[kabar]

It turns out, according to the Sunday Times, that Richard Lebaron, deputy head of the U.S. embassy in London, wrote a letter recommending Megrahi’s release as a better alternative than his death in prison. So, when Obama speaks about all Americans being “surprised, disappointed, and angry” to learn of the release, he is expecting us to believe that he had no idea what his officials were doing. Unbelievable.

Lebaron didn't initiate the letter if you read it. He was passing on a demarche from Washington. He was the messenger, nothing more.

[Qbert]

“Lebaron didn’t initiate the letter if you read it. He was passing on a demarche from Washington. He was the messenger, nothing more.”

Given the fact then that he was just relaying the opinion of the administration and other higher-ups (and assuming that Lebaron was telling the truth in the August 12 letter)- I’m guessing this is why the Senate (Menendez and others) abruptly cancelled the hearings?

[Conscience of a Conservative]

Richard Lebaron, deputy head of the U.S. embassy in London, wrote a letter recommending Megrahi’s release as a better alternative than his death in prison.

That's not entirely accurate. The letter recommended that Megrahi's release in Scotland, with travel restrictions preventing him from leaving the country, would be better than transferring him to prison in Libya, where he might receive a hero's welcome. Essentially, the letter's recommendation was:

Keep Megrahi in a Scottish prison >>>>> Release Megrahi in Scotland (with travel restrictions) > Transfer Megrahi to Libyan prison (where he would receive a hero's welcome).

The administration should have been more forceful (i.e., the letter should have demanded that Megrahi not be released, no exceptions), but it is inaccurate to characterize the letter as "recommending Megrahi's release as a better alternative than his death in prison."