Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder Moreover, what Clinton did or didn't do is completely irrelevant to what Bush has done here. It's also very telling when all anyone can do is defend this with "well the other guy did it", as if two wrongs make a right.
Originally Posted By friendofdd I think I am more confused than usual. Some of the posts seem to be talking about a pardon. Wasn't it a commutation of sentence?
Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder "I think I am more confused than usual. Some of the posts seem to be talking about a pardon. Wasn't it a commutation of sentence?" Some people are bringing up Clinton's pardons as a way of excusing Bush's commutation of Libby's sentence. Also, Bush apparently has not ruled out pardoning Libby.
Originally Posted By RoadTrip I still think this is much ado about nothing. President Bush has been responsible for the deaths of thousands of U.S. soldiers and 10's of thousands of Iraqi civilians. Now we are supposed to get all upset because a mid-level official lied in court. Give me a break. I am so far beyond that it makes no difference.
Originally Posted By RoadTrip <<Now we are supposed to get all upset because a mid-level official lied in court.>> Should have added "and Bush kept him out of jail".
Originally Posted By Elderp "I think I am more confused than usual. Some of the posts seem to be talking about a pardon. Wasn't it a commutation of sentence?" The press secretary in today's briefing said that Bush hasn't ruled out a pardon. I think when public interest dies you will see the full pardon come out. The problem right now is Libby can still lose his law license and Bush doesn't want that but public sentiment is a bit high now. It is totally bunk, but that is what is going on.
Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder It is a very, very, very, very, very, very very, very, very sad commentary on the state of this Administration and our country when its president stoops to criminal conduct to free one of his cronies and no one seems to care.
Originally Posted By friendofdd SPP, I don't know about the criminal aspect. The network news coverage seems to indicate this commutation is legal, I'm not qualified to make such a decision, so have to take thier word for it. But I really don't understand why you say no one cares. There is much public controversy and criticism, as well as such discussions as this topic. Many seem to care very strongly.
Originally Posted By gadzuux Ready for a surprise? For all you folks who think we're overreacting about libby's prison sentence being commuted and think it pales in comparison to marc rich - guess who marc rich's lawyer was that presided over his pardon with clinton? Why none other than lewis scooter libby! From 2001 reports - <a href="http://archives.cnn.com/2001/ALLPOLITICS/03/02/clinton.library/" target="_blank">http://archives.cnn.com/2001/A LLPOLITICS/03/02/clinton.library/</a> >> WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Vice President Dick Cheney's chief of staff testified Thursday he believes prosecutors of billionaire financier Marc Rich "misconstrued the facts and the law" when they went after Rich on tax evasion charges. The testimony from Lewis "Scooter" Libby, who represented Rich dating back to 1985 but stopped working for him in the spring of 2000, came during a contentious, hours-long House committee hearing into former President Bill Clinton's eleventh-hour pardons. << So I guess that argument just went out the window.
Originally Posted By vbdad55 <So I guess that argument just went out the window< How did it go out the window -- all it shows is exactly what I have been saying - GOP or Dem right now - they are all in this together - this just shows it further.
Originally Posted By ClintFlint2 Yes rt I see it the same way. What is the big deal anyway?? This administration has killed thousands of people and stripped all of us of our freedoms now we should be outraged over this smaller incident? Nobody died, nobody was hurt, nobody got even poison oak or a blister. WHO CARES?!
Originally Posted By Dabob2 Well, it's a strange phenomenon with us humans. Usually we can somehow wrap our heads around a single person much more than thousands. There's a great but little-known Billy Wilder movie with Kirk Douglas called Ace in the Hole, in which Douglas says (paraphrasing) something like: "thousands of people dead is a tragedy we don't want to think about. One person trapped in a well is front page stuff." Sometimes it's because the one person comes to symbolize something larger. Thousands were dying in Darfur AND Iraq when the Teri Schiavo case came up; one person, yet it was she who commanded the headlines, newscasts, and the attention of Congress and the President (far more than Darfur ever has). Because she came to symbolize many things for many people; the absolute value of life for some, the question of who decides the fate of someone in that condition for others, the question of if the government should be involved in highly personal family decisions for others. Likewise, Libby's commutation symbolizes larger things about this presidency that are much easier to get our heads around than distant tragedies. I'm not saying that's a good thing; I'm saying it's quite common.
