Mulling pardon, Bush ordered last-minute review of Libby case

[Geee]

Washington Examiner:



Lewis 'Scooter' Libby (2nd R) and his lawyer Theodore V. Wells, Jr. ® leaves U.S. District Court February 3, 2006 in Washington, DC. (Photo by Brendan Smialowski/Getty Images) (Getty Images)
As his time in the White House drew to a close, President George W. Bush authorized a final review of the case of Lewis Libby, the top aide to Vice President Dick Cheney convicted of perjury and obstruction of justice in the Valerie Plame-CIA leak affair. But in the end Bush, skeptical of pardons in general, determined not to repeat the scandal of the final days of Bill Clinton's term in office, appalled by the number of last-minute requests for presidential clemency, and embarrassed by an incident in which he was forced to withdraw a pardon after just one day, decided against a pardon for Libby. In his new memoir, Decision Points, Bush calls denying Libby a pardon "the most emotional personnel decision I had to make" during eight years in office.

As Bush tells the story, Vice President Dick Cheney, a staunch advocate for Libby, "pressed his case that Scooter should be pardoned" in the final days of the administration. "Scooter was a decent man and dedicated public servant, and I understood the ramifications for his family," Bush writes. "I asked two trusted lawyers to review the case from top to bottom, including the evidence presented at the trial for and against Scooter." Bush says he also authorized the lawyers to meet with Libby to hear his side of the story. "After careful analysis, both lawyers told me thy could find no justification for overturning the jury's verdict," Bush concluded.

According to sources who asked not to be identified, the two lawyers were White House counsel Fred Fielding and James Sharp, who represented Bush personally in the CIA leak investigation. The men worked separately -- in effect giving Bush two new opinions on the Libby matter.

[Evad]

"After careful analysis, both lawyers told me they could find no justification for overturning the jury's verdict," Bush concluded."

1--Was this before or after we knew Armitage was the source of the leaks.

2--Was this before or after we found out that Fitz knew it was Armitage all along and pursued the case anyway. He's the one that should have been prosecuted.

I get the time lines mixed up on when these event occurred.