting. Put him away for a few years without charging him just to let him think about it.

    Re: Libby's Judge is a Tough Sentencer (none / 0) (#6)
    by squeaky on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:45 PM EST
    dw-Ah, the subtle difference between Freedom Fighter and Enemy Combatant. Yes, they look the same to me too. The only real difference is in how they are treated.

    Re: Libby's Judge is a Tough Sentencer (none / 0) (#7)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:45 PM EST
    CP, Could you please provide an explanation for how Libby put the nation's security at risk? This is an interesting comment, but it lacks any clarification of how this new endangerment of the nation panned out.

    Re: Libby's Judge is a Tough Sentencer (none / 0) (#8)
    by squeaky on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:45 PM EST
    jp-Rhetorical ignorance=fake bliss. I guess you do not read the posts by Jeralyn et al at TL or any other source other that FOX. If that is a sincere question, which obviously is can not be, try reading Fitzgerald's Indictment and Press conference for starters.

    Re: Libby's Judge is a Tough Sentencer (none / 0) (#9)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:45 PM EST
    Wow, I didn't know that CP needed a blocker to deflect simple questions. So is it your belief, CP, as implied by Squeaky, that by lying about his conversations with reporters Libby endangered the entire country? That is, after all, what Libby has been indicted for, lying to a grand jury. It's nice to see that the left suddenly takes perjury before a grand jury to be an act of treason, but I do wish you would all make up your minds on this one. But if, CP, by chance, Squeaky does not speak for you, and if, by chance, you had a different thing in mind when you said this, please feel free to explain. Unlike Squeaky, I have an honestly open mind, and I am curious about what you believe it is that Libby did that endangered the security of this country.

    Re: Libby's Judge is a Tough Sentencer (none / 0) (#10)
    by squeaky on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:45 PM EST
    Funny that your open mind is closed to reading the actual indictment and press conference. Your dishonesty is apparent here or you have to get a new pair or reading glasses. Or is it that you need cliff notes from cpinva.
    Unlike Squeaky, I have an honestly open mind, and I am curious about what you believe it is that Libby did that endangered the security of this country.
    Re: Libby's Judge is a Tough Sentencer (none / 0) (#11)
    by swingvote on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:45 PM EST
    Squeaky, Sure, I can read the report and I can read a transcript of the press conference, but how does that in any way tell me what CP meant? Have you been briefed by CP on exactly what was meant by that comment, or are you simply assuming that you know what was meant and using your assumption as another excuse to spout off and hurl insults? Have you read the indictment, Squeaky? If so, you should be able to quote easily the section of it detailing Libby's treasonous behavior. If so, you still will not have confirmed that this is what CP was referring to, but at least you can fill your time with something a little more productive. Otherwise, why not just let CP speak for CP? He or she is far better able to do that than you are anyway.

    Re: Libby's Judge is a Tough Sentencer (none / 0) (#12)
    by swingvote on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:45 PM EST
    Squeaky, While we wait for CP to respond, assuming any response is coming, let's take a look at that indictment you're so proud of claiming to have read. In contains five criminal charges against Libby. They are: Count 1: Obstruction of Justice Count 2: False Statement Count 3: False Statement Count 4: Perjury Count 5: Perjury I don't see anything about treason in there, or about endangering the security of this country. Do you have some variant version of the indictment you are reading from; or are you in fact simply reading from the liberal hymnal on this case, claiming the ideas of others as your own and/or pawning them off as CP's? If Libby is guilty of outing Valerie Plame, an alleged crime for which he has not even been indicted, it was a stupid thing to do and I have no problem with seeing him punished for it. If he is found guilty of the charges which actually have been leveled by the grand jury, I also have no problem with seeing him punished. But I do question which of the actions he is accused of constitutes treason in CP's mind (we'll ignore what it constitutes in your mind gievn that you show few signs of having one of your own). If it obstruction of justice that constitutes treason? If so, is this true in all cases, or is there a subset of such cases (perhaps those involving Republicans) for which this constitutes treason? Is it making false statements that constitutes treason, or perjury, or both (and what exactly is the difference?). Or is it a combination of all three that equates to treason? Chances are CP has a better answer than you do, but minus that, we'll just have to wonder.

    Re: Libby's Judge is a Tough Sentencer (none / 0) (#13)
    by squeaky on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:45 PM EST
    JP-Have you read the indictment and press conference? I have and your answer is there. It is clear that your dodge is now propelled by what cpinva thinks not what Fitzgerald thinks. Nice way to avoid the issue.

