Earlier this week I put up a post at Bark Bark Woof Woof about Mitt Romney’s hypocrisy regarding the commutation of Scooter Libby.
As governor, Romney twice rejected a pardon for Anthony Circosta, who at age 13 was convicted of assault for shooting another boy in the arm with a BB gun – a shot that didn’t break the skin. Circosta worked his way through college, joined the Army National Guard and led a platoon of 20 soldiers in Iraq’s deadly Sunni triangle.
In 2005, as he was serving in Iraq, he sought a pardon to fulfill his dream of becoming a police officer.
In his presidential bid, Romney often proudly points out that he was the first governor in modern Massachusetts history to deny every request for a pardon or commutation during his four years in office. He says he refused pardons because he didn’t want to overturn a jury.
During the four years Romney was in office, 100 requests for commutations and 172 requests for pardons were filed in the state. All were denied.
Now Mr. Romney thinks Scooter’s commutation was reasonable. Hypocrisy, I noted, thy name is Mitt.
Well, that generated a comment from a supporter of Mr. Romney.
Anthony Circosta was guilty; it’s questionable whether or not Libby committed any crime. They’re not the same. If you don’t like the law that’s preventing Circosta from becoming an officer-change the law, don’t give exceptions to the law.
I think that is a concise example of how the right-wing mind works: Mr. Cirocosta was convicted; he’s guilty. But Scooter…hmmm….not sure he committed a crime, so he goes free.
Mr. Libby was found guilty by a jury; so was Anthony Circosta. That’s the same, unless you think trial by jury only applies to other people rather than rich white men with connections in the White House.
This is what we’re up against, folks.