Slashdot Mirror
Bush Commutes Libby's Sentence
An anonymous reader notes that President Bush has decided to commute Scooter Libby's sentence after numerous appeals failed. Libby was convicted in March of obstruction of justice in connection with the Valerie Plame affair. The President's action spares Libby from 30 months behind bars."
It's true the President has that kind of power, but isn't he supposed to at least try to seem impartial and not at all corrupt?
Are there any stipulations regarding the Presidential use of power at all?
I am government man, come from the government. The government has sent me. -- G.I.R.
Never saw that coming.
crap.
Nothing for you to see here. Please move along.
Unfortunately, this adequately conveys my surprise...
This just proves that it's not what you know (or did), it's who you know!
Need I say more? So much to do with nerds? Send in your money now.
Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to think "profiling is worse than the slaughter of innocent people..."
I'm no fan of the POTUS, but why is this news here?
... and perfectly legal, in this case.
Still, I guess it just goes to show that now, perjury is OK!
I must also strongly agree with Joe Wilson: "Scooter Libby is a traitor." I certainly hope that those responsible for the egregious breach of national security are convicted as such.
He could have pardoned Libby. Then Libby could continue to practice law and wouldn't have to pay the fine. Well, I don't think anybody thinks the fine will come out of his own pocket. And look forward to a pardon when Bush leaves office, which should not be under honorable circumstances.
Nerds are people first and nerds second, and as people, we should all be concerned about the actions of thus most unctuous and corrupt government.
Apparently our leader has decided that being shamed in front of your family and having your reputation tarnished plus being fined a nominal fee is enough of a punishment for high crimes against the government. Surely such things a possessing a few ounces of pot then deserve nothing more than a vicious finger-wagging, right? ....right?
Outing an active agent is an act of treason which, if I recall correctly, is still punishable by death in the US. Whether Libby, Rove, or Cheney did it doesn't (and shouldn't) matter.
This so-called administration has broken, no--pulverized--their oaths of office.
Libby was responsibly for conducting misinformation of the press and the public for the benefit of Bush and Cheney, and he was good at it. If Bush allows him to be punished for his crimes, he would surely begin to disclose massive amounts of information about things the administration did to deceive the country. I would be very surprised if he and Bush didn't have an agreement on this long ago, "If you ever get into trouble over this, I'll do what I can to ease your sentence." Libby's still responsible for paying a $250,000 fine (will he get an anonymous gift or bonus in that amount shortly?) and will now have a felony on his record (costs him certain rights, such as the right to bear arms).
I'm firmly convinced that we haven't had the Democracy we were promised in America since 1963.
While JFK and those before him were not perfect men, at least they tried to uphold the principals of this nation for the greater good of all Americans.
With this administration so blatent with it's lies and contempt for the rule of law and the Constitution and with FOX pundits who often say they wish they could imprison or even kill Democrats or "lefties", I am convinced this nation is under the control of anarchists who wish to push this nation to civil war. And it's not Repubilicans vs Democrat... because the Democrats are hardly a better choice, but a division vbetween those who believe in the Constitution and individual rights, and those who want a Statist system where there is no longer any accountability.
And I hope they keep pushing. Because I'm begining to believe that the time for the ballor box is nearing it's end and all we'll be left with is teh ammo box for casting our votes. The people will only be able to abide by so many offenses. If this blatent lawlessness continues to prevail, the people will sooner or later stand up, and some of those people will be Generals and Admirals within our military.
Does this view sound extreme? Yes.
But I hardly think it's far fetched.
I'm sure there are a lot of people whose frustration is turning to anger and disgust.
AMEN to Anon over here. I saw one tech community destroyed by stories like this. I come here to get away from digg. If you like stories like this feel free to hang out at digg, or it's stupider little brother reddit, but don't ruin yet another online tech community.
You could always, y'know, not visit Politics thread. It's not like you clicked on the "Bush Commutes Libby's Sentence" headline and went, "OH MY GOD POLITICS!! I had NO WARNING!" Seriously, what were you expecting? Discourses on the implementation of preemptive scheduling in the 2.6 kernel?
'If you're flammable and have legs, you are never blocking a fire exit.'
So conveniently close to a holiday, too. A large number of people are on vacation, and both vacationers and everyone else will be too busy playing with booze and fireworks to give this much consideration.
The Internet is full. Go away.
