Would Bush consider 'pre-emptive pardons'?
George W. Bush has been exceedingly stingy when it comes to presidential pardons and commutations, issuing fewer than any modern president. But as Bush’s presidency winds down, there’s some talk about the president using his powers to help conceal some of the administration’s own transgressions.
As the administration wrestles with the cascade of petitions, some lawyers and law professors are raising a related question: Will Mr. Bush grant pre-emptive pardons to officials involved in controversial counterterrorism programs?
Such a pardon would reduce the risk that a future administration might undertake a criminal investigation of operatives or policy makers involved in programs that administration lawyers have said were legal but that critics say violated laws regarding torture and surveillance.
Some legal analysts said Mr. Bush might be reluctant to issue such pardons because they could be construed as an implicit admission of guilt. But several members of the conservative legal community in Washington said in interviews that they hoped Mr. Bush would issue such pardons — whether or not anyone made a specific request for one. They said people who carried out the president’s orders should not be exposed even to the risk of an investigation and expensive legal bills.
There are two angles to consider here: whether the White House would do this and whether the White House could do this.
On the prior, the Bush gang isn’t saying much. The NYT asked the White House about whether “pre-emptive pardons” — clearing people of legal responsibility before they even face charges — are on the table. The Times reported, “Emily Lawrimore, a White House spokeswoman, would not say whether the administration was considering pre-emptive pardons, nor whether it would rule them out.”
On the latter, is this even a legal option? Does the president even have the authority to pardon someone who isn’t even facing criminal charges? Apparently, he can.
Of course Bush has to consider that if his co-conspirators are pardoned, they cannot plead the fifth to avoid answering questions from investigators or congressional committees looking into crimes committed during his administration.
You know what? The whole idea of presidential pardons is bullshit.
Why would anyone doubt his capacity for dishonesty and circumvention of the rule of law?
" Does the president even have the authority ...."
As if that ever stopped bush from doing anything he wanted.
What could have stopped him would have been impeachment. which leads me to say...Nancy and Harry must go!!!
This current Supreme Court has already demonstrated that precedence is does not apply so maybe it will be time to challenge this ruling. If the boy Bush and his pal, barnacle Cheney were to be impeached, then there would be no concern about pre-emptive pardons.
If he pardons the con-cons preemptively, he should be impeached, even if it takes the next congress to do it. If preemptive pardons are legal, post presidential impeachment should be also.
BlueMark @ 1:
Good point and if they refuse to answer questions, they can then be charged with obstruction of justice which would be a charge placed after Bush leaves office.
If he's under impeachment he can't pardon.
Bush might pardon a whole bunch of folks and himself, too, but those pardons are for US laws. I trust these pardons don't preclude the international community from indicting these yokels on international war crimes charges.
Well of course he can. Gerald Ford did it, remember?
Investigations should continue, because Bush can't pardon himself, right?
Thank goodness for the International Court of Justice in The Hague.
Here's the Bush League's fall-back plan to prepare for President Obama:
Step 1: January 16: George Bush pardons his entire administration's senior staff - from Cheney on down.
Step 2: Bush resigns on January 17 or so. President-for-a-day Cheney is sworn in.
Step 3: New President Cheney pulls a President Ford, and pardons ex-President Bush.
CBS edits McCain gaffe from interview, provides fake answer for viewers to cover for McCain
John Aravosis (DC) · 7/23/2008
http://www.americablog.com/2008/07/cbs-edits-mccain-gaffe-from-interview...
ysbaddaden @ 8:
The Constitution reads that he can pardon anyone except those that have been impeached as long as he is still President (under articles of impeachment or not). Sure, maybe, you can interpret the clause to mean that presidents under impeachment can not pardon before trial, but what do you think this Supreme Court would do?
Anais @ 9:
If you think any country would dare to indict any of these bozos I have a nice bridge to sell you.
If an ex-president gets incarcerated anywhere in the world, the US would not respond kindly to that.
Americans like to keep the illusion that they are the "good guys" even if they have to bomb the shit out of the rest of the world to maintain that illusion.
Is the Pope Catholic?? Our 'friend' Israel will order Bush to declare martial law when they bomb Iran and order the US into their war. Of course, then King Geo will appoint himself pResident for life.
Our real hope is that regardless of a presidential pardon for the criminals in the Bush regime, it won't stop other governments filing charges of war crimes and crimes against humanity in international courts of justice. Let's hope they do so and these courts issue 'warrants' and that people seeking justice will seize the criminals and take them to the Hague where they can be tried.
After all this criminal government has done just that to thousands of people and worse - tortured and murdered their victims.
Would you people give impeachment a rest? Do you seriously want Cheney to be president for the next six months???
TimTexas @ 15:
The constitution needs to be amended then, by having that power the president can over rule the judiciary branch of the government... I was always bothered by that. If the president is above the law, then those checks and balances, that my civics teacher liked to brag about as the "genius" of the American government system, are completely bogus.
displaced @ 19:
He has been the de facto president for the past 8 years, so the only difference would be that the whole junta gets put in notice.
