Republicans continually make stupid mistakes that cost them dearly, but just when you think they can't be saved, along comes a Democrat to make the Republicans look really good. Today it was John Conyers:
The House Judiciary Committee has officially announced its plans for a hearing into President Bush's commutation of Scooter Libby's prison term.I don't think the President made a mistake in the case of Libby's clemency. I think he made a pretty smart, and fair, decision. Heck, even most of the jury members said they thought Libby should be pardoned.The hearing will take place next Wednesday morning; titled "The Use and Misuse of Presidential Clemency Power for Executive Branch Officials."
"In light of yesterday'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," John Conyers said. "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."
Even though this is not one of those dumb Republican moves I was referring to, we all know there have been far too many of them lately and anytime a Democrat starts making statements like John Conyers did yesterday it makes Republicans look good in comparison. Talk about overreaching. Conyers never disappoints when it comes to shamelessness. Kim did an excellent job pointing out the hypocrisy of those criticizing Bush now for granting Libby clemency, but who did not seem concerned about Bill Clinton's controversial pardons as he left the White House. For those with faulty memories, here is the complete list of Bill Clinton's pardons, via Allen Estrin at Townhall.
Permalink | E-mail This | Technorati Links | Sphere: Related Content | Digg this! | FARK It!
Filed under:
Democrats, Politics, Scooter Libby
Comments (27)
If the Dems really wanna "l... (Below threshold)1. Posted by C-C-G | July 4, 2007 12:06 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
If the Dems really wanna "look into Presidential authority" to grant pardons, they need look no further than Article 2, Section 2 of the Constitution:
There, all done.
1. Posted by C-C-G | July 4, 2007 12:06 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 4, 2007 00:06
2. Posted by Philip Mella | July 4, 2007 12:17 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
But, remember, the rules only apply when they work to the advantage of liberals. Otherwise, they cravenly accuse conservatives of exploiting the system.
With the MSM and academia in their pocket is it any wonder that we're fighting an uphill battle?
The truth, of course, is the first casualty.
2. Posted by Philip Mella | July 4, 2007 12:17 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 4, 2007 00:17
3. Posted by Allen | July 4, 2007 12:27 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
One thing that a lot of people are forgetting is that justice may have been served, but most people don't see it that way.
How ever it is BS by one side or the other, is it or not going to hurt the so called Law and Order party?
3. Posted by Allen | July 4, 2007 12:27 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 4, 2007 00:27
4. Posted by Steve J. | July 4, 2007 1:24 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Pres. Bush betrayed our trust by commuting the liars's sentence. In itself, that may be considered an obstruction of justice.
4. Posted by Steve J. | July 4, 2007 1:24 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 4, 2007 01:24
5. Posted by Rob LACal. | July 4, 2007 1:27 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
LOL, this is simply Hilarious. The Criminal Democrat Party is so desparate to criminalize each and every Republican they can with their bogus hearings , witch hunts and false accusations. It's such a joke knowing what frauds they are masquerading as caring and law abiding. LOL Only a democrat can lie to oneself and believe it. Completely delusional supersized with BDS.
5. Posted by Rob LACal. | July 4, 2007 1:27 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 4, 2007 01:27
6. Posted by Steve J. | July 4, 2007 1:27 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Heck, even most of the jury members said they thought Libby should be pardoned.
Some thought that because they felt Libby was taking one for the higher-ups - Cheney and Bush.
6. Posted by Steve J. | July 4, 2007 1:27 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 4, 2007 01:27
7. Posted by C-C-G | July 4, 2007 1:43 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Steve, where in the Constitution does it say the President can be impeached for that?
I want article and section, just like I gave above.
7. Posted by C-C-G | July 4, 2007 1:43 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 4, 2007 01:43
8. Posted by drjohn | July 4, 2007 8:31 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Pres. Bush betrayed our trust by commuting the liars's sentence. In itself, that may be considered an obstruction of justice.
Libby was convicted on the basis of conflicting memories between himself and Russert. Russert got special treatment, Libby got shafted.
Ridiculous.
Betrayed our trust? You mean like giving a pardon to Marc Rich because Rich's wife slept with Bill?
How about Sandy Burglar? Abuse and destroy classified information and get away with it?
Please....
8. Posted by drjohn | July 4, 2007 8:31 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 4, 2007 08:31
9. Posted by drjohn | July 4, 2007 8:33 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
This thread is well titled and it is likely prescient. Rather than actually do anything, Democrats have spent pretty much their entire tenure reneging on their promises of ethics and saving earmarks and the like and doing their absolute best to embarass and ruin Bush.
They could have proven themselves better than those they replaced but they have shown themselves to be petty and worthless.
9. Posted by drjohn | July 4, 2007 8:33 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 4, 2007 08:33
10. Posted by Rance | July 4, 2007 8:45 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
I will believe that it is fair, honest, and above board when POTUS reviews Victor Rita's case and cuts him the same deal.
10. Posted by Rance | July 4, 2007 8:45 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 4, 2007 08:45
11. Posted by WildWillie | July 4, 2007 9:00 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
I want that hearing to take place. I want the republican members to supeana the heck out of all the Clinton pardon receivers. Get their crimes on the record. That alone will make Libby look like very small fish and of course make the demo's look more foolish. Love it. Do it. ww
11. Posted by WildWillie | July 4, 2007 9:00 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 4, 2007 09:00
12. Posted by jpe | July 4, 2007 9:03 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
They're not going to do that, dipshit. Reread the post. Slowly. Maybe you should read it aloud and you could have a grownup with you to help with the big words.
Attaboy!
