Pardon Me?!

The Constitution of the United States specifically invests the President with the power "to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offences against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment." This power is not among the most awesome powers of the American Chief Executive; it is, at best, his most benevolent power.           

 William Duker, William & Mary Law Review, Volume 18, Number 3, Spring 1977

“Article II, Section 2 of the Constitution, ratified in 1789, authorizes the president to grant pardons and other forms of clemency involving ‘offenses against the United States.’ The goal is to ensure more fairness in the criminal justice system and avoid abuses by prosecutors. The pardon power also was designed to ‘restore the tranquility of the commonwealth and promote conciliation, wrote Alexander Hamilton, one of the nation's founders.” USNews.com, Kenneth Walsh, 6/8/19. This presidential right has been rife with controversy, well into some of the most recent administrations. 

For example, after Richard Nixon resigned amidst the Watergate scandal, “Gerald Ford adopted [George] Washington's reconciliation rationale for what has probably been the most important and criticized presidential pardon in U.S. history – his granting in 1974 of a ‘full, free and absolute pardon’ to his predecessor Richard Nixon ‘for all offenses against the United States.’ Ford was referring to the Watergate scandal, which caused Nixon to resign as the House moved closer to impeaching him. It was the first and only time that a president has received a pardon, and it caused a huge firestorm because Nixon was so unpopular. 

“Some critics suggested that Ford secretly promised to pardon Nixon in exchange for Nixon resigning and allowing Ford, then his vice president, to succeed to the top job. This was never proven. Ford argued that the pardon was necessary to move beyond the rancor of the Watergate scandal. But the pardon was a factor in Ford's loss in the 1976 presidential election. Ford also offered conditional amnesty to more than 50,000 draft resisters as a way to move beyond the polarization caused by the Vietnam War [Could this presage an elevated Mike Pence pardon of Donald Trump?]…

“Bill Clinton, who served from 1993-2001, drew much criticism for two of his pardons in particular – one for his brother Roger Clinton after Roger Clinton served a year in prison for a drug conviction, and one for Clinton supporter and financier Marc Rich, who was indicted by a U.S. attorney for tax evasion and illegal trading with Iran.” USNews.com.

So Donald Trump’s pardons, while controversial, may seem to fall in line with this category of outrageous forgiveness… or is Trump’s basis for issuing pardons more suspect? There are concerns for precedents and perhaps even an open encouragement of even murderous lawlessness. “Current and former military officers have urged the White House not to pardon service members and security contractors implicated in war crimes, warning that forgiving their offenses would send a dangerous signal to U.S. troops and potential adversaries.

“Aides to President Trump have been examining high-profile war crimes cases from Iraq and Afghanistan, preparing paperwork so Trump could issue pardons during Memorial Day commemorations next week, according to two senior U.S. officials.

“But the possibility that Trump could issue pardons has brought a flood of opposition from current and former high-ranking officers, who say it would encourage misconduct by showing that violations of laws prohibiting attacks on civilians and prisoners of war will be treated with leniency…

“Trump has repeatedly bypassed normal procedures for issuing pardons and granting clemency, seizing on cases mentioned on Fox News or those that resonate with him or his supporters. This month, he pardoned Army 1st Lt. Michael Behenna, who was convicted of killing an Iraqi during questioning in 2008.

“‘We are talking about some of the most despicable war crimes. To even contemplate pardons in such cases is disgusting and dishonorable,’ said Raha Wala, a lawyer at Human Rights First. ‘It’s no wonder that some of our most respected military leaders are speaking out against this, as they should.’” David Cloud writing for the May 23^rd Los Angeles Times.

For a president under investigation for possible criminal activity before and during holding office, the pardon power can be viewed as a double-edged sword. “Typically, the Justice Department’s Office of the Pardon Attorney makes recommendations to the president, but Trump appears to operate outside of the department and seems comfortable granting clemency to people he knows or knows about, [Jeffrey Crouch, an assistant professor at American University and author of The Presidential Pardon Power] said.

“Trump has said repeatedly that some people charged in the special counsel investigation into Russian election interference were treated unfairly; his personal lawyer has said the president could move to pardon them…

“‘The pardon power should not be something that’s used for the personal benefit of the president,’ [Andrew] Rudalevige [professor of government at Bowdoin College in Maine] said. ‘Even though it’s a legitimate constitutional power, a president could legitimately be impeached for the abuse of that power.’” Melissa Gomez writing for the May 23^rd Los Angeles Times. 

Trump seems to favor several particular categories of federally convicted felons that differentiate his choices from those of his predecessors: flatterers, folks embracing his most extreme political views, members of the military even those convicted of homicide… and Republican political officials convicted of campaign violations, coverups, tax evasion and occasionally lying to Congress or federal prosecutors to protect Trump or his associates and family.

“The ability to grant pardons is among a president’s most unchecked powers… Pardons have corrected injustices, and they’ve caused outrage. But historians consider some of President Trump’s pardons among the most controversial ever granted.

“Experts say many of his pardons follow a pattern of rewarding people popular with his supporters or those who have spoken glowingly of the president. One pardon recipient wrote a book titled ‘Donald J. Trump: A President Like No Other.’… ‘So many of these pardons tie personally back to Trump, and that’s what stands out,’ said Allan J. Lichtman, distinguished professor of history at American University.” LA Times

For example, Conservative provocateur Dinesh D’Souza and pro-Trump “documentary” filmmaker/author, pleaded guilty to campaign fraud in 2014, joins uber-Trump flatterer, former media mogul, Conrad Black (convicted of defrauding shareholders), who wrote the above-noted book. Various principals implicated in the litany of DoJ and Congressional investigations surrounding Donald Trump and his empire have openly stated that they were contacted by attorneys within the Trump orbit hinting at possible pardons in exchange for protecting the President even if they crossed legal criminal lines. Arizona Sheriff Joe “tent city” Arpaio was convicted in 2017 of criminal contempt for violating a federal court order to stop his deputies from racially profiling Latinos. Trump issued a pardon before he could be sentenced. He was an adamant and outspoken supporter of Trump’s anti-Latino immigration policies.

Rule of law appears to be an inconvenience to the President, heavily reflected in his blanket policy of refusing to honor or allow those within he perceived orbit to honor any and all Congressional subpoenas relating to him, his administration and his family. But as roguish as this behavior may appear those familiar with the Constitution and federal law, it is precisely this defiance that engenders Trump’s wild and unyielding popularity with his base. Unfortunately, the resulting polarization, exacerbating anger on both sides of the aisle, is beginning to threaten the very existence of the entire nation.

              I’m Peter Dekom, and these roguish actions are accumulating so fast, with devastating consequences for the basic three-branch-structure that underlies the foundation of our country, that this may be well-beyond the mere beginning of the end of the United States of America.