Posted on 07/02/2007 2:56:38 PM PDT by NormsRevenge
#3, good point - he can still get vindication by getting the unfair conviction overturned.
Wow, I had no idea that Tucker Carlson was related to Ambassador Carlson...... it makes me wonder what their relationship can be like these days..... not that I ever watch PMSNBC, but I did click by there tonight to laugh at the pitiful rants a couple of times, and I caught a particularly vicious little aside by Tucker Carlson in which he asserted that VP Cheney is as loony as Michael Jackson. Pure smear, without even a semblance of data or analysis. It did make me wonder how a once sensible guy like Tucker has long since become a complete whore for the political left, always smearing conservative figures in order to help the loonies at PMSNBC feel like they’ve got “one of their own” in Tucker....
Or, maybe, just maybe, I looked at the situation objectively and decided that the agents were wrong.
You can drop the Graham-style accusations now.
Bush is out of touch with the conservative base. He has a tin ear on what we wanted for Libby—a pardon! He is still pandering to the mainstream press.
The commuted sentence still leaves Libby with a $250,000 fine and a felony conviction. Not a good reward for a stand up guy who has spent heavy on lawyer defense fees. Bush and Cheney owed him more.
If you looked at the evidence objectively you could not possibly have come to that conclusion.
He is a total fraud of an alleged conservative.
Even if you don’t think so, I did.
Enjoy your evening. I won’t be humoring you any longer.
Something Ramos and Compean will not be doing. But something Osbaldo Aldrete-Davila will be doing, thanks to the combination of all the drug money he has earned and the taxpayer money he will receive in exchange for his perjured testimony.
![]() |
For Immediate Release
Office of the Press Secretary
July 2, 2007
Statement by the President On Executive Clemency for Lewis Libby
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.
# # #
Thanks for posting this.
Tucker and Joe, whoring themselves out for network money.
Sad.
JULY 2005 : (SCHUMER HOLDS PRESS CONFERENCE DEMANDING THAT ROVE'S SECURITY CLEARANCE BE TAKEN AWAY) I'm thinking that one of the reasons that Schumer had that press conference with Wilson on Thursday, asking for Rove's security clearance to be taken away, and forced to quit if he is the "leaker", is because by making such a big deal about this... IF the Grand Jury does come down with indictments against Wilson and Plame, Wilson and Schumer will go back to the press and say that NOW Bush's Justice Department is punishing Wilson yet again, for coming forward and asking for Rove's resignation... They have set this up, so that THEY will be be the victims still, instead of the United States people, and the CIC, George Bush. 45 posted on 07/16/2005 9:24:11 PM PDT by Txsleuth
I'm sure Iran is paying them a lot of money for their efforts.
I hope you are right on this one.
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.