• We are currently performing site maintenance, parts of civfanatics are currently offline, but will come back online in the coming days. For more updates please see here.

Should Bush pardon Lewis "Scooter" Libby?

Should Bush pardon Lewis "Scooter" Libby?

  • Yes, immediatley

    Votes: 4 7.0%
  • Yes, right before Bush's term ends

    Votes: 9 15.8%
  • No

    Votes: 41 71.9%
  • Other

    Votes: 3 5.3%

  • Total voters
    57
Quite so.

I always find it strange that a land that rebelled against the royal perogatives, of which one was perogative was the granting of pardons,
should asign that perogative to State Governors and the POTUS.

And they seem to grant pardons in very peculiar circumstances.
These people are supposed to be upholding the law, not undermining it.


Not sure when our own Lizzie last pardoned anyone.
Oh yes, in 2006 for soldiers executed in 1914-1918 war.
You threw me there for a minute. I was thinking, "Lizzie? Huh?" I got it now, you arent in Norfolk, Virginia. Hey my mamma didnt raise no dummies:shifty:
 
Yes, no real "crime" was commited here, its just a witch hunt.

Because it was a witch hunt. The 'special prosiguter' couldn't get for outing Plame as a CIA agent because it wasn't a crime and she was outed long before Libby mentioned her name. So under preasure he went for purgery. Its not like when Clinton flat out lied. Libby was caught 'lieing' about who he spoke to on what day. God forbid he was just wrong thats not allowed. So when then they discovered he was wrong they trumped it up to purgery.

Completely laughable. This was an independent prosecutor appointed by the REPUBLICAN led Judicial branch.

You guys are missing the point... on purpose? Its not the perjury, its the OBSTRUCTION. He basically killed the investigation by refusing to give people up.
 
And if it was a witch hunt, it was poorly conducted. They didn't even dunk anybody under water to see if they were witchy enough to survive drowning and thus a candidate to be burned at the stake.
 
Completely laughable. This was an independent prosecutor appointed by the REPUBLICAN led Judicial branch.

You guys are missing the point... on purpose? Its not the perjury, its the OBSTRUCTION. He basically killed the investigation by refusing to give people up.

What obstruction exactly? There was no crime to obstruct the investigation of.

And since when can't an independant prosecuter Go on his own little hunt?
 
What obstruction exactly? There was no crime to obstruct the investigation of.

And since when can't an independant prosecuter Go on his own little hunt?

does it matter if there is a crime if you obstruct an investigation?

say a cop comes to your house with a warrant, you know you have nothing but they want to search.

you won't let them in. would that not be a crime?
 
I'd rather see him pardon the two border patrol agents who shot a Mexican drug smuggler in the butt while smuggling pot into the country.
 
Paradigne: :rotfl:

In general: is this a partisan issue?

Further: I guess if Bush will use the veto once in awhile, he should try using the pardon too.
 
On Tuesday, I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, former aide to Vice President Cheney, was found guilty on counts of perjury, lying to the FBI and obstructing an investigation into the leak of a CIA operative, Valerie Plame, and faces up to 25 years in prison.

Should President Bush issue a pardon to Scooter Libby or not?

You just said in your post a bunch of the crimes he commited, so why should he be pardoned?
 
If Jesus can forgive him then why not Bush forgive him.:lol:
 
does it matter if there is a crime if you obstruct an investigation?

say a cop comes to your house with a warrant, you know you have nothing but they want to search.

you won't let them in. would that not be a crime?

Thats not even remotely the same thing.

Its more like the cops come to your house and ask you if you talk to John and said you ahd a ballon ot tuesday 4 years ago. You say no. You then tell them it was Jimmy on monday. But your wrong. It was John. Did you lie and obstruct or were you just wrong.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
(Op/ed piece from Yahoo! News.): Sorry no link.

Lewis Libby has now been found guilty of perjury and obstruction of justice for lies that had absolutely no legal consequence.

It was not a crime to reveal Valerie Plame's name because she was not a covert agent. If it had been a crime, Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald could have wrapped up his investigation with an indictment of the State Department's Richard Armitage on the first day of his investigation since it was Armitage who revealed her name and Fitzgerald knew it.

With no crime to investigate, Fitzgerald pursued a pointless investigation into nothing, getting a lot of White House officials to make statements under oath and hoping some of their recollections would end up conflicting with other witness recollections, so he could charge some Republican with "perjury" and enjoy the fawning media attention.

As a result, Libby is now a convicted felon for having a faulty memory of the person who first told him that Joe Wilson (news, bio, voting record) was a delusional boob who lied about his wife sending him to Niger.

This makes it official: It's illegal to be Republican.

Since Teddy Kennedy walked away from a dead girl with only a wrist slap (which was knocked down to a mild talking-to, plus time served: zero), Democrats have apparently become a protected class in America, immune from criminal prosecution no matter what they do.

As a result, Democrats have run wild, accepting bribes, destroying classified information, lying under oath, molesting interns, driving under the influence, obstructing justice and engaging in sex with underage girls, among other things.

Meanwhile, conservatives of any importance constantly have to spend millions of dollars defending themselves from utterly frivolous criminal prosecutions. Everything is illegal, but only Republicans get prosecuted.

