Dan Froomkin had a great run-down of the coverage of the Libby commutation yesterday, including a link to a Dana Milbank piece on Tony Snow’s idiotic, self-contradictory press briefing. Josh Marshall takes a trip down Scott Stanzel’s bizarre follow-up bits, and digs out this gem:
Question: Scott, is Scooter Libby getting more than equal justice under the law? Is he getting special treatment?
Scott Stanzel: Well, I guess I don’t know what you mean by equal justice under the law.
Pretty much sums up the whole Administration in a nutshell with that one, doesn’t he?
It really is a fairly simple thing to understand: President Bush wanted the judge to give Libby special treatment — and when Judge Walton treated him like any other American who would have been convicted of that conduct (and actually cut him a break by sentencing him to 30 months instead of 37, which he could have done), President Bush thought that was being too harsh.
But only because it was Libby. Anyone else in America would have gone to jail and done the time for his crimes.
And they have, as the LATimes easily demonstrated by looking at the actual sentencing records of federal defendants convicted of the same criminal charges as Libby. Further, the Bush Administration failed to follow its own internal standards that it established for consideration of pardons and commutations: (H/T to Andrew Sullivan on this link.)
Judge Gonzales told me three things about President Bush’s policy in considering requests for commutation. First, that President Bush would not consider commutation if he believed that the case had already received full and fair consideration by the jury and the courts who heard the case. Second, that the President would not consider the request until he had a recommendation from the Department of Justice. Finally, he said that the President would not act on any request for commutation until all judicial avenues in the case had been exhausted.
As far as I have been able to ascertain from all public reports and the President’s own statement on the commutation, none of these conditions were met in Libby’s case. Not one. Maybe next time Larry Johnson is visiting his neighbor, he can mention that, too. (Do click through…)
Hypocrisy, thy name is Bush. The American public is subject to one standard, and your cronies and big money donors get an entirely different level of treatment. The justification for the Libby commutation of the sentence being “too harsh”? It doesn’t hold water.
UPDATE: Before someone starts the “Clinton did it, too” line of bullshit (as if that’s an excuse for George Bush playing favorites for his cronies and obstructing justice…hello?!?), Froomkin has an answer for you today. Thanks, Dan!
(A little Friday YouTube of Queen. Somehow “Liar” seemed apt…)



174 Comments





Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About Firedoglake
Zed?
Dick Cheney Controls Tim Russert.
le troisieme…
*xyz @ 2:
I’ve missed that for some time now. I once stole it but gave you credit…
“Lies” from the Gulf of Tonkin era.
Be the Media.
http://freewayblogger.blogspot…..-wide.html
The song clip is perfect for the thread. It so concisely sums it all up.
Regarding impeachment. I realize full well that the chances for a ’super majority’ are slim. Please spare me the lectures about this. Impeach the vice president.
Oh good, I finally have a chance to use this from a discared post, discussing the likelihood attorneys all over the county will try to use the “Libby defense” as a reason for commuting other prisoner’s sentences:
For the Democratic leaders of my party:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v…..mp;search=
No, not everyone else would have gone to jail. The BFF’s of the Bu$h administration and the Bu$h family crime syndicate would certainly not be going to jail under any circumstances. The Bu$h’s are American royalty and the BFF’s of royalty do not go to jail; only the commoners do.
*xyz @ 2
Tim Russert is an extension of the 4th Branch
Scarecrow @ 9
it doesn’t sound like equal justice under the law, but that’s just me.
Dana Milbank’s use of Jabberwocky…brilliant!
“impeachment” is a wastefull, self indulgent behavior unless it has a good chance of success. The arguments against it are well described:
1) It ties up congress for months with a hopeless effort- and is therefore irresonsible.
2) It will create a backlash and actually enhance the standing of those who are being threatened with impeachment.
3) It will polarize the electorate and lead to higher turnout among goopers in the next election.
4) It will damage dems politically..
The current situation could change- a recent poll shows that a majority now favor impeaching Cheney- but if they don’t have the votes to pull the whole thing off- it’s best not to start.
Kinda OT but it has to do with our wonderful judicial branch.
http://www.regressiveantidote.net/
From the Froomkin link in the Update above:
Someone’s been reading FDL. Only it’s shiny object.
Democrats. I did not vote for jelly fish last November! So far… what have you done?
do-si-do @ 14
Yes it was and I liked this bit of snark!
rwcole @ 15
John Nichols does a good job of treating impeachment in his recent book, The Genius of impeachment. Actually, even though there was not majority support throughout the electorate for Clinton’s impeachment (his approval ratings were 62% at the time IIRC), and even though the impeachment failed miserably, the GOP picked up seats in the next election.
Nichols contends that just having the balls to stand up for something, like the goddamn piece of paper on which this country was founded, might rebound to the Democrats’ benefit. And if it doesn’t, who gives a shit??? Someone has got to take a stand and say,
To do nothing is a waste of time.
Ms. Merrit gets mentioned in today’s Froomkin: Froomkin
Oklahoma kiddo @ 21
Amen!
Oklahoma kiddo @ 21
Yes, there is a certain logic in what you say.
rwcole@15
all that you say may be true but this junta in dc ignores the will of americans and takes pleasure in doing all they want – are we to accept their actions at no cost to them???
How is the Libby sentencing different from Rita v The United States that SCOTUS decided a few weeks ago?
A lot of the “Clinton did it, too” is bullshit and amounts to swift-boating. Here follows my response to yesterday’s example. Unfortunately, Dana Milbank stole my shtick when he appeared on K.O. Countdown last night.
“I don’t know what is Arkansan for chutzpah [1] but this is a gigantic case of it.”
We have reached a sad time when goyishe [2] Tony Snow is speaking Yiddish from the White House. Don’t we Jews have enough tsouris?[3]
Apparently, in this latest iteration of the “Bill Clinton did it, too” excuse, the White House is seeking to evoke the recollection of the Mark Rich pardon. Gay gezinteh heit. Chub a gutten yur. [4]
On Bill Clinton’s last day in office, he pardoned a refugee from the Nazis, Mark Rich, M.O.T., [5] a financier and philanthropist who had been falsely accused of tax evasion by Rudy Giuliani.
I say falsely accused because such is the opinion of U.S. tax professors Bernard Wolfman of Harvard Law School and Martin Ginsburg of Georgetown University Law Center. It was also the opinion of a panel of distinguished Republican lawyers including I. Lewis ‘Scooter’ Libby. Be that as it may, these kinds of disputes are not unusual, and they are normally resolved in civil suits.
