Conyers to hold hearing on executive clemency.
By on Jul 4th, 2007 at 8:05 pm
Conyers to hold hearing on executive clemency.
The House Judiciary Committee, “upset after Bush’s decision to grant clemency to I. Lewis ‘Scooter’ Libby,” will hold a hearing on July 11 to examine presidential clemency power. From a statement issued by Conyers’s office:
In light of Monday’s announcement by the president that he was commuting the prison sentence for Scooter Libby, it is imperative that Congress look into presidential authority to grant clemency, and how such power may be abused. Taken to its extreme, the use of such authority could completely circumvent the law enforcement process and prevent credible efforts to investigate wrongdoing in the executive branch.
View Most Popular
Advertisement
Visit Our Affiliated Sites
What We're About
What We're Fighting For
What We're Fighting Against
Featured
Subscribe to the Progress Report
Got a hot tip?
Have a hot news tip? We'd love to hear from you. Use the form below to send us the latest.
Reports
In depth studies on select topics
Topic CloudView topics sorted by popularity
Afghanistan
Bailout
Big Oil
Bolton
Bush
Cheney
Civil Rights
Congress
Earmarks
Economy
Energy
Environment
Ethics
Fox News
GI Bill
Global Warming
Guantanamo
Health Care
Immigration
Iran
Iraq
Justice
Kristol
LGBT
Lieberman
Limbaugh
McCain
McClellan
Media
Military
O'Hanlon
O'Reilly
Obama
Palin
Politics
Race
Radical Right
RNC Convention
Rove
Terrorism
Third Bush Term
Torture
Veterans
Wiretapping
Women's Rights
ArchivesBlog Roll
Clinton… he did it too.
July 4th, 2007 at 8:09 pmTu quoqui!
Besides, Clinton wasn’t hiding a crime to save himself–unless you’re in Georgia.
July 4th, 2007 at 8:18 pmSo, if you call for a hearing in D.C. but have no witnesses, do you really hear anything?
July 4th, 2007 at 8:21 pmThey can keep hearing, but how can they act?
July 4th, 2007 at 8:25 pmThis country needs a truth commission to sort out the vast crimes committed by this lawless administration.
July 4th, 2007 at 8:26 pmI wouldn’t mind an amendment to allow Senate revocation of clemency - maybe with a super-majority.
July 4th, 2007 at 8:30 pmThis is an excellent development. If anyone gets to the bottom of this completely wrong action on the part of the president it will be Chairman Conyers. We need to know if any laws were broken in this commutation as the Justice Dept was not consulted. This must be investigated completely. President Bush should never have commuted the sentence of Libby. He is a convicted felon and deserves to serve the 30 months in jail just like any other person who would have served his full sentence.
July 4th, 2007 at 8:33 pmThe constitution grants the president to do things.
The constitution grants the Congress to decide how those things are done. They decide the procedures and mechanisms by which that authority is exercised.
If Bush did not follow the procedures for his commutation of Libby’s sentence, then that action may be null and void (by virtue of being illegal and unconstitutional), and Libby would, therefore, have to report to jail as scheduled.
But I freely admit that I’ve had no law training whatsoever. So, yeah, I probably don’t know what the hell I’m talking about.
July 4th, 2007 at 8:44 pmHearings alone will not be sufficient. So far,Democrats had many hearnings.
They even issued Subpoenas…yet, everything remains the same.
The new Congress began to lose steam,and popularity…
Unless people see results other than talking,hearings and toothless ‘nonbinding’ resolutions,then this Congress already has failed its duty and what it had promised the voters to deliver.
July 4th, 2007 at 8:45 pmSome might be interested in how Giuliani viewed executive clemency when he was Associate AG in Reagan’s DOJ. The occasion for the comments is Reagan’s Christmas pardons in December of 1982, as reported by The New York Times. Another familiar face makes a cameo appearance as well, Fred Fielding.
You can find it in the above.
Bruce Kimerer
July 4th, 2007 at 8:50 pmBrooklyn, NY
Sorry — I forgot to add the link
http://www.typepad.com/ t/ app/ weblog/ post?id=36115618&saved_changes=1&blog_id=1339976
bruce kimerer
July 4th, 2007 at 8:51 pmSorry again
Wrong link. This is it.
http://thegiulianipapers.typepad.com/the_giuliani_papers/
July 4th, 2007 at 8:53 pmThe way I understand it, the Constitution prevents a president from pardoning a government figure to prevent himself (the president) from being investigated for wrongdoing. This could be what’s happening here with Bush, as Scooter Libby’s obstruction of justice actually prevented Fitzgerald from gathering enough evidence to charge anyone in the Bush administration with leaking Plame’s name, which is a federal crime. Thank God for Congressman Conyers!
