Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

President Bush Commutes Libby's sentence

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.


TOPICS: Breaking News
KEYWORDS: 007plame; cialeak; commute; fitzmas; govwatch; libby; libbyisnoliddy; merryfitzmas; pardon; pardons; scooter; technicality
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 501-520521-540541-560 ... 781-785 next last
To: STARWISE

I hope their heads explode


521 posted on 07/02/2007 5:27:51 PM PDT by Mo1 ( http://www.gohunter08.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 398 | View Replies]

To: Texas Federalist

Reason it out and you maybe you will see why the President did it the way he did. Libby will still be able to appeal and clear his name.


522 posted on 07/02/2007 5:28:05 PM PDT by Kath (Luvya Dubya)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 128 | View Replies]

To: txrangerette
Whatever.

I called you a Bushfan.....(so?)--
(I wouldn't get upset if someone called me a Duncan Hunter fan)

..but you go around calling Freepers who disagree with you...'deranged' or DU'ers....

..and I'm suppose to take a lesson in civility from you?

523 posted on 07/02/2007 5:28:48 PM PDT by Guenevere (Duncan Hunter for President 2008!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 514 | View Replies]

To: ConservativeMan55
The fundamental reason the Judge denied Libby's motion for release pending appeal in that CONSERVATIVES pushed through the "Bail Reform Act" of 1984 .

I am not a law and order conservative, but a libertarian, and as much sympathy as I feel for Libby in this case, I rejoice in a certain Schadenfreude when the overweening intransigence of our hard core "right" tars one whom they believe to be their own, as much as I wish Libby well, personally. Me, so long as you don't commit violent crimes, or rob or steal or do some other grave injury to a fellow citizen, I am pretty much laissez faire and have no use for this kind of "uptightness" to put it politely.

In this particular instance there was no justice to obstruct, and I have no sympathy for overweening bureaucrats off on a witch-hunt, even if they are so-called "agents" of the formerly revered FBI.

524 posted on 07/02/2007 5:28:53 PM PDT by AndyJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ConservativeMan55

Federalist No. 74

The Command of the Military and Naval Forces, and the Pardoning Power of the Executive

From the New York Packet
Tuesday, March 25, 1788.

Author: Alexander Hamilton

To the People of the State of New York:

He is also to be authorized to grant "reprieves and pardons for offenses against the United States, EXCEPT IN CASES OF IMPEACHMENT." Humanity and good policy conspire to dictate, that the benign prerogative of pardoning should be as little as possible fettered or embarrassed. The criminal code of every country partakes so much of necessary severity, that without an easy access to exceptions in favor of unfortunate guilt, justice would wear a countenance too sanguinary and cruel. As the sense of responsibility is always strongest, in proportion as it is undivided, it may be inferred that a single man would be most ready to attend to the force of those motives which might plead for a mitigation of the rigor of the law, and least apt to yield to considerations which were calculated to shelter a fit object of its vengeance. The reflection that the fate of a fellow-creature depended on his sole fiat, would naturally inspire scrupulousness and caution; the dread of being accused of weakness or connivance, would beget equal circumspection, though of a different kind. On the other hand, as men generally derive confidence from their numbers, they might often encourage each other in an act of obduracy, and might be less sensible to the apprehension of suspicion or censure for an injudicious or affected clemency. On these accounts, one man appears to be a more eligible dispenser of the mercy of government, than a body of men.

