Free Scooter Libby

by Christopher Hitchens - June 18th, 2007 - Slate

If Scooter Libby goes to jail, it will be because he made a telephone call to Tim Russert and because Tim Russert has a different recollection of the conversation. Can this really be the case?

[snip]

Does it not seem extraordinary that a man can be prosecuted, and now be condemned to a long term of imprisonment, because of an alleged minor inconsistency of testimony in a case where it is admitted that there was no crime and no victim?

Chistopher Hitchens, the writer of this article, is a liberal. A hard core bordering on Marxist liberal. Do not fail to appreciate this. He also has posted this article on a liberal news site. That is an interesting sidelight on what Hitchens is saying in this article. Scooter Libby is a political opponent of Hitchens and they share almost nothing in common in their views on politics. With that certainty in your mind re-read this article defending the Vice President's advisor Scooter Libby from a prosecutor who has spent millions trying to destroy a Repubilcan administration and a Clinton appointed Judge who has displayed clear bias against the defendant and the administration he worked for since this case started.

I agonized over where to post this article. I could not decide whether it belonged on my sister blog, "The Rule of Law", or here on the "Inner Banks Eagle". The first deals with court tyranny and the second deals with politics. In the final analysis I opted for the "Inner Banks Eagle" because this is so obviously more political corruption than court corruption. However it is a tough call. It has major elements of both.

Getting back to Christopher Hitchens. Hitchens is a man of ideals. He believes in fair play. He is committed to the classical liberal goals. He is NOT a partisan like so many in the current Democratic Party. He is also brilliant and a great writer (not my opinions alone). Those are some of the reasons that he remains on my list of favorite writers even though we disagree on so many things. When Christopher disagrees with me, I know I had better think through my own logic very carefully else he will destroy my case. Disagreeing with HItchens is an interesting intellectual challenge. When we agree coming from such divergent political philosophies I doubt there is much on which we are wrong. It is that belief that makes this article so important.

What I can't understand is how so many liberals are supporting actions against Libby that are inimical to their very basic premise of what is fair in government. If a fair court system is not a part of liberal philosophy what is? How can anyone defend this farce of a trial based on such a corrupt agenda? Does the "rule of law" mean nothing?

Christopher Hitchens has chosen as his title the classical liberal demand for those who are being unjustly accused. Free Scooter Libby. It is a perfectly just demand.