In the Republican orgy of recriminations against the Clinton administration that was the hallmark of the early days of the Bush administration, it was alleged that President Clinton pardoned Rich in return for favors paid to him. Indeed, the Prime Minister of Israel, Ehud Barak, who had worked so hard with President Clinton to secure a lasting resolution to the Israeli-Palestinian problem, had made a clemency plea on behalf of Rich, as had numerous other Israeli officials.
Grasping at straws, Clinton-haters pointed out that Rich’s former wife and the mother of his three children, socialite Denise Rich, had made large donations to the Democratic Party and the Clinton Library during Clinton’s time in office. A Federal Prosecutor was appointed to investigate whether or not a crime was committed by Clinton’s exercise of the plenary pardon power. The conclusion arrived at by James Comey, who was to later become the Acting Attorney General under George W. Bush, was that there were no grounds to present to a Grand Jury.
Nobody, not even the most rabid Republicans ever suggested that the pardon of Mark Rich was a part of a conspiracy to protect members of the administration. Never was it suggested that Bill Clinton had a political motive for his decision to right a wrong committed by an over-zealous prosecutor, who now happens to be running for the Republican nomination for President.
Still want to talk about Mark Rich? Gai kakhen afenyam. [6]
“… and tell ’em Menachem Mendel [7] sent ya!”
Footnotes for the Yiddish challenged:
[1] lit. Nerve. Colloq: balls, as in “He had the chutzpah of a blind burglar.”
[2] Non-Jewish, and (when used in an otherwise English sentence) non-Jewish in a stereotypical way.
[3] troubles
[4] “Go and be healthy. Have a good year.” The equivalent to the dismissive “Knock yourself out,” you should pardon the expression.
[5] Member of the Tribe, (e.g. Rich, Libby)
[6] Go shit in the ocean.
[7] Big Mitch
At this point they really do need a bright shiny object.
That scares the hell out of me.
OT – Hey, gang, wish me luck. When I was at Murray’s book party a couple of weeks ago, I ended up talking to the guy who does the BlogJam column about bloggers at the Politico, he asked to interview me for the column about my FDL experience (mostly.) I made it clear that I was a regular commenter and not a poster, and he still wanted to do it, so I figured, what the heck.
It’s the Politico, so I had my reservations about it, but I looked over some of the previous columns and they looked okay (if you ignore the completely useless mouth-breather commenters who show up there.)
Anyway, it’s supposed to appear on Tuesday, and since all the possible “killer post” comments I sent him are from here, we may get an influx then. (Considering the Politico’s audience, we may get an influx of trolls, too, unfortunately.)
I’m just hoping I come off okay in the piece.
Biodun @ 26
It is all about who you know and if they have the goods on you.
BTW it’s President Bush’s birthday today. He is 61. I don’t know if that is in chimp years.
I do know that there are 3592 Americans and an unknown number of Iraqis who will not be having any more birthdays of any kind.
rwcole @ 15
Saying ‘we’re not going to impeach because we don’t have the votes’ is like saying ‘we don’t think we can convict, so we won’t even file charges’. It says to everyone watching that the whole thing is a meaningless exercise in futility.
Go into it with the thought that conviction is at least possible, if not certain, and there’s a much better chance of getting it.
juslin
No- We take the reins of government out of their hands- we take the White House- and both houses of congress and we bury the bastards in impotence and obscurity—that’s how the system works.
Oklahoma kiddo @ 21
And appears to be the strategy of the current Democratic (mis)leadership.
otherwise their’s no point in an opposition party – tho one hardly notices that the dems ARE an opposition party just now……
scarecrow @ 12
Tim Russert is a twig on the 4th branch! {g}
Bob in HI
Actually I think I’ll take the advice from a pro. John Dean said the other night on Olbermann that there is a “strong case” to be made for the impeachment of Richard Cheney.
james @ 20
Yes, Thank you.
I’m sorry didn’t we learn something about this in the 5th grade, or was it 4th? I’m pretty goddamned sure by the time I was taking history, and government, in high school we got what the hell this meant. It means EXACTLY what it says.
Clinton did it too! Two wrongs make a right! If the Republicans are bringing out the moral equivalency argument already then they know that their in trouble. When Bush had high popularity that trick might have worked. Given Bush’s current poll numbers ussing a Moral Equivalancy argument to try and settle the Scooter contraversy is like trying to put a fire out by pouring gas on it.
Just how bad is Karl sweatin the RNC email scandal? Karl’s job is to advise Bush about politics blame Clinton is getting less and less effective as a tactic. Is this his only trick or is he to distracted by RNC emails and other contaversy’s to notice its been months of 30% in the polls.
30% at the polls for MONTHS why does Karl still have a job even Gonzo is not doing Bush that kind of damage.
Hugh @ 30
There are plenty of Bushes who will be having plenty more birthdays and that’s all that matters to Preznit Bush.
Oh, and to our wonderful mods/techies — if there’s any way to do a database search and find out for the article how many comments I’ve actually posted here (just since the changeover to WordPress, obviously), that would be cool. But I know you’re busy, so if not, I understand.
You know, as mad as I am about the Libby thing, are we really talking about impeachment for that? It’s scummy. It may be illegal, if someone could prove that he was obstructing justice. I mean, there are some things that Bush has done that are more clearly illegal. That’s what we want to impeach him for.
In any case, Gonzo has to go first. I don’t think anyone answered my question from a few threads ago: What is the downside of impeaching Gonzo?
AZ Matt @ 24
;0)
AZ Matt @ 22
This is really important information that can be great push-back: Clinton responded honourably to Congressional requests in spite of impeachment!!!!
Hugh @ 30
Oh, its’ “almost a million” Iraqi’s Iraq Body Count or 73120.
things come undone @ 40
Karl’s only job now is to make sure they all make it to Jan 20, 2009 and it looks like he’s doing a great job.
the attitude that snowjob displayed at the las presser showed the contempt bushco has for we the people
Thank you both for paying attention to a major component of the cost of this folly.
I bristle every time I hear the costs of the war expressed in American lives, as though those were the important ones.
raven @ 45
Robert Wexler has a posting over at Huffington Post advocating for his censure resolution.
Personally, I agree with Marcy that this is a really bad idea.
juslin @ 48
Bush does have contempt for us ” the little people” but Bush is an empty suit. He is NOT the president – he a wooden dummy who answers only to Cheney. That’s who the president is and I say we go for him because Bush would be terribly handicapped without him. Bush doesn’t scare me – Cheney does.
fdl reader @ 45
Obviously, from the way you spell “honourably” you ain’t no real ‘merican. That’s why you don’t understand how “Clinton did it, too” works.
