Has Karl Rove been pardoned? In secret? Why not?

[Democracy deth watch]

I just did some reading on presidential pardons. The Constitution puts no limit on the president's exercise of the pardon privilege. Congress has tried to restrict pardons only to people who have been convicted, but has failed to do so. Federal law only suggests that the president consult with the office of the pardon attorney in the Justice Department. Patrick Fitzgerald works for the Justice Department.

I bet Karl Rove went to his last meeting with Fitzgerald carrying two letters from President Bush. One was a letter of pardon. The other was an executive order telling Fitzgerald to keep his mouth shut about the pardon.

[babylonsister]

1. Are YOU Karl Rove? nt

[Kagemusha]

2. There is no such thing as a secret pardon.

There may not be any real limits on the president's ability to provide a pardon, but it sure as hell has to be public to BE a pardon.

[DS1]

5. Correct

In order for there to be a pardon, there has to be a crime. Otherwise there would be nothing to pardon? Unless, of course, I'm totally insane. This is possible, but hopefully unlikely.

[Prophet 451]

9. You would think

but since it's been established that a pardon can be granted before a conviction, that really doesn't apply.

[tulsakatz]

14. it has?

when was that established and why? I mean, how would they pardon someone who isn't guilty of committing a crime?

A pardon is a way of forgiving a crime.........if there's no crime, there would be no reason for a pardon.

[Prophet 451]

15. It's in the OP

Congress has tried to restrict pardons only to people who have been convicted, but has failed to do so.

Flies in the face of logic, I agree but apparently, it's possible.

[whalerider55]

17. if memory serves

can anyone tell me what crime nixon was CONVICTED of before he was pardoned by Ford?

or Cap the Knife Weinberger, for that matter?

i do believe the president has the ability to pardon, or "pre-pardon" to avoid the conviction of someone who has pictures of him having sex with a donut.

whalerider

[alcibiades_mystery]

19. Nixon was granted a blanket pardon prior to any indictment

Keep up, please.

[Democracy deth watch]

21. Think about Jimmy Carter's pardon of those who'd avoided draft

That pardon, if memory serves, covered people who'd never been charged.

[EST]

22. Please see the recent "pardons" in Kentucky.

The governor not only pardoned many indicted , although not yet convicted, as well as preemptively pardoning some for future indictments on the same matter.
Also, if I remember correctly, prez boosh #1, on that gloomy christmas eve, 1992, preemptively pardoned many of the Iran-contra culprits, indicted but not yet prosecuted and convicted, as well as the ones who had been convicted.

One of my greatest greatest faults of Bill Clinton was his selling out of the country and dems by refusing to take any action on this issue. He may not have been totally responsible for the rise of the evil little emperor, but he bears a huge amount of the blame for not recognizing the threat and doing something about it.

[WiseButAngrySara]

57. Good point! Thought provoking. It had never occured to me. ....n/t

[heartofthesiskiyou]

49. See Ford pardons

Nixon. Done to keep Nixon from being charged with any crimes after he left office.

[alfredo]

26. Our Governor pardoned his staff right after they were indicted.

He also gave them a blanket amnesty. It wasn't in secret.

[Prophet 451]

8. Don't think so

I could be wrong but I'm pretty sure it doesn't have to be public to carry legal force.

[Jersey Devil]

30. It must be made public at least indirectly

If it is not made public then there is nothing to stop a prosecutor from just continuing with the prosecution of a case. Filing of the pardon with the court would stop everything in its tracks. But the prosecutor would certainly want a copy to cover himself for dropping the case and since all court proceedings are public under the constitution it would be a public record just as with any other court filing absent an order of protection from the court, for which there would be no grounds whatsoever.

[Democracy deth watch]

36. I like your thinking, but there's no USA v. Rove case to file a ...

presidential pardon in. At least not a public one. At least not last week when I checked. There's only USA v. Libby.

[Jersey Devil]

47. There is no "case" but there is a legal proceeding

before the Grand Jury and the authority to stop it could only be established by filing the letter of pardon. Personally I think the theory that a pardon could be secret is preposterous because if it ever leaked it would spell utter disaster for the president.

