Can bush give pardons to people before they are charged w/ a crime?

[Botany]

Seems like a whole bunch of pardons will be needed. All kidding aside
the bush /Cheney years have been a non stop crime spree ..... Cheney
& Rummy lied to start a war for oil and money. They need to be in prison
for life.

Rove
Rummy
Cheney
Meirs
Adelman
Wolfowitz
Blackwell
Florida 2000 people
Blackwater
Condi
Abramoff
Ralston
Gonzales
Feith
White House Iraq Group
Office of Special Plans
Tom Fenney
Ohio 2004 people
NSA / Telecom Companies (I forgot Jay Rockefeller already took care of that)
Bradley Schlozman
Monica Goodling
The Don Seigleman people
Haliburton/ KBR
U.S. Attorney who were loyal Bushies
Kagan
Abrams
Bob Novak

You know what is sad I could have kept on listing people and groups

Nathan Sproul for example
Mat Damnschroder, Franklin County BOE head
Diebold
ESS
Triad

[Solly Mack]

1. yes

[babylonsister]

2. Per Turley last night on KO, it's a very slippery slope.

Video here in case you missed it:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=385x241561

[Lyric]

3. Yes. Ford pardoned Nixon before he was charged and/or convicted of anything.

Sadly. *sigh*

[truebrit71]

4. Yes. His old man did it. Pissed me off something fierce...

...

[HelenWheels]

5. But it requires admitting the wrong doing

which in the case of torture of non-Americans presents problems with those pardoned in America. Though Bush would pardon them here, that has no effect if other countries decide to try them, it actually helps the other countries convict them.

[amdezurik]

6. no, you do not need to admit anything

Now depending on who you are, if you are not Turd Bloosm or Crash-cart Dick you may have to apply for one, in which case you will have to detail all charges and stuff, but there is no REQUIREMENT that dumbaya grant any of those of course. but if you are a croney he can just issue a blanket pardon.

[MrCoffee]

7. No it doesn't...read Ford's pardon of Nixon

Now, THEREFORE, I, GERALD R. FORD, President of the United States, pursuant to the pardon power conferred upon me by Article II, Section 2, of the Constitution, have granted and by these presents do grant a full, free, and absolute pardon unto Richard Nixon for all offenses against the United States which he, Richard Nixon, has committed or may have committed or taken part in during the period from January 20, 1969 through August 9,1974.
http://www.ford.utexas.edu/LIBRARY/speeches/740061.htm

It can be as vague as you like.

[AndyA]

8. Apparently, yes, Bush can pardon someone before they've even been charged...BUT...

The specific crime must be named.

And it does not stop civil suits from being filed against the individual.

If Bush does this, he will be opening Pandora's Box.

[happyslug]

9. You can NOT even decline the Pardon.

I believe it was in the 1920s when the issue came up, but basically the Supreme Court ruled the purpose of a Pardon is for the general good, thus even if the Defendant does NOT want to be pardon, the pardon is still valid. The case involved the commutation of a Death Sentence to one of Life imprisonment. After 20 years in prison the Prisoner filed a Writ of Habeas Corpus on the grounds he had never AGREED to the reprieve. The prisoner maintained that without his consent the method of punishment could NOT be changed and thus the reprieved was invalid, the court took a different view of what a Pardon was:


We will not go into history, but we will say a word about the principles of pardons in the law of the United States. A pardon in our days is not a private act of grace from an individual happening to possess power. It is a part of the Constitutional scheme. When granted it is the determination of the ultimate authority that the public welfare will be better served by inflicting less than what the judgment fixed. See Ex parte Grossman, 267 U.S. 87, 120 , 121 S., 45 S. Ct. 332, 38 A. L. R. 131. Just as the original punishment would be imposed without regard to the prisoner's consent and in the teeth of his will, whether he liked it or not, the public welfare, not his consent determines what shall be done. So far as a pardon legitimately cuts down a penalty it affects the judgment imposing it. No one doubts that a reduction of the term of an imprisonment or the amount of a fine would limit the sentence effectively on the one side and on the other would leave the reduced term or fine valid and to be enforced, and that the convict's consent is not required.

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=274&invol=480