Slashdot: News for Nerds


Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Bush Commutes Libby's Sentence

kdawson posted about 7 years ago | from the next-stop-paris dept.

Republicans 1574

An anonymous reader notes that President Bush has decided to commute Scooter Libby's sentence after numerous appeals failed. Libby was convicted in March of obstruction of justice in connection with the Valerie Plame affair. The President's action spares Libby from 30 months behind bars."

cancel ×


Huh? (5, Insightful)

obeythefist (719316) | about 7 years ago | (#19723621)

It's true the President has that kind of power, but isn't he supposed to at least try to seem impartial and not at all corrupt?

Are there any stipulations regarding the Presidential use of power at all?

Re:Huh? (3, Funny)

ILuvRamen (1026668) | about 7 years ago | (#19723691)

No, didn't you learn in history class that the proper way to do it is to wait until the last couple days of your term then pardon like EVERYONE lol. I think just about every president pardoned multiple ppl in the last couple weeks in office

Re:Huh? (2, Informative)

nebaz (453974) | about 7 years ago | (#19723791)

Considering a judge recently said that Libby could not delay starting to serve his sentence (~30 months), if Bush waited until a couple of says before he left office, Libby's sentence would be just about complete. It would be a waste of a pardon.

Re:Huh? (1, Interesting)

sith (15384) | about 7 years ago | (#19723811)

presidents generally pardon people that have already served their sentence, to clear their name, rather than people that haven't served a single day...

Re:Huh? (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#19723921)


You mean like Bill Clinton pardoning Marc Rich [] after his wife donated thousands of dollars to the Democratic party and his on legal defense fund?

Yah, he 'served a lot of time' in Switzerland right next to those sky bunnies...

Re:Huh? (0, Offtopic)

obeythefist (719316) | about 7 years ago | (#19723907)

No, didn't you learn in history class that the proper way to do it is to wait until the last couple days of your term then pardon like EVERYONE lol. I think just about every president pardoned multiple ppl in the last couple weeks in office

I'm Australian. Queen Elizabeth doesn't have a "term".

Re:Huh? (4, Funny)

timeOday (582209) | about 7 years ago | (#19723923)

I think just about every president pardoned multiple ppl in the last couple weeks in office
Last couple weeks, do you know something we don't?

Re:Huh? (2, Insightful)

UnknowingFool (672806) | about 7 years ago | (#19723703)

No, the power to pardon is absolute according to the Constitution. Unfortunately presidents can abuse this privilege without real legal ramifications. Many believe that President Clinton pardoning his brother in the last days of his term constituted such an abuse. I would argue that this is another example of abuse.

Re:Huh? (4, Insightful)

Harmonious Botch (921977) | about 7 years ago | (#19723769)

This is as old - at least - as President Jackson, who said "To the victor belong the spoils." One of the spoils is to be able to pardon the guys who do dirty work for you. Sad to say, it's been going on for at least 150 years.

Re:Huh? (4, Informative)

gurps_npc (621217) | about 7 years ago | (#19723913)

Note, he did not actually pardon, he commuted. That means officially he is still a convicted criminal and must pay a 1/4 of a million dollar fine.

It also makes a mockery of Bush's promise to punish the guilty. Letting a guy obstruct justice is not "finding the leak" as he promissed.

Re:Huh? (5, Funny)

Harmonious Botch (921977) | about 7 years ago | (#19723993)

Ooops! You're right, I meant commuted. Pardon me.

Re:Huh? (2, Informative)

Richard McBeef (1092673) | about 7 years ago | (#19723851)

No, the power to pardon is absolute according to the Constitution.

Wrong. The constitutions says no pardons for impeachment.

Re:Huh? (1)

Nefarious Wheel (628136) | about 7 years ago | (#19723957)

Vice President Gerald Ford went on record during the Watergate-led impeachment proceedings of President Richard Nixon that Nixon would receive a full pardon if convicted of any of the crimes the impeachment proceedings would send to trial. This changed the end-game a little, but not that much. Another clear example of abuse of presidential pardon, interestingly even before Ford took office.

Your President has a lot more power than people suspect. Did you know, for example, that he has complete jurisdiction over inland waterways? That is, if he required all industrial users of inland waterways to take their water downstream from their effluent discharge, it would have the force of Federal law?