[serryjw]

23. WHY?

IF there was a sealed indictment why NOT a presidential pardon?

http://www.tpmcafe.com/story/2005/10/20/182923/29

[Democracy deth watch]

29. It'd be pretty easy to keep this one secret.

If you could keep Fitzgerald from quitting in protest.

[Jersey Devil]

33. Fitz would file it with the court making it a public record

End of argument

[serryjw]

37. National Security?

PFAW would need FOIA??

[Democracy deth watch]

39. In what court file would this pardon go?

Right now, all the court documents pertaining to Rove are sealed. If there's a USA v. Rove case anywhere, no one in the public has seen a single document it contains.

[Jersey Devil]

45. It would be filed with the fed court in DC overseeing the GJ

The prosecutor would have to give the court a reason why he is not performing his sworn duty to prosecute a case in which he believes an indictment would be returned. The court oversees a grand jury, not the prosecutor.

[serryjw]

50. How could Fitz

prosecute a case that a sealed indicted was issued and then Bushit gave a secret pardon to?

[Jersey Devil]

54. If the pardon is not filed with the court then there is no pardon

An indictment is a court document that says a defendant must stand trial. Also, there are very limited reasons why an indictment can be sealed - usually to allow the arrest of a defendant before he can flee the jurisdiction or to hide the fact that there is an ongoing investigation against other defendants so they don't run as well. As soon as a Defendant is arraigned the indictment is unsealed and becomes public. You cannot keep an indictment under seal for no reason or just because the president wants it that way.

Once an indictment is found it cannot be stopped without a court order or, in this case, a pardon, which would also have to be a part of the court record.

The reason is simple. Our constitution provides that our trials are public so that there are no Star Chamber proceedings against our citizens and so that the justice system is subject to public scrutiny. The dismissal of an indictment based on a secret pardon would be an abomination to our system and I cannot imagine any judge allowing it no matter what his judicial philosophy might be.

[serryjw]

56. Jersey I hear what you say

But * has done so much that is unconstitutional, why not this? 9-11, national security and the war on terror seems to cover any protection that * Bushit needs.

It seems so strange that Fitz would go to all this trouble for over 2 years, presumably knowing that any indictments would be sealed, then * would issue a pardon on the indictment. WHY would * let Libby sing and NOT Rove? I assume Libby knew as much as Rove? Something is smelly ??

[Democracy deth watch]

60. If an indictment is not filed with the court, then there is no indictment

[Recursion]

42. Easy

Because if he pardons Rove, impeachment is back on the table. I betcha.

[WannaJumpMyScooter]

41. Who says when it has to be revealed though?

You?

[The Straight Story]

3. We should know in 24 business hours... :) (nt)

[rocktivity]

4. I think that even a member of the Bush White House

has to be convicted in order to be pardoned. On the other hand, Rush Limbaugh says he pleaded not guilty and got probation, anyway!

:headbang:
rocknation

[Catrina]

16. I don't think so, Bush Sr. pardoned people who were indicted but not

convicted.

I thought about this as a possibility also, that if Rove was indicted last week, that Bush would or could pardon him. However, I don't know if they could keep it a secret.

It's probably not likely, but I'll bet they talked about it. From what we know about both of them, I can imagine them thinking this up and how it would disappoint everyone who was looking forward to Rove's indictment.

I noticed that in today's court filings, Libby has added Rove to his list of witnesses. Fitzgerald had already said he would not be calling him as a witness (maybe because he planned to indict him). Nor would Libby want an indicted witness, I would think. I think he is now on Libby's list of witnesses. If so, that might mean they know something ~ depending on when he was added to the list.

[Democracy deth watch]

31. No conviction necessary

Nixon wasn't convicted, yet he was pardoned. Draft "dodgers" were not all convicted (some were still in Canada), but all were pardoned.

[Scoody Boo]

6. How About This...

No meeting with Fitzgerald, no indictment, no pardon.

Wishing is not going to make what didn't happen, happen.

[Democracy deth watch]

27. Welcome to DU!

Figured I'd be the first, just for the sake of irony.

