Posted on 10/27/2005 1:35:47 PM PDT by fight_truth_decay
J. James Estrada editorializes in The American Daily:"
"Working in the U.S. Attorney’s office in the Southern District of New York, James Comey investigated and declined to indict Hillary Clinton in Pardongate, a case involving pardons for votes in the New York town of New Square. In his final days in office, President Clinton pardoned four rabbis from the town and Hillary went on to win the votes of the village: 1200 to just 14 for Rick Lazio, her New York Senate opponent."
"Comey went on to prosecute Martha Stewart and from there then went on to become Deputy Attorney General in the new Bush administration. I suppose Bush named Comey to show he would be tough on Wall Street corporate crime."
"When it came time for the Attorney General’s office to name a prosecutor in the celebrated Plamegate, John Ashcroft recused himself, leaving it to Comey to name the prosecutor. He named his long time friend and former associate, Patrick Fitzgerald."
"Fitzgerald is hot on the trail, apparently, of I. Scooter Libby. Libby is VP Dick Cheney’s chief of staff. Libby is also a former lawyer for Marc Rich. Yes, the same Marc Rich who also benefited from the last minute Clinton pardons of January 2001. His case was pursued and dropped by Mary Jo White, then U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York."
"Will this circle of intrigue roll past the White House walls of secrecy of both the present and former administrations in the form of indictments, or, is Fitzgerald just spinning his wheels? If the pattern holds true to form, when it involves the Clintons (and Libby can spill the beans on the Rich pardon), all allegations of wrong doing will be dismissed."
"Stay tuned."
Now let's talk about pardons. Pardons have not been discussed, as far as I know, by the media as a "what if" to an end.
Bush could stop judicial proceedings by simply pardoning those close to him indicted of a crime, or even those not yet convicted or even formally charged with a crime. What the President does depends on the alternatives if he does not act. Talk about being between a rock and a hard place. The President's pardoning power would be held off as long as possible, for obviously he must dodge as few tomatoes as possible for several more years. This of course would bring the expected political backlash from the Left where he is already whipped on a daily basis..so what else is new?
The fact is, the Framers created a power to pardon.
Worse case scenario only: If these high level indictments take place, could Bush be called as a witness and placed under oath? The best way, whether popular or not, is to make sure that no criminal trial ever occurs.
Clinton, when at a news conference in Little Rock, Ark., to announce his remaining Cabinet selections, said he wanted to learn more about the pardons, adding, "I am concerned by any action that sends a signal that if you work for the Government, you're beyond the law, or that not telling the truth to Congress under oath is somehow less serious than not telling the truth to some other body under oath."(always nice to add a little humor to a piece).
Then The Wheel Turned, and Clinton while in the last moments of his Presidency (had the clock struck Midnight yet?)pardoned several of his closest political supporters: Marc Rich, Pincus Green, Carlos Vignali Jr, Braswell.
Independent prosecutor, Lawrence E. Walsh stated: "Although it is the President's (Mr. Bush's pardon of Mr. Weinberger ) prerogative to grant pardons, it is every American's right that the criminal justice system be administered fairly, regardless of a person's rank and connections."
Thus,in a single stroke, Bush Sr. swept away one conviction, three guilty pleas and two pending cases, virtually decapitating what was left of Walsh's effort, which began in 1986. Mr. Bush's decision was announced by the White House in a printed statement after the President left for Camp David, where he will spend the Christmas holiday. Mr. Walsh bitterly condemned the President's action, charging that "the Iran-contra cover-up, which has continued for more than six years ($$$$$$), has now been completed."
Professor Brian Kalt [Michigan State]: says that "No president should have the power, immune from meaningful responsibility to the electorate, to impose his or her own version of the law without democratic accountability." But we let judges do that every day. The point of pardons is to allow exceptions to be made when the law is too rigid to do the right thing."
I don't know why we don't read scholarly quotes that include, ".. that it is, therefore, in the best interest of the country and her citizens..."
Sometimes, you just gotta bully up to the pulpit!
If he was a Republican as now, he would have to step down if indicted because of his own party caucus rules. Case in point: Tom Delay.
Since I am not in favor of any dynasty I'm with you...
Come on Dubya, throw us a bone!!
Caucus rules can be changed.
I think Libby will be indicted for witness tampering, because of the letter he sent to Miller which sounded like he was coaching her on what to say.
If there was anything he would be indicted for, I think that would be it -- because if true it would make the prosecuter mad.
If he is indicted for that, I don't think the President should pardon him.
If he is indicted for perjury, that that perjury is because of multiple appearances before the grand jury which he did only because the president ordered it, he should be fired and pardoned.
That way the president can say he has gotten rid of people who had any possibility of being linked, but that his people won't face prosecution for testifying -- since it was Bush that essentially ordered them to testify.
After all, if it wasn't for everybody trying to cooperate because they were in the White house, none of these people would have testified, nobody would have released the journalists from their confidentiality, and nobody would get charged with perjury.
Read someplace in my research today that norm for the number of pardons under a President is 125...Bush might set a pardoning record with the number of "charges" that are occurring from the Left.
Wonder who Bush will pardon at some point in his presidency. Some we will never hear about, but there should be some names of prominence (by that I mean press worthy).
Given that DC is 90+% democrat, wouldn't that be valid grounds on having the venue moved, should an indictment happen, to Maryland (which seems like a right-wing state in comparison to DC) or Virginia? A republican being tried in DC--it'd be over before it even began.
I think it may be time for a "mega pardon", a pardon of 100 miscreants.
In the same announcement, GWB should pardon:
1. Hillary Clinton for hiding the Rose Law Firm billing records in the White House.
2. Bill Clinton for selling a pardon to Marc Rich.
3. Sandy Berger for stealing classified documents that would embarrass Hillary from the National Archives.
4. Ted Kennedy for a conspiring to conceal a man-slaughter.
5. John Kerry for treasonously negotiating with the Viet Cong.
6. Turban Durbin for lying about his war record.
7. Ronnie Earle for abuse of prosecutorial discretion
8. Governor Blanco for dereliction of duty
....
100. Scooter Libby for forgetting the details of an event that occurred two years ago.
To pardon 99 Democrats and one Republican could hardly be characterized as "partisan", now, could it?
Yes, but he will not because he is an Honorable man unlike Bill Pure Scum Clinton. He should though.
The number of prosecutors who have indicted members of sitting presidential administrations and gone on to the top post at the FBI is exactly zero.
.....Asked about the notion of becoming FBI director after Robert Mueller, another prosecutor who quit private practice to put bad guys behind bars, he laughs. 'That's probably Director Mueller when he's having a bad day, trying to unload it on somebody else.' He did not say he was uninterested...
Judge Napolitano (Fox) was asked a few moments ago on e-mails coming in on the use of a Pardon. He has responded the same way we all suggested here. I know I sent the question in to my contacts last night. Was good to hear it addressed.
Clear the deck for the most astonishing period of economic growth ever.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.