President Bush on the justice system:
I don’t believe my role is to replace the verdict of a jury with my own
He wrote that in his autobiography, “A Charge to Keep,” on why he had 152 inmates put to death while governor of Texas. But…uh…everything changed after September 11. Or something.
But he didn’t replace the verdict of a jury with his own; rather, he replaced a portion of the sentence of a judge with his own.
The guilty verdict remains…for now. (Has Vegas issued odds yet on a pardon?)
Exactly Jeff. Libby has Bush’s most treasured associate quality – he is seamlessly loyal and doesn’t name names. Best that he should be rewarded with a reprieve from the penitentiary where that quality might be tested.
Bush clearly doesn’t care to have a conversation about the course of Whitehouse actions that led to the invasion of Iraq. The question is whether America is inclined to sweep accountability under the rug.
The Capital Times:
Gimme Shelter!
“Nonviolent offenders should not be serving hard time in our prisons. They need to be diverted from our prison system.”
Hillary Clinton – Democratic Debate June 28, 2007
I don’t think that the solution she had in mind was for Bush to effectively pardon one of his cronies, and then just leave the laws on the books.
Though honestly, I’m in favor of very harsh sentences for corrupt politicians, and this includes cases of perjury to protect corrupt politicians, especially given that a $250,000 fine and probation really doesn’t mean much to people with friends at the top. If Hillary Clinton feels otherwise (and I wouldn’t be surprised if she does), then that’s yet another thing I disagree with her on.
Another primo example of the stark difference between Bush 2000 rhetoric vs. Bush 2007 reality appears when you compare a promise he made in one of the debates with Al Gore.
Bush said something like this — When I’m president my foreign policy won’t be “arrogant.” So, America won’t be engaged with “nation-building.” As I remember it, he repeated this as a pledge several times during the campaign.
Of course, one might stoop to defend Bush’s rather clumsy nation-building efforts in Iraq by saying he hasn’t been nation-building, it’s been more like nation-destroying.
J.S., you quote Clintonisms (words and/or deeds) as if those frequently muddle-headed antics in some way justify Bush’s actions.
Until recently, I was a lifelong Republican myself, one who voted for George Bush Sr. in 1988 and who cast a sum total of zero votes for Bill Clinton, and I’m absolutely incensed at the horrors that this current administration is inflicting upon our country’s fiscal policy, military, civil rights, political system, concepts of due process, and our standing in the world. (By no means a complete list.)
I supported Bill Clinton’s impeachment for the same reason that I support Libby’s imprisonment: unpunished perjury undermines our justice system, regardless of what events (political, sexual, …) surround the the perjured testimony.
You’re going nowhere by saying “But…[first name] Clinton [did|said] [insert waffles & syrup].”
Mmmm…. Waffles…
Waldo was illustrating how Bush was hypocritical (despite the fact that Bush didn’t actually replace the verdict of a jury with his own in the Libby matter.) I fail to see how it’s not relevant to point out that he’s not alone in issuing conflicting statements.
What’s that saying? When all you’ve got is a hammer, everything looks like a nail?
It would certainly be odd for a jury to convict and leave it to the judge to determine the punishment, intending for the punishment to be…nothing.
But, he did pay a $250,000 fine, didn’t he?
Must have been terribly hard, given his status as a long suffering public servant. Poor Scooter.
(I wonder if we’ll be seeing him out and about more than he has been. I look forward to chance to meet him.)