Suspected Hamas Operative References Libby Precedent To Seek Reduced Jail Time
Suspected Hamas Operative References Libby Precedent To Seek Reduced Jail Time
The New York times reported yesterday that Scooter Libby’s commutation has been a “gift” for defense attorneys, with many using the so-called “Libby motion” to argue, “My client should have got what Libby got, and here’s why.” Subsequently, judges may have “reason to lighten sentences and undermining the goal of a more uniform justice system.”
The New York Sun reports today that an “alleged Hamas operative is likely to be among the first criminal defendents to try to capitalize on President Bush’s commutation.” Mohammad Salah is scheduled to be sentenced next week on obstruction of justice charges, with a 22 year maximum sentence. “What the president said about Mr. Libby applies in spades to the case of Mohammed Salah,” said defense attorney Michael Deutsch.
Deutsch plans to use several of Bush’s arguments to argue for reducing the prison sentence for Salah to probation:
When Mr. Bush commuted that prison sentence on Monday, he made particular note of the alleged unfairness in how Libby’s sentence was calculated. “Critics say the punishment does not fit the crime: Mr. Libby was a first-time offender with years of exceptional public service and was handed a harsh sentence based in part on allegations never presented to the jury,” the president wrote. [...]
“It applies to an even greater extent in Mr. Salah’s case,” Mr. Deutsch said. “In our case, these allegations were presented to a jury and he was acquitted.”
Mr. Deutsch also noted that while Libby was convicted of lying to the FBI and a grand jury in a criminal investigation, the lies Salah was convicted of telling were part of his defense to a civil case brought by the family of a victim of a Hamas-sponsored bombing.
The Salah case is one of many that may be influenced by Libby’s commutation. Susan James, defense attorney for former Governor Don Siegelman (D-AL), who was convicted of corruption and obstruction of justice charges, plans to argue for the “Libby treatment” for Siegelman. “[Bush] has basically come in and said the sentence is too harsh,” James said. “I’ll find some way to weave that into our argument,” James said.
The Bush administration alleges that Hamas aides terrorist groups. Just last month, the White House stated that Hamas is a “dangerous force” that follows “the way of terror.” Salah’s use of the “Libby motion” to reduce his own sentence bolsters the fact that Libby’s commutation has undermined Bush’s own national security policies.
More at Sentencing Law and Policy.
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
125 Responses to “Suspected Hamas Operative References Libby Precedent To Seek Reduced Jail Time”
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
I guess this is funny????
Here's the text Olbermann's special comment from Tuesday night. If you missed it, you should check it out.
http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2007/07/04/2279/
July 5th, 2007 at 11:38 amSorry, Salah, but the "Libby defense" only applies to well-heeled, well-connected Caucasians.
July 5th, 2007 at 11:40 amOh my gawd. ROFL! This is freakin' PRICELESS. How on Earth is Dubya going to live THIS down.
In the words of an old friend of mine:
Smooth move, Ex Lax.
And when Bush starts complaining about it, these other words from that old friend:
That's just how the poison cookie crumbles.
ROFLMAO.
July 5th, 2007 at 11:41 amThe Bush administration alleges that Hamas aides terrorist groups. Just last month, the White House stated that Hamas is a “dangerous force†that follows “the way of terror.â€
Sounds like the Bush administration has been writing copy for Netflix™ blurbs. Maybe they're practicing for their next career?
July 5th, 2007 at 11:44 am.
Comment by Crump's Brother — July 5, 2007 @ 11:38 am
I saw that Special Comment, CB. Olby hit another one out of the park.
I only hope that people are paying attention.
(For those who missed it, and would rather listen to Olby than read him, here's a link, courtesy of crooksandliars.com.)
July 5th, 2007 at 11:44 amCue Condi: "Who could have possibly forseen the consequences of commuting Scooter's sentence? I don't think anyone could have expected this."
July 5th, 2007 at 11:45 amWhat's good for goose is good for the gander.
July 5th, 2007 at 11:47 amThanks GWB, you're an idiot.
But, but,....oh yeah, remember how Clinton taught our kids that oral sex and lying were acceptable? See, Clinton did it, too.
/sarc off
July 5th, 2007 at 11:47 amWhat a tragedy GW has become. Do you ever get the feeling that everything he touches turns to crap. He can't even keep one of his friends from going to jail without screwing it up.
July 5th, 2007 at 11:47 amBush let his friend go free after being involved in a conspiracy to commit TREASON.
"... with liberty and justice for SOME."
July 5th, 2007 at 11:48 amAbsolutely outstanding. Noted Jurist George W. Bush's precedent should rightfully go down in judical history. He re-writes the constitution And becomes a citable reference in American juristprudence. So much for despising judicial activism! He hates the terrorists (fights them night and day!) and he's instrumental in getting their sentances reduced. Heck of a job, Georgie!
July 5th, 2007 at 11:48 amFlaco -
Way of subject don't you think.
July 5th, 2007 at 11:48 amI'll say it again... Commutation and Pardons should require a majority Senate confirmation after a President decides to use this power. It's too much power for one branch, let alone one person! Amend the Constitution!
July 5th, 2007 at 11:49 am"This has nothing to do with Al Gore, who I like. But his kid is a menace, much worse than Paris Hilton. He could kill people, driving at 100 mph, stoned. It's dangerous. He needs to be stopped."
Huffpo poster
July 5th, 2007 at 11:50 amCue Rummy: "Golly, commuting Scooter's sentence was a known known to those in the know while setting a precedent by doing so is simply an unknown unknown."
July 5th, 2007 at 11:50 amFlaco -
Way of subject don’t you think.
Comment by ben
Sorry I thought this was the "Gore busted thread".
