Yes, Clinton disappointed me with Pardongate. He further tarnished his already tarnished image by doing what he did his last day in office. My initial reaction was, "What the hell was Clinton thinking?!" I will not argue that point. But the Rich pardon also must be viewed in the context of other presidential pardons, particularly some made by Gerald Ford and Bush Sr. Some of those were a little "fishy" too. Don't you agree? Neo opines that the Rich pardon was more nefarious than, say, Ford's pardon of Nixon, because there are allegations that money is involved with the Rich pardon.
I don't buy that line of reasoning. A bad pardon is a bad pardon. Period.
It was time in '74 to move on when Ford pardoned Nixon, a move that I supported then and still support.
Same thing, really, going on now. If the Repub attack dogs in Congress are smart (sorry, they're not), they'll close up shop on Pardongate pronto and wait for Clinton to screw up as a private citizen, when his future sins won't be protected by the seal of the presidency, and he'll be dragged into civil or criminal court like any other Joe Citizen. You're a lawyer. You tell me. Does any president have to give a reason for any pardon? I don't think so. Hence, case closed, in my opinion. |
