Blog Of The Nation
I shouldn't say that I can't believe Bush all but pardoned Scooter Libby. It would make me aghast if I wasn't used to this type of behavior by now.
It would really be nice to work in the White House these days. If you block justice for your boss, Dick Cheney, no problem. Pay the fine and go about your business. If you're Dick Cheney and people want to see your records, create a fourth branch of the federal government. What excellent job security.
This shouldn't surprise anyone. Bush is selfish, like the majority of his administration.
Like it was commented earlier today, this shouldn't be news. There are far more important things going on.
Bush's decision is so out of line that his own ultra-conservative supreme court has ruled in a similar case to give MORE jail time to the defendant. Bush's effective pardon of Libby is yet another indication of the administration's belief that they are above the law.
I agree with Daniel. The administration's behavior should shock no one at this point. I just wonder who wrote Bush's speech containing the concept that he had thought "long and hard" about anything...
I'd like you to ask all those who support the president's decision where they stood on the Clinton impeachment, and, if they were for the impeachment, how they reconcile the two views.
I can not believe there are not Veteran and soldier support groups out there publicly denouncing this move. They have been sent to defend and uphold the laws of this democracy. Like the outcome, hate the outcome, it is the rule of law that separate us from the nations we denounce. Here is a guy whose is part of the cartel that knowingly provided false intelligence used to convince congress to send our troops to war where so far nearly 3600 have died and 25,000 have been injured. Where is their pardon?
How can you support a democracy through a dictator?
Bush may have that constitutional right, but Scooter should do his time.
Esp since his party has/will fundraise to pay his fine.
The rift between 79% of this democracy with its president is irreperable.
Bush did not even present this to the public face to face on television.
Is there any other period in ourhistory where the president has so thoroughly ignored the public or has the public/government relationship gone completely off track?
This is a stunning period for me, one in which I have difficulty finding historical comparisons.
Outrageous! Cheney commits treason, then pardons Libbey to silence him. And the spineless congress refuses to impeach. If treason is not a high crime or misdemeanor, what is?
the blame goes to the american voter. why would you vote for a millionaire in the first place who priorties are to other millionaires.mr libby will pay the quater of a million like i pay my local utility. that a boy g-dub-ya
It seems unbelievable to me that the president says that this is unreasonable that this convicted man should serve this sentence when he has many men that aren't even charged sitting in Guantanamo that may never leave or even have a chance to defend themselves
I have no confidence in anything this administration does and I am beyond being shocked. However, in this case unless, Dick Cheney or Dick Armitage goes to jail, then why should Libby take the fall.
Of course, Bush will pardon Libby on his way out of the white house.
The President said he respects the jury decision ---
The jury convicted Libby of a felony --
Felonies usually carry a term of at least one year --
So the President thinks that a felony of this type deserves no jail time what so ever? Why not make him serve like 6 months if he really respects the jury decision.
Even Paris served about 20 days for a misdemeanor.
I would respect the President more if he just said, this is my buddy, I have the power. To try to give us twisted logic is blatently disingenuous.
I don't know why Bush didn't go all the way and Pardon Libby. It is not like his ratings could go down much more. Even if they went down it would not make a difference. I think he will just Pardon him later.
Absolutely no surprise here; but, Libby did the crime, Libby should do the time. period!
Failing that, there is no longer a rule of law in these Untied States (intentional missmelling).
Ambassador Wilson claimed on NPR this morning that the Bush Administration is "Corrupt to the Core." This may be another coverup of criminal activity. (We may never know...)
Libby's acts have made him famous. judging from the headkunes over weeks, fame buys you leanancy on your sentence.
I can't believe that our President commuted Scooter Libby's sentence. I believe he should allowed the process to come to a close before he exercised any of his options. I don't think a full pardon is justified and its an embarrasment to executive powers and a black eye for the republican party
I can't help but feel that the "criticisms" of the right (the fact that Libby didn't get a full pardon) is just posturing to counter act the valid concerns of the public at large. The fact that Libby's "punishment" is a fine and probation is a gross injustice and only further cements the notion that the Bush administration has a severely skewed sense of morality. The only thing more outrageous is the fact that no serious steps have been taken towards impeachment for the myriad of this administration's offenses.
