About us Login Get email updates
Research
Print

Nightline, GMA, Today report Thompson's reaction to commutation, but not his ties to Libby defense fund

July 03, 2007 4:59 pm ET

Trouble viewing clip? Download: QT | WMV

28 Comments

In reports on President Bush's decision to commute the sentence of former vice presidential chief of staff I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, several network news programs have quoted from or cited potential presidential candidate Fred Thompson's statement approving of Bush's decision without noting Thompson's connections to the Libby Legal Defense Trust. Thompson is a member of the trust's "Advisory Committee" and has reportedly held at least one fundraiser to help pay for Libby's legal fees.

On July 2, President Bush commuted the portion of Libby's sentence requiring him to serve 30 months in jail. In response, Thompson released this statement: "I am very happy for Scooter Libby. I know that this is a great relief to him, his wife and children. While for a long time I have urged a pardon for Scooter, I respect the President's decision." The release continued: "This will allow a good American, who has done a lot for his country, to resume his life." While the release noted that Thompson had "urged a pardon" for Libby, neither the release nor subsequent news reports mentioned his connection to the Libby Legal Defense Trust.

According to the trust's website, the organization was established "to help defray the legal defense costs for Lewis 'Scooter' Libby and his family against the recent legal charges brought against him." The site urges visitors to "join Scooter's many friends and colleagues in supporting the defense of this good man in clearing his good name." According to a June 25 Associated Press report, Thompson "helped run" the organization, which "set out to raise more than $5 million to help finance" Libby's legal defense. In addition, a July 3 Washington Post article reported that Thompson "held a fundraiser for Libby at his McLean [Virginia] home," according to fellow advisory committee member and former Ambassador Richard Carlson.

Reporting on the "blast of reaction" from presidential candidates during the July 3 edition of NBC's Today, NBC News White House correspondent Kelly O'Donnell asserted: "Fred Thompson, who had called for a pardon, respects the decision, calling Libby 'a good American who can get back to his life.' " Similarly, on the July 3 edition of ABC's Good Morning America, ABC News correspondent David Kerley reported: "Many Republicans praised the move by the president. Rudy Giuliani calling it a good decision, one he believes in. Fred Thompson says it allows a good American to resume his life." And on the July 2 edition of ABC's Nightline, ABC News correspondent Chris Bury said: "Political reaction was swift. Republicans applauded. Rudy Giuliani called it 'a reasonable decision.' Fred Thompson: 'I'm very happy for Scooter Libby.' "

By contrast, a July 3 FoxNews.com article quoting Thompson's press release also noted his position with the defense trust: "Among the first to offer support was former Tennessee senator and possible White House hopeful Fred Thompson, who served on the advisory board of the legal defense fund for Libby, and urged Bush to pardon him. 'I am very happy for Scooter Libby,' Thompson said. 'I know that this is a great relief to him, his wife and children. This will allow a good American, who has done a lot for his country, to resume his life.'"

From the July 3 edition of NBC's Today:

O'DONNELL: A blast of reaction quickly from the campaign trail. Democrat Hillary Clinton, Monday night in Iowa:

CLINTON [video clip] And what we saw today was elevating cronyism over the rule of law.

O'DONNELL: [Sen.] Barack Obama [D-IL], who said the administration puts itself above the law. [Sen.] Joe Biden [D-DE] used his website to urge supporters to telephone the White House in protest. But a different take from Republicans: Rudy Giuliani called the president's choice "correct" and Fred Thompson, who had called for a pardon, respects the decision, calling Libby "a good American who can get back to his life."

From the July 3 edition of ABC's Good Morning America:

KERLEY: Many Republicans praised the move by the president. Rudy Giuliani calling it a good decision, one he believes in. Fred Thompson says it allows a good American to resume his life. The president reportedly made this decision very quickly yesterday after a federal appeals court ruled against Mr. Libby. And according to some of the staff members at the White House, he did not consult the Justice Department before making his decision.

From the July 2 edition of ABC's Nightline:

BURY: Political reaction was swift. Republicans applauded. Rudy Giuliani called it "a reasonable decision." Fred Thompson: "I'm very happy for Scooter Libby." Democrats blasted the president. From Hillary Clinton: "Another example that this administration simply considers itself above the law." Barack Obama: "This cements the legacy of an administration characterized by a politics of cynicism and division."

