Bush is now a liberal.
 

So he lets Scooter out of a very harsh sentence without fully understanding the long term ramifications.

Critics of the federal sentencing system have a long list of complaints. Sentences, they say, are too harsh. Judges are allowed to take account of facts not proven to the jury. The defendant’s positive contributions are ignored, as is the collateral damage that imprisonment causes the families involved.

On Monday, President Bush made use of every element of that critique in a detailed statement setting out his reasons for commuting Mr. Libby’s sentence.

That left experts in sentencing law scratching their heads.



So Bush has reasoned that Federal Sentencing is too tough. This is great news for Defense Attorneys across the land who have always said Federal Court was way too strict. Bush's own Justice Dept. disagrees and wants to make federal sentencing tougher. This is really getting funny. Mr. Bush thinks federal sentencing is too tough.

Yeah...how many were executed in Texas while he was governor? Of course none were wealthy/connected white guys probably...

partial list of the 185 people commuted or pardoned by Bill Clinton.


Roger Clinton, Jr. - Roger was arrested for cocaine possession served a year in federal prison
Patricia Campbell Hearst - sentence commuted on condition by Jimmy Carter, pardoned by Clinton
Marc Rich - Fled the US while being prosecuted on charges of tax evasion and illegally making oil deals with Iran during the hostage crisis.
Dan Rostenkowski - United States Representative Democratic Party
Archie Schaffer - Tyson Foods executive was convicted for bribery, see Mike Espy
Susan McDougal - partners with Bill Clinton and Hillary Rodham Clinton in the failed Whitewater deal
Henry Cisneros - Clinton's Secretary of Housing and Urban Development. Pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor count of lying to the FBI, and was fined $10,000.
Pincus Green - Green fled the US with Marc Rich indicted by U.S. Attorney on charges of tax evasion and illegal trading with Iran
Mel Reynolds - Democratic member of the United States House of Representatives

Not to mention all the people who mysteriously perished during Mr. & Mrs. Rodham's presidency.

No doubt, every President does this...I just find it funny when law & order types do!

and slick willy didnt do any of this..............

in this case, i agree with bush cutting out the prison portion of the sentence. a 250k fine is pretty stiff punishment on its own, especially when you consider that this guy was never in trouble with the law, and that no criminal prosecution stemming from this entire investigation seems to be forthcoming.
there is still a possibility that a full pardon may occur.

but when you compare his perjury sentence to..oh, say, sandy berger stealing classified documents, some of which he destroyed, and he didn't spend a day in jail--well, it's a head-scratcher imo.

Always thought the presidential power to pardon was an odd part of our heritage. A leftover from the monarchial government of England, no doubt. It does seem to have been subject to abuse, although it doesn't often get press when it's employed. But it also has some redeeming qualities. It allows the prez to cut through the red tape and just do the right thing (though I'm not saying that Scooter deserved to be partially absolved). I remember when Ford pardoned Tricky Dick. It probably cost him re-election (or should I say election, since Ford was never elected, even as vice-president), but in retrospect, I think it was the right way to end the Watergate scandal and put it all behind us.

Critics of the federal sentencing system have a long list of complaints. Sentences, they say, are too harsh.
1.Judges are allowed to take account of facts not proven to the jury.
2.The defendant’s positive contributions are ignored,
3.as is the collateral damage that imprisonment causes the families involved.

As Somer said: This is from a law and order guy. Liberal Defense Attorneys are licking their chops because of the reasoning he used. Again, you cant have it both ways.

Bush has set a precedent by using the above. This is what we expect from democratic liberals as other posters so aptly pointed out with slick william, etc...

This is really going to be funny when the 3 above are used by defense attorneys to ask judges to reduce the sentences of criminals charged with federal crimes.

Federal sentences are too harsh, almost draconian. But the truth is that Bush's actions will have no effect on other criminal cases in the federal system because such sentences are the result of strict sentencing guidelines which take into account many factors in a very exacting manner. It would make not a bit of difference if a defense attorney pointed out the justifications spewed out by the White House in defense of the president's use of his pardon power. A federal judge in any other criminal case will still be limited and directed by the guidelines, from which there can be little deviation.

And by the way, not all defense attorneys are liberals. Plus, an attorney, whether liberal or conservative, is going to do all he can, and make every reasonable argument he can on the behalf of his client. An attorney can't disregard any potentially effective argument just because he disagrees with it philosophically. If he did, he wouldn't be doing his job, which is to zealously defend his client.

SIT DOWN..




..Mr. Darden.

Ellen Podgar disagrees with you but I understand what you are saying.

“By saying that the sentence was excessive, I wonder if he understood the ramifications of saying that,” said Ellen S. Podgor, who teaches criminal law at Stetson University in St. Petersburg, Fla. “This is opening up a can of worms about federal sentencing.”

And by the way, not all defense attorneys are liberals. And of course you are correct. I think I was making a fairly safe generalization.

Ok Judge Morton you finally got me laughing.
That my boy, is funny.

ROR

The Ellen Podgar from the prestigous Stetson University......

The can of worms was opened a long time ago regarding the excessiveness of federal sentences. And I don't think Professor Podgor meant to imply that this will make much of a difference in the trial courts, at least not immediately. It might add ammunition, however, to appellate challenges to the sentencing guidelines.

Yeah, your probably right, in terms of "liberal defense attorney" being a safe generalization.

Hey they named a hat after that University. You know there is a Simon Frazier University or College in Canada so I see where you are headed.

was just reading today about yet another huckabee pardoned former convict being re-arrested. they said that since he's not well-known as far as running for president, he wouldn't take much heat. but that guy pardoned more criminals than the three previous governors COMBINED. one of which was clinton, who i believe served three terms (not all consecutive--and before my time!) as governor. seems the former baptist minister believes quite a bit in redemption, altho the most recent re-arrestee had a horrible behavior record while in jail. certainly not a model prisoner...so why the early out? ah, that's huckabee for ya. certainly would not in a million years get my vote for prez. and i hope like hell no one considers him for their running mate! ugh

The Fraser Crane of Simon Frazier University...

Well, certainly not surprising to the many of us that know and love you, Featherhead.

I can just see Morton pounding that gavel... by God the Judge has had enough dammit.

WTF is wrong with me. Im still laughing at this little scene.