Just your opinions, please. My question is neutral.
2007-07-02 12:10:35 · 15 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
I expected it. There really isn't much more that Bush can do to drop my opinion of him.
2007-07-02 12:20:36 · answer #1 · answered by x2000 6 · 3⤊ 2⤋
This is an easy one. It fans the flames of partisanship. By doing this, Bush is sending a message that he believes Libby was indicted on a politically motived charge and didnt do anything wrong. Since Bush believes that no one in his administration has every made a mistake, the fact that Libby was found guilty therefore must only have been political maneuvering. Its ridiculous and to me this comes dangerously close to treason, even though Libby is really taking the fall for Cheney. Cant wait till these crooks are out of office.
2016-05-17 04:01:39 · answer #2 · answered by ? 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I actually expected a complete pardon, which would have erased the fine, probation, and conviction. Libby still will never be able to practice law again, have to pay a huge fine, and live with the fact that he is a convicted felon. He still will be punished for his crime, even if he doesn't serve a day in jail.
Personally, I think this is pretty much a non-issue. Had Bush pardoned Libby, I would feel a little differently.
2007-07-02 12:27:58 · answer #3 · answered by msi_cord 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I feel he should've given Libby a complete pardon, not simply commuted the sentence. Two years probation & a quarter million dollar fine is still rather harsh considering he was just trying to do his job.
I'm quite certain that had this incident occurred under Slick Willie's administration, he would've handed out a pardon without hesitation and the Democrats would've stood up & cheered.
2007-07-02 12:20:36 · answer #4 · answered by ? 5 · 2⤊ 3⤋
These presidential powers are supposed to be used for gross violations of due process and the like. A jury found this guy guilty and he was sentenced to 2.5 years, probation and a fine for committing perjury and a couple of other things. Perjury is not a victimless crime and hurts the very foundation of the judicial system. I do not see any gross miscarriage of justice in this case, therefore this whole thing is BS.
No one is above the law, that includes every single Democrat also.
2007-07-02 12:14:03 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 5⤋
It should not have been unexpected since he apparently has no respect for legalities in areas that don't fit his agenda.
Expect a full pardon when he leaves office.
He didn't just lie. He committed perjury.
2007-07-02 12:19:56 · answer #6 · answered by maxmom 7 · 2⤊ 3⤋
It makes me happy. The more underhanded, unscrupulous things Bush and Cheney do, the better to insure a Democratic President in '08. Go Bush!
2007-07-02 12:15:57 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 4⤋
Sounds like they were going to put him in prison for a lie. Now, I don't approve of lying... but its not worth jail time for... his job sure, but not jail. (Didn't someone *else* famous **coughclintoncough** get convicted of the same thing, yet do no time?
Sure, throw an old man into prison with a bunch of *real* criminals, subject him to strip-searches... yeah... that justice. And Clinton pardoned lots of crooks.
Now, I just was to see Bush let those 2 border patrol guys off the hook!
2007-07-02 12:18:29 · answer #8 · answered by MotherBear1975 6 · 4⤊ 4⤋
Oh well, since the current (R) party has set this precedent, let's just pardon and clear Bendict Arnold. After all all thing's considered he was a traitor who actually did a few thing's worthwhile for America.
2007-07-02 12:16:30 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 3⤋
It's criminal. Bush pardoned Libby for committing a crime Bush (and / or Cheney) authorized him to commit.
So much for the "rule of law" the pseudo-cons have been crowing about lately.
2007-07-02 12:17:18 · answer #10 · answered by Fretless 6 · 3⤊ 5⤋