WASHINGTON — The president’s power to pardon is one provision in the Constitution that some members of Congress find unsettling, especially at the end of a president’s term.
Not surprising since Congress has no power to stop or repeal a presidential pardon.
But since pardon controversies usually erupt only every four or eight years, those who want to curb the pardon power by amending the Constitution never have had enough momentum to do so.
Article II, section 2 of the Constitution says the president “shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offences against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.”
If President George W. Bush were to issue pardons of former Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, Vice President Dick Cheney’s former chief of staff Lewis “Scooter” Libby, or others, would the Democratic-controlled Congress pass a constitutional amendment to limit presidents' pardon power?
Probably not.
James Pfiffner, a presidential scholar at the School of Public Policy at George Mason University said, “I see no likelihood that the Constitution would be amended to limit the pardon power. It is just too difficult to amend the Constitution.”
The debates over pardons at the end of presidents’ terms tend to be quickly forgotten.
President Bill Clinton’s final day pardons of fugitive commodities dealer Marc Rich and others were front-page news for several weeks after Clinton left office, but Congress and the news media soon shifted their sights to other topics.
Reputation a deterrent to bad pardons?
With no way for Congress to stop a president’s pardons, pardon critics fall back on arguments that a president ought to worry about his reputation before handing out dubious pardons.
The New York Times editorial page, never a Bush supporter, said last week that “if he wants to try to reclaim his reputation,” he should not issue pardons to administration alumni such as Libby, whose sentence Bush has already commuted.
But as Bill Clinton proved, “legacy” and historical reputation are changeable concepts.
In 1974, as a congressional candidate, Clinton railed against President Gerald Ford’s pardon of his predecessor Richard Nixon.
White House tapes made clear Nixon had worked to block a criminal investigation of the 1972 break-in at Democratic National Committee headquarters at the Watergate in Washington.
Nixon was forced to resign. His successor, Ford, then pardoned him for any Watergate-related crimes he might have committed.
An outraged Congress briefly considered action: Sen. Walter Mondale, D-Minn., proposed a constitutional amendment allowing a pardon to be rescinded by a two-thirds votes of both House and Senate.
“This pardon has again opened the wounds of Watergate,” Clinton told voters in 1974. “It has undermined respect for law and order… It has tormented the families of those already in prison for the administration’s political crimes.”
Clinton praises Ford for Nixon pardon
Twenty-five years later, as president, Clinton awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom to Ford and praised him for giving Nixon the pardon.
The current version of the end-of-presidency pardon speculation heated up this week as Weekly Standard editor William Kristol wrote that the president should consider pardoning “everyone who served in good faith in the war on terror, but whose deeds may now be susceptible to demagogic or politically inspired prosecution by some seeking to score political points.”
He said, “The CIA agents who waterboarded Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, and the NSA officials who listened in on phone calls from Pakistan, should not have to worry about legal bills or public defamation.”
But Sen. Russ Feingold, D-Wisc., a harsh Bush critic, said last month, “If President Bush were to pardon key individuals involved in the misdeeds of his administration, from warrantless wiretapping to torture to the firing of U.S. attorneys for political reasons, the courts would be unable to address criminality, or pass judgment on the legality of some of the president's worst abuses.”
Rep. Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y., another Bush foe, has offered a non-binding resolution saying it would be “a dangerous abuse of the pardon power” for Bush to pardon officials of his administration.
Nadler wants attorney general-designate Eric Holder, once he takes office next year, to appoint an independent counsel to investigate “illegal acts by senior officials of the administration of President George W. Bush.”
But Nadler’s suggestion is an illustration of the check-mating power of the pardon. Even if Holder did appoint an independent counsel, that prosecutor would have no one to prosecute if they’d already been pardoned.
(Holder, as deputy attorney general under Clinton, played a role in the pardons of Rich and others, a topic he's likely to be questioned about during his confirmation hearings.)
In the rhetorical clash of “please pardon” versus “don’t you dare pardon,” the essential fact is this: Other than holding hearings after the fact, as it did with Clinton’s pardons eight years ago, Congress can do nothing about pardons it dislikes.
What the Framers thought
The debates at the 1787 constitutional convention as well as Supreme Court rulings have made it clear that the president’s power to pardon is sweeping, covering those who have been convicted of violations of federal law, those who have been indicted but not yet stood trial, and even those who have not yet been indicted.
The constitutional convention debated and overwhelmingly rejected a proposal requiring that the Senate concur in any pardons.
In light of how much the Framers of the Constitution feared monarchical power, why did they give the president such unlimited power?
