Pres.Bush Commutes Libby Prison Sentence

[Andreus]

^ Prezs often exercise executive power, and often, when they do, the citizenship find it questionable

this president has ruled by mandate to the exclusion of the system of checks and ballances that the constitution guaranttees

what others have done it in the way that he has?

i can think of none

 

[jackoroe]

^ just trying to open a definition for discussion, party-neutral; though I respect your opinion

And welcome to CE&P! The fact is Libby is a convicted criminal. I really could care less if he goes to jail or not. I also recognize the authority of the President, to commute sentences which the President has chosen to do in this instance. As to being a traitor and having committed an act of treason, let's stay with the legal definition. Even the more informal definition seems to require collusion with the enemy. That was no evidence of that in this situation. The discussion here seems to be centering around whether the commutation of sentence was "right."

I'm of no opinion one way or another on the issue. My only concern is was it lawful to commute the sentence, which it is. To make the point to some of our somewhat less thoughtful posters, I pointed to similar behaviors of other sitting presidents. Apparently some of those posters feel that this is far more egregious matter.

Once again, welcome!

 

[Andreus]

B4 you yell at me Andreus, executive power is a strange animal -- it moves outside the rules of checks and balances. I know what you are saying.

haha

im not yelling

i use the angry red smilie when i'm doing that

otherwise just assume that i am... as my boss puts it... being abrupt in my method of communication

 

[springboksfan]

and if you think my anger is big just wait until all of america digests this

Drew, the sad truth is that most Americans a) don't understand what happened today and b) don't give a damn. Sure, they're still pissed at Gerald Ford for pardoning Richard Nixon, but that's something they could sink their teeth into. This particular scandal/crime/event/whateveryouwanttocallit is too finessed and handled for most people to want to keep track of it. Therefore, they just shrug their shoulders and go, "Whatever. He [W] shouldn't have done it, but I don't have a clue what he did."

 

[jtilden21]

^ that was my point jackoroe. Even with the casual definition I offered, is it?

And, the prez used a given exercise that he is entitled to do.

Not that I agree personally, but by the books..........

 

[Andreus]

And welcome to CE&P! The fact is Libby is a convicted criminal. I really could care less if he goes to jail or not. I also recognize the authority of the President, to commute sentences which the President has chosen to do in this instance. As to being a traitor and having committed an act of treason, let's stay with the legal definition. Even the more informal definition seems to require collusion with the enemy. That was no evidence of that in this situation. The discussion here seems to be centering around whether the commutation of sentence was "right."

I'm of no opinion one way or another on the issue. My only concern is was it lawful to commute the sentence, which it is. To make the point to some of our somewhat less thoughtful posters, I pointed to similar behaviors of other sitting presidents. Apparently some of those posters feel that this is far more egregious matter.

Once again, welcome!

that is the topic of the thread...

yupp

just looked and read it again

and jack

you are trying to deflect the injustice of the man you support by inferring that others are just as bad

you know that as do all the people here that have seen you apologize for all the filthy wrongdoings this administration has shoved down americas throat

this is the wrong time to attempt to sound reasonable

he can just scroll through the forum and read

 

[Andreus]

Drew, the sad truth is that most Americans a) don't understand what happened today and b) don't give a damn. Sure, they're still pissed at Gerald Ford for pardoning Richard Nixon, but that's something they could sink their teeth into. This particular scandal/crime/event/whateveryouwanttocallit is too finessed and handled for most people to want to keep track of it. Therefore, they just shrug their shoulders and go, "Whatever. He [W] shouldn't have done it, but I don't have a clue what he did."

the senate committee chair has promised to hold the president in comtempt for faiulure to turn over the documents that will show us what has happened, and that means that gonzales will have to choose between bush or the senate

we know what he will do and we know the senate wont accept that

all this will have to go to the courts and it will happen during an election

neither side will budge

its scary in its scope

it really is

 

[jackoroe]

^ I am reasonable. I didn't advocate murdering the Vice President, you did.