:-)
My party is impressing me. With their inaction. Taxpayer money at work.
Mark Rich was in trouble, in part, for doing business with Iran when he wasn’t supposed to. Why isn’t Cheney and Halliburton being held to the same standard….Oh, yeah…I forgot.
So we have empirically identified that Scooter, Dick and GW are scumbags (along w/Lieberman, Frist and a huge cadre of lobbyists and congressman). Obviously our congress is missing the raw cajones to expedite a fix or dump these guys.
How can we avoid getting another criminal in the White House? What can we start doing now?
Marc
Ezra has a must read.
http://www.prospect.org/cs/art…..t#comments
Don’t let the rapture pass you by!
Badwater @ 47
And beyond, you better believe it…Cheney has NO intention of handing over our government to anyone not under his control.
Censure? Why don’t we just have the GOP write sentences.
Remember, Kissinger is behind them all.
EllenG @ 50
From the Wexler piece
The question should not be whether his corrupt and deceitful actions merit removing him from office. That is its own debate, and one that is not likely to reach a consensus anytime soon.
Oy vey. You can read it here.
Under Democratic leadership, the Senate has passed the following measures:
A fiscally responsible budget: a budget that restores fiscal discipline and will lead to a surplus, while cutting middle-class taxes and funding foreign anddomestic priorities, including education, children’s health care, veterans, and our troops;
9/11 Commission recommendations: a bill to make America more secure by giving our first responders the tools they need to keep us safe; making it more difficult for potential terrorists to travel into our country; advancing efforts to secure our rail, air, and mass transit systems; and improving intelligence and information sharing between state, local, and federal law enforcement agencies;
Homeland security funding: legislation that provides $1.05 billion in funding necessary to address dangerous border and transit vulnerabilities left open by the Bush Administration since 9/11;
Support for our troops: legislation funding the President’s requests for Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom, including $1.2 billion in additional funding for a total of $3 billion to provide our troops in Iraq with mine-resistant, ambush-protected vehicles;
Health care for wounded soldiers and veterans: legislation that provides $3 billion in supplemental funds for military health care and $1.8 billion in supplemental funds to the Department of Veterans’ Affairs to accommodate the increasing number of new veterans returning home from Iraq and Afghanistan;
Benchmarks for Iraq: legislation that conditions U.S. economic support for the Iraqi government on its progress toward achieving key political benchmarks;
National Guard readiness: legislation to provide an additional $1 billion to President Bush’s request for National Guard equipment needs to remedy equipment shortfalls that are compromising the quality of force training and limiting the Guard’s ability to quickly respond to natural and potential man-made disasters at home;
Continuing Resolution: legislation providing funding for the nine remaining appropriations bills that were not completed by Republicans in the 109th Congress. In passing this legislation, Democrats stayed within budget limits, eliminated earmarks, and increased funding for national priorities, including veterans’ medical care, Pell grants, elementary and secondary education, the National Institutes of Health, state and local law enforcement, and global AIDS prevention and treatment;
Energy Bill: landmark legislation to increase our energy independence, strengthen the economy, reduce global warming emissions, and protect American consumers.
American competitiveness: bipartisan legislation to increase the nation’s investment in basic and innovative research; strengthen educational opportunities in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics from elementary through graduate school; and develop the infrastructure needed to enhance innovation and competitiveness in the United States;
Ethics and lobbying reform: a bill to slow the “revolving door” for former Senators and staff, strengthen limits on gifts and travel, expand lobbying disclosure requirements, establish a study commission on ethics and lobbying, prohibit pensions for Members of Congress convicted of certain crimes, and implement reform procedures relating to earmarks and conference reports;
Minimum wage: legislation to increase the federal minimum wage to $7.25/hour;
Middle-class tax cuts: the 2008 Budget Resolution provides for permanent extensions of the Marriage Penalty tax relief, the $1,000 refundable Child Tax Credit; the 10 percent income tax bracket; the adoption tax credit; the dependent care tax credit; U.S. soldiers’ combat pay for the earned income tax credit; and reform of the estate tax to protect small businesses and family farms;
AMT patch: the 2008 Budget Resolution ensures that the number of taxpayers subject to the alternative minimum tax will not increase in 2007, giving Congress and the Administration time to come up with a permanent solution;
Head Start: a bill to expand eligibility for the Head Start program;
Stem cell research: legislation to expand the number of human embryonic stem cells eligible for federally-funded research;
Children’s health coverage: the 2008 Budget Resolution and the 2007 Emergency Supplemental provide needed funds for the Children’s Health Insurance Program;
FDA reauthorization: a bill to greatly improve the Food and Drug Administration’s oversight of drug safety;
Rebuilding the Gulf Coast: legislation providing a total of $6.4 billion for victims of Hurricanes Katrina and Rita, including $1.3 billion to complete levee and drainage repairs, $50 million to reduce violent crime in Gulf Coast states, and $110 million to repair the seafood and fisheries industries, which is vital to the region’s economic recovery;
Army Corps reform: legislation to ensure that the Army Corps of Engineers does its job more effectively and soundly;
Disaster assistance for small businesses: legislation providing recovery assistance for small businesses impacted by the 2005 hurricanes in an effort to revitalize the Gulf Coast economy;
U.S. Attorney appointments: legislation ending the indefinite appointment of interim U.S. Attorneys and restoring the role of the Senate in the selection of U.S. Attorneys;
Tax relief for small businesses: legislation providing a range of deficit-neutral tax incentives designed to help small businesses grow;
Education and training: the 2008 Budget Resolution provides for the largest increase since 2002 in funding for elementary and secondary programs; and
Energy and environment programs: legislation increasing funding for basic science research at the Department of Energy and for energy efficiency and renewable energy programs.
Not much support for impeaching Cheney — just 54 %!
Redshift @ 42
Try this on Google.
site : firedoglake.com Redshift.
I was amazed at what a mouthy little joker I am,75 pages.
Cheney must be stopped:
http://www.dailykos.com/storyo…..4513/79996
Big Mitch @ 52
Caught! Actually I am American (not even dual citizenship) residing in Canada … I just like the British form ~ “quaint” and all.
I loved the Yiddish lessons and the distilled info on l’affaire Rich, Mitch. Thanks!
i gather cheeny is in his bunker resting comfortably after his puppet commuted? convicted felon’s jail time… yeah it’s time to impeach and ASAP!!
I’m going to repeat a comment I made on the prior thread for everyone:
Please don’t post incredibly long comments. It trips the filters because they think you are a scroll troll, and your comment has to be backed out manually. Thanks.
