Comments on: Bush Commutes Libby’s Sentence

By: P.S. Ruckman, Jr.

P.S. Ruckman, Jr. — Tue, 03 Jul 2007 20:58:22 +0000

> I don’t know federal law, but I wonder whether Bush could have ordered imposition of a different, lesser prison term.

* Certainly. A reduction in the length of a sentence or reduction to time served is very common.

>Could he have altered the length (to say nothing of terms) of probation?

* I am not aware of an example like this, but I am not aware of any reason why the president could not do it. Commonly, a clemency warrant will simply say, “and will be subjec to terms of probation” (without any extra details)

> Could he have put Libby on house arrest for eight months?

* Yes, but the form would have been a conditional commutation of sentence, like the one Patricia Hearst got from Carter.

> And what if Libby gets caught driving drunk next month. Can he be sent to the pokey for a probation violation?

* Oh yes. Been done before. Classic example, Lupo “the Wolf” Saietta

>Given that Bush respects the jury’s verdict, why exactly is probation, rather than 30 months, or 20 months, or 6 months, appropriate?

* The jury’s verdict was in regard to the offense, not the sentence.

best,

By: Libby will only suffer until election time

Libby will only suffer until election time — Tue, 03 Jul 2007 19:50:48 +0000

Bush can just pardon him later.

By: Adam

Adam — Tue, 03 Jul 2007 16:38:15 +0000

I’d respectfully suggest that most don’t share your level of concern.

By: Fraud Guy

Fraud Guy — Tue, 03 Jul 2007 16:17:49 +0000

Speaking from the flyover states, I do care. In a local mob trial, one of the witnesses was just remanded into custody for refusing to testify against the defendants. He doesn’t have a pardon or commutation to back himself up, just fear of reprisal.

By: Adam

Adam — Tue, 03 Jul 2007 15:44:38 +0000

“Libby will now have to live with at least a few of the nasty collateral sanctions (potential loss of voting rights, loss of the ability to obtain certain professional licenses, etc.) that come along with a felony criminal conviction.”

The case is still on appeal. Are you suggesting that those consequences would follow even if the court of appeals vacates the conviction?

As for “most Americans,” I’d say that most Americans (at least most of those outside of DC, New York, and Los Angeles) simply don’t care.

By: Cathy

Cathy — Tue, 03 Jul 2007 09:08:57 +0000

The second interesting issue is that this maneuver shows how the executive can manipulate sentences.

Of course, this is the same issue that came up in the Paris Hilton case…

By: Patrick S. O'Donnell

Patrick S. O'Donnell — Tue, 03 Jul 2007 04:23:14 +0000

Count me among most Americans.

By: Dave

Dave — Tue, 03 Jul 2007 04:16:33 +0000

What will be interesting is the candiates responses to this issue and how they successfully use it to help themselves in the eyes of the American public. I think most Americans view this as George helping his friends out.