(Disclaimer: IANAL, I just read this in a book written by an Annapolis graduate.)

Re:Huh? (1)

MorpheousMarty (1094907) | about 7 years ago | (#19723713)

He's supposed to do a lot of things. What's your point?

Re:Huh? (4, Insightful)

daeg (828071) | about 7 years ago | (#19723717)

No. It is part of the checks and balances on the Judicial and Legislative branch (Legislative because if he wanted to, the President could pardon everyone convicted of a law he felt ran contrary to the country). He is supposed to show restraint in using the power and use it only when it does not weaken laws unnecessarily.

Of course, since President Bush doesn't seem to follow much for precedent in other areas, it comes as no surprise he commuted the sentence.

Personally, I don't care about Libby. I'm more concerned that he has weakened the force that testifying to Congress should hold. Testifying to Congress should be a big deal. Obstructing them should be a big deal. He not only lied to Congress, he lied to the country our Congressmen represent.

Re:Huh? (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#19723905)

He not only lied to Congress, he lied to the country our Congressmen represent.

Which one? Saudi Arabia?

Re:Huh? (4, Insightful)

timeOday (582209) | about 7 years ago | (#19723961)

It is part of the checks and balances on the Judicial and Legislative branch
I thought checks and balances were entirely optional now. Can't the judiciary just declare they're no longer part of the judicial branch, or claim this has to do with national security, or say they respect the president's right to his own opinion while completely ignoring him? Turnabout is fair play.

Re:Huh? (1)

joseph_noire (1123171) | about 7 years ago | (#19723719)

Come on now, the power was there so the President can protect the faithful!

Re:Huh? (5, Insightful)

linumax (910946) | about 7 years ago | (#19723721)

Well the question is could it get any worse for Bush? He can't get elected for a third term, his approval rating is lower that any other president, the Democrats do not have the balls to impeach Cheney, let alone Bush, etc. Will American people march in the streets against him? very unlikely, they're too busy following the lives of spoiled celebrities. It just can't get any worse for Bush.

Re:Huh? (2, Insightful)

MaxwellStreet (148915) | about 7 years ago | (#19723817)

It actually makes perfect sense...

Bush isn't going to win any Dem's over by allowing Libby to serve his sentence. They already hate him, and that's not going to change.

He could, however, energize what's left of his base - those hardcore conservative Republicans who still support him (ever wonder just who that last 30% are?) who have been clamoring for a pardon since Libby was convicted.

With Lugar and other Republicans leaving his side on Iraq, this might be a way to shore up his party. And by letting his conviction, fine, and felon status stand, he gets to appear as though he's not too terribly corrupt.

It's all political calculus - nothing more.

Re:Huh? (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#19723939)

> (ever wonder just who that last 30% are?)

Try 18%. He has an 18% approval rating, and surprise surprise, the polls showed that 18% of respondents supported pardoning Libby.

Impeachment proceedings will energize the base. Letting Bush be Bush appears to be ensuring that anyone even remotely associated with Bush will ever enjoy a popularity of no higher than 18%. Problem with "energizing" with polarizing issues is, you're hoping to either appeal to a "silent majority" as presumed the case with culture-war issues, or for a halo effect to reach out to the moderate majority. Bush on the other hand is reaching out to the Ann Coulter camp. The 18% that begins and ends there.

2008 is going to be a bloodbath for any politician that doesn't deny Bush three times before the cock crows.

Re:Huh? (2, Informative)

SengirV (203400) | about 7 years ago | (#19723753)

Yeah perhaps you should look at your god(maybe not you personally, but he is for most reading this) did - []

feelings and reality (1)

goombah99 (560566) | about 7 years ago | (#19723757)

While I sympathize with the human that is scooter and feel bad he was going to prison for a sort of derivative crime I still think he needs to go to prison. The crime while derivative is a crime none the less and he was found guilty so no arguments there. Interfering with a prosecutors investigation is serious business. Now he has to be punished even if there was no underlying crime that was the subject of the investigations. He chose to lie. That much we know because the jury said so. So tough luck for his bad choices. It's perhaps a shame but absolutely necessary.

is $250K fine a punishment? I sincerely doubt it. Money can easily be made up to him given all the fortunes involved. So I don't think it will hurt him.

