The most infamous and controversial Clinton pardon, Marc Rich (Wire fraud, mail fraud, racketeering, racketeering conspiracy, criminal forfeiture, income tax evasion, and trading with Iran in violation of trade embargo). Even Dems were upset over this pardon.
Rich bought crude oil from the Ayatollah Khomeini's Iran while Iran was holding U.S. citizens hostage. This was in direct violation of a U.S. trade embargo -- and, in effect, helped to arm the Iranians by giving them needed cash.
Yet, Rich and his wife Denise (now former wife...he has since left her for a new chickie-babe) raised and donated more than $1 million to the Democratic Party in recent years and also provided the Clintons directly with a $10,000 contribution to their legal defense fund and $7,300 worth of furniture. Hmmmmm.....
In comparison, Libby is small potatoes. A man who did nothing except forget what he said to whom...
2007-07-03 08:06:37 · 19 answers · asked by Truth B. Told ITS THE ECONOMY STUPID 6 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
I amusing the term "pardon" because that is what it is being compared to...sheesh, I knew I should have said, "flap."
2007-07-03 08:41:21 · update #1
I certainly do remember him and also remember being absolutely infuriated that he managed to receive a pardon. And yet people are screaming their heads off over Libbly.
Amazing!
2007-07-03 08:10:42 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 4⤋
A lot of presidents exercise their right to pardon, republican president Ford pardoned corrupt Nixon, Bush took good care of Scooter Libby. Senator Clinton had nothing to do with any Pardons Bill did, besides Marc is hardly one of the worse criminals in history.
2016-05-17 09:24:54 · answer #2 · answered by ? 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No, Libby is a traitor, he is about as bad as Rich, but again that is no excuse. Clinton was a terrible president and Bush even a worse liar than Clinton. When will people stop comparing Bush to Clinton. Neither were/are good presidents. But it does run int the Bush family to pardon people that can put them into jail if they told the truth. Where did Libby get his orders to reveal the information? Libby didn't forget anything. You don't forget outing a CIA agent.
Oh yes, President Reagan also traded with Iran. Traded arms so they could kill Iraqis whom we were also supplying with weapons. And then funded terrorists in Central America. Talk about evil.
2007-07-03 08:15:15 · answer #3 · answered by Jim San Antonio 4 · 2⤊ 1⤋
I agree with you that the Marc Rich pardon was dubious and wrong. I disagree completely that Libby is small potatoes. You are oversimplifying what he did immensely. If anything, it shows that Presidents should not have the power to pardon criminals. If you're trying to make this an anti-Democrat argument, you'll only be being hypocritical, if not obtuse. Gerald Ford pardoned Nixon, afterall. You can't do much worse than that. In any case, that does not make Clinton right to pardon Rich. I think you make a good point in bringing that up.
2007-07-03 08:11:29 · answer #4 · answered by Mr. Taco 7 · 3⤊ 1⤋
(1) The Rich pardon will be an issue 8 years later if the Democrats nominate Hilary.
(2) Libby lied about lies ordered by Bush & Cheney to cover up their lies that got us into an unnecessary war and cost the lives of 3,582 brave Americans. The lives of American soldiers are not "small potatoes."
(3) If Libby had gone to jail, he would have ratted on Bush & Cheney to bargain his way out, so Bush commuted his sentence to keep him quiet.
(4) Rich traded with Iran? That reminds me of Dubya's Grampa Prescott, who was a director and vice-president of the Union Banking Corporation, which was seized during World War II under the Trading with the Enemy Act.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Union_Banking_Corporation
2007-07-03 08:44:19 · answer #5 · answered by Ray Eston Smith Jr 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋
I am a dem/lib, but I think the Marc Rich is much worse than this by far. Not saying that though. Just because Clinton did something, doesn't mean it makes it OK or less of a big deal for Bush to do it. This is just another "Clinton Did It!" excuse to make it seem justified that Bush followed suit.
2007-07-03 08:11:15 · answer #6 · answered by hanginleft17 2 · 3⤊ 1⤋
What does that have to do with Libby
It sounds like a diversion or childish ploy
Because someone else did something wrong doesn't excuse
explain away or make right another bad thing
We are talking about W not Clinton
It's like you get a speeding ticket and your defense is well I only do 10 miles over the limit my neighbor drives 25 miles over the speed limit
2007-07-03 08:16:26 · answer #7 · answered by crossingover 4 · 3⤊ 1⤋
Libby wasn't pardoned. Marc Rich was a real live criminal but then again his wife donated alot of $ to Clinton.
2007-07-03 08:12:18 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
Yes, Marc Rich should not have been pardoned BUT neither should have Libby's sentence been commuted.
Once again, we are comparing oranges to apples... let's get back to current events instead of history... Every administration has had unpopular pardons. So what is your point?
2007-07-03 08:13:38 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 1⤋
Marc Rich had to leave the USA had to give up his citizenship and
PAY ONE HUNDRED MILLION DOLLAR FINE
When Reagan and Oliver North sold weapons to iran to get Iran Contra money (trading with Iran--same as Rich did) Reagan got a free pass and Ollie got a pardon from his fellow conspirator
Same as we have with Scooter----Pardoned by a fellow conspirator
Let's see buying oil -----vs.---selling weapons to enemy
Yes sounds like twisted republican logic to me
2007-07-03 08:14:52 · answer #10 · answered by Deidre K 3 · 2⤊ 1⤋
According to the United States judicial system, the FELON Libby lied under oath to a grand jury during a time of WAR.
If that's your idea of doing nothing, you might want to change the law so everyone else can do it to.
2007-07-03 08:10:35 · answer #11 · answered by NightShade 3 · 7⤊ 1⤋