Bush statement on Libby order

  • Thread starter Thread starter gilliam
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
sirduckjr said:
I am not trying to score some cheap political point. The President has defended the Texas Death Penalties Laws by saying it is important to consider the will of the people and decisions made by juries in the legal process. All of a sudden, the president doesn’t think it is so important to respect the legal process. This is a philosophical flip flop to accomodate him politically.
Click to expand...
Keep in mind that this is NOT a pardon for Libby. It is a commutation and there is a difference. Either way, a president has this power and many have used it.
 
President Bush has used the pardon 113 times (less than any other modern president, including single term presidents), and commuted sentences a total of 3 (here the numbers are supported in an article by someone who opposed his decision). President Clinton issued more than that in his final day in office alone–141 on his last day in office (here for in a piece by the White House Press Secretary, obviously a supporter, but the textual support links to USDOJ support here.)

This isn’t a criticism of Clinton, it is merely to put it in perspective.
 
estesbob said:
I know. Now I am sure they are going to tell us how that was “different”
Click to expand...
What was different?
  1. Cisneros negotiated a misdemeanor plea agreement and was fined. I don’t know if he paid the fine prior to the pardon, but he was never sentenced to jail.
  2. Libby did not make a plea agreement and was convicted of a felony.
  3. Cisneros was in trouble about lying to the FBI on a personal matter in relation to his mistress./ Libby was in trouble for inhibiting a federal investigartion on the outing of an undercover agent.
  4. Cisneros was pardoned, Libby had his sentence commuted and may be pardoned in the future.
What wasn’t different?
  1. They both lied under oath and where convicted of it.
 
sirduckjr said:
What was different?
  1. Cisneros negotiated a misdemeanor plea agreement and was fined. I don’t know if he paid the fine prior to the pardon, but he was never sentenced to jail.
  2. Libby did not make a plea agreement and was convicted of a felony.
  3. Cisneros was in trouble about lying to the FBI on a personal matter in relation to his mistress./ Libby was in trouble for inhibiting a federal investigartion on the outing of an undercover agent.
  4. Cisneros was pardoned, Libby had his sentence commuted and may be pardoned in the future.
What wasn’t different?
  1. They both lied under oath and where convicted of it.
Click to expand...
I knew the excuses would start-first it was a straighforwad question:

What member of the Clinton Administration had his sentence commuted and therefore didn’t have to spend one night in jail or be subject to further investigations where they could not testify under oath?

Now its -oh but DIFFERENT! 🙂
 
estesbob said:
I knew the excuses would start-first it was a straighforwad question:

What member of the Clinton Administration had his sentence commuted and therefore didn’t have to spend one night in jail or be subject to further investigations where they could not testify under oath?

Now its -oh but DIFFERENT! 🙂
Click to expand...
According to the original question, your answer does not qualify. Mr. Cisneros was not sentenced to jail! Therefore he wasn’t in any danger of serving time considering the plea agreement.The Clinton pardon of Cisneros was simply to wash the record of the conviction. Please show me the article where Clinton commuted the sentence of Mr. Cisneros or any other official of his administration.

It is unfortunate you want to throw the Clinton name in defending the actions of President Bush. For the record, I would not vote for either Clinton or Bush.
The point of my outrage deals with the precedent of a sitting President commuting the sentence of someone who went through the legal process and was found guilty but will not suffer the real consequence of his actions which is jail. Money does not count to individuals like this because someone will start a Libby defense fund and he will not be out dollar when it is all said and done. How do you think someone with the character of a Slick Willie will take advantage of this in the future now that Bush has set the precedent?
 
It’s a done deal…let it rest.
Every administration has and will pardon or commute sentences.
I am no fan of our current President, but he is way down on the list of pardons. Of course, we’ll see what happens in the next two years, but, thus far, he is probably at the bottom of the list.

Scooter is a convicted felon at this point…sufficient. Why would anyone want to see a non-violent individual behind bars?

John
 
To the Clinton’s charges of the Bush administrations “cronyism”:

New Questions About Roger Clinton’s Slippery Schemes Roger is Former President Bill Clinton’s half brother who was pardoned by the then President Clinton on 20 Jan 2001. Rodger was convicted of drug trafficking.

I still don’t think President Bush should have intervened in the Libby case, but both of the Clintons crying cronyism against the Bush administration is a little disingenuous from where I sit.
 
b_justb said:
To the Clinton’s charges of the Bush administrations “cronyism”:

New Questions About Roger Clinton’s Slippery Schemes Roger is Former President Bill Clinton’s half brother who was pardoned by the then President Clinton on 20 Jan 2001. Rodger was convicted of drug trafficking.

I still don’t think President Bush should have intervened in the Libby case, but both of the Clintons crying cronyism against the Bush administration is a little disingenuous from where I sit.
Click to expand...
What I think the point is, Clinton’s object to Bush’s cronyism, because it is not their cronyism. If Bush would accept their cronyism, the Clintons would be fine with that.
 
jman507 said:
What I think the point is, Clinton’s object to Bush’s cronyism, because it is not their cronyism. If Bush would accept their cronyism, the Clintons would be fine with that.
Click to expand...
If Hillary is the nominee I suspect the Republican nominee would love for Preseidential pardons to be a campaign issue.
 
