Personally, I think lying to a congressional grand jury is a serious crime and he should have done some time. The reason I think Bush commuted his sentence and not a full pardon was because he still has a year and a half left in office. He was doing what was necessary to keep him out of jail and is hoping the appeals process will either be dragged on for a while because people have a short term memory and in hopes it will be turned over in appeals and to keep his hands free from more scandal which seems almost impossible, but if not Bush can pull a Clinton and pardon 140 on his last day of office when it "doesn't" matter anymore. Some people have served more than 5-10 years for a similar offense that Libby committed. Most people serve 10-31 monthes. He was sentenced to 30 monthes so he fell into the upper eschalon of the average sentence. He should serve it or the court should be held in contempt for political antics. The argument "I was only doing what I was told" didn't work for the Nazis at Nuremburg. Why should it work in congressional hearings. To me, it is a bigger deal that he lied to congress than leaking the identity of this woman that may or may not have been an active agent. I don't support Repubs or D-crats. I support justice. This whole ordeal seems to be about something other than justice......money and politics.
2007-07-04 12:05:55
·
answer #1
·
answered by shrugger 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Libby deserved to do his time in jail. Also, by commuting the sentence, Bush will adding to the difficulties that Republican candidates will experience in 2008. Bush made a mistake.
2007-07-05 19:55:48
·
answer #2
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Lying to the Grand jury is purgery. Blowing the cover of an intelligence operative is akin to attempted murder, depending on the circumstances. That undermines the effectiveness of our national security. All that because their spouse doesn't agree with a policy that up to 75% of America is in agreement with. Libby should have been burned at the Stake as well anyone who supports him. THAT IS TREASON BY AIDING AND ABIETING OUR ENEMIES. DONT SUGAR COAT IT . RIGHT WINGERS BASH CLINTON ABOUT HIS PARDONS, BUT HE RELASED INCARSERATED PEOPLE, SOME WRONGLY CONVICTED. NONE WERE TRAITORS. DEAL WITH FACTS NOT CNN OR FOX HEADLINES.
2007-07-04 19:21:30
·
answer #3
·
answered by rikfreese 3
·
1⤊
0⤋
Bush righted a wrong. Clinton pardoned 140 crooks during his last few days in office. There's no comparison. Libby's case was simply political persecution. Clinton did it for money and "favors". "Justin H" should check his facts. Plame was not a covert operative, she was little more than a file clerk.
2007-07-04 19:06:10
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
All Presidents do it and all Presidents get a lot of bad publicity about it too! In this case with President Bush's approval being so low it could be what ends all hope of regaining any respect for the remainder of his term.
2007-07-04 19:15:10
·
answer #5
·
answered by Pamela V 7
·
2⤊
0⤋
He interfered in a case that was under appeal, undermining the justice system. If the sentence was atypically severe it will have been reduced by the appellate judge. Bush never said that the conviction itself was a mistake.
2007-07-04 18:58:44
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
0⤋
"immoral act"???
an immoral act would be ignoring that he was railroaded by a partisan prosecutor.
An immoral act would be to pardon several cocaine smugglers after donations to family members, like Clinton did.
They convicted libby of lying about something he said he didn't remember, which, ironically was not remembered by the other party in the conversation, either.
2007-07-04 18:57:43
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
2⤋
Right, wrong what does it matter now. It's done and there's nothing anyone can do to undo it. Did Clinton do the right thing when he pardoned 459 criminals in his last days?
It's done, let it go.
2007-07-04 19:01:02
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
I think he was absolutely wrong. Libby was convicted for his role in a cover-up that exposed national security secrets by outing a covert operative. In my mind that comes very close to treason.
2007-07-04 18:59:52
·
answer #9
·
answered by Justin H 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
I don't think Bush did one right thing since the courts put him in the white house in 2000.
2007-07-04 19:06:10
·
answer #10
·
answered by EviL 6
·
0⤊
0⤋