July 5th, 2007 at 11:52 amOh that's right they don't do that here because it is not the Bush Twins.
Comment by Flaco
He's gone into rehab - so get off your "high" horse.
July 5th, 2007 at 11:53 amI guess if Scooter had been an intern instead of a White House aide, then the neocon's would have been more outraged. Or not.
July 5th, 2007 at 11:54 am"Oh that’s right they don’t do that here because it is not the Bush Twins."
Comment by Flaco
I think you're talking about Noelle Bush. Let's hear you rag on her for abusing drugs - or is it ok when you're a republican?
July 5th, 2007 at 11:56 amFlaco's gone into rehab? Great. Now he can figure out why he can't stay on topic. Mayhaps a severe case of Adult Duh Dufus disorder.
July 5th, 2007 at 11:56 amA Prius can do 100 mph?
July 5th, 2007 at 11:57 amFlaco
If Gore had been elected President, his son arrested and convicted, and his son's sentence commuted by Gore you would have been perfectly content with that, wouldn't you? How about posting something relevant to THIS thread about a NATIONAL precedent?
July 5th, 2007 at 11:57 amThe Bush administration alleges that Hamas aides terrorist groups. Just last month, the White House stated that Hamas is a “dangerous force†that follows “the way of terror.â€
I say the Bush Administration including Scooter "aide terrorist groups" by uncovering covert cia officers. I also say that the White House "is a dangerous force that follows the way of terror" by their conyinued efforts to USE fear as a way of forwording their warped agenda.
July 5th, 2007 at 11:58 amImpeach, then throw them all in jail for treason.
Flaco, your hero Bush is so throttled I'm sure he'll pardon Gore's son any day now.
July 5th, 2007 at 11:58 amDo you a point, Flaco? Or are you merely trying to meet our expectations that you will continue to behave like a guttersnipe on these threads?
July 5th, 2007 at 11:58 am"I’m sure its okay to ridicule and speculate on Bush’s alcoholism two decades ago, or Gingrich’s divorce in the mid-90s, or Thurmon’s affairs in the Depression era, or Limbaugh’s oxycontin addiction, but when Gore’s son is caught speeding while intoxicated, the “its his personal life†excuse comes out of the woodworks.
Al Gore, the modern messiah of the American left."
Huffpo poster
July 5th, 2007 at 11:58 amComment by Flaco
And Al's mad, because Global Warming is refusing to testify for his own defense.
July 5th, 2007 at 11:59 amComment by barfly — July 5, 2007 @ 11:56 am
#
Hell, I thought he was talking about Rush Limbaugh.
Back on topic.
July 5th, 2007 at 11:59 amHow many other criminals in America who are facing charges of perjury and obstruction are going to invoke this same argument when it comes to sentencing?
Comment by Flaco
C'mon pinhead; if you think Gore's son is such a menace for abusing drugs, why are you giving Noelle Bush a pass?
July 5th, 2007 at 11:59 amFlaco can do 100 mph in reverse - to back away from any neocon-confronting topic.
July 5th, 2007 at 11:59 amSorry go back to your discussion. :D
July 5th, 2007 at 11:59 amIt won't actually play out that way, because invocation of the President's authority to commute or pardon crimes is completely arbitrary and the basis for his authority to exercise this power is his personal judgment.
Yes, it's hypocritical, but that's the reason for the outrage, because there are very similar cases where the defendants will not receive the same treatment. The rest is just lawyer posturing, which is what they are paid to do.
July 5th, 2007 at 12:01 pmNo one is going to get anywhere arguing a presidential pardon/commutation is precedent. Legal precedent applies to a judicial ruling/finding, not the opinion of the president.
July 5th, 2007 at 12:01 pmIt's a non-issue. Sure, it opens the doors for possible appeal, but will go nowhere. "Bush did it" is as successful a legal argument as "Clinton did it."
"Sorry go back to your discussion. "
Comment by Flaco
As I thought. Flaco only cares about drug-abusing dems, but not republicans. What a moral midget.
July 5th, 2007 at 12:01 pmDon't feed Flaco or CT_V1,
If you respond to there crap about Gore, they will only continue to post it.
The right is going to use the Gore story to turn attention away the Libby commutation. Don't let them.
July 5th, 2007 at 12:03 pmSorry go back to your discussion. â€
Comment by Flaco
As I thought. Flaco only cares about drug-abusing dems, but not republicans. What a moral midget.
Comment by barfly
July 5th, 2007 at 12:04 pmHey us midgets are people too!
Flaco
Al Gore isn't president. So far as I know he isn't going to be president. And frankly, I don't think he even wants to be president anymore.
Further, there is no indication whatsoever of Gore flexing his political or economic clout to reduce his son's sentence thus far.
So what his son, who is famous for precisely the same reason that Paris Hilton is famous, does is of absolutely zero interest to me. While you probably live with your head buried in the tabloids, the rest of us really don't give a toss.
When Al Gore himself gets involved, then we will comment, up until then, its of about as much worth in the public debate as pointing out that the opponent's moccassins are untied.
July 5th, 2007 at 12:05 pm#27 Flaco, you just equated Al Gore's son, a private citizen who has never been an elected official and is not now running for any public office, to the President, the Former speaker of the House, an eight term Senator, and the leading radio mouthpiece for the Republican propaganda machine.
Nice, Flaco, really nice.
How stupid is this clown? He seems to grow stupider every day.
July 5th, 2007 at 12:05 pmOnce again, the chymp undermines the justice system. Who coulda thunk it?
July 5th, 2007 at 12:08 pmThe defense's theory will fail because pardons and commutation's have no precedent in altering federal sentencing guidelines. The judge can lawfully choose not to depart from those guidelines, while the defendant has the right to appeal to higher courts as well as to the President's desk.