Halliburton owes Cheney for a lot of no-bid contracts. Cheney owes Scooter for muddying the waters in the Plame affair. Any bets on whether Scooter lands a choice position at Halliburton in the near future?
Little Billy learns today the valuable lesson that you are ultimately beyond reproach assuming your friends are sufficiently powerful.
(I guess it just really goes to show that you can parade out this argument for any old thing.)
Dick Cheney has frequently alluded that he is above the law in every respect, do you really think that his aides are any different? More proof that rich white guys almost never go to jail.
And Bush commutes his measley 30 months in jail while still doing nothing for Ramos and Compean who are serving 11 and 12 year sentences for DOING THEIR JOBS as border patrol agents.
What a crock justice is in the country. I have no respect for the law at all anymore.
signed;
A disgusted citizen of a corrupt nation.
If telephones are outlawed, then only outlaws will have telephones.
how does that make this in any way acceptable?
this has to be the worst excuse for accepting this kind of behavior that's ever been uttered
"Mr. Libby was sentenced to thirty months of prison, two years of probation, and a $250,000 fine. In making the sentencing decision, the district court rejected the advice of the probation office, which recommended a lesser sentence and the consideration of factors that could have led to a sentence of home confinement or probation. I respect the jury's verdict. But I have concluded that the prison sentence given to Mr. Libby is excessive. Therefore, I am commuting the portion of Mr. Libby's sentence that required him to spend thirty months in prison."--President Bush.
If Bush is citing the probation office's advice, what was that advice? How long was the lesser sentence? Zero, no jail time at all? If not, then why did Bush let Libby off scot free? What is the jail term Bush thinks is appropriate for perjury and objstruction of justice, and why was Libby not required to serve that term?
And why does Bush say "I respect the jury's verdict," when he patently does not respect the jury's verdict? What could possibly constitute more disrespect than setting the verdict aside?
None of those 140 worked for him or committed their crimes while acting in their capacity as a public official.
Not yet.
Bush hasn't yet declared martial law, and set himself up as Emperor. Until we no longer have a ballot box, we don't use the ammo box.
Or something like that. I saw it in a sig around here somewhere.
Microsoft is to software what Budweiser is to beer.
very few people here even know what the conviction was for.
He didn't out anyone. There wasn't even a crime committed.
Many people in the investigation changed their stories or had contradictory testimonies. Libby's sentance was pure politics.
I'm not happy with 80% of what Bush is up to these days, but this was a slap in the face of political witchhunts, nothing more.
Check out the business cronies Clinton pardoned on his way out, you'll find a much greater conflict of interest.
This may be the first major act by President Bush that is unquestionably constitutional.
But never once "outing" a CIA agent ...
I'd have to say that there is a noticeable difference between the two acts.
Perjuring yourself over a consensual blow job is a crime.
Perjuring yourself to cover "outing" a CIA agent if MOTHER-FUCKING TREASON.
(1) How serious people think the crime is seems to be only dependant on what colour team they support: either (blue) "Complicit in the outing of a CIA operative - bordering on treason!" or (red) "No crime (she wasn't a covert operative), no harm (he had nothing to do with the news stories), no foul". Who is right? Who cares?
(2) accusations of potentially politically motivated judicial decisions: The penalty given, and the refusal to allow appeals before incarceration has been argued to be at least marginally unusual for this sort of case (IANAL, but I've occasionally glanced at Google News), like the blue team finding a chance to make the red team make themselves look bad by drawing commutation out of wildly unpopular red team president: maybe, maybe not, but in this climate, who is to say? (hint, if you support the red team, the judgement was wrong and politically motivated. If you support Blue team, it was just and right and appropriate to the seriousness of the crime - see (1))
(3) Shrill condemnation for a completely inevitable act by the red team: but, regardless of what team is in power, what do you expect? Either they honestly believe that the judgement was a miscarriage of justice (in which case, what else is the power to commute sentences supposed to be for) or he was actually up to no good, on orders from the government (in which case leaving the guy out to dry would go past the line of unethical). See (1) for a guide on how you should fall on this.
Is this fiasco really factor for anyone? Wouldn't it be better if we stuck to what is *really* bothering us? There is plenty there, and it actually matters!
From your mouth to God's (or FSM's) ears... ;)
Ben Hocking
Need a professional organizer?
Clinton pardoned FAR worse people than Scooter. By a long shot.
How nice of Dubya to pardon a guy who was probably holding a lot of dirt about his administration in his back pocket.
