• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Clinton's Pardons

Bill Thompson

Banned
Joined
Oct 23, 2006
Messages
6,171
I bought Zig Zeigler's book last night while I was waiting on our table to be ready at the famous Harris Ranch restaurant in central California last night. The Clintons were on my mind. The comments Ziegler makes about everyone is a salesman and life is all about selling yourself ring true.

Of course, if what you are selling is not quality, you are, in fact, a con artist.

But politics is the one profession where you can resell yourself. You can choose to make it all about image and perspective, if you are smart enough. Make people feel good about themselves and about you and you will go to the top in politics.

And if you have the press on your side, you are good as gold and untouchable.

The only problem, the only overlooked speed bump might be the internet. For the first time in history people who are not reporters by profession can shine light on truths about you that you might take for granted that remain hidden.

This, http://www.usdoj.gov/opa/pardonchartlst.htm for instance. I know how much we love our elected leaders and are willing to overlook any warts. But, come on, people, even this is too much.
 
I bought Zig Zeigler's book last night while I was waiting on our table to be ready at the famous Harris Ranch restaurant in central California last night. The Clintons were on my mind. The comments Ziegler makes about everyone is a salesman and life is all about selling yourself ring true.

Of course, if what you are selling is not quality, you are, in fact, a con artist.

But politics is the one profession where you can resell yourself. You can choose to make it all about image and perspective, if you are smart enough. Make people feel good about themselves and about you and you will go to the top in politics.

And if you have the press on your side, you are good as gold and untouchable.

The only problem, the only overlooked speed bump might be the internet. For the first time in history people who are not reporters by profession can shine light on truths about you that you might take for granted that remain hidden.

This, http://www.usdoj.gov/opa/pardonchartlst.htm for instance. I know how much we love our elected leaders and are willing to overlook any warts. But, come on, people, even this is too much.

I would appreciate it if you could explain why pardons granted nearly six years ago by an ex-president are such a big deal now.

Thanks much!
 
I would appreciate it if you could explain why pardons granted nearly six years ago by an ex-president are such a big deal now.

Thanks much!

Er, because he's the most recent ex-president? By the way, I'm sure the ailing Gerald Ford will be delighted to hear he can stop taking crap for pardoning Nixon now. Why not drop him a line? I'm sure he could use the good news.
 
I would appreciate it if you could explain why pardons granted nearly six years ago by an ex-president are such a big deal now.

Thanks much!

Yeah, really.


> CLINTON, Roger

FTW!

> HUCKLEBERRY, Debi Rae

I didn't know that was a real name.
 
Well, if past Presidental Pardons are of such import, then perhaps a bit of historical perspective is in order:

George W. Bush > 58 Pardons (so far),
Bill Clinton > 396 Pardons,
George H. W. Bush > 74 Pardons,
Ronald Reagan > 393 Pardons,
Jimmy Carter > 534 Pardons,
Gerald Ford > 382 Pardons, and
Richard Nixion > 863 Pardons.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/09/28/politics/main889049.shtml
 
Couldn't have been worse then Bush pardoning the Iran Contra conspirators.
 
http://www.usdoj.gov/pardon/bushgrants.htm

What am I supposed to be looking at in Clinton's pardons? There's a process for requesting a pardon. With the exception of a few people - like Marc Rich - that process was used. The process used for most of those pardons is probably similar to both Bush's processes.

You seem to know something that I do not. Of course, most people would not know how presidential pardons work :) . I wouldn't even know how to google that or where to poke around for information. Maybe I was sick that day in history class.

(I am hinting that you educate me or point me in the direction of some education)
 
The only problem, the only overlooked speed bump might be the internet. For the first time in history people who are not reporters by profession can shine light on truths about you that you might take for granted that remain hidden.

This, http://www.usdoj.gov/opa/pardonchartlst.htm for instance. I know how much we love our elected leaders and are willing to overlook any warts. But, come on, people, even this is too much.
And for the first time in history people with no funds but an agenda, can spread their bull to anyone in the world with a computer, for almost no money.
 
You seem to know something that I do not. Of course, most people would not know how presidential pardons work :) . I wouldn't even know how to google that or where to poke around for information. Maybe I was sick that day in history class.