The debate of Libby's pardon should center on favoritism and the constitutionality of granting that specific pardon. It shouldn't spill over into the rest of the legal system.
July 5th, 2007 at 12:08 pmWilco
Good point. Of course, there is enough outrageousness related to the specific commutation of Scooter that we don't need to be looking for or manufacturing any wider precedents. Thanks for the focus.
July 5th, 2007 at 12:08 pm#40 But it's good politics to keep Bush's clemency decision in the news, calling out again and again the sickening hypocrisy of two-wrongs-make-a-right Republicans.
July 5th, 2007 at 12:10 pmComment by Crump's Brother
Actually, Mr. President intended the Al Gore, III, bust to challenge TP's excessive coverage of Paris Hilton.
July 5th, 2007 at 12:10 pmI think Bush could stab 100 children in the face with a pitchfork, live, on national television, and Congre$$ still would not act. Absurd.
July 5th, 2007 at 12:12 pmBut, but,….oh yeah, remember how Clinton taught our kids that oral sex and lying were acceptable? See, Clinton did it, too.
/sarc off
Comment by PatrioticLiberalChristian(PLC) — July 5, 2007 @ 11:47 am
Interesting take, even for a liberal Christian. You wouldn't be one of those cafeteria Chrisitans I hear tell about on this site would ya? ;)
July 5th, 2007 at 12:17 pmYou mean I never pardoned anyone during my 8 years in office. Shit, if I remember correctly, I was giving out pardons to felons like candy.
anyone that wanted a pardon, I gave a pardon to them.
Isnt' amazing, poor Bush, thank goodness my Liberals are such great hypocrites. I LOVE IT!!!
when I gave pardons the media loved it, my Liberals love it, I was adored, I was revered, I was worshiped.
My Libtards claim that conservatives cry with, "Clinton did it too." what my sycophant followers don't realize that it is not about me doing it too, but rather, that I was either applaued for the pardons I gave, or the left was completed silent on my pardons. Bush does the same thing, and my hypocrites go crazy.
Ahhhh, isn't life grand! Love the hypocrisy of my left wing party. Love it!!!!
July 5th, 2007 at 12:22 pmI know everybody loves the Clinton did it too perspective, but just look at this list. Were people here upset that he was ruining the justice system or should resign. The hypocrisy is amazing.
http://www.usdoj.gov/pardon/clintonpardon_grants.htm
July 5th, 2007 at 12:24 pmHey,
Will TP or any other left wing blog cover Al Gore's son drug addictions? hmmm.......nah!!! that would be too honest for TP to do.
Just like they haven't covered the massacre committed by Al Qaeda in an Iraqi town. The whole media has a black out on this Al Qaeda atrocity.
shhhh....if the media or the left doesn't talk about it, it hasn't happened.
July 5th, 2007 at 12:24 pmToo bad I can't pardon myself after I get my sorry a$$ kicked out of the White House in 2009!
Maybe I should start a war with Iran and North Korea at the same time? That way, nobody will remember how I'm the worst President in history!
God, I'm a horrible President! Even Dicky-poo hates my guts!
July 5th, 2007 at 12:25 pmAll of them.
Not talking about legal precedent here. This is about making a good-faith argument that prison time for perjury, obstruction of justice, lying to the FBI, etc. violates the 8th Amendment.
Look at it this way, as well. The President is the Head of the Executive Branch, including the Office of the Attorney General, the Chief Prosecutor of the United States. So, now you have the Chief Prosecutor's superior saying that any prison time at all for the crimes of which Libby was convicted is "harsh."
Yes, that makes a strong constitutional argument that prison time for those crimes violates the 8th Amendment. Defense Attorneys might be guilty of legal malpractice if they don't argue this!
July 5th, 2007 at 12:28 pm#47 I see that the troll brigade is arriving in force. Morning meetings at the RNC have been finished and daily talking points have issued to the foot soldiers.
July 5th, 2007 at 12:28 pmNo muslim terrorist stories here, just keep moving sheep...
July 5th, 2007 at 12:29 pmToo bad I can’t pardon myself after I get my sorry a$$ kicked out of the White House in 2009!
Maybe I should start a war with Iran and North Korea at the same time? That way, nobody will remember how I’m the worst President in history!
God, I’m a horrible President! Even Dicky-poo hates my guts!
Comment by Pres. "Dubya" Bush — July 5, 2007 @ 12:25 pm
I hear you my main man! Al Gore hated my guts too. Al Gore hated me so much that he put a restraining order on me during his 2000 Presidential campaign!! Man, I was so happy when he lost! Who the fck did he think he was messing with the god of the Democratic party!
Although, except my wife and my daughter. Women put restraining orders against me all the time.
July 5th, 2007 at 12:30 pmbut don't worry, I counted on the vote of my hypocritical Liberal women. They love to claim that womanizers are evil, and that men that use women are evil. But shit, if it hadn't been for these airheads, I would have never been elected!
Sure, Mohammad.
Just ask Bush to commute your sentence too.
July 5th, 2007 at 12:31 pmBwahAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Comment by Crump's Brother — July 5, 2007 @ 11:38 am
Oh yes, it is funny!!!
July 5th, 2007 at 12:33 pmAnother exclamation mark and it would have sounded ridiculous.
July 5th, 2007 at 12:33 pmComment by TripMaster Monkey — July 5, 2007 @ 11:40 am
Indeed.
What was this nut case thinking?!?!?
July 5th, 2007 at 12:34 pmHEYOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Bush has created his very own "Saturday Night Massacre."
What shall we call it?
Monday Morning F*ck Up?
