Scooter's conviction means he's likely going to see some prison time, and that means he's going to need a Get Out Of Jail Free card. After all, we can't have rich white lawyers going to prison, can we? That would make a mockery of the entire judicial system. Extended prison sentences are for people who get caught carrying an eighth of an ounce of marijuana, not for high-ranking public servants who lie to the FBI in order to cover up possibly treasonous activity by the Vice President.

And so "rule of law" conservatives were falling all over each other last week to call for Our Great Leader to pardon Libby, based on the fact that... well, they didn't like the verdict.

National Review Online got the ball rolling with an editorial entitled "Pardon Libby," published just hours after the verdict came down. NRO notes that, "The trial that concluded in a guilty verdict on four of five counts conclusively proved only one thing: A White House aide became the target of a politicized prosecution set in motion by bureaucratic infighting and political cowardice."

Really? I thought it proved Libby was guilty of perjury and obstruction of justice. Silly me.

NRO goes on to blame "partisans," Joe Wilson's "paranoid persecution theory," a "scandal-hungry media," and "petty agendas" that "subverted justice," finally suggesting that, "Reasonable people can conclude that it was only Scooter Libby's imperfect memory - not willful deception - that gave rise to the charges of lying under oath and obstruction of justice."

Yes, never mind the inconvenient fact that a jury of his peers just found Libby to be dead guilty of willful deception. Hyper-partisan conservatives - I'm sorry, I mean, "reasonable people" - can still conclude that he is completely innocent!

The "travesty of justice" theme was carried far and wide across the conservative blogosphere and into the mainstream media, with many very upset wingnuts such as Kate O'Beirne and Ed Rogers having little tantrums all over the place. Rogers was particularly (and comedically) upset on "Hardball":

ED ROGERS: I know Scooter Libby. What stops him is the truth. Scooter Libby will tell the truth and...

CHRIS MATTHEWS: Why hasn't he done it so far?

ROGERS: ... the sentencing guidelines are what they are. I think he has.

MATTHEWS: What has stopped him...

ROGERS: I think he...

MATTHEWS: ... from telling the truth?

ROGERS: I think he has told the truth.

MATTHEWS: You mean the jury's wrong.

ROGERS: And I think his defense - yes, I think the jury was wrong. I don't think justice was done. I think it's unfair what's happened. I think it's...

MATTHEWS: How much did you stick into the defense fund...

ROGERS: ... bad what's happened.

MATTHEWS: ... to justify this argument?

And to me, this next part is the fun part because it goes to show how some Republicans not only think a jury verdict shouldn't apply to one of their own, but also they are oblivious to another rule they want to break...

But before the Pardon Patrol gets too excited, they should probably take note. According to Newsweek:

...there's one significant roadblock on the path to Libby's salvation: Vice President Dick Cheney's former chief of staff does not qualify to even be considered for a presidential pardon under Justice Department guidelines.

From the day he took office, Bush seems to have followed those guidelines religiously.

(snip)

Those regulations, which are discussed on the Justice Department Web site at usdoj.gov/pardon, would seem to make a Libby pardon a nonstarter in George W. Bush's White House. They "require a petitioner to wait a period of at least five years after conviction or release from confinement (whichever is later) before filing a pardon application," according to the Justice Web site.

The Top 10 Conservative Idiots - The Top 10 Conservative Idiots, No. 282