by Southern Housewife

Created on: July 03, 2007

The sound you hear is the Founding Fathers somersaulting in their graves or the Constitution flying out the window. Scooter Libby is singing "I've Got Friends in High Places," meanwhile "equal justice under law," one of the tenets separating democracy from dictatorships, joins habeas corpus, and separation of powers under the Bush Administrator bulldozer.

For months, a jury carefully listened and weighed evidence for and against Mr. Libby, and after ten days deliberation found Mr. Libby guilty on four of five counts of perjury and obstruction of justice. No doubt, the jurors conscientiously recalled the civics lesson from the Clinton Impeachment that lying before a grand jury and obstruction of justice are very serious felonies and if allowed to go unpunished will undermine our entire justice system.

In commuting Mr. Libby's prison sentence, President Bush said he "respects the jury's verdict," but believes the prison sentence was excessive. Does it really show respect for the jury, plucked from their daily lives to serve our country for months, hearing Mr. Libby's case, when the conclusion was foregone? Perhaps the entire process could have been speedier and cost the taxpayers far less money, had the jury known from the outset, Mr. Libby would never pay for his crimes.

Was the punishment for Mr. Libby excessive, or did the punishment fit the crimes? According to the federal sentencing guidelines, in this case the punishment fit the crime. Thirty months in Club Fed hardly seems excessive for someone found guilty on four counts of felonies that could undermine our entire justice system. While the President has absolute Constitutional authority to pardon or commute sentences, to the untrained eye it may appear as if the President lacks respect for the judicial process or at least has no problem end-running it when expedient. Commutation of a sentence generally implies one has actually seen the inside of a jail cell. The Justice Department has federal guidelines for pardons and commutation. None of those were followed.

Why bother with the charade the President's decision to commute Mr. Libby's prison sentence is some sort of compromise? In this instance, the difference between commuting the prison sentence and a pardon is hardly worth mentioning. Will someone have the unmitigated gall or hubris to suggest this extraordinary gift wasn't enough, and insist Libby should be pardoned?

Have we forgotten the stinging words from 1999 of Rep. Stephen Buyer of Indiana,"None of our laws provide for good job performance, contrition, forgiveness or popularity polls as a remedy for criminal conduct." Could we have so quickly cast aside the warning of Rep. James Sensenbrenner, R-Wis. during the Clinton Impeachment, "The truth is still the truth and a lie is still a lie, and the rule of law should apply to everyone"?

Failing that, where shall we go from here?

Learn more about this author, Southern Housewife.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.