2007-03-13 14:15:44 · 14 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
He's already been convicted, so innocent is out of the question.
They want him to get a pardon because they don't like the verdict handed down by the jury. They don't think he did anything wrong.
But you're right -- the problem with asking for a pardon is that it requires admitted remorse for what the person did.
2007-03-13 14:19:48 · answer #1 · answered by coragryph 7 · 6⤊ 6⤋
Accepting a pardon is not admitting guilt. Scooter Libby should never have been convicted, but from the very beginning this was a kangaroo court. The verdict was obviously political in nature. All one has to do to reach that conclusion is listen to the statements before and after by the head prosecutor and the jurors themselves.
Scooter Libby is only guilty of having a somewhat faulty memory. If he's convicted for lying, then the following people also involved with the Valerie Plame leak investigation should also have been tried and found guilty:
Judith Miller
Tim Russert
the major CIA witness... (Can't remember his name.)
Also if you listen to some of the other details, it seems that many of the jurors -knew- some of those involved with the case (for example, one was a former neighbor and friend of Russert). So the real question is, was justice done?
Looking at the way this was conducted, I don't think any objective person, putting aside their political biases, could say that it was. If the appeals process does not vindicate Scooter Libby, President Bush needs to give him an official pardon.
Edit:
G,
Don't look now, but the donkey tattoo on your butt is showing. Scooter Libby did NOT ask anyone to fill out false affidavits for him. Bill Clinton did. In addition, something else which makes it obvious he was lying... If you got a BJ from an (admittedly) beautiful woman, would you not remember it? C'mon! The fact is there was reasonable doubt, but the jury let their own biases get in the way of justice, as you are now.
2007-03-13 14:33:13 · answer #2 · answered by Firestorm 6 · 0⤊ 2⤋
honestly, Bush will pardon him. Scooter can drag out appeals and Bush can pardon hin as he leaves workplace. i imagine all of us know that had Cheney or Rove been named by ability of Libby, he wouldn't have taken the fall for them. Why is this pardon particularly heinous? because all of us suspect that Libby in undemanding words lied for those more beneficial united stateshow severe does it bypass? Feels Watergate-ish to me. that's in undemanding words the starting up. I basically want to operate in case you save retaining "Plame wasn't covert" & everyone may have obtained that options. in case your comany has your SS# on record, do you imagine he ought to disclose your Social protection # in a team assembly?
2016-12-01 23:17:12 · answer #3 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
are people retarded? I keep hearing "what did he do?" and "he's not guilty"
HE LIED UNDER OATH... and it was pretty obvious by the way... it's about as open and closed as it gets, unless he has Alzheimer's or something...
this isn't that complicated? you all seemed to understand it when Clinton did it, yet are BEYOND clueless when Libby did it?
is this all that's left of the Republican party? those that don't even know what perjury is?
Quite a few Republicans apparently don't even know what perjury is... so I'm pretty sure they are foggy on the whole "pardon" issue and what that could mean... judging by the responses...
2007-03-13 14:29:12 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
Well, if Mark Rich can get a pardon from Clinton, or the other fugitives he gave pardons to, then Scooter Libby, who did what, should absolutely get one. Thank You
2007-03-13 14:22:51 · answer #5 · answered by garyblaine calif. native 2 · 2⤊ 3⤋
Repugs want a pardon because they know Scooter knows where all the bodies are buried and they don't want him to sing to get a better sentence.
Of course he is guilty of outing a CIA which according to Junior Bush's daddy is an executing offense.
2007-03-13 14:26:38 · answer #6 · answered by realst1 7 · 2⤊ 2⤋
Yeah, I'm all for giving him a pardon as long as they penalize the folks above him that gave the marching orders.
2007-03-13 14:23:17 · answer #7 · answered by mattzcoz 5 · 2⤊ 1⤋
I assume he will go through the appeals process first. If his conviction is not over-turned on appeal, a pardon is his only remedy.
Remorse is a factor which is considered.
2007-03-13 14:23:28 · answer #8 · answered by Shrink 5 · 3⤊ 1⤋
He will get a pardon because he was a good little opertive and didn't squeal on his boss, repuglicans are like that you know.
2007-03-13 14:34:52 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
Removes the charges- there is no need for moral absolution.
2007-03-13 14:31:59 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