<-- Scooter Libby scoots away without any hard time.Am I dreaming? Can this really be happening?
Numero Uno: George W. and Dick Cheney consider themselves above the law in an executive order signed by Georgie himself, both saying they are not covered by this order. It's a presidential order Bush issued in March 2003 to cover all government agencies that are part of the executive branch. But, incredibly, Cheney and Bush refuse to comply, and nothing happens! No consequences!
Numero Dos: Cheney Chief of Staff Scooter Libby is convicted of a felony in the Valerie Plame Affair, and Bush commutes the sentence (2.5 years in prison) so Scooter doesn't have to pay for his crimes, crimes that Bush said would be paid for!
I don't mean to display too much naïveté here, but the relativistic attitudes that coexist around what would seemingly be a slam dunk are just stunning. I guess this just shows how powerful Cheney is as impeachment insurance. Why impeach Bush, when all we'd get is Cheney to replace him?
4 comments:
It seems to me that Bush and Cheney are the real culprits here. Libby's only crime was being too loyal to the Bush team. If I understand the situation correctly, Libby was convicted of lying to protect his boss. The guy who actually outed Valerie Plame has been totally ignored. If we can't impeach both Bush & Cheney, and make Nancy Pelosi our next President, I would just as soon have this problem go away. Commuting the Libby sentence may do just that.
Wayne
Well, I can't agree that "...Libby's only crime..." should go unpunished. Folks, Libby is Buffy Sainte-Marie's Universal Soldier:
"He's the Universal Soldier and he really is to blame,
His orders come from far away no more,
They come from him, and you, and me..."
And these "soldiers" are everywhere, and they're nearly always volunteers, not conscripts. I say hold 'em all responsible for their parts, whether as leaders or as lying followers.
January, 2009, can't get here soon enough...
Bush & Cheney's actions make perfect sense once one recognizes that they (and their neo-con cronies) don't believe in the rule of law. They believe in the rule of men: leaders making edicts. When one has that mindset, there are no general cases to which rules apply; only special cases about which "deciders" pass edicts.
Molly Ivins pointed this out in a column she wrote in 2003: "These people don't want to govern. They want to rule." See article.
Post a Comment