Conservative radio personality Rush Limbaugh was subjected to a three-year criminal investigation for allegedly buying prescription drugs illegally to treat chronic back pain. Despite the witch-hunt, Democrat prosecutor Barry E. Krischer never turned up a crime.

Even if he had, to quote liberal Harvard Law professor Alan Dershowitz: "Generally, people who illegally buy prescription drugs are not prosecuted." Unless they're Republicans.

The vindictive prosecution of Limbaugh finally ended last year with a plea bargain in which Limbaugh did not admit guilt. Gosh, don't you feel safer now? I know I do.

In another prescription drug case with a different result, last year, Rep. Patrick Kennedy (news, bio, voting record) (Democrat), apparently high as a kite on prescription drugs, crashed a car on Capitol Hill at 3 a.m. That's abuse of prescription drugs plus a DUI offense. Result: no charges whatsoever and one day of press on Fox News Channel.

I suppose one could argue those were different jurisdictions. How about the same jurisdiction?

In 2006, Democrat and major Clinton contributor Jeffrey Epstein was nabbed in Palm Beach in a massive police investigation into his hiring of local underage schoolgirls for sex, which I'm told used to be a violation of some kind of statute in the Palm Beach area.

The police presented Limbaugh prosecutor Krischer with boatloads of evidence, including the videotaped statements of five of Epstein's alleged victims, the procurer of the girls for Epstein and 16 other witnesses.

But the same prosecutor who spent three years maniacally investigating Limbaugh's alleged misuse of back-pain pills refused to bring statutory rape charges against a Clinton contributor. Enraging the police, who had spent months on the investigation, Krischer let Epstein off after a few hours on a single count of solicitation of prostitution. The Clinton supporter walked, and his victims were branded as whores.

The Republican former House Whip Tom DeLay is currently under indictment for a minor campaign finance violation. Democratic prosecutor Ronnie Earle had to empanel six grand juries before he could find one to indict DeLay on these pathetic charges -- and this is in Austin, Texas (the Upper West Side with better-looking people).

That final grand jury was so eager to indict DeLay that it indicted him on one charge that was not even a crime -- and which has since been tossed out by the courts.

After winning his primary despite the indictment, DeLay decided to withdraw from the race rather than campaign under a cloud of suspicion, and Republicans lost one of their strongest champions in Congress.

Compare DeLay's case with that of Rep. William "The Refrigerator" Jefferson, Democrat. Two years ago, an FBI investigation caught Jefferson on videotape taking $100,000 in bribe money. When the FBI searched Jefferson's house, they found $90,000 in cash stuffed in his freezer. Two people have already pleaded guilty to paying Jefferson the bribe money.

Two years later, Bush's Justice Department still has taken no action against Jefferson. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi recently put Rep. William Jefferson on the Homeland Security Committee.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, Democrat, engaged in a complicated land swindle, buying a parcel of land for $400,000 and selling it for over $1 million a few years later. (At least it wasn't cattle futures!)

Reid also received more than four times as much money from Jack Abramoff (nearly $70,000) as Tom DeLay ($15,000). DeLay returned the money; Reid refuses to do so. Why should he? He's a Democrat.

Former Clinton national security adviser Sandy Berger literally received a sentence of community service for stuffing classified national security documents in his pants and then destroying them -- big, fat federal felonies.

But Scooter Libby is facing real prison time for forgetting who told him about some bozo's wife.

Bill Clinton was not even prosecuted for obstruction of justice offenses so egregious that the entire Supreme Court staged a historic boycott of his State of the Union address in 2000.

By contrast, Linda Tripp, whose only mistake was befriending the office hosebag and then declining to perjure herself, spent millions on lawyers to defend a harassment prosecution based on far-fetched interpretations of state wiretapping laws.

Liberal law professors currently warning about the "high price" of pursuing terrorists under the Patriot Act had nothing but blood lust for Tripp one year after Clinton was impeached (Steven Lubet, "Linda Tripp Deserves to be Prosecuted," New York Times, 8/25/99).

Criminal prosecution is a surrogate for political warfare, but in this war, Republicans are gutless appeasers.
 
That oped piece reads better as comedy than a serious commentary. So much of it is completely false or kernels of truth stretched to ridiculous proportion.

And, the leaking of Plame's name may or may not have been a crime. Just because she wasn't stationed anywhere as a covert doesn't mean she wasn't covert or hadn't been during the time-frame that the relevant statute covers. But, we never got to the bottom of it because Libby stonewalled. If there was no crime, then why stonewall for Dick Cheney? Hmm...
 
ahahahaha @ "molesting interns"

yeah, cause monica wasnt of consenting age and she didnt go down :rolleyes:
 
Perjury is not the worst of what he did. It was Libby's obstruction that prevented Fitzgerald (the Special Prosecutor) from getting to the bottom of the leak issue.

I suppose I should have clarified; perjury is worse on a personal standard, he betrayed himself. Obstruction of justice is worse on a legal standard, but he didn't betray his superiors or himself is doing so. Although I suppose in that sense he betrayed the American people to whom his superiors are supposed to be accountable...

But if you betray yourself, everything else collapses around you anyway.
 
Back
Top Bottom