Was that another case of executive recklessness or not?
2007-07-04 19:40:02 · 13 answers · asked by adams_unaji 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Nope. I think Libby said he'd spill the beans if they made him do as much as one day of jail time. Nothing reckless about it, Bush was covering his own ***.
Now watch as conservatives get annoyed and complain that people are still talking about the President commuting the sentence of a man who essentially committed a treasonous act.
2007-07-04 19:44:37 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 5⤋
He overstepped his bounds and should be impeached for interfering with the legal rights of the People to try a person in court for his or her crimes. He was not reckless as much as he violated the law with his intrusion of the process, and basically because he knows that our Constitution of the United States will not imprison him. The solution is still impeachment, he is not beyond reproach in this matter. But, what spinless congressperson will bring about the process? Answer? One that is not elected yet.
I believe Bush can still be impeached after the General Election as well, and if we win the process will render him without the perks of retirement from the White House, which would serve him justice and we would not feel like a ton of losers in this mess, as it is.
2007-07-04 19:54:59 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
Kind of surprising, but if Libby was gonna spill the beans then Bush had no other choice. Since the Democrats made sure he get jail time and begin serving it before Bush leaves office and has a chance to pardon him. Bush has already hit rock bottom so it's not gonna make him any less popular. BTW, Bush is still gonna pardon Libby when he leaves office, on top of this favour.
2007-07-04 19:53:28 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
It is the first step.
On the last week in office, Bush will give Libby a full pardon.
He will also pardon Cheney, Rove, Rumsfeld, and every other "loyal Bushie" he can think of. That way they can all write tell all books and get overpaid jobs without fear of reprisals for their horrible actions.
2007-07-04 20:10:26 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Some of you guys need to grow up this is the way politics are played the media is the one blowing this out of proportion-I didn't like Clinton but it was his prerogative to use the power the Constitution gave him to pardon 140 criminals but you lefties are not complaining about that.
2007-07-04 20:20:54 · answer #5 · answered by josh m 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If by "executive recklessness" you mean drunk, say, drunk with power and a feeling that youre immune to every law in the books....then I'd have to say yes.
2007-07-04 20:12:53 · answer #6 · answered by Jesus W. 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Typical. Throw a trusted aide under the bus to take the spotlight off the real criminals and then give him a half-hearted break to hopefully shut him up.
2007-07-04 20:25:25 · answer #7 · answered by Bostonian In MO 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It is no different than any other commuted sentence, by any other President, from Washington to Wubba. I think the media is using this as yet another way to try and pit the U.S. citizenry against one another.
2007-07-04 19:52:32 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
Wow. I guess it just proves that you can get away with anything in this country as long as you are friends with the president.
2007-07-04 20:35:51 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
It;s not any worse than Clinton pardoning how many terrorists was it? And that tax evader what's his name Rich, oh yea right after he got a huge contribution from him for his presidential library? So, these things are not just one sided, try being a little more open minded. the open minded part is for dangerous
2007-07-04 19:54:54 · answer #10 · answered by Moose 6 · 1⤊ 3⤋