Other Crap

Constitutional update on the Scooter case

A few hours ago I mentioned that the Constitution allows the President to pardon (or otherwise forgive) people with whom he has a personal or professional connection, even if he himself is under investigation. I guess I'm not the first one to notice that weakness in the wording of the document.

According to this link, George Mason, father of the jar and the mint, argued to the Philadelphia convention that the existing wording allowed the President to use his pardoning power to "pardon crimes which were advised by himself" or, before indictment or conviction, "to stop inquiry and prevent detection."

James Madison, who authored or co-authored much of the document, stubbornly refused to acknowledge the need for a change. He responded: "If the President be connected, in any suspicious manner, with any person, and there be grounds to believe he will shelter him, the House of Representatives can impeach him; they can remove him if found guilty. Now let's order in some of those esteemed cheesesteak sandwiches."

OK, I may have made up that last sentence, but Mason was right. I do not understand Madison's intransigence on this point. They should have added a few more words to prevent the President from pardoning or otherwise forgiving people connected to himself and/or people involved in investigations connected to the President.

Although any President who pardons a personal friend or close associate is exercising legitimate constitutional authority, there is outrage every time it happens, whether done by a Democrat (Clinton pardoning McDougal) or a Republican (Bush commuting Libby's sentence).

And with good reason. I still believe an amendment would be appropriate.