Consider it a helpful hint — and don’t come griping to me if your long comments get stuck if you don’t take it. ;-)
Censure. My party has to act like they’re acting. Don’t they? Censure? Why not call a ‘time out’ for the bad little Republican boys and girls?
The only thing the GOP respects is strength.
juslin @ 48
did you hear the dismissive “I’m sorry” apology? it was sickening.
Bob Schacht @ 36
no…..he’s a bird poop on a twig on the 4th branch of the tree and the tree in the HOLE….
(and the green grass grows all around all around….)
Bustednuckles @ 63
Interesting. I show up 2X, starting July 2. Hmmmm….
Oklahoma kiddo @ 58
I can think of three sentences I’d like to see written:
“I resign as President of the United States.” — George W Bush
“I resign as Vice President of the United States.” — Dick Cheney
“I resign as Attorney General of the United States.” — Alberto Gonzales
They wouldn’t even have to write them out a thousand times. Once would be sufficient.
Redshift @ 42
Wow, talk about due diligence! Just when I thought it was OK to just pull data out of one’s ass, I remembered I was here at the Lake…
Good luck Redshift! I’m sure you’ll do the commenting pups proud. Be sure to leave the tinfoil hat at home ;)
OKK@69
as usual you’re on point :o)
TiredFed @ 68
Tony Snowjob makes Barbeque Bob look like a hero with integrity.
Speaking of tinfoil, the new French housing minister has a tinfoil hat on her head kinda…it’s on Rawstory (my links to Raw don’t work properly).
Peterr @ 72
They could even type them on the computer with spellcheck.
Hey Peterr, sorry I missed your holy hand grenade last night. bwahahaha! I didn’t know it had its own wiki entry! I crashed without even saying good night. So a belated thank you for a good chuckle.
Badreporter cartoon!
Mark Fiore cartoon – Independence Funnnny!
yeah i did take notice – and i felt sorry for snowjob when he came down with cancer – now? not so much….tiredfed@70
Bustednuckles @ 63
Ah! It only showed a couple of results when I tried that, and I hadn’t tried the “show similar results” link (since Google is usually pretty good at eliminating duplicates, but not for this.)
“Only” 48 pages for me, 483 comments, but it appears it only started indexing blog comments back in April of last year. (Actually, that’s if I search for “Redshift says”; just searching on my name gets me other people’s responses quoting me, too.)
AZ Matt @ 79
That is one of the funniest and truest cartoon/animations I’ve every seen!!
GeorgeSimian @ 43
Absolutely no downside.
rwcole @ 15
Finally, some wisdom rather than emotional reaction. However, I don’t think the above would apply to Cheney or Gonzo. We could get them.
p.s. – Enough on Libby. The truth is our Constitution does grant the President the power he used, and he may use it without any regard to fairness or equal justice and yes, he may reward his friends. This is why elections matter.
Froomkin is terrific as usual. I read the link to Rosa Brooks piece on the new found outrage of the media. It made me wonder if the media has gotten the go-ahead from the powers that be to act like real journalists. The Snow presser a few days ago was was startling. I don’t think I’ve seen a wh press conference quite like that since I can’t remember when. The press was following Helen Thomas’ lead. So who let the dogs out?
do-si-do @ 74
Hee, hee! I’ll remember that, thanks!
LS @ 72
I had the same thing — try the “repeat the search with the omitted results included” link.
seconded.
Who knows where this may lead…..maybe usher in a whole new cyberworld, the commentosphere…
Redshift 81,
Only a couple of results show up for me, and they start on 7/1/07. I wonder why.
To dream that someday Bush, Cheney, or Abu will resign is a collosal waste of time.. these bums will only leave wearing handcuffs.
LS @ 81
I heart BadReporter!
And yes, starspangled stonewalling leaves me feeling snuggly and secure! er, not!
Thanks AZ Matt!
oddmommy @ 87
I saw a term: commentariat
I think that means us.
Redshift @ 87
1,190 when I did that. Yikes.
james @ 16
Ah! The Judicial Branch..now that is the $64 question, isn’t it. Correcting the criminality of Republican Congress and Executive branch won’t be easy but is “known political” process. If the Federal Courts and SCOTUS continue to give a legal stamp of approval for the subversion of the Constitution..that is new ground and it won’t be pretty. Impeaching judges and court expansion…it will be ugly.
Is there now any doubt that Cheney is in charge?
Is there now any doubt that Bush and Cheney have something to hide?
Bush had to commute Libby’s sentence immediately after the Appeals Court announced to ensure Libby didn’t change his mind and decide to rat them out? Bush could have waited until the day of Libby’s incarceration, but he didn’t. He moved swiftly (faster than falling off a bike) and decisively to keep Libby from talking.
Is there now any doubt that impeachment proceedings for Cheney need to begin?
Emotional reaction? Sit on it.
Three museums are competing with each other for the 40-foot long, duct-tape and butcher paper Bong Hits 4 Jesus banner.
Two are in Juneau, where it was originally unfurled, but the Washington DC Newseum wants it too:
“We have a very visible display,” said Cathy Trost, director of Newseum exhibit development.
If the Newseum acquired Frederick’s 40-foot duct-tape-and-butcher-paper banner proclaiming “Bong Hits 4 Jesus,” it would hang next to Mary Beth Tinker’s armband protesting the Vietnam War, Trost said.
“We think this is the kind of case where student speech and control collide,” Trost said.
Both artifacts illustrate varied outcomes in school district attempts to control student speech.
In 1965 the 13-year-old Tinker was suspended, with her brother, for wearing the armband in school.
Tinker’s victory before the Supreme Court set the bar for student speech rights for 38 years before Frederick’s case was lost to the Supreme Court last month.
boxer @ 84
“He has the power” is not the end of it; there is such a thing as abuse of power. Contrary to Bush’s assertions, elections are not the only moment at which the president must consider the will of the people, or their sense of right and wrong.
This was wrong. Everyone knows it was wrong, other than hardcore wingnuts. Say “enough” and just let it go because he has procedurally gotten away with obstruction of justice, instead of continuing to talk about just how wrong it was, and we’ll just get rolled by Republicans again.
They never let go, never say “enough” even when they’re completely wrong and don’t have a factual leg to stand on, even after they’ve failed in all the legal and procedural attacks. If we don’t have the fortitude to do it when we’re right and we know it, we might as well pack up and go home. Bush didn’t end this, he crystallized it so that many more people can understand what’s wrong. It should not dismissed as a legal loss, it should be a rallying point to fix what’s wrong.
