Quote :

"What this President has done is reject the sentence of a judge he appointed, on a case prosecuted by a man he selected, that was unanimously upheld by a 3-judge panel two-thirds of which probably voted for him."

So? I'd think worse of him if he just cow-towed to the judicial branch because they're "his" people. Maybe that's just me.

The President can pardon whomever he pleases for whatever reason he wants. It's good to be king. Should he have pardoned Libby? Well, that's a little like asking if he should've eaten scrambled eggs for breakfast or worn the red vs. blue tie. He's the President. He can pardon whomever he pleases for whatever reason he wants.

Want standards for Presidential Pardons? We call those elections. I think he won the last one.

There is an element of "authority" inherent to the Executive branch. Get used to it. And for the record, the Libby trial was a bunch of anti-climatic political nonsense, hardly anything worth ruining a man's life over, and the apoplectic liberals writhing over the even-more-anti-climactic commutation can suck it.

On a lighter note ...

My favorite part of the commutation aftermath was this gem from Al Sharpton about Genarlow Wilson:

Quote :

""If this young man's name was Scooter Wilson, he wouldn't be in jail," Sharpton told supporters at a "rally for justice" at the Douglas County courthouse, west of Atlanta. "If he had a different complexion, and a different connection, we'd be having a welcome-home party. But since he didn't have anybody in the Oval Office to deal with excessive sentencing for him, he got hundreds in the streets that will speak on his behalf.""

Constitution Alert! The President can't pardon state crimes, only federal! If only Genarlow Wilson had the benefit of a Special Prosecutor with unlimited power and money to chase him down over his blow job, instead of the local beat cops ...

7/7/2007 6:16:36 AM

Quote :

"And for the record, the Libby trial was a bunch of anti-climatic political nonsense, hardly anything worth ruining a man's life over, and the apoplectic liberals writhing over the even-more-anti-climactic commutation can suck it."

Personally, I think if you take this case out of the setting of all the rampant corruption and poor decision making that the Bush administration has committed, barely an eyelash is batted. No one would really care. Just like all the pardons of Clinton didn't raise too much of a stink at the time because the only truely terrible thing Clinton did in office was get a BJ.

But, when thing after thing continually goes wrong, even the smallest of issues sets you off. And this is yet another line item in an administration that has been one of the most secretive, dictatorial, (attempted) liberty stealing that this country has seen yet.

7/7/2007 9:27:44 AM

Quote :

"Constitution Alert! The President can't pardon state crimes, only federal!"

Smoker4

Hmm.

Quote :

"Need for Relief. The purpose for which pardon is sought may influence disposition of the petition. A felony conviction may result in a wide variety of legal disabilities under state or federal law, some of which can provide persuasive grounds for recommending a pardon [emphasis added]. For example, a specific employment-related need for pardon, such as removal of a bar to licensure or bonding, may make an otherwise marginal case sufficiently compelling to warrant a grant in aid of the individual's continuing rehabilitation. On the other hand, the absence of a specific need should not be held against an otherwise deserving applicant, who may understandably be motivated solely by a strong personal desire for a sign of forgiveness."

http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/pardons3.htm

Quote :

"The [Supreme] Court has also described the pardoning power as 'unlimited' (with the exception of treason) and 'not subject to legislative control.'"

http://ednet.rvc.cc.il.us/~PeterR/Papers/paper1.htm

But the official USDOJ site lists this:

Quote :

"Under the Constitution, only federal criminal convictions, such as those obtained in the United States District Courts, may be pardoned by the President. In addition, the President's pardon power extends to convictions obtained in the Superior Court of the District of Columbia and military court-martial proceedings. However, the President cannot pardon a state criminal offense. Accordingly, if you are seeking clemency for a state criminal conviction, you should not complete and submit this petition. Instead, you should contact the Governor or other appropriate authorities of the state where you reside or where the conviction occurred (such as the state board of pardons and paroles) to determine whether any relief is available to you under state law. If you have a federal conviction, information about the conviction may be obtained from the clerk of the federal court where you were convicted."

