The Libby Clemency
THIS is NOT a pardon:
NOW, THEREFORE, I, GEORGE W. BUSH, President of the United States of America, pursuant to my powers under Article II, Section 2, of the Constitution, do hereby commute the prison terms imposed by the sentence upon the said Lewis Libby to expire immediately, leaving intact and in effect the two-year term of supervised release, with all its conditions, and all other components of the sentence.
THESE are pardons. A major HT goes to Drudge for linking to the infamous list; historical context is very useful.
That historical context makes the reactions of most of the whiners snortworthy, with the grandest of prizes for chutzpah going to Hillary Clinton:
“This commutation sends the clear signal that in this administration, cronyism and ideology trump competence and justice.”
Pardonize and cronyize this, and especially this, Hillary:
President Clinton’s pardons have been a political issue for Hillary Clinton because of her ties to a number of the cases. In addition to the people who paid her brothers, those receiving pardons included commodities trader Marc Rich, a fugitive who was prosecuted for tax evasion by then-US Attorney Rudolph Giuliani and fled to Switzerland. Rich was pardoned after his former wife, Denise Rich, contributed heavily to Hillary Clinton’s Senate campaign.
Controversy over the pardons was reignited last week after Hollywood mogul and former Clinton supporter David Geffen criticized the Clintons for the Rich pardon.
Anyone who thinks that the Libby commutation is going to have a long-term political effect on anything or turn into a campaign issue is smoking what someone says he never inhaled (scroll to bottom at link). If someone tries to make it so, guess who it will hurt?
______________________________________
UPDATE: I agree with the contention that Bush should have gone with a real pardon — except See Update 2. If the appeals continue and the conviction is overturned, it will be a double victory for sanity.
UPDATE 2: The Cliff’s notes version of why Libby really deserved a pardon was laid out by Christopher Hitchens a couple of weeks ago. It’s Tim Russert’s word against Libby’s over a noncriminal matter. The whole thing is worth a read to get a full flavor for the extraoradinary hostility of the prosecutor and judge in this case. I’m assuming that the appeal of the conviction itself will continue, and believe it pretty likely that it will be thrown out on appeal.
I was really amazed that Clinton made any comment. She would have been well advised to avoid addressing any question about pardons.
Politically, this won’t matter a week from now. The presidents approval numbers are as low as they can go. The folks who will get upset about this action would never be Bush supporters. What drove Bush’s approval numbers down from high 40’s to the 20’s was continually irritating those of us who voted for him in various wasted attempts to get those who didn’t vote for him to like him.
Comment by largebill — July 3, 2007 @ 8:53 am
#1, She thinks she’s untouchable.
Comment by TBlumer — July 3, 2007 @ 9:09 am
Tom, just to be clear, you really believe that Libby is “…an innocent man who lost track of what he said, when he said it, and to whom”? That’s a line from the Opinion Journal item you link to.
Comment by Jill — July 3, 2007 @ 10:08 am
#3 Jill, Yes I do. And I further believe that a couple of reporters involved in all of this could have been charged with the same non-crime, and that Fitzgerald would have been forced to indict Joe Wilson for lying to investigators and possibly other crimes relating to bringing forth an investigation with no basis had Fitzgerald ever bothered to put Wilson under oath.
Comment by TBlumer — July 3, 2007 @ 12:11 pm