But if you prefer to deal with things the ostrich way by sticking you head firmly in the sand, be my guess... because that has worked beautifully for the past decades, hasn't it?
Whether they could? Have you not been paying attention? If dumya does it that makes it ok. Apparently he's been running on "insurance rules" since day one.
ysbaddaden @ 8:
Normally you are correct but this is bushworld where bush is the law.
RepubAnon @ 13:
Step 4: Declares War on Iran.
Step 5: In this new 'emergency' declares the election a security risk and cancels it and its results.
Step 6: Is installed as "President for Life'.
The Dude @ 21:
Nah, I say it's better to let Bush think the coast is clear and have him leave office in 1/23/09 thinking that there is no need to pardon anyone. So let's all pat him on the back and say "good job!" for the next six months. That way the indictments can be issued on 1/24/09 with no preemptive pardons getting in the way.
Bush WILL order pardons for his entire administration and everyone in the CIA and the military for any crimes committed during his presidency.
He has no choice.
The Slate article said that the President couldn't pardon people who broke state laws...so are there state laws these corrupt people could be charged with breaking?
lowincomesenior @ 17:
Israel touching Iran would make each oil of barrel an order of magnitude more expensive.
Which means, that we simply can't afford (as in the wallet sense of the word) to attack them. Period.
Israel needs to have Iran as the perennial evil just so they can diffuse their current shitty political climate at home.
Iran needs to have the great satan out there so the mullahs can have their fun.
We need Iran as the perennial boogie man so that the people at the top can syphon more money to "protect us."
And China needs Iran to provide cheap gas.
It is all part of the divine comedy, I guess.
enor @ 24:
Step 7: Then "le terreur" begins. All opponents of the administration (read: Bloggers) will be dragged out into the streets and shot.
Would Bush consider premeptive pardons?
Let's just say its a family tradition.
The Dude @ 16:
I get the feeling the current regime wouldn't be too bothered if a former democratic president ended up on the business end of a foreign jail term.
The sovereignty of any such country would suddenly be inviolate and the word 'diplomacy' would be used a lot.
displaced @ 25:
I don't particularly believe in denial.
Once he is out of office, he is no longer accountable.
No administration has ever pressed charges against the previous one, as far as I can remember regarding American politics. And It would be more likely that pigs start to take flight than the possible Dem administration changes that status quo in 2009.
Nada @ 31:
Well, everybody knows that Dems aren't real Americans anyways.
I was referring to real Americans as in GOP administrations. :-)
George H.W. Bush pardoned away his Iran-Contra problem. Weinberger was pardoned prior to trial.
George W. Bush will pardon away his problems too. It's the family tradition.
Surely these pardons would not stand, if he's on trial at the Hague....can they?
Cats r Flyfishn @ 7:
Which would matter ONLY if, subsequently, they were going to be questioned under oath.
NA-GA-HAPUN
No newly inaugurated Presnint--especially NO Dim, male or female--is gonna prosecute her/his predecessor--especially a PUKE--for anything done in office. It would be tantamount to signing your own execution order.
Badwater @ 34:
And in less that a decade, all these fuckheads will be back to screw us more.
If you don't cut gangrenous limbs the necrosis will keep on spreading...
The Bushes have been at it for the better part of a century, and most of the names at the center of these shit storms have been active sans any repercussion since Nixon. No wonder Hunter S. Thompson hated the guts of that slim bucket.
Question: can a person refuse to testify in future investigations pertaining to matters for which they have already received an advance pardon?
enor @ 24:
Step 7: Dies of his heart condition.
Step 8: The new Bolsheviki take over in the chaos ensuing.
It's sounding more like a Medieval Fiefdom than the United States of America. No doubt at all that he'll do it but it raises the interesting second question of whether he can pardon himself...
The Dude @ 16:
The only one's who wouldn't take kindly to that are the inbred hicks that supported him in the first place. Remember, he stole the election with Diebold. He's not as popular with us as you think.
If you guys want to arrest him, arrest away. I'm all for it. The man needs to see four walls of a prison cell for the rest of his life.
It'll set a good example to all the other murderous, greedy, criminal offenders of the world.
Seems to me that if he issues pardons ahead of time that would be some sort of admission of guilt. Kind of like buying fire insurance for your home the day before your home mysteriously burns to the ground. It would look suspicious as hell.
Numinous @ 41:
Inbred hick? Go to Hell and drag that racist shit with you. If I said that Obama was half of what some GOP people will say here in the South, still, you'd squeal. Insult a poor area of Southerners and nobody complains. Why? Because we all know racism's a Southern flaw, except that the last time I checked, Indians are still worse off in the entire non-Southern part of the nation than blacks have been since the 1960s.
BTW, I'm no Bush supporter, the man's a warcriminal, and spits on American ideals. I just get tired of being lumped in with the Creationist whackadoodles that want a Christian Saudi Arabia.
