Bush Commutes Libby's Sentence
President Bush has commuted the sentence facing Lewis "Scooter" Libby over his role in the Valerie Plame Affair because the President believes the jury verdict was "excessive."
Libby's clemency is special in several ways. Bush did not consult with the Department of Justice beforehand; the clemency violates DOJ standards; and, up until now, most of his pardons have been perfunctory -- and few.
Presidential power to pardon or grant a reprieve of a sentence resides in Article II, Section 2 of the U.S. Constitution. The President has provided "clemency," which is a reprieve: it reduces the severity of a punishment, but the person remains "guilty."
Those watching the case expected the President to act once it became obvious that Libby faced jail time. The Presidential announcement came on the heels of another appellate court decision that "Libby could not delay his prison term in the CIA leak case."
Libby still faces a $250,000 fine and two years probation.
The Presidential statement summarizes arguments over the case thusly:
Critics of the investigation have argued that a special counsel should not have been appointed, nor should the investigation have been pursued after the Justice Department learned who leaked Ms. Plame's name to columnist Robert Novak. Furthermore, the critics point out that neither Mr. Libby nor anyone else has been charged with violating the Intelligence Identities Protection Act or the Espionage Act, which were the original subjects of the investigation. Finally, 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.
Others point out that a jury of citizens weighed all the evidence and listened to all the testimony and found Mr. Libby guilty of perjury and obstructing justice. They argue, correctly, that our entire system of justice relies on people telling the truth. And if a person does not tell the truth, particularly if he serves in government and holds the public trust, he must be held accountable.
What the Presidential summary clearly avoids noting is this: because Libby lied repeatedly under oath, we are unlikely to ever know if a crime was committed. Special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald elaborated on this point in October 2005.
A Special Case
What makes the Libby clemency special? First, the President did not first run the request through lawyers at Justice. He also ignored special counsel Patrick J. Fitzgerald, although it is routine to ask for his input.
Second, the clemency contradicts the DOJ United States Attorney's Manual Standards for Consideration of Clemency Petitions.
Section 1-2.112 Standards for Considering Pardon Petitions
In general, a pardon is granted on the basis of the petitioner's demonstrated good conduct for a substantial period of time after conviction and service of sentence. The Department's regulations require a petitioner to wait a period of at least five years after conviction or release from confinement (whichever is later) before filing a pardon application (28 C.F.R. § 1.2).
Section 1-2.113 Standards for Considering Commutation Petitions
Requests for commutation generally are not accepted unless and until a person has begun serving that sentence. Nor are commutation requests generally accepted from persons who are presently challenging their convictions or sentences through appeal or other court proceeding.
Finally, Bush has been miserly with his pardons, ranking just above Presidents Washington and Adams for "fewest" pardons.
For all of these reasons, this was indeed a special act that made no side -- with the exception of Libby -- happy.
See:
Originally posted at 4.03 pm Pacific on 2 July; updated at 4.23 pm; updated at 3.15 am on 3 July
Comments
This is the most corrupt administration ever. Liars pardoning liars.
This act is the collusion of criminals. Bush has disgraced the office of the President time and again. How many more acts will stain this once-proud country until his terrible last term ends?
allura,
A little melodramatic aren’t we? Bush is no criminal and neither is Libby. Everyone knew this was coming except maybe you, butler and the author of this site.
Get over it and move on. It’s not like Libby’s the president lying under oath or stuffing secret documents down his pants. Maybe you haven’t noticed that there’s a lot of this that goes on in politics?
C
Hi, Chuck!
You typed:
Not to be too argumentative … but I’m correcting your “record.” I refer you to a quote from the article:
Chuck, just because you know something’s coming doesn’t make that something correct. And also, in case you may have forgotten or be unaware, it is a crime to out a CIA agent whose identity is hidden and Lewis Libby obstructed justice by preventing Patrick Fitzgerald from finding out the truth about who outed the CIA agent.
“Lewis Libby obstructed justice”
You say that like you have some inside information? Or, did you just take Fitzgerald’s assertion as fact? Assertions aren’t facts Kind.
And, knowing something is coming can be correct but may not be fair or right. The fact is, Presidents do this routinely or haven’t you been paying attention?
I also don’t accept your assertion that Plame was covert. This entire exercise was just a witch hunt that’s wasted millions of dollars. To claim Plame was covert when she drove every day to the CIA parking lot and all of her neighbors knew she was CIA is ludicrous and proof that Fitz was out of control. Just my personal opinion of course.
USP- Once again I have no idea what you’re talking about? Do you?
c
Talk about lying, and liars pardoning liars. I think Libby deserves to be set free since the only reason he was tried, convicted, and sentenced was Valerie and Mr. Wilson’s deceptions. Call no man a liar works today. The one that calls, “Liar, liar…” is the usually the real liar. You accuse someone of what you’re guilty of yourself.
Chuck, thanks for waving your part-izan flag for us.
Your lack of respect for this country is profoundly disturbing.
Vic,
I’m crushed!
NOT!
ps…I think you were disturbed long before you read my commments
Half a nice 4th!
