Sunday's TV Scoops on Bush's Libby Pardon, Including The Dem, GOP, Replies and Allegations
The inside dope on who, what, when and where, money was raised for Libby's defense and how Dems and GOP's responded to comments allegations and threats back and forth.
Are Dems Worried About the Pelosi Debacle? Aggressive Action or More Falderal?
House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers, the Democrat probing President Bush's decision to erase the prison sentence of a former White House aide, said Sunday, there is "the suspicion" the aide might have identified others in the Bush administration if he went to jail. Therefore, Conyers has scheduled a committee hearing Wednesday on Bush's pardon of Libby.
House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers said Sunday there is "the suspicion" the aide might have identified others in the Bush administration if he went to jail. Therefore, Conyers has scheduled a committee hearing Wednesday on Bush's pardon of Libby.
Interesting that lower level Bushites didn't complain when a fragile, claustrophobic, 26 year beauty went to jail for a comparably microscopic misdemeanor, but quickly, Top-GOPpers, want a convicted, federal criminal free before his sentence even begins The Republican ruthless Law and Order stance apparently only applies to those who are not members of their elite or those who can send them to prison, or to impeachment.
Appearing on ABC's This Week, Conyers stated that there exists a "suspicion that if Mr. Libby went to prison, he might further implicate other people in the White House." Conyers said, "There was some kind of relationship here that does not exist in any of President Clinton's pardons... [and] it's never existed before."
Conyers said he is going to ask Bush to waive executive privilege and "do what President Clinton did - namely to bring forward any of his pardon lawyers or anyone that can put a clear light on this and put this kind of feeling that is fairly general to rest."
Bush said Libby's sentence was too harsh, yet 78% of similar cases got sentences in the same or higher range, according to Chicago radio commentators, Sunday. Libby was convicted of lying and obstructing justice, the same charge that got President Clinton Impeached. In the Libby case however, the investigation into a leak revealing the identity of CIA officer, Valery Plame, lives were endangered and the president's hubristic move placed doubt in the minds of all CIA agents about just where and with whom the president's loyalty lies. Morale is at a low point in that agency because of the lack of security, from a president whose fear and panic tactics have resulted in record spending for "security," most which were merely rewards for his donors,
Conyers said Sunday in an interview on ABC's This Week, "What we have here - and I think we should put it on the table right at the beginning - is that the suspicion was that if Mr. Libby went to prison, he might further implicate other people in the White House, and that there was some kind of relationship here that does not exist in any of President Clinton's pardons, nor, according to those that we've talked to ... is that it's never existed before, ever George Stephanopoulos then asked, Let me stop you there, because you seem to be suggesting that President Bush commuted Mr. Libby's sentence in order to keep him quiet."
Conyers answered, "Well, that's - I said that's what the general impression is. And what we're trying to do - and this is why we've written the president, inviting him to do what President Clinton did, and namely to bring forward any of his pardon lawyers or anyone that can put a clear light on this and put this kind of feeling that is fairly general to rest. That's the whole purpose."
White House spokesman, Tony Fratto, replied: "That's a fairly ridiculous and baseless assertion. It may be impossible to plumb the depths of Chairman Conyers' 'suspicions', but we can hope this one is near the bottom."
Silly, apples to oranges, comparison replies were made by sycophantic stooges of the administration, toadies with their usual appeal to the least informed, mostly Fox advocates, refusing to allow facts to interfere with their babblings.
When Conyers was asked about subpoenas, which were issued to the White House relating to the U.S. Attorney's purge, he answered, "The White House has decided to defy Congress's latest demand for information regarding the dismissal of nine U.S. attorneys, sources familiar with the decision said yesterday."
Conyers said the White House has not communicated with him on its intent to defy Congress. "Well, I'm glad The Post finds out about what the president plans to do before anybody just gives us a call. We're going to pursue our legal remedies to press forward with the subpoenas."
George Stephanopoulos, host of ABC's This Week, asked if, "that means holding the White House in contempt of Congress?" "Well, yes," Conyers said. "It means moving forward in the process that would require him to comply with the subpoenas like most other people."
Senator, Democrat Patrick Leahy: Vermont, said, on CNN's, "Late Edition," that since he thought Libby would just embrace the fifth amendment, it would be useless asking him (Libby) to testify before Congress. "His silence has been bought and paid for and he would just take the Fifth."
1 | 2
