And so begins the long process of hounding Republican Presidents for their pardons -- after all, aren't Republican politicians MORE MORAL than Democratic ones? Therefore, they have to be FAIR and go after other naughty works by other living presidents too! (otherwise, i'd be partisan for them to just bash one political party's ex-presidents -- right?)
posted on March 7, 2001 12:17:20 PM newAnother difference between the Cox and Rich cases is that while Rich fled the country and was never prosecuted for the crimes of which he was accused, Cox admitted making false statements about collateral to back his loans, and served time in prison and paid fines for his crimes.
posted on March 7, 2001 12:54:52 PM new
The problem as I see it is the Presidential ability to grant pardons in the first place.
Sorry, but the President, no matter who he is, is not so all-knowing and experienced that he should have the power to overrule the will of the courts and juries -- particularly since it seems that in recent years these pardons have been granted not on merit but on the basis of nothing more than personal whim or political debts.
Another thing -- the power to grant pardons like this strikes me as too ... royal. Like something a king would do. We got rid of kings more than 200 years ago.
Get rid of Presidential pardons too -- the abuses will then stop, I assure you.
posted on March 7, 2001 01:04:39 PM new
In essence, how different are the pardons from many special interest campaign contributions or congressional perks from lobbyists?
Examining the selling of pardons by Republican presidents however does help to dispell the rumor that God is a Republican.
posted on March 7, 2001 06:05:05 PM new
C'mon, JamesO: it's not how guilty they were or how straightforward their prosecutions were: the question is for both the Clinton Pardons and the Bush Pardons is did money exchange hands -- were the Pardons bought/bribed?
Now, on the news, there is talk about the Iran-Contra Pardons as well. I guess we'll see ex-President Bush being hounded for 8 years by Special Proscecutors and an Impeachment trial. After all, the Right Wing denied that they had a consipracy to "get" Clinton: they were just "doing Justice". Well, let's see them start "doing Justice" on Bush, then Reagan, then Ford and Nixon! Otherwise, they lied to us and YOU voted for them!
posted on March 7, 2001 07:10:45 PM new
The courts and the prosecutors all have an interest in denying any error. The law is sometimes inappropriate to the point of being silly. To have a mechanism to correct real injustices and problems that no appeal will ever touch will not be out of date until the justice system is perfect. This is something that has really NOT changed from the days when the constitution was written and the writers knew first hand the need of such a power and were correct to establish it. The fact that some people like President Bush in his time as Governor find that the system is without error and chose never to use that power granted them tells you they are simply detatched from reality if they really BELIEVE every criminal convicted is truely guilty.
People who believe in infallability are scary.