The commutation is absolutely outrageous. It is exactly "corrupt" as Joe Wilson called it, and the know-nothing responses by conservatives parallel the know-nothing opinions by the now illicitly stacked Supreme Court. This is American Fascism (Fascism meaning Musolini, not Hitler).
As a 5th generation Texan, I wish more strongly with each passing week that he would claim someplace else as his home state. It's sad to see how much he and his entire administration have squandered goodwill here and abroad.
The commutation wasn't because of the "prominence and unique connection to the White House" as stated on the program. This is a case of the criminal president and vice president authorizing Libby to break the law on their behalf by obstructing justice, knowing all the while Bush would see that no jail time was served.
The commutation of Libby's sentence doesn't "send a bad message to the American people about justice." It is a subversion of justice. It is, itself, probably a crime. We need some backbone from the Democratic congress. Things are getting worse.
Liby should be given a pardon and then waterboarded. After all its not really torcher.
Scooter Libby was found guilty of a felony while working as a "special assistant to the president". Bush does not dispute his guilt. An obstruction of justice felony conviction committed while in the employment of the president and vice president. That very same president decided to keep Scooter out of jail. He didn't wait until the appeals process was over. He should be ashamed.
President Bush said that he respects the decision of the jury, but that he found a problem with the sentence. It would be reasonable to conclude, then, that he has a problem with the judge. Yet, Bush appointed Judge Reggie B. Walton to his post in 2001 and ostensibly did so because of Walton's tough stance on crime. Hypocrisy much?
If I was a CIA agent, I would be livid. Why would I lay my life on the line if some political hack in the White House could lie about who blew my cover and obstruct the investigation into who was responsible?
CIA turnover ought to be rampant now.
Your Wall Street ournal Editorial representative just said again that Valerie Plame was NOT undercover - something the courts have established.
Regarding Scooter Libby:
Do you remember when Bill Clinton lied to a Federal Grand Jury?
He didn't loose his law license or spend time in prison.
Democrats who are out for blood, ought to remind themselves of this.
Then he went on to make 140 pardons of his criminal cronies.
Here's a list of them provided by the Department of Justice, in case you forgot.
http://www.usdoj.gov/opa/pardonchartlst.htm
Libby should be required to serve the sentence he received for conviction for perjury and obstruction of justice. "The decider" chose to commute the sentence for political reasons, to alleviate pressure on Libby to speak out about the malfeasance of the administration. What does this say about the Executive's view of the rule of law in our federal courts? He has the power to commute the sentence, but it was exercised improperly. But it's no surprise.
The thing that bothers me most about this commutation is that it is extraordinarilty fishy. It strikes me as highly likely that Libby struck a deal to have his sentence commuted in exchange for not rolling over and giving up VP Cheney for treason against the state.
I think we should amend the Constitution to require Congressional (or better yet, voter) approval before being allowed to take the law into his own hands, at the least. As a libertarian, I'm tired of the finger-pointing between left- & right-wingers. There are far more than two ideals in this country. How is it in our national interest to allow the president to pardon his buddies, be it Clinton pardoning Mark Rich, Bush1 pardoning Cap Weinberger, or Bush2 commuting Libby? What happened to separation of powers? What's with the executive branch making and deciding laws?
Libby will have all his charges erased when Bush leaves office. "Courage" would be to actually look into what really happened here, but the truth always seems to be the first victim in politics.
I think that the President has a perverted sense of justice. If he thinks Libby's sentence was too harsh, he should remember those who have been in prision camps much longer than Libby would have spent behind bars. The President continues to refuse to give these people a trial, a right to hear what they are charged with, let alone an oppertunity to be sentenced!
No, I'm not surprised that Bush commuted Libby's sentence. The arrogance of the current administration is legendary. The question remains, why weren't the leakers prosecuted? This case clearly reaches up into the upper echelons of the executive branch and this commutation relieves the pressure. Its a shame for all of us.
Can't any member of the news media have the guts to ask a tough question? How can anyone who is paying any attention at all not question a statement that Scooter Libby will have to pay the fine? It's well publicized that there's a fund for his legal defense. That Steve Moore would equate Bill Clinton's perjury to Libby's in a time of war is laughable. Please NPR at least you could have the nerve to ask the obvious questions.
