The Volokh Conspiracy

Now we'll see whether Libby has enough leverage to get a pardon before he goes to jail, or whether he'll have to wait. Seeing as Bush's ratings are permanently in the toilet, and he probably doesn't think Libby didn't anything wrong anyway, a pardon might well be forthcoming.

Libby was not a bail risk, obviously, so the issue was did he show a decent chance of getting a reversal. In my universe, the shortness of his sentence would also be a factor -- he might well serve over half of it before getting a decision on appeal. I would count shortness of sentence a lot for that reason.

I have been speculating that Bush will feel free to pardon Libby during Christmas '07, meaning Libby will only have to spend about 5 months behind bars. The timing works out well because ... (a) it's holiday time and people are less interested in the news for a few days; (b) it's just before the primary season starts, so the news coverage afterwards is about the primaries, not the pardon; (c) it's just before primary season, so it doesn't setup any GOP vs. Dems problems for the potential votes; and (d) the general election is 11 months later, which is quite a long ways away in an era of short news cycles.

I think the easist thing for Bush to do if he doesn't want Libby in jail is grant a respite--which delays execution of the sentence--pending appeal. In effect, granting bail pending appeal.

Then, he can delay the question of pardoning or commuting the sentence (if it is not overturned) until shortly before he leaves office.

I think the easist thing for Bush to do if he doesn't want Libby in jail is grant a respite--which delays execution of the sentence--pending appeal.

Hmmmm. Do you think a respite will go down much easier PR-wise than a pardon? Especially if the respite is followed by a pardon in Jan 2009?

Hmmmm. Do you think a respite will go down much easier PR-wise than a pardon? Especially if the respite is followed by a pardon in Jan 2009?

Exactly. These "Scooter" threads also bring out a lack of sagaciousness. People just think, "I want Scooter free!" and so they come up with some "solution" that effectuates that desire.

It's not as if a "respite" will be understood as anything less than a pardon. And if the "respite" is granted pending the appeal, what happens when the D.C. Cir. affirms the conviction? It would be awfully hard to justify pardoning Libby after an affirmance.

this should properly be viewed as a question of how much juice Herr Cheney still has. i think it is fair to say he wants his scooter pardoned.

Cheney is pathological. He views people are objects - as means to his end. He does not care about Libby. Well.... He cares about Libby only to the extent that Libby's serving time in prison is an affront to him and his own personal power.

That you refer to Cheney as "Herr Cheney" yet fail to recognize this basic aspect of his personality makes you seem much less clever than you perceive yourself to be. (Referring to Cheney as "Herr Cheney, in any event, isn't clever at all. It just makes you look like a kook. And I say this as someone who thinks pretty lowly of Cheney.)

After three years of repeatedly proclaiming "no comment - we're staying out of this until the investigation runs it's course"*, don't you think it's rather disingenuous for them to muck with the process at this point?

--
*not a ver batum quote.

After three years of repeatedly proclaiming "no comment - we're staying out of this until the investigation runs it's course"*, don't you think it's rather disingenuous for them to muck with the process at this point?

Absolutely. I also think it would be disingenous to pardon him given the criteria for pardons the Administration has used for others.

I also think a number of the Administration's positions are quite disingenous, but also find they don't have much problem asserting positions that are contrary to their prior positions, or, indeed, common sense, so long as there is something that comes even close to sounding plausible to be used as a justification

...so long as there is something that comes even close to sounding plausible to be used as a justification.

Well, you are aware that Clinton issued respites when he was in office. So they've got the "but...but...but...Clinton" card to play. Sounds like a slam dunk to me. (c:

And to think, Sandy Berger never came near prison.

"Herr Cheney"?

So he's a German.

And Germans are a bad.

Because they are all still Nazis.

And Cheney is a Nazi.

QED, I suppose.

I find it amazing to see all these people who know the depths of Dick Cheney's soul. "He views people are[sic] objects...". And "personally, i think any speculation that he has lost some of his power over his suck-puppet busch are premature." "busch"? He has a beer for a sock-puppet?

