Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: combjelly who wrote (448299)	1/17/2009 3:55:19 PM
From: i-node	Respond to of 1574002

I don't know whether you can fine it online. But the key issue is not so much the pardon of a fugitive, as it was that reasonable care was not used in the process. In the aforementioned instance, it was concluded that a fair trial ought to be conducted and later on, if there is a conviction, then a pardon could be issued. You don't pardon a man who has run from justice as Marc Rich did. It is a different thing from the Nixon pardon, in which the entire design of it was to prevent the nation from having to be put through a trial, which most people now acknowledge was the correct move for Ford to have made. The right to pardon is absolute, and therefore, a president MAY do as he pleases -- although, selling pardons, as Clinton did, could be problematic. Bush, CORRECTLY, IMO, chose not to pursue any legal action against Clinton which would have certainly taken the country to a constitutional crisis (since clearly Clinton sold the pardons and clearly he would have challenged the concept that a wrongful pardon is even possible under our Constitution).