Libby going to jail

[Garfield1966]

Looks like Libby did his part of the deal so now it was W's turn to do his part in covering Cheneys criminal a$$.

Whpo wants to put money down on how many stump speeches W gives for Republican candidates?

I have $100 on 0, zilch, nada, zip. OK, maybe McCain since they are bunk buddies but no one else.

So do W and Cheney just lay awake at night figuring new ways to screw their party or does this just come naturally?

 

[Garfield1966]

I just read a very interesting theory.

W commuted the entence and left the conviction in place inorder to preserve the 5th amendment rights of Libby. This way he can continue to act as a fire wall between Cheney and justice. Libby can plead the 5th and everyone stays out of jail. Very nice, tidy and very politician like .. ie corupt.

As long as libby does not go hunting with Cheney, everyone stays safe.

 

[sentrido]

“If there’s a leak out of my administration, I want to know who it is . . . If the person has violated law, that person will be taken care of.â€￾

I read it wrong the first time too.....

 

[Garfield1966]

Now ain't that the truth. I had something entirely different in mind as well when he said that. My bad.

 

[boxer]

Don't hold your breath but I'm waiting for the pardon/commutation of the two border patrol agents who got the shaft from the Justice Department.

 

[Garfield1966]

Don't hold your breath but I'm waiting for the pardon/commutation of the two border patrol agents who got the shaft from the Justice Department.

Nothing in it for dick and W so it ain't going to happen.

I love how W does not even have the balls to say anything in person. He does it via a press release over the 4th of July weekend. What a coward.

 

[delldude]

Ha ha hahhha....what balls he has.....

Ok for Bill though...

Classic double standard.....Clinton out did Bush by a mile and Bush is wrong...you guys suck. :down:

 

[Gilding the Lily]

My first reaction: Perhaps the prison sentence is a bit excessive, but why not commute the PORTION of the prison sentence that Bush finds excessive? (i.e. 10 months, 20 months, whatever)

Because he commuted the ENTIRE prison sentence, I can come to no other conclusion but Bush found the ENTIRE prison sentence excessive.

Bush has not formally excused Libby, and Bush's statement indicates "respect" for a federal jury's determination that Libby committed numerous federal crimes. Ironically, however, apparently Bush does not respect the within-guideline prison term that the Judge concluded was "sufficient, but not greater than necessary" for Libby's numerous federal crimes.

Why is it ironic? Because many OTHER federal defendants have argued in many forums that guideline imprisonment levels should not be shown undue respect, but Bush's Justice Department has argued in many forums that the guidelines merit faithful allegience.

I guess faithful allegience goes out the door when its one of your own. It will be interesting to see if, after Bush has made clear that he views the guidelines are "excessive" for one of his buddies, others with sentencing power begin to give less respect to the guidelines when the fates of less-connected defendants are in the balance.

BTW, decorated military veteran Victor Rita received a 33-month federal prison sentence for nearly identical crimes.

Sum: Perhaps the prison sentence is a bit excessive... but the ENTIRE prison sentence should not have been commuted, just a PORTION of it should have been commuted.

 

[NewHampshire Black Bears]

"Lilly",

Oddly enough, I agree with you on this one, in that "El Chimpo" could have got ol' scooter a Paris Hilton deal.

Either way, I hope you realize that your objection to El Chimpo's "involvment"/(90% pardon) will expose you to scrutiny from the holier-than-thou ....resident DUO, on this thread !

Actually, I should be glad, because NOW in the presidential debates, the question to the Republican candidates, and republican nominee, will be (precicely)..."Do you condone ..LYING under oath, to a Special US Federal prosecutor" ???



Clinton/Richardson...08'

NH/BB's

A little quiz;

Match these four words, to get a prospect on the success of the GOP in 08'


A. A Rope
B. Dig their own GRAVE
C. HANG themselves
D. A shovel

 

[Garfield1966]

Ha ha hahhha....what balls he has.....

Ok for Bill though...

Classic double standard.....Clinton out did Bush by a mile and Bush is wrong...you guys suck. :down:

Dell, your reading comprehension is failing you.

First, I never argued that W did not have the right to pardon whom ever he chooses too. Second, I never argued that Clinton did not pardon anyone.

If you will do some research on your boy W, he has already granted 113 pardons and he has 18 more months to go. Most of Clinton's pardons came at the end of his second term (also very underhanded and cowardly IMO).

