Grasping Reality on TypePad, by Brad DeLong

I would have bet good money that Judge Sentelle, at least, would have said that Libby's appeal presented a "close question" and that Libby should remain free while his appeals are pursued--which means until January 19, 2009, when he receives a pardon. Sentelle, after all, was the judge how thought the hyperpartisan wingnut Kenneth Starr who had at least five right-wing reporters on speed-dial to leak to was an appropriate choice for special prosecutor.

I would have been wrong:

Appeals court won't delay Libby prison term: A federal judge last month ruled Libby would have to report to prison in six to eight weeks. His lawyers then asked a U.S. appeals court to keep Libby out of prison while he appeals his conviction, a process that could take months. The three-judge panel of the appeals court rejected Libby's request in a one-paragraph order, ruling he has not shown that his appeal "raises a substantial question." The ruling was issued by all three members of the appeals court panel. Judges David Sentelle and Karen LeCraft Henderson were appointed by Republican presidents while Judge David Tatel was appointed by a Democratic president.

I've heard three guesses for what went down:

1. Judge Sentelle wears a black robe, tries to do justice, but simply has awful judgment: he really did think that the hyperpartisan wingnut Kenneth Starr who had at least five right-wing reporters on speed-dial to leak to was an appropriate choice for special prosecutor.
2. Judge Sentelle thought it would be really embarrassing if he pretended that the Libby appeal was a "close question," and thinks that White House-aides should be willing to do two years' white-collar time if they lie to protect their president (or vice president).
3. Judge Sentelle thought it would be somewhat embarrassing if he pretended that the Libby appeal was a "close question," and the second vote wasn't there on the panel.