Bush pardons Libby

[Ugg]

Link (http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/washington/AP-CIA-Leak-Trial.html?ex=1341028800&en=f5cb75985f21b87a&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss)


Is anyone surprised?

[mrkramer]

Is anyone surprised?

no

[dswoodley]

That sucking sound you hear is GWB's approval rating going into negative digits

[mactastic]

He commuted the jail portion of the sentence. Not that it makes much difference.

And no, I'm not surprised. Had he let Libby go to jail, his poll numbers would have sunk to the low 20s as his core supporters deserted him.

However, it is a travesty of justice that a man convicted of obstructing an investigation into treasonous activities by Bush's WH will get off with what amounts to a slap on the wrist for someone with the financial resources Libby has. And it further solidifies the perception that this president thinks he and his administration are above the law.

But Clinton was a Bad Guy for pardoning Marc Rich...

[mactastic]

That sucking sound you hear is GWB's approval rating going into negative digits
Oh I think he'll see a little bounce as his base rallys around him. His numbers would have dropped worse had he let Libby go to jail.

[dswoodley]

Oh I think he'll see a little bounce as his base rallys around him. His numbers would have dropped worse had he let Libby go to jail.

I will bet you a jelly-donut and coke lunch his ratings sink...further. ;)

[OutThere]

That sucking sound you hear is GWB's approval rating going into negative digits

Fixed ;)

[Don't panic]

I did' t think he would, actually.
truly revolting.

[Queso]

Not really a surprise. You could see this coming a mile off.

[mactastic]

I will bet you a jelly-donut and coke lunch his ratings sink...further. ;)
Ouch you're making my stomach hurt!

I guess another way to look at it is that his numbers may not sink as fast as they otherwise would have. My feeling is that the people who still support Bush's presidency are people who feel very strongly that Libby should not go to prison. The rest of the public already doesn't approve of Bush. Although I would not bet against Bush's "strongly disapprove" numbers hitting new heights...

BTW, is that Bush-coke, or Coke Classic?

[dswoodley]

Ouch you're making my stomach hurt!

I guess another way to look at it is that his numbers may not sink as fast as they otherwise would have. My feeling is that the people who still support Bush's presidency are people who feel very strongly that Libby should not go to prison. The rest of the public already doesn't approve of Bush. Although I would not bet against Bush's "strongly disapprove" numbers hitting new heights...

BTW, is that Bush-coke, or Coke Classic?

Yeah, i had to give up those lunches a while ago - some blood sugar issue...

I guess this issue is - exactly how much is left of Bush's base? My guess, it's shrinking every day and can continue to do so. I see your point though.

"BTW, is that Bush-coke, or Coke Classic?" LOL!

[leekohler]

Piece of S***! I predict his numbers sink as well. This man is beyond shame.

[pseudobrit]

How long until he becomes a right-wing hero the caliber of Ollie North?

[mrkramer]

That sucking sound you hear is GWB's approval rating going into negative digits

I think that the only ones who still approve of him will be glad about this, so I doubt that it will affect his approval ratings much

[dswoodley]

How long until he becomes a right-wing hero the caliber of Ollie North?

I dunno, Ollie had genuine flag-waving supporters behind him.

[pseudobrit]

Amazing. I've just read a report where a supporter refers to him as a "first-time offender."

So is it "three strikes and you're out" for treason, too?

[Music_Producer]

Unbelievable mother f#####

[Dont Hurt Me]

Party and corporations first, forget laws when you also own half of congress. Thats are Hero President.

[JW8725]

Well done for voting him in a second term....wohooo U. S. A. U. S. A.!!!!:rolleyes:

[Kashchei]

When I first saw this thread I was surprised that ObeyGiant et al had not expressed their joy. I quickly realized that they were undoubtedly busy cleaning up after their waking wet dream. This is the audience that the sentence commutation was aimed at, those that have supported this farcical president from the beginning and will continue to do so no matter what (almost, I'd like to think).

I just returned from Switzerland where I stayed with someone who grew up in Germany during the 1930s. We had long discussions and I came to realize that the situation she described to me was the situation we are currently facing in this country. I am not surprised at Bush's actions today, but I am shocked at how transparent his motivations are and how blind his supporters are. Perhaps they should begin to wear brown shirts to make the historical analogy even more exact.

[dswoodley]

Well done for voting him in a second term....wohooo U. S. A. U. S. A.!!!!:rolleyes:

The alternative was a wooden pole. I voted for the pole.

[zimv20]

some reactions (http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2007/7/2/18445/15686) (links therein):


"The President's decision to commute Mr. Libby's sentence is disgraceful. Libby's conviction was the one faint glimmer of accountability for White House efforts to manipulate intelligence and silence critics of the Iraq War. Now, even that small bit of justice has been undone. Judge Walton correctly determined that Libby deserved to be imprisoned for lying about a matter of national security. The Constitution gives President Bush the power to commute sentences, but history will judge him harshly for using that power to benefit his own Vice President's Chief of Staff who was convicted of such a serious violation of law."


"Until now, it appeared that the President merely turned a blind eye to a high ranking Administration official leaking classified information. The President’s action today makes it clear that he condones such activity. This decision is inconsistent with the rule of law and sends a horrible signal to the American people and our intelligence operatives who place their lives at risk everyday. Now that the White House can no longer argue that there is a pending criminal investigation, I expect them to be fully forthcoming with the American people about the circumstances that led to this leak and the President’s decision today."


"With its decision, the Bush Administration has proven that to the very end, it is interested only in shielding its members from accountability rather than encouraging it, even when doing so comes at the direct expense of our nation’s security."


The President’s commutation of Scooter Libby’s prison sentence does not serve justice, condones criminal conduct, and is a betrayal of trust of the American people.

The President said he would hold accountable anyone involved in the Valerie Plame leak case. By his action today, the President shows his word is not to be believed. He has abandoned all sense of fairness when it comes to justice, he has failed to uphold the rule of law, and he has failed to hold his Administration accountable.

[zimv20]

more reactions (http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2007/7/2/191845/5318):

"Only a president clinically incapable of understanding that mistakes have consequences could take the action he did today. President Bush has just sent exactly the wrong signal to the country and the world. In George Bush's America, it is apparently okay to misuse intelligence for political gain, mislead prosecutors and lie to the FBI. George Bush and his cronies think they are above the law and the rest of us live with the consequences. The cause of equal justice in America took a serious blow today."

