Libby's sentance commuted

[TevashSzat]

Americans really should kick this two-party habit. It's obviously bad for one's health.

Hmm... you are right, we ought to make it one party with ME as its leader jk

[KukriKhan]

Hang on to your hats, ladies and gentlemen, boys and girls. This might be the spark that lights the fuse to the fully-loaded cannon that is the frustration and outrage of the american people.

[Lemur]

This might be the spark that lights the fuse to the fully-loaded cannon that is the frustration and outrage of the american people.

And we will do what, exactly, with that outrage? Nobody really wants an impeachment. I think everybody's resolved to riding this lame horse out, and getting somebody else in a year and a half who will (hopefully) clean up the mess.

[KukriKhan]

And we will do what, exactly, with that outrage? Nobody really wants an impeachment. I think everybody's resolved to riding this lame horse out, and getting somebody else in a year and a half who will (hopefully) clean up the mess.

Fine question.

Issuing pardons/commutations is within his pervue, with precedent leading back to the other GW (Washington) and the Whiskey Rebellion, so not impeachable. They've all done it, Whig, Democrat, Progressive and Republican, usually at the end-of-term, as "get a grip" Xiahou referenced.

We reelected this guy because we thought we needed continuity during a crisis, and the other guy, war-vet or not, didn't seem to have the intestinal fortitude to do the job.

Keeping him in office implied a level of high trust and confidence that his actions and words reflected the will of the people. "Do what you must do, within the law, to keep us safe and free." And ignorant, if you buy Tachikazi's lament.

This action, this uncharacteristic commutation of jail time for a clearly criminal offense - every bit as justified as Paris Hilton's driving unlicensed, for which the silly girl served her time - breaks that trust, that special confidence we repose in our CinC.

If Scooter gets off, so should the GI's and Marines and Air Forcemen and Sailors who've been convicted of crimes commited in the line of duty, as they understood it; an idea as antithetical to americanism as dictators, jack-booted stormtroopers and collective property ownership.

I neither endorse nor predict armed uprisings over this. I DO predict that this action will tip the balance, making the presidency even weaker than in the Carter years, rendering our word abroad laughable, and domestically automatically suspect. It will make our 20-somethings even less trusting of the perfectly good system that has evolved, and ultimately,

make us more vulnerable to attack physically (due to the inherent dithering of congress), and more vulnerable to our freedoms being thwarted, in the name of protecting us from that physical threat.

All in the name of personal loyalty.

Sorry. That's not enough for me when the fate of a country is at stake.

[Xiahou]

I think KurkiKhan is making way too much of this. As I've already covered, pardons (which this isn't) have a time-honored tradition and are entirely legal under the Constitution- for good or ill.

As a political move, it's actually a good one- which is a refreshing change from the Bush White House. He had nothing to lose by doing so, and stood to gain a little by doing it. People who hate Bush will still hate Bush- nothing is going to change that. The people who don't care about "Plamegate" still won't care- which is probably the largest group. And those that thought Libby was railroaded by Fitzgerald, will be undoubtedly pleased by this.

[Papewaio]

I take it a few more then the President can commute a sentence (for instance a judge).

Back to Pardons...should the President only be able to Pardon while they are 'fully' in office... say when another President has been elected but not taken the throne (so to speak)... during that period the outgoing President cannot make Pardons?

Or should Pardons be checked and balanced? Should they be able to vetoed on a 2/3s majority of House and Senate? Okayed by the Judiciary?

Should it have to be co-signed by the Vice President (he has the most to lose as he potentially has 2 terms to get elected to President up his sleeve)?

I'm just interested to see if you guys can sort out this issue before we become a republic ourselves... may 30, 40 years from now, so take it easy while you decide.

[Devastatin Dave]

Maybe Scooter and Marc Rich can bunk together in the Lincoln bedroom this Summer...Oh and by the way, this isn't the pardon (had to repeat it even though no one is listening), but don't let your frenzy derail your ignorant ravings.
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/ar...TICLE_ID=21595

[Slyspy]

I think KurkiKhan is making way too much of this. As I've already covered, pardons (which this isn't) have a time-honored tradition and are entirely legal under the Constitution- for good or ill.

As a political move, it's actually a good one- which is a refreshing change from the Bush White House. He had nothing to lose by doing so, and stood to gain a little by doing it. People who hate Bush will still hate Bush- nothing is going to change that. The people who don't care about "Plamegate" still won't care- which is probably the largest group. And those that thought Libby was railroaded by Fitzgerald, will be undoubtedly pleased by this.

