The NYTimes reported that Bush has commuted Libby's 30 month sentence, calling it "excessive." Perhaps, but to replace 30 months with none seems just as excessive. It's pretty clear this man broke the law, and it is hard to see this move as anything but an admission by this administration that it can fall no further by doling out obvious political favors.
To those who will complain about this post. Tell me, what is wrong with commuting the sentence after 12 months? Or how about letting this man twist in the wind like so many prior staffers?
1 comment:
You're absolutely right: Mr. Libby did break the law - he was convicted of obstruction of justice and related offenses for not being fully truthful to a grand jury.
Lately, we seem to not view this sort of "procedural" crime as deserving incarceration - c.f. President Clinton's punishment for clearly committing perjury was a lot of embarrassment, and being disbarred. Mr. Berger's punishment for theft of classified material (and then lying about it) was a stiff fine and probation.
I don't like this trend, myself, but unfortunately there is precedent.
Side note I just learned: Libby was Marc Rich's attourney when Clinton pardoned him... not sure if that means anything, but it's interesting.
Post a Comment