Pardon me?

I just heard the news that President Bush has commuted the prison sentence of Scooter Libby; however, he did leave in place the two year sentence and the $250,000 fine. I am of very mixed opinions on this, however, I ask you to kindly bear with my feelings on the matter.
My first thought on this matter is that Libby was convicted of perjury about, and the obstruction of justice for a crime that was never committed. As such, it is rather hard to see how he was ever even prosecuted (much less successfully) for this matter.

My second thought, however, is that a jury of twelve men and women found him guilty, and he was sentenced in accordance with the appropriate guidelines. In other words, there must be something that the jury was aware of that we, the general public, were not privy to.

As such, I wonder why President Bush has used one of his “ultimate powers” to contradict the will of our justice system. Did he do it to assuage the conservatives who thought Libby was wrongly prosecuted? The same conservatives who Bush and other liberal Republicans had just thoroughly disenchanted with their desire to ram a bad piece of legislation down the throats of the American public?

Or did the President do it because of political expediency? Is he trying to recapture some of that oft-derided thing we call the approval rating? Or did he do it simply because he likes to hand out amnesty?

It matters not. When President Bush offered clemency rather than an outright pardon, he in effect concurred with the ‘guilty’ finding of the jury, while also making a mockery of the judicial system.

Should Bush have provided clemency to Scooter Libby? I do not know enough about what actually happened to be able to answer this question. At least this clemency was not for a personal financial benefit to President Bush, as some other recent President’s have done.

You can email Alan at alan@alanfernald.com twenty-four hours a day.