    Re: Libby's Judge is a Tough Sentencer (none / 0) (#14)
    by swingvote on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:45 PM EST
    Squeaky, Is there a name for this private little world you live in? I specifically asked CP what he/she meant. You presumed to jump in with your own answer, which you claim to be Fitzgerald's even though you can't find a single count for treason or "endangering the security of this nation" in the indictment. (Feel free to try, but that will require actually reading it first.) Now you claim that my question to CP is somehow a "dodge". The ill-logic of that statement is astounding. I asked CP to clarify his or her own comment with regard to the issue of treason and that is somehow a "dodge". A "dodge" from what? From not asking CP to clarify that statement? I'd say your mind works in mysterious ways, but then, as I've already made clear, I have my doubts as to how much of a mind of your own you have, so I'll just have to say that whoever is feeding you your new "talking points" needs to revisit the basics of rhetoric and logic. So which count against Libby is it that you believe Fitzgerald considers an act of treason? Or are you suggesting that Fitzgerald believes that Libby has committed treason but has chosen not to indict him for it? If so, Fitzmas day must have been an even bigger disappointment for you than for the majority of those here. If anyone is doding here, Squeaky, it's you. You barged into a polite conversation before it even got going, threw out some more of the standard liberal boilerplate about this case without even bothering to engage your brain stem, and now you try to change the subject to what you believe that Fitzgerald believes, with no cited evidence to support you and a clear indictment that does not include treason. This kind of stuff may go over well at MoveOn.org or whatever other extremist liberal haunts you usually hang out in, but you're batting zero as far as TalkLeft is concerned. If you weren't such a good liberal lapdog, Scar would have come along by now to accuse you of trying to "hijack the thread".

    Re: Libby's Judge is a Tough Sentencer (none / 0) (#15)
    by squeaky on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:45 PM EST
    JP-private world? Yes you are the un-artful dodger. With your 358 word nonsense comment you still refuse to answer my question. Have you read the indictment? Have you read the transcript of the press conference? or are you just looking for cpinva's cliff notes? The fact that you believe that I am batting zero is a major compliment from the likes of you.

    Re: Libby's Judge is a Tough Sentencer (none / 0) (#16)
    by swingvote on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:45 PM EST
    Squeaky, This is the last time I will respond to you unless you actually say something for once in your life. To date you have been nothing but a waste of time. I'm amazed that you can actually count the words in a post but fail to read any of them. That takes true dedication to remaining willfully ignorant. You go girl! I listed the five counts of the indictment Squeak. Where do you think I got them from if not from the indictment? Did CP list them in what you refer to as the "Cliff Notes"? Nope! If that had been the case, I might not have had to ask the question I did. Now, have YOU read the indictment Squeak? I don't believe you have. I believe you have read some liberal blogger's write up on the introduction to the indictment, which is merely a fine bit of padding to make the several million dollars spent so far seem worthwhile. It doesn't matter how many times Fitzgerald speaks of harm to the nation in the introduction if all he accuses someone of actually doing is lying to the grand jury. I could preface a perjury indictment with the entirety of War and Peace but it would not mean the actual charges had anything to do with that book. Libby has been charged with Obstruction of Justice, Making False Statements, and Perjury; he has NOT been charged with Treason. He has also NOT been charged with outing Valerie Plame. No matter how many times you repeat that to yourself, it is not true. Ariana has lied to you yet again. Get over it. You ask if I've read the indictment yet you fail to notice that I have quoted the counts from it. The only logical conclusion is that it is you who has not read the indictment, since you don't know what it says, and since you have yet to cite even one word from it, that logic is pretty hard to refute. Face it Squeak, you have been caught out once again having no idea what you are talking about, and it is more than clear that all you ever do is come here to attack people. You don't read other people's comments, you simply look at the names of those who posted them and assume you know what they said, and the fact that you so often get it completely wrong is all the evidence anyone needs to know that this is true. Even now you are simply waiting to see another comment with my name so you can post the next piece of canned garbage you got from Michael Moore or Ralph Neas, and the really sad thing is that you probably don't understand any of their comments either; you simply regurgitate on demand. Your lies have caught up with Squeak. Enjoy the rest of your day. I'll wait for CP, should they ever return.

    Libby's Judge is a Tough Sentencer | 20 comments (20 topical)