I don't think it works like a "get out of jail, free" card, to cover future prosecution - a pardon can't be given unless a criminal conviction taken place.
In the absence of the latter, the former is a moot point.
"The President ... shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offences against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment."
Technically ambiguous, since you haven't committed an offense until you've been convicted of one (the old innocent-until-proven-guilty) - and yet, the offense itself still exists, so the President could pardon "the person who committed the offense," be within his rights, not violate the presumption of innocence, and effectively prevent prosecution.
In other words, Ford's pardon was probably hasty, in the strictest sense, but once it was done, it made Nixon into Officially Not The Person Who Committed The Offense. Which means there'd be a lot of trouble getting grounds for arrest, etc. It's a fun legal fiction, actually.
Anyway. Could Obama do the same thing? Well, now that Ford's gone and done it, yes. He's a Constitutional lawyer, though, so I think it would just seem like ... an inelegant hack. If he were in the mood to absolve GWB of guilt, he'd probably find a less iffy way to do it.
Would he do the same thing? Depends if he thinks Ford's "national unity" argument is both plausible and more important than the fact that pardoning Nixon pretty much cost Ford the '76 election.
Ya know, it wouldn't surprise me if he managed to pardon Bush *AND* win re-election. /me googles Ford's actual terminology
"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."
Note the wording--"has committed or may have committed or taken part in".
Bush was the one to bring up the concept of conviction before pardon with Scooter Libby.
A friend of mine pointed out that historically, pardons were granted to political opponents. I'm wondering if Obama will revive that tradition.
It could be construed as one hell of an backhanded compliment, much like his pre-primary quip to Hillary in the debates that she would serve very well in government, as a member of *his* cabinet. Prophetic words, those?
A pardon does imply guilt, while showing political magnanimity. "You bloody well did fuck up, but I'll forgive you". It's politically loaded. I'm wondering if Obama has the cojones to pull it off. If anyone can, it'd be him.
I would love to see what the talk-radio echo chamber would make of it if Obama did make such a pardon, since it would imply guilt. I think it would be fantastic.
What do you think is holding Bush back from doing anything *truly* irreversable in his last few weeks in office -- like starting a war with Iran?
I'm pretty convinced the word has already been passed through underlings, the threat already made: if Bush does anything *too* egregious, Obama yanks his pardon and Bush faces the music. Leave office quietly, and Bush gets his "get out of jail" card.
Because Bush easily *can* do devastating damage in just the last few weeks of his term -- and is more than petty enough to do it. And if Bush isn't smart enough to realize this, he certainly has subordinates who *are*. So the word surely has already been passed both ways and the deal already cut. Obama's pardon, for Bush's good behavior.
And Obama will do it. Because the consequences of the alternative are devastating.
With everything else going on that the legislature should be spending their time on (the wars, the economy, confirmation hearings for new appointees) do they really need to be wasting time and money on impeachment hearings - and the circus they will create - once President Bush is out of office? Let him go back to Texas and obscurity instead.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
branchandroot
no subject
Date: 2008-12-08 04:33 am (UTC)In the absence of the latter, the former is a moot point.
no subject
Date: 2008-12-08 04:36 am (UTC)Article II, Section 2 of the Constitution
Date: 2008-12-08 05:05 am (UTC)Technically ambiguous, since you haven't committed an offense until you've been convicted of one (the old innocent-until-proven-guilty) - and yet, the offense itself still exists, so the President could pardon "the person who committed the offense," be within his rights, not violate the presumption of innocence, and effectively prevent prosecution.
In other words, Ford's pardon was probably hasty, in the strictest sense, but once it was done, it made Nixon into Officially Not The Person Who Committed The Offense. Which means there'd be a lot of trouble getting grounds for arrest, etc. It's a fun legal fiction, actually.
Anyway. Could Obama do the same thing? Well, now that Ford's gone and done it, yes. He's a Constitutional lawyer, though, so I think it would just seem like ... an inelegant hack. If he were in the mood to absolve GWB of guilt, he'd probably find a less iffy way to do it.
Would he do the same thing? Depends if he thinks Ford's "national unity" argument is both plausible and more important than the fact that pardoning Nixon pretty much cost Ford the '76 election.
Re: Article II, Section 2 of the Constitution
Date: 2008-12-08 05:23 am (UTC)/me googles Ford's actual terminology
"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."
Note the wording--"has committed or may have committed or taken part in".
Bush was the one to bring up the concept of conviction before pardon with Scooter Libby.
A friend of mine pointed out that historically, pardons were granted to political opponents. I'm wondering if Obama will revive that tradition.
It could be construed as one hell of an backhanded compliment, much like his pre-primary quip to Hillary in the debates that she would serve very well in government, as a member of *his* cabinet. Prophetic words, those?
A pardon does imply guilt, while showing political magnanimity. "You bloody well did fuck up, but I'll forgive you". It's politically loaded. I'm wondering if Obama has the cojones to pull it off. If anyone can, it'd be him.
Re: Article II, Section 2 of the Constitution
Date: 2008-12-08 01:40 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-12-08 08:06 am (UTC)I'm pretty convinced the word has already been passed through underlings, the threat already made: if Bush does anything *too* egregious, Obama yanks his pardon and Bush faces the music. Leave office quietly, and Bush gets his "get out of jail" card.
Because Bush easily *can* do devastating damage in just the last few weeks of his term -- and is more than petty enough to do it. And if Bush isn't smart enough to realize this, he certainly has subordinates who *are*. So the word surely has already been passed both ways and the deal already cut. Obama's pardon, for Bush's good behavior.
And Obama will do it. Because the consequences of the alternative are devastating.
no subject
Date: 2008-12-08 02:31 pm (UTC)obama wil pardon bush, but not for the reasons given here.
My opinion
Date: 2008-12-08 03:43 pm (UTC)