He has over two million in a "free Libby" fund already set aside. So not only is the fine paid, he's got a little nugget for his troubles.
Well, he is still "guilty". He's still on parole and still has to pay a fine. Every President pardons their buddies. Some for Clinton: Carlos A. Vignali had his sentence for cocaine trafficking commuted, after serving 6 of 15 years in federal prison. Almon Glenn Braswell was pardoned of his mail fraud and perjury convictions, even while a federal investigation was underway regarding additional money laundering and tax evasion charges. Braswell and Carlos Vignali each paid approximately $200,000 to Hillary Clinton's brother, Hugh Rodham, to represent their respective cases for clemency. Hugh Rodham returned the payments after they were disclosed to the public. Braswell would later invoke the Fifth Amendment at a Senate Committee hearing in 2001, when questioned about allegations of his having systematically defrauded senior citizens of millions of dollars. Marc Rich, a fugitive, was pardoned of tax evasion, after clemency pleas from Israeli prime minister Ehud Barak, among many other international luminaries. Denise Rich, Marc's former wife, was a close friend of the Clintons and had made substantial donations to both Clinton's library and Hillary's Senate campaign. Several months after her last donation, emails reveal Republican attorney "Scooter" Libby asked her to approach Clinton about pardoning Marc Rich. Clinton agreed to a pardon that required Marc Rich to pay a $100,000,000 fine before he could return to the United States. According to Paul Volcker's independent investigation of Iraqi Oil-for-Food kickback schemes, Marc Rich was a middleman for several suspect Iraqi oil deals involving over 4 million barrels of oil. Susan McDougal, who had already completed her sentence, was pardoned for her role in the Whitewater scandal; McDougal had served 18 months on contempt charges for refusing to testify about Clinton's role. Dan Rostenkowski, a former Democratic Congressman convicted in the Congressional Post Office Scandal Melvin J. Reynolds, a Democratic Congressman from Illinois, who was convicted of bank fraud, 12 counts of sexual assault, obstruction of justice, and solicitation of child p*rnography. Roger Clinton, the president's half-brother, on drug charges. Roger Clinton would be charged with drunk driving and disorderly conduct in an unrelated incident within a year of the pardon.[14] He was also briefly alleged to have been utilized in lobbying for the Braswell pardon, among others. Bush Senior Pardons: Bush's last controversial act in office was his pardon, on December 24, 1992, of six former government employees implicated in the Iran-Contra scandal - most prominently former Secretary of Defense Caspar Weinberger. Weinberger had been scheduled to stand trial on January 5, 1993, for allegedly lying to Congress regarding his knowledge of arms sales to Iran and concealing 1700 pages of his personal diary detailing discussions with other officials about the arms sales.
Sorry supermac None of those people committed treason against the United States in a time of war. But I'm sure the "Clinton did it" defense is sure to follow.
Commutation vs. Pardon? Here's the difference... Libby does no jail time, but can still proceed with his appeal, thus allowing him an out if asked to appear before Congress and also allowing him to invoke the 5th should he be somehow compelled to testify. if pardoned, there'd be no reason to invoke the 5th. So, a reward for staying quiet which keeps all the tools needed for not saying anything more in the toolbox... not to mention that it takes any nagging incentive away from cutting a deal with Fitzgerald. As to the fine? Psssh. Some rich guys will pony up and that will be that. As for the conviction? he'll be well taken care of by the Repub welfare machine. And do we really think this was Bush's idea? I bet all the docs were prepared in the VP's office.
DOJ manual on Commutations (emphasis added) ... Section 1-2.113 Standards for Considering Commutation Petitions A commutation of sentence reduces the period of incarceration; it does not imply forgiveness of the underlying offense, but simply remits a portion of the punishment. It has no effect upon the underlying conviction and does not necessarily reflect upon the fairness of the sentence originally imposed. Requests for commutation generally are not accepted unless and until a person has begun serving that sentence. Nor are commutation requests generally accepted from persons who are presently challenging their convictions or sentences through appeal or other court proceeding. http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/
No, but Robert E. Lee and Jefferson Davis did. No real point here, just trying to clear the palate. Interesting to see President Guantanamo worried about harsh sentences. Anything to stop reading stories about Presidential candidate quarterly fundraising figures.
Libby's prosecution was the biggest sham in recent memory. What was the guy guilty of, being a Republican? The only joke here is that the rest of the sentence remained in tact. This was a manufactured controversy from Day 1. Typcial liberal sour grapes, heck, they are just bitter they couldn't get their hands on Cheney. Bush did the right thing. The liberal lynch mob can go back to doing what they do best -- biching and whining.
Of course all of thsoe pardons came at the very end of the president's term after most of thos people had already served at least part of their sentence. Likewise, most of the people you mentioned were simply pardoned as political favors or payoffs - almost none of them were actual members of the administration that was doing the pardoning, which is perhaps the most unseemly part of the whole thing. Regardless of what any past president did or didn't do, this is not simply not acceptable behavior and not defensible.
Well, the whole thing about conservatives being hard on crime turns out to be another hypocricy along with fiscal spending. What is the party all about besides looking after your own?
When Fred Thompson (who is my fav. right now btw...) was asked if he would pardon Libby as President (a month ago), he stated absolutely without hesitating ...and he stated due to the reasoning of it not being right from the get go...something to that effect.
And Bush can get back to what he does bast: ruining the country and his approval rating. Hoo-ah. Anybody want to set an under point for his poll numbers? I say he's got a shot at going below 25% now.
Are you speaking about the approval rating that is higher than that of the Democrat-controlled Congress? OOPS
Nice. So, the titular head of an administration that practices extraordinary rendition, which runs Gitmo, which approves torture... is concerned about the excessiveness of Libby's 30 month sentence.
Just went over to dailykos to laugh my ace off at their outrage. LOL. They think the country will react to this non-story. What they don't realize is that the entire story was a contrived, manufactured controversy that was intended to do nothing but punish someone close to Bush. That's it. What was Libby guilty of? What's hilarious is that those bozos think that the average voter actually understands this story the way they do. What a joke. Most people have never even heard of Plame (or her non-undercover desk job). This is a policy wonk-wannabe's story and it just pooped out on the rabid libpigs. TEARS
Considering that something like 60-70% of respondents felt he should go to jail whereas 18% felt he should be pardoned - your math is a bit...off. OOPS THE THIRD, THE FINAL CHAPTER
So which group was right about the outcome? OOPS UP-SIDE THE HEAD, I SAID OOPS UPSIDE THE HEAD. Poor little policy wonk-wannabe SamFisher. He's vexed again by his nemesis The President. Eh, huddle up tonight with the rest of your junior lawyer buddies and bemoan the dashing of your hopes and dreams tied to this frivolous, non-story of a case. The witch hunt that held so much promise for the most bitter, angry sect within the liberal cult ends with nothing more than a slap on the wrist. Pooooooor liberals, they are proven wrong again.
