Ah, but “hope” springs eternal as we wait for “change” … troops leaving Iraq but going to Afghanistan. Ironic and pathetic at the same time.

Happy New Year!!!

good point judy.but just look south we texans hold grudges and we don’t forget .most americans learn about civil rights but quickly forget about what the framers of the constitusion was trying to prevent . we think that it’s ok for the pres. to pardon a f ing turkey it’s ok to pardon a criminal .how about just giving them an appeal and the same opp. that oj had, insted of a judge and court that was courrupt like the border agents and they were just doing there jobs one got 11 years and the other got 12 years by a judge that aqquited a known illeagl cuban airplane hyjacker .

tpayne, I share your desire to counter tyranny. Consider hte prospect of a solution similar to the Scottish criminal review board mentioned above. That group recieves and seeks out unjust decisions that are unjust.

Using that approach, we’d get rid of the tyrannical wielding of personal power and gain an ongoing method of righting wrongs. For example an empaneled justice commission could pardon not only Joe Blow who is in jail for 10 years for simple possession (of anything). It could pardon all the Joe Blows everywhere based on an unfair class of laws.

A civilized president could set up the structure in such a way that it would become self perpetuating, in as much as possible and we’d be rid of the trappings of the arbitrary dispensation of justice.

For instance, just think if we ever elected a true progressive President. To picture that, ask yourself if Cynthia McKinney had just been elected President, would you want her to have the ability to issue pardons to drug-war prisoners?

Yes, this power has been abuse by Clinton, who essentially sold the pardons. And it could be abused by Bush. But, would you really want to take it away if we ever won the Presidency? A progressive President elected after all these years might have a lot of wrongs to right, and the power of the pardon would be a way of doing it.

But, there is one change I would make. I’d say Federal employees can never be given a pardon for crimes that they committed while in office. Those are violations of the public trust. Certainly a President should not be able to pardon people in his own administration who commit crimes while he’s the responsible elected official in charge. And I’m not sure I’d want a following President to have the ability to pardon such crimes. Or maybe put a 10 year waiting period on it or something.

But, I’d be very careful against removing the power altogether. Its designed as a counter to tyranny. Its a check and balance against the police and the prosecutors getting too out of control.

http://repository.naftemporiki.gr/photonews/2008/12/08/15630_normal.jpg

Pardons offer the president the opportunity to behave very badly and get away with it. In my opinion, there should be no pardon power period. It’s a relic. At the state level, there’s quite a business in the process, some governors have walked away with serious money as a result. We’re not serfs and they’re not royalty.

HueLonger, you’re welcome! The fact that Peltier is still in jail is an excellent argument that pardons don’e deliver justice. That’s totally outrageous. Good for Amy Goodman.

There’s a better procedure than chief executives doling out their odd form of justice. In Scotland there’s a legal appeal to a special commission for highly questionable judicial decisions. The defendants in the PanAm bombing case, Lockerbie, used this path effectively. They got a serious review of their convictions that is ongoing. The specific purpose of the court is to hear controversial cases, not avoid them. The’ve shown intellectual integrity so far in this one (exposing bribes of witnesses, impossible claims, etc.).

Peltier should be freed along with the others in those cases. Where’s the pardon? Where’s the clemency? I guess the “big dog” was just to busy with the absentee billionaire, Mr. Rich, to do something truly meaningful. Thanks for raising Peltier’s name. I’d thought of him prior to writing this.

If someone picks this idea up and runs with it, I’ve got another – The Constitution & Legislation Competency Exam. Make the president and Congress pass a competency examination on the provisions of the Constitution and and the content and impact of every bill on which they pass judgment. They have to pass the latter to take office and they can vote only on those bills they’ve read and understood. I would keep them busy.

I can’t remember ever hearing about railroaded innocents being pardoned and the only time it seemed close was when Amy Goodman pressed Bill Clinton to pardon Peltier. That could be the only counter argument I could think of. Anyone have examples of this?