Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

Politics
posted by janrinok on Friday April 13 2018, @08:39PM   Printer-friendly
from the stand-by-your-man dept.

Update: President Trump has pardoned I. Lewis Libby Jr., former Vice President Dick Cheney's chief of staff. He is better known as "Scooter Libby":

"I don't know Mr. Libby," Trump said in a statement, "but for years I have heard that he has been treated unfairly. Hopefully, this full pardon will help rectify a very sad portion of his life."

Previously:

President Trump plans to pardon I. Lewis Libby Jr., who as chief of staff to Vice President Dick Cheney was convicted of perjury in connection with the leak of a C.I.A. officer's identity, a person familiar with the decision said on Thursday.

Mr. Libby's case has long been a cause for conservatives who maintained that he was a victim of a special prosecutor run amok, an argument that may have resonated with the president. Mr. Trump has repeatedly complained that the special counsel investigation into possible cooperation between his campaign and Russia in 2016 has gone too far and amounts to an unfair "witch hunt."

Mr. Libby, who goes by Scooter, was convicted of four felonies in 2007 for perjury before a grand jury, lying to F.B.I. investigators and obstruction of justice during an investigation into the disclosure of the work of Valerie Plame Wilson, a C.I.A. officer. President George W. Bush commuted Mr. Libby's 30-month prison sentence but refused to grant him a full pardon despite the strenuous requests of Mr. Cheney, a decision that soured the relationship between the two men.

A pardon of Mr. Libby would paradoxically put Mr. Trump in the position of absolving one of the chief architects of the Iraq war, which Mr. Trump has denounced as a catastrophic miscalculation. It would also mean he was forgiving a former official who was convicted in a case involving leaks despite Mr. Trump's repeated inveighing against those who disclose information to reporters.

Critics of Mr. Trump quickly interpreted the prospective pardon as a signal by the president that he would protect those who refuse to turn on their bosses, as Mr. Libby was presumed not to have betrayed Mr. Cheney. Mr. Trump has not ruled out pardons in the Russia investigation.

Is this President Trump's "Chelsea Manning moment"?


Original Submission

Related Stories

President Obama Commutes Bulk of Chelsea Manning's Sentence 119 comments

In one of his last moves in office, President Obama has commuted the 35-year prison sentence of Chelsea Manning, the Army private who leaked a massive trove of military secrets to WikiLeaks.

The former intelligence analyst's prison sentence has been shortened to expire on May 17, 2017, according to a statement from the White House.

Her lawyers at the ACLU expressed relief after the decision, saying that Manning has already served more time behind bars than any other whistleblower in U.S. history, and under difficult conditions.

Also at the BBC and the New York Times.

Previously: Chelsea Manning Reportedly on Obama's Short List for Commutation; Assange Offers Himself in Trade


Original Submission #1Original Submission #2Original Submission #3

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
(1)
  • (Score: 2) by Gaaark on Friday April 13 2018, @08:59PM (4 children)

    by Gaaark (41) on Friday April 13 2018, @08:59PM (#666623) Journal

    like Pete Rose, his pardon should come with an asterisk beside his name: yup, convicted but his friends are nice to him.

    --
    --- Please remind me if I haven't been civil to you: I'm channeling MDC. ---Gaaark 2.0 ---
    • (Score: 0, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Friday April 13 2018, @09:14PM (3 children)

      by Anonymous Coward on Friday April 13 2018, @09:14PM (#666630)

      Nearly every pardon amounts to "yup, convicted but his friends are nice to him".

      Pardons without conviction are rare, Nixon's being the famous example. NIXON DID NOTHING WRONG. Well, at least Nixon didn't order anything like a FISA warrant against political opponents.

      • (Score: 5, Informative) by NotSanguine on Friday April 13 2018, @10:17PM (1 child)

        Pardons without conviction are rare, Nixon's being the famous example. NIXON DID NOTHING WRONG. Well, at least Nixon didn't order anything like a FISA warrant against political opponents.

        Given that FISA wasn't passed until four years after Nixon resigned, it makes sense that he didn't order up FISA warrants against anyone.

        However, it's been clearly documented that Nixon used the FBI and IRS to harass those on his enemies list [wikipedia.org].

        What's more, Nixon authorized the burglary of the DNC headquarters (Watergate), as well as the burglary of files from [wikipedia.org]Daniel Ellsberg's [wikipedia.org] psychiatrist.

        Nixon also attempted (and succeeded) in torpedoing peace talks in Vietnam [nytimes.com] before his election in 1968.

        WRT Ford' pardon of Nixon, there was plenty of evidence that Nixon was involved in the planning and cover ups of the burglaries at DNC headquarters and Ellsberg's psychiatrist. Had he not been pardoned, he would most likely have been convicted of conspiracy and accessory charges.

        "I am not a crook!" -- Just another Nixon lie.

