Posted on 01/19/2009 10:37:26 AM PST by DBCJR
I think I've heard pretty much the same thing.But my understanding is that any President can legally grant a full pardon (or a lesser degree of clemency) to *anyone* at *any* time after the commission of *any* Federal offense.
You are absolutely right! Communting their sentence was the appropriate thing to do.
President Bush should NEVER have prosecuted them. The prosecutor was specially picked by Bush and this reflects Bush’s desire to “play ball” with the Mexican Government who was calling for action. They saw this as an act to close our borders, i.e., enforce our laws. This was NOT Bush’s finest hour, as reflected in a commutation vs a pardon.
You’re probably right. I was just doing some wishful thinking with regards to which President should pardon these guys.
President Bush should NEVER have prosecuted them. The prosecutor was specially picked by Bush and this reflects Bush’s desire to “play ball” with the Mexican Government who was calling for action. They saw this as an act to close our borders, i.e., enforce our laws. While I remain a Bush supporter, this was NOT Bush’s finest hour, as reflected in a commutation vs a pardon.
I will NEVER forget where I was when the cigar story of the Lewinski Scandal hit primetime news. I was seated in a pastor’s living room with his wife and two young daughters present. I excused myself and went to the restroom for about 20 minutes, I was so embarrassed.
But do they get any back pay? Are they reinstated for their jobs?
I’m celebrating for them. Johnny Sutton is a donkey’s rear end and Bush’s continued support for him is unforgivable.
thanks w
No, they don’t get backpay. They are STILL guilty. A commuted sentence simply says their sentence has been served. This was not a pardon.
Thank You Mr. President!
Talk about last-minute! Sheesh. Thank goodness they are going home at long last.
Well if they’re not fully pardoned, then Bush has only done a mediocre job. I supported him until these last couple of years when Bush has gone Liberal RINO in a lot of his decisions. He may have known what he was doing, but he didn’t let the public know and the media crucified him. In a lot of decisions, if he’d just explained what was going on, he’d have held a larger percentage of approval. Or at least given people a heads-up.
Obama is going to have a lot of trouble if he is not “transparent” in his decisions. People want to know why their leader is doing something so that they can more easily accept it. Most Americans don’t like being told to do something without having a reason or an explanation. And Americans reserve the right to disagree.
Recall: Dissent is Patriotic. Wears on both feet and both sides of the road.
Several sources reported today that there will be no pardon for Libby. He has to try to get his conviction overturned on appeal. In short, Bush stabbed him in the back.
As abhorrant as Bush’s stance has been on this issue, placating the Mexican government, Bush has a legacy.
Bush did an outstanding job except for a few issues:
1) Immigration.
2) Failed to see Iraq was NOT a single people but three tribes who have fought for millenia. This caused misjudgments in winning the peace.
3) Trusting Putin,
4) Letting Frank, Dodd, Schummer get by with the Fannie Mae & Freddie Mac debacle, and not reigning in the SEC.
Bush miracles:
1) Kept another attack from happening on American soil
2) Rebounded from the Clinton recession, then from the destruction of our national financial district.
3) Re-armed for war and ramped up intelligence after a Clinton dismantling and waged war on two fronts simultaneously.
I think Bush’s legacy will ultimately hinge upon his fiscal policy. His debt was atrocious before he signed a $750 biilion bailout.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.