July 4th, 2007 at 8:58 pmAs for Clinton, I am not sure his pardons were for people who were covering up any alleged “crimes” on his part.
and he shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offences against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.
Comment by Anais — July 4, 2007 @ 8:58 pm
What you mentioned is not specifically prohibited by the constitution itself. But the procedures by which he may do this is still the repsponsibility of the Congress to determine. (Art 1, Sec 8, Cl 18.)
But I do believe that the Congress has prohibited what you described, in that he would be pardoning a potential witness against himself or his vice president. And I can’t imagine the framers believing something like that should be allowed.
July 4th, 2007 at 9:03 pmBush Prevailed where Clinton failed. I hope next time you will vote republican. Thanks and god bless america “excecept for the demoncrats a-o!
July 4th, 2007 at 9:11 pmBut I do believe that the Congress has prohibited what you described, in that he would be pardoning a potential witness against himself or his vice president. And I can’t imagine the framers believing something like that should be allowed.
Comment by Wayne A. Schneider — July 4, 2007 @ 9:03 pm
The PROBLEM is that there are 5 justices on the Supreme court who care not about the framer’s intent!
July 4th, 2007 at 9:17 pmGoddammit, stop calling hearings and PUT IMPEACHMENT BACK ON THE F*CKING TABLE!
July 4th, 2007 at 9:20 pmComment by FrAnCiS ThY GrEaT —
Francis the talking mule is still around? It’s not the quality of his message that is so great, it’s the fact he can type using hooves. Truly impressive!
July 4th, 2007 at 9:21 pmMr P,
No family BBQ or fireworks to go to? Have you been here all day?
July 4th, 2007 at 9:48 pmMr. President is the lonliest sob on earth. There is never a time, 24/7, that the goofy son of a byatch is not on this board spewing absolutely, unaduterated, adolesant bullshit. He adds nothing intelligent to the discourse of this board and is even a disgrace to the bottom dwelling slugs or trolls who have no life or ability to think for themselves. They should all go to hell and never come back.
Comment by kasinca — July 4, 2007 @ 9:33 pm
Yeah, as if this board ever delves into intelligence or original thought. If you removed all the posts with an “impeach Bush” theme, Mr. President would be the only poster here.
July 4th, 2007 at 10:07 pmWell, if you didn’t want to be “bullied†then you shouldn’t have accused me of something I did not do.
I guess that is too much to ask from you though… your being a Lefty and all…
Comment by Mr. President
What is it you supposedly “didn’t do” this time? Are you saying you didn’t post as Mr. President and then as Monica right after, please we’re not as stupid as the idiots you live with that fall for all of your manipulations. We know you just a liar who backpedals when he’s caught. You and CT don’t want people calling you on your disgusting behavior then you should both get the hell off TP. You have worn out your welcome and you contribute nothing, not one effing thing.
July 4th, 2007 at 10:10 pmshane, no difference, inane = inane and insane = insane.
July 4th, 2007 at 10:13 pmComment by Briseadh na Faire — July 4, 2007 @ 9:51 pm
Well said, Briseadh na Faire. They should do their constitutional duty, or stand down in favor of someone who will. For Christ’s sake, if Robert Bork was willing to step up where others refused and do the wrong thing, you’d think we could have someone who will step up and do the right thing!.
July 4th, 2007 at 10:33 pmHearings on the Libby issue are a waste of time. Everyone knows that Libby was rewarded for not spilling the beans on Bush/Cheney.
The committees should continue the efforts other matters such as Siebel Edmunds. By the way, what happened to Tice the NSA whistleblower?
Then Dems assume power in 2008 it is my sincere desire that they go after Bush, Cheney, Wolfowitz, Rumsfeld, Condi et. al. and put their collective asses in Leavenworth or Attica.
July 4th, 2007 at 10:49 pmREMOVE THIS TYRANT FROM OFFICE, ALONG WITH THE REST OF HIS ADMINISTRATION GUILTY OF HIGH CRIMES AND MISDEMEANORS, not only against the Constitution, not only against the American People, but against the people of the world.
Comment by Briseadh na Faire — July 4, 2007 @ 9:51 pm
I hope you email that statement to Rep Conyers, my friend.
