I think it’s difficult sometimes to be an average person in this country; knowing what’s true and what’s not not only requires a brain, but a willingness to be open-minded, to search a variety of sources ranging across the political spectrum, and in different media (Sometimes the truth isn’t on the left, or the right, but by combining the two. While I have a progressive perspective, it does pay to be open-minded until enough facts are in. Even when the facts are in, knowing what the opposing viewpoint is either strengthens and clarifies my stance, or modifies it). Still, I think it’s a civic responsibility each and every one of us needs to shoulder: being informed about what is happening in our country isn’t always easy, and sometimes it requires research.

Of course, it doesn’t help that our Corporate Media has been rather lazy for some time, and aren’t willing to face their own responsibilities. Yet you’ll often find nuggets in the most insipid or uncritical of articles, op-ed pieces, and the like.

Over the past week or two, I’ve started to feel like some long-overlooked, long-hidden, or long-unacknowledged truths have come to light. What people will do with this information is something else, though.

Let’s look at Exhibit A. A number of people, including myself, suspected or knew the major rationale behind the war in Iraq was a naked power grab for Iraq’s natural resources, especially oil. The rush to defend the Ministry of Oil, while allowing looters to ravage the museums, archaeological treasures, and other important aspects of Iraq was an eye-opener back in 2003. The no-bid contracts awarded to Halliburton raised many eyebrows as well. But just last week, one of our “partners” in Iraq admitted what most of us have known or suspected for some time now– as this lead sentence from an article in The Sydney Morning Herald states:

The government has admitted the need to secure oil supplies is a factor in Australia’s continued military involvement in Iraq.

The piece continues by saying that the need for a stable Iraq, friendship with the U.S. and the UK, etc., etc. were equally important. But I think the average reader (as well as the reporter) recognizes the key truth there. It’s a war primarily about oil. It’s four years and tens of thousands of lives too late, but at least the truth is finally being admitted out in the open, where it should be.

Let’s move on to another truth. It’s been obvious now for some time, but Smirk had the audacity earlier this week to publicly state that he doesn’t really give a shit about what happens in Iraq, because he’s going to drag out this civil war (and it is a civil war, believe me; when one of the most well-known mosques in the country is bombed not once, but twice, you know the Shi’ites and Sunnis aren’t about to sit down and break bread together) until it’s dropped into somebody else’s lap. He’s made up his mind:

Last December, when Bush rebuffed a bipartisan exit strategy presented by the Iraq Study Group, he said he would leave the decision to withdraw from Iraq to his successor.

That question is “not going to face this government,” Bush said, chuckling slightly at a news conference with former British Prime Minister Tony Blair, “because we made up our mind. We’ve made that part clear. It’ll face future governments. There will be future opportunities for people to say, ‘Well, it’s not worth it. Let’s just retreat.’ “

So he doesn’t care what the people he governs think. He doesn’t care what the Congressional representatives think. He doesn’t care what the military thinks. He doesn’t care what the soldiers on the front lines think. We also all know he certainly doesn’t care what the rest of the world thinks. He’s made up his mind. A truth that I think we should all keep in mind. A truth I think we should remind our legislators about. I think he certainly was telling the truth about not paying attention to polls, because if he was, the fact that over 60% in a poll nearly a year ago opposed the war, a number that hasn’t changed a lot as of last week, would matter a lot to him. It apparently doesn’t.

Smirk’s impunity certainly is fostering a lot of truth-telling on his part, even though he’s still lying or covering up about a lot of things. Let’s look at a third example of the truth coming to light. Just yesterday, at a press conference (or “presser,” as they say), Smirk finally admitted something quite a few of us knew he knew all this time: that there was a leak from the White House about Valerie Plame. Here’s what our Child Commander-In-Chief had to say on the subject:

“I’m aware of the fact that perhaps somebody in the administration did disclose the name of that person,” Bush said.

Perhaps? I don’t suppose the names Armitage, Libby, and Fleischer mean anything to you? Perhaps Cheney and Rove?

But regardless of his past pronouncements on the issue, Smirk is all for leaving this mess in the past.

“It has been a tough issue for a lot of people in the White House, and it’s run its course, and now we’re going to move on,” Bush said.

