You know what I have to say about the whole Libby thing.
I don't give a damn.
It's just politics as usual. Both parties do the same thing. I don't care anymore.
I really stopped caring the last time a President did something illegal, and nothing came of it. Or the time before that.
Clinton created the Escalante Grand Staricase National Park. Didn't follow the rules set down to do such things. Didn't do any studies. Did it by fiat, stealing land from the one state he came in third in the election, so he had nothing to lose, and gained him more environmental votes. Announced from another state, rather than the one where all the land came from.
There was even a lawsuit, and the final result - what was done was wrong, but as it took years for the case to come to a conclusion, it would cost the government too much money to change it back so the illegal act stood.
Nixon did all his crap.
Strong Evidence that Johnson has something to do with Kennedy's murder.
I couldn't care less about a commute of sentence. It's business as usual.
2 comments:
So President Bush does the right thing and that's politics as usual? Hardly. President Bush usually does things out of a sense of right over wrong (rather than politics) all the time. Not that he hasn't made mistakes (he's made plenty) or that he never does anything for political reasons (the massive senior drug entitlemant program early in his administration is a great example). But I find your analysis of "both parties do it" to be faulty (both parties do do it but one party does it far more than the other).
What part of "Libby was convicted of perjury based on a crime (that wasn't a crime) the prosecutor knew Libby didn't commit" don't you understand? Perjury a serious crime? You betcha. But every indication holds that Libby--who was one of the busiest men in the nation as VP Cheney's chief of staff--is only guilty of misremembering a conversation he had with members of the press.
That fact that Libby wasn't pardoned (his sentence was commuted) should show that President Bush took Libby's case seriously: President Bush was willing to override the judge's sentence but not the jury's conviction. That is exactly what the constitutional pardon power of the president is designed to do. President Bush has not abused his pardon power (eighty pardons in six and a half years compared with President Clinton's more than 400 pardons in eight years). Go look up the people that both have pardoned and you tell me with a straight face that both parties are equal.
Oh, by the way, there is no evidence that then-Vice-President Johnson had anything to do with President Kennedy's assassination. That's black helicopter stuff. Really. There's an excellent book on this written by the guy who prosecuted Charles Manson (his name escapes me). He has studied the Kennedy assassination for over thirty years and dispells the myths surrounding JFK's murder. Gotta pick that one up.
Good points. I don't know if what Libby did was wrong or not, or if what Bush did was wrong or not - I haven't really researched it. I've read stuff on both sides whose points I can see.
I'm just tired of all the partisan politics - hence the I don't give a ....
Post a Comment