NationStates Jolt Archive

Last election, there was a bit of a hubbub (not a big hubbub, just a small one) made over some guys that Clinton pardoned at the last minute.

And of course there were the midnight appointments early on in the nation's history, as well as very late appointments made in more recent years.

Basically, what I'm getting at is, what do you think George W. Bush is going to do with his remaining time in office?

And do you think that just before Obama is inaugurated that there will be a flurry of "midnight appointments"?

Enough paper shredding to supply a nation of rabbit cages, no doubt.

Pre-emptive pardons of his entire administration for the Plame Exposure?

Enough paper shredding to supply a nation of rabbit cages, no doubt.

And make Enron look green in comparison.

Basically, what I'm getting at is, what do you think George W. Bush is going to do with his remaining time in office?

Drop a nuke on the grave of Muhammad.

Pre-emptive pardons of his entire administration for the Plame Exposure?

Is that legal?

Drop a nuke on the grave of Muhammad.

Oh god...

Is that legal?

Does he care?

Clinton was a lawyer, knew how the paperwork worked. Bush isn't a Lawyer, he's a business major with a C-average. Even if he wanted to, I don't think he could push through more than a handfull of either appointments, OR pardons.

I could see him firing a whole bunch of folks though-they teach THAT in business school.

Is that legal?

Does he care?

Beat me to it.

Oh god...

"Go out with a bang."

Beat me to it.

I mean, do you think it would stand in court? If they were actually charged? I mean, it sounds pretty fishy.

Clinton was a lawyer, knew how the paperwork worked. Bush isn't a Lawyer, he's a business major with a C-average. Even if he wanted to, I don't think he could push through more than a handfull of either appointments, OR pardons.

I could see him firing a whole bunch of folks though-they teach THAT in business school.

He's already trying to gut as much environmental regulation as he can as fast as he can now that the Republicans are on their way out of power.

He's already trying to gut as much environmental regulation as he can as fast as he can now that the Republicans are on their way out of power.

Look at it as an opportunity-by gutting existing, obselete, and easily sidestepped regulations, he's opening the books for enforceable, current, and achieveable regulations to be written by the educated elite using the most current science and technology.

Not that this will happen, mind-I rather expect the new regs will be similar to the overcomplicated, luddite, and easily circumvented regs he's gutting now, only more draconian.

Maybe he'll pardon Ted Stevens. I can't believe Alaska put a convicted felon back in the Senate.

As for appointments, any that require Congressional confirmation will be blocked. Otherwise, of course he will.

I reckon if he put his mind to it he could start another 3 wars in that time...

Maybe he'll pardon Ted Stevens. I can't believe Alaska put a convicted felon back in the Senate.

As for appointments, any that require Congressional confirmation will be blocked. Otherwise, of course he will.

Wait... they did?

Wow.

How many votes needed to expel him?

Wait... they did?

Wow.

How many votes needed to expel him?

He was only facing charges through most of the election-he wasn't convicted until late in the game-it's kind of like that fellla that died a few years back, but was still on the ballot. As a convicted felon who hasn't served time yet, Stevens isn't eligible to be sworn into the office, IIRC. Depending on how they've got their constitution set up, it's either the Legislature or Governor puts someone in to fill his spot until a special election can be held to replace his convicted felon ass.

Wait... they did?

Wow.

How many votes needed to expel him?

Technically, they're not finished counting the vote, but Stevens is ahead with 99% reporting. So it's possible that Stevens will lose, but he should've lost in a landslide. He's a bloody felon!

It takes a 2/3 vote to expel someone, but it probably won't come to that. If he wins he'll probably resign.

Depending on how they've got their constitution set up, it's either the Legislature or Governor puts someone in to fill his spot until a special election can be held to replace his convicted felon ass.I think the governor appoints until they have a special election. She probably can't appoint herself, though. She'd have to resign to run.

EDIT: Actually, I don't think there's an express rule against a felon serving in the Senate.

Is that legal?

Bush the elder pardoned a bunch of people for Iran/Contra, some of them before they had actually faced charges. They would have, but the pardons made it kinda pointless.

Well, at least Bush isn't going to try to make off with the furniture... ;)

And Ford preemptively pardoned Nixon. The president can pardon whoever he wants.

And Ford preemptively pardoned Nixon. The president can pardon whoever he wants.

So will Bush pardon his old buddy, Osama Bin Laden ?