Monday Commuter to Hell?
Anyone?
July 5th, 2007 at 12:35 pmComment by PatrioticLiberalChristian(PLC) — July 5, 2007 @ 11:47 am
Yes, Clinton did teach our kids that oral sex and lying are acceptable.
July 5th, 2007 at 12:36 pmThe real point here is the acquittal of the charges of the ORIGINAL UNDERLYING CRIME. Now, how many counts was Sami Al-Arian acquitted on?
July 5th, 2007 at 12:38 pmComment by Flaco — July 5, 2007 @ 11:50 am
Yes, he and his father are a menace to our noble Nation.
July 5th, 2007 at 12:38 pmSorry I thought this was the “Gore busted threadâ€.
July 5th, 2007 at 12:39 pmOh that’s right they don’t do that here because it is not the Bush Twins.
Comment by Flaco — July 5, 2007 @ 11:52 am
HEYOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
What's up Flaco?!?
A Prius can do 100 mph?
Comment by Flaco — July 5, 2007 @ 11:57 am
Yeah, I was suspicious about that too.
I think that this might just be...
... dare I say it...
... a ...
(conspiracy) shhhhhh...
July 5th, 2007 at 12:41 pmAnd Al’s mad, because Global Warming is refusing to testify for his own defense.
Comment by CT_V1, Dean of Dissent — July 5, 2007 @ 11:59 am
Hey CT!
July 5th, 2007 at 12:42 pmMr. President,
"Yes, Clinton did teach our kids that oral sex and lying are acceptable."
Yes, Bush has taught our kids that as long as you have a bud in the highest office of the land, you can obstruct justice without worry about the consequences.
Oral sex, is acceptable jackass. I'm guessing you don't like oral sex?
Lying, while morally wrong, is ok too. AS LONG AS YOU DON'T IMPEDE INVESTIGATIONS WHEN YOU DO IT!!!
July 5th, 2007 at 12:44 pmTerrorist wants a lighter sentence just because some other non-terrorist received a pardon the other day.
"You're supposed to be nice and share your pardons, Georgie."
"Yes, only Georgie has to share."
That's the typicalIslamo-Stalinist contention.
July 5th, 2007 at 12:45 pmMr. President, Do you not like oral sex. Is it unacceptable to you?
July 5th, 2007 at 12:45 pmComment by Wilco — July 5, 2007 @ 12:01 pm
Comment by CT_V1, Dean of Dissent — July 5, 2007 @ 12:08 pm
Well, that's it, the two posts above say it all.
So much for your Lefty propaganda TP.
July 5th, 2007 at 12:47 pmHey CT!
Comment by Mr. President
It's good to have you back on, Mr. President.
I have to ask: Is effectively countering Islamo-Stalinism a task or a hobby?
July 5th, 2007 at 12:48 pmActually, this goes for all of you trolls:
Obviously you don’t actually get the issues involved in this, and need to read up on them a bit before you start throwing around words like “Hypocrit.â€
Clinton’s 140 pardons, including that of Marc Rich, were not of figures whose crimes were intended to shield the Whitehouse. Marc Rich in particular was in a position where America was not going to get him, and the only way to get anything out of him was to offer a pardon.
Scooter Libby’s sentence was for the crimes of purjory and defeating the ends of justice, whereby he strove to shield the very people who pardoned him from a full and vigorous investigation. Commuting his sentence was in short, symptomatic of a highly corrupt backroom deal via which Libby wouldn’t go to jail, so long as he didn’t “rat†on his political masters.
While the pardons on January 20th were contraversial, there was never a hint that it might be in effect, buying off witnesses against the Clinton Whitehouse. Commuting Libby’s sentence on the other hand, is seen as being exactly that, the Republican President buying off a witness against his administration.
Comment by Bruce Gorton — July 5, 2007 @ 12:31 pm
July 5th, 2007 at 12:51 pm#47 I see that the troll brigade is arriving in force. Morning meetings at the RNC have been finished and daily talking points have issued to the foot soldiers.
Comment by VerbalKint
Did you read the list, are you upset with any of those pardons?
July 5th, 2007 at 12:57 pmCT_V1,
"Is effectively countering Islamo-Stalinism a task or a hobby?"
Is effectively countering Christo-Fascism a task or a hobby?
July 5th, 2007 at 12:58 pmwow!
What are your feelings on Nelson Mandela?
July 5th, 2007 at 12:59 pmActually, this goes for all of you trolls:
Obviously you don’t actually get the issues involved in this, and need to read up on them a bit before you start throwing around words like “Hypocrit.â€
Clinton’s 140 pardons, including that of Marc Rich, were not of figures whose crimes were intended to shield the Whitehouse. Marc Rich in particular was in a position where America was not going to get him, and the only way to get anything out of him was to offer a pardon.
Scooter Libby’s sentence was for the crimes of purjory and defeating the ends of justice, whereby he strove to shield the very people who pardoned him from a full and vigorous investigation. Commuting his sentence was in short, symptomatic of a highly corrupt backroom deal via which Libby wouldn’t go to jail, so long as he didn’t “rat†on his political masters.
While the pardons on January 20th were contraversial, there was never a hint that it might be in effect, buying off witnesses against the Clinton Whitehouse. Commuting Libby’s sentence on the other hand, is seen as being exactly that, the Republican President buying off a witness against his administration.
Comment by Bruce Gorton
All speculation, without proof.
July 5th, 2007 at 1:00 pmComment by Crump's Brother
The ultimate problem at the moment is Islamo-Stalinism.
July 5th, 2007 at 1:02 pmwow!
Person gets his sentence commuted for a crime that hamperied an investigation into the person, or a close confederate of the person who commuted the sentence and you aren't just a little bit suspicious?