One of your commentators just compared a case that deals with a Federal Felony - a major crime - with the Bill Clinton case were the issue was lying about engaging in sexual activity with a consenting adult. That isn't even a misdemeanor, and should have been simply left as an issue within the Clinton family. The case was a trumped up charge in Clinton's case, while Libby was acting as an officer of the court and committing purgery.
Please stop talking about Bill Clinton. He was never charged with lying to a Grand ury, no matter if he did. He was never charged.
WAS SHE, WAS SHE NOT A COVERT AGENT???!!!
PLEASE HELP CLEAR THE AIR WITH A LITTLE TRUTH!
There is absolutely no question that Valerie Plame was a covert agent. This was established in court and the reason the CIA referred the issue to the Department of Justice in the first place. People who state otherwise are not telling the truth. Exposure of a covert agent is by definition treason. There was a criminal conspiracy in the White House to commit this crime, and the Libby case is all about protecting the Vice President and the President from their treason. The commutation of Libby, and his future pardon, constitutes obstruction of justice - the quid-pro-quo deal made with Libby to protect the President and Vice President. How many crimes must they commit before Congress does its job and begins impeachment proceedings?
It was very discouraging to see President Bush take the action he did in the Libby case. It proves once more that justice is up for bid and the rich and powerful have more control over how the justice system works than average people. Justice is a cliche and he has lowered the standard to the type of tin-pan dictator's hold on justice south of the border. But equally as serious is whether we really heard the truth. What is Bush and Cheney hiding that would require giving Libby hush pay-off for his silence on the administration's manipulation of the facts in order to sell the public on the war. I suspect that the real tragedy here is the 3,600 senselessly killed American soldiers, the thousands wounded and thousands more Iraqis killed and injured. We have no one to blame but ourselves for this breach of accountability.
It's irrelevant whether Libby was guilty, or whether the sentence was "severe." Thousand of ordinary people request commutations and pardons from the president. I find it hard to believe that the only request in the last six 1/2 years that was found to be legitimate happened to come from a high ranking administration official. This is unequal application of justice.
Rebecca Roberts?
Why do you not challenge people when they claim that Plame was not covert.
This is not a debatable point, or a matter of opinion, and you are not being neutral or fair by letting claims like that go unchallenged.
You are actually favoring the liars.
It's a matter of record. A fact.
Do your job! Be a journalist, not a receptionist.
If we have an independent Judiciary and if no one is above the law, why is a sitting president intervening in a jury's decision? "Scooter" Libby should at least serve some of the sentence imposed on him. Otherwise, some people are certainly above the law.
How do the Republicans explain their hypocrisy of opposing amnesty for illegal immigrants, who they believe have broken the law and firmly support amnesty for Scooter Libby, who was convicted of breaking the law but will escape justice because he is well connected with the rich, powerful Republican friends of Bush and his cronies? We MUST begin now to tag this action as "Amnesty for Libby". The Right-Wing has 'dirtied' this term so let's use it agaist them and this action.
The WSJ talking head asks "Should Bill Clinton have one to jail for lying to a grand jury?" How pathetic. Clinton was impeached for lying about sexual behavior. Scooter was found guilty by a jury and sentenced to jail. No comparison. Where did the WSJ spinner go to school? There is no comparison between impeachment and "guilty" by trial. More smoke by the right wing neanderthals.
Of course Libby should go to jail, but he was the fall guy for his bosses, who were desperately afraid of what he might say behind bars. His commutation and ultimate pardon are the price that Bush/Cheney had to pay to aviod being fitted out for the orange jump suits later on
Why did Rebecca Roberts not question the Wall Street Journal editor when he said that Valerie Plame was not a covert agent? Did she agree with him? Or did she not have any information that would show him to be fabricating? Is it true that Plame was not a covert agent? It must be one way or the other. What is Roberts' job - to simply ask one question and allow the guest to speak?
For those who think Libby should be pardoned because he is merely a scapgoat: the cummutation reduces the probability of finding out whom he is a scapegoat for. Do they think there is any justice, or benefit to the nation, in that result?