Thus this is a travesty because it says high government officials are beyond reach of the law. Their subordinates can take the blame and be set free. A minor ding on their resume, assuming they get caught at all.

Re:Huh? (5, Insightful)

Marxist Hacker 42 (638312) | about 7 years ago | (#19723807)

It's true the President has that kind of power, but isn't he supposed to at least try to seem impartial and not at all corrupt?

You've apparently not been paying attention to the news for the last 7 years. Let me introduce you to 21st century American Politics- when the question isn't "is this politician corrupt?" but rather "who has purchased this politician?", because the assumption is EVERY politician is corrupt.

Re:Huh? (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#19723831)

The President's pardon power is established under the United States Constitution, Article II, Section 2:
The President ... shall have power to grant reprieves and pardons for offenses against the United States, except in cases of impeachment.

Uh, Presidents use this pardon all the time for good, bad, and no reason. This power is in the constitution. Ford, Carter, Nixon, Johnson, Bush, Clinton, Bush_I have all used it. Almost every other President has used it too.

President Clinton pardoned a number of convicted drug dealers [] . I don't have a problem with this, it is a power given.

I do have a problem when someone else selectively complains because they don't like how something that has always been used, is used, just by the "other team."
Pardons since 1945: .htm []

Re:Huh? (5, Insightful)

shawnap (959909) | about 7 years ago | (#19723833)

There is nothing impartial about pardoning someone.
The act itself indicates that the individual being pardoned has either already been convicted by a jury or that his conviction is a forgone conclusion.

The recompense is that it is all public.

We all know that Libby lied to a grand jury;
that he did it to obstruct the investigation of a felony;
that he worked in the white house at the time;
that he was convicted;
that that the supreme court recently upheld a harsher punishment for the same crime;
that his appeal was not heard;
And finally, that the president, knowing all this, chose to commute his sentence.

We are to review the president's actions.

Re:Huh? (1)

nurb432 (527695) | about 7 years ago | (#19723915)

Not in the least. Its his privilege to do this, and its one place he can show favoritism if he wants too.

Worthless Peices Of Shit (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#19723627)


So sad (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#19723637)

I can't believe there isn't a bigger uproar over this entire thing. I mean, this chick is hot! [] It would be one thing if they destroyed the career or someone average-looking, but I can't believe the American public is so apathetic that they don't even care what happens to someone so photogenic!

Re:So sad (1)

mdsolar (1045926) | about 7 years ago | (#19723887)

I wonder if this beats the plea deal Spiro Agnew got: [] , called the "greatest deal since the Lord spared Isaac on the mountaintop"?

Guess the wimp factor doesn't go away. Nixon had the guts to let Agnew twist.

Fine by me (0)

harris s newman (714436) | about 7 years ago | (#19723643)

Once the dem's get into the white house and take both houses Bush better move outside the country since he will be up on multiple charges of: 1) Contempt of congress 2) War crimes etc oh, and you dam drugged out faggot conservatives, well you can "mod me down".

Re:Fine by me (0, Flamebait)

LinuxGeek (6139) | about 7 years ago | (#19723707)

Wow! You are the perfect poster child for the Democratic party.... Not! I have voted for both major parties and independants in the past. The Democratic and Republican sides of me sure hope you do not have children.

idiocy. (-1, Troll)

Wakko Warner (324) | about 7 years ago | (#19723645)

The Freepers rejoicing this act of treason should be the first up against the wall when the revolution comes.

Re:idiocy. (1)

Associate (317603) | about 7 years ago | (#19723695)

Right after the lawyers of course.

Re:idiocy. (1)

Wakko Warner (324) | about 7 years ago | (#19723737)

I wonder what the intersection of those two sets looks like.

Re:idiocy. (1)

Associate (317603) | about 7 years ago | (#19723803)

I think it would be best to call out all the lawyers first. You get more hits on that query than Republican fanboys, crooked politicians (redundant of course), or words that begin with a letter.

Re:idiocy. (1)

flynns (639641) | about 7 years ago | (#19723759)

Right after the Marketing Department of the Sirius Robotics Corporation.

Why is this here? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#19723649)

Everybody KNEW that it was coming. What I want to know is where will he work next? DOJ or White house?

Re:Why is this here? (1)

tukkayoot (528280) | about 7 years ago | (#19723981)

Everybody KNEW that it was coming. What I want to know is where will he work next? DOJ or White house?