TiredFed @ 94
no
Floyd Abrams has a pretty disingenuous letter to the editor in the NYT today. He’s responding to Michael Kinsey’s ridiculous claim that if reporters “behaved more ‘reasonably’ by not publishing the information” the whole Libby thing would not have happened. Abrahms tells us that Judy did not publish the info she got from Scooter, and therefore she did, in fact, act “responsibly.”
Oops, Judy’s own lawyer has forgotten that the reason she didn’t report the story was because she was on probation for her bogus WMD stories; not because she acted “responsibly”
You can read it here.
From reading the Robinson, Dionne, and Froomkin pieces, I’m hopeful that the Bush obstruction of justice meme is seeping into the MSM…just in time for the Sunday blab fests. And Larry Johnson eviscerates Bobo’s column. Beautiful.
Maybe we should hold off on the censure vs. impeachment talk for awhile and let the President’s act of obstructing justice take hold in the popular culture.
I’d like to see the following headlines on CNNMSNBCWAPONYTCBS: “Clinton says Bush obstructed justice by commuting Libby’s sentence,” “Obama comments on obstruction of justice charges,” Waxman to investigate White House obstruction of justice questions.”
A week or two of headlines like that and impeachment will be a slam-dunk.
can the next Prez un-commute Libby’s sentence?
LS @ 64
it’s sad to contemplate salvation by cholesterol…
And that commutation isn’t getting any more popular, it seems…
politicalticker
Redshift @ 97
I love this.
Message to the ‘front runners’. Fire the consultants!
From today’s press gaggle with Tony Fratto:
Proceedings at this point were momentarily suspended as Mr. Fratto’s pants spontaneously combusted.
Apparently the determining factor of whether a withdrawal is precipitous is if a Democrat says it. Also Mr. Fratto doesn’t seem to have been paying attention. Security has already collapsed in Iraq. But then this is necessary kabuki from the Propaganda Secretary’s office. Mustn’t admit that Bush’s war has failed and it is Bush who lost it and Iraq. As for that down, forward, surge bit, WTF is he talking about?
LBrowne @ 102
Note that this CNN story did not mention the poll’s finding on impeaching Cheney.
I’m kinda thinking someone got a bit spooked by that Cheney expose.
They exposed a spy ring! Valarie Plames support system, a CIA spy net, put at risk of death, who know how many have been exposed. WMD spies that were defending America and our allies from attacks were exposed by that rat and Cheney/Bush. The damage to our national security is incalcuable for war profits! The bush family was in the spook business and know damn well what they were doing. Pardon for Treason. Benedict Arnold ring any bells?
Big Mitch @ 27
Geez Menacham, getting a lot of miles outta this onem hunh?
I learned all my Yiddish from Lenny.
Now there was a guy who knew tsouris!
you know, Libby never really looked all that worried during the trial. not even on the day he was sentenced.
ROFL!
Ron Paul has more cash on hand than does John McCain…
mc @ 100
The problem is changing the narrative to that, and the Dems that show up in the MSM are really bad at that skill. Way to used to letting someone else lead the dance. We can get it from KO and those columnists you listed, but its rather hard to get the rest of the rank and file to be get the point about it. Courage? They do not have, aside from a few.
scarecrow @ 107
CNN has rules about how much truth they can report in any given story. Haven’t you noticed?
Redshift @ 97
Yes, that’s exactly it! Very well said!
rwcole @ 33
Sure isn’t a heartening thought with the performance the Dems have given so far.
i’m just thinking of all the damage bushco will inflict upon this nation as his term expires….let’s hope that he doesn’t get a chance to appoint another winger oops another supreme court justus uhhh justice….
Here comes the Iranian version of Chalabi…and it is a woman.
http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/ar…..1.php#more
All this money collected by candidates. Add it up. How many kids mouths would that feed?
big brother @ 109
There’s the winning soundbite/teeshirt slogan/bumper sticker, right there.
Pardon for Treason.
Say it loud. Say it often.
LBrowne @ 114
CNN is Fox-Lite
LS @ 64
Heaven help us.
Hugh @ 106
Yeah, that ‘down, forward, surge’ bit is awful.
Not to mention they are glibly throwing the dissenting Republicans under the same bus they throw the Democrats under. How does that sit with any fence-sitting Republicans when the chatter says many of them have just about had it with Bush’s obstinate ways and total disregard for the rest of the party?
Not so good, I figure.
TiredFed @ 101
doesn’t that depend on whether or not he did or did not serve the time he was or was not supposed to or not supposed to serve, depending on whom you’ve talked to or, not, *gasp* and maybe what he/she/they know or, not, or think they do or, *oh! a not-shinola thing!*
oops! sorry if too long, Redd.
Redshift @ 97
When it comes to pardons “He has the power” is in fact the end of it, unless you want to amend the Constitution, or you have sufficient direct evidence of Bush’s participation in a high crime or misdemeanor rising to such a level that the Senate would convict him, under its current membership and that Scooter Libby had knowledge of it, and that this is why Bush pardoned him. Good luck.
LS @ 54
Sure would be ironic if he was somwhow connected to Halliburton during it, wouldn’t it?
Would explain Scooter’s role as his attorney for the pardon as doing a favor for Cheney….oh my god!!
My ex is right, I am too cynical.
Tweety had a house full of clowns last
night… Ron Christy and Riflin…
I am so happy I’m a democrat… imagine
being a fucking repug with their Bubba did
it nonsense… How can they live with
themselves…
Rifkin calling Fitz a runaway prosecutor…
They need different rhetoric…
Boy, do they HAVE serious mental issues…
No apologies about the length.
See post end of last thread (~127)
rwcole @ 15
Impeachment is Self-indulgent? Somewhere far lower on the scale than a BigDog’s antics. And nowhere in the ballpark of this MALADMINISTRATION.
It would be irresponsible NOT TO IMPEACH.
Like we are not the recipients of every forward-, sideways-, and around-the-back-lash now?
Standing enhanced like people put in the stockades maybe.
We stand at 54% willing to impeach.
W stands at sub30% approval, meaning there are MANY potential converts if we do the WORK.
So, you are willing to forgo rectification of our Constitution & Rights because you’re afraid to compromise the lock we have on elections in 08? What will our Congress face if we are at war with Iran by then? #3=Bassackwards thinking imho.
I would welcome a Congress comprised of Dems and Pubs alike who have the integrity to work together to oust thugs. Have we tested them or coddled them (pubs), rather than testing our own patience until 08???
Growing a pair can damage someone politically?
This is putting the cart before the horse.
Have the CAJONES to start and make it worth the fight.
What concerted effort have we made to
deluge the RIGHT to do the RIGHT thing?
NONE that I know of.
NOW.