Badwater @ 34:
Yup. If you look at G.H.W. Bush's father, Prescott Bush, he was a traitor to the United States during the height of World War II. You know, the kind that would normally be riding an electric hot seat. Luckily for him (and unluckily for the rest of the world) he used his money and connections to weasel out of it.
Make no mistake, the Bush family hates American values.
They want everyone to be stupid, violent, worshipers of the state. Sound familiar, anyone?
Is there anything that says that we cant expell him from the country? Outside of Israel and Saudi Arabia, where could he go? I dont think, as much as I want him to, that Obama will arrest him. The Kaiser left Germany after WWI, so it has been done before, and without his backers here in America Bush would join Slabadan(?) in The Hauge.
He would have to issue a mountain of these pardons. Has any president ever issued that many at one time for his administration?
And you can bet that once he's out of office the little shit will not only avoid any kind of justice but he'll continue to reap the benefits of his crimes as he and his "think tank" [does that not make you howl with laughter?] rake in no-bid contracts and big speaking fees from his friends in the whore house and his war mongering, murder for profit business buddies.
Numinous @ 41:
The thing is that, for the most part, the rest of the world sees him as "our problem."
They won't risk having bombs dropped on them, when Americans themselves won't even consider prosecuting these assholes.
This is what I find so appallingly self centered about Americans. Pelosi can't put impeachment off the table, and we can continue with our status quo, but some people expect that a European court will do the right thing.
As far as the euros are concerned, the longer these bozos stay in power, the more we are going to get screwed and the more they get to surpass us. r
General_Rennenkampf @ 43:
I guess inbreeding must be a touchy subject for you?
jeff @ 46:
Solobodan Milosevic's been dead for some time, toots, where you been? Solobodan was only put on trial because the West wanted to poke Russia. If they had wanted to, the surviving members of the Stalinist geronotocracy in Russia could have been put on trial in 1991, for the same reasons as the Nazis. What's that? Russians can't be put on trial because no Leftist ever does anything wrong, ever, it's all the Elder's fault? /snarkcasm on the last sentence.
He can pardon them for crimes they've already been convicted of, but he cannot grant them immunity from prosecution for crimes they have not yet been prosecuted for, nor for crimes they have not yet committed. And you can bet your bottom dollar they'll be committing fresh crimes to cover up their outstanding crimes.
Cats r Flyfishn @ 7:
The article states that the pardon can be extended for charges that haven't even been brought up yet. A little foresight will show that the president will pardon any contempt charges in addition to any other crime his cohorts committed. This is a planned maneuver, and it seems that the discussion taking place is going to allow people to get comfortable with the action and overlook it like everything else Bush has done. Many of you have been hoping that this administration would see criminal charges, I have to say that I never believed for a second that once Bush is out of office he or any other administration official would be part of any hearings. This will be a record setting presidency for all the wrong reasons.
The Dude @ 50:
Yes, it is. I think calling teams "Redskins" and "Braves" are equally touchy subjects, though, and most of the NFL teams that I'm aware of with that are outside the South. Calling Southerners inbred is racist. So's naming a team the Indian equivalent of the "Spics" or "Jewboys." There's a great deal of racism and out-grouping in the US that needs dealing with.
These people who are hoping bush will issue these pardons are admitting they feel there is a need for them. So isn't that also an admission that they too see something illegal in what this administration has done?
Can't we just become vigilantes in prosecuting the war crimes of the Bush Administration?
Numinous @ 45:
Prescott Bush was part of a plot to overthrow the US government in the 30s. They hired the wrong man (Gen. Semdley Butler).
If we had an actual free press, Bush's family history of treason would have been an issue as far back as grandpoppy Bush's first senatorial run.
That is the problem with liberals in this country, too afraid of showing their teeth and have to deal with the fact that sometimes enforcing the laws mean that you have to be tough. Instead, we are always told that we need to "let it go, and move on... it is too divisive and we are better than that and blah blah blah"
Decades of sticking their heads in the sad will mean that liberals will soon be extinct.
And I can envision the speech that Obama will give once he gets in office, "we need to move on from the politics of division, look to the future and not the pass" and all that shit that is code for let the criminals go scott free yet one more time.
General_Rennenkampf @ 54:
Most Americans are ignorant of what they say. This is a little off topic, though Bush is guilty of it against muslims, but Americans have to take more time getting to know the rest of the world. Our culture is selfish and locked into video games, text messaging, and television. Unfortunately the television programs that we watch really aren't educational, they usually promote all the wrong morales. The dumbing down of America is complete, for the most part. The signs of success are apparent by the actions of big media and this administration.