"This decision to commute the sentence of a man who compromised our national security cements the legacy of an Administration characterized by a politics of cynicism and division, one that has consistently placed itself and its ideology above the law. This is exactly the kind of politics we must change so we can begin restoring the American people’s faith in a government that puts the country’s progress ahead of the bitter partisanship of recent years."

aaaaaaand fred thompson:
"I am very happy for Scooter Libby. I know that this is a great relief to him, his wife and children."

[Thanatoast]

Well, now that we've gone from "everybody knows it" to "rubbing it in our faces" who's willing to play odds on what happens? I say tons of Democratic bluster with no payoff followed by the WH's press secretary saying something like "we are saddened that the Democratic congress has decided to play politics". And of course, the Dems will roll over like they always do.

:sigh:

[Thomas Veil]

This is absolutely disgusting.

I don't even care so much if Bush's numbers go down. I want this to reflect on the Republican party. I want voters to remember, for the sixteen months, that the GOP is just fine with criminals who commit treason against the United States.

I need a drink. No, several. :mad: :mad: :mad:

[mactastic]

Well, now that we've gone from "everybody knows it" to "rubbing it in our faces" who's willing to play odds on what happens? I say tons of Democratic bluster with no payoff followed by the WH's press secretary saying something like "we are saddened that the Democratic congress has decided to play politics". And of course, the Dems will roll over like they always do.

:sigh:
Pretty much. Democrats will just bend over and take the proverbial "no lubricant please" option.

And of course this is a good week for this kind of news because most Americans are otherwise occupied. Plus I read somewhere that the 4th of july is the day Americans consume the most beer of any day of the year. So by next week this will likely have died down.

I can hope that the Democrats and the media will keep this issue alive for a while, but with no spooge-soaked dress or Hilton skank involved I don't hold out much hope of that.

Of course, righties were able to muster quite a bit of outrage over Marc Rich. The news media hyped that one for weeks, and there was no treason involved there.

[Sun Baked]

Lucky he was a goat, because the lamb would have been great with mint sauce.

[Dont Hurt Me]

Welcome to the Republican party.

[Thomas Veil]

Welcome to the Republican party....Where crime pays.

[Lord Blackadder]

The Democrats should not take this laying down - but they will.

Saying that history will judge Bush harshly doesn't do squat for us right now...

2008 can't come too soon. "Former President George W Bush" will be musc to my ears.

[biturbomunkie]

i'd be surprised if bush didn't issue the pardon. i'd also be surprised if the dems are gonna do something about it.

[hagjohn]

Not really surprised... I think everyone saw this coming. Both parties suck at this point.

[it5five]

**** Bush. **** him. **** him.

I'm so incredibly angry right now.

Congress will not do a thing about this, and that pisses me off the most. Nobody has the balls to stand up to Bush, so he's doing all this **** KNOWING he's going to get away with it.

[obeygiant]

Deep breaths, it5five. :)

Wow. This is pretty hardcore. Its almost enough to switch me because I'm agreeing with what most of the Dem pundits are saying. Oh, and Fox news wasn't even covering it. I had to watch Olbermann who spent 45min of his hour on it.

[it5five]

Deep breaths, it5five. :)

Wow. This is pretty hardcore. Its almost enough to switch me because I'm agreeing with what most of the Dem pundits are saying. Oh, and Fox news wasn't even covering it. I had to watch Olbermann who spent 45min of his hour on it.

It was the initial shock that made me that angry.

I've calmed, but I'm still pissed.

[zimv20]

patrick fitzgerald responds (http://www.firedoglake.com/2007/07/02/fitzgeralds-statement/):

We fully recognize that the Constitution provides that commutation decisions are a matter of presidential prerogative and we do not comment on the exercise of that prerogative.

We comment only on the statement in which the President termed the sentence imposed by the judge as "excessive." The sentence in this case was imposed pursuant to the laws governing sentencings which occur every day throughout this country. In this case, an experienced federal judge considered extensive argument from the parties and then imposed a sentence consistent with the applicable laws. It is fundamental to the rule of law that all citizens stand before the bar of justice as equals. That principle guided the judge during both the trial and the sentencing.

Although the President’s decision eliminates Mr. Libby’s sentence of imprisonment, Mr. Libby remains convicted by a jury of serious felonies, and we will continue to seek to preserve those convictions through the appeals process.

[freeny]

So Paris Hilton gets more time then Scooter Libby....

Im floored (smiley doesnt exist for this emotion)

[zimv20]

tpmcafe (http://electioncentral.tpmcafe.com/blog/electioncentral/2007/jul/02/surveyusa_shows_huge_opposition_to_commutation)


SurveyUSA Shows Decisive Opposition To Commutation

SurveyUSA (http://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollReport.aspx?g=4b5255b9-3878-4082-b7d0-160d8ddcd52e) has released a poll done quickly tonight, measuring public reaction to the Libby commutation. The results among those respondents familiar with the case:

• 60% say the prison sentence should have been left in place.

• 21% agree with the commutation.

• 17% say Libby should have been pardoned entirely.

Among respondents, 55% were familiar with the case. And 40% of Republicans said the prison sentence should have been kept in place, along with 77% of Democrats and 56% of independents. The margin of error was 3.4%.

[SMM]

Well done for voting him in a second term....wohooo U. S. A. U. S. A.!!!!:rolleyes:

He was not voted either time. And we have Ralph bloody Nader to thank for helping the bastard steal the WH.

[zimv20]

tpmmuckraker (http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/003585.php) has joe wilson's take:

"From my viewpoint, the president has stepped in to short circuit the rule of law and the system of justice in our country. In so doing, he has acknowledged Mr. Libby's guilt for, among other things, obstruction of justice, which by definition is covering up for somebody in a crime. By commuting his sentence, he has brought himself and his office into reasonable suspicion of participation in an obstruction of justice. The commutation of (Libby's) sentence in and of itself is participation in obstruction of justice."

[ham_man]

He was not voted either time.
What do you call it?

...Where crime pays.
I fail to see how Libby (or anyone else in the administration) has come out ahead in this, politically or otherwise.

[mrkramer]

He was not voted either time.

The first time he didn't have the majority of votes, but the second time he did somehow get the majority of votes.

[IJ Reilly]

i'd be surprised if bush didn't issue the pardon. i'd also be surprised if the dems are gonna do something about it.

What can the Democrats do about it? The answer is "nothing," except to exercise loud public futility, or bring it up again and again during the campaign. Of the two options, only the second makes any sense politically or practically.

[it5five]

What do you call it?


I fail to see how Libby has come out ahead in this, politically or otherwise.

He doesn't have to spend 2 years in jail?