In the meantime, some kid in his 20s is rotting in a Georgia jail for having consensual sex when he was 17 and she was 15.
http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/06/11/teen.sex.case/
Obstruction of justice okay. Getting a blow job, no. Consistent with the Republican party's approach to Clinton I guess.
Whenever I see corruption like this I remind myself of our Founder's absolute GENIUS. The legislative branch creates independent prosecutor to investigate executive branch -> the people convict -> the judicial branch sentences -> the executive branch commutes -> the legislative branch goes nuts. It's a perfect series of checks and balances.
Meanwhile, we go about our lives content with the knowledge that our government is far too involved arguing about whether some exec in the Vice-President's office lied about an investigation in which a crime may or may not have actually been committed (no one was ever charged) to actually scheme up ways to consolidate power and threaten the Peoples' freedom. And in the end, no branch got too much say and it was the people who were required to actually convict the dude.
Thank you Adams, Jefferson, Franklin, and Hamilton. This was the true gift of our Founding Fathers; not a perfect government. They knew that men will never change.
Here's the response I sent to someone who argued that the commutation was just:
He was an extremely high ranking government official who lied to the FBI to protect the guilty. When that sort of thing is treated lightly, it sends a clear message to the public that our government is about politics and power, not about justice.
FWIW, I also think Rep Jefferson (D-LA) should be put under the jail.
The reason is this: a fine to Scooter Libby means exactly nothing. The PNAC will pay it for him. Moreover, for every Jefferson or Libby that gets caught, fifty scurry free through the halls of DC. And furthermore, the stakes are enormous. Libby will have power beyond yours or my imagining for the rest of his life for what he did. The only way to disincentivize the behavior, when one in fifty get caught and the rewards are frankly beyond my comprehension, is to make the penalty leviathan.
Why do you suppose our politicians are so corrupt? Is it because they are bad people? No. It is because they are human and they are faced with enormous profit and zero downside. No one could be expected to maintain their moral integrity in the face of that. We have to help them stand their ground, by making corruption unthinkable.
The only other option is to let it keep happening, and watch our nation continue to erode.
Stop-Prism.org: Opt Out of Surveillance
I used to think that history might only place Bush in the top ten of America's greatest presidents,
I suspect that Bush would just barely make it into the top ten presidents of the past fifty years.
__ Someday, but not this morning, I'll finally learn to use the preview button.
If it was a political story related to tech I'd understand it being on slashdot.
But what the hell is this story on the front page of Slashdot for?
No, he was going to a federal 'pound me in the ass' prison.
I simply don't understand why this is a humouous meme in our culture.
To the right, one would think that gay male rape would be regarded as a sin and a gross violation of manhood.
To the left, one would think that prison abuse happening on a widespread scale should be something that a civil society should abhor.
To the notion of American individual rights, one would think that being sentenced to rape is a cruel and unusual punishment.
As is, it is treated flippantly.
Shame on any of you who think this is funny. Prison rape is NOT a fucking joke! It is a disgusting violation of human rights and the persistant and wicked idea that it's either funny or representative of justice that someone be sentenced to RAPE is the primary reason why it continues.
If you think my condemnation of you rape advocates is unfair, then I would like either a "liberal" or a "conservative" to make a strong, compelling case why any crime which merits prison time be "rape by default". Please tell me how exactly that represents "justice" to you.
I don't make the rules. I just make fun of them.
You're not supposed to draw attention to yourself in the press, especially in a situation where everyone will ask "why did the CIA send this retarded Joe Wilson guy to Niger?" when the answer is "because his wife at the CIA got him the job." She put her politics over her job and her cover.
And so have every President.
But there's a difference between a druggie who only hurts himself and a small handful of people, and someone who does the dirty work of spreading misinformation that helped get us into a war that has cost billions and affected the lives of millions. Quite frankly, I'd put government misinformation as a crime higher than anything like murder, robbery, whatever; the scale of the effects of the two are just worlds apart.
And no, I'm not a liberal. I'm a libertarian.
Hmm... and every single one of those except #4 is the direct result of marijuana being illegal.
..and America is watching TV.
1) ARMITRAGE leaked the name and Fitzgerald knew this long before he put reporters in jail and went after libby. If Armitrage wasn't prosecuted, then the leak was not a crime. If there was no crime, then there could be no obstruction since there was no crime to be covered up.
