FL Congressman Seeks Censure of President Bush Over Libby

Has it really come to this? Have our so-called leaders in Washington become such petty, bickering bitties that Congressman Robert Wexler of Florida has decided to seek a censure of President Bush for exercising a Constitionally defined power?

It appears so:

Congressman Wexler, a senior member of the House Judiciary Committee, said today that "this presidential intervention is an unconscionable abuse of authority by George W. Bush, and Congress must step forward and express the disgust that Americans rightfully feel toward this contemptible decision. Scooter Libby was found guilty of perjury and obstruction of justice by a jury and was appropriately sentenced by a judge President Bush himself appointed. This deceitful chain of events began with the Administration’s falsifying of intelligence on Iraqi nuclear capabilities. It is clear that the perjury of Mr. Libby in this case effectively protected President Bush, Vice President Cheney, and other Administration officials from further scrutiny regarding the clear political retaliation against former Ambassador Joseph Wilson and his wife, Valerie Plame Wilson, a covert CIA agent. This commutation is nothing short of political quid pro quo, and Congress must go on record in strong opposition."

Admitting the fact that the President's actions were politically not the brightest move, from a legal and Constitutional standpoint, the President acted within the bounds of his authority. It was not an abuse of authority and if it is a quid pro quo, it is not exactly like Scooter Libby is walking away clean, he is still a convicted felon who is now $250,000 lighter in his bank account.

The only thing in Wahsington that is truly bipartisan theses days is pettiness. Everytime I think that the pettiness can get no worse, some Congressman finds a way to disabuse me of that position. Congressman Wexler takes the cake as the chump of the week.

The Difference Between Scooter Libby and Bill Clinton

Bob Geiger tries to make a point about how GOP Senators who voted to impeach Bill Clinton are somehow hypocrites when it comes to holding high public officials accountable for their actions.

While there is plenty of hypocrisy to go around on the Libby commutation, there is no hypocrisy on the party of GOP senators who voted to impeach the President and support the President in his decision to commute Scooter Libby's sentence.

First the similarities between the two cases. Both were high public officials. Both lied under oath and both were tried for their alleged or actual crimes. Finally, both cases have been handled according to Constitutional dictates.

Now the differences.

Bill Clinton was an elected President. Scooter Libby a staffer unelected by anyone but Dick Cheney. While both men are supposed to uphold the highest moral standards, one was a public official publicly elected. Prior to his naming as a possible outer of Valerie Plame, I wouldn't have been able to pick out Scooter Libby from a lineup nor know his name outside the Federal Yellowbook--and I follow politics.

Scooter Libby was convicted and is still a convicted felon. Bill Clinton, while many GOP Senators voted to impeach him, was not and is not a convicted anything.

Geiger then makes this statement:

Of the 25 Republican Senators still in the Senate and who voted that day to convict Clinton on both articles of impeachment, not one of them has issued a public statement on the Libby sentence commutation in the three days since it occurred.

Not one.

There's not even a statement of support for Bush's lawless decision (empahsis added)

For this stupidity, I refer Mr. Geiger to Article II, Section 2 of the Constitution and this lesson on the Constitution I recommended for another Constitutionally, ignorant liberal-Joe Wilson.

While the GOP Conference in the Senate can issue press releases as they see fit, I noticed that Bob Geiger didn't comment on the rediculous hearing that the House Judiciary Committee is planning. Talk about hypocrisy.

White House Reacts to Clintons' Comments ON Libby

This is why I like Tony Snow, even though he has a tough job:

The White House on Thursday made fun of former President Clinton and his wife, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, for criticizing President Bush's decision to erase the prison sentence of former aide I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby.
"I don't know what Arkansan is for chutzpah, but this is a gigantic case of it," presidential spokesman Tony Snow said.

Responding to a question about the planned hearing by the House Judiciary Committee:

"Well, fine, knock himself out," Snow said of Conyers. "I mean, perfectly happy. And while he's at it, why doesn't he look at January 20th, 2001?"

In the closing hours of his presidency, Clinton pardoned 140 people, including fugitive financier Marc Rich.

While other candidates can shoot their mouth off about the Libby Commutation, Hillary and Bill Clinton would have been well advised to keep their mouths shut on this score.

Presidential Pardon Power Hearing

JOhn Bresnahan notes that House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers is planning to hold a hearing on July 11 to examine the President's power to grant clemency.

The House Judiciary Committee, upset over President Bush's decision to grant clemency to I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, will hold a hearing on July 11 to examine presidential clemency power, Rep. John Conyers (D-Mich.), the panel's chairman, announced on Tuesday afternoon. No witness list has been released yet.

