Am I the only Sumbitch

[Dr Grump]

who thinks Presidential pardons suck. Saw Frost/Nixon the other night and forgot that Ford pardoned Nixon. Also thought Clinton pardoning Rich was freaking pathetic.

I cannot think of one solid GOOD reason why a President should have such a power. I can think of plenty of dodgy reasons.

Some might argue that after a lot of thought and probing, justice was not served, but I reckon that most pardons are partisan. I also think if there is a good case for pardoning, the US already has a justice system in place that can address the issue...

 

[Modbert]

who thinks Presidential pardons suck. Saw Frost/Nixon the other night and forgot that Ford pardoned Nixon. Also thought Clinton pardoning Rich was freaking pathetic.

I cannot think of one solid GOOD reason why a President should have such a power. I can think of plenty of dodgy reasons.

Some might argue that after a lot of thought and probing, justice was not served, but I reckon that most pardons are partisan. I also think if there is a good case for pardoning, the US already has a justice system in place that can address the issue...

The President should have the right to grant another trial; not pardon however.

It crushes the foundation of the justice system since the President can basically say whether the verdict was right or wrong that he is overturning a conviction.

 

[garyd]

Every governor in the US has that capability why deny it to the president.

 

[Anguille]

I cannot think of one solid GOOD reason why a President should have such a power.

I cannot either. What is the case in NZ?

 

[Dr Grump]

Well, take it away from the governors, too!

No such thing in NZ. The public outcry would be immense. In saying that, our PM doesn't have the power your president does either. He only has one vote in the 120 member parliament like everybody else..

 

[jillian]

Well, take it away from the governors, too!

No such thing in NZ. The public outcry would be immense. In saying that, our PM doesn't have the power your president does either. He only has one vote in the 120 member parliament like everybody else..

Every state would have to act individually to take away the right of each governor to grant pardons. The Federal legislature wouldn't be permitted that type of authority over a state official.

 

[manu1959]

Well, take it away from the governors, too!

No such thing in NZ. The public outcry would be immense. In saying that, our PM doesn't have the power your president does either. He only has one vote in the 120 member parliament like everybody else..

Every state would have to act individually to take away the right of each governor to grant pardons. The Federal legislature wouldn't be permitted that type of authority over a state official.

unless is was to take tax money from them to spend on things in other states.....or other countries...or themselves....

 

[xsited1]

If we're talking about a person of "prudence and good sense."

Founding Father Alexander Hamilton wrote "... in seasons of insurrection or rebellion, there are often critical moments, when a well-timed offer of pardon to the insurgents or rebels may restore the tranquility of the commonwealth. "It is not to be doubted, that a single man of prudence and good sense is better fitted, in delicate conjunctures, to balance the motives which may plead for and against the remission of the punishment, than any numerous body [Congress] whatever."

At the Constitutional Convention of 1787, delegates easily defeated proposals to make presidential pardons subject to the approval of the Senate, and to limit pardons to persons actually convicted of crimes.

 

[jillian]

Well, take it away from the governors, too!

No such thing in NZ. The public outcry would be immense. In saying that, our PM doesn't have the power your president does either. He only has one vote in the 120 member parliament like everybody else..

Every state would have to act individually to take away the right of each governor to grant pardons. The Federal legislature wouldn't be permitted that type of authority over a state official.

unless is was to take tax money from them to spend on things in other states.....or other countries...or themselves....

If I'm not mistaken, a state always has the right to opt out of accepting federal funding if it doesn't want to comply with Federal regulations. That would make it voluntary. No?

 

[Dr Grump]

So does that mean you guys agree or disagree with the presidential pardon powers?

 

[jillian]

If we're talking about a person of "prudence and good sense."

Founding Father Alexander Hamilton wrote "... in seasons of insurrection or rebellion, there are often critical moments, when a well-timed offer of pardon to the insurgents or rebels may restore the tranquility of the commonwealth. "It is not to be doubted, that a single man of prudence and good sense is better fitted, in delicate conjunctures, to balance the motives which may plead for and against the remission of the punishment, than any numerous body [Congress] whatever."

At the Constitutional Convention of 1787, delegates easily defeated proposals to make presidential pardons subject to the approval of the Senate, and to limit pardons to persons actually convicted of crimes.

I think Alexander Hamilton had it right. But is that really what the pardon has been used for? I suspect pardoning a few drug dealers or some businessman who's wife you know isn't quite what Hamilton had in mind. Ford pardoning Nixon, though, may actually have ft the bill.

 

[jillian]

So does that mean you guys agree or disagree with the presidential pardon powers?

I haven't decided.