2) If there was no crime there should have been no further prosecution - and the reporters that went to jail for Contemopt shoudl never have been put there (and consequently Libby never prosecuted either).
3) Large number of legitimate defenses were disallowed Libby and his defense team, including the question of whether a leak was a crime or not. The JURY never got to hear all of the story -they jsut got to hear the continued refernces to a leak that apparently was not a crime without being told the whole of the truth. This is a substantial chance that this conviction will be overturned on appeal.
4) the Judge basically threw away the prosecution and probation offices recommendations, in order to make a political statement with the sentencing. So, Bush, like CLinton before him, made a political statement with the powers of his Office of President.
Wait a sec. This is Slashdot. Daily Kos is over there... and so is Digg.
Oh well, slashdot circling the drain, leftwards, as well, descending into the feverswamp of leftist idiocy. I wish we could flush the idiotic naive lefty editorial slamnt that seems to have taken residence here since kdawson started his lefty trolling. Either that or put a Free republic moron up here to post for "balnace".
Then techno libertarians who initially flocked to this place could sit back and watch BOTH sets of idiots die of apoplexy, and maybe we'd get back a tech site that used to be a place to go that was populist in tilt, but politically neutral ground.
KDAWSON, troll, must GO! Or else give someone for the Right equal powers to post flamebait to the front page.
Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo! http://goo.gl/J9bkO
"Stuff that matters."
If you want to make an apple pie from scratch, you must first create the universe. -- Carl Sagan
We shall be hearing "I don't recall" a lot more now.
Libby's conviction was for testimony in front of a grand jury. You don't have an attorney present and are not permitted to check documentation, and you get no cross-examination of opposing testimony. But if what you say is inconsistent...Bam! Criminal liability.
The precedent of Libby's conviction makes the lesson clear. Whatever you do, never, ever co-operate with a grand jury investigation. Deny your memory, take the fifth, halt the proceedings to consult your attorney (the only way to see an attorney is to stop everything and exit, then come back in), answer every question minimally, and generally drag your feet on every point. In other words, the way to avoid charges of obstructing justice is to obstruct justice, but in a passive-aggressive way.
That by itself is adequate reason to pardon Libby. Not because Libby necessarily deserves a full pardon, but because this conviction screws the grand jury system up even more than it already is.Should the taxpayers bear the burden of this man's retirement?
Please, impeach Bush.
Worst president ever.
https://www.youtube.com/c/BrendaEM
We'll only see a conviction for the outing of Plame when White House staffers stop perjuring themselves and stone-walling the investigation.
In other words, never...
The real reason Libby was prosecuted is lost on many of the administration's defenders. Many have deluded themselves into believing that Libby's prosecution was some sort of political witch hunt.
This would have to be the first political witch-hunt in history where a Republican politico was prosecuted by a Republican prosecutor, sentenced and jailed by a Republican Judge, and refused bail by an appelate court, the majority of whom were Republicans.
Libby's prosecution wasn't a witch-hunt. Libby was prosecuted because he blocked Fitzgerald's investigation. Libby lied and stone-walled, preventing Fitzgerald from ever getting to the bottom of why Plame was outed.
The "why" is very important. This is because the Intelligence Identities Protection Act only allows prosecution of those who knowingly reveal the identity of a covert agent. Fitzgerald had to prove they knew, but he couldn't reach that level of proof without honest testimony from those involved.
But because Libby lied to the grand jury and FBI, because Karl Rove stone-walled and nearly found himself similarly prosecuted for perjury, Fitzgerald was unable to get enough proof to prosecute any IIPA violations.
Libby's lies probably saved some in the administration from prosecution under the IIPA. That is why Libby was prosecuted for perjury and why no one has been (or probably ever will be) charged for outing Plame under the IIPA.
Fair enough I suppose. The president isn't required to convene a joint session. But the OP was driving at denying the president an audience for the SotU. So in that sense, Congress is required to convene if the president calls for it. As for the "extraordinary occasion" bit, the threshold for convening Congress is much lower with the advent of mechanized travel and electronic communication. Washington isn't so far away anymore; even California reps can commute on weekends.
You say you don't want to play childish games, but then immediately call for an investigation of a case where every salient fact has been well established for months. The leak was Richard Armitage. The prosecutor knew this before Libby was called to testify. Plame was not covert in the legal sense (though someone at the CIA called her "covert", apparently in some looser sense). Investigate what? Sounds like yet another meaningless Beltway political game.