Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Is there any way to override a presidential pardon?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU
 
catmandu57 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-25-06 11:33 AM
Original message
Is there any way to override a presidential pardon?
If w* does give kennyboy a get out of jail free card when his term is up, is there any way to say no and lock him up for good? Is a presidential pardon absolute?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
ronnykmarshall Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-25-06 11:34 AM
Response to Original message
1. I don't think so.
Once a person is pardoned that's the last word.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
emanymton Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-25-06 11:34 AM
Response to Original message
2. No. Presidential Pardons Are Absolute, Final, No Review No Over-ride.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hugin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-25-06 11:40 AM
Response to Reply #2
5. Based on the Constitution which used to be the law of the land...
However, since the Bushites have chosen to go their own way.

Looks like anything is "fair game". (To use their own terminology)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tesha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-25-06 11:47 AM
Response to Reply #5
6. You'll have to check the "signing statement" that John Hancock wrote. (NT)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hugin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-25-06 11:48 AM
Response to Reply #6
9. Sure thing.
Do you have it handy?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rock Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-25-06 11:37 AM
Response to Original message
3. No. It's absolute.
However, Congress may think it's so egregious that they will impeach. May, I say.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Freddie Stubbs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-25-06 11:48 AM
Response to Reply #3
7. Most Presidents don't do their their controversial pardons until
they are almost out of office. The first President Bush pardoned Casper Weinburger and Clinton pardoned marc Rich in the waning days of their Presidencies.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
catmandu57 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-25-06 11:37 AM
Response to Original message
4. F***
If that happens, I would say that all bets are off the table, but, I think there will either be a mountain of pardons or lil boots* declaring himself dictator for life.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WA98296 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-25-06 11:48 AM
Response to Original message
8. President Hillary Clinton will pardon Bush...Brace yourselves.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
noonwitch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-25-06 11:56 AM
Response to Reply #8
16. She won't have to if no one ever files any charges
The next president won't have to pardon any of Bush's lackeys who get caught. If they do Bush like Reagan, his lackeys will get indicted and he'll walk out of office in 2009 as planned. Whoever gets elected will probably prefer it this way, to get off to a fresh start.

Bush is not going to ever be charged with a crime for his time in office. Even if Libby and Rove get convicted of crimes and sent to jail, Bush is not going to get charged, and Cheney probably won't, either.

Unless Cheney or another Bush affiliate wins the 2008 election, nobody is going to care about pardoning Libby or Rove, if either does get convicted. G. Gordon Libby never got a pardon (not that he ever asked for one, because I'm sure he didn't).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jacobin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-25-06 11:49 AM
Response to Original message
10. nope
None.
Zip
Nada
Final
Over
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-25-06 11:49 AM
Response to Original message
11. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
Recursion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-25-06 11:49 AM
Response to Original message
12. None. Zero. Zilch
And as distasteful as a Lay pardon can be, the absolute nature of Presidential pardon is SUCH an important check that it's worth defending.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zbdent Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-25-06 11:50 AM
Response to Original message
13. If there were,
the republiconvicts would have used it in 2001 . . .
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
davepc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-25-06 11:51 AM
Response to Original message
14. They're absolute. The Founders had a lot to say about them...
Edited on Thu May-25-06 11:52 AM by davepc
Article 2

Section II

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://www.house.gov/house/Constitution/Constitution.html

As an aside, the Constitution gives very limited powers to the President...



Humanity and good policy conspire to dictate, that the benign prerogative of pardoning should be as little as possible fettered or embarrassed. -- Alexander Hamilton


http://www.usconstitution.net/consttop_pard.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
magellan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-25-06 11:55 AM
Response to Original message
15. He'd seal his legacy as a failure if he pardons Lay
And Bush** adores the idea that one day he'll be vindicated by historians and hailed as the greatest pResident ever. (Insert :rofl:) There won't even be a remote chance of rewriting history if he pardons Lay -- the entire country will turn against him and the Repugs, and Bush**'ll be hunted down like an animal by ex-Enron employees.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
catmandu57 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-25-06 12:01 PM
Response to Original message
17. It seems to me that if we were going to change the constitution
That this would be something to address, instead of gay marriage, flag burning, and that old chestnut a balanced budget.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AndyTiedye Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-25-06 12:24 PM
Response to Original message
18. Send Them to the Hague!
a pResidential pardon won't get you out of the Hague.




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Peace Patriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-25-06 12:32 PM
Response to Original message
19. Yes, there is always a way. For instance, Congress could declare the
2004 election invalid--due to its egregious (and quite deliberate) non-transparency--and invalidate not only all Bush pardons, but all Bush appointments to the courts, and all Bush acts period.

WE are the sovereigns of this land. We, the people. And we don't have to revolt to do it. We have the INHERENT--if currently theoretical--power. We can go much further than impeachment; we can just blot out all of the illegal, unconstitutional, illegitimate actions of the Bush junta over the last five and a half years, all the way back to 2000.

We can RE-WRITE the Constitution, for instance, to ban all private money in political campaigns, provide public financing, and reclaim some of our public airwaves from the war profiteering corporate news monopolies. We can DISMANTLE corporations--pull their corporate charters, and seize their assets for the public good.

There are a lot of powers that we have, that we don't realize--because we've been oppressed by the Corporate Rulers for so long, and propagandized by them.

But I think we need to start with restoring TRANSPARENCY in our elections--which are now ALSO controlled by corporations--BUSHITE corporations--in the new electronic voting systems that are run on "TRADE SECRET," PROPRIETARY programming code, with virtually no audit/recount controls (--engineered by the two biggest crooks in Congress, Tom Delay and Bob Ney, abetted by Christopher Dodd). Getting rid of these election theft machines is still possible at the state/local level, where ordinary people still have some influence.

Why do you think they made our elections NON-TRANSPARENT and unverifiable? It's BECAUSE of our inherent powers as a people to legitimately and legally demolish the power of the Corporate Rulers. We threatened them with it, in the 1999 Seattle protests, in which 50,000 people took to the streets and shut down the World Trade Organization meeting because of its secrecy and lack of democracy and its assault on our sovereignty. THEN we got a Corporate Supreme Court-appointed fascist, with diabolical designs, and, when they proceeded with their global corporate predator war, against the will of the people (almost 60% of whom opposed it at the time of the invasion), they took away our right to vote.

So, now we have to get it back. That's the heart of the problem right now. The Bush junta is behaving as it is--with utter contempt for the Constitution and the law--BECAUSE they are unaccountable to us, and they know it. But there is only so much Diebold/ES&S can do--a 5% to 10% "thumb on the scales" for Bushites--without triggering civil unrest, or at least a massive revolt against their machines (thus losing their new election theft capability for future contingencies).

Once we have transparent elections again, we can do anything we collectively decide to do, for the good of the country. I know it's not as easy as that, but our right to vote is the fundamental condition that we need to restore, for reform to be feasible. Election transparency, and a lot of hard civic work over many years, will be needed for REAL reform--reform that will prevent another fascist coup like this from ever happening again--and not just a cosmetic, temporary War/Corporate Democrat type of reform that is largely illusionary and leaves us open to renewed fascist assault.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
garybeck Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-25-06 12:34 PM
Response to Original message
20. yes, but it involves bullets. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Apr 23rd 2024, 02:04 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC