It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Presidential pardons

page: 1

log in


posted on Jul, 1 2007 @ 12:53 AM
There isnt an whole lot I can add to this thread other then the following questions.
If your elected would you pardon anyone ?
If you would pardon persons who would they be ?
Why would you pardon the persons in question ?

I don't have any persons in mind who I would pardon at this stage and I would use the power if I may call it that to pardon after careful thought. Put another way I wouldn't go around pardoning people left right and centre.

[edit on 1-7-2007 by xpert11]

posted on Jul, 1 2007 @ 02:57 AM
I feel that the power of the president to pardon is a very important one and is essential to our system of checks and balances.

If I was President, I'm sure I would pardon people.

The candidates would far ranging, from those who have done wrong in the past, but clearly have paid their debt to society and are highly unlikely to commit another crime again and deserve to have their clean record restored; those who appear to have been the object of an overzealous and/or politically-motivated prosecution; situations where it would be better to just put the affair behind us than go through with a prosecution, I'm sure there are many other reasons.

posted on Jul, 1 2007 @ 10:53 AM
I have 2 pardons in mind.

Scooter Libby...about to serve time on a case that should have never been brought to trial. Compare Libby to Sandy Burg(l)er. Burg(l)er stole documents pertaining to Clinton's 9/11 activities, and did not spend one day in jail.

Edwin Edwards...former Democrat Louisiana Governor, servring time for rackateering charges. He has already spent 4-5 years in jail already with 3-4 years to go. He is old and is not a threat to anyone, and it would be a great act of good faith between the parties.

[edit on 1-7-2007 by RRconservative]

posted on Jul, 2 2007 @ 05:53 PM
I can not think of anyone that I would pardon.

As a rule though, I would not pardon an individual until the end of my presidency unless
they were about to recieve the death sentence.

posted on Jul, 2 2007 @ 05:59 PM
I would Pardon IMMEDIATELY 3 people for sure...

Campeon and Ramos - The two border Patrol Agents, and amy others like them.

Leonard Peltier - Indian that shot a FBI agent on a reservation during a gunfight.

posted on Jul, 3 2007 @ 06:56 PM
if they commited a crime or responsible for something i wouldnt pardon them
i would let them face justice like anyother person would have to.

in the eyes of justice their ranks,faith, ect mean nothing

posted on Jul, 6 2007 @ 06:44 AM
I'm going to go against my normal tendancy to write a novel in response.

I wouldn't pardon anyone.

As flawed as our court system is, I still have a lot of faith in it, at least, I have a lot more faith in it than I have in most other country's ability to give a fair and speedy trial.

Now the whole Gitmo (et al) shame of holding people indefinitely without trial and so forth is a blight on that system, but it is a blight brought about by the actions of a corrupt power-grabbing administration, and would be brought to a screeching halt. I still wouldn't pardon the detainees, but they would be given a fair and speedy trial.

As for normal U.S. Citizens, though, if a jury who sat through every day, week, month, year, etc of a court trial, had to learn about and comprehend every bit of evidence, and then sit in a room and debate about the verdict till they arrived at an answer, then who am I to commute or pardon someone?

Unless I sat there in the court-room, every day of the trial, and comprehended every aspect to the point where I knew in my heart this person was utterly innocent and that they'd simply had poor representation in court, I would not pardon anyone, not even my own son. To so would be a slap in the face to everyone who participated in the investigation, the trial, and the victims of the crime.

posted on Jul, 12 2007 @ 06:56 PM
In certain situations, the President may indeed have access to more information and resource than had been known to the judge, prosecutor and jury. In these situations I see it being applicable, depending on the relevancy of the subject and the charges.

posted on Jul, 15 2007 @ 02:54 AM
Honestly, I wouldn't pardon anyone either. I think that if they were found guilty of a crime by a jury of their peers, then they were guilty. I believe that our justice system is stable enough that people can decide the innocence or guilt of another citizen.

Now, onto what I think could be done to make the system better...

I think there need to be stricter guidelines for whom the president can pardon, and for what. He/She has way too much leniency as to what they can pardon for. It's practically whatever they want. If I were able to change the system, I'd make the President have to stand in front of a jury of his electors, and describe, in great detail, why he/she's doing what they are. If, after all of the debate has been done, those presiding over the hearing decide that the person being nominated for the pardoning need to serve time, then the president should be mandated to comply to the wishes of his electors.

My biggest problem with the whole pardoning thing was with Scooter. He was found guilty of obstruction of justice for leaking the name of a secret agent working for the government. That, by definition, is treason. At the very least, he should have served time for his actions. At most, he could have been killed. Instead however, the good president coddled this man, and allowed him to walk free. The only reason he got away with this, perjury, and 3 other charges was because the president let him off the hook. If some average Joe did this, they'd be labeled a threat to our nation, accused of being a terrorist, and locked up for the rest of their lives, and the President wouldn't even lose a wink of sleep because of it. I'd go so far as to wager that he wouldn't pardon anyone else for the same crimes.

Without getting any hotter under the collar than I am, I just want to say that criminal negligence has taken a whole new plateau here. The president has just allowed a criminal that jeopardized the lives of a US undercover agent, and anyone they were involved with, to walk free, and for no other reason than he thought that the sentence was too excessive. Well, it could have been worse, much worse.

It's truly a shame that this kind of behavior is allowed, and even supported, when it's very criminal.


new topics

top topics


log in