July 5th, 2007 at 1:02 pmWhat are your feelings on Nelson Mandela?
Comment by Bruce Gorton
About his life? Imprisonment? Release? Political career? Activisim?
July 5th, 2007 at 1:03 pmPerson gets his sentence commuted for a crime that hamperied an investigation into the person, or a close confederate of the person who commuted the sentence and you aren’t just a little bit suspicious?
Comment by Bruce Gorton
There has been no proof to show any wrongdoing in the Plame case by the President or Vice President.
July 5th, 2007 at 1:05 pmI don't understand the "Clinton did it" defense of the Bush administration. As much as conservatives hated Clinton, (also surprising since he was more fiscally conservative than either Reagan or Bush I) one would think that whenever Bush does something comparable to Clinton (no matter how weak the comparison) they would throw their hands up in disgust. Strange that instead they defend Bush by drawing parallels between him and their icon of hatred. Logically this creates a contradiction...they should either loathe Bush for his similarity to Clinton or embrace Clinton for his similarity to Bush.
This is of course assuming that the "Clinton did it" scenarios that they present are valid which by and large they are not.
July 5th, 2007 at 1:05 pmI don’t understand the “Clinton did it†defense of the Bush administration. As much as conservatives hated Clinton, (also surprising since he was more fiscally conservative than either Reagan or Bush I) one would think that whenever Bush does something comparable to Clinton (no matter how weak the comparison) they would throw their hands up in disgust. Strange that instead they defend Bush by drawing parallels between him and their icon of hatred. Logically this creates a contradiction…they should either loathe Bush for his similarity to Clinton or embrace Clinton for his similarity to Bush.
This is of course assuming that the “Clinton did it†scenarios that they present are valid which by and large they are not.
Comment by erock
Actually it is to show the people that are complaining about Bush and supported Clinton that they are being hypocritical. Clinton was the last president and to not compare the current president's actions to the most previous one would be irresponsible. I personally don't have a problem with Clinton's pardons, it is his right as president to have done them and for the left to be screaming about Bush resigning or being impeached for issuing pardons is nonsense.
July 5th, 2007 at 1:12 pmThe ultimate problem at the moment is Islamo-Stalinism.
Comment by CT_V1, Dean of Dissent — July 5, 2007 @ 1:02 pm
CT,
I can see that you've examined your priorities and have decided the best course of action for you.
It's your right to contribute nothing, and you are certainly doing that.
July 5th, 2007 at 1:15 pmwow!
Nelson Mandela is commonly seen as a great hero of South Africa. He is considered to be the guy who united the place.
On his innaugeration he pardoned a lot of criminals. South Africa at the time was at the start of the crime wave we are suffering now.
There has been no proof to show any wrongdoing in the Plame case by the President or Vice President.
Comment by wow! — July 5, 2007 @ 1:05 pm
I wouldn't say no proof, simply no conclusive proof, because one of the witnesses obstructed justice.
This witness was found guilty of perjory and obstruction of justice, and then sentenced all by a Republican prosecutor, and a Republican Judge, and a unbiased jury of Americans. Indeed the jury pool was reduced because of the need to keep out biased jurors.
That witness' sentence was then commuted. You do the math.
July 5th, 2007 at 1:17 pmCT_V1,
Perhaps you could fill me in on who is supporting Islamo-Stalinsim.
Or maybe just Stalinism. Could you define that term for me.
July 5th, 2007 at 1:19 pmActually it is to show the people that are complaining about Bush and supported Clinton that they are being hypocritical. Clinton was the last president and to not compare the current president’s actions to the most previous one would be irresponsible. I personally don’t have a problem with Clinton’s pardons, it is his right as president to have done them and for the left to be screaming about Bush resigning or being impeached for issuing pardons is nonsense.
Comment by wow! — July 5, 2007 @ 1:12 pm
As I mentioned, by and large the "Clinton did it" scenarios are mostly faulty. In this case, the most significant difference is that Scooter Libby obstructed an investigation that may or may not have found the President or his staff to be guilty of crimes against the state. None of Clinton's pardons appear to have had such motives of self-preservation.
July 5th, 2007 at 1:24 pmI wouldn’t say no proof, simply no conclusive proof, because one of the witnesses obstructed justice.
This witness was found guilty of perjory and obstruction of justice, and then sentenced all by a Republican prosecutor, and a Republican Judge, and a unbiased jury of Americans. Indeed the jury pool was reduced because of the need to keep out biased jurors.
That witness’ sentence was then commuted. You do the math.
Comment by Bruce Gorton
Keep on assuming you know what happened. Perhaps he just didn't want his friend to go to jail (Bill Clinton did pardon Roger Clinton). Perhaps he doesn't believe it is a fair sentence for the crime?
July 5th, 2007 at 1:26 pmAs I mentioned, by and large the “Clinton did it†scenarios are mostly faulty. In this case, the most significant difference is that Scooter Libby obstructed an investigation that may or may not have found the President or his staff to be guilty of crimes against the state. None of Clinton’s pardons appear to have had such motives of self-preservation.
Comment by erock
No motives of self-perservation, why don't you look at some of the donations Clinton received from people he has pardoned.
July 5th, 2007 at 1:28 pmCrump's Brother
What is particularly ironic is that the problem that grew out of Afghanistan and Osama Bin Laden - is based on the guys who fought against Stalin.
America's current problem now is Theocracy. Chrisitian, Islamic, Zionist, Hindu and even Atheist, there is not a one of them that is actually a good thing for anybody. When church and state mix, things go horribly wrong for everybody because the state has no business telling you what to think or what to believe, and frankly anybody who uses their faith as an automatic pass to your trust needs to be distrusted from the outset.