I find it interesting that the conservatives, who have recently shown such self-righteous indignation over illegal immigration, are applauding the president's decision to commute Libby's sentence. Where is the respect for law and order now?
This is part of Bill Clinton's Federal Grand Jury testimony:
Q: If Monica Lewinsky says that you used a cigar as a sexual aid with her in the Oval Office area, would she be lying? Yes, no, or won't answer?
Clinton: I will revert to my former statement. (Former Statement) You are free to infer that my testimony is that I did not have sexual relations, as I understood this term to be defined.
Whatever he was lying about, he was lying to a Federal Grand Jury! And he never served prison time.
A caller on Talk of the Nation hit the nail on the head today. If Bush had granted Libby a full pardon, he would have been eligible to testify against Cheney and the other real criminals in this currurpt administration. It's another sad day (and six years) for justice.
Almost everyone in the mainstream news media, including this show, enjoys throwing in Bill Clinton's pardon of criminal Marc Rich for moral comparison with Bush's actions yesterday. But they always fail to mention one thing: who was Rich's lawyer, who secured this incredible pardon? His name is I. Lewis Libby.
First, I completely agree with the action of the President. Libby just shouldn't do the time. Period. File this one under "C" for conspiracy or "N" for no-brainer.
Sadly, the Libby commutation is going to be just one more partisan chew the fat debate: Dems (mostly) will disagree and namecall while Republicans will agree, then push for a full partdon.
You said earlier in the show that support on your blog for the commuting of Libby's sentence was pale. Well....if your audience is primarily liberal, what do you expect?
Hit a conservative blog or talk show and the comments will lean to the right. (duh, respectfully).
Valerie Plame was a NOC agent, non-official cover. Years of money and planning went into establishing her as a private sector "energy analyst," and she probably cultivated a network of informants and assets in the effort to control nuclear proliferation. That her cover was blown to defend a bogus proliferation claim (Niger yellow cake) in the buildup to an illegal war, which itself has encouraged nuclear proliferation, should give every American pause. I just can't understand why conservatives, who generally support effective national security strategies, would support this crime which may have damaged our security just to accomplish a political vendetta. Make no mistake: supporting this commutation, or a pardon, is equivalent to supporting the crime, because it halts the progress of the investigation. If justice would truly run its course, we'd hear about the involvement of Cheney, maybe Bush, and others in the administration. Why have conservatives been bamboozled into supporting this kind of mafia-style government?
I think Clinton is completely relevant here. Although the situations are not exact, the principles are similar. Why is everyone out for blood for a simple perjury charge? This isn't even about the leak anymore. I don't remember a time when either party has sought to make so much out of nothing.
Want to compare this to another president? Try Nixon. He didn't DARE get his Watergate aides out of jail. They served their terms. I can't believe that NPR and the rest of the press are letting the administration get away with this. This is FAR worse than Watergate!
Bill Clintons lie to the grand Jury was the result of questions that the government had no right to ask about an incident that resulted in a few million potential Americans ending up on that fated blue dress.
Scooter Libby's lie to the grand jury was to cover up a criminal coercion to quell a dissenting and accurate view about Iraq's WMD. A fact that lead the congress to send Americans to their death.
The host and guest suggest this sort of story has little sustained interest outside the beltway. This is completely wrong and infuriating that these people would even suggest it. The pattern of criminal behavior by our president and his cronies should be front page news every day until all of them are impeached and imprisoned, and we learn as a people how to continuously be in charge of our own democracy.
I find it absolutely appalling that your guest from the WSJ has twice compared this trial to that of President Clinton. Yes, President Clinton did lie to a jury to hide skeletons in his own personal closet that affected nobody outside of his family. After 8 years and what, 3 billion dollars, all that was found was a very inappropriate extramarital affair.
In the Scooter Libby case, we are talking about a lie to a grand jury to cover a presidential lie made during the State of the Union address. A lie that led our country into an unprecedented war of aggression.
The comparison is absurd and needs to be challenged.
In my Latin American politics class, this summer, we have been measuring democratic consolidation of different countries. One of the measures is Rule of Law-the idea that those who violate the law are punished without impunity. How can we hope to improve democracies in other countries if we can't even follow our own rules?
Here is where I see a problem. Libby was found guilty for obstructing prosecution, and when his sentence is commuted to show no jail time the media is in an uproar.
