Sunday, January 15, 2017

Pardon Me?

In the spirit of Gerald Ford and George H.W Bush, I really think Barack Obama needs to issue a pre-emptive pardon to Hillary Clinton on January 19th, or maybe early on the 20th.

Again, Trump is referring to this:

Christopher Steele, the former MI6 agent who investigated Donald Trump’s alleged Kremlin links, was so worried by what he was discovering that at the end he was working without pay, The Independent has learned.

Mr Steele also decided to pass on information to both British and American intelligence officials after concluding that such material should not just be in the hands of political opponents of Mr Trump, who had hired his services, but was a matter of national security for both countries.

However, say security sources, Mr Steele became increasingly frustrated that the FBI was failing to take action on the intelligence from others as well as him. He came to believe there was a cover-up, that a cabal within the Bureau blocked a thorough inquiry into Mr Trump, focusing instead on the investigation into Hillary Clinton’s emails. 
Interestingly, these connections have more to do with the Russia connection than with the reports of blackmail material.  Just to put that in context of recent history:

By late July and early August MI6 was also receiving information about Mr Trump. By September, information to the FBI began to grow in volume: Mr Steele compiled a set of his memos into one document and passed it to his contacts at the FBI. But there seemed to be little progress in a proper inquiry into Mr Trump. The Bureau, instead, seemed to be devoting their resources in the pursuit of Hillary Clinton’s email transgressions.

The New York office, in particular, appeared to be on a crusade against Ms Clinton. Some of its agents had a long working relationship with Rudy Giuliani, by then a member of the Trump campaign, since his days as public prosecutor and then Mayor of the city.

As the election approached, FBI director James Comey made public his bombshell letter saying that Ms Clinton would face another email investigation. Two days before that Mr Giuliani, then a part of the Trump team, talked about “a surprise or two you’re going to hear about in the next few days. We’ve got a couple of things up our sleeve that should turn things around”.

Jason Chaffetz, the same person who wants to question the head of the Office of Government Ethics because he dared criticize Trump's claim about how he will put his businesses in a "blind trust," has said he will continue to investigate Clinton's use of a private e-mail server.  Would that lead to referring criminal charges to the DOJ?  Well, when the PEOTUS says Ms. Clinton is "guilty as hell," why should anyone think it will stop with his inflammatory tweets?

This is already shaping up to be one of the most corrupt and clueless administrations in U.S. history.  This tweet, in 6 days, will be illegal:

The President can't promote a particular company.  It's a violation of federal law.  Does anyone expect Trump to suddenly become aware of that in a week's time, and act accordingly?  And that is the smallest, least important, of his infractions.

So the only decent thing for Barack Obama to do, the one thing that cannot be undone, is to issue a pardon to Hillary Clinton for anything she might have done which might be construed as an illegal act.  Whether she accepts it is another matter, but she doesn't deserve to be hounded, much as her husband was, by an overzealous prosecutor with an axe to grind.


  1. I wonder if Obama has it in him to do it. This close to the end of his political career, that shouldn't be a question.

    Hillary Clinton has been the focus of the longest, most extensive, most expensive witch hunt in American history and it's obvious the Republican-fascists are prepared to continue it. Chaffetz will do it because being entirely without any abilities to do any other kind of thing, he believes it will continue to get him notoriety. The same can be said of the other witch hunters.

    If Barack Obama doesn't shield her from this, he will have confirmed every bad feeling I've developed for him. His may turn out to be like a presidency writ in water and it's largely his own fault.

  2. I completely sympathize with your sentiments, but I tend to think the opposite. Secretary Clinton did nothing for which by any stretch of the imagination she could be criminally prosecuted. A pardon would simply solidify in too many people's minds the conviction that she got away with something. Not pardoning means that either Trump has to drop it, or he has to force an unjust prosecution, which would make him look worse than he does now. It wouldn't be any fun for Secretary Clinton, but my guess is that she'd rather be publicly vindicated than become a "pardoned felon" in the new president's rhetoric.

    1. It balances on a knife's edge, doesn't it? Is it worth the burden on Ms. Clinton to make Trump and Sessions look like demagogues? Or is she better off refusing, and defying the would- be despot?

      She can refuse the pardon, which is really why I think it should be offered. Being able to do so might actually be her best defense.

  3. I just noticed, I didn't sign in from my friend borrowing my computer so my previous comment listed as "Unknown", that's me.

    I agree with all of the points made, of course, she didn't break any laws so she doesn't need a pardon but they're going to continue the witch hunt. Of course turning down a pardon does present Trump-Pence with the problem of either bringing a prosecution or dropping it. Though I don't think any of the old rules apply in the Age of Lies.