I mean shit, you are all intellegent people: You get approached by somebody who tells you to invest in their business, which their pamphlet says in big letters is run on "Christian Principles" you tell them to get stuffed because you know they are conmen. Why do you treat your politicians any differently?
July 5th, 2007 at 1:29 pmNo motives of self-perservation, why don’t you look at some of the donations Clinton received from people he has pardoned.
Comment by wow! — July 5, 2007 @ 1:28 pm
That's not self-preservation, its greed.
July 5th, 2007 at 1:29 pmwow!
The same GW Bush of the same Republican party which pushed for tougher sentencing is the same GW Bush who thought to sentence was too harsh?
I can see straight away what happened. It was a dirty deal, and though the evidence to convict isn't there, I am pretty sure that GW and Cheney were behind the leak based on Scooter's commuted sentence.
July 5th, 2007 at 1:32 pmThe same GW Bush of the same Republican party which pushed for tougher sentencing is the same GW Bush who thought to sentence was too harsh?
I can see straight away what happened. It was a dirty deal, and though the evidence to convict isn’t there, I am pretty sure that GW and Cheney were behind the leak based on Scooter’s commuted sentence.
Comment by Bruce Gorton
Perhaps, too bad there is no evidence to validate your assumption.
July 5th, 2007 at 1:34 pmThat’s not self-preservation, its greed.
Comment by erock
And if that greed paved the way to get him into office, it is self-preservation of his career.
July 5th, 2007 at 1:35 pmAnd if that greed paved the way to get him into office, it is self-preservation of his career.
Comment by wow! — July 5, 2007 @ 1:35 pm
Again, a parallel with no merit. Bush's actions appear to have been intended to keep him from impeachment and possibly jailtime. Also, if you will notice, the vast majority of Clinton's pardons occured after the beginning of his second term making your theory a little silly.
July 5th, 2007 at 1:49 pmNoted Jurist George W. Bush’s precedent should rightfully go down in judical history. He re-writes the constitution And becomes a citable reference in American juristprudence. So much for despising judicial activism!
I guess liberals no longer believe in separation of powers...
July 5th, 2007 at 1:50 pmIf Gore had been elected President, his son arrested and convicted, and his son’s sentence commuted by Gore you would have been perfectly content with that, wouldn’t you?
You mean like how Clinton did with his brother?
July 5th, 2007 at 1:51 pmThe same GW Bush of the same Republican party which pushed for tougher sentencing is the same GW Bush who thought to sentence was too harsh?
The sentence is too harsh for Scooter. Doesn't mean it would be too harsh for everyone else.
July 5th, 2007 at 1:55 pmAgain, a parallel with no merit. Bush’s actions appear to have been intended to keep him from impeachment and possibly jailtime. Also, if you will notice, the vast majority of Clinton’s pardons occured after the beginning of his second term making your theory a little silly.
Comment by erock
Look at the list of pardons he made before his second term. Also since everybody is assuming everything here without proof, isn't it possible that he told the donors that he would pardon at the end of his second term to be more discrete?
July 5th, 2007 at 1:55 pmPerhaps, too bad there is no evidence to validate your assumption.
Comment by wow! — July 5, 2007 @ 1:34 pm
Are you absolutely certain of that? One day a president will come along and declassify this period of history's documents. I would not like your odds of being right at that moment, of their being no evidence.
The only reason why Bush hasn't been impeached yet is because the Democrats don't want to impeach him. The evidence is there, but the Democrats, either due to the fact that they are more concerned about their particularly stupid crop of strategists' opinions then their duty to their country, or because they want the same powers Bush has got right now, do not want to impeach Bush.
You righties do not realise how big a threat Bush's precedents pose. You look at him through your partisan brains, you don't actually think about what he has achieved or what the bottom line is with GW Bush.
The Bottom line is as follows:
His chief proponents wave around 9/11 as his chief defence - which means his only defence is that he failed massively to protect the lives of 3000 Americans. Bush's only rallying cry, his version of Carter's 3-Mile Island, the thing which people raise to defend Bush is a day on which 3000 Americans died.
That is not a good president. He had 90% approval the day after 9/11. Liberals heeded the call to not politicise 9/11, to not raise the spector of just who was in power at the time. They heeded this call right up until they were betrayed. 9/11, the day the US failed to stop a massive attack by Islamic radicals and it cost America 3000 lives. The president at the time? A Republican and the liberals stilled their criticism because they did not want to use this to claim victory. They didn't want to cheapen that loss.
The Republicans weren't so scrupulous.
Liberals are angry, because liberals do not like being subject to a president who seemingly used his power as president to keep himself, or his deputy out of jail for outing a valuable CIA asset. People died because the name Brewster Jennings was revealed. Liberals do not like being subject to a president who is more concerned about his vacation then his people. Liberals, do not like being subjects, liberals are citizens.
July 5th, 2007 at 1:57 pm"valuable CIA asset"
Now that is funny!
July 5th, 2007 at 2:01 pmwow!
So you would rather America not know what is actually going on in Iran's nuclear weapons programme? There were more agents using that shell as a cover then just Plame. Some of those agents died because that name was leaked.
July 5th, 2007 at 2:07 pmSo you would rather America not know what is actually going on in Iran’s nuclear weapons programme? There were more agents using that shell as a cover then just Plame. Some of those agents died because that name was leaked.
Comment by Bruce Gorton
Please give links to show that agents have died because of this, I don't mean a left wing site an actual news source please.
July 5th, 2007 at 2:12 pmhttp://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&contentId=A40012-2003Oct3
Take that, combine with what we know of the Arabs (These are guys who sentence people to death for writing mildly offensive things about a guy whose primary message included not deifying him) and tell me what happened to those guys whose names were linked to Brewster Jennings and Valerie Plame.