The expediency of vesting the power of pardoning in the President has, if I mistake not, been only contested in relation to the crime of treason. This, it has been urged, ought to have depended upon the assent of one, or both, of the branches of the legislative body. I shall not deny that there are strong reasons to be assigned for requiring in this particular the concurrence of that body, or of a part of it. As treason is a crime levelled at the immediate being of the society, when the laws have once ascertained the guilt of the offender, there seems a fitness in referring the expediency of an act of mercy towards him to the judgment of the legislature. And this ought the rather to be the case, as the supposition of the connivance of the Chief Magistrate ought not to be entirely excluded. But there are also strong objections to such a plan. It is not to be doubted, that a single man of prudence and good sense is better fitted, in delicate conjunctures, to balance the motives which may plead for and against the remission of the punishment, than any numerous body whatever. It deserves particular attention, that treason will often be connected with seditions which embrace a large proportion of the community; as lately happened in Massachusetts. In every such case, we might expect to see the representation of the people tainted with the same spirit which had given birth to the offense. And when parties were pretty equally matched, the secret sympathy of the friends and favorers of the condemned person, availing itself of the good-nature and weakness of others, might frequently bestow impunity where the terror of an example was necessary. On the other hand, when the sedition had proceeded from causes which had inflamed the resentments of the major party, they might often be found obstinate and inexorable, when policy demanded a conduct of forbearance and clemency. But the principal argument for reposing the power of pardoning in this case to the Chief Magistrate is this: in seasons of insurrection or rebellion, there are often critical moments, when a welltimed offer of pardon to the insurgents or rebels may restore the tranquillity of the commonwealth; and which, if suffered to pass unimproved, it may never be possible afterwards to recall. The dilatory process of convening the legislature, or one of its branches, for the purpose of obtaining its sanction to the measure, would frequently be the occasion of letting slip the golden opportunity. The loss of a week, a day, an hour, may sometimes be fatal. If it should be observed, that a discretionary power, with a view to such contingencies, might be occasionally conferred upon the President, it may be answered in the first place, that it is questionable, whether, in a limited Constitution, that power could be delegated by law; and in the second place, that it would generally be impolitic beforehand to take any step which might hold out the prospect of impunity. A proceeding of this kind, out of the usual course, would be likely to be construed into an argument of timidity or of weakness, and would have a tendency to embolden guilt. PUBLIUS.


The Federalist Papers : No. 78

The Judiciary Department
From McLEAN'S Edition, New York.

Author: Alexander Hamilton

To the People of the State of New York:

Whoever attentively considers the different departments of power must perceive, that, in a government in which they are separated from each other, the judiciary, from the nature of its functions, will always be the least dangerous to the political rights of the Constitution; because it will be least in a capacity to annoy or injure them. The Executive not only dispenses the honors, but holds the sword of the community. The legislature not only commands the purse, but prescribes the rules by which the duties and rights of every citizen are to be regulated. The judiciary, on the contrary, has no influence over either the sword or the purse; no direction either of the strength or of the wealth of the society; and can take no active resolution whatever. It may truly be said to have neither FORCE nor WILL, but merely judgment; and must ultimately depend upon the aid of the executive arm even for the efficacy of its judgments.

This simple view of the matter suggests several important consequences. It proves incontestably, that the judiciary is beyond comparison the weakest of the three departments of power; that it can never attack with success either of the other two; and that all possible care is requisite to enable it to defend itself against their attacks. It equally proves, that though individual oppression may now and then proceed from the courts of justice, the general liberty of the people can never be endangered from that quarter; I mean so long as the judiciary remains truly distinct from both the legislature and the Executive. For I agree, that "there is no liberty, if the power of judging be not separated from the legislative and executive powers.'' And it proves, in the last place, that as liberty can have nothing to fear from the judiciary alone, but would have every thing to fear from its union with either of the other departments; that as all the effects of such a union must ensue from a dependence of the former on the latter, notwithstanding a nominal and apparent separation; that as, from the natural feebleness of the judiciary, it is in continual jeopardy of being overpowered, awed, or influenced by its co-ordinate branches; and that as nothing can contribute so much to its firmness and independence as permanency in office, this quality may therefore be justly regarded as an indispensable ingredient in its constitution, and, in a great measure, as the citadel of the public justice and the public security.


The judicial branch has no options regarding this matter.

The legislative branches can impeach and convict if they consider this to be a high crime or misdemeanor(s).

All the rest is pure blather, put up or STFU...