Nah. I am going to be positive and assume Bush will try to have people say ONE positive thing about him, by not doing all this last minute stuff.

Technically, they're not finished counting the vote, but Stevens is ahead with 99% reporting. So it's possible that Stevens will lose, but he should've lost in a landslide. He's a bloody felon!

It takes a 2/3 vote to expel someone, but it probably won't come to that. If he wins he'll probably resign.

I think the governor appoints until they have a special election. She probably can't appoint herself, though. She'd have to resign to run.

EDIT: Actually, I don't think there's an express rule against a felon serving in the Senate.

You are correct, there isn't...

Despite being a convicted felon, he is not required to drop out of the race or resign from the Senate. If he wins re-election, he can continue to hold his seat because there is no rule barring felons from serving in Congress. The Senate could vote to expel Stevens on a two-thirds vote.

In the event Stevens resigns, Alaska's governor cannot appoint a successor and a special election would be held between 60 and 90 days of his vacating his Senate seat, according to Alaska state rules.

"Put this down: That will never happen — ever, OK?" Stevens said in the weeks leading up to his trial. "I am not stepping down. I'm going to run through and I'm going to win this election.


http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27398089/

"Go out with a bang."

That sound more like a Clinton thing. ;)

He'll do the one thing every president wants to do at least once. Rub one out in the oval office.

Does the President even have to say what a pardon is for?

I'm thinking ... pardon (for instance) Colin Powell without saying what for. The suspicion wouldn't be entirely fatal to his political future, but it would do some damage.

Does the President even have to say what a pardon is for?

I'm thinking ... pardon (for instance) Colin Powell without saying what for. The suspicion wouldn't be entirely fatal to his political future, but it would do some damage.

Well, I'll reference the Nixon pardon (http://www.ford.utexas.edu/library/speeches/740061.htm) again:

Now, THEREFORE, I, GERALD R. FORD, President of the United States, pursuant to the pardon power conferred upon me by Article II, Section 2, of the Constitution, have granted and by these presents do grant a full, free, and absolute pardon unto Richard Nixon for all offenses against the United States which he, Richard Nixon, has committed or may have committed or taken part in during the period from January 20, 1969 through August 9,1974.

He pardoned him for crimes he "may have committed." So, no, he doesn't have to specify a crime. I read a Tom Clancy novel where President Jack Ryan leaves a safe full of blank presidential pardons to a black ops unit. That might be stretching it, though.

He'll do the one thing every president wants to do at least once. Rub one out in the oval office.

I think I have a new life goal...

That's gotta get challenged in court.

As for Stevans... I hope they vote to expel him. The Democrats would have to win like what, 10 Republicans over?

That's gotta get challenged in court.

As for Stevans... I hope they vote to expel him. The Democrats would have to win like what, 10 Republicans over?

Even if they do, it's not like a DEM would take his place.

Well, I'll reference the Nixon pardon (http://www.ford.utexas.edu/library/speeches/740061.htm) again:

Now, THEREFORE, I, GERALD R. FORD, President of the United States, pursuant to the pardon power conferred upon me by Article II, Section 2, of the Constitution, have granted and by these presents do grant a full, free, and absolute pardon unto Richard Nixon for all offenses against the United States which he, Richard Nixon, has committed or may have committed or taken part in during the period from January 20, 1969 through August 9,1974.

He pardoned him for crimes he "may have committed." So, no, he doesn't have to specify a crime.

Thanks. Should have been able to find that myself, but it's after midnight and I'm pretty much done.

As I read that, the President can pardon crimes he's not even aware of.

Escaping from NSG now ... and with most of my brains still in, too! Weee!

============

I think I have a new life goal...

And who says you have to be President? Twenty years of cleaning experience and a spotless background check could get you that chance. Don't forget your camera.

Maybe he'll pardon Ted Stevens. I can't believe Alaska put a convicted felon back in the Senate.

As for appointments, any that require Congressional confirmation will be blocked. Otherwise, of course he will.

Youngstown, Ohio put Traficant back in the House. It's hardly unheard of.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Traficant

Look at that hairpiece!

*snip substance*

Look at that hairpiece!

If I wore that I'd expect to be arrested ... just so they could search it.