I don't get it. If it isn't a pardon then what is it? If it isn't a pardon then how is it legal under the constitution? Does the President have extra-judicial powers beyond that of issuing an official pardon?

[PanzerJaeger]

Fine question.

Issuing pardons/commutations is within his pervue, with precedent leading back to the other GW (Washington) and the Whiskey Rebellion, so not impeachable. They've all done it, Whig, Democrat, Progressive and Republican, usually at the end-of-term, as "get a grip" Xiahou referenced.

We reelected this guy because we thought we needed continuity during a crisis, and the other guy, war-vet or not, didn't seem to have the intestinal fortitude to do the job.

Keeping him in office implied a level of high trust and confidence that his actions and words reflected the will of the people. "Do what you must do, within the law, to keep us safe and free." And ignorant, if you buy Tachikazi's lament.

This action, this uncharacteristic commutation of jail time for a clearly criminal offense - every bit as justified as Paris Hilton's driving unlicensed, for which the silly girl served her time - breaks that trust, that special confidence we repose in our CinC.

If Scooter gets off, so should the GI's and Marines and Air Forcemen and Sailors who've been convicted of crimes commited in the line of duty, as they understood it; an idea as antithetical to americanism as dictators, jack-booted stormtroopers and collective property ownership.

I neither endorse nor predict armed uprisings over this. I DO predict that this action will tip the balance, making the presidency even weaker than in the Carter years, rendering our word abroad laughable, and domestically automatically suspect. It will make our 20-somethings even less trusting of the perfectly good system that has evolved, and ultimately,

make us more vulnerable to attack physically (due to the inherent dithering of congress), and more vulnerable to our freedoms being thwarted, in the name of protecting us from that physical threat.

All in the name of personal loyalty.

Sorry. That's not enough for me when the fate of a country is at stake.

This really isn't that big of a deal man. To be honest, no one aside from the political junkies care. Watergate, this is not.

And take a deeper look at the case, this guy actually didn't deserve the jail time.

[Lemur]

For those who are deep in the throes of terminal frustration and disgust with the current President, here's a Firefox add-on that may bring you comfort.

-edit-

To be honest, no one aside from the political junkies care.

Not sure if that's accurate. Reports are that the White House shut down their "comment line" (202-395-0805) today. Could be a coincidence, I suppose.

A blogger sums it up nicely:

The dirty unwashed masses who populate our juries are fit to judge each other, but evidently not the ruling class. David Broder can breathe a sigh of relief that People Like Him are safe from those overly zealous US Attorneys who might want to hold them accountable to the same absurd standards that the little people must live by.

How quaint.

Anybody else think that Libby had an understanding with the Executive that jail time = I talk? There was a telling quote from an insider that Bush didn't want to intervene in the process "until he had to."

[PanzerJaeger]

Not sure if that's accurate. Reports are that the White House shut down their "comment line" (202-395-0805) today. Could be a coincidence, I suppose.

Rush Limbaugh's phone lines are swamped every day, but that doesnt mean he's got even 1% of America interested in what he's saying or doing.

But who knows, you may be right. We'll just have to wait and see how this plays out.

[Xiahou]

The only surprise here is that Libby's sentence was commuted instead getting an outright pardon. The outrage expressed is pretty comical though- our last president signed a stack of pardons longer than my arm (140) for his political flunkies on his last day office alone. This isn't even a pardon.

Get a grip.

[Slyspy]

The only surprise here is that Libby's sentence was commuted instead getting an outright pardon. The outrage expressed is pretty comical though- our last president signed a stack of pardons longer than my arm (140) for his political flunkies on his last day office alone. This isn't even a pardon.

Get a grip.

Surely then this highlights a weakness in the presidency itself rather than in any particular political party?

[Xiahou]

Surely then this highlights a weakness in the presidency itself rather than in any particular political party?

Tough call. Pardons are a power that was very deliberately granted to the President, as chief executive, by our founding fathers- it's not some loophole that's being exploited- it's explicitly in the Constitution.

Here's an informative article on the subject.

If they're abused, the obvious recourse would be for voters not to re-elect the president. However, that was in the time before term-limits on presidents. Now, it seems that lame duck pardons (particularly last day in office pardons) seem to have become an unseemly tradition in the White House. After all, the president doing the pardoning already knows he won't be re-elected, so there isn't much to lose.

[Tachikaze]

How does Bush get away with this stuff? Do US citizens understand who little control they have over their government? Or, should I say, how little control they want to take over their corrupt government?

I'll bet when Bush is impeached and convicted he'll pardon himself and no one will stop watching sports or reality shows long enough to notice or care.

We really might as well have a dictatorship.