How to stop the Chimperor from pardoning his cronies

[jgraz]

This is a great idea -- we need to get our congresscritters on board with it.

The "no funds" rider

Posted by Mark Kleiman


The nine most beautiful words in the English language, for those of us eager to get some control over the current junta:

"No funds appropriated by Congress shall be used to ..."

That language, when included in any appropriations bill, can stop Executive Branch action in its tracks. Nothing can be done without funds. The Anti-Deficiency Act of 1921 criminalizes any expenditure not covered by an appropriation. Since it is against the law for an Executive Branch official to work unpaid, no Executive Branch official can do anything forbidden by a "no funds" rider, even if it involves no other expenditure of Federal resources.

<snip>

I have two specific proposals to offer:

1. To prevent mass pardons in January 2008, a provision that no funds appropriated may be used to prepare or issue a pardon for any person who, during the current administration, has been an employee of the Executive Office of the President, or has held a Schedule C (patronage) position, or been a non-career member of the Senior Executive Service, or held a position, permanently or on an acting basis, that requires Senate confirmation.

<snip>

http://www.samefacts.com/archives/2007_democratic_agenda_/2007/01/the_no_funds_rider.php

[annabanana]

1. I'm sure it would be underwritten by some lobbyist.

piece of cake

[BOSSHOG]

2. I can't justify any president having pardon authority

but most specifically bush who has surrounded himself with criminals. I like your proposal. If you are in anyway connected to an administration you can not be pardoned by the president for any reason. I would include right wing radio haters in that group of "connected to the administration."

[proud2BlibKansan]

3. So how do we prevent him from

adding a signing statement?

[maine_raptor]

4. Will not work.

Why?

Because all Bush has to do is go down to Staples and buy a sheet of paper and a ballpoint pen with his own money, then simply write:

"Pursuant to the pardon powers granted to me as President of the United States, I hereby pardon the following for all crimes they may have committed:", then add a list of names.

No federal funds are used and given that the Constitution grants him full and complete pardon authority, it's legal.

[jgraz]

6. It's also illegal for an Executive Branch employee to work for free

He HAS to have funding to do anything he does.

[Ian David]

9. Can we cut off all funding to The White House and its staff? n/t

[jgraz]

15. In theory, though there may be something else that prevents this from happening

The Rethugs have often proposed removing funding for federal courts that don't behave the way they like.

[salin]

5. can he "pardon" in advance?

Can he pardon before their is a formal court case? If he can't - get all the investigations in a row - get all the info moving - and start doing the massive frogmarches the day the next president is sworn in.

[maine_raptor]

8. Yes

He can even pardon for crimes "not yet committed". The ONLY exception is in cases of impeachment. He cannot pardon someone impeached and removed from office.

[salin]

10. so I president salin... could pardon you, maine_raptor for

anything you might do in the future. And now you can commit heinous crimes with impunity? What a odd allowance. I had no idea.

[maine_raptor]

12. You got it!

And I hereby promise to pardon you, salin, when I become president, deal? :rofl:

[salin]

14. deal....

do you have any idea if it has ever been used in such a fashion (in terms of crimes not yet committeed?) By extension, could I pardon your not-yet-concieved child for any future acts that might be committed?

[maine_raptor]

16. I can't recall any instance of it being used that way

but it is possible. Don't forget that the ONLY limit listed in the Constitution is the impeachment exception. As for pardoning of a not-yet-conceived child, no that would not be possible because that person does not exist at the time the pardon is issued.

[Gregorian]

7. I think impeachment is a better solution. (Oops. See edit.)

The following quotes from the comment section of the article were found to be incorrect-
(In my elation, I forgot the facts and posted this.)


Under the Constitution, a president can not pardon anyone who is impeached. A senate conviction for impeachment is not necessary to prohibit a pardon; the house impeachment is enough.


Reading the comments under the "mass pardons" link in that article, I discovered the president can't pardon himself. That is news to me.




Being a constitutional right, I don't see how the plan could work, as described in the article.

[maine_raptor]

11. The person has to be impeached AND removed from office

before the exception comes into play. And the article is wrong; a president CAN pardon himself.

[Gregorian]

13. Darn it!

But after seeing several posts confirming it, I began to doubt myself.

[caseycoon]

17. EASY...

Investigate/arrest/convict HIM first!
(along with Cheney)
:applause:

[maine_raptor]

18. Oh and a very interesting side note to this discussion:

Remember when there was all that debate over the torture bill going through Congress? One of the rationales that Bush put out was that it was needed to make sure that interrogators would not be prosecuted for "doing their job".

Given the Pardon power that Bush has, I've always wondered why that bill was even needed. After all Bush could just issue a pardon for those folks and thus they would avoid any possible trial.

Funny how during that debate not too long ago, the presidential pardon power was never brought up. At least I never heard any discussion on it.