Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Former President Clinton requested to testify before House Committee
Drudge Report ^ | March 26, 2007 | Matt Drudge

Posted on 03/26/2007 2:39:41 PM PDT by West Coast Conservative

Judiciary Committee Ranking Member Lamar Smith (R-TX) today asked Former President Bill Clinton if he would be available to testify at the Democrats' Thursday hearing on presidential pardon authority.

"Former President Clinton is no stranger to controversial pardons, most notably the pardon of Marc Rich on his last day in office," stated Ranking Member Smith. "I can think of no better person to address this issue."

At Thursday's hearing of the Judiciary's Crime Subcommittee entitled, "The Appropriate Use of the Presidential Pardoning Power," Democrats are expected to explore what is and is not the appropriate use of pardons, despite a president's plenary power to issue pardons.

President Clinton granted pardons or commuted the sentences of nearly 500 people, including fugitive financier Marc Rich, whose wife donated $450 thousand to the Clinton Library. Other pardons included a person accused of cocaine trafficking and a former Democratic committee chairman indicted on political corruption charges.

The Constitution gives the President the absolute authority to grant clemency, commutation, and remission of fines for offenses. Despite this absolute authority, presidents are not immune from criticism and even congressional attempts to restrict pardon authority.

"Mr. Clinton's exercise of his pardon authority would be of real interest to Members of the Subcommittee," concluded Smith. "I hope he will lend his expertise.


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: billclinton; clinton; house; pardongate
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-31 last
To: Lets Be Frank
If I were a betting person, I'd bet he politely declines the invitation.

Not a chance. He'll be in the spotlight and attention will be on him. Doesn't matter what kind of attention it is because to clinton it's all about ME all the time.

21 posted on 03/26/2007 3:43:09 PM PDT by barker ( A smile is a curved line that sets things straight.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: West Coast Conservative
They're spending money to have hearings on something they can't stop and have no control over?

The Congress can pass as many "rules" as they want to amuse themselves but they hold no legal authority to enforce them.

22 posted on 03/26/2007 3:48:00 PM PDT by jess35
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AmericanDave
That blink is cool!
23 posted on 03/26/2007 3:54:05 PM PDT by vortigern
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: barker

You think Hillary would want to have his pardons dredged up again?


24 posted on 03/26/2007 4:20:15 PM PDT by Lets Be Frank
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Lets Be Frank
"If I were a betting person, I'd bet he politely declines the invitation."

He'd show if he was being paid for it. Afterall, the Clintons and Rodhams got their share of money for pardons in the past. They never do anything unless it benefits them personally.

25 posted on 03/26/2007 4:43:00 PM PDT by mass55th (Courage is being scared to death - but saddling up anyway~~John Wayne)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Shqipo
They can't stand the thought of a Scooter Libby pardon, if and when one becomes a possibility. Bunch of losarses. (sp)

Actually, they love the thought of a Scooter Libby pardon. That is why they keep trying to play up the idea that Bush is considering it. Consider it a reverse slander attempt. Same reason the Democrats keep trying to implement the draft.

26 posted on 03/26/2007 5:01:37 PM PDT by Pikachu_Dad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: West Coast Conservative

The Republicans should demand he be placed under oath.


27 posted on 03/26/2007 5:14:43 PM PDT by Starstruck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ReleaseTheHounds

""While he's there, ask him about requiring 93 US Attorneys to resign and be gone in 10 days, especially that pesky US Attorney in Little Rock.""

My thoughts exactly. I am guessing there is no chance he will appear before congress to discuss these two topics because there is little chance he would leave in a good light.


28 posted on 03/26/2007 11:14:18 PM PDT by volunbeer (Dear heaven.... we really need President Reagan again!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: West Coast Conservative

why bother...like the rest of the Lefties, if his lips are moving; he's lying! LMAO


29 posted on 03/27/2007 5:26:25 AM PDT by kellynla (Freedom of speech makes it easier to spot the idiots! Semper Fi!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: vortigern

Yeah cool, but easy to over use... LOL


30 posted on 03/27/2007 6:56:09 AM PDT by AmericanDave (It's like Deja Vu, all over again............ Yogi Berra)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: carolinablonde

Probably not


31 posted on 03/27/2007 7:29:41 AM PDT by wastedyears ("These colours don't run, from cold bloody war." - Steve Harris, Bruce Dickinson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-31 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson