Libby must start serving prison sentence.

Libby must start serving prison sentence.

www.reuters.com

Former vice presidential aide Lewis "Scooter" Libby must begin serving his 2 1/2-year prison sentence while he appeals his perjury conviction, a U.S. judge ruled on Thursday.

Libby, Vice President Dick Cheney's former chief of staff, was found guilty in March of obstructing an investigation into who blew the cover of a CIA analyst whose husband criticized the Iraq war.

(visit the link for the full news article)



[edit on 14-6-2007 by LuDaCrIs]

[edit on 14-6-2007 by LuDaCrIs]

Personally, I think 2 1/2 years is too short of a time to be serving. But at least the judge was quick on imposing this.

Will bush pardon his sentence? Is it possible for the President of the US to get rid of a sentence like this?

www.reuters.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

This was a surprising move. Normally, people are allowed to remain free pending appeal unless they are a flight risk or a danger to society.

Yes, Bush can pardon Libby. And he will.

Originally posted by jsobecky
This was a surprising move. Normally, people are allowed to remain free pending appeal unless they are a flight risk or a danger to society.

Yes, Bush can pardon Libby. And he will.

I am kind of unsure what pardon actually means in this case. Does it mean he will serve his sentence and then get it "pardoned" off of his criminal record or does it mean he will not serve any time at all?

I bet he'll be pardoned soon, before he has to go to prison. That'll be in about 5 or 6 weeks.

A pardon completely removes the conviction, it's like it never happened.

Originally posted by djohnsto77
I bet he'll be pardoned soon, before he has to go to prison. That'll be in about 5 or 6 weeks.

A pardon completely removes the conviction, it's like it never happened.

Whats the point of a pardon? Why did they ever let presidents do this? I am not even sure who "they" is. I am assuming this comes from the US constitution or something.

Originally posted by jsobecky

Yes, Bush can pardon Libby. And he will.

And why should a convicted felon be pardoned? Thats the bit i dont get

Originally posted by LuDaCrIs
I am assuming this comes from the US constitution or something.

Yes.

In the United States, the pardon power for Federal crimes is granted to the President by the United States Constitution, Article II, Section 2, which states that the President:

shall have power to grant reprieves and pardons for offenses against the United States, except in cases of impeachment.

Both Bush's have been notoriously stingy regarding pardons. They rarely give, or gave, pardons. This is in contrast to Clinton, who handed them out like M&M's to people like Nicholas Altiere, a coc aine importer no less.
www.usdoj.gov...


Libby will be pardoned because it is well-know and accepted that he was the fall guy for higher-ups, and took the heat for them in this case.

Originally posted by yanchek
Yes.

In the United States, the pardon power for Federal crimes is granted to the President by the United States Constitution, Article II, Section 2, which states that the President:

shall have power to grant reprieves and pardons for offenses against the United States, except in cases of impeachment.

Whats the logical reasoning behind this rule?

Clearly it will never be changed, but I see no reason to give anyone such powers. If someone is convicted, thats it. No ifs and or buts. If you want to get off: prove you were innocent and appeal. But to have some guy in an office pardon you seems like a hole load of $#@*. Especially if you are a drug dealer! (as jsbecky mentioned)

Maybe i am missing something here?

Originally posted by jsobecky

Libby will be pardoned because it is well-know and accepted that he was the fall guy for higher-ups, and took the heat for them in this case.

If this is true why did the Judge and the Prosecution then carry on with the case or even go so far as to sentence Libby? It would seem to be a waste of money and time prosecuting the wrong guy, would it not?

Scooter gets thrown in the slammer while his appeal is pending and Sandy Berger walks.

Scooter - obstruction, perjury.

Sandy - Stealing documents from the national archives and intentionally destroying them with scissors. Documents regarding Clintons handling of terror activities (specifically the millenium bombing plot)

He first lied (perjured himself) and said he removed the documents accidentally, then he recanted and admitted he knowingly removed them with the intent of destroying them.

His penalty, monetary fine, probation, and TEMPORARY revocation of security clearance.

Tell me....where is the freakin' justice?



edit to add:

And remember Fitzpatrick was looking for who leaked valerie Plames identity. Richard Armitage (another Clinton holdover, I believe) admitted that he was the person who told Novak who Plame was and how she was implicated in the Niger yellowcake fiasco.

So the target of Fitzpatricks investigation was the leaker and all he came away with was catching a good civil servant in perjury trap, based on faulty memory. Then some tool judge sends him to jail while his appeal is being processed, while Armitage also walks free.

B.S.


[edit on 6/14/2007 by darkbluesky]

en.wikipedia.org...

LuDaCrIs there are legit reasons to pardon.:

-It can help a country move on and heal. After the civil war there was mass pardons.

-Laws are not up to date with society.

I feel that Libby was nothing more than the fall guy to keep the real mastermind out of charges and out of impeachment.

Funny I believe he will get pardon and then he will have a nice big paying job provided for his time and services.

Originally posted by DCP
en.wikipedia.org...

LuDaCrIs there are legit reasons to pardon.:

-It can help a country move on and heal. After the civil war there was mass pardons.

-Laws are not up to date with society.

Good point. Will concede.

But, I still don't get why there is no oversight to these pardons. Maybe congress should vote on pardons. I don't know. It just seems like its being abused for political motives.

The ironic part about it is that the grand jury was investigating the outing of a CIA employee's identity. But nobody, not even Libby, was ever indicted on those charges. Libby was convicted of perjury and obstruction of justice. They didn't believe his story that he had forgotten who told him Plame was CIA.

Originally posted by LuDaCrIs
But, I still don't get why there is no oversight to these pardons. Maybe congress should vote on pardons. I don't know. It just seems like its being abused for political motives.

It is abused. Look at Clinton's list that I gave the link to; there are several defendants who were from Arkansas. It doesn't hurt to donate heavily, or have a personal friend high up.

Pardons are used all over. Governors have pardon power. And it's common for many "political prisoners" to be freed when a new leader comes into power in many nations.