Here are the two pieces of legislation that were and continue to be pushed by Aipac to force our nation into a military conflict with Iran
H Con Res 362
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c110:H.CON.RES.362:
Co sponsors
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d110:HC00362:@@@P
Here is the text of Senate Res 580
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=sr110-580
Co-sponsors
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=sr110-580
NOTICE THAT THERE ARE FAR FEWER SUPPORTERS OF THIS WARMONGERING LEGISLATION DIRECTED TOWARDS IRAN IN THE SENATE THAN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVE. APPLY PRESSURE ON YOUR REPS. NO SANCTIONS NO WAR ON IRAN BASED ON UNSUBSTANTIATED CLAIMS THAT ARE COMING FROM AND BEING REPEATED BY THE SAME FOLKS WHO LIED OUR NATION INTO AN UNNECESSARY WAR IN IRAQ.
TELL YOUR REPS TO PAY HEED TO THE LATEST NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE ESTIMATE ON IRAN NOT TO THE WARMONGERS
Call your Reps and ask them to take their names off of the co-sponsor list if they are on it,
Action Alert
Diplomacy, not War with Iran
Action Alert H.C.R. 321 and H.C.R. 362
Please join PDA, The Council for the National Interest and other groups in a national call-in/email campaign to OPPOSE H.C.R 362, the Blockade of Iran bill, and SUPPORT H.C.R. 321, which calls for a diplomatic initiative with Iraq, Iran, Syria, and neighboring countries as a means of getting out of Iraq and resolving other disputes.
H.C.R. 362, if followed, would in effect set up a blockade of Iran, which is considered an act of war under international law. This would constitute a “trigger event” that inevitably would provoke action by Iran, retaliation by the US, and draw us into pointless war similar to the way the Gulf of Tonkin incident pushed us into the Vietnam War. (More details here.)
Call the Capitol switchboard at 202 224-3121 and ask for your Representative and Senators. You can find your Representative and Senators here.
Phone calls are effective because they create a buzz in the office. Ask to speak to the legislative aid who handles Iraq and Iran. Urge your representative to vote against H.C.R. 362 whether he or she is already a co-sponsor or not. Urge them to co-sponsor H.C.R. 321. Thank them if they are in accord with our positions and urge them to talk to the leadership to convince colleagues to vote the same. As always, be polite and respectful, but be firm, as this is a crucial time.
Contact the media : Write a letter to the editor of your local newspaper or national media outlet.
Or you can send an email message--we encourage you to alter the text and the title of the email below.
Thank you!
Pawn @ 58:
We do need better education...especially when a Presidential candidate thinks that Iraq borders Pakistan. What's more that a Presidency can violate the Nuremberg precedent is another sign of American ignorance.
Considering our glorious constitution vis-à-vis the crimes of Bush, our craven and complicit congress, with the exception of a few brave and conscientious individuals, has totally botched its duties given the checks and balances described therein.
Aside from their cravenness and complicity which are big deals, literally and figuratively, I can only imagine they must be afraid that were they actually to be found doing their job as described in that glorious document and a big bomb went off somewhere in the country, the neocons would slaughter them in the next election.
That and of course every vote in congress is bought and sold to the highest bidder. The constitution doesn't have the same lobbying power that have the military industrial media complex not to mention the mega multi-national corporations in general, ergo… congress does nothing about Bush's crimes.
Except to offer a few obligatory whines.
The Presidential power of the pardon is huge and it seems immutable. Except of course it only applies in this country.
Can he pardon himself? Consider this. No one has done it so he could try.
Will some foreign power indict him later on. It is possible down the road. We are in decline economically and our reputation in the world is in shreds.
War crimes cannot be pardoned. It took ten years to catch Radovan Karadžić, aka the Serbian Santa (look at his capture phone), so there is hope. It would be nice to see all of the Bush-Cheney cabal punished and serve very long jail times, but it's far more important that we repair the damage they've done.
General_Rennenkampf @ 54:
Apples and oranges.
A Jew calling a nazi a subhuman piece of shit is in the same league as a nazi calling a Jew an untermensch.
It doesn't take a genius to understand that...
I hit submit too fast, it should read "it is NOT in the same league"
Is there any way that pre-emptive pardons for wide swaths of his administration could be construed (and charged) as obstruction of justice?
This is f'ing sick. I'm no Constitutional scholar, but I'm guessing that any president has had the power to effectively pardon himself. If he orders someone to do something illegal, then pardons that operative, isn't that roughly the same thing as breaking the law and pardoning himself? The fact that bush might be the one to exercise that power stinks worse than his record number of signing statements. What a catastrofuck.
The Dude @ 63:
True, but neither should happen. Of course, if the Nazis had been nice guys, they wouldn'tve been Nazis. If I'd been a Jew in that era, I'd hope that when the SS came for me I'd have a bullet awaiting them so there'd be no slow death in a death camp. I like a nice, quick death, the thought of a slow one gives me the willies.
General_Rennenkampf @ 67:
Yes, and if some people in this country had not acted like "inbred hicks" we would not have to call them "inbred hicks." Capice?
How brain dead would you have to be to think Bush and his crime family would not take advantage of premptive pardons?
Any criminal would use a "Get out of jail free" card if they had access to it!
