Posted on 01/22/2017 1:14:19 PM PST by Kaslin
In the words of Michael Corleone, “Just when I thought I was out…they pull me back in.”
The “they” in this case is now former President Barack Obama (damn, it feels good to write with the word “former” preceding it). I’d hope to be done writing about him, at least in current terms, but one last time he’s done something that requires addressing.
Obama’s magic pen was busy in his last days signing pardons and granting clemency to drug dealers, terrorists, and traitors alike. If you destroyed lives, Barack Obama wanted to set you free.
Setting aside the idea of non-violent drug dealers, it’s the release of traitor Bradley Manning and terrorist Oscar Lopez Rivera with which I have a problem. (I call Bradley Manning by his name because I choose to show him and his “gender identity” the same respect he showed his duty, our troops and allies, and our national security.)
First, let me say I don’t question any president’s right to pardon or commute sentences for anyone, generally. It’s a constitutionally granted power resting completely with the president, unfettered. It’s the unfettered part that is the issue.
It’s not who – any president can apply this power in any way they see fit – it’s the timing that is the problem.
Everyone knew these pardons and commutations were coming, they always come at the end of a president’s term. But coming at the end of a president’s term means zero accountability to the American people.
Brad Manning damaged this country and put the lives of many foreigners working with our military at risk. He violated the Espionage Act, not some local city ordinance.
Obama was free to commute his sentence, even for the fraudulent reason he gave at his press conference. Just as he was free to commute the sentence of unrepentant terrorist Oscar Rivera. But to do so without him or his party facing any repercussions from the public is simply wrong.
It’s not the first time a president issues controversial pardons and commutations on his way out the White House door. Former President Bill Clinton sold a pardon to fugitive tax cheat Marc Rich, who’d fled the country rather than face justice.
As with Obama, Clinton and his party never faced voters’ judgment of their actions because they were taken after the election. That is why there should be a change in the process, not the power, when it comes to the president’s ability to pardon and free prisoners.
The Constitution should be amended to limit the window of time in which a president can exercise this power.
The relevant part of Article II, Section 2, reads, “Shall have power to grant reprieves and pardons for offenses against the United States, except in cases of impeachment.” It should be amended to read, “Shall have power to grant reprieves and pardons for offenses against the United States, except in cases of impeachment, from the day they assume office until two weeks before the presidential election. Should a president win a second term, this power is restored immediately. If they should lose, it shall not return until their successor assumes office.”
This would eliminate the midnight pardons and allow the American people to register their thoughts on presidential actions, either against that president or their party, at the ballot box. Had Barack Obama issued these orders before the 2016 election, Donald Trump may well have won the popular vote. At a minimum, Hillary Clinton would have had to weigh in on them, defending them or distancing herself from them, giving voters an opportunity to punish or reward her and her party.
As it stands now, what the American people think about freeing Manning and Rivera is irrelevant.
This power should not be stripped from the Executive Branch simply because it’s been abused, but it be condensed by a few months. If a president can’t defend their actions, or fear the reaction from the people, maybe they shouldn’t engage in those actions.
There is no way Bill Clinton pardons Marc Rich before the 2000 election, just as there’s no way Barack Obama commutes the sentences of Bradley Manning and Oscar Rivera in the middle of October. They took these actions on their way out the door specifically because there was no way to hold them accountable. If a president will only do something because no one can stop them, maybe they shouldn’t be doing it in the first place.
The “power to grant reprieves and pardons” is an important one, but so is the responsibility of a president to justify their actions. The Constitution should be changed to reflect that.
An aside:
Since Obama set Manning’s release date for May, and there’s a chance he will have his sex change operation before then, President Donald Trump should expedite that release to be immediate. Taxpayers are on the hook for the bill of Manning’s surgery as long as he’s in prison. If he’s released, it’s on him. No doubt liberal will take up a collection to pay for it, and that’s fine. But this traitor has drained enough of our resources; time to make him or someone else on his behalf pony up.
Should be limited to only those CONVICTED of crimes against the United States.
Forget it. The key is not to elect idiots like Clinton and Obama.
Americans get the government they deserve.
I’ve stated before that all presidential pardons should be done before the presidential election.
Won't happen with this Bozo.
True
Have to amend the Constitution...won't happen.
I suggest the following.
Allow the president to pardon anyone he wants, but allow Congress to remove him from office early with a simple majority vote if he gets out of line, once the election has been held.
What Obama got away with this time was criminal in nature.
It will need a Constitutional amendment so the idea will go nowhere.
Last Tuesday was the first time Obama actually made me cry. One last slap in the face and poke in the eye to our great Military. I am so relieved that the Military now has a CIC and a SecDef that respect them and will do right by them. Enough of the Obama Social Experiment. Our Military deserved much better over the last 8 years. Commuting the sentence of a traitor to this country, was the most abhorrent thing I have ever seen a President do. Period.
Well, it helps to understand Obama was a traitor.
I agree with your take on things.
“Should be limited to only those CONVICTED of crimes against the United States.”
Should also be limited in NUMBER. Maybe 100 pardons, and THAT IS IT!
Same for any type of immigration Amnesty - if we do something, say some of the DREAMERS, pick a number, and THAT IS IT! Same for people claiming ‘refugee’ status. If we want to help people that claim to be ‘refugees’, then the first 10,000 and THAT IS IT!. The same for national monuments. If we want to give the president the power to declare monuments, then he gets 10,000 acres to play with, and THAT IS IT!
Probably a lot more like it.
We need reign-in these damn open-ended laws...and stop giving the president NEAR-DICTATOR powers. Although I am patient, so doing so AFTER Trump might be a good time to start.
Another needed Amendment is that congressional budgets in Presidential election years must fully fund the government until 1 month after the new president takes the oath of office and that no budgets can be passed during a presidents lame duck period.
This should also be applied to federal regulations as well.
These lame duck period shenanigans by both parties is infantile, foolish, crooked, and dangerous.
To rely on elections is to rely on the rule of men, and not law.
>> If a president will only do something because no one can stop them, maybe they shouldn’t be doing it in the first place.
If a president will only do something because no one can stop them, maybe they shouldn’t be PRESIDENT in the first place.
You could make the same case that nearly all of the powers of the president and Congress should be curtailed the same way.
I think 0vomit’s abuse of the presidential pardon was itself treasonous. Perhaps there are grounds to bring him up on charges. (Along with all of the other treasonous acts he has committed.)
If 0vomit knows what’s good for him, he will move overseas to a country with no extradition treaty.
If you are found guilty of a crime and you are serving this time why should the president override the conviction
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.
