Bush does the right thing, for a change

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Bro. Curtis, Jul 2, 2007.

  1. Bro. Curtis

    Bro. Curtis
    Expand Collapse
    <img src =/curtis.gif>

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2001
    Messages:
    20,240
    Likes Received:
    2
    http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=a2WQ_iYK.XEI&refer=home


    July 2 (Bloomberg) -- President George W. Bush commuted Lewis ``Scooter'' Libby's prison term in the CIA leak case, saying the 2 1/2 year prison term was ``excessive.''
    Libby, 56, was convicted of lying to investigators probing the 2003 leak of CIA official Valerie Plame's identity. Backers of Libby, former chief of staff to Vice President Dick Cheney, had argued for a pardon. Bush acted after a U.S. appellate court today refused to let Libby stay out of prison during his appeal.
    ``My decision to commute his prison sentence leaves in place a harsh punishment for Mr. Libby,'' Bush said in a statement. ``The consequences of his felony conviction on his former life as a lawyer, public servant, and private citizen will be long- lasting.''
     
  2. MrJim

    MrJim
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2007
    Messages:
    354
    Likes Received:
    0
    If Bill Clinton didn't have to go to jail...
     
  3. Magnetic Poles

    Magnetic Poles
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    May 16, 2005
    Messages:
    10,407
    Likes Received:
    0
    Did anyone expect anything less from this corrupt administration? Libby walks and yet Gernarlow Wilson continues to serve a much more excessive sentence in Georgia. I guess if Libby was a black kid, it'd be different.
     
  4. Bro. Curtis

    Bro. Curtis
    Expand Collapse
    <img src =/curtis.gif>

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2001
    Messages:
    20,240
    Likes Received:
    2
    Um, I don't see the connection. Wilson maybe shouldn't be in jail, but it's got nothing at all to do with this case.

    Anyhoo, Libby still has to shell out $250 grand. Not exactly chump change. And Bush's complete statement is far from a glowing fan letter. It's pretty harsh, and this is fair.
     
  5. MrJim

    MrJim
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2007
    Messages:
    354
    Likes Received:
    0

    Who's that?:confused:
     
  6. carpro

    carpro
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Messages:
    20,896
    Likes Received:
    294
    Excellent decision.
     
  7. StefanM

    StefanM
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2004
    Messages:
    6,422
    Likes Received:
    72
    I would have been outraged at a pardon, but I'm not upset over this. He's still a convicted felon.
     
  8. Enoch

    Enoch
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2004
    Messages:
    1,267
    Likes Received:
    0
    :applause: This is good, although I would have preferred a pardon for Mr. Libby. But perhaps this is more advantageous down the road...
     
  9. Petra-O IX

    Petra-O IX
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2006
    Messages:
    1,086
    Likes Received:
    0
    There was no doubt in my mind that Libby was not going to be sent to prison to rot. Whether his sentence was commuted or if he had been pardoned, Libby was going to be taken care of.
    If George Bush wants to really do the right thing he would Pardon Border Patrol Agents Ramos and Compean. These two guys are real victims of a trumped up justice.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e3cBjFL0sMg
     
  10. Bro. Curtis

    Bro. Curtis
    Expand Collapse
    <img src =/curtis.gif>

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2001
    Messages:
    20,240
    Likes Received:
    2
    Amen to that, Rocko.
     
  11. menageriekeeper

    menageriekeeper
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2004
    Messages:
    7,152
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ya'll are going to have to explain to me how this is a good thing. :confused:
     
  12. Pastor Larry

    Pastor Larry
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    May 4, 2001
    Messages:
    21,763
    Likes Received:
    0
    How's it bad?

    The Dems, in the debate on Tavis Smiley the other night, lamented white collar criminals in prison, lamented mandatory sentencing, lament overcrowding of jails ... except apparently when they have an opportunity to play politics with it.

    It's probably the right thing.

    Libby did not jeopardize national security (contrary to what some Dems are claiming). He perjured himself, apparently, which is ... exactly what Bill Clinton did.

    Compare the sentences: 250,000 to 90,000 (is that correct?); loss of job and 30 months in prison to 24 months continuing in the WH and no time time in prison ...

    All in all, the Dems don't have much to complain about. Libby is still a convicted felon with a ruined reputation for lying about something that never happened.
     
  13. KenH

    KenH
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2002
    Messages:
    32,485
    Likes Received:
    0
    I wonder how this will play politically in 2008? Will it smack of more Bush cronyism to the average voter? Will it add even more momentum to the Republican Party's death spiral?
     