[FFTT]

If I were Fitzgerald, I'd subpoena Libby's butt again to tell the court
what he knows about the destruction of White House documents and
the firing of those attorneys.

He's on probation and doesn't dare take another one for the team.

I'm also pretty sure Libby had Cheney's office over a barrel.

If he went to prison, I have a feeling he would have spilled the beans
before too long.

[solvs]

What can the Democrats do about it? The answer is "nothing," except to exercise loud public futility

They're already doing that, and I hope they keep doing it. I hope this gets played everywhere. Bush (practically) pardoned a guy who lied about a treasonous crime. I want them to play this as much as they possibly can. Further proof the administration thinks they are above the law and are exactly what they claim their enemies to be. I hope they go out there talking about how this is completely against what America stands for, and with all their talk about freedom and protecting our soldiers and how everyone else is so unAmerican and treasonous for not caring about those in harm's way, I hope the Dems show them to be (once again) huge hypocrites on the matter. Especially given the rights obsession with Clinton lying.

But they won't, because they don't. They make a big stink for now, raise some money, then do nothing. Knowing that we'll support them by default. Thinking if they "take the high road" (translation: do nothing) they'll gain more of those who would never support them than they lose of those who do, but are frustrated with the lack of any progress or oversight.

And I'm waiting for certain people in this forum to come in and tell us that somehow justice was served because Clinton did it too, so that somehow makes it ok.

[Dont Hurt Me]

Not really surprised... I think everyone saw this coming. Both parties suck at this point.
Without a doubt the American people need someone representing them, at the moment both partys are pawns of the Corporations. So we have Crap or Crap to choose from. Either way its pure crap. Time for another revolution in this country.

[Father Jack]

Disgrace

[walangij]

Without a doubt the American people need someone representing them, at the moment both partys are pawns of the Corporations. So we have Crap or Crap to choose from. Either way its pure crap. Time for another revolution in this country.

By far the BEST suggestion for Warren Buffet's charity money I ever saw on mainstream television last year, CNN, was someone saying: use that money to start a moderate based party that actually represents the people and is not infiltrated with lobbyists/private interest groups/ect. We need to get our colleges to stand up, with something like Facebook, why can't we seem to get that 60s civil rights spirit back into our generation.

I am in shock at this, yet I expected it somewhat. What perplexes me and makes me laugh is the people who defend Bush for the pardon saying that Bush is right for doing this b/c BS BS BS are the exact same politicians that screamed IMPEACH!! IMPEACH!! HOLD UP THE RULE OF LAW!! NO ONE IS ABOVE THE LAW!! HE BROKE IT AND HE SHOULD PAY!! about Clinton and his scandal. Oh this backwards world of ours.

[Turkish]

Shame is, he will pardon him fully on his way out.

[Swarmlord]

I'm speechless. The way people are going on about this, you'd think the guy pardoned was Mark Rich or something. :cool:

[IJ Reilly]

They're already doing that, and I hope they keep doing it. I hope this gets played everywhere. Bush (practically) pardoned a guy who lied about a treasonous crime. I want them to play this as much as they possibly can. Further proof the administration thinks they are above the law and are exactly what they claim their enemies to be. I hope they go out there talking about how this is completely against what America stands for, and with all their talk about freedom and protecting our soldiers and how everyone else is so unAmerican and treasonous for not caring about those in harm's way, I hope the Dems show them to be (once again) huge hypocrites on the matter. Especially given the rights obsession with Clinton lying.

But they won't, because they don't. They make a big stink for now, raise some money, then do nothing. Knowing that we'll support them by default. Thinking if they "take the high road" (translation: do nothing) they'll gain more of those who would never support them than they lose of those who do, but are frustrated with the lack of any progress or oversight.

And I'm waiting for certain people in this forum to come in and tell us that somehow justice was served because Clinton did it too, so that somehow makes it ok.

I think the Democrats are best advised to limit the stink about it now and leave it to the presidential candidates to remind the American people again and again about what this administration promised and what it actually delivered.

[leekohler]

I'm speechless. The way people are going on about this, you'd think the guy pardoned was Mark Rich or something. :cool:

The rule of law only applies to liberals I guess. :rolleyes: So predictable of you.

[Swarmlord]

The rule of law only applies to liberals I guess. :rolleyes: So predictable of you.

No, I think that if Americans realized just how many people have been pardoned by exiting presidents over the years they'd be shocked.

[leekohler]

No, I think that if Americans realized just how many people have been pardoned by exiting presidents over the years they'd be shocked.

Oh please! Ollie North was my all-time favorite (after Nixon). I don't think people would be shocked at all. Most people here weren't born yesterday. We know- and we continue to be equally p***ed off about it.

It's people like you who bug me. You seem to think that if everyone does it, it must be OK and nobody should be angry. And spare me your Clinton/Rich BS. A lot of us here were just as angry about that.

[Swarmlord]

Oh please! Ollie North was my all-time favorite (after Nixon). I don't think people would be shocked at all. Most people here weren't born yesterday. We know- and we continue to be equally p***ed off about it.

And yet I don't think that a Congress has existed that would take that perk away from the Presidency, because they'd want it there for themselves if they ever assumed the top office.

[leekohler]

And yet I don't think that a Congress has existed that would take that perk away from the Presidency, because they'd want it there for themselves if they ever assumed the top office.

For someone who claims to be "moral", Bush is quite the opposite, no?

[mactastic]

I'm speechless. The way people are going on about this, you'd think the guy pardoned was Mark Rich or something. :cool:
Maybe you missed it, but I was pissed about the Rich pardon. Not as pissed as I am about this, but then this involves treason.

[obeygiant]

No, I think that if Americans realized just how many people have been pardoned by exiting presidents over the years they'd be shocked.

here is a list of pardons granted by Clinton

http://www.usdoj.gov/pardon/clintonpardon_grants.htm
http://www.usdoj.gov/pardon/clinton_comm.htm

There is a ton of them.

Joseph A. Yasak N. D. Ill. 1988 Knowingly making under oath a false declaration regarding a material fact before a Grand Jury, 18 U.S.C. § 1623

http://www.usdoj.gov/pardon/actions_administration.htm

[leekohler]

here is a list of pardons granted by Clinton

http://www.usdoj.gov/pardon/clintonpardon_grants.htm

There is a ton of them.

It took you guys three whole pages! I realize you've been cleaning up after your waking wet dream, but come on! That took way too long! "Wah, wah, wah! Clinton did it too! Wah!" Give it a rest and deal with the present please.

[mactastic]

God it's amusing to watch conservatives use Bill Clinton as their moral compass! :D

"Well the Clenis did it, so it must be OK". That's our new standard???