525 posted on 07/02/2007 5:29:05 PM PDT by michigander (The Constitution only guarantees the right to pursue happiness. You have to catch it yourself.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: maine-iac7

They can’t stop .. they don’t know how


526 posted on 07/02/2007 5:29:15 PM PDT by Mo1 ( http://www.gohunter08.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 518 | View Replies]

To: plain talk

“One page for Clinton? There have only been two impeached Presidents. Clinton will get more space than you granted if nothing more than to talk about the impeachment and the dotcom bubble. Bush1 was GWI. Bush2 was 9/11 and Iraq.”

“William Jefferson Clinton’s administration was compromised by numerous scandals, some by subordinates, some of his own making. Although popular, he was the only elected President to have been impeached in U. S. history and was impeached for lying to a grand jury. No programs or initiatives of his own adminstration’s making survived his Presidency.”

Although he seems big now, there really is nothing to analyse from his Presidency. He also has the very bad fortune to be sandwiched between father and son as Presidents.

He will get less than a page.


527 posted on 07/02/2007 5:30:24 PM PDT by TexanToTheCore (If it ain't Rugby or Bullriding, it's for girls.........................................)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 486 | View Replies]

To: bray
President Bush does what he thinks is right no matter who thinks it is wrong. Potatohead should be in jail for Perjury not Libby.

Got that right - and by not giving Libby a full pardon which would prevent Libby from an appeal = the door is open for these libRats to really be the ones ending up needing a pardon = let's be sure Hitlery doesn't get in - she'd spring 'em

Bush did exactly what Libby and his lawyers wanted - he wont go to jail but can still go for an appeal which could expose the dirty dealings and lies of the perps

528 posted on 07/02/2007 5:30:45 PM PDT by maine-iac7 ( "...but you can't fool all of the people all the time." LINCOLN)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 305 | View Replies]

To: itsamelman

IO never get the mentality of people urging suicidal people to actually do it.

Indicates a very, very sick mind and soul.


529 posted on 07/02/2007 5:31:00 PM PDT by Killborn (BASH BUSH!! All the COOL kids are doing it!!!! Perfect for people with no logic or reason!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 474 | View Replies]

To: STARWISE; Laverne; the Real fifi; Bahbah
Just found this at firedoglake. This thread is so long I haven't read it all..has this been posted yet?

UPDATE: Just got this from Harry Reid’s office:

Washington, DC — Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid made the following statement today after President Bush commuted the prison sentence of former White House aide I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby for obstruction of justice:

“The President’s decision to commute Mr. Libby’s sentence is disgraceful. Libby’s conviction was the one faint glimmer of accountability for White House efforts to manipulate intelligence and silence critics of the Iraq War. Now, even that small bit of justice has been undone. Judge Walton correctly determined that Libby deserved to be imprisoned for lying about a matter of national security. The Constitution gives President Bush the power to commute sentences, but history will judge him harshly for using that power to benefit his own Vice President’s Chief of Staff who was convicted of such a serious violation of law.”

UPDATE #2: More statements from Dem. leadership: Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Rep. John Conyers, Rep. Louise Slaughter, and Sen. Chris Dodd:

“By commuting Scooter Libby’s sentence, the President continues to abdicate responsibility for the actions of his Administration. The only ones paying the price for this Administration’s actions are the American people.”

Still waiting for the Presidential apology to Valerie Plame Wilson for his Administration betraying her cover and her work on Iranian WMDs, among other important national security investigations. Not exactly holding my breath for it, though…

UPDATE #3: Statement from former Sen. John Edwards: “Only a president clinically incapable of understanding that mistakes have consequences could take the action he did today. President Bush has just sent exactly the wrong signal to the country and the world. In George Bush’s America, it is apparently okay to misuse intelligence for political gain, mislead prosecutors and lie to the FBI. George Bush and his cronies think they are above the law and the rest of us live with the consequences. The cause of equal justice in America took a serious blow today.”