        --
        No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
        • (Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Saturday April 14 2018, @02:26AM

          by Azuma Hazuki (5086) on Saturday April 14 2018, @02:26AM (#666740) Journal

          If there are any historians left in 100 years, they will look back on the Ford pardon as the deathblow to accountability in American government.

          --
          I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
      • (Score: 2) by realDonaldTrump on Saturday April 14 2018, @12:58AM

        by realDonaldTrump (6614) on Saturday April 14 2018, @12:58AM (#666705) Homepage Journal

        Nixon was a winner, he won overwhelmingly. But he did something terrible to win. He sent Anna Chennault -- sexy Chinese lady, she could have been a model -- to talk to the ambassador of South Vietnam. To stop the peace talks before the 1968 election. He wasn't the President yet. But he tried to stop the talks. The talks stopped. And the war went another 7 years. Almost 7 years. Can we call it treason? Many people are calling it treason!!!!

        And he did so many wiretapps. It was wrong when Obama did it to me. And it was wrong when Nixon did it to the Dems!

  • (Score: 4, Insightful) by bob_super on Friday April 13 2018, @09:14PM (15 children)

    by bob_super (1357) on Friday April 13 2018, @09:14PM (#666629)

    Maybe, if Trump ends up pardoning anyone involved in shady stuff in his administration (and family), we could get ammunition to abolish that stupid presidential power, which is an abomination given the alleged separation of the branches of government.
    It exists in other presidential regimes too. I can't fathom why constitution writers think it's a good idea.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday April 13 2018, @09:20PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Friday April 13 2018, @09:20PM (#666633)

      The shady pardons come right before a president leaves office.

      Assuming 8 years:

      1. stuff before the reelection is not too shady -- there are consequences to be had
      2. stuff between then and the election of the next president is borderline (the president still seeks to influence that election)
      3. stuff after that, in the last few months of a presidency, is really shady

    • (Score: 3, Insightful) by SpockLogic on Friday April 13 2018, @09:25PM (3 children)

      by SpockLogic (2762) on Friday April 13 2018, @09:25PM (#666634)

      President Bone Spurs is sending a message to Manafort, Cohen et al that they should follow the omerta rule and he will pardon them for their silence even if they are convicted.

      --
      Overreacting is one thing, sticking your head up your ass hoping the problem goes away is another - edIII
      • (Score: 3, Insightful) by stretch611 on Saturday April 14 2018, @12:32AM (1 child)

        by stretch611 (6199) on Saturday April 14 2018, @12:32AM (#666689)

        Cohen will be most likely brought up on state level charges. The president can only pardon federal crimes. i.e. Trump can't pardon Cohen.

        --
        Now with 5 covid vaccine shots/boosters altering my DNA :P
        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday April 14 2018, @12:59AM

          by Anonymous Coward on Saturday April 14 2018, @12:59AM (#666706)

          Nor will Pence be able to pardon Trump on state charges.

      • (Score: 4, Interesting) by black6host on Saturday April 14 2018, @12:36AM

        by black6host (3827) on Saturday April 14 2018, @12:36AM (#666691) Journal

        That works only as long as there are no state charges. Trump can't pardon crimes at the state level. And I think folks have wised up and we will see more states' Attorneys General get involved should it appear anyone important is going to escape the noose.

    • (Score: 4, Interesting) by insanumingenium on Friday April 13 2018, @09:46PM (5 children)

      by insanumingenium (4824) on Friday April 13 2018, @09:46PM (#666638) Journal
      They thought it was a good idea precisely because it allows the legislature to have their teeth pulled, laws carry no weight when you can pardon any possible offense. The other side of that coin is impeachment, which is the correct response if a president is indeed a criminal.

      It isn't "an abomination given the alleged separation of the branches ", it is one of the strongest checks and balances that allow that separation to work. If you believe (as Trump claims to) that this conviction wasn't because of any actual wrongdoing, but to unjustly punish a political opponent, this is exactly the reason it exists.

      Out of curiosity, what are your thoughts on jury nullification? Not an enumerated power, but it serves a very similar cause, admittedly with far more restrictions (only works if there is a trial).
      • (Score: 4, Interesting) by MichaelDavidCrawford on Friday April 13 2018, @09:50PM (3 children)

        by MichaelDavidCrawford (2339) Subscriber Badge <mdcrawford@gmail.com> on Friday April 13 2018, @09:50PM (#666639) Homepage Journal

        If I had a lot of money - which I don't - I'd run a full page ad in every newspaper in the land specifically for the purpose of informing the public of their right to nullify.

        --
        Yes I Have No Bananas. [gofundme.com]
        • (Score: 4, Interesting) by insanumingenium on Friday April 13 2018, @09:59PM (2 children)

          by insanumingenium (4824) on Friday April 13 2018, @09:59PM (#666640) Journal

          The part I don't understand is how it is an established right, but that it is common in jury instructions to flat out deny it, and to even go so far as to make it against the rules to specifically inform the jury about nullification. Seems like a right you can't talk about isn't a right.

