Pardon Me, Sir?

Captain James T. Kirk, Doctor Leonard McCoy ..... In the interests of amity for the forthcoming peace talks, the sentence of death is commuted.

Though a little late and not exactly as expected, Bush commuted the prison sentence imposed on Scooter Libby. He will still have to face up to the $250,000 fine and 2 years probation. All this for a crime that was never committed. While this may satisfy some, I believe, and always have, that Bush should have pardoned Libby from the outset. This entire pile of crap about outing Valerie Plame as a covert operative was trumped up by Democrats to try and take down Cheney. The evidence during trial even revealed it was Richard Armitage who "leaked" the information. Valerie Plame wasn't even a covert operative, so there was nothing to leak about her status at the CIA.

And before anyone tries to make the argument that Bush only did this for political reasons, take a look here: http://www.usdoj.gov/pardon/clintonpardon_grants.htm Yes - those are the pardons granted by Bill Clinton during his 8 years in office. Something should disturb you greatly about that list. If you notice, every last one of the pardons that shows a party affiliation was given to a Democrat. A disturbingly high number are for financial fraud and military desertions. Furthermore, there is evidence to show that Clinton granted many of these pardons to people who paid him off to get them in the form of campaign donations. The crimes listed on this page are all very serious things. The DOJ doesn't have a list up for Bush pardons, though I'm sure he's granted some.

If anyone deserves to be pardoned, it would have to be Ignacio Ramos and Jose Compean, the two border patrol agents who were railroaded by the Bush administration for simply doing their job trying to enforce our borders. Even the judge in this case said that the punishment they got didn't fit but he was forced by federal guidelines. The problem is, they never should have been convicted to begin with because they fired on an armed suspect. Also, the charge that they failed to file a written report was completely bogus since agency policy specifically prohibited them from writing one up. The entire case stunk of Bush and his open border cronies wanting to make an example of someone as a deterrent to other agents who believe the border should be enforced. Still, I tend to agree with Bill Handel that eventually these two will get pardoned by Bush as a means to try and placate the party base.
.........................
"It is pointless to resist, my son." -- Darth Vader
"Resistance is futile." -- The Borg
"Mother's coming for me in the dragon ships. I don't like these itchy clothes, but I have to wear them or it frightens the fish." -- Thurindil

Well. I guess that's that then.

       
« Attack of the Killer Desk!
Project Arctic Iguanadon »

Posted on Jul 3, 2007 6:59 am by Samson in: | 4 comment(s) [Closed]
Comments
May I request some clarifications?

"All this for a crime that was never committed."

He wasn't responsible for the leaks, or he didn't commit perjury, or both?

"Valerie Plame wasn't even a covert operative, so there was nothing to leak about her status at the CIA."

I thought Fitzgerald got to look at the relevant documents and determined she was?

Also, the fact that Clinton made those pardons for political reasons wouldn't make it impossible for Bush to pardon someone for political reasons, no? I mean, I agree with you it's not like this gives anyone the moral high ground, but just because Democrats have used the pardon power politically in the past doesn't mean they can't call it when they see it. It just doesn't give them the right to call the Republicans worse.

       
Libby wasn't responsible for the "leak" - there was nothing to leak. Even if there had been, it was Richard Armitage who originally "outed" her. So by the time the information got around to Libby it was pretty well known. No underlying crime took place, so Libby had nothing to worry about.

There was no perjury either. Libby was charged with supposedly lying to investigators, not with lying under oath at trial. There's a huge difference. The prosecution should have abandon the case completely once the facts came out and it was clear Armitage was to blame if anyone. You don't continue to prosecute a case you no longer have unless you have an agenda behind it. The prosecutor got lucky in that the jury was too stupid to figure all this out.

And no, do more research. Plame was not a covert operative at any point during her stay with the CIA. She was a front desk jockey type. No covert status. So again, there was nothing to leak.

No. I'm sure Bush has pardoned people for political reasons. The information just isn't available on the DOJ website. My point is that the Democrats constantly berate Bush for doing this and that and all along their guys are doing the same thing behind the scenes, trying to cover it all up. Those pardons by Clinton just scream politics louder than usual.

       
Not to go too in depth here, because quite frankly, I'm tired of Plame, and shady Republican tactics and partisan namecalling and whatever else, except to note that:

1. I don't think the "D" part of that pardons list by Clinton means what you think it does. Pretty sure it has something to do with districts. Also a quick Wiki-ing notes that at least a couple of them are Republicans. I also find it interesting that the list for the first Bush is set up rather differently.

Which should not be construed, mind you, as a defense of the pardons themselves, several of which I personally find rather shady. However.

2. I'm also going to invoke my law here, which says that gratuitous mention of Clinton (or Reagan, for that matter), means you lose. Yes, I find this gratuitous.

3. What interests me about the thing is that, while Bush is perfectly within his rights to either pardon Libby or commute the entire sentence to nothing, he did not. Considering the President's history of doggedly sticking with his subordinates and damn the torpedoes, I find this, as I say, interesting.

       
So I lose because I used Clinton as an example in an argument about how Bush is being an amoral asshole?

This law of yours is quite amusing. Trying to grant yourself an exit from an argument when you've got no other points to make is a bit silly. Now, gratuitous mention of Hitler is another story all together. And Godwin's Law is gospel!

       
<< prev 1 next >>
Comments Closed
Comments for this entry have been closed.
Anonymous
Register

Forgot Password?

SuMoTuWeThFrSa
 
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
8 9 10 11 12 13 14
15 16 17 18 19 20 21
22 23 24 25 26 27 28
29 30 31