530 posted on 07/02/2007 5:31:23 PM PDT by greyfoxx39 ("We don't want to open a box of Pandoras." - Bruce King former governor of NM, DEM)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 471 | View Replies]

To: SunkenCiv
Judge Dismisses New York Times Lawsuit

Boy, this has been a rotten day for the left, hasn't it...HAHAHAHAHA!

531 posted on 07/02/2007 5:33:10 PM PDT by greyfoxx39 ("We don't want to open a box of Pandoras." - Bruce King former governor of NM, DEM)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 499 | View Replies]

To: True Republican Patriot

Amen. Blessings to I. Lewis Libby and his family too. A good day for the Libbys. While the toon said “Ah feel yore payne!” and bit his slimy lip, Dubya actually did something about it.


532 posted on 07/02/2007 5:33:28 PM PDT by Killborn (BASH BUSH!! All the COOL kids are doing it!!!! Perfect for people with no logic or reason!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 482 | View Replies]

To: Cedric; ears_to_hear


533 posted on 07/02/2007 5:33:34 PM PDT by MEG33 (GOD BLESS OUR ARMED FORCES)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 498 | View Replies]

To: ConservativeMan55
Scooter Libby was found guilty because he "misattributed" something he heard on the job to one journalist. He also said an innocuous, "I heard that too," to another journalist.

Misattribution is a common memory defect. IMHO this was what he did and he did not possess criminal intent. His lawyer was unable to use Dr. Schacter (Harvard expert on memory) as well as others. The judge prohibited this because of the "brilliant cross examination of Fitzgerald."

If Scooter had been permitted memory experts the outcome would have been different.

Guilt was not proven. What was proven is the judge, jury and prosecutor as well as the MSM all thought this was going to be another "Watergate." It never was and never will be.

534 posted on 07/02/2007 5:34:43 PM PDT by shrinkermd
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ConservativeMan55
I am happy with this decision, but President Bush needs to do more.

PARDON THE BORDER AGENTS


535 posted on 07/02/2007 5:34:57 PM PDT by barnicus (- DUNCAN HUNTER - 2008)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: greyfoxx39

LOL. Yes, greyfoxx, I think those have been posted.

Actually, I shouldn’t laugh. These are elected representatives making careless and irresponsible and false and venomous statements. It is such a serious problem that we face when this is what passes as “leaders.”


536 posted on 07/02/2007 5:35:42 PM PDT by Bahbah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 530 | View Replies]

To: greyfoxx39
Still waiting for the Presidential apology to Valerie Plame Wilson for his Administration betraying her cover and her work on Iranian WMDs, among other important national security investigations. Not exactly holding my breath for it, though…

Now it's Iranian WMDs ??

537 posted on 07/02/2007 5:35:43 PM PDT by Mo1 ( http://www.gohunter08.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 530 | View Replies]

To: ConservativeMan55

WONDERFUL !!!!! What a joke this was. Fritz should be put on trial for wasting tax payer money !!!


538 posted on 07/02/2007 5:36:37 PM PDT by Deetes (God Bless the Troops)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: oakcon

“An allegory of what happened to the DUmmies, the MSM, and liberals in general (some images may disturb, but most are hilarious)”

PRICELESS!!!

LMAO!!!


539 posted on 07/02/2007 5:36:56 PM PDT by xDGx
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 516 | View Replies]

To: traderrob6
He would have been better off pardoning him now, at least he would have gotten kudos from the right. As it stands now nobody is going to be happy. PS I like Bush but when he acts like this it drives me crazy.

ONCE AGAIN>>>

Libby and his lawyers DID NOT WANT a full pardon at this time. That would have prevented him from an appeal with a chance bring out the truth and clear his name. A full pardon at this time would, in effect, be an admission of guilt and being branded a felon for life...without the right of appeal.

I am, reluctantly, beginning to think, due to the preponderance of bash-Bush over this in this thread that it is not just because of ignorance - but infiltrators.

sniff sniff

540 posted on 07/02/2007 5:37:41 PM PDT by maine-iac7 ( "...but you can't fool all of the people all the time." LINCOLN)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 307 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 501-520521-540541-560 ... 781-785 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson