Expect a pardon, but not until January 2009. Bush is about protecting his own (and Rove’s) ass. If he were to pardon Libby today it would no doubt lead to a media shitstorm he does not want. But it would also, and I think more importantly in his mind, remove the one excuse (however flimsy) Bush has for not answering questions about Rove’s involvement in Plamegate.

Everyone keeps talking about how Scooter is such a great public servant, a team player. So what’s the big deal about doing a little time in a low security prison? Bush no doubt expects Libby to take this one for the team just like everything else. It’s not like the wingnut welfare network wont make sure Libby is taken care of once he is out.

â€the legal system has spoken, but I tell you, this is a really good guy who is a good public servant and ought to be treated in accordance with that…â€

I just have to wonder if it would make any difference the next time I get pulled over for speeding if I can get out of the ticket by telling the patrolman that I am nice to my mother on Sundays…

Libby might be a very nice person, and I am sure he probably is good to his wife and kids, and other peoples’ kids. It would probably be fun to sit down and have coffee with him. Unfortunately, he broke the law and has been convicted for it! There seems to be a great disconnect between â€nice person†and â€convicted felon†that these people just cannot fathom.

If Bush pardons Libby, the rule of law will no longer exist. The Neocon element whining about Libby’s conviction only shows what they truly think — that they are all above the law, or the laws do not apply to them, or laws only apply to the less-privileged. Bush had better think long and hard before he signs that pardon…

Rice needs to write a check to Syria and another to Lebanon.

Libby won a pardon from Bill Clinton for Marc Rich, and Bush will surely pardon Libby in his turn. And why? Because Marc Rich is arguably Israel’s most important and most aggressive (or â€most generousâ€?) individual patron.

Libby, of course, could always scoot off to Switzerland in Marc Rich’s private jet, and Jeb Bush could eventually hand him his pardon–provided Hillary Clinton didn’t beat him to the punch.

The values of Patrick Fitzgerald are not the values of American power-politics, and I doubt that they ever were. Which is all the more reason for being grateful to Fitzgerald: he ripped off the shroud enveiling this particular skeleton.

One thing that I haven’t heard anybody speculate about is the exact form the pardon would take. Bush could just pardon Libby for his convictions (perjury, false statements, and obstruction) or he could go for a blanket pardon (like Ford did for Nixon). I think both paths have real pitfalls for Bush and the Republicans.

KLynne- I have less of a problem with Rice giving her opinion, she is allegedly one of the President’s closest advisors, than the to cute by a half way of shading it. If these people want Bush to pardon Libby, they should say so directly on the record so that the whole world knows exactly the lack of respect for our judicial system and rule of law that they harbor.

I’m not so sure Condi is speaking to her husb… I mean Bush in this article – I see it more as a way of creating a â€groundswell of support†for Scooter in the mainstream press, from a more palatable messenger than Shooter. I can appreciate that Condi would want to avoid the problem of discussing the pardon with Bush, but it would take more as a matter of law than simply discussing the issue with him. The legal problem would occur not as a result of Condi advocating a pardon for Scooter – even the Pardon Counsel can do that as a matter of performing his duties, and I think a Cabinet officer can make those types of submissions to a President, and that it may even be covered by Executive Privilege in certain situations. The problem is where there is a quid pro quo of holding out a pardon in exchange for Scooter’s (or anyone else’s) silence or lies in frustration of an investigation. I’m still wondering if Scooter’s patrician resolve will be enough to steel him through 30 months of real time in a real prison – I just don’t see him as the Liddy type who’d hold his hand over a candle for Bush or Cheney, and the look on Scooter’s face after sentencing was that of someone who was about to be cast into Dante’s Inferno.

Klynn – Not being critical, I know you are quite innocent here, but â€a spade is still a spade†How do I put this? Perhaps not the best vernacular when commenting in referance to an person of African descent. It’s an old racial slur of sorts. Just FYI.

And all, I’m sure Natzi Colonels were nice to their children. Blind followers who chose to break the law are perhaps more dangerous than political sociopaths, as they are the enabelers and it is their numbers that are needed to bring down societies. Libby is the sort of guy who would have been joyfully goosestepping in Berlin in ’39,40, and ’41. We would have hung him in ’45.