Just signed After Downing Street’s petition on impeaching Cheney and added the following:
FYI, new thread
helen@100
floyd abrams kid runs msnbc…..ironic?
do-si-so @ 120
big brother @ 109
Pardon for Treason
Yes!
Chalabi *was* the Iranian version of Chalabi
LS @ 118
Wow!! Read this…Rich…Cheney…energy…Plame:
http://www.consumersforpeace.o…..ction.html
Big Mitch @ 27
Hey, Big Mitch,
Maybe it was a dream, but I think I’ve read this before from you on this site….
It was fun the first time….
boxer @ 126
Oh yes, it is far wiser to do nothing because that’s what the Bush Criminal Enterprise responds to, isn’t it? If we can not act with absolute certainty, we should not act at all. After all, if Republicans were faced with a Democratic President as bad as Bush, they would never seek impeachment if they weren’t already assured of having the votes to convict. The logic is impeccable if somewhat contrary to reality.
Bay State Librul @ 127
fwiw, I just sent a slap-upside-duh-head to hardball @ fed up w/ crummyworkbychris, irrelevant & idiotic dumpsterdiving into Clinton privatelives instead of tackling real issues etc., & appended link to Froomkin’s nice rant today. Probably won’t do any good, but did threaten that altho we used to be regular viewers, we could barely be called sporadic now, and that’s only because Schuster’s terrific.
Let’s hope I don’t get Schuster fired for being competent, gack…
Adie @ 137
Kinda ironic that Scooter Fibby was Rich’s attorney at the time of his pardon.
Hugh @ 135
The Republican impeachment was a complete win for Democrats. Clinton’s polls were never higher. Yeah, smart strategy. While we’re at it, maybe we should shut down the government, that worked well for the Repubs too.
Republicans would launch impeachment just ’cause they felt like it … oh, yeah, that’s what they did to Clinton.
Republicans tried to impeach Clinton and the Dems lost the WH. Yeah, that was a *real* political liability!
Tired Fred @ 94:
While I agree (Cheney must be impeached), I don’t think Bush commuted Libby’s sentence to save Cheney (the Angler series is a good sign Cheney has passed his expiration date). He did it to protect himself.
Yeah, Scooter was cocky all through the trial. Until Walton refused bail – the he looked ashen and scared. As Bush did while announcing the commutation (and I’m sure he was wearing a wire so he could speak coherently; probably also diapers).
Mack @ 133
Of course he was…;) I should have said something like the Iran attack version of Chalabi.
fdl reader @ 140
So your argument is the the procedure of impeachment is what cost Gore the election, not the substance behind it? Never knew that a technical procedure could sway so much opinion. I’ll have to try it the next time I’m in front of a jury.
boxer @ 139
um, because it was an asinine and hypocritical proceeding???
rwcole @ 15
None of those were true with Nixon. None. None of those were true of the Clinton impeachment, either. Some slight Dem gains in the 98 mid term, but GOP retained control of Congress for 8 more years and took the White House in the next two elections. We should be so lucky to have such a “failure” and “backlash.”
I haven’t followed the libby thing to closely since he was convicted as I was sure he would never spend a day in jail but now, after the commutation, I am reminded of something nobody seems to be commenting on. Susan Mcdougal. She, also, maintained she was innocent of contempt, but that Starr would prosecute her for perjury if she testified to the truth. She served a year, I think for contempt and was out of jail at the end of Clinton’s term. He pardoned her w/o the input from the special prosecutor,another parallel. But there is a big difference. Right or wrong, she served her time before getting a pardon.
From this we can draw one of the following conclusions.
A. If she and Clinton were innocent of collusion on getting the loan for whitewater, then a Clinton pardonee went to jail for not lying to a grand jury and a tinpot pardonee did not go to jail for lying to a grand jury.
B. Clinton did help her get the whitewater loan and rather than rat she did a year in jail, a year in which Clinton trusted she wouldn’t talk. In contrast, Bush didn’t trust libby for a minute of jail time.
Just another example of republican justice and republican fidelity.
TribeScribe @ 144
Exactly, and that will be the same words the Repubs. use from here to eternity, when Bush is declared NOT GUILTY. The best the that could happen to Bush would be for him to be impeached. He will then be able to truthfully say that all the evidence was examined and he was exonerated.
…because a Democratic Dick is far scarier than any Republican Dick…
cleter @ 146
You evidently missed the “unless it has a good chance of success” phrase at the beginning, that’s why Nixon resigned – he wasn’t impeached.
boxer @ 139
Clinton’s poll numbers going into impeachment were already high. Bush ran on a platform (laughable now but effective then) of restoring ethics to Washington and IIRC the Republicans picked up seats in the Congress. You should not mistake Clinton for the Democratic Party. Clinton survived but if the Party had many more such victories, it would have to disband.
The last few days, perhaps weeks, the Administration hasn’t really initiated anything. They’ve screwed up the Libby thing, but they’ve been responding responding and responding some more. They are the lamest of ducks except where Bush can unilaterally screw things up.
Dems need to keep the pressure on all across the board: Congressional hearings, legal cases, political events like SiCKO and Gore’s concerts and the like. Dems need to show up the Congressional Repubs with Wexler’s Censure bill (sounds like a winner). Dems need to reach out to the public with some affirmative things the public needs and wants: more effort to get the troops home from Iraq, effort to make life easier for unions, better immigration law and perhaps some larger efforts like corporate retirement fund protections (terribly lacking during the 1980s when so many people lost everything).
On a larger scale Congress might consider adjusting the system of taxation to set a base capital/income tax rate of about 18% and a consumption tax rate of about 10%. That would take a kink out of the tax system which has been troublesome in recent years.
So much to do, so little time.
If the description of Edwards’ health care reform is accurate, then I like it. Use government to establish a non-profit health insurance and let it ‘compete’ with the private sector! (My state WV did that when it appeared all the doctors’ malpractice insurance companies would leave the state and after the state set up a non-profit med malpractice plan the ‘confusion’ all disappeared).
I also like the idea of extending the government’s incubation of other business which could be spun-off into the private venture-capital funded world. There’s probably a fair amount of federal government activity which could be spun-off to private commerce to shrink the fed. gov.
So much to fix before we can really get revved up establishing new great things.
Hugh @ 151
So your argument is the the procedure of impeachment is what cost Gore and Kerry the elections, not the substance behind it? Never knew that a technical procedure could sway so much opinion. I’ll have to try it the next time I’m in front of a jury.
Boxer@139 – the GOP picked up seats in the congress even though the impeachment fell flat.
rwcole – Nice list of accomplishments but let’s look at them in context.