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

Seems to be a bit of a contradiction, yes?

[Edited on July 7, 2007 at 10:26 PM. Reason : .]

7/7/2007 10:10:24 PM

I am sure W. can just claim executive privilege as the Commander Guy and pardon whom he damn well pleases. The Constitution is just a piece of paper after all. Hell, his VP is the fourth branch of government so I wonder what kinds of mystical powers their god has bestowed upon him as well.

7/8/2007 1:30:31 AM

^ Thanks for that trinket, HockeyRomance.

7/8/2007 11:43:25 PM

presidential pardons is hardly a new thing. every president pardons a bunch of their buddies and buddies' buddies on their way out the door.

the problem is not so much that GWB commuted Libby's sentence, and will most likely grant him a full pardon by Jan 2009.

its that its yet another instance in a long string of actions from this Administration where they consistently show nothing but contempt for the Constitution and the principles of The Rule of Law that this country was founded upon.

7/9/2007 1:28:49 AM

Quote :

"presidential pardons is are hardly a new thing."

I'm trying to quit the Grammar Nazi Party, but you can do better, schmoe. Watch your subject-verb agreement.

Some problems I have with the protestations over the Libby commutation:

1. The selective outrage by many liberals. This is the main reason that the comparison of Clinton pardons and commutations is relevant.

2. The way special prosecutors and independent counsels function. A usually elected county prosecutor, for example: (1) You are caught allegedly committing a crime by law enforcement officer(s); and (2) the charge is dismissed, reduced, or you have your day in court to defend yourself. Simple.

The special prosecutors/independent counsel way: (1) A prosecutor is appointed in highly politically charged environment; (2) federal agents are involved and it is a federal crime to lie to them--even if you just get mixed up, which is easy to do; (3) grand juries, which it has been said could be convinced to indict a ham sandwich, are involved; and (4) the prosecutor goes looking for a crime, and it is seen as a partisan failure if someone is not indicted on some charge--whether the charges have anything to do with the alleged underlying crime or not.

If a special prosecutor/independent counsel were to be appointed for each person on TWW, we would all be in jail. Believe it.

[Edited on July 9, 2007 at 3:04 AM. Reason : .]

7/9/2007 3:00:56 AM

Quote :

"(the concept of) presidential pardons is hardly a new thing"

presidential pardons as a singular concept was (obviously) implied. i guess i shouldn't have assumed you would recognize that. i know you grammarians are some classic type-A concrete thinkers. in the future, i shall be more careful not to upset your sense of order.

7/9/2007 3:06:54 AM

http://www.denverpost.com/opinion/ci_6308408

7/9/2007 10:27:13 PM

^ FYI: That's unacceptable in TSB.

7/9/2007 11:53:33 PM

^^ that was a good article.

written by a Reagan-appointed US Attorney working at the DOJ.

Im sure Gonzalez will try and have him fired for writing that piece.

and no, you shouldn't post bare links. few people will read it.

7/10/2007 1:15:31 AM

^^no, not really. that's unacceptable as a first post for a thread.

7/10/2007 1:19:13 AM

It was late, I was watching the Tour and didn't feel like adding a lot of commentary. I figured those that were interested in the story would click on the link anyway.

