by Frank James
Just when it looked like the Paris Hilton story (or non-story, depending on your point of view) was fading from view, President Bush's commuting of the prison sentence of I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, has caused any number of people to dredge it up again as part of a debate on the relative treatment of the two lawbreakers, all of which gives Hilton a little more time in the limelight.
The Boston Globe, for instance, tries to capture this admittedly not-very-important debate with this photo package comparing the Libby and Hilton cases.
Maybe Larry King can do another hour with Hilton to get her opinion on Bush's commuting of Libby's sentence?




Comments
Forget Paris Hilton,the Libby move brings up B.J.Clintons pardons for money and Hillary's political future...
B.J. pardoned Marc Rich after he gave ONE MILLION DOLLARS to the B.J.Clinton Library.
B.J.also pardoned 16 Puerto Rican F.A.L.N terrorists so Hillary could get the Puerto Rican vote in New York.
While Bush is at it,he should give B.J.and Hillary pardons for all the crimes they commited in the past and the ones they will commit in the future.
Paulo
Posted by: Paulo | July 3, 2007 1:03 PM
The Supreme Court ruled that clemency is valid only when all judicial remedies have been ehausted.
Because the judicial process has not been exhausted, the President is affected the planned appeals, arguably intruding into the Judicial Branch's power.
[Emphasis in original] "The Supreme Court itself has opined that '[c]lemency is deeply rooted in our Anglo-American tradition of law, and is the historic remedy for preventing miscarriages of justice where judicial process has been exhausted.' " [ 66 Ohio St. L.J. 875]
The President has no basis to say that Libby has "suffered" in that the appeals have not been ehausted; and the Supreme Court has not reviewed the case.
Is there a reason Libby Counsel did not exhaust all options in requesting District court Review, or appealing the sentence to the supreme Court?
Summation
Until all judicial options have been exhausted -- which Libby counel have not done -- the President may not lawfully grant clemency.
Posted by: Cheryl | July 3, 2007 1:08 PM
Paris Hilton? Again? So soon?
Please kill me now.
Posted by: Doug Zook | July 3, 2007 1:32 PM
Paulo,
Marc Rich didn't work for the USA govt like Scooter did, not only that Paulo, SCOOTER WAS A WHITE HOUSE EMPLOYEE!
You Wingnuts need to come up with some better excuses other than "....but..but..Bill Clinton" to expain away this Republican administrations lawbreaking ways.
Posted by: The Cheerleader in Chief | July 3, 2007 2:38 PM
Cheryl,
Care to site some case law?
Posted by: Doug Zook | July 3, 2007 2:50 PM
Bubba to Swamp.
Come in Swamp.
Posted by: Bubba | July 3, 2007 4:21 PM
Cheryl,
What the President did in the Scooter Libby case was a special form of pardon known as a partial pardon or “commutation,” in which the punishment is remitted or commuted in part while leaving other punishments intact. In particular, the President commuted Mr. Libby’s prison term, “leaving intact and in effect the two-year term of supervised release, with all its conditions, and all other components of the sentence.” As granted, it is perfectly lawful and effective despite the fact Mr. Libby hasn’t exhausted his appellate remedies.
Legal authorities show that the President’s power to pardon may be exercised at any time after an offense against the United States has occurred, and before any offender is arrested, indicted or tried. In the case of Ex Parte Garland, 71 U.S. (4 Wall.) 333, 380 (1866), the U.S. Supreme Court stated the President’s power to pardon “extends to every offence known to the law, and may be exercised at any time after its commission, either before legal proceedings are taken, or during their pendency, or after conviction and judgment.” (Emphasis added; and see also Ex Parte Grossman, 267 U.S. 87, 120 (1925), in agreement.) In fact, the first U.S. Supreme Court case to consider the pardon power, U.S. v. Wilson, 32 U.S. (7 Pet.) 150 (1833), relied on English authorities to the effect that “a pardon may be pleaded in bar,” and also “pleaded in arrest of judgment.” (Id., at 161-163.) Anything that can be pleaded “in bar” or in “arrest of judgment” removes a court’s jurisdiction to try or punish a person for an offense before an appeal is taken.
Consider also the historical practice. By proclamation, Presidents Washington, John Adams, Madison, Lincoln, Johnson, Theodore Roosevelt, and Carter all granted blanket amnesties pursuant to their Article II, Section 2 power to grant Reprieves and Pardons. (See, e.g. Carter’s Executive Order, Proclamation 4483, Granting Pardon for Violations of the Selective Service Act, found at: http://www.usdoj.gov/pardon/carter_proclamation.htm .) Not only were the people so pardoned never punished, they were never prosecuted, and they never had to exhaust appellate remedies before obtaining the benefit of their pardons. Do you remember Richard M. Nixon? He was indicted for offenses arising from the Watergate debacle, but was never tried or convicted, because of President Ford’s intervening pardon.
In summary, the President’s pardon power may effectively end a prosecution before it ever begins. Needless to say, this means the exercise of that power does NOT have to await the exhaustion of appellate remedies to be effective.
I’m glad I could clear that up.
Posted by: John W. | July 3, 2007 8:07 PM
On FOX today they said Rich's lawyer was none other than Scooter Libby!
Posted by: lochnessmonster | July 3, 2007 8:28 PM
Can someone tell me, who will be forgotten first as time slogs along, the little Hilton girl or Scooter?
Posted by: GW | July 3, 2007 10:07 PM
While Bush is at it,he should give B.J.and Hillary pardons for all the crimes they commited in the past and the ones they will commit in the future.
Paulo
Posted by: Paulo | July 3, 2007 1:03 PM
Spoken like a true nut. Yes Marc Rich was indefensible but pales in comparison to Libby. You consistently defend traitors and therefore are in fact one as well. Pathetic.
Posted by: Logic Prisoner | July 4, 2007 12:50 AM
Alternative Caption Contest;
"Vlad! Where have you gone! Come back!!"
**********
Here's the star crossed lovers song;
Go 'way from my window,
Leave at your own chosen speed.
I'm not the one you want, babe,
I'm not the one you need.
You say you're lookin' for someone
Never weak but always strong,
To protect you an' defend you
Whether you are right or wrong,
Someone to open each and every door,
But it ain't me, babe,
No, no, no, it ain't me, babe,
It ain't me you're lookin' for, babe.
Go lightly from the ledge, babe,
Go lightly on the ground.
I'm not the one you want, babe,
I will only let you down.
You say you're lookin' for someone
Who will promise never to part,
Someone to close his eyes for you,
Someone to close his heart,
Someone who will die for you an' more,
But it ain't me, babe,
No, no, no, it ain't me, babe,
It ain't me you're lookin' for, babe.
Go melt back into the night, babe,
Everything inside is made of stone.
There's nothing in here moving
An' anyway I'm not alone.
You say you're looking for someone
Who'll pick you up each time you fall,
To gather flowers constantly
An' to come each time you call,
A lover for your life an' nothing more,
But it ain't me, babe,
No, no, no, it ain't me, babe,
It ain't me you're lookin' for, babe.
(B. Dylan)
Posted by: C.Morris | July 4, 2007 7:44 PM