[Scoody Boo]

32. Yes...

How ironic. :)

[ruggerson]

7. Please. We're on "Leisure Hours" Now for two days. No Rove stories.

n/t

[Prophet 451]

10. Probably

One thing we know about this administration, there is no depth to which they will not stoop.

[Cleita]

11. Since our country seems to be a different one that the one

I have lived in all my life since Bush took power, anything seems possible. They have been busy rewriting the Constitution in closed sessions this week so why not rewrite Presidential powers like pardons as well behind closed doors?

btw Welcome to DU.

[feistydem]

12. You gotta be convicted of something to be pardoned for the CRIME.

But you may at least be right that his pardon is already signed because BushCo all know Rove's guilty of criminal acts and they don't want him squaking about their own crimes.

[TahitiNut]

18. Not true. This has been repeatedly debunked on DU.

Think Nixon. No conviction. Ford pardoned him. Presidential pardon power is unlimited except narrowly in cases of impeachment.

[Kagemusha]

28. But that wasn't in secret at all.

That was out in the open. That's one of the few serious limitations.

[heartofthesiskiyou]

53. There are no limitations on Presidential powers

except he can't pardon impeachment per Article II. Sec 1.10 says everything is discretionary.

see post #48 below

[Texifornia]

20. Nope

One does not even have to be indicted in order to be pardoned. Nixon was pardoned without even being indicted. It caused a big stink at the time and helped defeat Ford in '76 Since then Reagan and HWB have pardoned those who were indicted but not yet convicted and others that were yet to be indicted.

The weird thing is: this is really possible.

[Catrina]

34. No, you only have to be indicted to be pardoned. Bush Sr. pardoned

Casper Weinberger who was indicted in the Iran Contra affair:


In addition to Weinberger, Bush pardoned Duane R. Clarridge, Clair E. George, Robert C. McFarlane, Elliott Abrams, and Alan G. Fiers Jr., all of whom had been indicted and/or convicted of charges by the Independent Counsel.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_H._W._Bush

Reading this, it's more than likely that Bush will do just what his father did, pardon everyone who was indicted before they turn him in. That investigation took six years. I'm afraid that if Rove was indicted last week by some chance, Bush would definitely try this little trick.

So, if I were Fitz, I would only file a few charges at a time, so that he keeps getting indicted and Bush has to keep pardoning him. At least that way, the public will see what's happening ~

[Sydnie]

35. That is a deliciously devious idea you have there

How I would love to see the never ending revolving door of charge and pardon played out.

[feistydem]

38. I stand corrected y'all. Now I'm really depressed. Thanks.

Please at least tell me he can't pardon his own ass!

:cry:

[Sydnie]

46. He can't pardon himself

BUT, if the GOP retains the WH, you can bet your ass that President would do it for him.

[EST]

58. Uh, I think he can--

except in matters of impeachment!

[Generic Other]

13. What a gross thought. I wouldn't put it past 'em.

I hope you didn't just give them an idea.

[Democracy deth watch]

25. Yeah, I thought I should FOIA the pardon office first.

But instead I posted here.

[RoyGBiv]

24. It's plausible ...

Problem is, we don't know, and in this particular scenario we won't know, so it's not all that healthy to speculate about it too much.

A blanket pardon is a lot like a Get Out of Jail Free card in Monopoly. You can get it when you don't necessarily need it, but keep it around just in case. I have no trouble believing Shrub has given such "cards" to anyone and everyone who might be implicated in anything in his administration, especially if the things of which they might be accused could be linked to him. Nixon really went down when his cronies started getting indicted and started talking openly in ways that implicated the Republican Party in grand terms. This could well be the lesson the criminals learned from the whole mess, and Ford's preemptive pardon could have been setting the foundation for it, intentional or not at the time.

[Pobeka]

40. But could they put a gag order on Fitzgerald?

Seems like he would make a public announcement about the indictment.

[Democracy deth watch]

43. Fitzgerald has to believe that all his work will end in pardons

He can look at history too and see what Bush Sr. did. So he reads the pardon letter and the keep-your-mouth-shut letter and thinks, "Hmm, this came a little earlier than I expected, but OK, my work here is through. Let's work on Libby until the Pres is done letting him twist in the wind, and then let's go back to prosecuting crooked Chicago city pols."