[obeygiant]

It took you guys three whole pages! I realize you've been cleaning up after your waking wet dream, but come on! That took way too long! "Wah, wah, wah! Clinton did it too! Wah!" Give it a rest and deal with the present please.

God it's amusing to watch conservatives use Bill Clinton as their moral compass! :D

"Well the Clenis did it, so it must be OK". That's our new standard???

Did you guys even read any of those?

I posted them because Swarm said we'd be surprised at how many pardons were granted, and he was right.

[dswoodley]

God it's amusing to watch conservatives use Bill Clinton as their moral compass! :D

"Well the Clenis did it, so it must be OK". That's our new standard???

I don't think anyone is actually making that argument. When conservatives in power do something liberals don't like, liberals point and scream bloody murder. When liberals are in power and do something conservatives don't like, conservatives point and scream bloody murder. And they do it all day long. I dropped being a D because of it. The hyprocrisy of both sides is brain-numbing. It makes me want to go do something more interesting. I think my daughter is watching the Backyardigans.

[obeygiant]

I don't think anyone is actually making that argument. When conservatives in power do something liberals don't like, liberals point and scream bloody murder. When liberals are in power and do something conservatives don't like, conservatives point and scream bloody murder. And they do it all day long. I dropped being a D because of it. The hyprocrisy of both sides is brain-numbing. It makes me want to go do something more interesting. I think my daughter is watching the Backyardigans.

quoted for truth.

[mactastic]

Did you guys even read any of those?

I posted them because Swarm said we'd be surprised at how many pardons were granted, and he was right.
Let me ask you this: Can you find any other example where Bush thought someone's sentence was too severe?

[mactastic]

I don't think anyone is actually making that argument. When conservatives in power do something liberals don't like, liberals point and scream bloody murder. When liberals are in power and do something conservatives don't like, conservatives point and scream bloody murder. And they do it all day long. I dropped being a D because of it. The hyprocrisy of both sides is brain-numbing. It makes me want to go do something more interesting. I think my daughter is watching the Backyardigans.
Sorry, but using someone else's bad behavior as an excuse for your own doesn't fly with me.

[dswoodley]

Sorry, but using someone else's bad behavior as an excuse for your own doesn't fly with me.

Yes, that is precisley my point, be they D, R, Liberal, or Conservative. And yet, it happens all the time, with all of the aforementioned affiliations.

[mactastic]

Yes, that is precisley my point, be they D, R, Liberal, or Conservative. And yet, it happens all the time, with all of the aforementioned affiliations.
So why worry about it? Is that your argument? Everyone does it, so there's no point in criticizing anyone for it?

[dswoodley]

So why worry about it? Is that your argument? Everyone does it, so there's no point in criticizing anyone for it?

My point is, I condemn all of them. I accuse all of them of being hypocrites and also anyone who blindly throws their hats in the ring just because they are a D, R, liberal or conservative. I cannot wait to see the end of the two party system. Maybe that will give mindless idealogues something more interesting to think about. No, I am not making an insult against you, but all too often in the short time I've been on these forums, I only see insults being hurled against each other and very few attempts to bridge political differences and actually work towards constructive solutions.

[leekohler]

My point is, I condemn all of them. I accuse all of them of being hypocrites and also anyone who blindly throws their hats in the ring just because they are a D, R, liberal or conservative. I cannot wait to see the end of the two party system. Maybe that will give mindless idealogues something more interesting to think about. No, I am not making an insult against you, but all too often in the short time I've been on these forums, I only see insults being hurled against each other and very few attempts to bridge political differences and actually work towards constructive solutions.

I see- would you like to start?

[dswoodley]

I see- would you like to start?

I already have. All of my dogs in these fights are on both "sides of the aisle". I don't tie my causes exclusively to one side or the other. If this is a serious offer, I'm listening.

[mactastic]

My point is, I condemn all of them. I accuse all of them of being hypocrites and also anyone who blindly throws their hats in the ring just because they are a D, R, liberal or conservative. I cannot wait to see the end of the two party system. Maybe that will give mindless idealogues something more interesting to think about. No, I am not making an insult against you, but all too often in the short time I've been on these forums, I only see insults being hurled against each other and very few attempts to bridge political differences and actually work towards constructive solutions.
Well it gets more and more difficult to be the bigger person each time I'm accused of wanting provide aid and comfort to enemies of America.

In the meantime, the two-party system is all we have. As they say, wish in one hand and **** in the other and see what you're left with...

[dswoodley]

In the meantime, the two-party system is all we have. As they say, wish in one hand and **** in the other and see what you're left with...

Only as long as people believe an alternative is impossible. Change doesn't happen by the hands of those who have no belief in it.

[leekohler]

I already have. All of my dogs in these fights are on both "sides of the aisle". I don't tie my causes exclusively to one side or the other. If this is a serious offer, I'm listening.

Fine, but I have to tell you- some of us are affected directly by what this administration is doing. It's hard to be objective when someone walks all over you and people like you to get elected. I don't feel all that charitable toward "conservatives", I can tell you that. I've tried being the nice guy for years- just gets you kicked in the face with these people. They don't use reason, so what to do?

[dswoodley]

Fine, but I have to tell you- some of us are affected directly by what this administration is doing. It's hard to be objective when someone walks all over you and people like you to get elected. I don't feel all that charitable toward "conservatives", I can tell you that. I've tried being the nice guy for years- just gets you kicked in the face with these people. They don't use reason, so what to do?

I very much appreciate your experience. I have received it on both sides. I was a Republican for 4 years then became a Clinton Democrat (a moderate democrat, right). I dropped the D party 5 years ago, and the Republicans years early for exactly the same BS you desrcibe. I feel neither charitable to Ds or Rs now, yet realize there is an imperative to get off this train wreck of an impasse.

[killerrobot]

He doesn't have to spend 2 years in jail?

Correction 2.5 years in jail. Just too harsh according to GWB. :)

Do you think the excuse that "my wife and children have suffered a lot" because I f!·"ed up will get me out of jail if I kill someone?
It would be my first strike too. :)

[zimv20]

Let me ask you this: Can you find any other example where Bush thought someone's sentence was too severe?

i can help (http://volokh.com/archives/archive_2007_07_01-2007_07_07.shtml#1183422066):

...I find Bush's action very troubling because of the obvious special treatment Libby received. President Bush has set a remarkable record in the last 6+ years for essentially never exercising his powers to commute sentences or pardon those in jail. His handful of pardons have been almost all symbolic gestures involving cases decades old, sometimes for people who are long dead. Come to think of it, I don't know if Bush has ever actually used his powers to get one single person out of jail even one day early. If there are such cases, they are certainly few and far between. So Libby's treatment was very special indeed.

