ACSBlog: The Blog of the American Constitution Society: CRS Explains Congress's Contempt Powers

ACSBlog: The Blog of the American Constitution Society: CRS Explains Congress's Contempt Powers

Mike Luckovich

via TPM

Mike Luckovich

specter calls for a special prosecutor!

specter calls for a special prosecutor!

This video was made today (not by me) using footage from this morning's Senate Judiciary Hearing.

Catapult the propaganda...Catapult the propaganda...Catapult the propaganda

Think Progress » Snow: Bush Isn’t ‘Big On YouTube Debates’

youtube debates

Domenici quote

GOP Defections on Iraq: Who's Next? - The Huffington Post

"'I have carefully studied the Iraq situation [translation: I know I should have been following this thing more closely all along, but I finally got around to taking a serious look] and believe we cannot continue asking our troops to sacrifice indefinitely while the Iraqi government is not making measurable progress to move its country forward [translation: it's not our fault that the Iraqi government isn't getting its act together. Our strategy was fine, it is that Iraqi government that isn't coming through on its end of the bargain],' Domenici told reporters from New Mexico this week."

[translation: my term expires next year]

white house spokespersons

White House: "Equal Justice?"
By Paul Kiel - July 5, 2007, 2:27 PM

Sometimes it's just too easy. From this afternoon's White House press briefing:

Q Scott, is Scooter Libby getting more than equal justice under the law? Is he getting special treatment?

MR. STANZEL: Well, I guess I don't know what you mean by "equal justice under the law." But this is a unique case, there's no doubt about that. And we have said that there are a lot of people on all sides of this issue who've made good points. The President took a very measured approach to it. He believed that the jury verdict should be respected and -- but he did feel that the sentence was excessive, in terms of jail time. But this is a unique case, and there's no doubt about that.

More below....

From the briefing:

Q Scott, why, if the President thought the sentence was excessive, why didn't he simply reduce it? Why do away with the entire sentence?

MR. STANZEL: Well, I think the President thought that the penalty -- the fine, the probation, the felony charge -- were all very significant penalties. And so that's why -- I'm not going to get into a gaming out of whether zero to 30 and somewhere in there was -- is the right place, but the President thought that the fine was excessive -- or the jail time was excessive, and that's why he commuted the sentence.

Q Even one day would have been considered excessive?

MR. STANZEL: The President commuted the entire sentence.

Q So a single day in jail for lying and obstructing justice, in a federal case, is excessive?

MR. STANZEL: The President believed that 30 months, the sentence that was given -- one day wasn't given, 30 months was.

Q Right, but it's not the 30 months that he thought was excessive, it was the entire sentence.

MR. STANZEL: It was the --

Q -- any time in jail.

MR. STANZEL: He commuted the 30-month sentence. So what the President believed was 30 months was excessive, and he respected the jury verdict, and the jury verdict also put in place -- found Mr. Libby guilty of perjury and obstruction of justice, which are serious charges, and those are addressed by the $250,000 fine and the probation and the felony charge.

Q Can you tell us if reducing the sentence was even considered?

MR. STANZEL: I'm not going to even speculate about internal deliberations. So the President made very clear his views in the two-page statement and in his comments the next day.