[Pobeka]

44. That doesn't sound like Fitzgerald at all.

I have heard him speak a few times, and he's a no-nonsense kind of a guy. I believe it would take a gag-order, some legal instrument, not just a warning letter to keep him from disclosing an indictment.

[heartofthesiskiyou]

48. I found nothing that says pardon could not be held in secret

There are numerous guidelines involved with pardons, but all are advisory both in the statute wording and in exact wording of the final Sec. 1.10 I'll leave out all the numerous things that are done normally and only quote the part that is most pertinent to your question, 'Re:could Rove be pardoned in secret'.

Presidential Pardons: Legal Guidelines
From Title 28, Code of Federal Regulations


Sec. 1.10 Advisory nature of regulations.

The regulations contained in this part are advisory only and for the internal guidance of Department of Justice personnel. They create no enforceable rights in persons applying for executive clemency, nor do they restrict the authority granted to the President under Article II, section 2 of the Constitution.


http://usgovinfo.about.com/blprespardons.htm

In the pertinent part of Article II section 2 us the US Constitution

Section 2

Clause 1:

The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States; he may require the Opinion, in writing, of the principal Officer in each of the executive Departments, upon any Subject relating to the Duties of their respective Offices, and he shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offenses against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.

http://usgovinfo.about.com/blconst.htm#a2sec2

Though I'm not an attorney I have training as a paralegal and I have more then 20 years of legal research under my belt including seven Supreme Ct cases in the Thomas series that were all handled as Pro Se Plaintiff or in some cases Defendant. My interpretation of the applicable law is that this could easily be accomplished in secret. There are no reporting requirements that I was able to find, such as in the Federal Register, or any such place and the plain language of the pertinent sections says everything is discretionary with the one exception in the Constitution itself; Impeachment may not be pardoned in Sec 2 Clause 1, which is a mute point as clearly no Impeachment has occurred.

Though I would stress this should be construed as a lay interpretation as I'm not an attorney, I would be quite surprised if a retained attorney could show otherwise; except in that I did not check any Appellate or Supreme Ct precedence that may but not likely exist as it would seem that Presidential power is very strong and open ended in this regard.

[Democracy deth watch]

51. Jersey Devil says Grand Jury rules would require disclosure

I hope he's right, but Grand Juries don't seem to be very public to me. It seems the only things they officially disclose are indictments and not much else. And if an indictment is derailed by a pardon, a Grand Jury has nothing to disclose.

[Jersey Devil]

55. No, not grand jury rules but court rules

If an indictment is found it becomes an order of the court that forces a defendant to stand trial. At some point the indictment would have to be made public. Only if a prosecutor comes before the court with a reason that is stated publicly can an indictment be dismissed. That is why the pardon would have to become public.

[Democracy deth watch]

59. Okay, but we don't have an indictment that we know of

Jimmy Carter pardoned "draft dodgers" who had never even been indicted.

So your explanation of court rules is relevant only after Rove has been indicted.

I don't think it's ever going to happen. I think Bush as figured out how to manipulate the pardons and Fitzgerald to keep Rove in charge of the political machine. It's worth the risk of discovery, especially so many months from the election, long enough for everyone to have forgotten. And they can always tell voters, "hey, we're saving taxpayer dollars because I was going to pardon him anyway."

If I thought Rove was actually going to face criminal charges, I'd be misunderestimating George Bush.

[DianaForRussFeingold]

52. Hi Karl ,Your name gives you away!

:kick:Carl,If Presidunce used an executive order,for Karl, God was watching'A president has the right to pardon, even before conviction?
Ford pardoned Nixon,even before he was convicted of any crime. But here's the down side,a pardon can be very politically costly, Ford's popularity dropped dramatically after the Nixon pardon, and probably cost him the election in 1976.I guess Dubya doesn't care,My first time voting and guess what,I voted for Ford'Forgive me,I was a Republican'and a Daddy's girl. :banghead: Here's a song for your boss,Beautiful song, bad video, God is Watching!http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mc9CKtZS2jw&search=from%20a%20distance