Posted on 07/02/2007 2:45:21 PM PDT by ConservativeMan55
Edited on 07/02/2007 3:05:31 PM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]
Foxnews alert.. libby sentence commuted
*********
STATEMENT BY THE PRESIDENT
The United States Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit today rejected Lewis Libby’s request to remain free on bail while pursuing his appeals for the serious convictions of perjury and obstruction of justice. As a result, Mr. Libby will be required to turn himself over to the Bureau of Prisons to begin serving his prison sentence.
I have said throughout this process that it would not be appropriate to comment or intervene in this case until Mr. Libby’s appeals have been exhausted. But with the denial of bail being upheld and incarceration imminent, I believe it is now important to react to that decision.
From the very beginning of the investigation into the leaking of Valerie Plame’s name, I made it clear to the White House staff and anyone serving in my administration that I expected full cooperation with the Justice Department. Dozens of White House staff and administration officials dutifully cooperated.
After the investigation was under way, the Justice Department appointed United States Attorney for the Northern District of Illinois Patrick Fitzgerald as a Special Counsel in charge of the case. Mr. Fitzgerald is a highly qualified, professional prosecutor who carried out his responsibilities as charged.
This case has generated significant commentary and debate. Critics of the investigation have argued that a special counsel should not have been appointed, nor should the investigation have been pursued after the Justice Department learned who leaked Ms. Plame’s name to columnist Robert Novak. Furthermore, the critics point out that neither Mr. Libby nor anyone else has been charged with violating the Intelligence Identities Protection Act or the Espionage Act, which were the original subjects of the investigation. Finally, critics say the punishment does not fit the crime: Mr. Libby was a first-time offender with years of exceptional public service and was handed a harsh sentence based in part on allegations never presented to the jury.
Others point out that a jury of citizens weighed all the evidence and listened to all the testimony and found Mr. Libby guilty of perjury and obstructing justice. They argue, correctly, that our entire system of justice relies on people telling the truth. And if a person does not tell the truth, particularly if he serves in government and holds the public trust, he must be held accountable. They say that had Mr. Libby only told the truth, he would have never been indicted in the first place.
Both critics and defenders of this investigation have made important points. I have made my own evaluation. In preparing for the decision I am announcing today, I have carefully weighed these arguments and the circumstances surrounding this case.
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.
My decision to commute his prison sentence leaves in place a harsh punishment for Mr. Libby. The reputation he gained through his years of public service and professional work in the legal community is forever damaged. His wife and young children have also suffered immensely. He will remain on probation. The significant fines imposed by the judge will remain in effect. The consequences of his felony conviction on his former life as a lawyer, public servant, and private citizen will be long-lasting.
The Constitution gives the President the power of clemency to be used when he deems it to be warranted. It is my judgment that a commutation of the prison term in Mr. Libby’s case is an appropriate exercise of this power.
No, We must find the BORDER AGENTS innocent by way of a fair trial. Just recently a Border Agent was found innocent after serving SIX YEARS and he has been reinstated and awarded back pay. Hardly fair for such a travesty of Justice.
LOL!!!!
Fitzy speaks: (From the Corner:)
Fitzgerald Statement on Libby [Byron York]
We fully recognize that the Constitution provides that commutation decisions are a matter of presidential prerogative and we do not comment on the exercise of that prerogative.
We comment only on the statement in which the President termed the sentence imposed by the judge as “excessive.” The sentence in this case was imposed pursuant to the laws governing sentencings which occur every day throughout this country. In this case, an experienced federal judge considered extensive argument from the parties and then imposed a sentence consistent with the applicable laws. It is fundamental to the rule of law that all citizens stand before the bar of justice as equals. That principle guided the judge during both the trial and the sentencing.
Although the President’s decision eliminates Mr. Libby’s sentence of imprisonment, Mr. Libby remains convicted by a jury of serious felonies, and we will continue to seek to preserve those convictions through the appeals process.
I think everyone should see that at least once you can input whatever name you want by typing it in before the .justgotowned.com
Bush so squandered whatever remaining political “juice” he possessed during in the amnesty fiasco that commuting sentences may be one of the few things he can still accomplish as President*. Thank God he used it for a good purpose!
*Except, of course, for the Executive Order he signed recently which gives Alaska back to the Russians.
Michelle Maulkin is subbing for Oreilly tonight; she has two libs on to discuss multiple things, including the commutation for Libby;
Here is a recap:
Both Laura Scwartz (dem strategist) and Kirstin Powers (dem strategist) agreed that the President did the right thing. Kirstin even went so far as to say that this whole case was a sham, never should have been brought to trial, Fitzy knew who the leaker was but set up LIbby for a perjury trap! (Of course, Kirstin is a logical dem), but even Laura Schwartz agreed that it was right. It will help Bush with the base, and that the democrats who are making statements are overreacting.
Interesting.
Libby will not go to jail - but had he been fully pardoned, neither will any of the real criminals in this whole farce.
With an appeal - a lot of heads could roll as the truth of their actions come out....and we could see disbarments and convictions for perjury - there are some nervous dimRats out there tonight. They hadn't figured on this...
By the way, JeanS, Bush did exactly what Libby and his lawyers wanted him to do - does that give you a clue????
While I’m thankful that this travesty of a case has been commuted, the entire affair was a non-starter. No charging of Armitage, Libby not charged with leaking the name, only a memory lapse..and for a case that had no merit to begin with...and all this while Sandy Burger pays 1/10th the fine for a conviction far more egregious. I hope President Bush issues a full pardon to Libby when he leaves office.
“A good start, I would rather have seen a full pardon.”
Bush could still pardon him before he leaves office.
I do not know if Bush took this into account, but if I were Libby I would want a commutation now and a pardon later. This gives Libby the opportunity to pursue an appeal and perhaps get a reversal as a matter of law. A reversal is vindication. A pardon only removes the legal consequences, but a reversal carries a moral vindication as well.
If things work as they ought to, the conviction will be reversed and Libby will be vindicated. If not, Bush should pardon him as a loyal soldier who went down doing his duty.
LOL!
The President has done great on alot of fronts. I give him an A-!
Yip-Yip-Yippeeee! Waiting for Joe and Valerie to crawl out to bemoan this affront to their treachery.
“It is really disheartening to read such ill-informed posts, one after the other and realize that this really is FR, even though it does not sound like it.”
Your conclusion of #2 and #3 are on target IMO. I would add another, that third party supporters want the RATS to win in 2008 hoping they will benefit from the Republicans being out of power and the RATS going to such extremes that the voters will swarm to their new party. As if!
VP Cheney who was boss and friend of Libby has given millions to charity. Does anybody seriously think that he will not take care of any Libby financial shortfall? Libby does not need money but he does need to get his law license back and be free to vote. That can be done if he wins on appeal or is pardoned by Pres Bush.
Libby,Libby,Libby, on the Label,Label,Label,
You will like it,Like it,Like it,On the Table,
Table,Table......
It’s fine for Bush to hold off on a full pardon. Libby does deserve the chance to clear his name. But bear in mind, he may well lose his appeal, in which case a pardon would look worse than it would now. In any case, Bush should clearly side with Libby in his public statements, and he hasn’t done this.
Finally some Cajones. Keep it up Bush. Take the gloves off. Brow beat Pelosi and Reid from the bully pulpit.
BINGO
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.