No, I don’t think it’s “run its course.” A lot of people don’t think it’s “run its course.” There’s a lot of questions still left unresolved, even if you’ve finally admitted the truth- that you knew there was a leak- and for a start, you can perhaps read Dan Froomkin’s take (WaPo, registration req’d), or Joe Conason’s thoughts. As Froomkin notes, Mr. Smirk, you stated that you’d talk about this once the investigation’s over. Well, a quick, “Yeah, we knew. Now let’s drop it” doesn’t do it for me. I, for one, would certainly like to know just how you decided to contradict your own government’s stance on sentencing guidelines and decided to let Fibby skate. 30 months commuted to 0 is a pre-emption, not a commutation. I’d love to know when YOU learned about all of this, and what role, if any, you had in this. I certainly would like to know what Scowl/Shooter did, and it appears he’s in this up to his neck. I certainly would like to know why this despicable act, an act of treason, hasn’t been appropriately punished. As you said back in 2003:

“I don’t know of anyone in my administration who has leaked,” Mr. Bush told reporters in Chicago. But, he added, “If somebody did leak classified information, I’d like to know it, and we’ll take the appropriate action. And this investigation is a good thing.”

Handing out a “get out of jail free” card to Fibby isn’t “appropriate action.” You essentially declared with your “commutation” that lying and obstruction of justice are appropriate actions. I’d certainly love to know if parents across the country agree that it’s ok for people to lie and cover up; a great lesson in ethics and values to teach the next generation.

The truth has been there all along; perhaps hidden, perhaps obfuscated. But in the end, “…truth will come to light… at the length truth will out.” [1]

What we do with the truth, what our leaders do with these truths, will say a lot about us as individuals and as a nation.

I am still extremely incensed. I spent today calling, e-mailing and otherwise contacting folks, from fellow travelers to the high and mighty. There are plenty of other reasons I’m totally disgusted with this administration, but like many others, I suspect this “commutation” is the proverbial straw that broke the camel’s back. Many of us who have long been simmering under the surface no longer can sit around and suffer through this administration. I, and others, are openly urging impeachment.

Smirk’s action was so blatantly self-serving it’s very difficult for anyone to really defend it properly. Aside from the compliant, mealy-mouthed Corporate Media and the loyal stalwarts of the Greedy Oppressive Pomposities (aka the G.O.P.) , I haven’t seen too many people rushing to lay out a coherent case for why Irving L. Libby should be pardoned. Throw in the fact that this “president” has one of the stingiest records in modern history regarding pardons and commutations (113 pardons, and only FOUR commutations to date), and it’s all the more curious. Again, Libby was convicted of obstruction of justice and convicted of perjury. In this article from Yahoo! News, you can see that

Federal court records indicate that 382 people were convicted for obstruction of justice over the past two years. Three of four were sent to prison. The average prison term was 64 months, more than five years. The largest group of defendants drew prison terms ranging from 13 months to 31 months.

What also bugs me is that Bush blathered about not getting involved in Libby’s case ” until Mr. Libby’s appeals have been exhausted.” Libby still had the Supreme Court, I believe, to appeal to regarding bail being granted while working through the appeals process, let alone a commutation or pardon. According to the Department of Justice’s Office of the Pardon Attorney in Section 1-2.112 in the Standards for Consideration of Clemency Petitions, “The Department’s regulations require a petitioner to wait a period of at least five years after conviction or release from confinement (whichever is later) before filing a pardon application (28 C.F.R. § 1.2).” Someone’s definitely jumped the gun here.

It’s not as if Libby is a complete innocent when it comes to the pardon/commutation process either. Remember, he’s a lawyer– and it’s interesting to note than in his pre-Shooter career, Libby served as attorney for Marc Rich, the fugitive financier pardoned by Clinton. While he wasn’t the attorney of record when Clinton pardoned Rich, Libby worked for Rich until 2000, and thus most likely helped craft the pleadings for a pardon, the rationales, etc.

