Monday, July 02, 2007

Bush spits in the face of us all and commutes Libby's prison term...jail is only for the rest of us

CNN IS SAYING that this “avoids the political aspects of the situation.”

NO FUCK THAT! The Democrats should NOT let Bush get away with this one. They should treat the situation as if Bush had pardoned Libby instead of just commuting the prison sentence. The fine is just a slap in the face. How much do you want to bet that the Libby defense fund will pay it?

The rule of law does not apply to Republicans, so sayeth the Litterbox. What does this tell you about law and order conservatives who always cry about the law when it’s anyone except them. They should just drop the act already.

30 months is too excessive?! So Bush had to commute the sentence? Hell, the Publicans or should I say the Rethuglicans wanted Clinton virtually executed for receiving a consensual blowjob in his office. So what you have here is Bush and the Republicans saying that no matter what Republicans do, they are not guilty, because if they are prosecuted under the law, it is only a political stunt meant to discredit them. So much for respecting the rule of law. Prison is only for the rest of us who cannot afford lawyers and who don't have conservatives in our law schools writing letters on our behalf.

John Aravosis over at AmericaBLOG notes that the Bush talk about letting justice run its course is all a bunch of bushit. Of course he is right, but also, Bush’s idea of justice is allowing Republicans to commit their crimes with impunity while his administration goes after Democrats on trumped-up charges such as those against ACORN, brought upon them by a partisan GOP HACK. Bush’s idea of justice works on the principle that Republicans are above the law, they are like gods whose motives we must never question, much less challenge in the court of law. It doesn’t matter that there is no evidence of a left-wing conspiracy to compromise our elections by committing massive voter fraud on a scale Republicans claim has never been seen before. It doesn’t matter that there is more evidence that Republicans sought to use their powers to suppress the vote.

This is a culmination of the GOP mantra that everything is a liberal conspiracy against them and that they are truly the victims and oppressed of the society. Our so-called resident-in-thief was only dispensing justice for that poor, downtrodden Republican who was dreading prison so much that he must have been praying like a good conservative Christian would.

"The reputation he gained through his years of public service and professional work in the legal community is forever damaged," Bush said. "His wife and young children have also suffered immensely. He will remain on probation. The significant fines imposed by the judge will remain in effect. The consequences of his felony conviction on his former life as a lawyer, public servant and private citizen will be long-lasting."
and what about the families of those who go to prison for minor drug offenses like possessing marijuana? What about them? Do they not suffer too or is it only that Republicans and their families suffer when they go to prison? Is this not like the argument Bill Napoli had when he said only Christian virgins suffer the trauma of rape and therefore they should be the only ones who deserve the exception when it comes to rape and incest? Tasteless I may be for pointing that out, but I see the same elitist argument that common people who don’t belong in the favored class don’t suffer.

The fine doesn't matter, because the defense fund will probably cover it...Probation is nothing. If Bush thought the sentence was too excessive could he not have halved it or something? Why should it have mattered? Libby was probably going to go to the country club prison anyway where he would have enjoyed the meals Duncan Hunter claimed Club Gitmo got, yes lemon chicken, gourmet style.

What exactly is your problem with the President commuting "Scooter" Libby's sentence? What exactly are you begging those impotent Democrats in Congress to do?

Research the facts before you do an Olbermann, ok? The President has the right under the Constitution to do what he did.

Now that I have addressed the legality of what happened, I want to know if you are equally outraged at these Clinton pardons?

Roger Clinton for cocaine possession.

Former Democratic Senator Dan Rostenkowski for his part in the Congressional Post Office Scandal.

Former Director to the CIA (and Clinton apointee) John Deutch.

Clinton's HUD Secretary Henry Cisneros.

Impeached Judge (now current Democratic Congressman) Alcee Hastings.

At least FOUR major cocaine distributors. (so much for a war on drugs)

Edgar and Vonna Jo Gregory, who paid the President's brother-in-law, Tony Rodham, over $100,000 in his successful bid for their pardon.

