Bush commutes Libby's prison sentence

[Vincent Vega]

That's again way besides what I've written there, as well as lots of assumptions you can't have read out of that comment.

We aren't looking at the Democrats, nor Clinton, nor the Republicans.

We are looking at the commuting of the sentence of Scooter Libby by Bush, which is highly controversial, and hardly justified yet.
That case, you have to evaluate. Nothing else.
If you ever became a juror, you couldn't argue the case at hand with other things that are very, very lightly connected. Some things here have no connection at all.

[struckpx]

Originally posted by Vincent Vega
That's again way besides what I've written there, as well as lots of assumptions you can't have read out of that comment.

We aren't looking at the Democrats, nor Clinton, nor the Republicans.

We are looking at the commuting of the sentence of Scooter Libby by Bush, which is highly controversial, and hardly justified yet.
That case, you have to evaluate. Nothing else.
If you ever became a juror, you couldn't argue the case at hand with other things that are very, very lightly connected. Some things here have no connection at all.

Yes, but you would be presented w/ evidence based on presedent.

And it is a big deal. You made the comparison to other people's sentences jail time. Well, then with the statement above, we shouldn't mention that as well, b/c we can't argue that b/c every case is different.

[Lila64]

and logic like that, or lack thereof struckpx is what usually keeps me out of FYM

Watch Olberman's video or read the transcript.

I'm out

[struckpx]

Originally posted by Lila64
and logic like that, or lack thereof struckpx is what usually keeps me out of FYM

Watch Olberman's video or read the transcript.

I'm out

well, the impeach Bush isn't showing much either.

it would be appropriate if it was cheney, but bush has not been that bad.

[anitram]

Originally posted by struckpx

he is trying to pardon 12 million people currently, but there is no public uproar at that.

Please tell me how you managed to type that with a straight face.

There is no public uproar? Except Lou Dobbs on TV every day, the Minutemen at the border and so many people calling their Congressmen and Senators that the Bill can't even get passed.

[Vincent Vega]

I can't find where I compared sentences.

However, in similar cases, like perjury and perjury, you can take a look at how the judges differ in the length they sent the person to jail. However, sentence X doesn't define sentence Y, as both cases are not 100 per cent the same.
For example, Libby is, or was, a lawyer himself. So he should have known what he was doing when he lied better than a person that isn't of that profession.
He then was a high-ranking official in your country's government, so his responsibility is by far greater than another persons.
He also got sentenced for obstruction (of evidence if I'm right). So it makes perjury and obstruction.
And then there is the judge, who has some leeway in how long he send a person to jail.

You can try and find a similar case, and examine whether the sentence here was too harsh or not. But it doesn't mean in any way that this is too harsh, only because he got a few months more. As long as the judge is following the guidelines, the sentence is justified.

So, what Bush, or his successor, could have done was commuting or pardoning Libby after, say, sixty per cent of the time the judge ruled out. Some would have protested, but overall you could argue that the original sentence was harsh and he served his time in a good manner, or whatever.

But to let him get off the jail before he even set one foot into the jail clearly shows favoritism. Every ordinary person would have at least spent some months in prison for this crime.
And it's by definition no minor crime, such as speeding.

[hardyharhar]

Originally posted by struckpx


well, the impeach Bush isn't showing much either.

it would be appropriate if it was cheney, but bush has not been that bad.

Why should Cheney be impeached, struck?

[phillyfan26]

All arguments about Clinton or immigration are 100%, completly irrelevant.

Some people have forgotten the issue. Allow me to sum up:

The issue is whether President Bush is covering up anything by COMMUTING Scooter Libby. This means Libby does not have to serve the 2.5 year prison sentence which the judge gave him, which is in the law for perjury. Prison terms are required for perjury. Also, he retains his fifth amendment rights, unlike if he was pardoned. There is much suspicion of him covering the tracks of VP Cheney.

Discuss that.

[struckpx]

Originally posted by phillyfan26
All arguments about Clinton or immigration are 100%, completly irrelevant.

Some people have forgotten the issue. Allow me to sum up:

The issue is whether President Bush is covering up anything by COMMUTING Scooter Libby. This means Libby does not have to serve the 2.5 year prison sentence which the judge gave him, which is in the law for perjury. Prison terms are required for perjury. Also, he retains his fifth amendment rights, unlike if he was pardoned. There is much suspicion of him covering the tracks of VP Cheney.

Discuss that.

Come on:

Any president would have done this if they were put in the same situation, regardless of political party affiliation.

It is still on appeal, therefore we can not debate the finality of his tenure in jail.

[anitram]

Originally posted by struckpx

It is still on appeal, therefore we can not debate the finality of his tenure in jail.

???

[Diemen]

Originally posted by struckpx


Come on:

Any president would have done this if they were put in the same situation, regardless of political party affiliation.