One of the Framers, Alexander Hamilton, argued for assigning the pardon power to the president alone because in times of rebellion against the government “there are often critical moments, when a well-timed offer of pardon to the insurgents or rebels may restore the tranquility” of the nation.
Convening Congress to debate pardons would take too long, he argued.
Ford, Bush, and Clinton weren’t worried about rebellions when they issued their famous pardons, although Ford did say he pardoned Nixon in order to avert a prosecution of the ex-president that would have divided the nation.
Recent presidents have used the pardon power to do justice as they saw it.
Pardons in Iran-contra affair
In 1992, Bush’s father President George H.W. Bush granted Christmas Eve pardons to former Defense Secretary Caspar Weinberger and five other former officials for their roles in the Iran-Contra affair.
In that mid-1980s episode, now mostly forgotten, Reagan administration officials arranged for weapons to be shipped to Iran in exchange for the release of U.S. hostages held by the Hezbollah militants in Lebanon.
But Bush said of Weinberger and the others accused in the Iran-contra episode, “their motivation — whether their actions were right or wrong — was patriotism.”
And he said those he pardoned “have already paid a price — in depleted savings, lost careers, anguished families — grossly disproportionate to any misdeeds or errors of judgment they may have committed.”
As contentious as the Iran-contra affair seemed in 1992, Bush was taking a step to make it history, to relegate it to place where people would no longer be debating it. He succeeded in doing that.
Whether his son could do something similar before his term ends on Jan. 20 is one of the intriguing final questions about the Bush presidency.
Bush is a a worm so there is no doubt he will pardon those who lied,stole,cheated,tortured, and exposed government secrets and operatives at his bidding. We might not be able to convict them for everything that they have done but Bush isn't bright enough to pardon them for everything and long before the Statute of Limitations expires we can find some reason to put his minions behind bars where they and Bush belong.
Right, I'm sure that his people leaked all that secret stuff to the New Obama...I mean York Times about spying on terrorists, what we were doing in Iraq and Afghanistan against Al Queda, and all the other programs that were going on to defend Americans.
You people are so dumb!!!!!!!!
I guess he belongs behind bars for killing all those terrorists that you feel are so harmless and would never hurt you right? Because you are so "tolerant". Can you actually name specifically one "crime" that you feel that Bush and his "minions" have actually done? Just one??
As opposed to the guy before him that not only lied to you, but to a Federal Grand Jury, and a Federal Judge?
Talk about pathetic neo-cons are so predicable.Every time that Bush's corruption is exposed they try to change the subject and make Clinton a scapegoat. One crime?How about subverting the Constitution by renditions of American citizens to foreign countries where they could be tortured and held without trial.Bush put the Bill of Rights in the trash compactor trying to justify his war on Iraq that had nothing to do with the war on terror.
The highest elected political position in the land is the President. He will pardon everyone that helped him cover up, lie, deceive, set up smoke and mirrors and direct money into the pockets of his cronies. Bush came to the White House as an oil man with a history of failed banks. He was in the middle of the S & L Scandals of the 80's along side his brother Neil and Brother Jeb. They made their money the old fashioned way; they stole it or defrauded millions of people out of it. Silverado Savings and Loan is not a fantasy, folks. Yes, Clinton pardoned many folks upon his exit from DC, but he came to the White House from much more meager beginnings than did George W. Bush and he did not have the type or size of scandals on his record as does Bush. It is not a time to sniffle about all of the pardons that Bush will issue. Let him cover up and pardon all the sin he likes, just be glad he is gone.
Can you actually prove or show any evidence of any kind that backs up your rant here?
Geez, you guys don't do anything but hate!!!!
You'll repeat any lie, twist any half truth, or just make crap up to back up your hatred of one man, one single solitary man, for no other reason except pure unadulterated hatred.
I have a novel idea. How about all you libs who think these a-holes in the middle east are basically misunderstood should really take your next vacation over there. Preferably in one of the more radical countries. Feel free to try and share your views of support with them.
Maybe in your few remaining minutes on this earth you will finally come to realize your stupidity.
Hey Mike,
Great post! Danny Pearl was just a reporter and look what they did to him.
Let's see, he's going to pardon people that chased and captured or killed terrorists that want YOU dead. He's going to possibly pardon people that "water boarded" people that is actually quite harmless, other than creating a moment of panic (and yes I've been water boarded so I know exactly what it is). He's going to pardon people that I'm sure you'll hate the idea of just because it's "Bush", so anything he does is beyond hateful. The way you people are, if he pardoned Clinton you'd applaud it and still hate Bush.