Chuck,
I had no expectations about “crushing” you.
You cannot shame the shameless.
You support Bush.
But I was curious, you wished me “a nice 4th”… just what does that day mean for you?
“You support Bush.”
In what way? I don’t recall ever making that claim? You don’t support the President of the United States? HMMM? Do I sense a little bit of partisanship wreaking from you posts? Is there not one policy or one Bush action that you support? HMMMM? Tax cuts, Iraq war, illegal immigration stance, Afghanistan, AIDS funding, Medicare Rx supplement, Supreme Court appointments the eloquent way he speaks??
Vic, if you are trying to “shame” me, stop wasting your time. I have plenty of “shame” but I wouldn’t waste it on this message board. I’d have to respect your opinion before that would happen.
The 4th is a day to celebrate the birth of our nation. It’s also my son’s birthday. Happy now?
C
Chuck,
I DO respect and support the OFFICE of the President
of the United States, which is in part why I am so disgusted
with Bush and you should be too.
Beyond a reasonable doubt you are a Bush supporter.
Though it is statistically possible to be able to
find someone that has witnessed all the corruption of
the Bushites, all the secrecy of the Bushites,
all the lies of the Bushites, all the disrespect for the
rights of Americans, all the disrespect for our laws,
all the callous disregard for human suffering and
dignity, yet proclaim as you did earlier in this message
board: “Bush is no criminal and neither is Libby”.
Reason says you are a Bush supporter.
Just as reason says that Bush intentionally obstructed
justice.
Libby lied under oath. (This is not Fitzgerald’s mere
opinion as you want to believe. He had a trial by jury.)
The oath is grounded on the honor of the man taking the oath,
on his respect for our system of justice, his belief in
the Bible he puts his hand upon, or if none of those
are within that man then the fear of penalty for perjury.
Fitzgerald was conducting an investigation. It was
not a politically motivated “witch hunt” as your part-izan
vision sees it. A formal complaint was made by the CIA
under Tenet – Bush’s Tenet – and this is what initiated the
investigation. It was an investigation of a treasonous
action. The treasonous action was performed to put fear
into those that would tell the American people the truth.
The truth was that we were lied into making war.
This is not something to be swept under the rug, or
as you put it: “get over it”.
Again, Fitzgerald was conducting an investigation.
One tool available to the investigator is the hammer
of jail time held over the head of someone that
obstructs the investigation. This is a vital tool for
the investigation and Bush removed it. He
obstructed the investigation.
But I am glad in your response. Perhaps you do
have some shame as you were reluctant to admit
you are a Bush supporter. But maybe it wasn’t
shame but your penchant for “tricky dickiness”
that had you keep it a secret. Either way you
did your part-izan flag justice.
Of course the sentence was excessive! Herr Bush & his gang have committed much worse crimes…they’ve committed treason on a grand scale, and nothing ever happened to any of them. A few federal crimes and everybody makes a big deal of it.
Chuck, you asked how kind67 knew that Libby “obstructed justice” : a more precise statement is that a jury of 12 convicted Libby on obstruction of justice.
Chuck, you typed:
“USP- Once again I have no idea what you’re talking about? Do you?”
It’s not clear from your comment what you are referencing as being confusing. IMO, the blog post is pretty straightforward. Ditto my prior comment to you correcting your assertion that I was unaware that a pardon of some sort was coming.
Hello, Deborah:
What “deceptions” did Valerie Plame and Joesph Wilson commit?
Kathy
Chuck, I can’t remember if I warned you before — but ad hominems like this are not acceptable at USP.
Vic,
I’m still waiting for you to point out that I’m a Bush supporter? And I’m also waiting for you to point out anything that you support in this administration?
Since you refuse to be upfront I’ll tell you this. I do support some things Bush has done. I also supported some things Clinton did. There’s just no such thing as the perfect candidate or politician.
You have absolutely no evidence that Bush has committed any crimes or you’d post them. Therefore, he’s not a criminal. I’m just stating the obvious and any “reasoned” person would know this, as you state. I believe I’ve made a reasonable statement and you don’t have the evidence to refute it. You may have circumstantial or conspiratorial evidence but that won’t work in a court of law now will it?
We’ll just have to agree to disagree on the Witchhunt. Your personal agenda overwhelms your reason I believe. Even reasoned Democrats agree that this was a witchhunt and the goal was to get Cheney or Rove. But, they got a little fish in Libby.
“tricky-dickiness” How old are you? Don’t you think that was a childish remark?
c
USP,
#14 my bad.
#15 OK
#16…I think some of us believe that the Plame/Wilson duo lied through their teeth about this and a willing media pushed it along. Agenda driven like many on this board including yourself Kathy, the media has done a wonderful job of promoting the liberal agenda while condemning the conservative agenda. Kudos to you, it’s working. And of course a bumbling president/congress has made your task so much easier.
c
Hi, Vic:
You typed:
Please do not try to read the minds of other posters.
Chuck has not said he supports Bush (well, he had not said this when you typed your comment).
A more accurate statement might be:
This statement is not a personal attack — and it’s clear that you “own your own words” here.