Youngstown, Ohio put Traficant back in the House. It's hardly unheard of.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Traficant

Look at that hairpiece!
Yeah, that's pretty baffling. Especially since, even without the felonis, Traficant was a complete nut ball who made Ted Stevens sound positively erudite. For instance, this is part of his closing statement before the Ethics Comittee that kicked him out (emphasis mine):

"I want you to disregard all the opposing counsel has said. I think they're delusionary. I think they've had something funny for lunch in their meal, I think they should be handcuffed, chained to a fence and flogged, and all of their hearsay evidence should be thrown the hell out. And if they lie again, I'm going to go over there and kick them in the crotch. Thank you very much."

He actually had a bit of an obsession with inflicting damage upon other people's crotches, including a promise that he would escape prison, "grab a sword like Maximus Meridius Demidius, and as a Gladiator . . . stab people in the crotch"

That's gotta get challenged in court.

As for Stevans... I hope they vote to expel him. The Democrats would have to win like what, 10 Republicans over?

The Senate Minority Leader, Mitch McConnell, has said they'll kick out Stevens if he loses his appeal. So it'd be a bipartisan effort.

Declare election invalid,then pardon himself for violating Constitution.

Even if they do, it's not like a DEM would take his place.

I don't care. I want him expelled from the Senate. Even if Palin appoints herself or someone who makes Mussolini seem cudly to take his place.

He'll do the one thing every president wants to do at least once. Rub one out in the oval office.

Hell, that's the first thing I'd have done when getting into office. Not the last.

Hell, that's the first thing I'd have done when getting into office. Not the last.

Couldn't it be both?

Couldn't it be both?

Now that I think about it, it could be both.

Wait... they did?

Wow.

How many votes needed to expel him?I expect the Senate will refuse to seat Stevens and then it will be up to Sarah Palin to appoint a replacement senator and she'll appoint herself.

Basically, what I'm getting at is, what do you think George W. Bush is going to do with his remaining time in office?

either 1) pardon himself and his administration
or
daydream of the day where he can retire to his ranch and not worry about anything nation-wide.

I expect the Senate will refuse to seat Stevens and then it will be up to Sarah Palin to appoint a replacement senator and she'll appoint herself.

Do you think she'd honestly do that?

Yeah, that's pretty baffling. Especially since, even without the felonis, Traficant was a complete nut ball who made Ted Stevens sound positively erudite. For instance, this is part of his closing statement before the Ethics Comittee that kicked him out (emphasis mine):

"I want you to disregard all the opposing counsel has said. I think they're delusionary. I think they've had something funny for lunch in their meal, I think they should be handcuffed, chained to a fence and flogged, and all of their hearsay evidence should be thrown the hell out. And if they lie again, I'm going to go over there and kick them in the crotch. Thank you very much."

He actually had a bit of an obsession with inflicting damage upon other people's crotches, including a promise that he would escape prison, "grab a sword like Maximus Meridius Demidius, and as a Gladiator . . . stab people in the crotch"
Hmm, and if that thing on his head is an extra taco pouch (what else could it be?) then it all starts to make more sense...

Do you think she'd honestly do that?

You Betcha! :wink:

It takes a 2/3 vote to expel someone, but it probably won't come to that. If he wins he'll probably resign.
NO WAY. He will have to be dragged out kicking and screaming.
I think the governor appoints until they have a special election. She probably can't appoint herself, though. She'd have to resign to run.
Alaska abolished appointments by the governor: last time this came up, the governor appointed his daughter; so the law now calls for a special election. Palin is favored to be the Republican nominee.
EDIT: Actually, I don't think there's an express rule against a felon serving in the Senate.
There isn't. However, I think his expulsion is pretty much guaranteed.

NO WAY. He will have to be dragged out kicking and screaming.

Alaska abolished appointments by the governor: last time this came up, the governor appointed his daughter; so the law now calls for a special election. Palin is favored to be the Republican nominee.

There isn't. However, I think his expulsion is pretty much guaranteed.



Sorry to be off topic, but what's up with your sig?

Drop a nuke on the grave of Muhammad.

where would that be? Mecca? Medina? Jerusalem? I'm just curious if anyone knows. Or is he even buried somewhere?

EDIT: Nevermind, Wikipedia to the rescue (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muhammad#Farewell_pilgrimage_and_death).

Here's what I think Bush will be doing for the next 75 days:
Excerpt from President Bush Discusses the Transition with Employees of the Executive Office of the President (http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2008/11/20081106-1.html), 6 Nov 08

A successful transition is just one of many important tasks remaining in our last 75 days. To help address the global financial crisis, the Secretary of Treasury is working endless hours, and I will host an international summit here in Washington on November the 15th. This will be a historic meeting -- and I'm confident that you will work hard to help make it a success.

We'll also keep urging Congress to approve America's free trade agreements with Colombia, Panama, and South Korea. And we will continue to protect this homeland by defeating the terrorists and extremists abroad, so we do not have to face them here at home.
Whether you agree with his presidential policies or not, George W Bush is fundamentally an honorable man. I don't see him attempting to slip any significant appointments or pardons into the mix. It's just not in character for him ... and I think the country would crucify him if he let Cheney or others push him into a bad decision.

I think he's been quite gracious about Obama's election and attempting to stay above politics during the campaign. He's not going to jeopardize what little remains of his legacy by doing something stupid.

where would that be? Mecca? Medina? Jerusalem? I'm just curious if anyone knows. Or is he even buried somewhere?

Medina, next to the empty tomb of Jesus ;)
IIRC Mohammad and Buddha are the only "prophets" of big religions of whom we have a body; though we have some blood of Hubbard...

Here's what I think Bush will be doing for the next 75 days:

Whether you agree with his presidential policies or not, George W Bush is fundamentally an honorable man.

Bullshit. Honorable men do not condone torture. Honorable men do not imprison people indefinitely without trial. George W. Bush is no honorable man.

Whether you agree with his presidential policies or not, George W Bush is fundamentally an honorable man.

WHAT??? I cannot imagine what makes you think so.
I don't see him attempting to slip any significant appointments or pardons into the mix. It's just not in character for him ...

It is totally in line with everything he has done from the beginning.
and I think the country would crucify him if he let Cheney or others push him into a bad decision.

We would like to anyway, but what can we do to him now?

Lord Black (http://pardonpower.com/2008/03/president-pardon-for-conrad-black.html), at least, is angling for a last-minute pardon. Probably others that I haven't heard about as well.

AFAIK the tradition of end-of-term pardons predates Clinton, it's just that with Clinton the Marc Rich pardon was a final blow to his reputation as President and that at the time nobody had good data (http://www.rvc.cc.il.us/faclink/pruckman/pardoncharts/Paper5.pdf) on whether Clinton's pardons were unusual in number or kind so the media reported it like no President had ever done this before.

WHAT??? I cannot imagine what makes you think so.

I don't think he performed well as President, but I think he's an honorable human being. He did what he honestly thought was right at the time in virtually every case. I happen to think that he's capable of extraordinary acts of self-delusion, and this aspect of his persona led him to make multiple horrible decisions, but again this doesn't make him dishonorable.

I see the current Bush White House as a sad and dismal place, with a dark pall visible to most everyone there. They know their approval rating is in the toilet. They know they lack the votes on the Hill to create any meaningful legislation. They know that anything requiring Senate approval will be denied or will languish in committee. They're just going through the motions of keeping the Executive functioning while they transition to the new guys.

As for Redwulf's comment ... c'mon, man. He's gone in 75 days and he's not going to do anything between now and then. Is it still necessary to demonize him when it matters not at all?

I happen to think that he's capable of extraordinary acts of self-delusion, and this aspect of his persona led him to make multiple horrible decisions, but again this doesn't make him dishonorable.

I guess we are having a definitional disagreement about "honorable" then. So: what is it that gives you the idea he won't delude himself into thinking that a whole raft of last-minute pardons and appointments are the right thing to do? He is already busy making last-minute regulatory changes (they take a month to be effective, which is why he has to start immediately). I am sure he has concocted deluded reasons why that is right, just like with every other horrible thing he has done.

I don't think he performed well as President, but I think he's an honorable human being. He did what he honestly thought was right at the time in virtually every case. I happen to think that he's capable of extraordinary acts of self-delusion, and this aspect of his persona led him to make multiple horrible decisions, but again this doesn't make him dishonorable.

I see the current Bush White House as a sad and dismal place, with a dark pall visible to most everyone there. They know their approval rating is in the toilet. They know they lack the votes on the Hill to create any meaningful legislation. They know that anything requiring Senate approval will be denied or will languish in committee. They're just going through the motions of keeping the Executive functioning while they transition to the new guys.

As for Redwulf's comment ... c'mon, man. He's gone in 75 days and he's not going to do anything between now and then. Is it still necessary to demonize him when it matters not at all?

You clearly don't visit Huffington Post or Daily Kos too often. If you did, you wouldn't have to ask that question-of course they do. Now that they've won, they've got to do everything possible to make the defeat of their hated foes as humiliating and lingering as possible. It's a Progressive thing.

