[QUOTE=tomndebb]
Torches and burning things are better handled in the BBQ Pit.
I see no debate, much less a great one.
[ /Moderating ]
[/QUOTE]
Cool. Now I can say what I really think. 
[QUOTE=tomndebb]
Torches and burning things are better handled in the BBQ Pit.
[/QUOTE]
… Where I can ask the mods to shut this thread down because of duplicate thread.
Not exactly the result you wanted, I wager. 
Yep. There’s already a Libby thread here.
[QUOTE=appleciders]
Yep. There’s already a Libby thread here.
[/QUOTE]
Let the free market decide! Competition is good!
Giuliani came out in favor of the commutation. I thought that guy was tough on crime.
I can’t really work up much outrage about this. Libby, although high-ranking, was merely a foot soldier being a stand up fall guy.
I think that Bush communting his sentence does more to cement the notion in voter’s minds that this administration is shamefully corrupt than to have Libby going to some country club prison for a few months.
Scooter Libby would have essentially been a political prisoner if Bush had not commuted the sentence. The sentence did not fit the crime and it was a miscarriage of justice. If perjury in and of itself is the key problem then it shouldn’t matter what was lied about, but Liberals seem to excuse perjury as long as the person committing the act is a Democrat President who is perjuring himself so that it helps his defense in a sexual harassment suit. Libby was more or less being crucified for something he’d never done, just because there was a desire to punish someone.
[QUOTE=Muffin]
Where do you think banned posters are disappeared to?
[/QUOTE]
I was going to mention another, er, forum, but upon reflection that probably would put me in Guantanamo.
[QUOTE=Martin Hyde]
Scooter Libby would have essentially been a political prisoner if Bush had not commuted the sentence. The sentence did not fit the crime and it was a miscarriage of justice. If perjury in and of itself is the key problem then it shouldn’t matter what was lied about, but Liberals seem to excuse perjury as long as the person committing the act is a Democrat President who is perjuring himself so that it helps his defense in a sexual harassment suit. Libby was more or less being crucified for something he’d never done, just because there was a desire to punish someone.
[/QUOTE]
Wait, which jury convicted Clinton? Is that the jury in your head with the very unique quality of non-existence?
How awful of those liberals to not respect the decisions of non-existent juries.
[QUOTE=alreadymichigan]
Wait, which jury convicted Clinton? Is that the jury in your head with the very unique quality of non-existence?
How awful of those liberals to not respect the decisions of non-existent juries.
[/QUOTE]
Yes, fortunately for Clinton he never had to appear before a jury, special treatment for special people and all.
If Libby was tried in front of the Senate do you really think he would have been convicted?
[QUOTE=Martin Hyde]
If Libby was tried in front of the Senate do you really think he would have been convicted?
[/QUOTE]
Is this more wisdom from your beloved non-existent legal system?
Under the real legal system, the one that exists outside your little mental fantasy land, why on earth would Libby be impeached? What the fuck does the Senate have to do with anything?
Hum…shouldn’t Scooter have to go hunting with Cheney?
[QUOTE=Martin Hyde]
Scooter Libby would have essentially been a political prisoner if Bush had not commuted the sentence. The sentence did not fit the crime and it was a miscarriage of justice.
[/quote]
You’ll have to explain, then, why the Bush-appointee judge felt it complied with the Federal sentencing guidelines, which according to the current Supreme Court, now have the presumption of reasonableness, and why your opinion on the matter is superior to his.
You’ll have to explain how Libby had “never done” what he did, which was to repeatedly seek, obtain, and disseminate information about Plame’s covert status, according to nine different witnesses, before the conversation occurred where he testified he’d initially learned about Plame’s covert status.
No, we actually have this weird notion that what you’re lying about matters, too.
But here’s the deal: if your standard is “perjury is perjury, regardless of the offense, and is always a serious crime deserving of real punishment,” then by your standard Libby should be in the slammer. And by the left’s standard, which takes into account the question of what’s being lied about, he also deserves to be in the slammer.
So it doesn’t really matter, does it?
[QUOTE=Mr. Excellent]
And yes, it’s important that Libby be punished - but he really is paying a substantial fine, and his legal career will never, ever come back. That might not sound like much - but I’ve only been a law student a year, and the thought of never being able to practice law is already enough to make me want to bawl like an infant. Does it really make sense for the state to assume the massive cost of imprisoning a criminal who poses no threat to the safety of people or property?
[/QUOTE]
Scooter Libby is a lawyer the way John Gotti is/was a resteraunteur. I mean, there’s business, and then there’s bidness!
Anyway, you may see lying to cover up treason as an OK thing, I don’t. The bastard belongs in a jail cell – for years.
[QUOTE=Mr. Moto]
I wasn’t demanding a full pardon.
This sits pretty well with me. It seems perfectly in line with how similar matters have been handled in the past.
[/QUOTE]
Yeah, treason’s OK. It’s practically a good thing, if you’re a Republican!
[QUOTE=RTFirefly]
You’ll have to explain, then, why the Bush-appointee judge felt it complied with the Federal sentencing guidelines, which according to the current Supreme Court, now have the presumption of reasonableness, and why your opinion on the matter is superior to his.
[/quote]
The judge was wrong, the support I have that my judgment is superior to his is his judgment was essentially reversed.
He was never convicted of any of those things, or for any crime under the IIPA.
That’s not an element of the crime of perjury, period. I can understand why you might want it to be, but it isn’t.
Where did I say that real punishment is only equated to prison time? $250,000 fines are serious, as is probation. Where did I say that perjury is a serious crime at all? I didn’t. I think it’s important that it is a crime, but I don’t think it should be punished as a serious felony. It should be like a misdemeanor meaning under 12 months in prison and/or a fine. People shouldn’t go to prison for years because they lied.
[QUOTE=Martin Hyde]
Where did I say that real punishment is only equated to prison time? $250,000 fines are serious, as is probation. Where did I say that perjury is a serious crime at all? I didn’t. I think it’s important that it is a crime, but I don’t think it should be punished as a serious felony. It should be like a misdemeanor meaning under 12 months in prison and/or a fine. People shouldn’t go to prison for years because they lied.
[/QUOTE]
Because treason is GOOD for America!
[QUOTE=Evil Captor]
Yeah, treason’s OK. It’s practically a good thing, if you’re a Republican!
[/QUOTE]
You need to brush up on Civics 101. No matter how you cut it, perjury isn’t treason.
Neither is revealing the identity of a covert operative, either (which is irrelevant since no one was convicted of that.)
[QUOTE=Martin Hyde]
The judge was wrong, the support I have that my judgment is superior to his is his judgment was essentially reversed.
[/QUOTE]
Wow.
So… you’re basically insane, then?
Fair enough. Er… good luck with that.
[QUOTE=Evil Captor]
Scooter Libby is a lawyer the way John Gotti is/was a resteraunteur. I mean, there’s business, and then there’s bidness!
Anyway, you may see lying to cover up treason as an OK thing, I don’t. The bastard belongs in a jail cell – for years.
[/QUOTE]
This was the point that galled me. Those who have supported the commutation of the sentence are pointing out that he’ll have his law license revoked and have to pay a $250,000 fine.
I don’t know Scooter Libby personally, but I’d wager a good chunk of change that it has been a pretty good while since he practiced law or was even contemplating going back to the practice of law after his government service. You dont’ need to be a lawyer to be a lobbiest or a Esteemed Fellow of Statesmanship and Government at the nearest conservative think-tank.
As to the $250,000 fine - I suspect the check to cover that has already been cut and is being hand delivered to the court clerk’s office.