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.
I think President Bush should have exonerated Libby of all charges from his bully pulpit, and that he should have identified the entire fiasco as a sham from the start that was run by democrats and liberals hell bent on giving this administration a black eye no matter was injustice must be carried through to do it.
But then again I think President Bush should require Homeland Security, the INS, and the border police to do their job and secure our borders. So what do I know.
Sorry you can’t realize SARCASM when you see it. Pfftt...
What's the common factor between the two cases? In the BP case the prosecutor was a FOB. In the Libby case the defendant was an FOB. Go figure.
I still think it was the right thing to do.
I heard that they’re trying to bring in Bubba more to help out of the “Hillary lacks experience” claim and due to her very high negatives. I can’t listen to Susan Estrich talk for more than about 15 seconds so maybe I need to turn on closed captioning when she comes on, lol.
Ramos and Compeon and Hernandez should all be immediately pardoned and compensated for the crime committed against them and their families!!!
Ramos and Compeon and Hernandez and Alito should all be pardoned and Bush and Sutton and Cardone all owe compensation to them and their families!!!
My husband and I agonize daily for the suffering that Bush and Sutton have caused Ramos, Compeon, Hernandez and Alito and their families!!! When will Justice be done and pardons be given for these innocent men???????????????????????????????????????
Yes, they showed clips of Bonnie & Clyde out in Iowa with the fawning folks. Husbands for Hillary was one of the slogans, if you can stand it.
Sure sounds like it! Know it is not a dead issue and they will be back.
Thanks for that info!
Bush was wise to keep the fine and probation intact.
That's still more than Clinton got for perjury and obstruction.
You’re welcome. You can see right through their fancy personal letter through guilt tactic, and the natural reaction is—so where’s the fence?
David Brooks: Ending the Farce (’Bush’s Decision in the Libby Case Was Exactly Right’)
The New York Times Select Edition (subscrition only) ^ | 7/3/7
Posted on 07/03/2007 8:48:42 AM PDT by hardback
A cast of thousands crowded the stage, filling the the air with fevered vapors and gleeful rage. The media stakeouts of Karl Rove’s driveway, the delirious calls from producers (The indictment is coming today!)
The media types so eager to get Rove, back when everyone thought he was the key leaker. Richard Armitage was as Fitzgerald knew from the start.
It was like a city of Ahabs getting deliriously close to the great white whale.
The trial to be honest, was somehwat aniclimatic. Fitzgerald, casting himself as Javert, demanded Libby get a harsh sentence as punishment for crimes he had not been convicted of.
The judge, casting himself as David against Goliath, demonstrated an impressive capicty for talking about himself. President Bush entered the stage like a character from another world, a world in which things make sense.
Of course the howlers howl. That is their assigned posture in this drama. The only thing you can count on is that their anger has been cynically manufactured from start to finish
The farce is over. It has no significance. Nobody but Libby’s family will remember it in a few weeks time. Everyone else will have moved on to other fiacos, other poses, fresher manias.
It has been a farce from day one. Rove should have stepped up to the plate and saved the Administration all this grief on Libby. Rove, you say. I figure if he leaked to to Novak in 1992 and got fired from the Bush 41 campaign, there is an excellent chance he leaked to Novak once again since they are good friends.
You want the real culprit — it is not Libby, my money is on Rove who let him twist in the wind.
This was the right decision, on Bush’s part.
Hey, PKM, don't let the fact that Armitage was the leaker get in the way of your opinion. I have no love for Rove, but your attacks on him over this are asinine.
So why, then, has Bush only built 13 miles of the 860 mile fence authorized in the bill, even though they admit they have funding for well over 300 miles?
You can bet all the money in the bank that first person Novak called was Rove. You can also take it to the bank that Rove got cute on this with some other reporters.
You have freep mail coming shortly!
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.