7/10/2007 8:38:45 AM

Ending the Farce
By David Brooks
The New York Times

Quote :

"In retrospect, Plamegate was a farce in five acts. The first four were scabrous, disgraceful and absurd. Justice only reared its head at the end. The drama opened, as these dark comedies are wont to do, with a strutting little peacock who went by the unimaginative name of Joe Wilson. Mr. Wilson claimed that his wife had nothing to do with his trip to investigate Iraqi purchases in Niger, though that seems not to have been the case. He claimed his trip proved Iraq had made no such attempts, though his own report said nothing of the kind. In short order, Wilson established himself as the charming P.T. Barnum of the National Security set, an inveterate huckster who could be counted on to wrap every actual fact in six layers of embellishment. His small part in the larger fiasco of the Iraq war would not have registered a micron of attention had the villain of the epic — the vice president — not exercised his unfailing talent for vindictive self-destruction. Act Two opened with a cast of thousands crowding the stage, filling the air with fevered vapors and gleeful rage. Perhaps you can remember those days, when the Plame story pretended to be about the outing of an undercover C.I.A. agent. Perhaps you can remember the howls of outrage from our liberal friends, about the threat to national security, the secret White House plot to discredit its enemies. Perhaps you remember the media stakeouts of Karl Rove’s driveway, the constant perp-walk photos of Rove on his way to and from the grand jury, the delirious calls from producers (The indictment is coming today! The indictment is coming today!). There were media types so eager to get Rove, so artificially appalled at the thought of somebody actually leaking classified information, they were willing to forgive prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald for throwing journalists in jail. It was like watching a city of Ahabs getting deliriously close to the great white whale. That was back when everybody thought Rove was the key leaker. But then it turned out he wasn’t. Richard Armitage was, as Fitzgerald knew from the start. By the start of Act Three, nobody cared about the outing of a C.I.A. agent. That part of the scandal disappeared. And all that was left of Joe Wilson and Valerie Plame were the creepy photos in Vanity Fair. Act Three was the perjury act, and attention shifted to the unlikely figure of Scooter Libby. As Joe Wilson was an absurd man with a plain name, Scooter Libby was a plain man with an absurd name. And the odder thing was that Libby was the only normal person in the asylum. People who knew him thought him discreet, honest and admirable. And yet the charges were brought and the storm clouds of idiocy gathered once more. Republicans who’d worked themselves up into a spittle-spewing rage because Bill Clinton lied under oath were appalled that anybody would bother with poor Libby over lying under oath. Democrats who were outraged that Bill Clinton was hounded for something as trivial as perjury were furious that Scooter Libby might not be ruined for a crime as heinous as perjury. It was an orgy of shamelessness. The God of Self-Respect took sabbatical. The trial and sentencing, Act Four, was, to be honest, somewhat anticlimactic. Fitzgerald, having lost all perspective, demanded Libby get a harsh sentence as punishment for crimes he had not been convicted of. The judge, casting himself as David against Goliath, demonstrated an impressive capacity for talking about himself. And finally, yesterday, came Act Five, and a paradox. Scooter Libby emerged as the least absurd character in the entire drama, and yet he was the one who committed a crime. President Bush entered the stage like a character from another world, a world in which things make sense. His decision to commute Libby’s sentence but not erase his conviction was exactly right. It punishes him for his perjury, but not for the phantasmagorical political farce that grew to surround him. It takes away his career, but not his family. Of course, the howlers howl. That is their assigned posture in this drama. They entered howling, they will leave howling and the only thing you can count on is their anger has been cynically manufactured from start to finish. The farce is over. It has no significance. Nobody but Libby’s family will remember it in a few weeks time. Everyone else will have moved on to other fiascos, other poses, fresher manias."

http://freedemocracy.blogspot.com/2007/07/david-brooks-ending-farce.html

[/Plamegate]

7/13/2007 3:16:56 AM

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D8QFR71G1&show_article=1

Plame case dismissed by D.C. judge, no details as to why yet. let the conclusions be drawn...

update: U.S. District Judge John D. Bates dismissed the case on jurisdictional grounds and said he would not express an opinion on the constitutional arguments. Bates dismissed the case against all defendants: Cheney, White House political adviser Karl Rove and former White House aide I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby.



[Edited on July 19, 2007 at 3:20 PM. Reason : sdfsdf]

7/19/2007 3:17:05 PM

http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200704u/nj_rauch_2007-04-03

Just some food for thought.

7/19/2007 8:16:12 PM