1. the budget that is supposed to get us back to a surplus, treats the expenses of this illegal war and occupation in Iraq as an off-budget item; if it was honestly worked out there would be no chance for a surplus;
2. DHS funding is a boondoggle going to an unnecessary government bureaucracy to be doled out to connected contractors;
3. Support for our troops? Instead of spending money on a new fighting vehicle that BEFORE IT LEFT THE FACTORY was not capable of withstanding mines or IEDs, how about spending the money on working out a withdrawal plan? If that withdrarwal means leaving behind some of the equipment we have there so that the Sunnis won’t be completely at the mercy of the Shia who will get funding from Iran in arming themselves for the inevitable civil war (no matter when we leave, there will be a civil war). Sending more troops there, including a woman who just finished a round of radiation therapy is not supporting the troops. Ending the stop-loss might help.
4. Increasing spending on vet’s health care? How about reopening the facilities that have been closed and providing better care on an outpatient basis? Walter Reed was not an anomaly, it just got coverage.
5. Increased spending on National Guard? Bush has more national guard units under federal control than any previous president enough so that governors are complaining about their lack of readiness in case of disaster.
6. Alternative energy spending? Ethanol is an agrobusiness boondoggle and is unrealistic as an energy alternative. When the government gives a $25,000 tax credit to the purchaser of a Hummer and $2,000 to those who purchase a Prius, our priorities are completely out of whack (and I know this was done under the GOP, but not many Dems protested the hypocrisy).
7. Increased the minimum wage. While congress is set to give itself a cost-of-living increase that will average approximately $4000 per member, they grudgingly will increase the minimum wage to $7.25….would you work for $7.25?
8. Reform of the estate tax to help small business owners and the owners of family farms is a GOP talking point. Not too many small businesses or small family farms have the $2,000,000 in assets in their estates to be hit with the Excessive Toys When You Die Tax (not the Death tax as even Democrats call it).
9. Greatly improved the FDA? Where? Did I miss something? Has the FDA been given enforcement powers to actually compel recalls of dangerous drugs? Have the trials associated with drugs been changed? I think I read something recently that there will be human trials WITHOUT INFORMED CONSENT violating the Nuremberg Principles.
I have to carefully read through your post, but these things just came to the tip of my tongue.
This Democratic controlled Congress hasn’t done a f…..g thing to fix what Bush has broken including the US Attorney firings. The fired attorneys should have had the option of being reinstated instead of allowing the little boy king to get his way.
boxer @ 148
Impeachment has to be for the right thing. Warrantless wiretapping is probably the best bet because it was always plainly in-your-face illegal. Yes, impeachment and conviction have to succeed.
Where the GOP blew it with Clinton is they set out to impeach and then had to spend 5 years looking for something to do it on. By the time they “found” something, the public was already sick of the screeching and the offense was so silly the public supported Clinton. Unless grievously mishandled, that won’t happen here.
I would counsel fellow progressives to be aware that the worst moral offenses aren’t necessarily the easiest to prove legal offenses, and we need the latter.
boxer @ 144
From what I’ve seen of the American electorate, you’d be safer using an American Idol analogy than trying any sort of logic, flawed or otherwise.
boxer @ 148
It is grievous to see that it is YOU who have resigned.
One last time, can anyone point to how the “procedure” of impeachment helped the Republicans. Can you honestly say that they wouldn’t have been better off not bringing an actual impeachment that they couldn’t win?
Also, if an impeachment without conviction is such a good idea, please address my above comment @ 141.
TribeScribe @ 157
?
boxer @ 153
Where did your reference to Kerry come from? And when did the electorate get reduced to the microcosm of the courtroom? Perhaps you should pay more attention to what I actually said rather than putting words in my mouth and destroying the strawman you have created. It is really up to you not me to show how Clinton’s impeachment was a victory for Democrats and a defeat for Republicans. It is a surprisingly contrarian view and needs evidence to be believed. And no I do not accept that Clinton’s JARs going from high to higher is a valid indication of this victory.
boxer @ 158
It was good for lots of fundraising, sales of videos about the 42 murders or whatever, united a rabid base, distracted from Gingrich’s idiocy…
Don’t think it won them the 2000 election. That was, I think, Gore being associated with Clinton when they have diametrically opposite styles. Gore is squeaky clean; Clinton only wakes up when he’s in serious trouble, so he makes sure he’s always on the edge of serious trouble. Clinton’s a seducer. Gore is a trusted authority. They don’t mix (or they shouldn’t).
james @ 156
GREAT IDEA! *AND* Instead of bemoaning averageness (while simultaneously ideologically championing the populace) fugging RUN WITH IT!
Let’s put an “American as Apple Pie
and American Idol face” on those who have been affected domestically by these treasonous thugs.
Your Neighbor, Your Kin, Your Coworker -
Our friggin keystone cops candidates should be
NAME DROPPING and trotting out on our airwaves:
***Every domestic case represented by the ACLU for domestic wiretapping and political intimidation
***Every high-profile case of mistaken imprisonment
***Every instance of declined DOMESTIC flying as a result of being on a NO-FLY list
***Every instance of declined or terminated employment for political reasons
***Every Every Every
WE HAVE TO HELP PEOPLE COME OUT OF THE SHADOWS AND PUT A NAME AND A FACE ON THOSE MOST AFFECTED BY DOMESTIC TERRORISM PERPETRATED BY THESE THUGS!
FUGGING GET RID OF THE SHINY OBJECT PARIS HILTONS and IMMERSE THE AIRWAVES in the NAMES OF the INNOCENTS and HERETOFORE UNKNOWNS.
WE THE PEOPLE.
RULE OF LAW.
Any questions?
Hugh @ 160
First, you said it cost them the next two elections, if you didn’t mean Kerry, I apologize.
Second, jury composition is designed in theory to be a fair representation of the public, so the analogy holds.
Third, I am referring to the “procedure” of impeachment. The majority of the America people found it to be a waste of time. It was initiated by the Republicans. Therefore a majority of Americans thought the Republicans wasted their time. Did this help the Repubs. or Dems?
Hugh – mia culpa, my comments should have been directed at cleter @ 146. Again I apologize.
Let’s stop pretending that Bush did in fact believe the sentence handed down by Judge Walton was excessive. We all know that is crap, so why even address. The commutation was planned long ago and the length of the sentence had nothing to do with it. It amazes me how BushCo and the right wing throw out these ostensibly true lines and then folks feel compelled to parse them.