 

[jtilden21]

And welcome to CE&P! The fact is Libby is a convicted criminal. I really could care less if he goes to jail or not. I also recognize the authority of the President, to commute sentences which the President has chosen to do in this instance. As to being a traitor and having committed an act of treason, let's stay with the legal definition. Even the more informal definition seems to require collusion with the enemy. That was no evidence of that in this situation. The discussion here seems to be centering around whether the commutation of sentence was "right."

I'm of no opinion one way or another on the issue. My only concern is was it lawful to commute the sentence, which it is. To make the point to some of our somewhat less thoughtful posters, I pointed to similar behaviors of other sitting presidents. Apparently some of those posters feel that this is far more egregious matter.

Once again, welcome!

Andreus: I read this thread from start to finish. I have my own thoughts and opinions.

I was just saying that, if you don't like the laws as they exist, we have to cahnge the laws. We cannot go after those ppl who use existing laws as they are.

 

[Spensed]

...the prez used a given exercise that he is entitled to do...

That's true. But there are guidelines and procedures normally followed for Presidential pardons and commutations, which are designed to prevent the impression that they are given arbitrarily to favorites in the royal court and that they ignore the rule of law that applies to everyone else who doesn't get a pardon or commutation.

Bush followed none of theose guidelines and procedures in commuting Libby's sentence.

King George III would have been proud of his worthy successor. LOL.

http://www.americablog.com/2007/07/scooter-libby-is-getting-very-special.html

 

[Andreus]

^ I am reasonable. I didn't advocate murdering the Vice President, you did.

no

i advocated the punishment of the vice president for committing atrocities of war

you are advocating the bush admins policy of undoing the justice system

 

[jtilden21]

spensed2 -- Given, but again, if he can and the procedure is broken, then it is up to the USA ppl to fix that.

You cannot undo the past; you can only change the future.

 

[jackoroe]

Jack, you are the very very last person on this forum to be in a position to talk about treason, if you get my drift. Fact is, jack, your coward president, his coward Vice and their staffs all belong in the bowels of America's worst prison. His supporters, the few remaining (after all, this guy is pulling support from less than 1/2 of the nation in most polls) should all be sterilized , all be deported ,their families deported, their neighbors deported, everyone they know deported. Then, and only then, can we reclaim our democracy from these sick and sorry creatures. I want my country back -- I want these cowards, fear-biters, pole-smoking Republicans, little boy and girl fondlers, malcontents and misfits gone.

​

So, shall I take that as an admission that Libby did not commit treason being as you've failed to provide a cite supporting your erroneous claim?

 

[jackoroe]

no

i advocated the punishment of the vice president for committing atrocities of war

you are advocating the bush admins policy of undoing the justice system

No, you said the VP should be shot. You support murder.

 

[jtilden21]

Come on, guys -- let's keep this on level without going there

 

[jackoroe]

That's true. But there are guidelines and procedures normally followed for Presidential pardons and commutations, which are designed to prevent the impression that they are given arbitrarily to favorites in the royal court and that they ignore the rule of law that applies to everyone else who doesn't get a pardon or commutation.

Bush followed none of theose guidelines and procedures in commuting Libby's sentence.

King George III would have been proud of his worthy successor. LOL.

http://www.americablog.com/2007/07/scooter-libby-is-getting-very-special.html

Special guidelines and procedures? Really, tell us all what they are! Do you just make this stuff up?

 

[jtilden21]

Special guidelines and procedures? Really, tell us all what they are! Do you just make this stuff up?

Jack: I think he meant that pardons should be an exception.

 

[Andreus]

No, you said the VP should be shot. You support murder.

i wont play this game with you tonight jack

this is about bush and you are deflecting the issue at hand

speak to the point of this thread

Did bush abuse his powers or not....

do you have the courage to say what you know is true?

 

[springboksfan]

Gentlemen, we need to raise the level of communication and debate in this thread or I'm going to have to give it a cooling off period. Thanks.

 

[jtilden21]

Okay, gents:

We have two points:

1) That the prez overstretched his political power
2) That the prez used executive privilege

Regardless of your personal opinions on the details, I think that the crux of the matter is: should executive privilege be allowed, without checks and balances? Or is this a breech of the checks-and-balances system?