(I am hinting that you educate me or point me in the direction of some education)

Same site:
http://www.usdoj.gov/pardon/petitions.htm
The Pardon Attorney assists the President in the exercise of his power under Article II, Section 2, clause 1 of the Constitution (the Pardon Clause). See Executive Order dated June 16, 1893 (transferring clemency petition processing and advisory functions to the Justice Department), the Rules Governing the Processing of Petitions for Executive Clemency (codified in 28 C.F.R. §§ 1.1 et seq.), and 28 C.F.R. §§ 0.35 and 0.36 (relating to the authority of the Pardon Attorney). The Pardon Attorney, under the direction of the Deputy Attorney General, receives and reviews all petitions for executive clemency (which includes pardon after completion of sentence, commutation of sentence, remission of fine and reprieve), initiates and directs the necessary investigations, and prepares a report and recommendation for submission to the President in every case. In addition, the Office of the Pardon Attorney acts as a liaison with the public during the pendency of a clemency petition, responding to correspondence and answering inquiries about clemency cases and issues. The following sets forth guidance on clemency matters.

Obviously, the President has full authority to issue pardons and commutations as he sees fit (it's a power reserved for the President). The DOJ assists in the clemency procedures. I assume that the President sets the guidelines for the rules described in the above site.

I recall that Marc Rich did not go through the "standard" process. This worked out better for him, because I doubt he was showing "Acceptance of responsibility, remorse, and atonement" or really had a "Need for relief." Which was why Rich's pardon was so scandalous, or at least tasteless.

The raw numbers look interesting, but this page shows that Nixon pardoned some 50% of applicants. Wow. Compare that to stingy George HW Bush whose pardon rate is 10% - the lowest rate of Presidents since 1945...

So, now that we've gotten that out of the way, what did Clinton do that was so horrible, and why is it important now?
 
And for the first time in history people with no funds but an agenda, can spread their bull to anyone in the world with a computer, for almost no money.
This is true.
But, at the same time, people can shine a light on someone who does that.
Are you, by the way, thinking you are doing that with me?
So, now that we've gotten that out of the way, what did Clinton do that was so horrible, and why is it important now?
Forgive me if I make a mistake because I am just running on memory and observation, but here is how I see it. I thought that the numbers and the nature of the crimes was what were most alarming but there are still other aspects of the pardons that seem alarming (I will get to why him and why now in a second). Clinton did this on the last minute (as I recall) that he was in office. He might have had every right to do whatever he wanted but it still seemed underhanded. The press could make a big deal out of it but, at the same time, noone could bring it up in any presidential press conference simply because he would no longer be in office. Secondly, I remember that he was impeached at the time. Yes, impeached. Not impeached and acquitted. Officially, he was impeached. And so he seemed to be going into some ethical gray area here.

Can an impeached president grant pardons? Well maybe nothing in the constitution says no as long as it is decided he can stay in office. But, is it ethically ok?

Now, why do I bring this up now? I have been reading about his wife and because she might be considered to be a presidential nominee of The Democratic Party.
 
Now, why do I bring this up now? I have been reading about his wife and because she might be considered to be a presidential nominee of The Democratic Party.

I don't really see what bearing his pardons have on her potential candidacy. Am I missing something? I mean, they might have similar politics, but that list above shows some Republicans with lots of pardons, some with few, and the same for Democrats. There doesn't appear to be a correlation there, much less causality.
 
Dude - I don't know what you're smoking:

http://www.usdoj.gov/pardon/actions_administration.htm

The majority of pardons Bill Clinton produced was in FY 2001. I get the impression by that time he was already acquitted of his impeachment charges. I learned about the DOJ Office of Pardon Attorney when Clinton pardoned Marc Rich. I don't think their guidelines have significantly changed from the process I linked to earlier.

I'm done with this thread for now, because I can't tell what your point is, and you seem ill-informed on the facts, even though the facts I found came from your original source.
 
I don't really see what bearing his pardons have on her potential candidacy. Am I missing something? I mean, they might have similar politics, but that list above shows some Republicans with lots of pardons, some with few, and the same for Democrats. There doesn't appear to be a correlation there, much less causality.

You are exactly correct. But I sense that some people like Hillary only because they miss the Clinton years. And this is some distorted way of getting those years back by getting Bill Clinton back into the White House.
 
I thought the might be some tooth in this thread. Something like comparing recidivism rates between presidents?
 

Back
Top Bottom