[hulugu]

During the 2000 election, Bush promised to "restore honor and dignity to the White House." This promise apparently meant Bush would use Clinton's own bungling as a blank check to shield him from criticism. I really think we can do better and the first step is in accepting that "the other guy did it" is not a valid defense, but rather another step in the race for mediocrity.

[Thomas Veil]

here is a list of pardons granted by Clinton

http://www.usdoj.gov/pardon/clintonpardon_grants.htm
http://www.usdoj.gov/pardon/clinton_comm.htmOkay, as everyone mentioned, we'll grant you Mark Rich. Which, as they everyone also mentioned, still doesn't make it right.

Now tell me that all those other pardons and commutations benefited Clinton or his cronies, as Bush did with Libby. And explain, as zimv20 noted, why Bush has been such a hardass about everyone else, but found a soft spot in his heart for Scooter.

[Thomas Veil]

During the 2000 election, Bush promised to "restore honor and dignity to the White House."Remember, this is the guy who, in the very first hours after he set foot in the White House, had his Prof. Moriarty, Karl Rove, spread ugly rumors to the media that the White House had been trashed -- equipment damaged, drawers defecated in, obscenities scrawled on the walls -- all of which turned out to be total ************.

That's how he started "restoring honor and dignity to the White House." :mad:

[walangij]

Remember, this is the guy who, in the very first hours after he set foot in the White House, had his Prof. Moriarty, Karl Rove, spread ugly rumors to the media that the White House had been trashed -- equipment damaged, drawers defecated in, obscenities scrawled on the walls -- all of which turned out to be total ************.

That's how he started "restoring honor and dignity to the White House." :mad:

"restoring honor and dignity to the White House"? lol.

What I don't understand is how the Democrats (or any opponents) can't seem to get their act together and take advantage of these types of situations. If it were opposite, everyone and their mom would know and have an opinion due to the amount of press the F-news and radio hosts would be talking about it, but these days with some local people in America I ask them bout this and they are like ...what happened?

[hulugu]

Remember, this is the guy who, in the very first hours after he set foot in the White House, had his Prof. Moriarty, Karl Rove, spread ugly rumors to the media that the White House had been trashed -- equipment damaged, drawers defecated in, obscenities scrawled on the walls -- all of which turned out to be total ************.

That's how he started "restoring honor and dignity to the White House." :mad:

Exactly, Bush made a big show of being better than Clinton, which like "compassionate conservatism" was just election year pandering, and that's why he was voted for by many people in 2000. Of course, these people didn't want to admit to themselves that they'd made a grevious error and judgement and covered it with another vote in 2004 — unless they had the bejeezus scared out of them by Cheney and the rest.

Slate's Timothy Noah had an interesting point about Bush's decision to commute Libby's sentence, he believes the judge was overly harsh in his decision and that Bush's act was one of compassion. I'd like to agree with Noah that this was a hard decision made out of conviction, but I can't help think that Libby was protected from prison not to protect Libby, rather it was done to protect Libby's boss. And, this bothers me.
And compassion from the guy who refused to commute death sentences while governor in Texas under any circumstances rings a little false now.

[SMM]

Did you guys even read any of those?

I posted them because Swarm said we'd be surprised at how many pardons were granted, and he was right.

I read them. I also read the ones from all of the Presidents. It appears that President Clinton was somewhere around the average for pardons. I also have a working knowledge of how the process works. Do you?

There is a major difference in a Presidential action for a past crime, and one granted to close, or derail an ongoing investigation. When 'all the King's Men' see that they will be exonerated from wrong-doing, it keeps their loyalty intact. It does not matter what President does this. They are guilty of circumventing the law.

Comparing the sins of Bush and Clinton, it is time for a special prosecutor. Actually we need several. The WH sins are so vast, no single investigation can begin to deal with them. Few are even looking at the environmental devastation which has been done. Thirty years of hard work have been completely lost.

[zimv20]

I can't help think that Libby was protected from prison not to protect Libby, rather it was done to protect Libby's boss.
from here (http://www.buzzflash.com/articles/alerts/264):

the reason for the commuting of Scooter's sentence is so that Scooter can still claim the 5th Amendment in further investigations of Bush, Rove, and Cheney.

Scooter still has an appeal pending, so he can still claim the 5th. A pardon now would have allowed Scooter to be forced to testify without limitation.

[hulugu]

No surprises there, this is just another manuever carefully orchestrated to appear as compassion. I can't believe this is the guy people wanted to have a beer with.

[Thomas Veil]

It appears that President Clinton was somewhere around the average for pardons.From here (http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/07/03/libby.sentence/index.html):

Pardons and Commutations

George W. Bush (2001 - )
Pardons -- 13
Commutations -- 4

Bill Clinton (1993-2001)
Pardons -- 396
Commutations -- 61

George H.W. Bush (1989-1993)
Pardons -- 74
Commutations: 3

Ronald Reagan (1981-1989)
Pardons -- 393
Commutations -- 13

Jimmy Carter (1977-1981)
Pardons -- 534
Commutations -- 29

Gerald Ford (1974-1977)
Pardons -- 382
Commutations -- 22

Richard Nixon (1969-1974)
Pardons -- 863
Commutations -- 60

Lyndon Johnson (1963-1969)
Pardons -- 960
Commutations -- 226

John F. Kennedy (1961-1963)
Pardons -- 472
Commutations -- 100

Dwight Eisenhower (1953-1961)
Pardons -- 1,110
Commutations -- 47

Harry Truman (1945-1953)
Pardons -- 1,913
Commutations -- 118So yeah, Clinton actually had fewer than a number of other presidents in modern history.

From the same story:

Bush did not wait for Libby or his lawyers -- who are still appealing his convictions -- to request clemency, Snow said.

A government official said that Bush did not consult with the Justice Department before rendering his decision. The Justice Department normally reviews petitions for clemency and generally advises against them when a case is still on appeal or until a convict has begun serving time.

"This is not something, again, where you have to go back and consult members of the Justice Department about what the facts of the case are or the circumstances surrounding it," Snow said.

Asked what input Cheney had into the commutation, Snow said, "I'm sure that the vice president may have expressed an opinion."

Snow said Tuesday that Bush "spent weeks and weeks consulting with senior members of this White House" before deciding on the commutation.So Bush "consulted" with his own people, but not the Justice Department, and Tony Snow says advice from Justice is not required, even though it seems to be standard operating procedure.

