Comments on: Commute Libby’s Sentence http://macsmind.com/wordpress/news/commute-libbys-sentence/ Official Blog of the MacRanger Radio Show on Blog Talk Radio Tue, 07 Feb 2012 14:48:20 -0600 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.3 By: The Strata-Sphere » Blog Archive » Commute Scooter Libby http://macsmind.com/wordpress/news/commute-libbys-sentence/comment-page-1/#comment-2337 The Strata-Sphere » Blog Archive » Commute Scooter Libby Thu, 07 Jun 2007 20:44:07 +0000 http://www.macsmind.com/wordpress/2007/06/07/commute-libbys-sentence/#comment-2337 [...] I agree with what Clarice Feldman and the folks over at Powerline said regarding the idea posed today in the Washington Post that Scooter Libby should have his jail time commuted and his fine retained (possibly reduced). The idea is sound because a jury decided there was an infraction of the law. It was not a major one and it was not the one Fitzgerald pretends it to be. Fitzgerald KNEW who leaked Valerie Plame’s name to the media and it was not Scooter Libby. [...] [...] I agree with what Clarice Feldman and the folks over at Powerline said regarding the idea posed today in the Washington Post that Scooter Libby should have his jail time commuted and his fine retained (possibly reduced). The idea is sound because a jury decided there was an infraction of the law. It was not a major one and it was not the one Fitzgerald pretends it to be. Fitzgerald KNEW who leaked Valerie Plame’s name to the media and it was not Scooter Libby. [...]

]]> By: clarice http://macsmind.com/wordpress/news/commute-libbys-sentence/comment-page-1/#comment-2340 clarice Thu, 07 Jun 2007 19:22:32 +0000 http://www.macsmind.com/wordpress/2007/06/07/commute-libbys-sentence/#comment-2340 Here's Fred's latest on the Libby case: http://www.townhall.com/Columnists/FredThompson/2007/06/07/sentencing_of_scooter_libby Here’s Fred’s latest on the Libby case:

http://www.townhall.com/Columnists/FredThompson/2007/06/07/sentencing_of_scooter_libby

]]> By: clarice http://macsmind.com/wordpress/news/commute-libbys-sentence/comment-page-1/#comment-2339 clarice Thu, 07 Jun 2007 19:14:51 +0000 http://www.macsmind.com/wordpress/2007/06/07/commute-libbys-sentence/#comment-2339 I do, too. And a commutation allows the Ct of Appeals to undo what Fitz and Walton created. Here is the comment of cathyf, a brilliant JOM poster: "Well, Bush is a notorious poker player who doesn't tip his hand unless he needs to. If he were going to do what I want him to do, I would think, first, wait until we see if Walton denies the appeal bond. If he doesn't, then Bush should just keep his mouth shut. If he does, then the next step will be to appeal that decision -- and I think that appeal has an excellent chance of succeeding. Only if the appeals court denies the appeal bond should Bush commute the sentence. I think that Walton is playing a dangerous game here. He is afraid that if Libby is allowed to appeal, then the appeals court is going to spank him very badly. So I think he is trying to force Bush to pardon Libby so as to moot the appeal and make it all go away. (Because, you see, a side effect of pardoning Libby is that it also "pardons" Walton and Fitzgerald and Russert by making any punishment for them dead letter.) If that's what's in Walton's head, well something about bringing a knife to a gun fight comes to mind... If we can figure out that Bush can commute the sentence to let the appeals go forward, I'm sure that the White House can figure it out, too. Also, I have noticed that there is one value that judges have which cuts across all idealogical and philosophical lines and all levels of the court system -- they get really really really pissed off at people playing them for fools. If the appeals court decides that Walton is trying to screw with them, they will overrule him and grant the appeal bond so fast that Walton's head will be spinning for a week. On that same line of reasoning, what Bush should want (as the guy who stood up twice and swore to defend and protect the constitution) is for the judicial branch to fix Walton's mess. The most effective way to do that is to give them enough room to do it -- anything which a prickly judge (and prickliness is a notorious aspect of judical character) would interpret as interference should be avoided unless absolutely necessary. What Bush should avoid at pretty much all costs is setting up a situation where the appeals court believes that Bush is going to pardon Libby anyway, because that would just piss them off, and who knows what sort of disaster they will cause if they decide to get revenge. Posted by: cathyf | June 07, 2007 at 03:00 PM" I do, too. And a commutation allows the Ct of Appeals to undo what Fitz and Walton created.
Here is the comment of cathyf, a brilliant JOM poster:
“Well, Bush is a notorious poker player who doesn’t tip his hand unless he needs to. If he were going to do what I want him to do, I would think, first, wait until we see if Walton denies the appeal bond. If he doesn’t, then Bush should just keep his mouth shut. If he does, then the next step will be to appeal that decision — and I think that appeal has an excellent chance of succeeding. Only if the appeals court denies the appeal bond should Bush commute the sentence.

I think that Walton is playing a dangerous game here. He is afraid that if Libby is allowed to appeal, then the appeals court is going to spank him very badly. So I think he is trying to force Bush to pardon Libby so as to moot the appeal and make it all go away. (Because, you see, a side effect of pardoning Libby is that it also “pardons” Walton and Fitzgerald and Russert by making any punishment for them dead letter.)

If that’s what’s in Walton’s head, well something about bringing a knife to a gun fight comes to mind… If we can figure out that Bush can commute the sentence to let the appeals go forward, I’m sure that the White House can figure it out, too. Also, I have noticed that there is one value that judges have which cuts across all idealogical and philosophical lines and all levels of the court system — they get really really really pissed off at people playing them for fools. If the appeals court decides that Walton is trying to screw with them, they will overrule him and grant the appeal bond so fast that Walton’s head will be spinning for a week.

On that same line of reasoning, what Bush should want (as the guy who stood up twice and swore to defend and protect the constitution) is for the judicial branch to fix Walton’s mess. The most effective way to do that is to give them enough room to do it — anything which a prickly judge (and prickliness is a notorious aspect of judical character) would interpret as interference should be avoided unless absolutely necessary. What Bush should avoid at pretty much all costs is setting up a situation where the appeals court believes that Bush is going to pardon Libby anyway, because that would just piss them off, and who knows what sort of disaster they will cause if they decide to get revenge.

Posted by: cathyf | June 07, 2007 at 03:00 PM”

]]> By: Macranger http://macsmind.com/wordpress/news/commute-libbys-sentence/comment-page-1/#comment-2338 Macranger Thu, 07 Jun 2007 19:08:20 +0000 http://www.macsmind.com/wordpress/2007/06/07/commute-libbys-sentence/#comment-2338 I agree Clarice, and perhaps more doable than a pardon. I like Libby's chances of overturning th conviction on appeal too. I agree Clarice, and perhaps more doable than a pardon.

I like Libby’s chances of overturning th conviction on appeal too.

]]>