Inspired by the two most high-profile commutations the newly ex-president handed down (to the crooked border patrol men).
At least one Bush loyalist I've read has declared that commuting the sentences of Ramos and Compean is better than pardoning them*, as a pardon implies admitting guilt, while you (or rather, the two agents-turned-cons) can accept a commutation and fight for the original sentence to be overturned on appeal. With a pardon there is no chance of getting a decision thrown out of court the normal way. Presidential or royal pardons are deux ex machina.
Here's where Ford and Nixon come in. In OTL Nixon was greatly perturbed by signing the pardon he'd accepted from Ford--he thought it was his final capitulation to his enemies. And Ford was deeply troubled by giving the pardon, hence, "After Ford left the White House in 1977, intimates said the former President privately justified his pardon of Nixon by carrying in his wallet a portion of the text of Burdick v. United States, a 1915 U.S. Supreme Court decision which stated that a pardon indicated a presumption of guilt and that acceptance of a pardon was tantamount to a confession of that guilt"--Wiki.
So, what if instead of granting Tricky a blanket pardon for any and all crimes committed in the White House, President Ford has his counsel and justice department people 'find' for him the rationale/power to instead grant a blanket, pre-emptive commutation to Nixon. It's a get-out-of-gaol-free card, but one that neither confers on the holder the handwaved innocence of a pardon (for what it's worth) nor freedom from the possibilty of ongoing investigation, indictment, and trial by jury. It's just a get out of gaol free card. And Nixon still has to fight for his name. He's only spared the indignity of a custodial sentence (or whatever you call it in America).
So, what are the chances of Ford's creative use of his constitutional prerogatives working? Even if Nixon accepts a pre-emptive commutation (he may beg off if he thinks he can get a better deal under, say, a President Reagan), the constitutionality of this thing is going to stink to high heaven.
Sam Ervin is going to be pissed. People will be resigning from Justice in disgust. The whole thing might end up in the Supreme Court, with the justices being forced to rule on just what powers are granted to the president by the constitution RE pardons and commutations.
But there's a longshot that this might work to diffuse the anger that otherwise boiled over OTL with Ford's pardon. Even some of the angriest Nixon-haters might decide this is the only way to get 'the silent majority' to at least support a conspiracy trial for the ex-president. While others might take perverse pleasure in Ford undermining his freedom to act with a follow-up pardon, and may actually call on the new president to refrain from doing a backflip on awarding this novelty.
Also, a slightly less controversial non-pardon may be all Ford needs to both hold onto the nomination, by fending off the conservative, pro-Nixon supporters at the convention, and thence to fall over the line at the general election in '76. Thoughts?
*Not that this logic is stopping hardcore anti-Bush nativists declare this is the final betrayal by Jorge.
At least one Bush loyalist I've read has declared that commuting the sentences of Ramos and Compean is better than pardoning them*, as a pardon implies admitting guilt, while you (or rather, the two agents-turned-cons) can accept a commutation and fight for the original sentence to be overturned on appeal. With a pardon there is no chance of getting a decision thrown out of court the normal way. Presidential or royal pardons are deux ex machina.
Here's where Ford and Nixon come in. In OTL Nixon was greatly perturbed by signing the pardon he'd accepted from Ford--he thought it was his final capitulation to his enemies. And Ford was deeply troubled by giving the pardon, hence, "After Ford left the White House in 1977, intimates said the former President privately justified his pardon of Nixon by carrying in his wallet a portion of the text of Burdick v. United States, a 1915 U.S. Supreme Court decision which stated that a pardon indicated a presumption of guilt and that acceptance of a pardon was tantamount to a confession of that guilt"--Wiki.
So, what if instead of granting Tricky a blanket pardon for any and all crimes committed in the White House, President Ford has his counsel and justice department people 'find' for him the rationale/power to instead grant a blanket, pre-emptive commutation to Nixon. It's a get-out-of-gaol-free card, but one that neither confers on the holder the handwaved innocence of a pardon (for what it's worth) nor freedom from the possibilty of ongoing investigation, indictment, and trial by jury. It's just a get out of gaol free card. And Nixon still has to fight for his name. He's only spared the indignity of a custodial sentence (or whatever you call it in America).
So, what are the chances of Ford's creative use of his constitutional prerogatives working? Even if Nixon accepts a pre-emptive commutation (he may beg off if he thinks he can get a better deal under, say, a President Reagan), the constitutionality of this thing is going to stink to high heaven.
Sam Ervin is going to be pissed. People will be resigning from Justice in disgust. The whole thing might end up in the Supreme Court, with the justices being forced to rule on just what powers are granted to the president by the constitution RE pardons and commutations.
But there's a longshot that this might work to diffuse the anger that otherwise boiled over OTL with Ford's pardon. Even some of the angriest Nixon-haters might decide this is the only way to get 'the silent majority' to at least support a conspiracy trial for the ex-president. While others might take perverse pleasure in Ford undermining his freedom to act with a follow-up pardon, and may actually call on the new president to refrain from doing a backflip on awarding this novelty.
Also, a slightly less controversial non-pardon may be all Ford needs to both hold onto the nomination, by fending off the conservative, pro-Nixon supporters at the convention, and thence to fall over the line at the general election in '76. Thoughts?
*Not that this logic is stopping hardcore anti-Bush nativists declare this is the final betrayal by Jorge.