The boldness, the transparency of all this corruption, is just amazing.

the reason for the commuting of Scooter's sentence is so that Scooter can still claim the 5th Amendment in further investigations of Bush, Rove, and Cheney.

Scooter still has an appeal pending, so he can still claim the 5th. A pardon now would have allowed Scooter to be forced to testify without limitation.Lovely. This guy is probably right.

[Thomas Veil]

One more thing, from Keith Olbermann (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19588942/):

It is nearly July 4th, Mr. Bush, the commemoration of the moment we Americans decided that rather than live under a King who made up the laws, or erased them, or ignored them—or commuted the sentences of those rightly convicted under them—we would force our independence, and regain our sacred freedoms.

We of this time—and our leaders in Congress, of both parties—must now live up to those standards which echo through our history: Pressure, negotiate, impeach—get you, Mr. Bush, and Mr. Cheney, two men who are now perilous to our Democracy, away from its helm.

For you, Mr. Bush, and for Mr. Cheney, there is a lesser task. You need merely achieve a very low threshold indeed. Display just that iota of patriotism which Richard Nixon showed, on August 9th, 1974.

Resign.

[Sayhey]

The main difference between this commutation and other actions by other Presidents is that this one doesn't just benefit a political friend or supporter, it continues the obstruction of justice in a probe of criminal conduct that points to both the President and the Vice-President. Say what you will about Mark Rich's pardon, but there has never been even a suggestion that it was done to cover up criminal conduct on the part of President Clinton.

What we have here, as revealed in the trial, is every indication that the communication of a covert agent's name and her status to the media was done at the direction of Cheney and with the approval of Bush. Removing the incentive that the prosecutors have over Libby in any effort they might make to have him turn states' evidence is obstruction of justice on the part of Bush because it could implicate him.

The bottom line is that Congress needs to put Libby on the witness stand and Fitzgerald needs to continue his investigation. You see, obstruction of justice, is a "high crime and misdemeanor."

[solvs]

The way people are going on about this, you'd think the guy pardoned was Mark Rich or something.

here is a list of pardons granted by Clinton
Your argument is as predictable as it is pathetic. Even if we were going to defend Clinton, and we aren't (despite his crimes in question being far less of a big deal compared to lying to protect an actually treasonable act), it doesn't excuse the President's actions. Clinton did it too. He lied under oath about a bj. He pardoned some people he shouldn't have. He did all sorts of bad stuff. How does that make what Libby did, and what Bush did, ok?

Hint: it doesn't, making me think you (once again) have nothing.

I don't tie my causes exclusively to one side or the other.
Neither do we when it comes to stuff like this. None of us defended William Jefferson. Some of us have even defended Republicans when appropriate. Can't speak for all of us. Obeygiant and Swarmie seem to be ok with this because Clinton did it too apparently (even though he didn't), and yet somehow we're the partisan hacks. :confused: Ok.

Does that mean it was ok for Clinton to do it fellas? Can Hillary do it too if God forbid she wins? After all, Bush did it. :rolleyes:

I also have a working knowledge of how the process works. Do you?
Need you even ask? Obviously not. But what else are they going to do? Actually argue on the merits of the case? Try and defend Bush's actions, or Libby's for that matter, using facts and logic? Can't really do that. Pretty much all they can do it bring up Clinton, as if that's any kind of defense, and lie some more about something that didn't happen with a guy who hasn't been in office in over 6 years.

But no, if Clinton was doing what Bush was doing, I would still be mad at him. I was mad at him for far less. Most of us were. The obvious crosses party lines.

Well, to most of us anyway. :rolleyes:

[IJ Reilly]

Libby's sentence not unusually long

Though Bush calls the 30-month prison term 'excessive,' records show defendants convicted of similar crimes served jail time.

WASHINGTON — In commuting the sentence of I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, President Bush said that the former vice presidential aide had suffered enough and that the 30-month prison term ordered up by a federal judge was "excessive."

But records show that the Justice Department under the Bush administration frequently has sought sentences that are as long, or longer, in cases similar to Libby's. Three-fourths of the 198 defendants sentenced in federal court last year for obstruction of justice — one of four crimes Libby was found guilty of in March — got some prison time. According to federal data, the average sentence defendants received for that charge alone was 70 months.

Just last week, the Supreme Court upheld a 33-month prison sentence for a decorated Army veteran who was convicted of lying to a federal agent about buying a machine gun. The veteran had a record of public service — fighting in Vietnam and the Gulf War — and no criminal record. But Justice Department lawyers argued his prison term should stand because it fit within the federal sentencing guidelines.

That Bush chose to make an exception for a political ally is galling to many career Justice Department prosecutors and other legal experts. Federal prosecutors said Tuesday the action would make it harder for them to persuade judges to deliver appropriate sentences.

The critics included some Republicans who said Bush's decision did not square with an administration that had been ardently pro law-and-order. "It denigrates the significance of perjury prosecutions," John S. Martin Jr., a former U.S. attorney and federal judge in New York, said of the commutation.

...

Sentencing experts said Bush's action appeared to be without recent precedent. They could not recall another case in which someone sentenced to prison had received a presidential commutation without having served any part of that sentence. Presidents have customarily commuted sentences only when someone has served substantial time.

"We can't find any cases, certainly in the last half century, where the president commuted a sentence before it had even started to be served," said Margaret Colgate Love, a former pardon attorney at the Justice Department. "This is really, really unusual."

...

White House Press Secretary Tony Snow, speaking with reporters two hours before Bush made his comments, said the president spent "weeks and weeks consulting with senior members of this White House about the proper way to proceed."

"He spent a lot of time trying to figure out how to maintain the faith in the jury system, and he did that by keeping intact the conviction and some of the punishments," Snow said.

The spokesman took pains to emphasize the penalty still facing Libby, saying: "This is hardly a slap on the wrist, in terms of penalty. It is a very severe penalty."

Some observers took issue with that.

"For Bush to jump in and make that argument … is ludicrous in light of the arguments that his Justice Department makes on a daily basis in federal court," said Douglas A. Berman, a sentencing expert at Ohio State University law school. "Similar arguments are made by lots of other defendants who have a much lower profile and who have their lives destroyed and who are going to rot in prison for a very long time."

The decision to spare Libby also rekindled debate over the federal sentencing guidelines, first enacted in the mid-1980s to ensure that defendants who commit similar crimes receive similar punishment.

Critics of the system, including federal judges, say the rules don't allow for mitigating circumstances in individual cases and can result in overly harsh punishment.