And he'll look at his pardons for the country, as opposed to Clinton who SOLD his pardons for money and votes.
Clinton "did not have the type or size of scandals on his record as does Bush"??? How about lying to a grand jury AND a Federal judge? How about lying to EVERY SINGLE AMERICAN about playing around with Lewinski? How about selling his pardon for Rich to get money for his "library"? How about pardoning FALN terrorists so Hillary could get the Puerto Rican/New York votes?
And what "type and size" scandals does Bush have? Other then your hate of course.
The wonderful thing about the pardon is that as much as you and Nadler want to cry, there isn't one single solitary thing you can do about it!!
Cry on libs, he's going to pardon people that protected you, as much as you seem to have not wanted that protection.
Mildly interesting but "next-to-useless" posting string!
Fortunately, time is humankind's inappropriate attempt at dividing up eternity which, when taken into account in this thread categorizes these arguments as the pale ruminations of nothing more than simple cognitive dissonance. The left-leaners cannot stand anyone telling them what to do and the right-leaners hicchup over anyone attacking their "personally established cultural rights".
Perhaps one might suggest to the adherents of both sides that they read about such controversy as surrounded President Adams' "Alien and Sedition Acts", or President Wilson's multiple invasions of Mexico and those pesky Central American banana republics, or (ah, but the list goes on and on in our Presidential history).
In short, every President of our country has had the opportunity and has often chosen to execute his (notice we still need to redress the issue of having never risen to the level of strength to place a "her" in the President's chair), Constitutional right to grant such pardons. GWB just happens to be the next President to have that opportunity. What he does with it is his right, and his alone. Next up with be President-Elect Obama following one or two terms in office and so on and so forth.
The president's power to grant pardons is absolute. That does not justify preemptive pardons and I hope Bush does not go there.
Dan #79...Here is a wonderful site that has been working endlessly to get our border agents freed! It is: grassfire.org Please check it out; they need all the support they can get!
Bush is a criminal and he and his staff of crooks are no different than the gangs that feed on the misery of the poor folks whose neighborhoods they live in. The only difference is that Bush and his thugs wear suits and ties and kill thousands more worldwide.
"Every time a Republican is convicted, an angel gets its wings."
Name one crime committed by GWB.
Molly...That is totally absurd! Bush is NO MORE a criminal than any of the rest, (Dem & Rep)!
How many of them outed a CIA agent? How many of them lied to drag us into a war in a country that never attacked us? How many of them planted friendly reporters to ask friendly questions? How many of them paid for propaganda?
How many of them spied on the public?
How many of them ignored the signs when warned of the coming financial melt down??
He's a traitor, and a criminal. I expect nothing less than that he will pardon everyone associated with him. The criminal in chief.
Waterboarding?Anybody watch the videos on Al jazeera of Americans being beheaded with a knife.If waterboarding or wiretapping Arabs gets intelligence,that prevents even one Americans death,it is worthwhile.
Wonder how many pardons will be on the table in 4 years?
My comment about the pardons are this and that is i think that Barry Bonds and all the rest of the baseball players that the Grand Jury has under their thumbs should all be pardoned and in fact if they really need someone to blame all this drug use then it should be the idiot Commissioner of Baseball Bud Selig because it took enough time to discover that they had a drug use problem in baseball. Good example is Steve Howe he went through 6 Rehab Programs before the Baseball Guru's decided that they shouldn't let him play anymore. At that point why didn't they put some kind of drug testing program but NO it took them until the 2005 Baseball Season before anything come up and by that time Bud Selig's Buddy Hank Aaron had set a record and then Barry Bonds was set to break it and then they decided that they needed a drug program for baseball. They keep using Barry Bonds body what he look like as a rookie with Pittsburgh and then the size of him this past year. Sure he is going to be bigger he's alot older it size is the factor then they need to take a look at Hank Aaron when he first started and when he retired. If you are going to give out pardons then give them to all the baseball player's under this curtain of drug use set by the Grand Jury and Bud Selig. Pardon them all and get the Grand Jury back to doing something that is needed in this country and that is more close look at the judicial system as of right now it stinks.
Pardon? What a joke. The real joke is that you/we can clamor all we want about our government and what we might consider proper or improper, right or wrong, but it doesn't change the fact that these little forums never get heard. You think the President, Congress, any of these self serving tsars give a rats ass about what you or I think? No. This country is going down the tubes and it's a shame. It's not about the pardon, per se, it's about the pardon bothering so many people yet the issue gets neglected as they know it always will. In other words.....tough @!$%#, we'll do what we want, who is going to stop us. Nice way to treat your fellow countrymen. Politicians are so warm and careing around election time, but when that's over.......we get the finger! Well pardon me for saying so.......
