I’ve always had more than a few doubts about Patrick Fitzgerald’s investigation of the leak of Valerie Plame’s identity by various administration officials, not least because it’s not clear if the underlying conduct was criminal. Even so, I never thought it was OK to lie to investigators even in a dubious investigation. I’m appalled that Jonah Goldberg, Katherine Lopez, and other establishment conservatives at National Review are calling for his pardon (especially as we are all simultaneously making such a big deal about the importance of legality in the context of illegal immigration). Today I wrote them a brief note:
Why should Bush pardon this guy? I thought conservatives were (rightly) angry at Clinton’s lying under oath, even though it was in a tawdry sex discrimination case brought by Paula Jones. It is important not to lie under oath even in the case of a dubious prosecution of a dubious offense. An oath is an oath. For the Ancient Romans, “breakers of oaths” was considered one of the worst insults to be hurled in one of their frequent polemics. It should remain so even in our degraded times. Punishing Libby would be a good way to reinforce social judgment about this sort of wrongdoing.
Libby is a liar. A jury found the same. His lying is the best explanation for his statements during the relevant time period. He lied before God, the Court, the FBI, and anyone else that would listen to his bulls**t. He should be in jail with Bill Clinton and all the other perjurers who may be out there. It’s shameful that party hackery and the kind of “who’s on our team” tribalism that led the left to support the Communist Rosenbergs is now doing the same to conservatives.
