Shady Politicians Helping Their Own

Paul Wolfowitz begs for Scooter Libby's political life and personal freedom:

I know of many examples of Mr. Libby's service to individuals, but let me mention two that are relevant in the context of the present case [this is Page 3 of his letter, BTW]. One involves his effort to persuade a newspaper not to publish information that would have endangered the life of a covert CIA agent working overseas. Late into the evening, long after most others had left the matter to be dealt with the next day, Mr. Libby worked to collect the information that was needed to persuade the editor not to run the story. His assistant Jenny Mayfield told me that was when she realized she was working for a very special person - as indeed she was.

I also remember how Mr. Libby offered his services pro bono or at reduced cost - after he had returned to private law practice - to help former colleagues and friends with legal issue. In one case helped a public official defend himself successfully against libelous accusations, something that is extremely difficult to do for anyone in public office. The official in question was Richard Armitage who recently served as Deputy Secretary of State.

This is one of many letters written on Mr. Libby's behalf. But as for Wolfowitz's comments above, I have some questions/comments:

1. Shouldn't a judge know what pro bono means? It sounds like either he thinks the judge is stupid or just wrote this knowing public eyes would one day read it.


2. Why did it take Wolfowitz so long to get to information/testimony relevant to the case?


3. Wolfowitz's example is interesting: Libby apparently went to great lengths to stop a story which contained information that would have endangered a covert agent; Robert Novak has been accused of doing just that in regards to Valerie Plame. So my question is: what was the difference in the two events? You can't really use the "Plame wasn't covert" argument because Wolfowitz's story seems to suggest that someone like Libby -who apparently is so passionate - would never have let Novak's article see daylight if her status was in question.


4. The story itself is bland and vague. We don't know if this other covert agent had any kind of relationship with Libby. Wolfowitz doesn't share what the damaging information could have been, or who the writer was, or the name of the media who was going to publish it. Granted, most of these answers would be labeled "National Security" but if so, why the hell would Wolfowitz bring it up if he knows he can't go into detail?
   

There's more, but I'm tired and confused. Let me close by saying that Tim Grieve over at Salon.com has an interesting take, and the guys at ThinkProgress say that Libby has been sentenced to 30 months in jail and a fine of of $250,000.