But the Bush administration and the Justice Department have been tough enforcers of and advocates for the guidelines. And they have frequently been critical of federal judges who give lighter sentences.

That made Bush's announcement Monday all the more puzzling. The 30-month sentence was within the range of the federal guidelines, and was issued by a judge whom Bush had appointed to the bench.

...

Though Libby's sentence may have seemed overly harsh to the president, it comes at a time when courts are upholding stiff sentences. In 2003, the Supreme Court upheld by a 5-4 vote California's "Three Strikes" law and affirmed a life sentence for a petty thief whose third offense was stealing videotapes from a K-Mart.

Former members of the Bush administration have been sentenced to jail time in circumstances roughly analogous to those of Libby.

A former federal procurement official, David H. Safavian, was sentenced to 18 months in October for lying and concealing his dealings with GOP lobbyist Jack Abramoff. Late last month, a federal judge sentenced J. Steven Griles, the former second-ranking official in the Interior Department, to 10 months in prison for obstructing a Senate investigation into his dealings with Abramoff.

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-na-libby4jul04,0,6710317.story

[Sun Baked]

Your argument is as predictable as it is pathetic. Even if we were going to defend Clinton, and we aren't (despite his crimes in question being far less of a big deal compared to lying to protect an actually treasonable act), it doesn't excuse the President's actions. Clinton did it too. He lied under oath about a bj. He pardoned some people he shouldn't have. He did all sorts of bad stuff. How does that make what Libby did, and what Bush did, ok?

Hint: it doesn't, making me think you (once again) have nothing.

And Martha Stewart go 5+5 months about lying about something they decided not to prosecute her for.

Sort of sucks that these flaps aren't helping when it comes to bringing people in to talk to FBI agents and the grand jury.

Instead, many witnesses may find that it is easier to just get a lawyer.

Which makes things harder for investigators to do their job if you have a person scared about being thrown in jail for talking to agents on a case -- especially if they don't know which side of the courtroom they are going to land in.

[zimv20]

olbermann has something to say (http://www.crooksandliars.com/2007/07/03/keith-olbermanns-special-comment-you-ceased-to-be-the-president-of-the-united-states/#more-18986) about it. j'accuse!

[solvs]

olbermann has something to say (http://www.crooksandliars.com/2007/07/03/keith-olbermanns-special-comment-you-ceased-to-be-the-president-of-the-united-states/#more-18986) about it. j'accuse!

I rarely have time to watch Keith anymore and have to just catch the highlights elsewhere (he has a podcast, subscribe to it) but this one last night I made a point to watch. Such powerful words. I agree with him wholeheartedly on this one, and I suspect the 70% (and growing) minority of this country that is also sick of this feels the same way.

And on the eve of 4th of July of all times :mad: disgraceful.

[lu0s3r322]

oh man, ive never seen olbermann before because i dont have cable, but he was so right. he's a really good writer and thinker. i agree with him 100%

i would buy cable for him.

[hagjohn]

I'd like to agree with Noah that this was a hard decision made out of conviction, but I can't help think that Libby was protected from prison not to protect Libby, rather it was done to protect Libby's boss. And, this bothers me.


I agree.

[Thomas Veil]

oh man, ive never seen olbermann before because i dont have cable, but he was so right. he's a really good writer and thinker. i agree with him 100%

i would buy cable for him.Olbermann views himself a little bit like a successor to Edward R. Murrow. If you don't know who Murrow is, look him up -- fascinating guy. He took on Sen. Joe McCarthy, another fanatic, with equal gusto.

Anyway, looking to emulate someone else can be good or bad. Done poorly, you come across looking like a cheap wanna-be. But Olbermann does a good job of capturing Murrow's controlled anger at politicians who abuse their power. That makes him a bigger patriot than a lot of the other phony flag-wavers you see on TV.

Speaking of phonies, the other reason you'd like Olbermann is that he's got a wicked sense of humor. No one tweaks the noses of guys like Bill O'Reilly and Glenn Beck better.

[solvs]

Olbermann views himself a little bit like a successor to Edward R. Murrow.
Actually he always seems to humble himself when he mentions it, saying he's trying but could never compare, which makes me respect him even more.

Unusually fairly quiet from the righties in here about this.

[leekohler]

Unusually fairly quiet from the righties in here about this.

They're too busy celebrating the end of rule of law.

[solvs]

They're too busy celebrating the end of rule of law.

Doubt they're celebrating the further downfall of their movement. ;)

[leekohler]

Doubt they're celebrating the further downfall of their movement. ;)

The only way to stop your movement from failing is to get rid of the rule of law, then appoint a king. ;)

[FFTT]

Just about every working day over the past few years, we drive under a bridge where someone has always flown the American flag.

Today there was an IMPEACH banner posted in that same location.

I had alway felt that Bush would leave his office in disgrace.

He has exceeded even my towering expectations. :cool:

[Swarmlord]

<snip> And explain, as zimv20 noted, why Bush has been such a hardass about everyone else, but found a soft spot in his heart for Scooter.

Because Scooter didn't actually leak anything. I guess the only way you can avoid a pergury charge these days is to just repeat that you don't recall anything. Had Scooter been the leaker, I bet that he'd be serving that time.

[ReanimationLP]

I think Hell has a better chance of getting ice water than a Republican winning the 2008 Presidental ticket after Bush.

[Yankees 4 Life]

Slate's Timothy Noah had an interesting point about Bush's decision to commute Libby's sentence, he believes the judge was overly harsh in his decision and that Bush's act was one of compassion. I'd like to agree with Noah that this was a hard decision made out of conviction, but I can't help think that Libby was protected from prison not to protect Libby, rather it was done to protect Libby's boss. And, this bothers me.
And compassion from the guy who refused to commute death sentences while governor in Texas under any circumstances rings a little false now.

Don't forget, cheney just declared himself independent of the exective brach 2 weeks ago, hereby creating a fourth branch of gov't. This administration is so sneaky and deceptive and i can't wait till this eight years of hell are over

[paddy]

I think Hell has a better chance of getting ice water than a Republican winning the 2008 Presidental ticket after Bush.

I'll agree with that but unfortunately with the current state of government finances when the Dems do get it they'll have to pursue a conservative fiscal policy which will make them very unpopular leading to another conservative government next time round. Still thought at least that scum will be out of the WH.

[Ugg]

Because Scooter didn't actually leak anything. I guess the only way you can avoid a pergury charge these days is to just repeat that you don't recall anything. Had Scooter been the leaker, I bet that he'd be serving that time.