BTW.... Impeachment would put a stop to the pardons so our spineless Dumbocratic leadership will also be guilty of standing idly by while these domestic terrorists try to insulate themselves from any future accountability.
Something to think about when the derelicts come up for re-election!
The Dude @ 68:
Meh, Kaiser Wilhelm and most monarchs of the 19th Century were inbred hicks, so....
There will be no election. The Bush Regime will not give up the power they have stolen, especially to Barack Obama. We are being set up, that is why McInsane is their candidate, any other Republican would never let the Bush Regime declare martial law in order to stop the election. McInsane has been promised something big in order to pretend to be the candidate.
The Dude @ 32:
Don't forget Bush I pardon of all those involved in Iran/Contra. There are investigations that continue into next administrations and once he realized that he was leaving office, he had to pardon them else he would have been found out.
why not, he loves being pre-emptive.
dothehop @ 72:
Bush stopped the Iran/Contra as soon as he started his tenure, Clinton de facto dropped any charges left against Bush.
General_Rennenkampf @ 70:
Most monarchies are indeed actually inbred, "blue blood" was a despective term for "hemophiliac."
Nice tangential argument that does not change the fact that there have (and will be it seems) plenty of inbred hicks in this nation of ours too.
What The Holy Heck @ 65:
Construe away, of course that is what it is. But, the pardon is as close to the decree of a monarchy as we have.
General_Rennenkampf @ 51:
Sorry, ment to say Radovan, it is so hard to keep up with all Balkan war criminals these days. Toots(?) does this mean I can call you shakes?
Reslugs have to work quickly to cover up the massive corruption and proven criminals in the Dumbya administration.
jeff @ 77:
Why not, my grip on reality's shaky as it is. *rimshot.*
rend @ 73:
That's why pickles smile is always so forced looking.
That and the nip-and-tuck.
#56
Anonymous Says: Can’t we just become vigilantes in prosecuting the war crimes of the Bush Administration?
That is always a personal option.
The problem with pre-emptive pardons, is pardons are generally an admission of guilt. Even if the accused confesses to guilt, there still has to be a trial by jury. Otherwise it's guilty until proven innocent.
This is a Gordion knot.
Bush will not make a move to be permanent president. Why? He wouldn't be able to his "good night's sleep" every night. Why? Do you think Cheney would sit back and let someone as stupid as the Shrub keep absolute power. No way. Bush wouldn't last 6 weeks against the Stalinesque Mr. Cheney.
Are "preemptive pardons" even legal? I thought the pardon had to be for someone actually convicted through the courts.
And wouldn't a "preemptive pardon" be an admission to covering up some wrong-doing which would make the pardon invalid if the crime being covered up involved the prez-nut?
taller ghost walt @ 83:
Darth Sidious voice: Legal? He will make it legal.
This post is not telling the whole story. It is surprising that it did not mention that on yesterday's Countdown, Keith Olbermann discussed this with Constitutional law expert Jonathan Turley. But Olbermann also brought up the fact that one of Obama's advisers has stated that Obama, if elected, would not prosecute anyone from Bush's administration unless it was somehow thought to be egregious. As Turley correctly pointed out, it should not make any difference how egregious those crimes are [ as if what this administration has done has not been egregious enough to warrant prosecution], any crimes that an administration commits should be prosecuted. One wonders how much more evidence one needs to determine that there is very little difference between the Democrats and the Republicans. To paraphrase Sam Spade in The Maltese Falcon, the Democrats and the Republicans are a swell bunch of thieves.
The Dude @ 32:
The morons are going to elect McBush. I am growing more certain of this everyday!
Most of America has not connected the dots from policy to political accountability. And the librul' media (ROFLMAO) is already in elect McBush campaign mode already.
btw, "post presidential impeachment" is legal.
It's a means for the Legislative Branch to make known what went on during an Admin wasn't kosher and that the current sitting President better mind his "p's and q's" in regards to committing the same funny stuff.
THE BUSH CRIME FAMILY.....THEY ALWAYS GET AWAY WITH IT!
Prescott Bush plotted to overthrow FDR and implement fascism
Bush's Grandfather Planned Fascist Coup In America
New investigation sheds light on clique of powerbrokers, including Prescott Bush, who sought to overthrow U.S. government and implement Hitlerian policies
Prescott Bush - Property Seized--Trading with the Enemy
In October 1942, ten months after entering World War II, America was preparing its first assault against Nazi military forces. Prescott Bush was managing partner of Brown Brothers Harriman. On Oct. 20, 1942, the U.S. government ordered the seizure of Nazi German banking operations in New York City which were being conducted by Prescott Bush.
Iran-Contra affair
Many investigations ensued, including those by the United States Congress and the three-man, Reagan-appointed Tower Commission. Neither could find any evidence that Reagan himself knew of the extent of the multiple programs.[1] In the end, fourteen administration officials were charged with crimes, and eleven convicted, including Caspar Weinberger the Secretary of Defense during these events.[9] They were all pardoned in the final days of the George H. W. Bush presidency, who had been vice-president at the time.