But Bush said of Weinberger and the others accused in the Iran-contra episode, “their motivation — whether their actions were right or wrong — was patriotism.”
The ends do not justify the means.
Should Spies: Hansen-Agee-Nicholson be Pardoned...???
Should VietNam War Draft-Dodgers been Pardon...Ask The 58,000Plus Victim's and Their Surviving Family Member's...???
Should Only E-6 and Below Be Tried and Sentenced To Hard Labor at Ft LevenWorth, KS...for Abu Grahib, etc- Alledged WaterBoarding, etc...& Not The Generals-Major's-Captain's, etc...???
Just ask The Returning Severely Wounded Military Uniformed Men & Women...!!!
"Extremism in the defense of freedom is no Vice. Moderation in the pursuit of liberty is not a virtue".
Should The British Generals and Other Underlings been Pardoned For Executing Patrick Henry...???
Should Nazi's That Escaped Trial at Nuremberg be Pardoned For Their Inhuman Treatment Of Jews during WWII...???
Should Japanese Soldiers During WWII on Burma who Forced Marched POW's Hundred's of Miles, and Forced These Same Men to Build The Bridge Over The River Kwai...Be Pardoned..???
Panty Waist's Who Clamour Against: Waterboarding-Sleep Depravation-and other Non Invasive Means To Obtain Information From Captured Soldiers during Operation Eduring Freedom...Should Reread Their History Books...To Fully Grasp--Just What Is and Isn't Torture...!!!
Furthermore, Get use to The Stark Reality That What Our Nation's Military Interrigator's use or Don't Use Is Substantially Less Inhuman Than What American Enemies Used-Use Likliy Will Use...On US---So Get On Board and Quit being a Passive Idiot...!!!
Presidential Pardon's is The Final Executive Action Given To Our OutGoing President By Our Constitution's Framers....!!!
Unfortunately, if Bush can look in his 'mirror' and pardon himself.....he can pardon anyone.
"would the Democratic-controlled Congress pass a constitutional amendment to limit presidents' pardon power?" This is an impossible assertion. Don't these guys have editors? Who hired this guy to write? Why did I finish reading his article? This isn't media elite, this is media slacker....
Interesting and vigorous debate on Ramos and Campean. I think there is enough both inside and outside the investigation, prosecution and trial of the two border guards to suggest (if not prove) prosecutorial misconduct. Anyone who has been a cop (as I have) knows that the standard in using deadly force is what a reasonable person would have done under the same circumstances given the knowledge that he had at the time. In other words, it is not dispositive whether or not the convicted drug smuggler actually had a gun, if a reasonable person standing in Ramos or Campean's shoes would have thought that he did at the time. There is credible evidence that both agents reasonable thought that the smuggler was armed. Further, there is evidence of perjured testimony used against the border guards. Finally, Johnny Sutton, the U.S. Attorney (and not coincidentally long time Texas political crony/puppet of Bush) committed significant prosecutorial misconduct during the prosecution. Unfortunately, as most attorneys will tell you (and I am one), proving prosecutorial misconduct on appeal is extremely difficult, particularly when you have to go outside the trial record. The bottom line is that the prosecution of Ramos and Campean has all the earmarks of political persecution grounded in Bush's root desire to ignore the border problem in favor of marrying the U.S. and Mexican economies. If Bush pardons either of them, he risks unsettling the carefully orchestrated process of eradicating our national sovereignty in favor of an American Union, patterned after the European Union -- a process quietly championed by his father. When all is said and done, W is his father's son.
Thank you for your input. It is good to hear the viewpoint of an attorney. There are so many of us out here who have been signing petitions, emailing and faxing trying to get these two unfortunate men pardoned. Do you believe it is a waste of time? Bush has made up his mind and that is the end to it?
The United States is currently 53 trillion dollars in debt. thanks to the Bush Administration's corrupt leadership for the past eight years. Go to brasschecktv.com and click on the video The Future of the US economy to see a great video on pre-2008 election US economic data. Decide for youself, will the United States clean up its debt. deficit or will our children, grandchildren, and great grandchildren be paying the debt off for us, resulting in low standards of living (?) for themselves and their families, (if they can afford families), for future generations.
You're in Easy Mode. If you prefer, you can use XHTML Mode instead. |