July 4th, 2007 at 10:50 pmThen Dems assume power in 2008 it is my sincere desire that they go after Bush, Cheney, Wolfowitz, Rumsfeld, Condi et. al. and put their collective asses in Leavenworth or Attica.
Comment by nofltwlt
The first three words after President Gore takes his oath of office in 2009 should be:
July 4th, 2007 at 11:19 pm“ARREST THESE PEOPLE” while pointing to Bush and Cheney.
yes, yes, impeach, IMPEACH!
July 4th, 2007 at 11:31 pmI can imagine Scooter Libby getting a radio show with G. Gordon Liddy. The “Liddy & Libby” show! WIthout his law license, what law firm would hire him?
July 4th, 2007 at 11:32 pmSorry,but I ain’t impressed by Conyers. The Monica Goodling hearing was godawful. Nadler is much more of a pitbull. I liked the way he ran the Christie Todd Whitman hearing. Conyers just lets everybody preen like a freaking peacock. If he was smart he’d let Nadler/ A. Davis handle all the questions. Davis I believe is a former prosecutor.
July 4th, 2007 at 11:54 pm#39 - Scooter ain’t gonna need a job. He’s gonna be a seven figure annual payoff for the rest of his life from Dickhead and Idiot Enfant for covering their asses. Scooter’s kids will be going to the toniest schools and Ivy League colleges with seven figure jobs ready for them when they get out of college with gentelman C grades. I just hope Biff and Binkie are sufficiently embarrassed when all the sludge from the GW admin is released decades from now.
July 5th, 2007 at 12:02 amWe can only wait. Any concrete steps taken that would impose some actual threat of accountability will be shot down by both sides. I can only guess that the Democrats aren’t more decisive because they don’t want to appear to be supporting ‘terror.’ It’s this great trick that has been pulled on not only the clueless, but the informed in office as well. They don’t want to risk their reputations in any way, so the speak loudly but carry a small twig. In his theater of panem et circenses he will always hold the upper hand.
/And further I am of the opinion that Carthage must be destroyed
July 5th, 2007 at 1:04 amBush had no idea what he was doing. He never does. Never has. It just felt Presidential, sounded good, like it might be fun. This dooface could be no more clueless. He is though rather enamored with his sly, crooked grin, and good-old boy smarts. Damned if he ain’t gettting one over on us time and again. I bet his sides have been stitched back countless times for the laughs he treats himself to at our country’s expense. His simple tears of joy could quench any drought and heal the sick. Wonders. They never cease. Always amaze. A child in the top room of the castle. The glory he sees.
July 5th, 2007 at 4:22 amInstead of Conyers wasting his time on another hearing that won’t go anyplace, why don’t he and the rest of the Democratic caucus put there energies to good use and hold a series of meetings with Nancy Pelosi to convince her to retract her statement about taking impeachment off the table and get the show on the road!
It would be useful to know which one’s if any of the blogs out there Pelosi reads, I for one would be constantly posting on those blogs just how terrible a mistake she has made by that decision.
I believe in effect Nancy Pelosi is as complicit in the continuous raping of our system as are the administration is because she in effect has given them a free reign to their illegal behavior by not putting the ultimate solution to this mess we are in by impeaching those responsible.
July 5th, 2007 at 6:52 amI look at what’s happening here and can’t help but think of Congress as first-time parents running around doing childproofing AFTER their toddler (George Bush) is up & running about.
July 5th, 2007 at 7:12 amThe problem is, there is still time for this out-of-control child to do some real damage, but unfortunately we are in reactionary mode.
One more point, to the impeachment crowd–
I am all for it, and believe that it could get us started in the right direction to save our country–
HOWEVER–for impeachment to work, some of your Senators will have to do the right thing, and I don’t think they are ready to do that just yet, and may not be before it’s too late.
I happen to live in a glorious blue (mostly) state–both Senators are Democrats, as is my Representative, so no problem there. It’s the rest of you, as constituents to Republican Senators and/or Representatives who need to apply pressure.
We could still turn this thing around, people.
Why the pussy footing? Why not go straight to impeachment?
Mr. Conyers, stop wasting the people’s money. Holding hearings on the Libby’s pardon isnt going to get us anywhere. Let the impeachment of Bush roll!
July 5th, 2007 at 8:27 amcan we take back the pardons of all the tax cheats and drug dealers that billy gave out?
July 5th, 2007 at 9:06 am“Bush Prevailed where Clinton failed. I hope next time you will vote republican. Thanks and god bless america “excecept for the demoncrats a-o!”