If there’s anyone left who doesn’t understand the connections and the tangled web of deceit in this whole sorry state of affairs, go here and see Professor Juan Cole’s rather simple formulation of the connections. It’s even illustrated, and will only take you a few minutes to read. For a detailed account of the Libby trial and excellent analysis of all the different aspects of the Plame Case, the trumped-up intelligence, the lies about Iraq, and much, much more, go to firedoglake. These guys are outstanding bloggers; while they’re unabashedly partisan (who isn’t these days?), a number of their regular bloggers/contributors are lawyers, and thus can more easily parse and break down the technicalities, the intricacies, and most of all the legalese. Even for someone versed in legalese, some of the language can be mind-numbing. These folks will simplify and boil entire briefings down to succinct paragraphs for you. In case you don’t have the time or energy to wade through it all (and it is a lot), here’s a particularly pertinent blog post: Why the Trail of Plame Leads to (or Through) Scooter Libby.

Quite a few news editorials are condemning the commutation, but one of the better editorials is this one, from the Vail Daily News. My favorite part is this:

Pardons and the commutation of sentences — which cannot be challenged by Congress or the courts — should not serve as free passes for the presidents’ buddies to break the law. They should be granted only when they are good for the country.

There’s been too many free passes for too many people in this administration thus far. It’s time all of us stood up and said, “No more!” The only obvious reason for a commutation is to spare a convicted criminal from having to go to prison, and still preserve his Fifth Amendment rights. Anyone care to guess who benefits from Libby keeping his mouth shut? It’s not just obstruction of justice that’s been committed here, it’s also obstruction of rationale: this administration is deliberately keeping this country from knowing the truth about how they lured the nation into the debacle known as Iraq.

Gonzales needs to go. Cheney needs to go. Bush needs to go. No more.

One of the foundations of our society is that we are a nation of laws. However, as I’ve stated elsewhere, this is the ideal; the reality is there has always been at minimum a two-tier system in this country. This painful reality has never been more true than today.

Smirk has decided that the serious felony of perjury doesn’t matter. He has decided that a prosecutor, judge, and jury don’t know what they are doing, and that he knows best. He has decided that going to prison is “harsh punishment.” If that’s so, let’s empty our prisons. There’s more than 2 million currently incarcerated in federal and state prisons. We certainly would save a lot of money by doing so. We can just convict and fine everyone. Today, the “President” commuted the sentence of Irving L. Libby. Libby was convicted of perjury, and sentenced to 30 months in prison; a sentence in the mid-range of sentencing guidelines. Apparently, it’s okay to lie nowadays; you just need to know the right people.

I don’t feel that the commutation will necessarily “punish” Libby. He’s well-off, and in any event, his defense fund will most likely help to cover the cost of the fine. Just like Wolfowitz, he’ll probably end up at some cushy job somewhere, so even if he were disbarred, it wouldn’t mean a whole lot. So there’s no real punishment. Hey, even Paris Hilton went to jail. Libby doesn’t have to. While I think DUI is a serious crime, so is perjury.

It isn’t just Libby. Lately, we’ve had Scowl/Shooter claim that he’s essentially a fourth branch of government, which is contrary to what just about every American learned in high school civics (except, apparently, for Cheney and his buddies). [In case you missed all that, you can read about it here and here. There's also a pretty good WaPo series on the head of the CIA the Vice-President (registration req'd)] We’ve had very little oversight in general; the committees in the House and the Senate are just barely scratching the surface, and this administration is determined to run out the clock so they can escape scot-free. Ideally, I’d like to see them sent before a judge, so the adults can administer the appropriate punishment. Realistically, I know that’s not all that possible, given the current configuration of the government. Still, I’ve already made the rounds, including banging out the following letter to Madam Speaker:

Dear Speaker Pelosi:

I am livid about the commutation of Irving L. Libby’s sentence by the President. The appeals process had yet to be fully completed, and Libby was convicted of a serious crime: perjury. This is further proof that there are two systems of justice in this country. One for the rich and powerful, and one for everyone else. It is clear the President doesn’t REALLY respect the jury’s verdict. It is also painfully obvious that this administration believes it is above the law. I urge the following three actions.

1) finding equivalent cases of convictions for perjury for the president to commute. If the president truly believes the sentence is “excessive” (and it was in the mid-range of the sentencing guidelines), then he should be willing to commute the sentences of others, not just Libby.

2) increased investigations, hearings, and research into the Plame case and the underlying situation: the so-called “case” for the invasion of Iraq. This administration must be brought before the law for its actions.

3) The option of impeachment to be placed on the table. Why you removed it in the first place, I have no idea. If the actions of this administration aren’t impeachable, then nothing ever is, or will be.

Respectfully,

Mr. S.