I’ll always remember Libby…

*If it’s Libby, Libby, Libby on the label, label, label; you will like it, like it, like it, on the table, table, table. 😃 *

Or did you mean a different Libby? 🤷
 
b_justb said:
To the Clinton’s charges of the Bush administrations “cronyism”:

New Questions About Roger Clinton’s Slippery Schemes Roger is Former President Bill Clinton’s half brother who was pardoned by the then President Clinton on 20 Jan 2001. Rodger was convicted of drug trafficking.

I still don’t think President Bush should have intervened in the Libby case, but both of the Clintons crying cronyism against the Bush administration is a little disingenuous from where I sit.
Click to expand...
I think some of our politicians think we all have collective amnesia and that what THEY do today, WE will forget by tomorrow. In other words, they think we are all dummies that will fall for what they tell us.
 
GW Bush is in serious trouble on this commutation and there will be a reckoning in lieu of all of the death warrants signed by him. I will pray for his soul and hope that the Love of Christ will touch his heart. He is, no doubt, going to go down in history as truly infamous.

I read that many think this commutation will be forgotten in that it is par for the course with regard to the powers that be. But, this is the same man who “lied us into war,” engaged in illegal wiretapping, and made a point of highlighting his tough love philosophy of suffering the consequences of wrongdoing. I confidently assert that there is nothing “par” about this round of play.

Furthermore, I aver to those who believe that this was a simple commutation that this “good ole boys” maneuver demonstrated an unprecedented level of arrogance, and, the same of which has sent shockwaves through the justice system.

This act/abuse/arrogance strikes at the very heart of our democracy and ought to motivate Congress to impeach this Pres. Bush for abuse of power and obstruction of justice.

Yes, he had the right to commute a sentence. But, no, not this sentence. This is, once again, abuse of power and obstruction of justice.

Again, I pray for his soul and call for his resignation.
 
Paralabagne said:
GW Bush is in serious trouble on this commutation and there will be a reckoning in lieu of all of the death warrants signed by him. I will pray for his soul and hope that the Love of Christ will touch his heart. He is, no doubt, going to go down in history as truly infamous.

I read that many think this commutation will be forgotten in that it is par for the course with regard to the powers that be. But, this is the same man who “lied us into war,” engaged in illegal wiretapping, and made a point of highlighting his tough love philosophy of suffering the consequences of wrongdoing. I confidently assert that there is nothing “par” about this round of play.

Furthermore, I aver to those who believe that this was a simple commutation that this “good ole boys” maneuver demonstrated an unprecedented level of arrogance, and, the same of which has sent shockwaves through the justice system.

This act/abuse/arrogance strikes at the very heart of our democracy and ought to motivate Congress to impeach this Pres. Bush for abuse of power and obstruction of justice.

Yes, he had the right to commute a sentence. But, no, not this sentence. This is, once again, abuse of power and obstruction of justice.

Again, I pray for his soul and call for his resignation.
Click to expand...
You disagree with the commute. That’s you’re right. No argument there.

However, you really should check your facts before making such rants. You’re not the first who has compared not commuting the sentence of a murderer with commuting the sentence of a non-violent first time offending public servant–morally, i’d pick the latter any day.

Bush lied? That’s getting stale absent evidence. If you want to make that claim, please explain why his predecessor, virtually everyone who worked for his predecessor, a huge chunk of congress (including those of his opposition party) before he was even elected, as well as the entire united nations security counsel and virtually every other leader on the planet helped him perpetuate this lie you are talking about. If you can do that, then feel free to say Bush lied. Unless you have proof–and given everything I just listed, it is unlikely you do–you are toeing the line on bearing false witness.

Insofar as pardons and commutes go, Bush has been stingier with them that any president in our lifetimes, and i’m not slamming them either. I’m just saying a little perspective is in order.

Not the best move on Bush’s part, I’ll admit, but this “get Bush on any thing for any reason at any cost” nonsense is just getting old.
 
Jay74 said:
You disagree with the commute. That’s you’re right. No argument there. .
Click to expand...
Yes, it is.
Jay74 said:
However, you really should check your facts before making such rants. You’re not the first who has compared not commuting the sentence of a murderer with commuting the sentence of a non-violent first time offending public servant–morally, i’d pick the latter any day. .
Click to expand...
They are the same in that both usurp the will of an impartial jury. And I still contend that Bush’s commutation was an attempt to protect his own skin. In my opinion, this is obstruction of justice.
Jay74 said:
Bush lied? That’s getting stale absent evidence. If you want to make that claim, please explain why his predecessor, virtually everyone who worked for his predecessor, a huge chunk of congress (including those of his opposition party) before he was even elected, as well as the entire united nations security counsel and virtually every other leader on the planet helped him perpetuate this lie you are talking about. If you can do that, then feel free to say Bush lied. Unless you have proof–and given everything I just listed, it is unlikely you do–you are toeing the line on bearing false witness. .
Click to expand...
This should be shouted from the rooftops daily.
Jay74 said:
Insofar as pardons and commutes go, Bush has been stingier with them that any president in our lifetimes, and i’m not slamming them either. I’m just saying a little perspective is in order. .
Click to expand...
Hang on. He is not finished yet.
Jay74 said:
Not the best move on Bush’s part, I’ll admit, but this “get Bush on any thing for any reason at any cost” nonsense is just getting old.
Click to expand...
It is just getting started. Darker clouds are on the horizon.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top