Tuesday, July 03, 2007

No need to beg for this pardon

Over the years, I've heard Republicans endlessly claim the upper hand on being tough on crime:

"We must stop coddling our criminals! Make an example of them by prosecuting them to the fullest extent of the law! Build more prisons! Make executions public! Nothing makes a better deterrent against crime then watching someone fry! An eye for an eye!"

And, as we heard endlessly during the Clinton circus:

"No man is above the law!"

Of course, that last one is true. Which is why, as of yesterday, no George W. Bush supporter should ever engage in a debate on crime. For their own sake. With one deft reduction of Scooter Libby's sentencing, Bush has shown once and for all that his friends will always take precedence over the justice system - or what's left of it ever since he's had his slimy hands on it.

Put in simplest terms, a Bush crony (allegedly on orders from Karl Rove) releases the identity of an undercover CIA agent for political reasons. Said revelation (through a top conservative column, no less) undermines national security and threatens the life of the agent. Then the outer attempts to block the investigation. And when it comes time for Libby to face a ridiculously lenient penalty, Bush commutes the sentence, calling it "excessive." And, shortly thereafter, he says he isn't ruling out a pardon at this point. You know, to save the country the embarrassment of having leaders punished for embarrassing crimes.

Do we need any more evidence that Bush is the most transparently hypocritical leader of our times, and will do anything to protect his buddies? To be fair, others often say they would bend the law for their friends and principles: the mafia, abortion-clinic bombers, the KKK, drunken college kids, etc. Illustrious company, for sure.

But above all else, I have to wonder: why does Bush still have the power of pardon when he himself is likely to be a dubious recipient of such a decree? That, even more than the Libby wrist-slap, makes the justice system look criminal.

5 comments:

Huck said...

Amen, brother! I´m with you 100% on all of it. Thanks, too, for checking out my blog. I´ve been on hiatus for a long time, but I´m hoping to be back with some regularity again.

Nick said...

I really don't give a rat's ass about Libby. Even if he didn't deserve the given sentence for Plame-gate, he's still likely a crooked politician who deserves to be brought back down to earth.

I say first pardon the 2 border agents currently serving 10-15 years for merely doing their jobs and stopping a habitual drug smuggler who had been deported more than once.

Libby's now free, while two men doing their jobs are still in prison. Good job Bush Administration!!

Cajun Tiger said...

If your first point of your "simplest terms" is completely inaccurate what does that say in regards to the rest of the post?

Ian McGibboney said...

What, that it might have been Dick Cheney instead of Karl Rove who ordered the leak? Well, I guess that completely changes my point then...

Cajun Tiger said...

No that Libby release the identity of an undercover agent is wrong on two fronts...first Libby wasn't the "leaker," Hermitage was...second, SHE WASN'T COVERT!