No ... Haliburton or some other corporation with strong ties to the administration, would be my guess.

Oh wow. (2, Insightful)

corifornia (995298) | about 7 years ago | (#19723651)

Never saw that coming.

verifying (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#19723653)

we can't trust without verifying

Sigh... (2, Insightful)

jargoone (166102) | about 7 years ago | (#19723655)

Nothing for you to see here. Please move along.

Unfortunately, this adequately conveys my surprise...

News for Nerds? (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#19723657)

OK, I can take all the "news" about missing Whitehouse emails because email has a thin connection to tech, which is News for Nerds material, BUT WHAT DOES THIS HAVE TO DO WITH NEWS FOR NERDS? Slashdot isn't Digg!

Re:News for Nerds? (1)

speaker of the truth (1112181) | about 7 years ago | (#19723735)

You mean nerds don't care about flagrant abuses of power? No wonder Bush got reelected. If nerds don't care about it, who the fuck does?

Re:News for Nerds? (1)

SyzygyBoi (1123187) | about 7 years ago | (#19723823)

Just because we don't care doesn't mean we don't understand...

Re:News for Nerds? (5, Insightful)

QuoteMstr (55051) | about 7 years ago | (#19723747)

Nerds are people first and nerds second, and as people, we should all be concerned about the actions of thus most unctuous and corrupt government.

Re:News for Nerds? (1)

dedazo (737510) | about 7 years ago | (#19723991)

Diggnation is preoccupied with the iPhone just now. I doubt they'd notice if a thermonuclear war broke out, except to try and log on to whine about how their MacBooks were not working from the massive EMP pulse, and to speculate about whether Microsoft or AT&T were to blame for that outrage.

Re:News for Nerds? (1, Insightful)

Minter92 (148860) | about 7 years ago | (#19723813)

AMEN to Anon over here. I saw one tech community destroyed by stories like this. I come here to get away from digg. If you like stories like this feel free to hang out at digg, or it's stupider little brother reddit, but don't ruin yet another online tech community.


CmdrTaco (troll) (578383) | about 7 years ago | (#19723661)

Get ready for a Fred Thompson in '08. No one's going to elect a woman or a, well, you know.


RLiegh (247921) | about 7 years ago | (#19723929)



WilliamSChips (793741) | about 7 years ago | (#19723945)

They said the same thing about a Catholic before JFK was elected.

Tedious (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#19723663)

Whoo hoo! Time for a good-old Republican bash-a-thon! Go get 'em, boys!

Re:Tedious (1)

Wakko Warner (324) | about 7 years ago | (#19723701)

what, and they don't deserve every last bit of it?

Justice (1)

Icarus1919 (802533) | about 7 years ago | (#19723665)

Finally, at least, all of us can get away with lying to the government and not go to jail for it! Wait, this doesn't count for everyone? But two years in jail is so unfair!

It's not what... (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#19723677)

This just proves that it's not what you know (or did), it's who you know!

Re:It's not what... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#19723953)

Correction: This just proves that it's not what you know (or what you did), it's who you know (or who you did)!

DNC - kdawson - /. (2, Insightful)

moseman (190361) | about 7 years ago | (#19723683)

Need I say more? So much to do with nerds? Send in your money now.

Thanks GW! (1)

TheBrutalTruth (890948) | about 7 years ago | (#19723685)

For restoring my faith in the Democratic system that we pretend to practice and care about. Now hand me my club and point me to those pesky baby seals!

Re:Thanks GW! (1)

arthurpaliden (939626) | about 7 years ago | (#19723755)

It is illegal to club baby seals, unless of course you know the President then you can get off doing it.....No pun intended.

but why is this in slashdot? (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#19723693)

I'm no fan of the POTUS, but why is this news here?

Just business as usual at the Bush camp. (0, Flamebait)

Hsensei (1055922) | about 7 years ago | (#19723697)

Seriously as sad as it is this doesn't surprise me. The worst part is no one will care, and the Bush regime will continue its reign of terror.

This has to do with tech how? (-1, Flamebait)

DietCoke (139072) | about 7 years ago | (#19723699)

I think Bush is a dick, but to see this as some sort of tech issue indicates a serious twisting of reality.

Go back to DailyKos and Freep, idiots. The rest of us want tech, not your idiotic crap.

