Pardon or No Pardon?

Here are some notable words from Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald:

 ""Mr. Libby lied about nearly everything that mattered," 

"disclosures of information regarding Ms. Wilson's employment may have been sanctioned by the Vice President" 

"The sentence has to make clear and loud that truth matters and one's station in life does not." 

Mr. Libby deserves prison and yes, he's a good soldier and took a bullet for Cheney. The fact is Mr. Editor, that once again you've sanctioned our "above the law" administration. You've once again expressed your distain for laws that are not of your liking. The repulsion that you've expressed for the American Judicial system and and our nation of laws is shameful.

In today's news, no less than 10 major newspapers from all over the USA including the LA Times, the Chicago Tribune, USA Today, and The New York Times all came out with editorial against a pardon.  In fact the only folks that demanded a pardon are the hard-line right wingers like William Kristol, the Wall Street Journal, Rush, Sean, Bill-O and the like.  This is the essence of the anti-pardon sentiment: 

The San Francisco Chronicle writes: "Clearing Libby [would suggest] a final payoff in a political bargain: He takes the fall without naming others and in the end receives a pardon that keeps him out of prison.

Generally the pro-pardoners say (The Albany Times-Union writes): 

"How could Mr. Libby really have obstructed justice, as Judge Walton said he almost certainly did, when no one was ever even indicted for the crime of outing Ms. Plame?

In response:

"The reality, though, is that the crimes for which Mr. Libby was convicted -- false statements, perjury and, yes, obstruction of justice -- impeded special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald's investigation of the leak that exposed Ms. Plame. . . .

Let's see... lying to investigators.. hmm... Clinton?  Impeached.  Libby? Jailed.  Seems fair.