George Bush Jr. has appointed numerous felons and others from the Iran Contra scandal to prominent positions in his current administration. He has suspiciously appointed Iran-contra insider, Lee Hamilton, to head the 9-11 investigation after a failed attempt to appoint wanted war criminal Henry Kissinger. His advisors in Latin American affairs are none other than Otto reich and Roger Noriega. Both implicated in Iran-contra and behind the recent coup in Haiti. Some people may not really be all that clued in on what happened during the Iran-Contra scandal. So I decided to put together this timely graphic in effort to explain what happened and why his dealings with these people, at a time when government honesty is so crucial, should be held under close scrutiny.
"It's a big club, and you ain't in it. You and I are not in the big club."
There really, really, needs to be a Constitutional amendment which prohibits the pardoning of anyone acting on behalf and committing crimes at the president's request. This is a nasty loophole. It allows the president to commit crimes by proxy with no legal ramifications.
So w is gonna be concerned about 'precedent' in laws as to whether he can pull this off, eh??? That's how he's going out -obeying a law. (snark)
He's never obeyed -or Had to obey- a law in his life.
Daddy always fixed w's incompetence, mismanagement & illegal activities with his connections and money; from his acceptance to (and graduation from) schools where he apparently learned Nothing (& before the Champaign Club that was w's Vietnam) to his bankruptcy problems with the Arbusto/Harkin/Spectrum Oil ventures & the accompanying Multiple Insider Dealing Charges with the SEC that were quickly hushed, Etc; to his Selection as America's president...
Why the hell would any person have ever thought his 'presidency' was gonna be anything different than what he had done his whole life??
....Precedent is a funny thing.
It has become painfully clear that George W. Bush and anyone connected to the Bush family political/business enterprise is Teflon coated. Why that should be is a question that needs some answers very quickly. Answers that will not be forthcoming from congress, the media or the courts.
taller ghost walt @ 83:
No. The pardon power is absolute and doesn't constitute an admission. No pardon can be overturned or declared invalid. This is fairly basic constitutional law.
THE BUSH CRIME FAMILY…..THEY ALWAYS GET AWAY WITH IT!
Neil Bush, the president's brother. Central player of the 1980'ssavings and loan scandal, he ran a savings and loan into the ground while shoveling millions of its taxpayer-backed dollars into the pockets of two deadbeat partners. Neil served as a director of Silverado Banking, Savings and Loan in Denver, Colorado, from 1985 until 1988.
The failure of Silverado -- its closure delayed until after the 1988 election -- cost taxpayers about $1 billion
Marvin Bush, the president's brother was on the board of directors of a company providing electronic security for the World Trade Center, Dulles International Airport and United Airlines, according to public records. The company was backed by an investment firm, the Kuwait-American Corp., also linked for years to the Bush family. The security company, formerly named Securacom and now named Stratesec, is in Sterling, Va.. Its CEO, Barry McDaniel, said the company had a ``completion contract" to handle some of the security at the World Trade Center ``up to the day the buildings fell down."
Jeb Bush
When federal regulators closed Broward Savings in 1988, they found the loan, which had been secured by the Bush partnership, in default. As Jeb's father was finishing his second term as vice-president and running for the presidency, federal regulators had two options: to get Jeb Bush and his partner to repay the loan, or to foreclose on their office building. But regulators came up with a third solution. After reappraising the building, regulators decided it wasn't worth as much as was owed for it. The regulators reduced the amount owed by Bush and his partner from $4.56 million to just $500,000. The pair paid that amount and were allowed to keep their office building. Taxpayers picked up the tab for the unpaid $4 million.
He also rigged an election that you may have heard about.
“It’s a big club, and you ain’t in it. You and I are not in the big club.”
Pardons, shmardons. No one in the Bush cabal is going to face criminal prosecution, so what's the diff?
It is not in the interest of any elected official of either party (others have no relevance) to be involved in an impeachment. That would show all of us that politicians, in general, are corrupt or are certainly corruptible with money (I'm often amazed by how little it take or how much someone can get away with). If we see that we could take action to remove all financial (or most) gain from being a career (someone who feels it a job to tell us how to live) politician. Clinton's impeachment was a morals issue, which we all could identify with in some way (at least alone at night in our own heads). However, all those involved in the impeachment could take (rightly or hypocritically) the high road and act as though they would not be caught in such a manner. BUT money is a different, they all are interested in that, and so are we. So no one wants to put the corruption under the microscope, they all might show up in some small amount.
There was an article in Newsweek about preemptive pardons http://www.newsweek.com/id/145842 "The Truth About Torture:To get a full accounting of how U.S. interrogation methods were used, the president should give those accused of 'war crimes' a pass." By Stuart Taylor Jr.
It's an interesting article to say the least.