Re:This has to do with tech how? (1)

CptFarlow (932986) | about 7 years ago | (#19723983)

I come to /. daily to check out tech and political news. It always has the stories I want to see or heard of, and it's great to see everyones opinion on the subjects. That's what /. is all about.

If you don't want to read political news, then just skip over the headlines that start with "Politics." Problem solved.

Figures. (1, Redundant)

flynns (639641) | about 7 years ago | (#19723711)

Who didn't see this coming; really?

An Utter Farce... (4, Insightful)

kravlor (597242) | about 7 years ago | (#19723723)

... and perfectly legal, in this case.

Still, I guess it just goes to show that now, perjury is OK!

I must also strongly agree with Joe Wilson: "Scooter Libby is a traitor." [] I certainly hope that those responsible for the egregious breach of national security are convicted as such.

surprised? (1)

Etrias (1121031) | about 7 years ago | (#19723727)

Does this surprise anyone? Anyone? Bueller?

Bush is a coward (4, Insightful)

Cracked Pottery (947450) | about 7 years ago | (#19723743)

He could have pardoned Libby. Then Libby could continue to practice law and wouldn't have to pay the fine. Well, I don't think anybody thinks the fine will come out of his own pocket. And look forward to a pardon when Bush leaves office, which should not be under honorable circumstances.

Re:Bush is a coward (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#19723849)

Well, I don't think anybody thinks the fine will come out of his own pocket.

That's right. It will come out of the millions of dollars raised for his legal defense fund. Probation is nothing. And the fact that it's not a violent felony (if on his last day Bush doesn't pardon Libby), nothing will happen. Hell, Libby will easily get jobs at Republican businesses or some cushy party headquarters job. He's set for life no matter what.

Boy, I wish I had that kind of punishment. Boohoo.

Re:Bush is a coward (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#19723909)

The pardon will come if the first plan fails. Right now he can still appeal, and take the fifth if the congress calls him to to testify.

Good News, Everybody! (4, Insightful)

MadUndergrad (950779) | about 7 years ago | (#19723749)

Apparently our leader has decided that being shamed in front of your family and having your reputation tarnished plus being fined a nominal fee is enough of a punishment for high crimes against the government. Surely such things a possessing a few ounces of pot then deserve nothing more than a vicious finger-wagging, right? ....right?

Re:Good News, Everybody! (2, Funny)

Soporific (595477) | about 7 years ago | (#19723893)

The pot deserves a very vicious finger wagging! But only after 20 or 30 convictions.


Slashdot turning into digg (1)

Minter92 (148860) | about 7 years ago | (#19723771)

Am I seeing slashdot turn into digg before my very eyes. I shudder in terror. I left digg because naive political commentary.

Re:Slashdot turning into digg (4, Insightful)

flynns (639641) | about 7 years ago | (#19723819)

You could always, y'know, not visit Politics thread. It's not like you clicked on the "Bush Commutes Libby's Sentence" headline and went, "OH MY GOD POLITICS!! I had NO WARNING!" Seriously, what were you expecting? Discourses on the implementation of preemptive scheduling in the 2.6 kernel?

Looks like.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#19723773)

Scooter scooted

Re:Looks like.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#19723955)

[Bush,Libby's Sentence] = 0

For shame (4, Insightful)

Dracos (107777) | about 7 years ago | (#19723779)

Outing an active agent is an act of treason which, if I recall correctly, is still punishable by death in the US. Whether Libby, Rove, or Cheney did it doesn't (and shouldn't) matter.

This so-called administration has broken, no--pulverized--their oaths of office.

Re:For shame (0)

WilliamSChips (793741) | about 7 years ago | (#19723963)

There are no federal capital crimes in the United States. The United States, being only half-civilized, has only a partial ban on the Death Penalty.

Clinton (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#19723781)

It's OK when Clinton pardons drug dealers, murderers, and illegal alien bank robbers.

Bush Had to Do This (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#19723787)

Libby was responsibly for conducting misinformation of the press and the public for the benefit of Bush and Cheney, and he was good at it. If Bush allows him to be punished for his crimes, he would surely begin to disclose massive amounts of information about things the administration did to deceive the country. I would be very surprised if he and Bush didn't have an agreement on this long ago, "If you ever get into trouble over this, I'll do what I can to ease your sentence." Libby's still responsible for paying a $250,000 fine (will he get an anonymous gift or bonus in that amount shortly?) and will now have a felony on his record (costs him certain rights, such as the right to bear arms).