I guess we will see who wins once the dust settles but Bush is well on his way to parity with Clinton so don't count your eggs just yet.

Aside from that, Bush said that he wanted to know who was responsible for the leak and that once found that person would be "taken care of". I guess we can put that commitment in the same trash bin with "Mission Accomplished".

 

[local 12 proud]

"Lilly",

Oddly enough, I agree with you on this one, in that "El Chimpo" could have got ol' scooter a Paris Hilton deal.

Either way, I hope you realize that your objection to El Chimpo's "involvment"/(90% pardon) will expose you to scrutiny from the holier-than-thou ....resident DUO, on this thread !

Actually, I should be glad, because NOW in the presidential debates, the question to the Republican candidates, and republican nominee, will be (precicely)..."Do you condone ..LYING under oath, to a Special US Federal prosecutor" ???
Clinton/Richardson...08' good one..

NH/BB's

A little quiz;

Match these four words, to get a prospect on the success of the GOP in 08'
A. A Rope
B. Dig their own GRAVE
C. HANG themselves
D. A shovel

Hey Bears,...Your boy BJ perfected lying under oath!

BTW... 'Ole Slick Willy' has 397 pardons under his belt but this one is still my all time favorite...

Roger Clinton 1. W. D. Ark. 1. 1985 1. Conspiracy to distribute cocaine, 21 U.S.C. § 846
2. W.D. Ark. 2. 1985
2. Distribution of cocaine, 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1)

http://www.usdoj.gov/pardon/clintonpardon_grants.htm

 

[Garfield1966]

I am not sure why you and Dell keep rolling out that tired dated excuse of "Clinton did it first …". So what if he did. I seem to recall one of the campaign rants of Cheney C0. Was that they will bring integrity and honor back to the White House. They argued that they are better than Clinton and Gore. Now, by saying that Clinton did this or that, that Cheney Co. is no better than Clinton. If that is the case, why was he elected in the first place?

For two people who seem to hate Clinton so much, the two of you seem to use him as a benchmark to justify Cheneys actions quite a bit. Why is that? I try and use people I admire as a benchmark, not people I loath.

 

[local 12 proud]

I am not sure why you and Dell keep rolling out that tired dated excuse of "Clinton did it first …". So what if he did. I seem to recall one of the campaign rants of Cheney C0. Was that they will bring integrity and honor back to the White House. They argued that they are better than Clinton and Gore. Now, by saying that Clinton did this or that, that Cheney Co. is no better than Clinton. If that is the case, why was he elected in the first place?

For two people who seem to hate Clinton so much, the two of you seem to use him as a benchmark to justify Cheneys actions quite a bit. Why is that? I try and use people I admire as a benchmark, not people I loath.

Just playing Tit-For-Tat with you lib loving hypocrites!

You decided to start throwing numbers around about pardons so you've been trumped!

BTW...'El Chimpo' as bears likes to refer to the current Prez. has had less pardons than any 'POTUS'... in the last hundred years.

Cheer up Gar the dems...(used to be my party, now the socialist elite)... got your back!... B)

 

[Garfield1966]

His term is not over yet.

You are not playing tit for tat. you are using Clintons poor behavior to justify the behavior of W.

Why would the dems have my back? My disdain for them is nearly equal to that of the Reps.

Instead of using Clinton to justify W's incompetence, why not try and justify his actions on merit? Or is it that there is no justification?

I never disputed that Clinton has more (396) than W (113) but W has 18 more months to go. You think W won't catch up? Look at his dads record. Nearly matched Clinton. Each president out does the previous one. Don’t worry, W will more than likely catch up. If he does not "win" it will not be for lack of trying.

 

[Garfield1966]

I was waiting for this one to come out. Now criminals can use W as a justification for a lighter sentence.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/04/washingt...mutecnd.html?hp



While it may not carry a legal precedent yet, all it takes is one to start the ball rolling. So much for W being 'hard on crime'.

While his DOJ pushes for tough sentencing guidelines, Cheney is out there handing get out of jail cards free to his posse. And you call the Dems hypocrites? Take a look in the mirror some time.


One other thing I find humorous is that I was just on Fox entertainment sight to see what they had to say and, well ....... they had nothing to say. The only piece I found was under politics and it just said what happened. No support, not an op-ed piece. Guess they cannot even come up with a good reason. I am sure they will have conjure something up by next week but their silence sure is telling.


Maybe I missed something but if it is there, you really have to dig for it.