Great guy, nice, loyal, dedicated – willfull criminal. That’s Libby. He has the blood of thousands upon thousands on his hands right along with his overlords. But who’s talking about that?

Dismayed

I agree with your correction. My apologies. No offense was intended. I take it’s meaning from the Greek expression from which it derives. But your are correct in pointing out the offense of it’s meaning in our culture. My regrets. FYI well taken.

As for the rest, I agree. You are right. No one is addressing the results of Libby’s actions. Blind followers are more dangerous. Trying to create a propaganda campaign on the life of a blind follower is even more dangerous.

KLynn@1309–â€However, the constant droning of the message of disregard for justice and the rule of law by the politically powerful, risks propagating disregard for justice and the rule of law on all levels of society. As the disregard continues, it renders our society hopeless. We become numb to the manipulation. Then we become a society of enablers.â€

Amen! The constant drone keeps things polarized. No one ever takes responsibility for their own actions. There is a book that I read once about the laws of power (I think I am remembering correctly), and the simplest thing in the world to do is to say, â€You are right — I made a mistake.†It totally disarms your opponent, and whatever issues exist very quickly go away.

My point is that, regardless of whether it is a Scooter Libby, or a Tom DeLay, or whoever, by never taking responsibility for one’s actions, the drone continues — and we spend a considerable amount of time and energy trying to move on to other things that have to get done. Nothing is ever resolved, and people are always left to doubt. To me, that is the worst part — we are always stuck with the old issues, and have less and less energy to work on the new.

Somewhere, I think that is what justice is supposed to be about — resolving what happened. It has been, but our Neocon friends don’t like the outcome. So, they want to â€gum it†to death.

With Bush weakened, the question is whether he can stand up to Cheney and the letter-writing worthies if they decide that Scooter must spend not a day in jail. January 2009 may not be soon enough for them. Which presents an interesting dilemma, given that the weakness that might push Bush into an early pardon also counts against his capacity to deal with the reaction to that pardon.

That is, if the Democrats don’t roll over and piss on themselves.

Typically, pardons are not granted unless the pardonee has applied for a pardon, expressed remorse, and several years have passed since the conviction/sentencing.

What Scooter’s fans really want, of course, is to have his conviction nullified. That ain’t happening. But what they all seem to forget is that if Scooter is pardoned, he no longer can assert his Fifth Amendment rights against self-incrimination when asked questions by a Senate committee.

The aspens do not want to appear to be conspiring through their roots, or so it would seen.

The twitterings of â€he’s a nice man†and â€such a dedicated public servant†remind me of nothing so much as the inevitable neighbors quoted when a horrific crime is committed — â€I can’t believe it, he was such a nice manâ€; â€he was a quiet guy, kept to himselfâ€; â€he always kept his yard tidy,†and so forth.

Guess what? Just because your friends and neighbors can’t believe it doesn’t mean it’s not true, and being a nice guy doesn’t make you innocent.

There were lots of â€nice guys†as members of the KKK who stood by as innocent men and women were violently raped, molested, tortured and killed. There were lots of family men who were nazi’s walking jewish men, women and children into gas chambers and raping young women before they went home to their wives. There are lots of â€nice fraternity†men who participate in hazings that include the group rape of an inebriated freshmen girls. There are â€nice guys†in fraternities who have â€ugly parties†by inviting the â€least attractive women†and then seducing them â€because it’s easy.â€

We are often in denial about the capacity for â€nice guys†to commit violent acts.

It serves the socio and psycho paths of society that we pay more attention to the stereo types than we do the facts. One day we will see that our blanket judgments do not make us safer, but actually put us in greater danger.

How many of us would have helped Ted Bundy put his surf board in his car with his cast on his leg and his better than average attractive face??

I just keep praying we learn to differentiate facts from judgments.

I swear christians invented the devil to keep us all from having to be accountable for our human frailities.

It ain’t pretty but we cannot change what we do not accept.

OK — I have an, apparently, dumb question.

Why is talk of a pardon, (given that Fitz’s investigation seems to be over), even related to obstruction of justice here?

I’m assuming, and I could be wrong, that Nixon’s discussions of pardons was before the investigation was fully over — but what’s the problem here in the Libby case?