Top Scoops

Book Reviews | Gordon Campbell | Scoop News | Wellington Scoop | Community Scoop | Search


Patricia L Johnson: Pardon Me?

Pardon Me?

By Patricia L Johnson

I Lewis Libby, also known as “Scooter Libby” was recently convicted of 4 of the 5 charges against him as follows:

1 Obstruction of Justice (18 U.S.C. § 1503) GUILTY
2 False Statements (18 U.S.C. § 1001 (a))
False statements to FBI investigators (concerning
conversations with NBC newsman Tim Russert) GUILTY
3 False Statements (18 U.S.C. § 1001 (a))
False statements to FBI investigators (concerning
conversations with Time reporter Matt Cooper) NOT GUILTY
4 Perjury (18 U.S.C. § 1623)
Perjury to the Grand Jury (Tim Russert conversation) GUILTY
5 Perjury (18 U.S.C. § 1623)
Perjury to the Grand Jury (Matt Cooper conversation) GUILTY
Source: Department of Justice - NBC News

Although the charges carry the possibility of up to 25 years in prison, only time will tell whether or not Libby will spend a night behind bars. His attorneys will be requesting he remain free for both a retrial and an appeal, if the request for a retrial is denied.

Then there’s always the possibility of a pardon. Article II, Section 2 of the U.S. Constitution provides the President of the United States with the power to grant pardons for any offense against the United States except in the case of impeachment:

“… and he shall have power to grant reprieves and pardons for offenses against the United States, except in cases of impeachment.”

On February 22, 2001 President Bush was specifically asked about the power of the pardon during a press conference and provided the following response:



Q Other Presidents are commenting on this matter. On the Rich pardon specifically, former President Carter said that in his opinion, it was "disgraceful." Do you not have an opinion on a power that is absolute and is vested in you as the President?

THE PRESIDENT: My opinion is I will -- should I decide to grant pardons, I will do so in a fair way. I'll have the highest of high standards.

Is it possible a ‘fair’ pardon could be granted by President Bush for Scooter Libby using the ‘highest of high standards’?

The media continually reports the fact that Scooter Libby was Vice-President Cheney’s Chief of Staff but seldom acknowledges, as indicated in the Grand Jury indictment, that Libby was also employed as “ASSISTANT to the PRESIDENT of the UNITED STATES.

In other words he worked directly for President Bush. Should the President of the United States be allowed to pardon a personal assistant when the personal assistant has been found guilty of charges against the U.S.?

How can the people of this country accept a judicial system that will put a man behind bars for stealing a loaf of bread to feed his family, but allow a pardon for felony convictions against an employee of the executive branch of government?

When our forefathers wrote the constitution did they really intend to give the President the power to give get-out-of-jail free cards to anyone convicted of breaking the law, including people that may have been told to break the law by the office?

While members of congress are contemplating the answer to that question, they may also want to give some consideration to the wording of Article II, Section 2 in the U.S. Constitution.

“… and he shall have power to grant reprieves and pardons for offenses against the United States, except in cases of impeachment.”

The word “he” might tend to put a damper on any pardons considered by a female president.


Patricia L Johnson is a writer residing in Northeastern Illinois.

© Scoop Media

Top Scoops Headlines


Julian Assange: A Thousand Days In Belmarsh
Julian Assange has now been in the maximum-security facilities of Belmarsh prison for over 1,000 days. On the occasion of his 1,000th day of imprisonment, campaigners, supporters and kindred spirits gathered to show their support, indignation and solidarity at this political detention most foul... More>>

Binoy Kampmark: The Mauling Of Novak Djokovic
Rarely can the treatment of a grand sporting figure by officialdom have caused such consternation. Novak Djokovic, the tennis World Number One, has always had a tendency to get under skin and constitution, creating a large following of admirers and detractors. But his current treatment by Australian authorities, and his subsequent detention as an unlawful arrival despite being granted a visa to participate in the Australian Open, had the hallmarks of oppression and incompetent vulgarity... More>>

Binoy Kampmark: Voices Of Concern: Aussies For Assange’s Return

With Julian Assange now fighting the next stage of efforts to extradite him to the United States to face 18 charges, 17 of which are based on the brutal, archaic Espionage Act, some Australian politicians have found their voice. It might be said that a few have even found their conscience... More>>

Forbidden Parties: Boris Johnson’s Law On Illegal Covid Gatherings

It was meant to be time to reflect. The eager arms of a new pandemic were enfolding a society with asphyxiating, lethal effect. Public health authorities advocated various measures: social distancing, limited contact between family and friends, limited mobility. No grand booze-ups. No large parties. No bonking, except within dispensations of intimacy and various “bubble” arrangements. Certainly, no orgies... More>>

Dunne Speaks: Question Time Is Anything But
The focus placed on the first couple of Question Time exchanges between the new leader of the National Party and the Prime Minister will have seemed excessive to many but the most seasoned Parliamentary observers. Most people, especially those outside the Wellington beltway, imagine Question Time is exactly what it sounds... More>>

Gasbagging In Glasgow: COP26 And Phasing Down Coal

Words can provide sharp traps, fettering language and caging definitions. They can also speak to freedom of action and permissiveness. At COP26, that permissiveness was all the more present in the haggling ahead of what would become the Glasgow Climate Pact... More>>