Originally Posted By gadzuux The 'one person' isn't libby, it's bush. The outrage isn't directed at libby either. The "point" is that our government has become so corrupted by THIS ADMINISTRATION that, even when they're legitimately indicted and convicted, they still dodge accountability. The appearance of 'quid pro quo' (you do this for me and I'll do that for you) doesn't matter to them. The apologists are making a big deal out of the fact that "libby never asked for a presidential pardon". Well no surprise there - he didn't need to. He's likely known from the beginning that he would be sprung no matter what. He was painted into the role of fall guy, with expert legal advice on exactly what to say to derail the investigation. The result is that the investigation dead ends - exactly the intent all along. They've stymied the ability of the special prosecutor to do his job by having libby commit federal crimes. Then in turn, they override a jury and several judges (and federal laws) to exhonerate libby from his actions. This is what corruption means. Contorting our government to serve their own interests. And that's an impeachable offense if ever there was one.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 <The 'one person' isn't libby, it's bush. > Well, exactly. That's why I said "Libby's commutation symbolizes larger things about this presidency." That post was an excellent summation of why this matters and why it angers people so. And before anyone jumps on gadzuux for suggesting impeachment; it's true that the president has nearly unlimited powers to pardon or commute. It's not THAT action that would be impeachable. But if it could be shown that this was a quid pro quo all along; that Bush (and/or Cheney) directed Libby to lie in order to derail the investigation, and told him that even if he was convicted, not to worry, you won't serve a day in jail - THAT would be impeachable. I don't know how you prove that, and I'm not even saying it happened that way. I am saying it would hardly shock me.
Originally Posted By ClintFlint2 ////that Bush (and/or Cheney) directed Libby to lie in order to derail the investigation,//// how on earth is anybody going to get an admission that Bush ordered the Code Red? So Bush told someone to lie, BIG DEAL, (not). I lie every day. But I have never killed anyone or broke into my neighbors house with guns just because my neighbor MIGHT be up to no good. Why not address Mr. Bush's real crimes against god and humanity like killing thousands and invading lands without provocation? because the opposition party is divided and weak and they can't do jack to Bush so they needle him with petty nonsense like cover ups and lies where nobody was hurt. Who gives a rip! Just like when b. clinton was not terribly honest nobody got hurt so who gives a rip about that one also. I sure don't. In fact I give him the high five for getting some on the side. It will be news to me when the cover up leads to death or beating of someone and until then I'm out.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 ////that Bush (and/or Cheney) directed Libby to lie in order to derail the investigation,//// <how on earth is anybody going to get an admission that Bush ordered the Code Red?> They're not, I'm sure. <So Bush told someone to lie, BIG DEAL, (not). I lie every day.> You're missing the point. There's no crime committed when you lie to your wife if she asks you if you like her new shoes. If Bush or Cheney asked Libby to lie to a Grand Jury or the special investigator or FBI, AND told him that in case of his being convicted of perjury they'd in effect spring him, yes that is a crime. But as you say, nearly impossible to prove short of a confession. <Why not address Mr. Bush's real crimes against god and humanity like killing thousands and invading lands without provocation?> Separate matter, and well worth addressing. Some people are, of course, but Congress doesn't seem to have the stomach for it.
Originally Posted By gadzuux You're right - we'll probably never know the complete truth. But there's the "appearance" of quid pro quo, and that alone would be enough for any other administration to avoid this pitfall. Not this bunch - they've never shown the least concern about "appearances" of anything, with conflicts of interest all over the place, for the entire six years. See also: Halliburton.
Originally Posted By vbdad55 <WHO CARES?!< well I still care, it was wrong and continues to send the wrong message that if you are well connected enough in politics you can basically do anything....I hate that, but first have to find a political party that actually cares what I think.
Originally Posted By jonvn You are not going to. You have to work with the two you have, and change one of them.
Originally Posted By vbdad55 I just don't see that happening anytime soon, sorry to be such a pessimist..