Re:Bush Had to Do This (1)

popejeremy (878903) | about 7 years ago | (#19723845)

Who needs the right to bear arms when you are in a position of power that allows you to have people killed by the U.S. Army?

I give up (3, Insightful)

l0ungeb0y (442022) | about 7 years ago | (#19723809)

I'm firmly convinced that we haven't had the Democracy we were promised in America since 1963.
While JFK and those before him were not perfect men, at least they tried to uphold the principals of this nation for the greater good of all Americans.

With this administration so blatent with it's lies and contempt for the rule of law and the Constitution and with FOX pundits who often say they wish they could imprison or even kill Democrats or "lefties", I am convinced this nation is under the control of anarchists who wish to push this nation to civil war. And it's not Repubilicans vs Democrat... because the Democrats are hardly a better choice, but a division vbetween those who believe in the Constitution and individual rights, and those who want a Statist system where there is no longer any accountability.

And I hope they keep pushing. Because I'm begining to believe that the time for the ballor box is nearing it's end and all we'll be left with is teh ammo box for casting our votes. The people will only be able to abide by so many offenses. If this blatent lawlessness continues to prevail, the people will sooner or later stand up, and some of those people will be Generals and Admirals within our military.

Does this view sound extreme? Yes.
But I hardly think it's far fetched.
I'm sure there are a lot of people whose frustration is turning to anger and disgust.

O RLY? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#19723879)

If this blatent lawlessness continues to prevail, the people will sooner or later stand up, and some of those people will be Generals and Admirals within our military.

The people around you are cows. They cannot cope with reality let alone think for themselves. It is a slim minority that “get it” in this country. Look at the news media. Look at the politicians these people elect. We are a nation of degenerates, incapable of deep thought.

Re:I give up (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#19723951)

The USA isn't a democracy. We are a republic. I guess you must have been sleeping that day in your government school government class? []
The United States of America is a federal constitutional republic ...

Majority rule is just as bad as a dictatorship, only the masses don't realize it. As soon as 50.1% of the voters realize they need only vote for the other 49.9% to give them all their money, it is ended. We are getting close, sadly.

Re:I give up (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#19723987)

The US wasn't really a democracy, it (was) a republic because we, the people, elected officials who vote on issues on our behalf. and even on that point if you think about it with the party lines as they are and the tendency of a party to back a cannidate fully in league with their ideals who then become the major choices [when is the last time anyone that wasn't endorsed by the dems or reps won the presidency?] once a leader is elected er in the case of Bush [who didnt actually have the majority by votes, only by electoral votes] where his obvious tyrranny is accepted by his own party and tolerated by the opposing party, you have a country that doesnt really elect good leaders nor does it do anything about it once the leaders do something un-constitutional. that is really sad, and worse yet there isn't really anywhere to get away from this BS either. that is except in space which we can't build a ship or anything without them noticing... damn

Timing is everything (4, Insightful)

VGR (467274) | about 7 years ago | (#19723827)

So conveniently close to a holiday, too. A large number of people are on vacation, and both vacationers and everyone else will be too busy playing with booze and fireworks to give this much consideration.

Halliburton back scratching? (5, Insightful)

MechaBlue (1068636) | about 7 years ago | (#19723835)

Halliburton owes Cheney for a lot of no-bid contracts. Cheney owes Scooter for muddying the waters in the Plame affair. Any bets on whether Scooter lands a choice position at Halliburton in the near future?

This is the most brazen abuse of presidential (4, Interesting)

maynard (3337) | about 7 years ago | (#19723837)

pardons and commutations since the Nixon pardon. And, perhaps, the Marc Rich pardon as well. My head is swimming. The President just commuted the sentence of a key insider to the executive branch, who committed felonies while on executive-branch time, and who hadn't even served a single day in jail. Further, he has a record of not commuting or pardoning offenders. From Carla Fey Tucker, the murderer he refused to pardon after she found Christ, to just about everyone else who has requested it during his presidency. But Scooter Libby, a man who alocuted his crimes before the court in order to receive a reduced sentence, has now just skated free.