The CIA isn't going to release a list of dead NOC agents because it compromises living ones and contacts for those agents in other areas (X Agent was killed in Saudi Arabia, but he also worked in Iran, which is hostile to Saudi Arabia, Saudi Arabia might know who he was, and who his contacts were, but you still don't want Iran to know.)
July 5th, 2007 at 2:30 pmhttp://www.washingtonpost.com/ ac2/ wp-dyn?pagename=article&contentId=A40012-2003Oct3
Take that, combine with what we know of the Arabs (These are guys who sentence people to death for writing mildly offensive things about a guy whose primary message included not deifying him) and tell me what happened to those guys whose names were linked to Brewster Jennings and Valerie Plame.
The CIA isn’t going to release a list of dead NOC agents because it compromises living ones and contacts for those agents in other areas (X Agent was killed in Saudi Arabia, but he also worked in Iran, which is hostile to Saudi Arabia, Saudi Arabia might know who he was, and who his contacts were, but you still don’t want Iran to know.)
Comment by Bruce Gorton
So again you are making assumptions, there is no evidence that that outing of Plame has resulted in the death of any agents.
July 5th, 2007 at 2:34 pmwow!
Use some common sense you moron. Seriously!
July 5th, 2007 at 2:36 pmUse some common sense you moron. Seriously!
Comment by Bruce Gorton
You should use evidence rather than hatred for Bush to fuel you debates you might actually make valid points then.
July 5th, 2007 at 2:38 pmwow!
Under Iranian law, the country which Brewster Jennings focussed on, spying carries the sentence of death. Every country in the world ran a check against Plame's name, and against the name Brewster Jennings.
You might want to one day actually look at the implications of the news rather then your absolute abject worship of GW Bush.
Oh, and...
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/30/world/middleeast/30IRAN.html?ex=1338264000&en=2954860c228bd0a9&ei=5124&partner=digg&exprod=digg
You wonder why this is happening now?
July 5th, 2007 at 2:44 pmLook at the list of pardons he made before his second term. Also since everybody is assuming everything here without proof, isn’t it possible that he told the donors that he would pardon at the end of his second term to be more discrete?
Comment by wow! — July 5, 2007 @ 1:55 pm
Your attempt at equivocation has failed miserably.
July 5th, 2007 at 3:00 pmComment by Zooey — July 5, 2007 @ 1:15 pm
Islamo-Stalinism is a serious problem throughout the world, it's the grapple of our time and a serious threat. It's a great priority to combat.
I don't take one's disagreement with me as notice that "I'm not contributing anything," as that shouldn't be the signal.
I think you're getting too defensive.
July 5th, 2007 at 3:32 pmOf the 25 current Senators who voted in 1999 to impeach President Bill Clinton for perjury and obstruction of justice, none have issued a public statement on the commutation of Cheney aide “Scooter†Libby’s sentence for the same crime in the three days since it occurred. 12:27 pm |
July 5th, 2007 at 3:35 pmwow! sez:
That's an idiotic argument...equivalent to me pleading innocent of drunk driving in a court of law on the grounds that I didn't actually kill anybody...or at least the prosecution couldn't prove I did.
You're going to have to do a lot better than that.
July 5th, 2007 at 3:45 pmI have to ask: Is effectively countering Islamo-Stalinism a task or a hobby?
Comment by CT_V1, Dean of Dissent — July 5, 2007 @ 12:48 pm
It is a duty, CT.
A National duty of true patriots like you and me.
July 5th, 2007 at 3:57 pmIt is patriots like Mr. Pres and CT that gave us the Patriot acts, illegal domestic spying, the military commissions act of 2006, the war in Iraq,Supreme Court Justices handing over the Presidency;
July 5th, 2007 at 4:02 pmOh my, this list could go on indefinitely.
It is a duty, CT.
A National duty of true patriots like you and me.
Comment by Mr. President — July 5, 2007 @ 3:57 pm
You've confused NATIONALISM with PATRIOTISM, you inbred fat*ss Nazi-b!tch!
July 5th, 2007 at 4:03 pmIslamo-Stalinism is a serious problem throughout the world, it’s the grapple of our time and a serious threat. It’s a great priority to combat.
I don’t take one’s disagreement with me as notice that “I’m not contributing anything,†as that shouldn’t be the signal.
I think you’re getting too defensive.
Comment by CT_V1, Dean of Dissent — July 5, 2007 @ 3:32 pm
That's a contrived term, and a b*llsh*t term to cover up the danger of religio-fascism like yours. Pure projection, you nazi-b!tch!
July 5th, 2007 at 4:04 pmUnintended consequences are a beyach, aren't they?
July 5th, 2007 at 4:16 pmIslamo-Stalinism is much like the earlier Conservative buzzword: Islam--Fascism, a meaningless oxymoron. Stalin, if you read your history books was an Atheist.
Call the system you wish to fight what it is: Theocracy.
I mean, why are you righties so afraid of the accurate name of the form of government championed by the likes of Osama Bin Laden?
July 5th, 2007 at 4:24 pmQuotes from G.W. Bush's acceptance speech:
I am proud to have Dick Cheney at my side. He is a man of integrity and sound judgment... America will be proud to have a leader of such character to succeed Al Gore as Vice President...
Of the armed forces under Clinton, he said:
Our military is low on parts, pay and morale. If called on by the commander-in-chief today, two entire divisions of the Army would have to report ... Not ready for duty, sir. ...
This broken military is the one he has used in his GWOT!
Then he said: "I will act on principle. ..."
We wonder what principle.
