Quote:
Originally Posted by Sidd Finch
Issuing a pardon says that the president thinks what you did might be illegal. It also says that president thinks you deserve a pardon despite torturing people. The latter message will be far more resounding.
|
Resounding with whom? Establishing that the US tortured and did not treat it as illegal, even asserting it was legal, has potential (if mostly somewhat academic) effects, as reflected by the executive director of the ACLU arguing in the New York Times that a pardon is better than doing nothing.
Quote:
|
I would rather we prosecute.
|
Me too, but it sure looks like we're not going to do that.
Quote:
|
If not, then state a good reason why we are not prosecuting.
|
Maybe a detailed explanation of how this really is criminal behavior but we're not going to prosecute it because reasons would have the same effect as the pardons. Don't know.
I do think if the pardon proposal is at all on the table it should come with details and naming names, and explain the reasons for the pardon (i.e., actions taken in good faith our of concern for the national defense against an insidious enemy and in the course of executing official duties).
Quote:
|
Query: What happens if some true believer says "I decline the President's pardon, as I did not commit a crime."? That would be awfully interesting, in a bad way, and I suspect he'd have right-wingers lining up to provide his defense.
|
I don't think you can make any government prosecute you, so I think declining would be irrelevant.
