When in the final hours of his Presidency, Bill Clinton fully pardoned over 140 people?
Or how about in 1999 when he pardoned 16 members of the terrorist group FALN, who set off 120 bombs in NYC?
Bush hasn't pardoned Libby, just commuted his sentence. He knows Libby is guilty and hasn't offered a full pardon. Libby still has to pay $250,000 in fines for his guilt.
2007-07-06 08:14:52 · 24 answers · asked by Maverick 6 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
runs_with_scissors: Even as a conservative, I have to agree with you. Cheney should have come under more heat for his involvement and so should Rove. They are the real culprits. They left Libby out to dry as the fall guy.
2007-07-06 08:23:54 · update #1
I'm a lib, but I don't object. Libby was the fall guy. I'm just disappointed that the real culprits, Cheney and Rove, aren't being held accountable.
2007-07-06 08:18:44 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 6⤊ 1⤋
Back atcha...... Why do all the BUSH lovers keep referring back to the Clinton administration.. I find it funny.. That is in the past .... Why whenever Bush is called on something we have to hear..... (in spoiled brat voice) "Well Billy did it first!!!!"
Please Clinton made mistakes .. but the "people" picked Bush to be bigger & better... Now that he has become the almighty screw up.. we have to listen to Whining- BOTTOM LINE: Libby committed a crime that you or I would have done time for.. The fact that he works for us.. should make you more concerned.. that they can do ANYTHING.. and get away with it.. Do you really think the fine hurt him?? Do you really think he will have probation like common criminals ?? Are you that naive? He obstructed justice & committed perjury -in a case that would have jeopardized a fellow Americans LIFE!
Commuting that...IS Dispicable!
2007-07-06 08:49:27 · answer #2 · answered by darkness breeds 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I'm not liberal. I'm not conservative either. Mr. Libby commited a crime which endagered national security. The investigation also involved the President and Vice President. President Bush had no business getting involved whatsoever.
It is quite common for Presidents in the last days of office to sign pardons. That isn't restricted to one party or another but is common across both and is completely different.
And as the saying goes....two wrongs don't make a right.
2007-07-06 08:24:44 · answer #3 · answered by chickey_soup 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋
EVERYONE **should** be VERY upset that FELON Libby isn't rotting in jail right now, where he belongs, with some big thugs having their way with him every night. Libby wasn't above the law, and deserved the sentence that he got -- and should be serving it.
BUSH, on the otherhand, just showed total disdain for the law, and did more grievous damage to our justice system.
CLINTON was WRONG when he issued those pardons and commutations at the end of his term. Just because presidents (UNfortunately!!) *have* that irresponsible power is no excuse to their being brainless enough to employ it!
So you think that "liberals" would agree with *Clinton's* pardons? Wrong! I'm a social liberal, and I **DEPLORE** all such pardons -- no matter who is in the White House.
They make a total joke and mockery of our system of criminal "justice."
2007-07-06 08:23:37 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
It's the principle of commuting the sentence of an employee of the administration. It's the appearance of impropriety. It's the perception that Libby was covering up for something his bosses did, and was let of the hook by those same bosses.
I'm not a Republican, but I was against Clinton pardoning 140 people, by the way. And don't forget, Libby was Marc Rich's attorney and helped negotiate his pardon.
2007-07-06 08:21:49 · answer #5 · answered by spire2000 2 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Because Scooter Libby lied, obstructed justice, and basically got off scott free. His fine means nothing to him, he is actually quite wealthy. The jail time was what mattered, and was what anybody else who had been convicted of his crimes would have gotten. That's the difference. All presidents pardon people at the end of their terms, just wait till Bush is closer to the end of his term, i guarantee he'll do it too.
Oh, and it isn't just liberals who are angry about this, it's all people who are interested in seeing justice and the rule of law return to this nation.
2007-07-06 08:50:49 · answer #6 · answered by gilliegrrrl 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Strictly politics; they are trying to tar everyone with the problems of the Iraq situation. Bush should have pardoned Libby outright; Libby was convicted of impeding investigation of a crime -- but no crime was committed, as the prosecutor was fully aware, so Libby was guilty of nothing. But the prosecutor should be hung out to dry; his activity was at least reprehensible, if not criminal.
2007-07-06 08:22:34 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
Two wrongs don't make a right. Just as it was wrong for Clinton to pardon all (or most) of those, it was also wrong for Bush to commute Libby's sentence. He was convicted by a jury of his peers. The system of American justice has spoken.
2007-07-06 08:19:56 · answer #8 · answered by Trav 4 · 3⤊ 1⤋
My only problem with it is that Bush ran on a "Law and Order" platform, yet he overturned a courts decision.
It has nothing to do with what Bill Clinton did or did not do.
2007-07-06 08:32:07 · answer #9 · answered by beren 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
AMERICANS are outraged that after YEARS of listening to cons whine about clinton committing perjury, when libby does it bush over-rides the judge that senteced scooter and commutes his prison time for his crime. (he was convicted)
what is it with cons and hypocrisy?
2007-07-06 08:18:14 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 1⤋