I would disagree on several levels with your conclusion, but not your premise that a pardon now would be a negative politically. However, the substance of that argument is that the Dhimmicrats and drive by media would launch nasty attacks on George Bush if he did this and accuse him of being a criminal. In case you haven't noticed they're doing that now. It's like saying we shouldn't attack Al Qaeda because they might get mad and attack us.
Pardoning Libby now would be a declaration that Fitzgerald himself committed an unlawful act by abusing his office and prostituting the law for political gain. But the President would have to do this 100% in the open, with an Oval Office speech, lay down the challenge to the moonbats that they must stop waging war on our country for their own selfish ends.
That's not the substance of my argument. The Dems [Reid and Pelosi] have already launched a shot across the bow warning Bush not to pardon Libby. It was a premptive attack drawing a line in sand. If Bush crosses it now, it will have political ramifications in Congress and in the media. The Dems will use it as a pretext/justification to take some other actions. What are the political advantages to taking the Dems on now by issuing the pardon?
Pardoning Libby now would be a declaration that Fitzgerald himself committed an unlawful act by abusing his office and prostituting the law for political gain. But the President would have to do this 100% in the open, with an Oval Office speech, lay down the challenge to the moonbats that they must stop waging war on our country for their own selfish ends.
He could do that if he wants to commit political suicide. Do you honestly believe that at this juncture coming out against Fitzgerald from the oval office would be politically wise? This is the guy he appointed and praised.