  14. Timsings

    Timsings
    Expand Collapse
    Member

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2006
    Messages:
    585
    Likes Received:
    0

    Once again it all comes down to whose ox is being gored . . . and who is doing the goring. All you Christian-Republicans want it both ways. When the government is against your positions (e. g., abortion), it can do no good. When it agrees with you, then it is wonderful. The point of our democracy is that the three branches are to function without the fear of intrusion by the other branches. The system of checks and balances is written into the Constitution to try to prevent abuses.

    In the case of Libby, President Bush has abused his position to keep a crony from going to prison. You say he has to pay a quarter million dollar fine. Big Deal! It's only money. I suspect that is pocket change. I also wouldn't be surprised if someone else pays the fine for him. President Bush is also worried about his damaged reputation. Another Big Deal! I'm sure he has a job waiting for him. Can you say "Halliburton"? (I knew you could.)

    You Christian-Republicans are upset about the Clinton case because the system worked, but you didn't like the outcome. In the Libby case, you're happy about the outcome, but it was only achieved by an intrusion into the judicial process by the executive branch. So much for the rule of law. Now we have something analogous to the rule of "You play the way I want to, or I'll take my ball and go home."

    This is a great way to celebrate the Fourth of July.

    I haven't read much of the Democrats' reaction, but what I have seen is not any better than the praise raised by the Christian-Republicans.

    Tim Reynolds
     
  15. carpro

    carpro
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Messages:
    20,896
    Likes Received:
    294
    I doubt that it will matter at all. At least no more than Clinton's pardons affected the democrats in the 2000 election.

    None of the players are running from office.
     
  16. Bro. James Reed

    Bro. James Reed
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2002
    Messages:
    2,992
    Likes Received:
    0
    On a perjury charge, the commuted sentence seems to be pretty fair.

    I have been on the ropes about this case since it happened. Persoannly, I have always seen reasons why he should have been exonerated and reasons why he should have been put in jail.

    Two things about this case; he lied under oath, and it seems that he was goaded into doing it by the prosecutors who continued to pursue him even after they knew the truth. (Kind of reminds me of the Duke Lacrosse case with Nifong pursuing unwarranted charges.) If the man hadn't lied, he would have come out fine. As it is, he served a good bit of time already for the lying, and he's facing a large fine and a bad name for the rest of his life. All in all, I would say that justice was done in this case, although it would have been better if this had been the sentence from the trial.
     
  17. Bro. James Reed

    Bro. James Reed
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2002
    Messages:
    2,992
    Likes Received:
    0
    Are you serious?

    The branches were designed to overlap with checks and balances so they could intrude on each other. That's what keeps one branch from going completely haywire and making itself the highest authority. Congress can pass laws and the President can veto them (intrusion), to which the Congress can override (intrusion of his intrusion), and the Supreme Court can overturn them (intrusion). The Supreme Court can make opinions on laws and the Congress can amend the Constitution (intrusion) or limit the power of the Supreme Court (intrusion) and the President can nominate people of his choosing to fill the court (intrusion). The President can execute an order and the Supreme Court can overturn his decision (intrusion) and the Congress can write laws negating the President's executive orders (intrusion).

    The reason the branches are allowed to intrude on one another is to prevent abuses of power.

    So far, it has worked pretty well, with some exceptions.
     
  18. Matt Black

    Matt Black
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2003
    Messages:
    9,141
    Likes Received:
    0
    This decision disgusts me. I thought we were bad enough over here with Tony's Cronies, and now it seems that cronyism is alive and kicking over your side of the Pond too. It reminds me of Henry II's rant against Becket in the 1160s: "It takes two murders to hang a cleric but only one to hang a layman." What we are witnessing here is a 21st century version of the Benefit of Clergy: the Benefit of Being Dubya's Friend.
     
  19. menageriekeeper

    menageriekeeper
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2004
    Messages:
    7,152
    Likes Received:
    0
    Coming from an area where cronyism has been a huge problem in the past, this one thing will stop me from voting Republican this year. I don't care how a man says he "feels" about abortion when his character is so flawed that he can't see past his own wants. Bush (and Cheny) has polluted the entire party with his arrogance. I can say Halliburton just fine.

    Back to Libby: If he had no reason to lie, then why did he?

    Lying under oath about something that was only the business of a man's wife and lying for absolutely no reason at all are two different beasts. I'm not sure why I can see the difference and those that think this is a good thing can't. (btw, I don't in anyway approve of Clinton's affair, I just believe that is an area the public has no business in unless the acts were non consensual)
     
  20. KenH

    KenH
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2002
    Messages:
    32,485
    Likes Received:
    0
    Libby has spent time in jail over this already?
     

Share This Page

Loading...