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.
Uh, yeah, sure. Especially since it was never established that any crime was committed regarding revealing Plame's name.
You have freep mail coming shortly!
If you can't post it in the open forum, don't bother.
I’m noticing a pattern.
Every thread here on FR turns into a “why we hate Bush because of the borders” forum by certain posters.
I’m just sayin......
I’m noticing a pattern.
Every thread here on FR turns into a “why we hate Bush because of the borders” forum by certain posters.
I’m just sayin......
Then I will go pull it and you don’t want to know why I pulled away from this Administration.
Fine with me!
Well, I remember your breathless promoting of a big Duncan Hunter "scandal" a few months back that turned out to be completely bogus.
And I know you tried to take anger at the Bush Admin and turn it against Fred, despite your promise when you came back to not comment on presidential campaigns since you are involved in Rudy's.
So pardon me if I don't take your latest breathless commentary at face value. That's what happens when you play games - you lose credibility.
I'm noticing a pattern, too.
There are fewer and fewer Bush-bots around lately. I agree with Bush's commutation decision - it gives Scooter a chance to get the verdict overturned. A pardon would not do that.
However, another poster showed the content of a RNC fundraising letter which was quite shameless. So I commented on that shamelessness. If Bush wants the base back, he will need to do more than commute a prison sentence. He needs to start doing his damn job enforcing our borders.
I continue to be amazed at the childishness on DU. They are clearly angry about this as we might be if the roles were reversed (witness Clinton). However, I think we are adult enough to realize that the President has the constitutional authority to commute/pardon and it is not reviewable. That is, we may dislike it but that is just the way things are. We may use the occasion to make great political noise.
Most of the posts on DU are just rants calling for impeachment. They are completely illogical and in a rage. I read through hundreds of posts and there was only one acknowledgement that Bush can legally do this. In the past I have seen some of the folks post over there that are obviously well-read. Most are just screaming children. I would like to know the demographics of that group. They have to be mainly ignorant16 – 22 year olds or older washouts from the 60’s.
Unfortunately for us these types on the Left are not allowed to take center stage. If they were, it would be the end of the Democrat party. What a bunch of whackos.
I’m not blasting anyone. Just making an observation.
I think the whole rotten, co-opted media should be held accountable for selling out and permitting themselves to be spoon-fed half-truths and rumors from political hack scumbags in the first place. Zero integrity merits zero respect.
Forget about partisan politics for a moment: if you’d ever known anyone who’s done covert work for a federal agency, I bet you’d take this more seriously. Mishandling classified information should be punished to the fullest extent of the law— I don’t care who does it. Brave men and women who serve their country as undercover operatives deserve far better than to have their life thrown away as expendable pawn in a politican’s chess game. Shameful.
Scooter Libby and Sandy Berger should be cellmates.
I couldn’t agree more. Wouldn’t it be great to showcase the DU types every night?
“This is your party, democrats”.
The mostly elderly democrats, especially those in the rust belt, haven’t a clue about the types on DU. That’s why the drive by media won’t showcase them.
dirtboy, when the President does something right, I’m going to say he’s done something right.
This was something right.
Move along.
Firstly I would still maintain that the President has every right to pardon Libby regardless of what Libby did. It doesn’t mean it is popular or even fair but it is the way it is. Partisan politics has nothing to do with it.
Beyond that, Libby didn’t mishandle classified information. That was not what he was convicted of or even accused of. The issue of the status of Plame’s status wasn’t even discussed. The prosecutor knew who leaked the info before the case started and it was never proven if the leak was even illegal. That is what makes this case so silly IMO. It was a process crime... as much as others want to make it about leaking the name of a covert agent, that isn’t what Libby was convicted of.
Now… if she was proven to be undercover and the leak was proven to be illegal and Libby was the one that leaked… then we might have a reason to complain. And complain is all we could do because again, the President has the authority to commute/pardon.
I would agree that mishandling classified information should be punished. I wish Bush would have taken a stand with this a long time ago with all of the leaks about the war coming from the Pentagon, Dept of State and Congress. This has shamefully not happened. I don’t claim to know the reasons why… the gov’t is big and difficult to shape, even if you are the President.
I have to ask...who did leak Ms. Plame's name to columnist Robert Novak?
The leak was from Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage.
I’m having trouble verifying that as a fact. Link?
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.