Just in case anybody thought BushCo rules were any more complicated than a game of cheater's Monopoly, he's now getting ready to issue a pack of "Get out of Jail Free" cards, to be used as needed.
Pardons may work within the US but it won't stop the world court from prosecutions. I hope they don't want to travel much.
President Gerald Ford has already set precedent for issuing pardons prior to indictment, prosecution or conviction on any charges when he preemptively pardoned Richard Nixon for any crimes he might have committed while in office. I don't see any reason Bush couldn't follow the same principle if he wanted to issue a preemptive pardon to any of his cronies.
For Bush to issue pardons preemptively is likely to be construed, at least by some, as a tacit admission of guilt. However, you can bet Bush will put his own spin on the reason for issuing preemptive pardons, such as claiming he believes the people he has pardoned are innocent, but that he wants to circumvent a likely partisan effort to unjustly go after the fine, upstanding public servants who served in his Administration which he believes would occur after he leaves office.
And don't be surprised if Bush issues a preemptive pardon for himself before he leaves office.
What do you mean, "Would he?"?
"Does the president even have the authority to pardon someone who isn’t even facing criminal charges? Apparently, he can."
That's just great. Why not take this all the way and pardon crimes that haven't been committed yet. Sort of like Minority report on opposite day. Then the president can pardon everyone on inauguration day and go wild.
Let's see... The administration has been making it up as the go along so far...
Don't be surprised if through the president managed to enact the Wang Doodle feature of executive priveledge that pardons him and anyone he wants from all past wrong doing and all future wrong doing...
oh yeah, and gives a special clause to allow Dick to shoot at least two more people in the face
jaramilr @ 104:
You may not like it but its in the constitution. It's clear as day that a president can pardon anyone for any crimes commited as of the date of the pardon, whether there has been a criminal investigation started or not. He can't pardon anyone for crimes committed after the day of the pardon. .
This 'pre-emptive pardon' thing sounds like the selling of indulgences by the Catholic Church in the 1400s.
Back then, Catholics could, for a small donation, get a piece of paper, signed by a bona fide bishop of the church, that automatically pardoned sins - including sins that had not yet been committed.
The eventual result of this was the Protestant Reformation, a popular revolt against the corruption of the Papacy. Sounds like a new revolt is in order.
If the President can order people to break the law and then pardon them for it, then we live in a dictatorship, not a democracy and we have an elected king, not a president.
How does this "brilliant" system of checks and balances we are supposed to have justify this?
If the only guard against this is congressional impeachment, and congress refuses, then their really is no law of the land and congress are collaborators in the crimes.
Lets face it. There will be no accountability for this administration, no matter who is the next President. Future administrations will see this and act accordingly.
Oh. . and we're fucked.
Bush will sign anything Big Dick puts in front of him!
NoGWBpolicyleftinplace @ 109:
He must have to write pretty small.
This is why democracy don't work when things like this start happening ..We are turning ourselves into an empire little by little. if we the public don't do something real fast we will loose this nation and we will be slaves for a long time. May God Help US.
The idea of preemptive pardon is ludicrous. Since someone is presumed innocent until found guilty, you cannot pardon someone until they have been convicted. To do that would infer that they are guilty even before they've been charged.
It's common for dictators to pardon themselves (or to cut deals for future pardons) before leaving power. Pinochet tried that too. Naomi Klein in her new brilliant book "The Shock Doctrine: the rise of disaster capitalism" has more on the topic. I encourage you to read it. It's the best book I have read in years.
No party to the Geneva Conventions can absolve itself, or another party, of liability for grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions. ( Convention I, Art. 51; Convention II, Art. 52; Convention III, Art. 131; Convention IV, Art. 148)
bklyn @ 113:
What about mass graves?
Hold on...last week Bush ended his last G8 summit with 'Goodbye from the world biggest polluter' and you people think he wont try preemptive pardons because it will make him look bad?
Bush doesnt care about the moral implications of doing the wrong thing...he only ever asks himself 'can i get away with it?' and the answer, throughout his entire life, has been 'yes'
with a little help from silent speaker pelosi
By their pardons you shall know them.
BUSH, NOVEMBER 2008........
"... and in the future... should i accidently kill someone... or have someone killed... or drive drunk... or pay someone to kick the shit out of you...
or should any member of the bush family accidently run you down in a crosswalk.... or put poison in your food.... or should one of my friends, dick or condi, or any parties to be named later EVERY DO YOU WRONG.... i pardon us... amen... so help us god... with liberty and justice for some."
PUT THAT IN YOUR SIGNING STATEMENT AND SHOVE IT UP YOUR ASS AMERICA !!!!
This issue was big fodder when Clinton was preparing to leave office. I say -- let 'em do what their gonna do. Their handprints will be on any pardon issued, and political hay can always be made after the fact. Also, we have to keep trial lawyers busy, right?
A presidential pardon can't overturn a civil suit or violation of a state law. I think I've finally figured out why they're so damned obstinate about not letting Washington D.C. become part of a state.