You are right. Bush prevailed at destroying this once great nation while Clinton failed. Actually, Clinton never tried to destroy this country. He did a very good job of taking care of us. And he left the government coffers in great shape.
As far as anyone here voting Republic, in your dreams sucker. Won’t happen. And the Independents are not voting Republic. Your goose is cooked. I even know Republics who are so ashamed of what their party has become they, too, are voting Democrat.
November 2008 can’t come soon enough. It will be a Republic blood bath, one that was well earned.
July 5th, 2007 at 9:55 amI applaud Rep. Conyers for doing this. I hope that in the end this will lead to checks on Presidential powers of commutation and pardonship. A majority Senate vote is all I ask to be added! Repubs should be all for it. Their boys are on the way out and it will give them a power to control future Democratic presidents — which I’m not against!
July 5th, 2007 at 12:05 pmBill Clinton was convicted of the same exact crime that Libby was, lying during an investigation. Bill Clinton tried to deny the rights of an ugly woman he wanted a blow job from. When she sued him,he lied about pulling his pants down and asking for the favor. Libby wasn’t the intended target and you know it. But when they couldn’t get Cheeney or Bush,Libby got hit for it. There was no crime commited by Libby that the original investigation was seeking. During testimony he he tripped up. Your intended target was Cheeney,not Scooter! It’s time you lefties face some cold hard facts;your not going to get Cheeney,and your not going to get Bush! They are to smart for your,our, dumb ass Congress.
July 5th, 2007 at 12:49 pmBut I do believe that the Congress has prohibited what you described, in that he would be pardoning a potential witness against himself or his vice president. And I can’t imagine the framers believing something like that should be allowed.
The courts and the founding fathers, in fact, believed the power of the President to power is absolute.
So does Patrick Leahy.
http://leahy.senate.gov/press/200102/010214.html
We need to view President Clinton’s pardons as a whole and in their historical and constitutional context, not focus exclusively on one or two controversial cases. The pardon power lies with the president, just as it lies with the governor in each of the states. When I was State’s Attorney for Chittenden County, I did not always agree when the Governor of Vermont used his clemency power, but I understood that it was his power to exercise as he saw fit.
The pardon power is absolute. It is absolute for Republican presidents, and it is absolute for Democratic presidents.
Even the Supreme Court of 1866 said (It) “is not subject to any legislative control. Congress can neither limit the effect of his pardon, nor exclude from its exercise any class of offenders.â€
July 5th, 2007 at 1:26 pmI hope that in the end this will lead to checks on Presidential powers of commutation and pardonship. A majority Senate vote is all I ask to be added! Repubs should be all for it.
The founding fathers rejected this specific argument.
http://www.iht.com/ articles/ 2001/ 02/ 20/ edlee.t.php
July 5th, 2007 at 1:28 pmOh, and another Democrat: Melvin L. Watt. He’s part of Conyers’ committee.
We are going to find that the President’s power is absolute, and despite the fact that I have concerns about pardons, some of the pardons issued in this case and some of the pardons issued by prior Presidents, probably the quicker I can make this opening statement and get this hearing over the quicker it will pass. So, with that frame of mind, I really think we shed light on this.
Odd, they wanted to move quickly after the Clinton administration. What hacks!
July 5th, 2007 at 1:32 pmOne of the reasons the Senate wasn’t given the power to affirm or deny pardons and reprieves was because of the trouble it would have been to assemble the legislature, the same reason we have the out-dated recess appointment authority. Both need to be fixed via Constitutional amendment.
July 5th, 2007 at 2:51 pmThe Supreme Court upheld pardon power in 1925 too (ex Parte Grossman) but suggested impeachment when the power is abused.:
- http://www.law.cornell.edu/ supct/ html/ historics/ USSC_CR_0267_0087_ZO.html
July 5th, 2007 at 2:54 pmI can imagine Scooter Libby getting a radio show with G. Gordon Liddy. The “Liddy & Libby†show! WIthout his law license, what law firm would hire him?
Comment by Wayne A. Schneider — July 4, 2007 @ 11:32 pm
Or, he can switch parties and run for Congress.
July 5th, 2007 at 10:49 pmJohn, you are like a fireman who shows up a day late with an empty water bucket in your hands. You’ll waste time looking into…..get out in front on this stuff man, or, get the hell out of the way and retire. What a sad disappointment you have turned out to be; Downing Street Memos, my ass!!!
July 6th, 2007 at 12:54 am