Is this the same Democratic Party that shamed the White
House for eight years in the 1990s with its illicit
activity and lying? The same one that, in charge of
Congress today, routinely breaks the law by abusing its
oversight powers to pursue a political vendetta against
President Bush? That Democratic Party?
....Democrats, who even today tout Clinton as one of the
greatest presidents ever, apparently suffer from a lack of
shame.
A Remembrance Of Pardons Past
By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY
Posted Tuesday, July 03, 2007 4:20 PM PT
Justice: Those who criticize President Bush's decision to commute Scooter Libby's 30-month prison sentence should remember: The punishment should fit the crime. And in this case, there wasn't one.
Yet, that hasn't stopped Bush's foes from going into high dudgeon about Bush letting Libby avoid jail.
The New York Times editorialized that Bush, rather than showing basic decency, "sounded like a man worried about what a former loyalist might say when actually staring into a prison cell."
Presidential candidate and media darling Barack Obama opined this demonstrated how the Bush White House has "consistently placed itself and its ideology above the law."
New York Sen. Chuck Schumer said Bush's decision "completely tramples" the notion of "equal justice under the law." House Speaker Nancy Pelosi basically called Bush a liar for daring to overturn an unjust prosecution.
Meanwhile, Schumer's colleague from the Empire State, presidential candidate Hillary Clinton, made this comment, dripping in irony: "This commutation sends the clear signal that in this administration, cronyism and ideology trump competence and justice."
Is this the same Democratic Party that shamed the White House for eight years in the 1990s with its illicit activity and lying? The same one that, in charge of Congress today, routinely breaks the law by abusing its oversight powers to pursue a political vendetta against President Bush? That Democratic Party?
Just checking. It's pretty rich listening to the Democratic grandees wax eloquent about the "rule of law." As we recall, just a few years back, they seemed to think the nation's laws were mere suggestions.
Here's what Scooter Libby gets, even after Bush commuted his sentence: A felony with two year's probation, a $250,000 fine and the loss of his law license.
An honorable man who did honorable service all his life — including pro bono work, even for Democrats — with no prior offenses, gets slapped with a 2 1/2-year sentence that, in effect, has been suspended but not erased from his record.
First-time offenders rarely go to jail. Not this time. Judge Reggie Walton apparently wanted to show how tough he was. But would it have been "equal justice" for Libby to do time? In a word, no.
Libby's guilty verdict from the jury was understandable. But that's not the same thing as saying that he was in fact guilty.
After all, Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald failed to make his original case, but didn't want to come up empty-handed. So he made a case instead based on Libby's admittedly imperfect memories of what transpired. It was a technical case, but it stuck.
Why did Fitzgerald push this case? Fitzgerald knew early on in his investigation that it was Richard Armitage — and not Scooter Libby — who revealed the identity of Valerie Plame, a known CIA operative who had not been a covert agent for nearly a decade.
According to accounts of insiders, he made his decision early on to pursue Libby — perhaps hoping to bag bigger game, like Vice President Dick Cheney.
Let's return to the previous occupant of the White House — relevant, of course, because he might soon be back in 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. as first husband if Hillary can win in 2008.
As we said, the "equal justice" argument against clemency really founders when you compare Libby with what took place under the Clinton administration and after. The difference in treatment is stark.
President Clinton: Impeached for perjury and obstruction of justice, but acquitted by the U.S. Senate. His impeachment on the obstruction charge was basically a hung jury — 50-50.
In 1999, District Judge Susan Webber Wright cited Clinton's "willful failure" to tell the truth and failure to obey the court's orders of discovery in citing him for civil contempt in the Paula Jones case. (Jones, remember, claimed she was sexually assaulted by Clinton.)
Again, Clinton lied and obstructed an investigation. Yet he got off with a hand-slap: No prison time. An admission of misconduct, a $25,000 fine and a five-year suspension of his license. He had to pay Jones' lawyers' fees and some court costs — $90,686 total — but no felony was put on his record.
Based on all this, the Arkansas Supreme Court made Clinton surrender his Arkansas law license and he subsequently resigned from the U.S. Supreme Court bar — just before they were about to suspend him.