Expand All Expand 1st Level Collapse All Add Comment
    • Author by edenscape246494 (July 03, 2007 5:12 pm ET)
         

      I love the lockstep Righty response that W did the right thing while Clinton's pardons were wrong...I wonder how long it takes this Trogs to put pants on in the morning...three holes and two legs may posit a conundrum for them

      Report Abuse
    • Author by jeter2 (July 03, 2007 5:29 pm ET)
         

      " While the release noted that Thompson had "urged a pardon" for Libby, neither the release nor subsequent news reports mentioned his connection to the Libby Legal Defense Trust.

      So?

      Since Thompson was out front in his defense of Libby this is hardly a deep dark secret he would want hidden.

      It is highly doubtful the media would deliberately omit this information because of nefarious motives.

      Once again MMFA seems to want to dictate each & every word uttered by the media.

      This info would neither add to nor subtract from the fact that Thompson was a Libby backer.

      Report Abuse
      • Author by Limit Corp. Ownership (July 03, 2007 6:47 pm ET)
           

        Wrong Jeter2,

        This information would most certainly add to Americans' understanding of this Libby fiasco.

        It would make it even more clear to Americans that this tired, old,  duffer lobbyist thinks he is above the law.  He's a disgrace to America.

        Report Abuse
      • Author by solon (July 04, 2007 10:02 am ET)
           

        NO, it is standard journalistic practice to disclose something that shows an axe to grind or a reason for bias. THIS is a perfect example of a reason for bias it should have been disclosed.

        Report Abuse
    • Author by winghunter3458 (July 03, 2007 6:45 pm ET)
         

      First, having Clinton remark on this subject at all is the height of hypocrisy...then to make the comments she did is a testament that she believes we have no idea of what she has done and rightly belongs in jail herself.

      Secondly, find out exactly why Fred Thompson supported this action and why;

      Sentencing of Scooter Libby by Fred Thompson

      http://www.townhall.com/columnists/column.aspx?UrlTitle=sentencing_of_scooter_libby&ns=FredThompson&dt=06/07/2007&page=full&comments=true

       

      Report Abuse
    • Author by johnny_nyc8351 (July 03, 2007 7:10 pm ET)
         

      Thompson raises money for traitors:

      GEORGE H.W. BUSH: “I have nothing but contempt and anger for those who betray the trust by exposing the name of our sources. They are, in my view, the most insidious of traitors.” [Speech at CIA, 4/26/99]

      Report Abuse
    • Author by johnny_nyc8351 (July 03, 2007 7:14 pm ET)
         

      Thompson also voted to impeach Clinton on obstruction of justice charges for lying about a blowjob.

      He believes lying about a blowjob is a high crime and misdemeanor but obstructing justice by lying about discussing the identity of an undercover CIA officer doesn't deserve a single day in jail. In fact he believes traitors should receive a free legal defense.

      Report Abuse
      • Author by jscott (July 03, 2007 8:43 pm ET)
           

        He's about to throw his hat in the ring for preznit.  People should greet him at EVERY campaign stop waving signs proclaiming him a soft on crime, criminal coddler.

        Report Abuse
        • Author by leatherhelmet (July 04, 2007 12:50 am ET)
             

          That wouldn't be too wise since there are alot of people out there trying to save people they think are innocent (remember Tookie?).

          Report Abuse
          • Author by friedbergboy1422 (July 05, 2007 11:37 am ET)
               

            LH, Please correct me if I am wrong, but the people fighting for Tookie were fighting for him to be spared the death sentence.  I am not sure there were many, if any, fighting for him to be released from prison.

            Report Abuse
        • Author by Indy (July 05, 2007 2:22 pm ET)
             

          I kinda think "Soft on Traitors and Their Collaborators in a Time of War" has a nice ring to it.... if not a little longish.

          By the way Clinton didn't pardon people who could possibly implicate him in a crime.  So get that straight before the Clinton Viagra crowd,  as in, still got hard on for this guy, gets rolling again.

          Report Abuse
    • Author by johnny_nyc8351 (July 03, 2007 7:17 pm ET)
         

      And before you right wing nut jobs post Libby never revealed Plame's identity to reporters, it's a matter of the public record he told Judith Miller of the NY Times (the favorite newspaper of the radical right).