I think what this is all about and what the bushco apologists are afraid to admit, is that scooter probably knew a lot more than he was willing to admit. There's nothing like spending 2.5 years in prison to make you realize that blind loyalty only goes so far. scooter was a serious liability in prison although bush's pardon will cost the republicans a lot of votes.

There's always a silver lining somewhere!

[obeygiant]

scooter was a serious liability in prison although bush's pardon will cost the republicans a lot of votes.


Actually it probably cost the republicans votes because Bush didn't pardon Libby. Many were pissed at only a comutation.

[Sayhey]

Because Scooter didn't actually leak anything. I guess the only way you can avoid a pergury charge these days is to just repeat that you don't recall anything. Had Scooter been the leaker, I bet that he'd be serving that time.

"Scooter" was one of the leakers!

Your post only shows you know nothing about the case and repeat any talking point that you hear. Libby told both Time magazine's Matt Cooper and the New York Times reporter Judith Miller about Plame's identity as a CIA agent. The fact that the original source of Novak's article was someone else, Richard Armitage, doesn't make what Libby did - or what Rove and Ari Fleischer did - any less of a crime. All of them gave out the fact Plame worked for the CIA before Novak's piece appeared. The crime takes place when an unauthorized person receives the information (i.e reporters,) not when it is printed in an article.

What became clear was that Libby was given orders by Cheney to give out classified information to the press. Included in those instructions were Plame's employment status with the CIA. How you can so blithely ignore all of this and repeat "Libby didn't do anything" is just truly amazing!?

What Libby also did, that the others couldn't be convicted of, was to compound his leaking of Plame's name with lying to the prosecution and attempting to obstructed the investigation in order to save his own butt and that of his boss(es). All of this is a crime. All of it centers around the exposing of the identity, for political gain, of a national security asset critical in the fight against the spread of nuclear weapons. Some might call that treason (http://www.archive.org/details/George_H_W_Bush_19990426_Leaks_Traitors).

[imac/cheese]

They're too busy celebrating the end of rule of law.

Though I am not a fan of the pardon process in general, isn't it the law that gives the President the power to pardon and commute sentences?

[Sayhey]

Though I am not a fan of the pardon process in general, isn't it the law that gives the President the power to pardon and commute sentences?

Yes, but there is also this:

It's true that the Constitution grants the president unlimited clemency and pardon power. But presidents have generally used that power to show mercy or, in rare cases, make political amends -- not to protect themselves from exposure.

The Framers, ever sensitive to the need for checks and balances, recognized the potential for abuse of the pardon power. According to a Judiciary Committee report drafted in the aftermath of the Watergate crisis: "In the [Constitutional] convention George Mason argued that the President might use his pardoning power to 'pardon crimes which were advised by himself' or, before indictment or conviction, 'to stop inquiry and prevent detection.' James Madison responded:

"[I]f the President be connected, in any suspicious manner, with any person, and there be grounds [to] believe he will shelter him, the House of Representatives can impeach him; they can remove him if found guilty. . . .

"Madison went on to [say] contrary to his position in the Philadelphia convention, that the President could be suspended when suspected, and his powers would devolve on the Vice President, who could likewise be suspended until impeached and convicted, if he were also suspected."... Washington Post columnist Dan Froomkin in his artcle "Obstruction of Justice, Continued (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/blog/2007/07/03/BL2007070301366.html?nav=rss_opinion/columns)"

[gauchogolfer]

Because Scooter didn't actually leak anything. I guess the only way you can avoid a pergury charge these days is to just repeat that you don't recall anything. Had Scooter been the leaker, I bet that he'd be serving that time.

I suppose you could also try *gasp* telling the whole, unadulterated truth. Since it was his lying that prevented getting any other indictments, according to Fitzgerald, I think he should have served time, and not paid a slap-on-the-wrist fine.

[hulugu]

Because Scooter didn't actually leak anything. I guess the only way you can avoid a pergury charge these days is to just repeat that you don't recall anything. Had Scooter been the leaker, I bet that he'd be serving that time.

So, wait, what? So, you don't consider perjury a crime? Just an unfortunate happenstance?

I don't understand why you're doing ethical backflips for this guy.

[zimv20]

i just learned that marc rich was represented by libby scooter before rich's pardon. how's that for some irony?

[FFTT]

I'm sure the "Poor Scooter" defense fund has a lot of interesting contributors.

They destroy him publicly,but fund him privately to keep his mouth shut
about documents, contracts, contacts, and manipulations of the truth.

[IJ Reilly]

i just learned that marc rich was represented by libby scooter before rich's pardon. how's that for some irony?

Some. But even more so it's evidence that these people belong to an exclusive club which transcends political alignments. They serve and protect their own.

[Thomas Veil]

Because Scooter didn't actually leak anything. I guess the only way you can avoid a pergury charge these days is to just repeat that you don't recall anything. Had Scooter been the leaker, I bet that he'd be serving that time.As hulugu says, Scooter was convicted of perjury, not leaking.

Actually he always seems to humble himself when he mentions it, saying he's trying but could never compare, which makes me respect him even more.Agreed. He follows the man's style without trying to make himself the reincarnation of.

And finally:

Latest poll (http://americanresearchgroup.com/): 64&#37; of all adults, and 69% of all voters, disapprove of the commutation.

Better yet, check the questions about impeachment. Responders are 5-4 in favor of impeaching Cheney, and split even re: Bush. :)

[EMKoper]

But Clinton was a Bad Guy for pardoning Marc Rich...

... the full list of President Clinton pardons, reprieves, etc... (http://www.usdoj.gov/pardon/clintonpardon_grants.htm) all executives pardon folks that make us 'scratch our heads'... check it out... I am scratching my head on some of these!

[FFTT]

This was all a carefully orchestrated maneuver used to protect Cheney's office.

Good 'ol Scooter knows WAY too much and Cheney and Rove and Gonzales would go down if he were to sing.

[solvs]

Kind of an old thread, but I didn't want to start a new one:

Justice Dept Seeks Reduced Abramoff Sentence (http://voices.washingtonpost.com/washingtonpostinvestigations/2008/08/justice_dept_seeks_reduced_abr.html)

[gauchogolfer]

Kind of an old thread, but I didn't want to start a new one:

Justice Dept Seeks Reduced Abramoff Sentence (http://voices.washingtonpost.com/washingtonpostinvestigations/2008/08/justice_dept_seeks_reduced_abr.html)

Sounds like both sides are looking to reduce his sentence, since he's been cooperating with prosecutions of others. I don't have too big a problem with it....unless he ends up serving in a McCain administration.