This absolutely reeks of conflict of interest. I am ashamed of my government.

A quote from Benjamin Franklin is in place: (1, Redundant)

Z00L00K (682162) | about 7 years ago | (#19723841)

"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both."

It seems to me that this is completely forgotten by the Bush government.

Still gets the 5th (4, Interesting)

TornCityVenz (1123185) | about 7 years ago | (#19723843)

Perhaps the worst part of this travesty of justice is that by doing this rather than pardoning him, this traitor still can continue to appeal, and Still will have the ability to plead the 5th in other cases related to the matter. in other words he can Cover of Bush and Cheney by pleading the 5th because he case is not pardoned. How convienant.

Bush regime, no democracy, etc., etc. (0, Troll)

kaufmanmoore (930593) | about 7 years ago | (#19723855)

Clinton pardoned over 140 people at the end of his term, this is nothing new or unique to this president nor any others in the future.

Democratic campaigners having collective orgasm! (1)

throatmonster (147275) | about 7 years ago | (#19723861)

Great fodder for the campaign trail... Goes to show you Bush cares more about his buddies than he does his political party as a whole.

Please think of the children, Mr. President. (2, Insightful)

Wilson_6500 (896824) | about 7 years ago | (#19723863)

Little Billy learns today the valuable lesson that you are ultimately beyond reproach assuming your friends are sufficiently powerful.

(I guess it just really goes to show that you can parade out this argument for any old thing.)

A Great Compromise by a Great President (5, Funny)

tjstork (137384) | about 7 years ago | (#19723873)

Once again, Bush the GREAT shows exactly how to chart a course for fairness, justice and truth. I think it was obvious to everyone that Scooter was the target of a Whitewater-esque witch hunt that had more to do with trying to pay back the Clinton investigations than it did any real crime, and I think the commute was fair. I used to think that history might only place Bush in the top ten of America's greatest presidents, perhaps behind Roosevelt in the last century, but now, I'm not sure that Bush might even be slighted by that.

Could it be that George W. Bush should be in the top 5 of America's greatest presidents?


Above the law (as usual) (4, Insightful)

tekrat (242117) | about 7 years ago | (#19723891)

Dick Cheney has frequently alluded that he is above the law in every respect, do you really think that his aides are any different? More proof that rich white guys almost never go to jail.

And Bush commutes his measley 30 months in jail while still doing nothing for Ramos and Compean who are serving 11 and 12 year sentences for DOING THEIR JOBS as border patrol agents.

What a crock justice is in the country. I have no respect for the law at all anymore.

A disgusted citizen of a corrupt nation.

...sigh.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#19723895)

What a waste of tax dollars and time. At the very least Bush/Libby should pay the expenses of this circus to the American public for this farce. I don't want to seem racist but changing my name to pedro and not paying taxes is starting to look like a good thing if this is the way our government spends our hard earned dollars.


Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#19723901)


This country is fucked up

./ != "the crapfest that is digg" (0, Troll)

lamegovie (1055366) | about 7 years ago | (#19723911) I would beg you, please don't post non-relevant articles here. Slashdot is better then that...

Bush further erodes Tom Cruise's career (2, Funny)

nixkuroi (569546) | about 7 years ago | (#19723925)

So, it looks like Bush has commuted Libby's prison sentence once the appeals court said he would have to be in prison during his appeal. As such, we now know it's ok to give up the identities of CIA operatives. If you remember, Cruise's whole mission was to protect the NOC list, a list of undercover CIA operatives...since releasing those names now comes with almost no consequence, we can assume that MI:I was basically completely unnecessary, leveling the foundation of the entire Mission Impossible series.

How sad for Tom Cruise.

Great news!!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#19723935)

Political prisoner freed, I'm sure Amnesty International will be thrilled about this. After all, we know liberal organizations like Amnesty International stand up against the taking of political prisoners, which is what Libby would have been. You can't tell me that "outing" a CIA agent that was not even covert is a crime. Great day for justice, great day for America. Scooter Libby shouldn't go to jail just because he's a Republican.

Just one question, why is this on Slashdot?

This story does not belong here (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#19723977)

Most stories in the politics section are technology related. Why is this story here? There are tons of political stories not reported here, but the editors felt the need to say that Bush commuted Libby's sentence. What gives? If you're going to report all political news, do so in a fair manner.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account