Getting Ready for the Bush Pardons
In his press conference earlier this week, President Bush declared flatly that he would not discuss the issue of pardons, which may be a sign that he's considering issuing a lot of pardons, a few pardons, or hardly any at all. While no one knows for sure what Bush will do, America should be prepared for a whole lot of last-minute pardons from the White House.
If so, who will get blanket pardons? It could be a crowded slate, beginning with everyone involved in the torture program (unlikely, though possibly Vice President Cheney and other policy makers), many of the principals in the US attorneys scandal ( including Karl Rove , again unlikely) not to mention assorted other wrongdoers like Scooter Libby (very likely), Mike Milken, and a host of other less-known figures, convicted or otherwise.
In early December, Attorney General Mukasey said that he saw "absolutely no evidence" that anyone involved in developing the torture programs "did so for any reason other than to protect the security in the country and in the belief that he or she was doing something lawful." Mukasey concluded that "In those circumstances, there is no occasion to consider prosecution, and there is no occasion to consider pardon." The other potential pardonees -- those involved in the US attorneys scandals, for example -- certainly won't be able to make the national security argument, but still may benefit from a Bush grant of clemency.
It is safe to say that the Obama administration -- and probably a large segment of the American public -- doesn't want to be bothered with Congressional and criminal investigations into the wrongdoing of the Bush years. Most people are hoping that Bush and Cheney will simply disappear into their respective caves, never to darken the national scene again. The argument is that we are facing enough grave and pressing challenges without looking back into the dismal record of the Bush years.
However, it is also true that the best way prevent future fiascos is to learn from past mistakes. Truth and reconciliation commissions have been effective tools in many countries to confront the sins of the past, and may even help to wash them away. House Judiciary Chair John Conyers has proposed a version of this -- the National Commission on Presidential War Powers and Civil Liberties. While America may not be ready for that particular vehicle, it would be wrong for an outgoing President who presided over disastrous -- and arguably criminal -- enterprises like the torture program to unilaterally slam the door on all future investigations into that conduct. The American people, their Congress and their courts should decide what is the best way to treat conduct that may have violated our laws and Constitution. In this case, George Bush should not be the decider.
It is quite possible that a batch of midnight pardons next Monday could cast a pall over the historic inauguration of Barack Obama, stealing the limelight with last-minute controversy. That is why it is important that not only the incoming Obama administration, but also the Congress and the media, be prepared to manage a firestorm over pardons on Inauguration Day. While it may be unlikely that George Bush decides on wholesale pardons, it is vital that he not rain on Obama's celebration, or at least that any lightning bolts from the disgraced, departing President not go unanswered.
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
If he gives blanket pardons to the administration criminals, it should guarantee a full and complete investigation and prosecution.
Does anyone believe a war criminal's pardons should be honored? What logic follows when a war criminal declares pre-emptively, crimes will be pardoned, because the war criminal says so?
Pardons galore. They are being prepared as we speak.
I’m betting against pre-emptive pardons from Bush.
1) A “pre-conviction pardon” is a contradiction in terms. It may not be legally valid.
2) Bush wants to prevent investigation. Pre-emptive pardons don’t do that.
3) To try anyone, a prosecutor would have to prove crimes were committed. Bush has taken the position that government-sanctioned kidnapping, torture, spying, etc., are not crimes, and that argument has held for years now. It would need to be overturned before criminal charges could be pressed. The whole process could take years, and it would take determination, integrity, and a huge amount of resources. Obama is a pragmatist. Would he invest a fortune in a politically divisive effort to establish some moot legal principles? Not likely.
4) Dick Cheney claims that Congress was complicit in the Bush administration‘s Constitutional violations. True or not, that’s a chilling forewarning of his legal defense. Even if Congress weren’t active co-conspirators, they could certainly be made to look like facilitators. It’s an excellent bet that Congress won‘t pursue the matter. Cheney’s got that handled.
5) Bush has trashed hundreds of his loyalists when it was expedient for him to do so. Ask Rumsfeld or Gonzales about his loyalty. Now he seems primarily interested in his personal legacy. Issuing blanket pardons would only damage his standing and negatively impact donations to his library.
Pardons appear to be unnecessary, and they don‘t serve Bush‘s personal interests at this time.
I'm not a lawyer...I just play one on TV....but I thought that you had to be convicted of a crime before you could be pardoned for it.
The only person I can think of that would fit this bill is Scooter Libby. He probably will get one of those pardons...after all, he was just following orders. But what about Rove, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rice and all the rest of the criminals? I don't think that most Americans want them to just disappear into their respective caves. Are we a nation of laws....or not???
