Having loved every minute watching the Watergate hearings, I wanted Nixon to get what was coming to him. But I could see reasons for not going through with it. I haven’t thought about all this in a long time, so I’m not sure what I think about this essay.
In the days since Gerald Ford’s death, so much praise has been heaped on the late president’s blanket pardon to his predecessor, Richard Nixon, that you’d think Tricky Dick was Jean Valjean. These magnanimous pronouncements are a preening exercise in cost-free generosity three decades after the fact. They reflect little or no consideration of the merits of the pardon itself.
No new information has emerged during the past 32 years that makes Ford’s pardon to Nixon look any more justifiable; indeed, what facts have dribbled forth make it seem less so. [...] Nor can the pardon plausibly be considered an example of the bipartisan spirit for which Ford is justly, if too extravagantly, praised by Washington insiders. The pardon may have had the long-term effect of tamping down partisan warfare between Democrats and Republicans over a possible criminal trial (obstruction of justice would have been the likeliest charge), but when a Republican short-circuits prosecution of a fellow Republican, you can’t call that bipartisanship. These logical obstacles help explain why people who defend the pardon today do so with vague language about how, in retrospect, it was better for the country to set rancor aside and move on.
Why was Ford wrong to pardon Nixon? Mainly because it set a bad precedent. Nixon had not yet been indicted, let alone convicted, of any crime. It’s never a good idea to pardon somebody without at least finding out first what you’re pardoning him for. How can you possibly weigh the quality of mercy against considerations of justice?
#16, Not true. No one is required to accept a pardon. Quite often pardons are accompanied with caveats and conditions, such as an admission of guilt, not allowed to own firearms, the forfeiture of property, or even the leaving the State. The recipient of the pardon is under no obligation to accept one or not. Mind you, when faced with years behind bars with people like Post #17, almost everyone accepts the pardon. Further, the Supreme Court has ruled (I understand) that the acceptance of a pardon is an admission of guilt.
Nixon was given the condition that he relinquish any claim to the White House Tapes.
To #7, what I should have said was it cost Ford his “re-election.” My mistake.
#19 – I can imagine your Mustang has a custom plate TNY-PNS.
Now go back to looking at the world through that little window in your Mom’s basement. BTW, I would have been your father if that dog hadn’t beat me over the fence.
#21. So … if you refuse a pardon, can you make the State prosecute you or keep you in prison?
Recent caselaw surrounding Gov. Ryan’s commutation of IL death row inmates (which utilized federal precedents on commutations and pardons) teaches that a pardon is a limitation on the government’s power to prosecute a person, not a governmental bargain with the defendant.
And I don’t think the acceptance of a pardon is an admission of guilt, since one of the common reasons for pardoning someone is that they were wrongfully convicted in the first place.
#24, That would be State law which would vary by state. For Federal Law, which is what governs Nixon’s pardon, it was decided in 1915 that a pardon may be declined.
The editor of New York newspaper was called before a Grand Jury and plead the Fifth (refused to testify on the grounds that he may incriminate himself). The Prosecutor got a pardon from the President absolving the editor of any crimes in order to compell him to testify. The editor refused it. The prosecution took the stance that he couldn’t refuse it and if he didn’t testify then he was in contempt of court. The editor appealed it to the Supreme Court which said,:
…‘A pardon is a deed, to the validity of which delivery is essential, and delivery is not complete without acceptance. It may then be rejected by the person to whom it is tendered; and if it be rejected, we have discovered no power in a court to force it on him.’
http://tinyurl.com/yk2g2r
BURDICK v. U S, 236 U.S. 79 (1915)
Also I believe a Governor may give someone a Full Pardon which is an admission by the State that the person is innocent.
The automatic acceptance of guilt with a pardon would apply to someone with a death sentence commuted to life or released from jail before the end of his sentence. Or, in the case of Oliver North (and the Iran Contra conspirators) before his trial started, by Bush jr’s daddy.
#25. Huh. well, I’ll be damned. there you go again, Mr. Fusion, injecting actual facts into an argument
Thank you for enlightening me on a subject on which I thought my knowledge was accurate.
#23 – You must like getting beat… only reason you bother to keep posting.
Just because I have a nicer car than you is no reason to get pissy. Likewise, if you’re talking about living in your parent’s basement you must be projecting… you’re the only one around here still living with mom.
You’ve been owned. Deal with it.
#27 – Mustang and “nicer car?” How can you possibly use that in the same sentence. I guess you were attempting to drive something cheap that you perceive manly after your sex change operation – the Addadictomy.
FOAD!
#28 – Your continued worship is noted, however your comebacks aren’t really working. The 5th grade humor doest work for very long, unless you know how to use it.
Besides, you admitted to having a fat wife in another thread… no wonder you’re so jealous.
#29 – Go back and read it again – it was your Mom I was speaking about. We know your lips get tired when you read…
While the continuing squabble between #29 and #30 may be enlightening about something or other, it seems just a tad off-topic to me. Reminds me of DeLay and that ilk posturing about Clinton’s morals, but I’m damned if I know who’s the analog of whom in that trashy little drama.
Sorry about the noise Geez. This mongoloid started this with a personal attack and it has had no where to go but down. I guess this is what we can expect when his parents are related.
LOL Okay, Haywood, since you were willing to race a dog over the fence to get to the prize, I guess that makes you the Clinton. Hope that’s okay.
Have you seen Hillary? Would you blame him??
Let me get this straight. It is off topic, but maybe someone else needs a pardon. Jablone did it with Hills mother. Hill’s parents are related. Then Jablone is blood related to Hill’s mother, and I assume IS Hill’s father. I assumed that because Jablone doesn’t share his last name with Hill, unless they married after the birth. Now because Jablone still lives in his parents (I’m not sure if that was Jablone’s parents or Hill’s parents) basement, where does Hill live? If they are Jablone’s parents, would they also be Hill’s Uncle and Grandmother? Does Hill live upstairs? Does Hill have his only little room in the attic so other people don’t ask questions? Does Jablone just spend his time in the basement or does he have his own apartment? Is there a bathroom or just an old tomato can? Are Hill’s siblings identical to their first, second, and third cousins?
Please pardon me for questioning this but I am very confused. I apologize to both gentlemen if I have this wrong, but geeze, this is a heck of a way to start off the year.
Enough with the childish, personal attacks on each other! I’ll delete any more that are posted.
I was around back then and Ford let his friend get off easy as they all do. They should have went through with the trial and Nixon should have gotten prison like all the rest had.
Again justice is never served when you are rich and contacts with politicians.
#37, True and I agree. I do not necessarily think prison would have been proper for a President though. Maybe strict house arrest and a substantial fine. That though is a different subject.
But I still relate Reagan’s Iran Contra and Bush jr’s wire taps to the pardon. If Nixon had been held accountable then these illegalities might never have happened. Or at least happened quite differently. Instead, the Republican Presidents have taken an attitude that they are above the law.
Sorry!
Ford should have at least required Nixon to confess before the pardon so that he couldn’t claim he was innocent for the rest of his life.