Two years ago, Sandy Berger admitted to stealing and destroying classified documents about the largest terrorism attack on our soil, during a commission that was investigating how the attack occured. A far graver crime.
Where is the outcry about this? If Libby should be in jail, then he should be looking across the hall into Berger's jail cell as well.
The only difference that I can see, is that one was part of the Bush administration and the other was part of Clinton's administration.
The arrogance and sheer disregard the presidents administration has shown for the justice system, not to mention the laws enforced by that system, is of the most contemptuous sort. In an effort to do whatever he pleases, the president and his policies seemingly attempt to do whatever he wants, regardless of precident or right and wrong. And when he gets tripped up he abuses exective power and changes the rules; rules that keep each of us honest and on a level playing field. Well that field just got flipped upside down. This administration is trying to mold America in the image of the few to the dicontent of the many. Wake up America. IDEALOGS ARE BAD FOR GOVERNMENT!
What a really lousy interview Rebecca just did with the Op/Ed Editor of the Wall Street Journal.
She left unchallenged his stupid talking-point assertion that Valerie Plame was not a covert agent! How many times does that have to be proved?
And why not ask him how he reconciles Bush calling upon Congress to make every federal crime subject to a mandatory minimum sentence (thereby preventing judges from imposing an individually tailored sentence based on their view of the offender's character and mitigating factors) with this commutation?
And when he was sympathizing with poor Scooter Libby's law career going up in smoke, how about asking about Valerie Plame's career?
In dredging up Clinton issues, since when do two wrongs make a right? Ask him!
There's just too many talking-points left unchallenged, and that's what's wrong with NPR, and the other media too, these days.
The comments comparing this action by W to Clinton are specious and hypocritical. Can you image the howls of purple-faced outrage that the Republicans would be spewing if this were Clinton? Remember the "rule of law" and how it was SO terribly important to uphold? Not anymore, I guess.
Finally, I love how they trot out Clinton's past deeds when it serves them, but conveniently forget their own actions during his terms.
NPRs he-said she-said "balanced" coverage of this is disgusting. The president is not Solomon, cutting Libby's sentence down the middle. He's a clever, devious criminal, covering his tracks by keeping his henchman out of jail.
This commutation is part of a criminal coverup, not a debatable dispensation of mercy.
I am outraged by the commute of Libby's sentence. There is already too great a disparity between the sentences for white-collar crime as compared to blue-collar type crimes. In my region today a man was sentenced to 32 years in prison for drug and gun violations. Few people were hurt by his crimes. Millions are injured by white-collar criminals, but they get a slap on the wrist.
I agree with Colin above, and with others with similar points. There is room for people to disagree about whether justice was served in this case. I have strong opinions about it myself.
However, Valerie Plame was covert. It is a matter of court record. It is a matter of Congressional Record. It is indisputable.
When somebody tells a lie to support their argument, it is poor journalism to allow it to go unchallenged. And no, having angry callers shout it is not the same thing as a host saying, "Excuse me, but I believe that's incorrect."
Moreover, it is entirely possible that the Plame leak, the subsequent trials, and perhaps the Iraq War might have been avoided had it not been for the complacency of the press, and its collective willingness to let lies like this pass. Haven't we learned anything?
I despair of journalism, and especially of journalism at NPR. I have a question for the gentleman-guest who so carefully recited the Bush Administration "explanation" and sought to give it a frame of reasonability. Have you no shame, no standards, no values other than being the mouthpiece of those whom you cover? I listened to the "reasonable" tone and the gentleman-guest's calming explanation and it sounded so much like Tony Snow's delivery. Has NPR Journalism become the polite recitation of whatever the White house says, no matter how wrong. What Bush did is really quite unprecedented -- using the pardon power to protect one of their own during the President's term. Has this happened before? There are still very real questions about Bush, Cheney's and Rove's responsibility for outing Plame. This is so clearly a move to thwart justice. And "journalists" just reiterate the deceptions that Plame was not covert when the judge and jury concluded she was. It's so manifestly an abuse of power, and yet that plain truth is just glossed over by "journalists" as if it were some nut-job political view. Every year my abandonment of supporting NPR becomes more firm. This kind of servile enabling and helping-out by making the outrageous seem reasonable is a real and serious threat to our republic. If we were to see the rise of an Augustus Caesar or a Mussolini (let's leave out the most explosive), I am certain that most journalists would do just the same, explain why the fella thought it was reasonable and necessary and his duty to take power. Thanks for nothing.