See Hoyt Hilsman's Profile
Thanks for the comment, Emerald. I'm afraid there is precedent for the pre-conviction presidential pardon. Here's the language from President Ford's speech pardoning Nixon:
"Now, therefore, I, Gerald R. Ford, President of the United States, pursuant to the pardon power conferred upon me by Article II, Section 2, of the Constitution, have granted and by these presents do grant a full, free, and absolute pardon unto Richard Nixon for all offenses against the United States which he, Richard Nixon, has committed or may have committed or taken part in during the period from July (January) 20, 1969 through August 9, 1974."
I agree it's unlikely that Bush will go this route with Cheney, Rove or others. But it is something to think about and perhaps be prepared for.
Thanks again for the comment!
I'll tell you what, TAKE DOWN the guys at the TOP, and I'll be satisfied to let the lesser culprits go. That way it's done and we can let the rest of them crawl off to hide, meanwhile proving to future people in power, that they will not get away with it---which needs to be proven to them, because they HAVE been getting away with it for a very long time. Occasionally throwing one of them under the bus, just to make it APPEAR that they've done something......
"It is safe to say that the Obama administration -- and probably a large segment of the American public -- doesn't want to be bothered with Congressional and criminal investigations into the wrongdoing of the Bush years."
It's safe to say that I would absolutely love to be "bothered" with investigations and hopefully court proceedings.
Americans are screaming for justice. By the way--so is the rest of the world.
This is the time when justice will be realized in other ways. We are about to enter a new era in America. The last era lasted from 1865 until the present. This will be known as the age of equality.
As a fellow-worrier, I'm inclined to share your concern about a batch of Monday-night Bush pardons casting a shadow over the Obama inauguration. That said, I suspect we may both be worrying over nothing. For one thing, it may be that Bush & Company will in fact, as you yearn for, slink off into some dark caves, never to be heard from again. For another thing, I think that the euphoria (and relief) of the new incoming president's historic arrival in the White House will overshadow whatever Monday night news event emerges.
History has its own sweep, its own oceanic pulse, and the nation is on the crest of that wave at the moment (co-existing, interestingly enough, with its financial and international diplomatic woes), and I think most people want to luxuriate in riding that crest, if only for a day, on January 20.
"It is safe to say that the Obama administration -- and probably a large segment of the American public -- doesn't want to be bothered with Congressional and criminal investigations into the wrongdoing of the Bush years."
It's safe to say that I would absolutely love to be "bothered" with investigations and hopefully court proceedings.
Get your head out of the Bush and see the light. Americans are screaming for justice. By the way--so is the rest of the world.
No pall.
quote:
It is quite possible that a batch of midnight pardons next Monday could cast a pall over the historic inauguration of Barack Obama, stealing the limelight with last-minute controversy.
/quote
Whatever 11th hour stunt Bush pulls, we'll start work on it bright and early, Wednesday. Until then, he's already left enough messes. I'm not going to worry about what he might do.
A blanket pardon is about as useful as a wad of Charmin. It has no basis in law and ought to be ignored at will. Check the Constitution. It says that the president can pardon people for crimes against the United States. This means the person receiving a pardon must have been convicted and sentenced. Scooter Libby, yes he can be pardoned. Karl Rove has never been convicted of anything yet and so any pardon issued to him would be improper.
The Gerald Ford precedent was wrong. But since it was never challenged in court or anywhere else, it is a moot point.
These criminals must be held to answer for their crimes, and Bush blanket pardons should not be allowed to stand in the way. It is the only way we can move the country ahead and repudiate this sorry past.
I don't know, Hoyt. Sure, it's true that,
"Most people are hoping that Bush and Cheney will simply disappear into their respective caves, never to darken the national scene again,"
but we want more than just that. We want bars on those caves. We want consequences for the war crimes committed by the whole cabal.
But, that said, I don't agree with you that,
"it may be unlikely that George Bush decides on wholesale pardons"
In fact, I think it's highly likely that he will. I'm putting all my money on pardons. Blanket pardons.
Will it rain on Obama's parade? Well, that depends on Obama's reaction. I'm hoping he's smart enough to be well-prepared - both for the pardons and the public outrage that will follow.
He did, after all, promise us hope. And I don't know about you, Hoyt, but I'm going to hold him to it.
How many of his disgraced CEO buddies will end up getting off with a pardon?
In China, they are sentencing to death High Level leaders and businessmen guilty of massive fraud and corruption. In the US, some of these guys have received as little as a few months, while China lowers the boom.
Which system is truly trying to end fraud and corruption?
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