You're right, any president would do that in the same situation, because to get to that same situation s/he would already have to be corrupt enough to knowingly allow (or in the Veep's case, order) a subordinate to commit a cowardly and traitorous act like outing a CIA agent for petty political reasons, and then have him mock the justice system by refusing to answer pertinent questions on the case, despite the fact that the president himself said that anyone who was involved with the leaking of Valerie Plame's name would be fired.

He sure has a funny way of holding people accountable.

As to your man Rudy, he's showing some real spine on this issue:

“After evaluating the facts, the president came to a reasonable decision and I believe the decision was correct.” — former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani.

Because obviously, when a sentence is excessive, the correct thing to do is eliminate the sentence altogether, rather than reduce it.

[struckpx]

Originally posted by Diemen


You're right, any president would do that in the same situation, because to get to that same situation s/he would already have to be corrupt enough to knowingly allow (or in the Veep's case, order) a subordinate to commit a cowardly and traitorous act like outing a CIA agent for petty political reasons, and then have him mock the justice system by refusing to answer pertinent questions on the case, despite the fact that the president himself said that anyone who was involved with the leaking of Valerie Plame's name would be held accountable.

He sure has a funny way of holding people accountable.

I actually believe that Bush was left out on a lot of this.

[Diemen]

Which actually makes it worse then, because at some point he had to realize that things were going on behind his back, and yet he doesn't have the spine to take a moral stand and hold those people accountable.

[struckpx]

Originally posted by Diemen
Which actually makes it worse then, because at some point he had to realize that things were going on behind his back, and yet he doesn't have the spine to take a moral stand and hold those people accountable.

i agree. i am somewhat of a bush and rice supporter, but i have never liked his other cabinet choosings, including cheney

[unico]

Originally posted by phillyfan26
All arguments about Clinton or immigration are 100%, completly irrelevant.

Some people have forgotten the issue. Allow me to sum up:

The issue is whether President Bush is covering up anything by COMMUTING Scooter Libby. This means Libby does not have to serve the 2.5 year prison sentence which the judge gave him, which is in the law for perjury. Prison terms are required for perjury. Also, he retains his fifth amendment rights, unlike if he was pardoned. There is much suspicion of him covering the tracks of VP Cheney.

Discuss that.

thank you.
it is refreshing to know that at least somebody is reading my posts.

[struckpx]

well, re-reading your comment there unico, he retains his rights, but he also has to pay punishment for much of the crimes. so, its a 50-50, he is not getting off the hook, and he is not going to jail. so it works out to be partisan. conservatives saw a man who had served for 30+ years in government and our country w/ dignity, liberals saw someone who broke the law and deserved no mercy, regardless of his deeds to society.

so, in the end it saves taxpayer money, and keeps the country overall calm. its kind of being way overblown. there are other people in the case who should be investigated, not libby. he is the middle man. he is the kid at school selling the dime sack instead of the dealer. get what i am saying?

[anitram]

Originally posted by struckpx

so, in the end it saves taxpayer money,

Let's dispense with prison terms for all perjurers then.

[Diemen]

Exactly, but by commuting his sentence, Bush has ensured that Libby cannot provide any evidence about those people further up the line, and in that sense it is a very big deal.

[struckpx]

Originally posted by anitram


Let's dispense with prison terms for all perjurers then.

there's a difference between someone who knows US intelligence, and one of us. it could ultimately come back to harm us if we treat him badly.

regarding the other post, that is not necessarily true. bush can always authorize an internal review on cheney. while he is unlikely to do this, i really do believe that bush has been left out of a lot of this garbage, instead rumsfeld, powell, and cheney were the main ones involved.

w/ his current trend of going against his party, it might very well happen. plus, condoleeza rice is not a fan of cheney as well.

[unico]

Originally posted by struckpx
well, re-reading your comment there unico, he retains his rights, but he also has to pay punishment for much of the crimes. so, its a 50-50, he is not getting off the hook, and he is not going to jail.

You honestly believe he is going to pay that $250,000 fine? Fred Thompson and Mary Matalin are included in Libby's defense fund. They are raising the money for this fine. Trust me, Libby himself will NOT be paying that money.

And even given what you're writing, I honestly don't understand your connection to make this a partisan issue. It is not partisan, it is corruption. Libby is lying to cover up Cheney's dirty hands, and Bush is making sure that it stays that way by keeping him out of jail and without a pardon.

I think by reducing this to a partisan issue you are:
1) generalizing people and
B) ignoring the bigger, and scarier picture here.

our administration has dirty hands. and right now it is so transparent. i'm still surprised by the people that can't see that. it is NOTHING to do with party affiliation. this is about a corrupt administration that is getting away with doing whatever they please and doing things contrary to international and domestic law.