If Paris could learn a few lessons in 20 days, Scooter Libby could learn a few in 30 months! Letting him get off so easily is ridiculous! This we call a democratic nation and try to spread the same elsewhere? Can someone tell me the difference between this and dictatorship?
Libby's commutation sets an important precedent: It is now acceptable for administration personnel to lie about criminal or ethical matters, especially to protect their administration. Such lying adds a promise to a threat. The promise: lie if it helps the administration -- you will probably not be punished. The threat: if you reveal administration truths you will be smeared.
In Oct 2000, Bush said:
"We will ask not only what is legal, but what is right; not what the lawyers allow, but what the public deserves."
Well, in that regard, commuting an individual who has been convicted of a crime by over-ruling a judicial decision may be legal under Presidential constitutional authority...but is that right?
Bush is so low in his polls that he doesn't care about the general public opinion at all and simply wants to please his base. He can't lose that 27% support because that's all he's got.
It's same old practice of the Bush admin. considering themselves as the "chosen people" to whom the law/constitution simply doesn't apply. It's one more corrupt act by this corrupt and incompetent administration. NOTHING NEW!
I don't see how this is any more wrong or politcally motivated then previous presidential favors or pardons. I think that the manner in which the president treated Libby's case was at least in a manner true to his own opinions and feelings of the matter.
Rule of law. Three little words. This administration has done more to undermine the rule of law than any other in our nations history. The fundamental idea of what the USA is and what it represents to the rest of world is that "all 'people' are created equal...". In the USA no-one should be above the law. This is a sad day in the sad history or worst Executive Branch in US history. This is a shout-out to the Legislative and Judicial branches and to the US citizenry... PLEASE WAKE UP!!!!
As I listened to the piece and read the blogs and comments; only one thing was surprising-that so many of us were surprised by this. Folks-this behaviour is nothing new and certainly not out of character for Dubya. His administration is full of this same sort of cronyism and flagrant disdain and disregard for our legal system. There is nothing even remotely surprising about this incident.
Should definitely be incarcerated!! I almost feel as we - the
taxpayers - are going to pay for the $250.000 fine he has to pay,
since this definitely is part of the cover-up! What great timing, as
we celebrate the birth of the Constitution!
Christiaan Blok
It's dismaying to me that the habits of the Bush 43 Administration have so blunted our collective ability to reason that we actually debate the merits of a cavalier action like the self-interested commutation of Scooter Libby as if it were worthy of anything other than repudiation and scorn. Let's not forget that this is a case about how the administration contrived evidence so as to hoodwink the populace into permitting it to pursue its foreordained plan to topple the regime of Saddam Hussein. Having recognized that the warmakers knew that they had fabricated the evidence supporting the case for regime change, we have to admit that the stated goal is not understandable as an element of a rational U.S. foreign policy; it can be understood as a way of advancing a number of other interests (e.g. Saudi, petropolitical, perhaps internal Iraqi) but not many of them seem to carry much water in light of events following the overthrow. And none of those reasons seems any more persuasive than the explanation that Bush 43 took us on this adventure, which has now tallied deaths in the hundreds of thousands and untold thousands more of maimings, to carry out a megalomaniacal personal vendetta.
I can reach no other conclusion, and so this latest abrogation of decency and integrity leads me to wonder why this discussion is proceeding about the legal merits of commutation and whether it's a prelude to a full pardon, instead of what we should be talking about--throwing out the bums who continue to snicker at us as we continue in our pathetic inability to stop them from eviscerating our democratic institutions.
Well, so much for "Rule of Law." Scooter Libby deserves prison. He is no scapegoat, and his "years of excellent public service" consist of plotting undemocratic, world-domineering policies.
Is there no one is Washington with any historical perspective? Sure, Libby didn't act alone with the Plame leak and thwarting its investigation, but he also didn't go against his better nature and just follow orders.
