Some testimony on the Libby commutation:

The most important and consequential problem was the decision to appoint a Special Counsel to investigate this matter in the first place. This step was particularly regrettable, since senior Department of Justice (“DOJ”) officials knew, prior to tapping Mr. Fitzgerald, that the leak of Valerie Plame’s name to the columnist Robert Novak — the ostensible basis of the CIA’s referral of the matter to the DOJ — was effected by Deputy Secretary of State Dick Armitage and Mr. Fitzgerald either learned about this fact at the time he was appointed or learned all of the relevant facts shortly thereafter. Also, it appears that shortly after his appointment, Mr. Fitzgerald knew that the very reason for his appointment — an alleged violation of Intelligence Identities Protection Act (“IIPA”), 50 U.S.C. 421 et seq. — was in error, since Ms. Wilson was not a covert agent within the meaning of the IIPA. More generally, as I have written and argued on other occasions, the appointment of a Special or Independent Counsel, no matter the probity and virtue of the individual involved, invariably skews the exercise of prosecutorial discretion and is virtually guaranteed to produce less than optimal results. It fosters time and again a “leave no stone unturned,” protracted, costly, and Inspector Javier — like pursuit of the individual being investigated. Yet, doing justice is not a mechanical process and it must always be informed by a sound exercise of prosecutorial discretion.

Here, we have a situation where a Special Counsel spent several years and millions of taxpayer dollars because he believed that Mr. Libby might have lied to him or to his investigators when they investigated a “crime” they already knew had not been committed. In the process, the Special Counsel caused a great deal of harm to the ability of reporters to ply their business — which is a core element of our body polity’s overall system of political and institutional checks and balances. I emphasize the word “might” because, quite aside from the frailties of human memory, Mr. Fitzgerald could not have known for sure at the time he went after Judith Miller, Matt Cooper, and other media figures that Mr. Libby’s account of having heard first from reporters of Ms. Plame’s work and her alleged role in organizing her husband’s trip to Niger differed from their recollections. That conclusion on his part necessarily had to wait until he successfully coerced the reporters involved. Ask yourself whether a regular DOJ prosecutor, not wearing a Special Counsel hat, would have done this.

I'm guessing that Congressman Conyers wasn't very pleased to hear any of it. And if so, that pleases me.

I believe that should be "Inspector Javert."

Right you are. I fixed it.