Bush does the right thing, for a change

"This commutation sends the clear signal that in this administration, cronyism and ideology trump competence and justice." - Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, D-N.Y.

Oh Yeah?

See the list of Clinton pardons.

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

 

It's no wonder that less and less people are claiming to be adherents of both major parties.

 

Where have you been?

Cronyism has always been alive and well in American politics. Don't look for it to end any time soo.

Your disgust at this decision may be misplaced. Many believe that the entire investigation into the trumped up Plame affair was disgusting, as well.

Fitzgerald continued to "investigate" even after he knew who the "leaker" was and he knew that no law was broken with that disclosure.

 

Bush did the right thing towards Libby in this case.

What amazes me is your continued justification and apologetic attitude towards the liberal and inept Bush Administration by comparing them to the Clinton years. Exactly how low are the standards you are using?

I agree with Bro Curtis that this has nothing to do with another case, but how do you justify an administration that commutes a sentence for Libby and continues to let two border agents unjustly languish in jail? It tells me this administration is liberal, inept, leaderless, and deserving of all that has befallen it.

 

Is there something wrong with being a Christian and a Republican?

 

I sure hope this doesn't mean that you're going to support a pro-abortion Democrat.

 

No, but there is something wrong with an administration that pandered for Christian votes, and turned right around and did everything liberal in the book, from record deficit spending, to uncontrolled borders, to inaction on social security, medicare, abortion, etc, to ineptness in executing a war.

 

There will more candidates on the ballot for president other than the two choices from different sides of the same Big Government coin.

It just depends on what is more important to a voter - voting for the "winner" of the Big Government run-off or voting for principle.

 

And the difference between that and a pro abortion republican is..................?

 

Best I figure, there's far more pro-abortion democrats running for president than pro-abortion republicans.
(I won't even vote for a pro-abortion dog catcher, no matter what party he's in.)

 

I'm still praying for the opportunity to vote for principles (pro-life is number 1 with me) and a winner. Best I can tell, every democrat running for president is pro-abortion. Now, if a pro-life democrat would step up to the plate, we'll see.

 

Probably your only hope for that combination would be for Congressman Ron Paul to win the GOP presidential nomination(and that is very unlikely). As things stand now it looks to me like the other GOP presidential wanna bees are almost sure fire losers to either Senator Clinton or Senator Obama.

As for me, after the GOP nominates another liberal such as Rudy Giuliani or Fred Thompson for president I'll be supporting the Libertarian Party presidential candidate.

 

Not at all. But there is something wrong when the two are equated or so tightly connected that the possibility of legitimately being Christian and anything besides Republican is denied. I have read such sentiments on this forum. Anyone who makes such an identification is bound to be disappointed. Also, it is not limited to Republicans. It is true whether you're talking about Democrats, Libertarians, Socialists, Communists, Greens, Progressives, or any other party you want to name.

Tim Reynolds

 

Man, you are right about that. To compare anything in the Bible with the likes of the the republican party or any other man made party (especially democrat) borders on heresey.

 

http://www.nysun.com/article/57770

Bush's Clemency

New York Sun Editorial
July 3, 2007


It has been said by the marquis Beccaria, that the power of pardon does not exist under a perfect administration of the laws; and that the admission of the power is a tacit acknowledgment of the infirmity of the course of justice. But if this be a defect at all, it arises from the infirmity of human nature generally; and in this view, is no more objectionable, than any other power of government; for every such power, in some sort, arises from human infirmity.… The power to pardon, then, being a fit one to be entrusted to all governments, humanity and sound policy dictate, that this benign prerogative should be, as little as possible, fettered, or embarrassed. The criminal code of every country partakes so much of necessary severity, that, without an easy access to exceptions in favour of unfortunate guilt, justice would assume an aspect too sanguinary and cruel.

— Joseph Story, Commentaries on the Constitution

The press and even his colleagues in Congress may have written President Bush off as a lame duck, but with the decision to grant clemency to I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby Jr., Mr. Bush demonstrated yesterday that he understands the nature of the attack on his administration and the politics of the war. Libby may have preferred a full-scale pardon, but there is yet time for that once Libby's legal appeals are exhausted. The decision to grant clemency rather than a pardon now holds out the possibility that a court may rule the special prosecutor illegal, thus sparing not only Libby but public servants in future administrations of any political party from having their boldness affected, in the words of Justice Scalia's great dissent in Morrison v. Olson.

The decision to spare Libby time in prison is not only humane but also just, for the underlying leak of Valerie Plame's identity was committed not by Libby but by Richard Armitage, and once that was known, the investigation should have stopped. Clemency is one of the presidency's least fettered constitutional powers, and in exercising it yesterday, Mr. Bush made clear that he understands the office he holds.

Mr. Bush's nuanced statement paid heed both to the decision of the judge and jury in the case and also to the facts as they are. Not so the intemperate response by the special counsel, Patrick Fitzgerald, who, in an extraordinary statement for an employee of the executive branch, challenged Mr. Bush's judgment that the 30-month prison sentence imposed on Mr. Libby was "excessive." As Story realized and as Mr. Bush realizes, it was precisely to deal with failures of judgment such as Mr. Fitzgerald's and the sentencing judge's that the Founders of America inserted the powers of pardon and clemency into the Constitution.

 

Whoops. I read the article wrong. I thought it said he had already spent 30 months in jail.

Perhaps he should spend some time in the pokey. Maybe Bush should have waited to commute for a few months to let Libby stew for a while.

Still, I can't help but think that had the prosecutors stopped the investigation once they knew the truth, then Libby would never have had the opportunity to lie.

It's about like a person convicted of murder who is eventually found to be innocent of the crime, yet while they were in prison they escaped and were caught, so they still have to serve the time from escaping from the prison they never should have been sent to in the first place.

I don't know, it really doesn't affect me either way. People in high places have always used their influence to help their friends and family in times of crises, so why should we expect different now? Lying under oath, unless you're a normal person, doesn't matter to anyone anymore, so what difference does it make? We all expect politicians to be liars anyway.

 

Few have good enough memories to effectively defeat a prosecutor whose sole purpose, buy that time, was to trip Scooter up, by demanding a statement of fact that he had a less than perfect memory. Fitzgerald needed a conviction of some sort, because his original premise wouldn't hold water. This whole trial is an embarrassment for America.

I wonder what you folks who dislike this act of pardon, thought of Clinton's en mas pardons, including Mark Rich, a known criminal on the run, and those So. American killers, and drug dealers. What no accusations of "political favoritism" or the "monetary gain" for the Clinton library. Or is all that different?

Should have been a full pardon. Maybe GWB will later.

 

I have no problem giving the man a pardon, and your comparison to the Clinton pardons has a lot of good points. What irks me is an administration that will pardon Libby, yet let two border patrol agents who were doing their job sit in jail for long terms, prosecuted by an administration that has no clue how to control the borders, or an attorney general that doesn't know a thing about justice.

 

The next time I read "Bush does the right thing", I hope it is a report of his pleading guilty to high crimes & misdemeanors in his impeachment trial. Barring that, maybe just news that he has resigned.

 

Based on what I know, and that is limited, GWB should have pardoned those two immediately. I keep wondering if what I don't know is why they're in jail.

I think they know how to control the borders, but choose not to. NOT GOOD