For example, we supposedly had to stop gay marriage because it would destroy the sanctity of marriage. Again, that’s crap, but our response to it was to say, no, it’s not a threat to marriage because of this, that and the other. The right wing didn’t give a damn about the sanctity of marriage, they just want to beat up the fags (I am one, so I use the term). But instead of calling them bigots, we get pulled into a debate on whether there is a threat to marriage.
Just call them liars and move on.
Allow me to begin by saying I support impeachment. But it is not an easy decision. On the one hand, I believe it is necessary to re-affirm the norms of society. In Alaskan law this is explicitly a purpose of the criminal justice system.
Moreover, who knows if it will succeed? As I used to tell clients, if I could foretell the future, I would be at a horse-track. Worst case we limit the damage he can do in the last 18 months of his term. At a minimum, we publicize his wrong-doing which is common knowledge in the blogosphere, but not generally in the population.
The downside is that the nation would be further polarized. I think it will break in favor of the democrats because the case is so strong against Bush. But at some point in the future, this country will either come together or fall apart.
“… and tell ‘em Big Mitch sent ya!”
O/T (please forgive)
David Shuster is kicking ass and taking names as replacement for Chris Matthews on Hardball. I am going to send MSNBC a note that advises them to give him the regular gig. You are invited to do likewise.
RE: CHS’s post:
I wanna know, why isn’t the entire blogosphere and the country and the WORLD, asking this putz WHAT PART OF Equal Justice Under The Law don’t he know?
Cuz, if he don’t KNOW this, then he’s certainly not qualified to do his job. This is kindergarten level ‘knowing’.
And he don’t know?
THIS is what should be parroted all OVER the MSM . . . the fact that he DON’T KNOW!!!! MY GOD, EVERYONE KNOWS!
SOMEone, ask him the damn question, WHY doesn’t he know the SIMPLEST of things about the law? He’s SPEAKING for the President!!!!
Harumph.
THE only logical comparison (and the one not mentioned) is BUSH -LIBBY / NIXON-WATERGATE. Focus on the main players and the objective, not on the actions and minor players.
Big Mitch @ 167
i felt the same way – & wrote a beautiful letter praising shuster to the powers that be at msnbc
viewerservices@msnbc.com
On Tuesday, everyone needs to watch another hearing in Judge Walton’s court very carefully. There is a theory, that the reason why the President only commuted the prison sentence but not the supervised release was so Scooter Libby could still claim the 5th if hauled before Congress, or any other Grand Jury investigations, asking about Bush and Cheney. Now the way the federal statute is written, it is impossible to get supervised release unless you actually did some jail time and then were released. The President has called this probation. However in the Federal system, they don’t have probation. ONly this supervised release. The statute is clear. He can’t get supervised release. Judge Walton is ready to rule that the supervised release must be stricken from the sentence. He is following the law and the statute. This will be a benefit for Mr. Libby, but a bane to the President and Darth Cheney, because he will not have a 5th Amendment claim, and must talk. If he doesn’t he might be found in contempt of Congress, and back looking at jail time. Why is the hearing on Tuesday, important? Scooter Libby’s lawyers, as defending their client, must argue for no supervised release. To argue otherwise would expose their client to further harm. Unless Libby says, no we want the supervised release, because otherwise, I will have to reveal where all the bodies are buried. If I, as a lawyer, and I am one, can argue a client out of any supervised release or further exposure, I have to. Watch their arguments very carefully. If they don’t argue that, then you know the fix is in, and there truly is a conspiracy. The national media needs to be talking about this.
GordonM @ 142
Still I think the key to impeaching Bush is through impeaching Cheney. Scooter was Cheney’s boy…and most of what he did was at Cheney’s behest (or…Cheney carried the word from “the Pres”).
One problem is how to get other Cheney staffmembers to break the case open….or to get charges that are limited to Cheney.
For example, it’s Bush that is making the hundreds of specific signing statements that state he will not obey “particulars” of the passed law..a blatantly Unconstitutional “line item” veto.
It’s Bush that forced the resignation of the AUSA’s for political reasons.
It’s Bush that has suspended “habeas corpus”.
It’s Bush that has violated the Geneva Conventions Treaty by giving a Presidential “Order” to torture.
Cheney may be the hand behind these things…but it’s Bush himself that had to implement them.
Hugh @ 151
Also the impeachment essentially put Clinton out of the election campaign to support Gore. They tainted Clinton so badly that Gore had to repudiate him.
We have to remember though that much of what led to the downfall of RMN was not done through the impeachment process…it came through the disclosures of Congressional Committees much like Waxman’s and Conyer’s finding case upon case of corruption and unethical behavior.
It was as a CONSEQUENCE of these findings that Articles of Impeachment WERE drawn up…even BEFORE there was a clear chance of success. The Articles were actually an impetus to House and Senate Republicans to meet with Nixon and ask him to resign.
I think that another Committee hearing should be set up discussing the Libby pardon.
Recall that Clinton did NOT assert Executive Privelege with the Rich pardon (allowing Podesta and others to discuss their advice to him). Will Bush assert that those who “advised” him be blocked from testifying?
Call in Cheney, Rove and others who advised Bush. What did they say…under oath!
They should call in Fitz and other DOJ officials to testify as to whether Bush contacted them about the impact of the commutation on the rule of law…and the CIA and query whether such a commutation might encourage those who leak.
The question should be asked why Libby was the only person to have ever received a FULL and COMPLETE commutation of sentence in Bush’s career. 6500 Pardon requests..4 commutations…with three only given after years of the sentence had been served. Libby got a UNIQUE offer of charity from King George!
Impress upon the public just how different this was from the Rich pardon…which was for tax evasion…which Rich’s lawyer Lewis Libby stated was likely unfounded. Note, as well, that Bush Sr. gave many additional commutations and remissions of fines during his term.
At some point make clear that the advice given in the previous hearings (which the Chair should not allow the Republican members to ramble on about) that the “prescription against Presidential abuse of the pardon power comes at the next election” cannot mean that the public can respond against the CURRENT EXECUTIVE or a VP that is running to continue that adminitration.
What then are the means for the public to react against such abuses? That question should be raised for each and every member of the Committee? The public can no longer vote THAT adminsitration out…what then IS TO BE DONE when pardon/commutation is abused to prevent the investigation of criminal acts by the Executive Branch.
Is it the same means that the Founders raised in the Declaration of Independence? That when King George undertakes to protect his agents from the legal codes that offer justice and equitable legal protections for all that rebellion is warranted?
If the process of impeachment is ruled out, then what recourse is left?
Great points and links Christy. It is deeply disturbing that all of the young people that I have encouraged to follow this trial and outcome have gotten the clear message that the U.S. judicial system is not fair or just. Period!