12. Posted by jpe | July 4, 2007 9:03 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 4, 2007 09:03
13. Posted by jpe | July 4, 2007 9:06 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Turns out the GOP had an identical hearing in the House in 2001.
13. Posted by jpe | July 4, 2007 9:06 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 4, 2007 09:06
14. Posted by Herman | July 4, 2007 10:46 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
"Kim did an excellent job pointing out the hypocrisy of those criticizing Bush now for granting Libby clemency, but who did not seem concerned about Bill Clinton's controversial pardons as he left the White House." -- Lorie
Why stop with Clinton??? Heck, if you Republicans want to examine ancient history and the pardons made by other presidents, believing them to be of any relevance at all here, why not consider Bush I, and his pardons of the Iran-contra criminals, or Ford's pardon of Nixon, the original "Tricky Dick"?
"Heck, even most of the jury members said they thought Libby should be pardoned." -- Lorie
Either conclusively prove that "most of the jury members" (i.e., seven or more) did in fact say this, or shut the (expletive-deleted) up!!!!
14. Posted by Herman | July 4, 2007 10:46 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 4, 2007 10:46
15. Posted by WildWillie | July 4, 2007 11:06 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
The judge said he didn't think Libby should go to jail but his hands were ties due to sentencing guidelines. ww
15. Posted by WildWillie | July 4, 2007 11:06 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 4, 2007 11:06
16. Posted by jhow66 | July 4, 2007 11:21 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Hey hermie did someone give you a weggie? snicker snort.
Wonder if old Johnie "turkey" Conyers ever found out what happen to the 100 turkeys that got "lost"? tee hee
16. Posted by jhow66 | July 4, 2007 11:21 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 4, 2007 11:21
17. Posted by drjohn | July 4, 2007 11:22 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Either conclusively prove that "most of the jury members" (i.e., seven or more) did in fact say this, or shut the (expletive-deleted) up!!!!
She's a (Expletive deleted) blogger here by invitation.
I also read the same thing.
(expletive deleted) you.
17. Posted by drjohn | July 4, 2007 11:22 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 4, 2007 11:22
18. Posted by wavemaker | July 4, 2007 11:34 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Actually jpe, the hearings in 2001 weren't "identical." They took place after Clinton left office, and encompassed ALL of the pardons, which were notable in light of their highly unusual number, as well as the circumstances surrounding a "convicted swindler and a major cocaine dealer who paid some $400,000 to Hugh Rodham, Clinton's brother-in-law, to advance their bids for clemency."
That's CLEMENCY, not PARDON, not COMMUTATION.
But what's the sense in employing scrutiny.
18. Posted by wavemaker | July 4, 2007 11:34 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 4, 2007 11:34
19. Posted by C-C-G | July 4, 2007 11:48 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Ya know something, JPE? I opposed the GOP hearings into the pardons as well.
See, I may have registered Republican, but I think for myself. Unlike lefties who get their talking points and marching orders from people like Teddy Kennedy (Mary Jo Kopechne could not be reached for comment). For the consequences of stepping outside the official talking points and marching orders, see Lieberman, Joseph.
19. Posted by C-C-G | July 4, 2007 11:48 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 4, 2007 11:48
20. Posted by C-C-G | July 4, 2007 12:25 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Oh, Steve J, I am STILL waiting for the provision(s) in the Constitution under which Bush commuting Libby's prison sentence is grounds for impeachment.
--sound of crickets--
20. Posted by C-C-G | July 4, 2007 12:25 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 4, 2007 12:25
21. Posted by jpe | July 4, 2007 12:38 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
See also: Graham, Lindsay.
21. Posted by jpe | July 4, 2007 12:38 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 4, 2007 12:38
22. Posted by jpe | July 4, 2007 12:39 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Working link
22. Posted by jpe | July 4, 2007 12:39 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 4, 2007 12:39
23. Posted by C-C-G | July 4, 2007 12:40 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
jpe, he is still a member of the GOP, isn't he? He hasn't been kicked out of the party, has he?
That one doesn't even get a nice try. 0.5 out of 10 on the spin.
23. Posted by C-C-G | July 4, 2007 12:40 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 4, 2007 12:40
24. Posted by C-C-G | July 4, 2007 1:36 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
I just had to throw this quote into the mix:
Can anyone guess who said that?
Here's the source of the quote.
Hypocrisy, thy name is Democrat.
24. Posted by C-C-G | July 4, 2007 1:36 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 4, 2007 13:36
25. Posted by Robin Roberts | July 4, 2007 6:43 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Rance, the idea that Rita was in the same position as Libby has been shown to be false, Rita had a criminal history. Reports to the contrary are false.
25. Posted by Robin Roberts | July 4, 2007 6:43 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 4, 2007 18:43
26. Posted by Zelsdorf Ragshaft III | July 4, 2007 11:17 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Seems as though those elected to congress of the democratic persuation to legislate seem more inclined to investigate. I wonder which will win out. More bills passed that are needed or investigation that go no where. If Conyers is interested in investigating Presidential powers, he should do something it appears he has not done yet and that would be to read the Constitution of the United States. I am sure the voters will remember that acts of this bunch of fools who think they are there of oversee the executive branch.
26. Posted by Zelsdorf Ragshaft III | July 4, 2007 11:17 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 4, 2007 23:17
27. Posted by wavemaker | July 5, 2007 6:57 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Personally, I'd prefer that the controlling party in Congress -- whichever it is -- would stop wasting our damn tax money doing multiple parallel "investigations" of the same crap that can and should be investigated by law enforcement, district attorneys or the DOJ.
27. Posted by wavemaker | July 5, 2007 6:57 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 5, 2007 06:57