It also explains why Congress has been pushing civil suits, rather than criminal charges for the people who are refusing to respond to the Congressional subpoenas.
bklyn @ 113:
I thought we all agreed that The Geneva Convention is a cute little historical document that only applies to small countries, but not us. ie-it only applies to 'bad guys,' as identified on late night WWII movies. Since we're the good guys we don't have to worry about it. Also, Congress is an amusing little debating club, but the executive branch doesn't have to listen to anything it says. That's been the rule for EVERY Republican president since Nixon. The constitution is also a nice little piece of historical memorabilia, but the executive branch gets to decide which bits and pieces of it it's going to adhere to.
"...but when the President does it, that mean's it's NOT illegal."
--Richard Nixon.
"..people respond to fear, not to love. They don't teach you that in Sunday School but it's true."
--Richard Nixon.
Didn't they steal enough money to afford, "the risk of an investigation and expensive legal bills"?
If not there is always K Street.
I'm in the minority who doesn't think he'll pardon anyone, in part because he's SO sure of how loyal everyone is, but also because it's unlikely the new justice department will find it politically feasible to come after him. For him there's no need. Consider the two options that exist.
1) He pardons everyone (which makes them look guilty) and then Conyers drags them one after another before congress whereupon they MUST tell everyone exactly what happened. Pardon equals immunity. They can't claim incrimination. The truth kills the GOP as a modern party, so they must either lie or refuse to talk. Both roads lead to prison, which admittedly Bush couldn't care less about so long as it isn't him. If anyone does break ranks, the fact that they risk perjury to rat out Bush gives them added credibility he'd rather they not have. There's no winning here and the unbelievable audacity of a blanket pardon would provide an Obama administration with the political cover to do a thorough investigation.
2) He pardons no one (why? They've done nothing wrong right???) and when Conyers drags them before congress they claim the 5th. It sure looks bad, but short of some concrete evidence (which a President Obama could, but probably won't look for), they'll walk. Damage to the GOP (and the death of all their reputations) is assured, but the truth stays hidden. Sure, SOMEONE might talk, but, as I said, Bush thinks they're all loyal. Indeed, unity is their best defense.
Bush is too smart to go for option 1. This is one most likely to lead to him being personally indicted. Option 2 amounts to challenging a sitting president to come after him, which I think is a good bet. There's no way Obama does it without the national kiss off of a blanket pardon, because it would establish a precedent where each incoming administration of the opposite party starts out by trying to put members of the previous one in jail. That would be a disaster even if it did feel good for those of us who know Bush is a war criminal.
Don't think I'm right? Maybe, but consider that he already sort of went with option 2 for Scooter Libby. If he'd pardoned Libby, then congress could compel his complete cooperation. By commuting the sentence, he retains some liability for anything attached to the Plame scandal that wasn't in the original indictment. Even if there *isn't* anything else, Scooter can claim there is when taking the 5th without having to prove it. Very smart....
Just remember that Gerald Ford pardoned Noxin for "crimes commited and crimes that may have been committed."
Article Two Section Two paragraph One of the Constitution ends with this quote "...he shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offences against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment." It does not state any limitations on who, what when or how, except in "Cases of Impeachment". At this point in time I am not certain if that means the impeachment of the President or the impeachment of all those public officials who are liable to removal from office by the use of the Impeachment. I believe that it covers the later. In the case of Nixon it did not cover his impeachment, but that would have had to be done by a Congress that had no interest.
There is no justice in this country.
The only potential up side is that this will kill the GOP as a political party. Also to all the law enforcement personnel, from now on arrest no one. For if these criminals walk any sanctity of the law is negated.
Let's face reality here. President Bush & his cronies are above the law. No stain of Adam's sin can ever touch them; no hand of the enemy can ever reach them. That explains what has happened the past 8 years. The President & his cronies said they were so much better than the Democrats. They told them to sit down & shut up. And the Democrats did just that.
General_Rennenkampf @ 43:
The people who are Hicks aren't a different race. It's a lifestyle choice. It's how you ACT. What you DO, that make a person a hick.
As for inbreeding? It's bad. Closed, isolated gene pools tend to have it more often. It still doesn't make you a different race. So.... not racism.
I will admit bigotry toward idiots. The cruel. The selfish, and the willfully ignorant. They come in all colors. I don't like 'em. I never will.
They are the major causes of the problems in the world.
Of course he's going to pardon people -- Rove, etc. But that's only good in US courts. If the torture that went on crosses a line in international law, pardons by a US president aren't worth the paper they're written on -- if the person is taken into custody outside the US.
I vote with #15Katleen says, and with #71Eathabides. There will be no (s)elections! McInsane is a distraction until Bloody Israel does it's thing. United States of Soviet America. This is a 'soft coup'. No way are the crooks going to let themselves get the gate in any way. They learned good (Dumba speak) from the 1933 gang, Tricky Dicky, etc.
Comments are closed on this entry