If you’re one of my occasional right-wing visitors, you’ll either snicker at this or attempt to defend the actions of this administration. If you’re apathetic about all this, you shouldn’t be. The rule of law is one of the things that distinguishes this country from many others. If you agree with me, contact the scofflaws at 1600 Pennsylvania here. Dash off a note to Pelosi here. If you know who your Congressional representatives are, find their information and contact them first thing in the morning. It’s time to start reminding the executive and legislative branches who they work for.

While I was off taking a break from blogging, there was a major trial going on in DC- I had hoped to stop outside the Prettyman Courthouse in DC last month while I was there, and see if I could spot the principals as they entered or exited the courthouse. Unfortunately, my schedule (and my habits) played havoc with me, and there was no way for me to take a gander at Scooter Libby or Patrick Fitzgerald, or anyone else.

I may yet get my chance to rubberneck in the future, if there are any consequences as a result of this morning’s hearing in DC. A congressional committee is, as I write this, hearing testimony from Valerie Plame, the outed CIA agent whose exposure by White House officials was the underlying crux of the Libby trial. I don’t have cable, so watching live coverage isn’t possible. But in any event, there’s always the internet. She may not be a film star (although she has the looks of one!), but this morning, Plame Speaks.

Although my own congressman, Henry Waxman, is chairing this particular committee and has shown quite a bit of tenaciousness in seeking the truth, I’m not going to hold my breath waiting for Congress to assert its responsibilities regarding oversight. What I hope happens as a result of today is two things: 1) that most of the ridiculous defenses skeptics and political loyalists have thrown up about the outing of a NOC (and for the record, this silly bit about “no underlying crime being committed” as a rationale for a potential Libby pardon pisses me off: as many, many others have noted before this, she had to have been NOC, or there would have been no basis for a trial. In any event, why lie if there’s been no crime committed? It’s the same deal as the current scandal regarding the U.S. attorneys (more on that later!); even if there’s been “no crime” committed, why fudge the truth? What is there to hide?) are for once and all time discredited, and 2) that the administration face up to its responsibilities and turn in those who are responsible.

To wit: on February 10, 2004, Smirk stated at a press conference in Chicago, “If there’s a leak out of my administration, I want to know who it is… If that person has violated the law, they will be taken care of.”

Well, I’m pretty sure he knew (and Scowl definitely knew) who leaked Plame’s identity even before that press conference. As the Libby trial demonstrated, Vice-President Cheney, Karl Rove, and Richard Armitage had knowledge of Plame’s identity; Cheney’s fingerprints were all over, Armitage has already acknowledged being one of the leakers, and Rove did his share in spreading the word. If Smirk had any integrity, he’d fire Rove and Armitage immediately (something he should have done ages ago), and ask his Veep to resign. Naturally, Smirk decided that keeping things simple wasn’t good enough– in 2005, he qualified his earlier remarks, stating that a crime would have to have been committed.

Again, I don’t expect that to happen. For all the crowing about responsibility, integrity, and the desire to maintain an absolutely pristine administration way back in 2000, this bunch, in my eyes, have failed to live up to the historical standards of integrity that the Oval Office expects and demands. I suspect that it will take the civil suit by Plame and her husband to fully expose this criminal act, and prompt some action on the part of the White House. Of course, I hope I’m proven wrong, and the security clearances of those responsible are revoked posthaste, and those individuals who have either admitted or been shown to be part of the conspiracy to expose Plame be fired (and tried in a court of law, but perhaps that’s asking for too much…?).

I’m definitely just a little voice here– if you really want to explore the history of this whole scandal, and follow along as news breaks, go to firedoglake. These folks know what they’re doing, and just about all of their bloggers are far, far, far better writers/bloggers than I’ll ever be.

Update: Since I posted this entry, James Knodell, the White House Director of the Office of Security, testified today that there has been NO internal investigation of the Plame leak. This is extremely troubling news, and I hope someone, somewhere, with the balls to do something about this, DOES SOMETHING. Exposing an intelligence officer that you’ve spend thousands of dollars and several years training, and you don’t follow up to see why this happened? To me, this goes beyond gross negligence: it’s a crime in itself.  I’m hoping that this story isn’t buried in the Friday afternoon news dump, and that it has legs, because this is a serious situation that is crying out to be rectified, FAST.