      Report Abuse
      • Author by mefirst (July 03, 2007 7:37 pm ET)
           

        and asked her to hide his white house connection by writing that he was "a former hill staffer".   and the kicker is she agreed.   she of the "i never met a piece of bush iraq wmd misinformation i couldn't repeat" school.

        Report Abuse
    • Author by copiousdissent.blogspot.com (July 03, 2007 8:02 pm ET)
         

      Look, if Hillary Clinton was a Conservative, you know for a fact MMFA would bring up each Clinton's pardon and use it to say she had no right to say anything.

      By not doing so, MMFA is engaged in misinformation just like what the media did here. 

      Report Abuse
      • Author by jscott (July 03, 2007 8:40 pm ET)
           

        If a frog had wings it wouldn't bump it's a$$ a hoppin.

        Report Abuse
      • Author by HuntingtonBeachLefty (July 04, 2007 3:39 am ET)
           

        "...you know for a fact..." (coprophagousdescent.blog...)

        I realize that works on you, when used by Rush, but it's really insulting when you use it here.

        Please give your opinions without insulting others by implying that they share your opinions.You'll get more respect, or some at least.

        If you need to impose your biases on others to support your argument,you may want to re-think your argument.

        And (this is a completely subjective thing) you may want to try a little editing.If it takes 12 paragraphs to make your point, and none of those is related to the topic,you may just be talking to yourself.

        As another poster mentioned, if your site wasn't a ridiculous transcript of Rush Limbaugh's show, you'd probably be busy enough there that you wouldn't have time to post 1000 words of BS here.

        Just some free, unsolicited advice.

        Report Abuse
    • Author by johnny_nyc8351 (July 03, 2007 8:13 pm ET)
         

      How did Hillary Clinton get into this?

      Are you going down the Clinton list or something?

      I've shown you the controversial (by right wing nut job standards) Clinton pardons don't compare to this Libby fiasco so now you're going to bring up Hillary?

      Why don't you try to show that 30 months for obstruction is "excessive" as Bush claims.

      Report Abuse
      • Author by leatherhelmet (July 04, 2007 12:48 am ET)
           

        It is excessive if you have to serve it before you are declared innocent at an appeals process.

        Report Abuse
        • Author by mefirst (July 04, 2007 7:24 am ET)
             

          wrong again.  if it was likely that he could have won at the appeals level, then that appeals court would not have allowed the trial judge to jail him.  libby was turned down by the appeals court, therefore he had little chance of his appeal winning.

          Report Abuse
        • Author by solon (July 04, 2007 10:06 am ET)
             

          You really do have some world class delusions leatherdude

          Report Abuse
        • Author by military_husband (July 04, 2007 11:29 am ET)
             

          Really? So this has never happene before? Gee, then I wonder why they have actual laws on how to handle this type of thing. You see, the judge ordered the sentence to start right away becuase of the "overwhelming evidence" (those were the judge's words) against Libby. Next he appealed that to a 3 judge panel who all said after looking over the case that he had no real chance at an appeal so he had to go to jail. So nope, not excessive, just by the book following of the laws.

          Report Abuse
        • Author by military_husband (July 04, 2007 11:33 am ET)
             

          And as a side not, when the charge is obstruction of justice, the underlying crime is always looked at and the severity of that crime is taken into account. This is why the sentence was on the stiffer side of the guidelines. To all those still asking the dumbest question on the planet: "Why wasn't anyone charged with the leak?" please go look up obstruction of justice. It is really that easy.

          Report Abuse
    • Author by mary59 (July 03, 2007 8:31 pm ET)
         

      Sounds like Thompson is guilty of extremely poor judgment.

      Report Abuse
    • Author by pongo (July 05, 2007 12:47 pm ET)
         

      Huntington, with all due respect, you might try practicing what you preach. You admonish copius by writing,

      "Please give your opinions without insulting others by implying that they share your opinions."

      and then write,

      "...post 1000 words of BS here."

      Save your preaching for Sunday school. 

      Report Abuse

my.MediaMatters.org

Login  Sign Up

Push Back

Phone calls, emails and letters from the public do make a difference. Remember that to be effective you must be polite, and professional. Express your specific concerns regarding that particular news report or commentary, and indicate what you would like the media outlet to do differently in the future.