"In light of Monday's announcement by the president that he was commuting the prison sentence for Scooter Libby, it is imperative that Congress look into presidential authority to grant clemency, and how such power may be abused," Conyers said in a statement released by his office. "Taken to its extreme, the use of such authority could completely circumvent the law enforcement process and prevent credible efforts to investigate wrongdoing in the executive branch."

Well, unless Conyers plans a Constitutional amendment, there is really no way to circumscribe the President's pardon power. Sure the President should use the power with discretion and to grant clemency to those whose sentences are really out of whack with any concept of justice, but even if the President were to pardon, say his best friend or a political ally or the criminal husband of a big campaign donor, there is little Congress or the Courts can do about it. The President's pardon power is for all intents and purposes absolute.

The Pardon power is a legacy of monarchal power. The King could grant clemency to people accused and convicted of crimes. In the United States, the Chief Executive was given the power as a check against judicial and prosecutorial bias. While it is permissible to question the criteria a President uses to determine whom to grant clemency, the fact that that President can do it at all is pretty settled law. The fact that Conyers is using as an excuse the Libby Commutation is simply petty partisanship.

This planned hearing is nothing more than a PR ploy for the Democrats to take advantage of a bleeding Bush Administration. Nothing will come of it and the whole event is a waste of taxpayer dollars.

Joe Wilson Needs to Read Constitution

I just can't seem to let go of the fact that the liberals simply don't understand what happened with regard to Scooter Libby. Sure, politically, President Bush knew he was going to take heat for the move, but it is not something he is unused to. But this comment by Joe Wilson is so utterly asinine as to need more publicity:

Former U.S. Ambassador Joe Wilson, husband of the CIA operative whose name was leaked to the media in 2003, said Tuesday that President Bush has “utterly subverted the rule of law” in sparing I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby from jail.

Since Joe Wilson needs a quick lesson in the Constituion, here goes.

Article II, Section 2 of the Constitution reads:

"The President...shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offenses against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment."

So let's see. Scooter Libby was convicted in a federal court of law, which means his crime was an offense against the United States and the president commuted his sentence (which is reprieve) and the Constitution gives the President this power explicitly.

So tell me Joe, how has the President's actions "subverted the rule of law?" I have learned, from the time I was a kid to my years in law school, that the Constitution was the Supreme Law of the Land. But apparently not in Joe Wilson land.

What an idiot!!!

HIllary Clinton On Libby Commutation

The AP has a series of quotes from various people about the commutation of Libby's prison term. Most of it is predictable tripe from candidates and Congressional leaders and you can pick the party of the person simply by their langauge. But this one caught my eye and I nearly sprayed my soda all over my computer when I read this:

"This commutation sends the clear signal that in this administration, cronyism and ideology trump competence and justice." - Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, D-N.Y.

How (Marc) Rich is that statement.

Look, I know she is a woman, but the huevos on this woman simply cannot be believed!!!

Libby Commutation

Even as the words of the news announcer were echoing in my head and in my car, I knew that the looney left was going to go absolutly bananas over President Bush commuting the sentence of Scooter Libby. Here is what Nancy Pelosi wrote:

The President’s commutation of Scooter Libby’s prison sentence does not serve justice, condones criminal conduct, and is a betrayal of trust of the American people.

The President said he would hold accountable anyone involved in the Valerie Plame leak case. By his action today, the President shows his word is not to be believed. He has abandoned all sense of fairness when it comes to justice, he has failed to uphold the rule of law, and he has failed to hold his Administration accountable.

Um, Scooter Libby is still a convicted felon! Whenever he seeks employment, he will have to answer the question of whether he is a felon in the affirmative. You can argue all you want about Libby's culpability in the matter or whether he is a fall guy for the administration, or the victim of a witch hunt by the left, he was still convicted and will remain a convicted felon.

Here is a question for the left. What is the functional difference between President Bush exercising his Constitutional authority to commute sentences or pardon people and the same authority exercised by President Clinton to pardon--PARDON--Marc Rich. The answer is at least President Bush didn't do it in a midnight move just before leaving office. President Bush has stood up, like a man, made his decision and will take the heat. President Clinton pardoned Rich in the last week in office, when very few people were watching and certainly the press was as vigilant as they are with President Bush.

Speaker Pelosi would do better to make sure her House is clean (read William Jefferson, John Murtha and others) before questioning the exercise of a Presidential perogative.