          • (Score: 4, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday April 14 2018, @12:07AM

            by Anonymous Coward on Saturday April 14 2018, @12:07AM (#666671)

            That's because it isn't a right. It's a power.

            A right is something that is acknowledged as such by someone else. A power is something you don't need anyone else's input for.

            In the case of nullification, the legal scum will never acknowledge it as a right. But the jury can still vote 'not guilty' -- for reasons of nullification, or any other reason, or no reason at all -- and that is that. No matter what the judge, prosecutor, police, etc. think. (In theory. It's probably a good idea for nullifiers to get out of that jurisdiction as soon as possible, lest your car headlights suddenly stop working, and drugs spontaneously generating in your back seat.)

          • (Score: 1) by DeVilla on Saturday April 14 2018, @12:33AM

            by DeVilla (5354) on Saturday April 14 2018, @12:33AM (#666690)

            Seems like a right you can't talk about isn't a right.

            Give that man a cigar and ban him from jury duty!

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday April 14 2018, @12:28AM

        by Anonymous Coward on Saturday April 14 2018, @12:28AM (#666685)

        This is nothing like jury nullification. Pardoning, as it exists now, has far too much potential for abuse, and means that elites will never see real justice. At the very least, there needs to be some restrictions on who they can pardon. Some person they have no association with? Fine. A corrupt political ally or family member? Not fine. There is too much potential for abuse in those cases.

        The other side of that coin is impeachment, which is the correct response if a president is indeed a criminal.

        That's like saying that I should merely lose my job if I murder someone. The reality is that most politicians do far worse damage than murderers. Who needs prison? Look forward, not back.

    • (Score: 3, Informative) by Entropy on Friday April 13 2018, @10:08PM (1 child)

      by Entropy (4228) on Friday April 13 2018, @10:08PM (#666642)

      Oh yeah.. This is much more shady than pardoning terrorists like Lopez Rivera. (Thanks, Obama!)

      • (Score: 4, Informative) by bob_super on Friday April 13 2018, @10:15PM

        by bob_super (1357) on Friday April 13 2018, @10:15PM (#666645)

        Oh, a case of whataboutism !

        I should have typed "everyone" instead of "anyone", since the intent was to point out how many pardons may soon be handed to those many loyal servant pleading guilty to Mueller ...
        A few shady pardons is tradition (a terrible one, for sure). A lot, including in the inner circle, could be ammo against the unchecked power to let your friends be crooks then take the fall, benefitting any president with questionable ethics.

    • (Score: 2) by All Your Lawn Are Belong To Us on Friday April 13 2018, @10:29PM (1 child)

      by All Your Lawn Are Belong To Us (6553) on Friday April 13 2018, @10:29PM (#666651) Journal

      It's not a check. It's a balance of Executive power against the Judiciary. So it does support separation of powers as classically understood in US Politics.

      --
      This sig for rent.
  • (Score: 0, Flamebait) by jmorris on Friday April 13 2018, @10:23PM (4 children)

    by jmorris (4844) on Friday April 13 2018, @10:23PM (#666649)

    George W. Bush will carry the same of his cowardice in not pardoning Libby to his grave. Something I'm sure Trump hopes sticks in the craw of the whole Bush clan by his doing what W lacked the integrity to do himself for a faithful servant. And yeah I'm sure it is also intended as a message to modern witch hunt victims like Flynn that patience and steadfast loyalty in the face of insanity will be rewarded.

    Oh, and for the record, that whole "Plamegate" investigation was a farce, the leaker confessed to the special prosecutor on the first day, yet the "investigation" went on how long? Pop quiz, who actually leaked and was it even a crime? Hint: The leaker was not charged.

    • (Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Friday April 13 2018, @11:27PM (2 children)

      by Anonymous Coward on Friday April 13 2018, @11:27PM (#666659)

      Pop quiz, who actually leaked and was it even a crime? Hint: The leaker was not charged.

      Logic fail. Just because a "leaker" was never charged does not mean no crime was committed. Yes, in a perfect world all lawbreakers would be charged but, in case you hadn't noticed, we don't live in a perfect world.

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday April 14 2018, @12:32AM

        by Anonymous Coward on Saturday April 14 2018, @12:32AM (#666688)

        Yes, in a perfect world all lawbreakers would be charged

        I suppose that, in this perfect world, unjust laws would not exist? Because if not, it would just be hell.

