Shortly after a federal appeals court said that Libby would not remain free while his case was on appeal, Bush announced that he was commuting Libby’s 30-month sentence. From the New York Times:

• Bush Spares Libby 30-Month Jail Term

It’s an interesting distinction that Bush did not actually pardon Libby. I wonder if there was a legal reason for this (i.e. Bush is so close to this that it might be even more improper to fully pardon Libby.)

Although I don’t think that anyone is actually surprised by this move, I find it hard to believe that it has actually happened. An editorial in The New York Times hits it spot on:

• Soft on Crime

It seems to me that given how close Bush and his cabinet are to this, it is entirely inappropriate for Bush to take a part in pardoning or commuting Libby’s sentence. Although from all accounts that I’ve heard, Bush did nothing illegal, it still reeks of dishonesty and corruption.