You clearly don't visit Huffington Post or Daily Kos too often.

I do. I also watch MSNBC. I also watch and read Fox News and other rightie sites, all with the same grains of salt.

The Left destroys their own moral high ground by using Rovian tactics against the Right. I'm taking a page out of Obama's acceptance speech and doing something about it. NationStates is my playground, and unlike most of you I can actually do something about it here.

It's time to be civil to one another. It's past time.

As for Redwulf's comment ... c'mon, man. He's gone in 75 days and he's not going to do anything between now and then. Is it still necessary to demonize him when it matters not at all?

When did stating fact become "demonizing" someone? This matters until he is brought up on charges for his heinous violation of both US and international law.

You clearly don't visit Huffington Post or Daily Kos too often. If you did, you wouldn't have to ask that question-of course they do. Now that they've won, they've got to do everything possible to make the defeat of their hated foes as humiliating and lingering as possible. It's a Progressive thing.

Because the fact that torture violates US and international law is based solely on my views of his political positions, it has nothing whatsoever to do with being a massive human rights violation. News flash, if Obama pulls this kind of shit while in office I'll be calling for HIS head too.

...I don't see him attempting to slip any significant appointments or pardons into the mix. It's just not in character for him ... and I think the country would crucify him if he let Cheney or others push him into a bad decision.

I think he's been quite gracious about Obama's election and attempting to stay above politics during the campaign. He's not going to jeopardize what little remains of his legacy by doing something stupid.

Just because he won't do anything he thinks is stupid doesn't mean he won't do anything. I think it would be foolish, out of character, and against historical precedent for him to take no significant actions in the final days of his Presidency. As to his legacy, I believe he takes the long view (as he should,) which means that unless he does something utterly mad like nuke Russia, he knows his place in history won't be affected by any regulation he rolls back or appointment he makes between now and January 20th, even if said rollbacks or appointments turn out to be rather important in some small way.

There is also an aspect of petty spite in him, which might lead him to do something like what his father did in sticking troops into Somalia in the last week of his presidency (not because he cared anymore about the starving Somalis then than during in the previous years, but because he knew it would be trouble for Clinton).

I just heard a Red State co-worker suggest that Bush should move troops into Iran before he leaves, since Obama would be too weak to do it on his own.

* sigh *

Here's what I think Bush will be doing for the next 75 days:

Whether you agree with his presidential policies or not, George W Bush is fundamentally an honorable man.

Wow, you have caught the graciousness bug too.

"Grew up a lot in office" is about as charitable as I'd go. He does seem like the kind of guy who "does business on a handshake" and most of his mistakes were from taking bad advice.

I don't see him attempting to slip any significant appointments or pardons into the mix. It's just not in character for him ... and I think the country would crucify him if he let Cheney or others push him into a bad decision.

After being drawn and quartered, a bit of crucifixion doesn't make much difference, hmm?

I think he's been quite gracious about Obama's election and attempting to stay above politics during the campaign. He's not going to jeopardize what little remains of his legacy by doing something stupid.

Jokes aside, you're probably right.

Only his diehard fans will give him the benefit of the doubt now. Probably won't do anything drastic.

I just heard a Red State co-worker suggest that Bush should move troops into Iran before he leaves, since Obama would be too weak to do it on his own.

* sigh *Frankly, I wouldn't be surprised. At least a few bomber raids.

Civilian government in Iran would be strengthened (basis for anti-American sentiment, always a winner there.) And it's they, not the religious leaders, who would negotiate with the new US administration and when it's all put back in the can they get the credit.

For a less tangible but perhaps more significant positive, the Iranian people would see US policy change significantly between administrations, perhaps even to the tune of Obama saying "sorry about that" and paying some compensation. That could give them more faith in democracy itself ...

The big losers would be the mullahs. They'd go crazy calling for jihad, then when it turned out the US wasn't going to exterminate all Iranians like they claimed, they'd look stupid to the Iranian people.

Machiavellian, I guess. I really shouldn't be calling for actions which will certainly kill innocent Iranians.

Oh god...

Well, if nothing else he probably is going to either nuke North Korea or Iran (ok...probably not nuke but at least try to get us in a war with them).

Maybe he'll pardon Ted Stevens. I can't believe Alaska put a convicted felon back in the Senate.

Believe it. My state is FULL of ignorant, corrupt morons. Of course our state supports him.