I. Scooter Libby has always been at the forefront of aggressive neoconservative policy.
In 1992, Libby, along with former Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz, and the current U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, Zalmay Khalilzad, wrote a "Defense Planning Guidance" report, commissioned by then Defense Secretary Dick Cheney.
This DPG called for the U.S. to claim its authority as the world superpower, to intimidate rivals for power, to bypass the United Nations as needed, to build more weapons to ensure global military dominance, and to strike pre-emptively against those who threaten U.S. interests anywhere in the world.
It was shockingly unethical, bullying and began the end of Americans-as-good-guys. It was supposedly shelved after its embarrassingly heartless approach to the world was leaked.
But in 1997 it resurfaced, only slightly edited, as the Statement of Principles of the Project for a New American Century, signed by Libby, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Jeb Bush, Elliot Abrams, Zalmay Khalilzad and more. Though PNAC officially closed in 2006, its personnel and policies still thrive at the American Enterprise Institute, Heritage Foundation, the Weekly Standard and, yes, the White House.
A lot has been mentioned here about 'democracy' and 'the rule of law.' But since most of you seem to have forgotten, here's a reminder: our democratically-ratified Constitution IS law! I wonder if liberals are so used to contorting Constitutional phrases like the 14th Amendment's "...nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law..." into an abortion right that they're completely baffled by this clear statement from Article 2: "...and he [The President] shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offences against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment." Period. Why is this even a issue?
The only thing more infuriating than Bush commuting Libby's sentence is Hilary Clinton criticizing it. Her comments are hypocritical after considering the Clinton pardons. How dare she?
I realize that it it is late to add comments to this blog post. Although a long-term listener of "Talk of the Nation", this is the first time I have visited "Blog of the Nation", and I was driven to come here by the sorry spectacle of the Wall Street Journal editor spewing Republican talking points (lies) unchallenged. Valerie Plame was not covert? And the Libby commutation has what exactly to do with Clinton? (Or even Sandy Berger? The misdirection continues in the blog comments.)
I am comforted that many of my fellow listeners agreed, and I appreciate their efforts to challenge these lies in the comments above.
About the commutation: Although it is within the president's constitutional rights, I think it stinks. Having said that, though, I can't muster much outrage. Is anyone really surprised? Besides, there are so many other examples of this administration's partisan misdeeds that I am growing weary.
But to hear one of the right-wing hacks repeatedly making false statements to continue the administration's obfuscation, to hear bald-face lies about matters of fact go unchallenged by the host -- that really disappointed me. Come on NPR, you should do better than that.
I agree with the comments of Colin Dodd, Rich Fairchild, Brendan McManus and others. I expect a conservative commentator to lie, this is what they do. I did not expect an interviewer for NPR to condone those lies. The statement that Valerie Plame was not a CIA covert operative has been proven to be untrue by statements from the CIA and the Federal Prosecutor. Scooter lied to protect members of the Bush administration from being implicated in a potential act of treason against the United States of America. This is not a minor or non-existent crime. Thanks to the performance of Ms. Roberts, NPR is now a contributor to a stream of lies designed to protect the Bush administration and a host of conservatives from the consequences of crimes against this Nation. I ask NPR not to allow Ms. Roberts to host any future discussions that so clearly exceed her knowledge base. The role of good journalism is to question the facts and insure that they are accurate. The present global mess affecting the future of this Nation is largely due to news media presenting lies to the American public as unchallenged fact.
Once upon a time, an advisor to the king was found to be lying to a court and was sentenced to serve time in the dungeon. The advisor told the king that if he did not help him, that he would inform the court about crimes committed by the king and his viceroy. The king then issued a proclamation that the advisor be set free. Upon hearing the proclamation and suspecting the king's wrongdoing, the people of the kingdom rose up and demanded that the king stand before the court.
There seems to be a substantial amount of well placed anger with respect to Ms. Roberts permitting unchallenged lies to go out over the air. (The lies relaste to the claim that Ms. Pflame was not a covert agent of the CIA.) Surely any informed reporter would have noted that the prosecutor presented evidence last May that she was a covert agent, and ask the lying guest to refute it. She didn't.
Comments
Discussions for this story are now closed. Please see the Community FAQ for more information.