Next he says: "The world needs America's strength and leadership... We will give our military the means to keep the peace, and we will give it one thing more ... a commander-in-chief who respects our men and women in uniform, and a commander-in-chief who earns their respect.
A generation shaped by Vietnam must remember the lessons of Vietnam. When America uses force in the world, the cause must be just, the goal must be clear, and the victory must be overwhelming."
We've learned that lesson allright, right GW?
And finally, he summarizes: "And to lead this nation to a responsibility era, a president himself must be responsible. And so, when I put my hand on the Bible, I will swear to not only uphold the laws of our land, I will swear to uphold the honor and dignity of the office to which I have been elected, so help me God. ...
After all of the shouting, and all of the scandal. After all of the bitterness and broken faith. ... Our country is ready for high standards and new leaders ... An era of tarnished ideals is giving way to a responsibility era ..."
Yeah, right.
He ended up lowering the bar, and has accomplished none of these lofty goals. In fact, it would appear that he deliberately worked against them.
Yes, Bill Clinton lowered the moral standards of a nation by receiving, then lying about, oral sex. We have all suffered for that, haven't we? I know I feel a little naughty after a good BJ.
But look what Mr. Bush has done to the moral fabric of America. His message of high moral standards, like with so many politicians, is just for public consumption and lacks any true moral substance.
His favorite philosopher is Jesus!
How he tries to emulate him by pitying and aiding the poor.
Like poor Scooter. Hasn't he suffered enough.
He paid his $250 thousand dollar fine today. So all is well.
Scooter had over $5 million donated to his defense fund.
How ill he manage?
Obstruction of Justice...it pays better than assistant to the Vice President!
July 5th, 2007 at 4:24 pmThat’s a contrived term, and a b*llsh*t term to cover up the danger of religio-fascism like yours. Pure projection, you nazi-b!tch!
Comment by ValiantVenusGrewFromUranus — July 5, 2007 @ 4:04 pm
...says the generator of contrived terms and talking points, all of which require censorship.
Project much? Project much? Project much? Project much? Project much? Project much? Project much? Project much? Project much? Project much?
July 5th, 2007 at 4:37 pmProject much? Project much? Project much? Project much? Project much? Project much? Project much? Project much? Project much? Project much?
Project much? Project much? Project much? Project much? Project much? Project much? Project much? Project much? Project much? Project much?
Project much? Project much? Project much? Project much? Project much? Project much? Project much? Project much? Project much? Project much?
Project much? Project much? Project much? Project much? Project much? Project much? Project much? Project much? Project much? Project much?
Project much? Project much? Project much? Project much? Project much? Project much? Project much? Project much? Project much? Project much?
Project much? Project much? Project much? Project much? Project much? Project much? Project much? Project much? Project much? Project much?
You know, before the Riech-wing does any more hollering that Clinton did it too, you all should review the facts about this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Susan_McDougal
She did the time, including 7 weeks in solitary confinement.
Clinton did it too?
I don't think so.
July 5th, 2007 at 5:30 pmIn fact, of the 14 people convicted in the course of Ken Starr's Whitewater investigation, not one had their sentence commuted before going to prison.
Yet Ken Starr used offers of reduced sentences in order to try to obtain cooperation.
One of the 14 died in solitary confinement.
Faced with the circumstances of an investigation into corruption by a special prosecutor, President Clinton could have commuted the sentences or pardoned the guilty, but he didn't.
Clinton most certainly did not do it too. Any argument to the contrary must address the Whitewater investigation, the convictions, the prison times served by friends and associates of the Clintons.
July 5th, 2007 at 5:47 pmWhile I'm at it, has anybody noticed that the only people to serve jail time in the Plame case were the very reporters the Administration used to disseminate the leak?
July 5th, 2007 at 5:49 pmIslamo-Stalinism is a serious problem throughout the world, it’s the grapple of our time and a serious threat. It’s a great priority to combat.
I don’t take one’s disagreement with me as notice that “I’m not contributing anything,†as that shouldn’t be the signal.
I think you’re getting too defensive.
Comment by CT_V1, Dean of Dissent — July 5, 2007 @ 3:32 pm
Don't be ridiculous, CT.
July 5th, 2007 at 8:50 pmThe New York times reported yesterday that Scooter Libby’s commutation has been a “gift†for defense attorneys, with many using the so-called “Libby motion†to argue, “My client should have got what Libby got, and here’s why.â€
Hmmm, I don't recall the NY Slimes propagandists running out and interviewing lawyers for terrorists about why THEIR clients weren't permitted to purchase pardons from Clinton.
July 5th, 2007 at 10:21 pm"...taught that oral sex and lying was acceptable..."
Oral sex is more than acceptable; it's great! and how many guys having a affair have lied about it? The comparisons just don't compute. The best thing about the Clinton impeachment is that it made it okay to talk openly about oral sex and various forms of foreplay. For this prudish Puritan society, that's a significant contribution, particularly in this Age of AIDS.
Of course, FOX and CBS are still too embarrassed to hear the word 'condom' in an ad, but maybe they'll grow up by the 22nd century.
July 6th, 2007 at 12:35 pmHow can anyone be surprised. As governor of Texas and presidential candidate, Bush committed perjury and obstruction of justice when he publicly contradicted his own sworn state, as did the other principals involved. His attorney general, John Cornyn, now Senator Cornyn, settled out of court, and also charges against himself, with taxpayers money. If Janet Reno had thought of that the media would have covered up Clinton lying that he didn't have sex with that woman the same way they have with Bush. BTW, what Clinton and Lewinsky did is not my definition of having sex.
July 7th, 2007 at 12:42 amand the band played on...
July 7th, 2007 at 7:15 pm