Thanks.
Chuck, thanks for answering for Deborah.
In the entire time I’ve been following this story, this is the first time I’ve had anyone suggest that Wilson and Plame are lying. Why would they lie? Wilson was appointed to his ambassadorship by Bush the Elder, IIRC. Plame worked for the CIA, which is a branch of the executive — currently run by Republicans.
This claim boggles.
AFA your disagreement that Plame was covert — I refer you again to the document from the CIA that Fitzgerald filed as part of the Libby sentencing procedure.
Chuck,
“I’m still waiting for you to point out that I’m a Bush supporter?”
It appears that
I have done this, your claims throughout
appear to
have done this.
You, Chuck, said:
This site is arbitrited by “uspolitics” with certain rules, but
am I permitted to pause for a chuckle?
Chuck, you set the bar at: the evidence is to “work in a court of law”
else Bush is not a criminal. And just *who* is to determine if the
evidence is of such moment ? Would that be you Chuck?
Yet, a court of law has found Libby guilty but that is not good enough
for you.
Pause.
Ergo.
In my opinion, you appear to put your hands over your eyes
to crimes when your apparent partisanship demands it in
the case of Libby and appearantly would thus do it in the
case of Bush as well.
Bush has, throughout his tenure, unequivocally demonstrated that
our laws, our Constitution, are “just a gddamn piece of paper”
(Bush said this, witnessed by Republican Congressional leaders,
in November 2005) to him. It is his modus operandi. Any reasonable,
informed, non-partisan person can only believe that Bush’s
explanation for Libby’s commutation follows this pattern and is
just another lie foisted upon the American people,
just another “gddamn” insult to our country.
And yet, it is not “just another” lie. The holder of the highest
office in this land has chisled at the “firmest pillar of our Government”.
He has made a lie of everything. If we do not stand as equals before
the law then what are we? The war by choice, the war in Iraq,
which Bush *now* tells us is about engendering democracy
…engendering democracy!?
Anyone, in my opinion, that says to just “get over it”, is
a Bush partisan and I question how much regard they have
for this country whose soul is it’s principles.
“Yet, a court of law has found Libby guilty but that is not good enough
for you.”
Guilt by association? Come on, you can do better than that?
All your rantings are just silly assertions and unprovable. It was the same with Clinton in the 90’s when the conservatives were after him for white water but settled with Clinton’s lie about Monica. It was a huge waste of time and money and so it goes again with Fitzgerald. Only now it’s the kooky lefties that are slinging mud and making silly assertions to gain political advantage.
I say get over it and move on again Vic. This is a diversion from some real problems that need attention. And spending 24/7 trying to impeach Bush is just ludicrous. Again, I know of no reasonable person who is making the claims you make about Bush. NONE!
c
USP, Re: Wilson/Plame Lies
Most of the claims of lies that I’ve heard come from the cable talk shows. Also, I’m confused that Armitidge wasn’t arrested and jailed since he was the true leaker and Fizgerald knew it. Yet Fitzgerald continued with the investigation and finally rattled enough cages to come up with a very forgetful Libby. Since I don’t consider Plame to be covert, regardless of the CIA memo, this whole affair bores me and takes away time, money and energy to fix real problems. Of course, to the left the real problem is in the WhiteHouse so there ya go. Anything to discredit Bush, Cheney or Rove must be worth it eh?
Couple of links about the lies:
http://www.aim.org/media_monitor/A3879_0_2_0_C/
http://www.spectator.org/dsp_article.asp?art_id=11171
c
Hi, Chuck –
I don’t watch cable news shows.
Valerie Plame did not have the authority to send her husband to Nigeria, no matter how many links you dish up by people who say that he did. The fact that he was a former ambassador to Iraq, in a Republican Administration — who had also served in Nigeria — seems to be conveniently forgotten/dismissed/ignored (take your pick) by your two columnists.
From Nigerian Yellow Cake Facts:
A key difference between Armitage & Libby — acknowledgng he has a memory *and* acknowledging a mistake. There seems no clear evidence that he knew she was covert in June — there was some circumstantial evidence. There was a Lot More circumstantial evidence in July.
Note that Novak and Rove have a history: Rove worked on George H. W. Bush’s vice-presidential campaign. He was fired from Bush’s re-election campaign for leaking information to Novak.
Those two columnists aren’t mine. You said: “this is the first time I’ve had anyone suggest that Wilson and Plame are lying”
I was just illustrating that there is some talk out there that they did lie. But like I said, I really don’t care. This is simply a non issue to me. To you lefties it’s just another tool to beat up the administration and weaken our country.
C
thanks, chuck — i guess i wasn’t clear. my point was that these assertions that valerie plame has lied in this case is an empty assertion.
that’s why, i guess, i didn’t know what you were talking about when you said she had lied. i i didn’t know this talking point had been dredged up again.
unlike you, i think the issue is important because of what it reveals about dirty tricks in the white house, from an abuse of power (selective release of classified information) to an arrogant lack of concern about lives and costs if the life belongs to someone “against you.”