Did anyone ever consider the possibility Cheney wants Libby pardoned because he knows his friend was the victim of a political vendetta? Fitzgerald knew there was no crime before Libby was even deposed.

And what did Sandy Burglar get for his (much more serious) crimes?

tsotha,

Since this "political vendetta" against Libby has been carried out by a Republican-appointed prosecutor, a Republican-appointed trial judge, and now a circuit panel with a Republican-appointed majority, I can only assume that Scooter is a well-known Democrat.

Libby has been pardoned.

Technically, he has not been pardoned, he's had his sentence commuted. The conviction still stands, and he still has to pay the fine and deal with probation, but he doesn't have to serve any prison time. I assume we can all come together and applaud this even-handed compromise by our President.

He could have at least commuted it to one day in jail so we can pretend that the same justice applies throughout society. With that in mind, I'm going to smoke a joint on my porch in honor of Mr Libby.

I assume we can all come together and applaud this even-handed compromise by our President.

Surely yes. Perjury, after all, is itself a kind of even handed compromise between the truth and one's own interests.

Maybe the other people convicted of perjury and obstruction of justice will have their sentences commuted, as well.

If they, or their wealthy friends, have $250,000 to pay, then I'm sure something could be arranged.

tsotha,

I don't think this event devalues pardons. Your confusion is cause by the fact that this is a barter exchange, not a cash exchange.

I don't think Bush is likely to take an approval hit. What's going to happen, Democrats and Independents will decide they like him even less? The fact is, the only thing Bush can do at this stage of his Presidency to obtain any political capital whatsoever is to take actions that please the Republican base (which is quite annoyed about immigration of late). So I wouldn't be surprised if Bush picked up a point or two for this reason.

BTW, for those Republicans who love the mantra 'Clinton lied!', how many were outraged at the Iran-Contra pardons?

Oops, sorry - 'witch-hunt'.

While the approval ratings question is interesting (I tend to agree with Steve; this isn't going to touch him in the polls only because there aren't many hearts and minds to be won or lost) I'm curious what other people think on a related issue: what effect, if any, will this have on Bush's "legacy"?

In my mind, for this to be anything but a negative mark on Bush vis-a-vis history, history has to not only conclude that the majority of Bush's foreign policy decisions were correct to a degree that required a great deal of unity and discipline within the ranks, but history must also conclude the prosecution and conviction of an individual involved in that discipline was therefore rendered a complete witch hunt and hoax. Otherwise, if history concludes that even though the sentence was hears, a jury rendered an appropriate verdict, Bush appears as (at best) an overly loyal partisan who helped out a friend, and (at worst) guilty of covering up some of the excesses of that "discipline".

I think Occam's razor suggests that the the "witch hunt" theory is less likely to gain traction. There would have to be an almost complete shift in perception over the years to vindicate the complete and preemptive commutation of a sentence rendered on an Administration official acting in the scope of his duties. More likely, this event portrays Bush in a negative light to future generations.

Given that, I also have to ask--why? Isn't it time for Mr. Bush to be focused on that legacy? We often see heads of state moderate their tone and behavior toward the end of their term, once their approval ratings fix and people move on to the new what next. Why hasn't that occurred here?

I wonder how this will affect Libby's appeal. Will he drop it, not wanting to risk a judicial confirmation of his guilt?

Well, likely primary voters are not necessarily representative of the party at large, and generally likely voters are not necessarily representative of the populace at large.

Sure, but wasn't my point that the pardon would help Bush with "the base"? Don't make me scroll back up and reread it!

Steve,

I thought the original question was whether he would take a general approval hit, and the links I gave go into the fact that Republicans, including Republicans who generally gave Bush a positive approval rating, were opposed to a pardon (as of March). Of course, President Bush shows no signs of caring about his approval rating.

Steve,

Sure, but who says "Smokey" speaks for other Republicans?

Generally, every time people argue that President Bush has hit a hard floor of support, he finds a way to break through it. So, in theory at some point he may in fact be down to just the Smokeys of the world, but I don't think that point has yet been reached.

Steve,

I guess my point is that Bush is currently supported by more than just diehard partisans. And I do think some of those other supporters likely have exactly that attitude (that the law does in fact matter).