Sandy Berger: Former National Security Adviser Berger pleaded guilty in federal court to stealing classified documents from the National Archives, destroying some of those documents (obstruction), and lying to federal investigators (perjury).
Berger hid secret NSA documents in his socks and pants. He stole and apparently destroyed secret documents from the national archives.
He claimed the reason he took the documents was so he could prepare himself and others to help the 9/11 commission. This differed, however, from his previous explanation, in which he said he had made an "honest mistake" and either misplaced or unintentionally threw the documents away.
He took five copies, but returned just two. Again, perjury and obstruction of justice? Berger, too, got off with no prison time, a $50,000 fine, two years' probation and 100 hours of community service. No felony on his record. He also lost his law license.
Then there are the Bill Clinton pardons. Those now screaming about the leniency granted to Libby surely forget that Clinton issued 140 pardons on his last day in office. Many are questionable, to say the least.
Among the most notable (courtesy of the on-line reference Wikipedia):
Clinton commuted sentences for 16 members of the Puerto Rican separatist group FALN. That group had set off more than 100 bombs in the U.S., and the 16 had been convicted for a number of violent crimes, ranging from sedition to bomb-making.
Why would Clinton show such a tender heart for terrorists? Could it be he knew Hillary would need Puerto Rican votes to be elected in New York? We'll entertain alternative explanations, but that one so far seems to fit best.
Clinton also pardoned carnival operators Edgar and Vonna Jo Gregory. How did carnival operators get on his radar? Turns out they had loaned Hillary's brother, Tony Rodham, $107,000, which he never repaid. He didn't have to, as it turns out. Clinton stamped that debt "paid in full" with his pardons.
Then there was Carlos Vignali, a cocaine trafficker whose sentence Clinton commuted. And Almon Glenn Braswell, who was found guilty of mail fraud and perjury but won a pardon.
Why the pardon? Braswell and Vignali each paid Hillary's other brother, Hugh Rodham, $200,000, hoping he could win them clemency. Rodham returned the money, but only after the scandal became public.
Remember Marc Rich? He was pardoned for tax evasion. His ex-wife, Denise Rich, made substantial gifts to the Clinton library and to Hillary's senatorial campaign. Think there was a connection?
By the way, Rich later showed up in another scandal — the U.N.'s oil for food affair. Despite his pardon, he was hardly contrite.
We could go on. And on. For example, both Tyson Foods and Sun Diamond were fined millions of dollars for giving illegal gifts to Clinton's former Agriculture Secretary Mike Espy. Yet, somehow Espy himself was found innocent. How's that for equal under the law?
Others also found grace under Clinton's pardon frenzy — former Rep. Mel Reynolds (found guilty of sexual assault on a child and later of bank fraud); Susan MacDougal (pardoned for her role in the Whitewater scandal); and President Clinton's brother Roger Clinton (pardoned for earlier drug convictions).
As we said, the list is a long one. We gave just a taste of its sordid contents. But it puts Scooter Libby's case in context.
Democrats, who even today tout Clinton as one of the greatest presidents ever, apparently suffer from a lack of shame.
As Democrat after Democrat in the current Congress becomes embroiled in questionable and sometimes outright illegal behavior, we hear next to nothing from the leadership. Nothing, that is, until Libby's pardon, which fits perfectly into the Democrats' bogus "culture of corruption" campaign against the GOP.
By the way, why not go after the real liars in this case? Former Ambassador Joe Wilson and his wife, former CIA agent Plame?
They told so many conflicting tales to Congress, the press and the Libby investigators, it's hard to keep them straight. Wilson lied about Iraq's efforts in Africa to get nuclear material for its nuclear program, and Plame lied about being the one to send Wilson on the fact-finding trip to Africa.
No perjury or obstruction charges for them. Still, they couple has been lionized by the media for their repeated lies about Bush.
Which brings us back to Libby. This commutation wasn't venal on Bush's part. He had politically next to nothing to gain. And we're happy to see Bush hasn't ruled out a full pardon.
But for now, a free Libby can pursue his appeal, as more facts no doubt emerge showing how wrong his prosecution was. In the meantime, as the old saying goes, a half a loaf is better than none. We'll take Libby's freedom as a small measure of justice.
ibdeditorials.com |