And let's not forget Clinton business partner, Susan McDougal - who was rewarded with a pardon for not doing duty her civic duty to fully & completely about the criminal activities of the President in that same case.

And I want you to answer whether perjury is a serious crime or not. If you feel Libby should be imprisoned... did you feel the same way about Bill Clinton when he lied under oath?
I want you to ask yourself the same thing. I say this because like most Republicans when some scandal pops up in this administration, you attempt to use the Clinton did it defense. Did you feel perjury wasn't serious enough in this case but was for Clinton? You wanted his HEAD on a platter, but since this is a Republican administration, you'll let it slide by. You say that there was no crime committed, but Fitzgerald couldn't prove that because of obstruction of justice and perjury. 70 PEOPLE died because of the leak, yet you say this isn't serious because you would say anything to defend this administration. Why don't you research it yourself before pulling a Sean Hannity?

Yes, Clinton should have been censored, but was perjury to cover up a consensual blowjob equal to perjury to cover up the outing of a CIA agent which resulted in the deaths of 70 people overseas?

Libby could have squealed like a pig and implicated higher-ups in the administration but the fact is that he's not going to, BECAUSE Bush said he was going to take care of those who committed the crime or helped in the process. Instead of bringing them to justice and holding them accountable, he took care of them alright. Bush Can still proclaim that he was dispensing justice because we all know he is a god, and the only one worthy of determining whether a sentence is right or not.

Yes, the president had a right to do it, but this crime was too close to his own administration, and it clearly was an attempt to discredit a vehement critic of the administration's misleading the nation to war (Don't tell me you think the WMDs existed).

You know, if I were called to the stand to discuss adultery, yeah I would lie too. Admit it, you would too if you were the president. Would you have admitted that you cheated on your wife with an intern? Would you? Of course not. I doubt you would be honest, and I admit I WOULD have lied my ass off.

It's too bad you Republicans were throwing stones from glass houses (cough Newt Gingrich, Bob Livingston) in your attempt to discredit a president whom you hated.

You conservatives always talk about how liberals are traitors to their country, but when a CIA agent working on WMDs (Funny, I thought they were so important in the leadup to war) is outed, there is nary a word from y'all. Who are the traitors? Just ask Bush 41 when he said, ""I have nothing but contempt and anger for those who betray the trust by exposing the name of our sources. They are, in my view, the most insidious of traitors."

So, just because Clinton did it, does it make it okay when Bush pardons someone close to him? You guys sound like little 5 year olds pouting on the playground. This is a mere slap on the face. Libby will probably have Republicans who donated to his defense fund pay his fine. Probation's nothing, because once it runs out, what's to prevent him from selling a book that'll appear on the best-seller list thanks to the conservative publishers?
I want you to think about the underlying crime here...the outing of a CIA agent who was COVERT, even though you conservatives would like to justify her outing by muddying the facts and spin. I thought you conservatives were the defenders of America, defenders of patriotism, the only patriotic Americans in the whole country, but yet you justify or at best do not condemn the outing of Valerie Plame who was working on WMDs. If WMDs were so important, then why did this administration out her? Do you really think Libby was acting on his own to obstruct the investigation? Why would he do so if he was innocent? Was it to protect someone higher up than him? Perhaps Cheney himself?

Your silence on the issue speaks volumes. It says that conservatives value law and order only when they're not involved (after all Judge Walton was a Republican nominee, not some liberal activist judge as you magically turn every judge who rules against what you believe into, even if they were appointed by conservative presidents).

All I see in your response is knee-jerk GOP talking points...

However, I grant you this. Since you do have a problem with Clinton pardoning Marc Rich and others, you must surely have a problem with Bush commuting Libby's sentence and the potential pardon that is to come. Well then join me in calling for a panel of nonpartisan judges reviewing presidential pardons...
Post a Comment

<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?