      • (Score: 2) by jmorris on Saturday April 14 2018, @07:25PM

        by jmorris (4844) on Saturday April 14 2018, @07:25PM (#667003)

        No, that is a reading comprehension fail for you. A "hint" is only intended to guide the searcher to the truth. But in this case it is pretty damning since the "Special Counsel" was appointed specifically to investigate the leaking of a covert operator's name to the media. If that act wasn't in fact a crime[1] it kinda shatters the whole illusion. Libby was railroaded on a process crime in the investigation of a non-crime in what was already a closed case? After the leaker had confessed months ago and had been cleared of all wrongdoing on the grounds that what he did wasn't a crime? Really? If you read that and aren't convinced we are on the wrong effing side of the looking glass then I'm afraid you are beyond help. Seriously, read this paragraph again, it isn't opinion, none of the facts are still in dispute.

        [1] It was not a crime because Mrs. Plame had not been covert for years, everyone in DC knew about her, her past and most important the present overt political activity of both her and her husband.

    • (Score: 4, Insightful) by Azuma Hazuki on Saturday April 14 2018, @02:28AM

      by Azuma Hazuki (5086) on Saturday April 14 2018, @02:28AM (#666742) Journal

      You are a perfect example of tribe-above-all-else politics, and a microcosm of the disease that's shot the GOP through like metastatic cancer.

      --
      I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
  • (Score: 5, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Friday April 13 2018, @10:25PM (2 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday April 13 2018, @10:25PM (#666650)

    That would be Valerie Plame, wife of retired diplomat Joe Wilson.
    Wilson rebutted the yellowcake accusations made by Dubya's administration. [wikipedia.org]

    Dubya's administration, wanting very much to find an excuse to start a war against Saddam Hussein, then retaliated against Wilson by destroying the career of his wife.

    ...and despite Wilson's rebuttal of the story, Lamestream Media kept repeating the "Saddam has WMDs" lie.
    Subsequently, over a million people were killed in Iraq, mostly civilians, and the country was wrecked.

    ...meanwhile, Saudi Arabia has not been bombed, invaded, and occupied by USA.
    (15 of the 19 perps on 9/11/2001 were Saudi nationals.)

    -- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]

    • (Score: 3, Funny) by fustakrakich on Saturday April 14 2018, @12:27AM

      by fustakrakich (6150) on Saturday April 14 2018, @12:27AM (#666684) Journal

      meanwhile, Saudi Arabia has not been bombed, invaded, and occupied by USA.

      Professional courtesy...

      --
      La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
    • (Score: 3, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday April 14 2018, @06:23AM

      by Anonymous Coward on Saturday April 14 2018, @06:23AM (#666825)

      Trump's pardon of Libby was a huge favor to one of his loudest defenders on Fox News [thinkprogress.org]
      The husband of Libby's attorney is one of Trump's most strident defenders.

      the attorney who represents Scooter Libby is Victoria Toensing, wife of Joe diGenova. diGenova regularly appears on Fox News and rails against special counsel Robert Mueller's investigation of the Trump campaign.

      Following John Dowd's recent departure from Trump's legal team, Toensing and diGenova were announced as new members--only to have the jobs fall through because of conflicts of interest.

      But while diGenova may not be directly working for Trump, he continues to do his bidding on the president's favorite cable news channel.

      -- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]

  • (Score: 2) by All Your Lawn Are Belong To Us on Friday April 13 2018, @10:34PM (1 child)

    by All Your Lawn Are Belong To Us (6553) on Friday April 13 2018, @10:34PM (#666652) Journal

    Obviously the support of somebody along the Cheney-nexus was vital to some scheme of Trump's. Wonder whose support the pardon bought? I think that's a 6th reason after CNN's possible 5. [cnn.com]

    Then again, I'm attributing to malice what could be explained to stupidity.

    Then again again, every single Intelligence Officer should feel violated today - especially those who are covert. Yep, your cover can be blown by politicians and nobody will face a permanent penalty for it.

    --
    This sig for rent.
    • (Score: 2) by takyon on Friday April 13 2018, @10:46PM

      by takyon (881) <reversethis-{gro ... s} {ta} {noykat}> on Friday April 13 2018, @10:46PM (#666656) Journal

      Then again, I'm attributing to malice what could be explained to stupidity.

      I doubt Trump had a burning desire to pardon Scooter. Sheriff Joe Arpaio, sure. But the Scooter pardon was clearly suggested to him by somebody who had his ear for a few minutes. He may or may not have gotten anything in return (other than factional goodwill and an easy message to send about being loyal to your President).

      --
      [SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday April 13 2018, @10:46PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday April 13 2018, @10:46PM (#666655)

    John "I am the Walrus" Bolton goes in, "Scooter" the Libby goes free. I'm not saying that correlation is causation, but Trump does seem to be rather empty upstairs, and to merely parrot what the last person who spoke to him said. That, or what they said on Faux News. Remember the Aspens, Scooter! Your pal, "Turdblossom". Any your other war criminal pal, Dick "Dick" DarthCheney.

(1)