So despite pretty vehement opposition to the Bush administration I’m actually quite glad to see Bush commute Libby’s sentence. It’s not that I don’t think the administration didn’t act repugnantly in the whole Valerie Plame affair but Libby seems to be nothing more than a loyal staffer who got stuck in the hot seat. It’s Bush and Cheney who bear the responsibility for this whole business not Libby and by commuting Libby’s sentence Bush leaves little doubt where the blame lies. I don’t see much deterrence value in convicting him of this sort of crime. The only thing a prison sentence would really teach white house staffers is to say they ‘don’t recall.’ A lesson Gonzales seems to have already learned.

Besides I still have some misgivings about the whole business of obstruction charges. By no means could this investigation be called a witch hunt but where should one draw the line for crimes like lying to an investigator? What if the prosecutor asks you if you were cheating on your wife? Or asks a political figure if they lied in their campaign promises? Sure the questions likely have to be material to a genuine investigation but when is a crime significant enough to prosecute someone for not revealing compromising information? I’m troubled by the possibility that future parties could use investigations of minor crimes to put administrations between a rock and a hard place as even a direct refusal to answer can be an answer. Frankly I just don’t know the answers to these questions.

I guess I’m just not sure Libby needs to go to jail so I’m happy that he doesn’t have to and that Bush is effectively going to take the blame not his unfortunate subordinate. I mean all other things being equal it’s sad to see someone go to jail.  I don’t think that white house staffers should get special treatment but then again I feel that prosecutors have too much power and discretion generally and that we many of our sentences are far too high.