Following up the last post–per commenter copymark, President Reagan’s labor secretary, Raymond J. Donovan, was indicted in 1985 for grand larceny, later aquitted. So was he not an indicted “White House official”? I believe he doesn’t count because he didn’t work in the White House, but in the Department of Labor. He was part of Reagan’s administration but not part of his White House staff.
I believe the title of Most Guilty Sitting Cabinet Member should go to Warren Harding’s secretary of the interior, Albert Fall, who was convicted and sentenced to a year in prison plus a $100,000 fine for his involvement in the Teapot Dome scandal of 1922. I’ve found conflicting information about whether Fall resigned before or after charges of fraud and corruption were brought against him by the Senate, however. It’s possible he had already resigned before he was charged, but I don’t believe he had. (And speaking of pork–Fall’s middle name was Bacon.)
John Mitchell, Richard Nixon’s attorney general, also was convicted of conspiracy, obstruction of justice, and perjury and sentenced to two and a half to eight years in prison for his role in the Watergate break-in and cover-up. But John Mitchell had resigned as attorney general before he was indicted.
Thank you, I get the distinction now. I was wondering about all those clowns from the Watergate and Iran-Contra eras as well but I read now how those guys resigned before they were indicted.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlatest/story/0,1280,-5377092,00.html
So “Scooter” Libby is the first White House staff member to be indicted while in office since Grant’s administration.
Could that be considered an official interpretation of the record?
Copymark–apparently that’s the distinction, yes.
Didn’t Scooter resign in the AM? Anyhow, Fitz isn’t done yet. Plenty of fun yet to be had by all.
CNN announced Scooter’s resignation just after 1 pm, which was after the indictment had been filed with the court and made public.
This is tangential to the specific post above, but I would like to offer this comment on the Plame matter: What so struck me after I watched Fitzgerald’s press conference on Friday was the really palpable difference between Fitzgerald’s professionalism, maturity, and clear-cut reliance on provable facts in making his case for indictment and the Bushies’ bullying-play-to-fear fact-twisting hype in making their case for war in Iraq.