I see that commentators I respect, such as Charles Krauthammer and Bill Kristol, are calling for President Bush to pardon Scooter Libby. They make a very persuasive case, but I would be surprised if a presidential pardon is forthcoming—not, at any rate, until the legal process has run its full course. In an Anglo-Saxon democracy under the rule of law, it is always potentially damaging for a head of state to grant pardons, especially to friends, associates, or those who have served under him. Not only must justice be done, it must also be seen to be done.
In practice, this means that pardons are high-risk politics. The pardoning of Richard Nixon, however justifiable, severely damaged Gerald Ford politically. If Tony Blair were to be indicted for the “cash for honors” affair, he would have to resign; if he were convicted, he could expect no pardon. Even if the Queen were minded to grant him one, it would be political suicide for Blair’s successor to ask her for it.
In France, however, they do things differently. Compare the Libby case to that of Jacques Chirac. While in office, Mr. Chirac enjoys full presidential immunity. By announcing on Sunday that he would not seek re-election for a third term, the French president has, in theory, laid himself open to prosecution after he steps down in May. There may then be a brief window of opportunity during which the authorities could bring a case against the former president for any one of the dozens of corruption scandals that have tarnished his career ever since he was mayor of Paris in the 1980′s and 1990′s.
Chirac’s former prime minister, Alain Juppé, is only the most senior of several aides to have been convicted on serious charges. Last month Michel Roussin, Chirac’s chief of staff while he was mayor, had his appeal against a four-year suspended prison sentence quashed. Roussin, whom Chirac later promoted to minister, was convicted of running a six-year scam whereby politicians received kickbacks from public-school service contracts. The corruption that flourished under Chirac’s nose was on a huge scale, ranging from vote-rigging to putting hundreds of party cronies on the public payroll. There is plenty of evidence that Chirac enriched himself and his family, too, though he has always insisted that he was entitled to help himself to various slush funds.
None of these city-hall scandals, despite being public knowledge throughout his presidency, has deterred Chirac from provoking fresh accusations, notably over his connections with the regime of Saddam Hussein. And only last year he was implicated in the Clearstream affair, an attempt to smear his rival Nicolas Sarkozy.
It is true, however, that Mr. Chirac’s corruption scandals pale in comparison to those of his two immediate predecessors. Valéry Giscard d’Estaing notoriously accepted gifts of diamonds from the Central African Republic’s military dictator Jean-Bédel Bokassa, while François Mitterrand not only protected his cronies, like Maurice Papon, from their Vichy pasts, but was implicated in several murky deaths, including the dubious suicide of François de Grossouvre. Neither Giscard nor Mitterrand was ever brought to account.
Even so, it is interesting that Jacques Chirac feels confident that no charges against him will be brought once he leaves office. Could it have something to do with the fact that he recently appointed Laurent Le Mesle, his personal legal adviser, to the post of chief prosecutor in Paris? Presumably the president expects that Le Mesle can be relied upon to protect his patron. All the chief prosecutor has to do is to sit tight for one month after Mr. Chirac leaves the Elysée Palace in May. If this impending bill, aimed at writing into law the de facto immunity sitting French presidents enjoy, passes, any charges relating to crimes committed while Chirac was president would have to be brought against him by June, after which he will be immune from prosecution. No pardon, no embarrassment. The French political elite certainly knows how to look after its own. L’état, c’est moi—et la justice aussi.
You gotta admit having an ex-SNL guy, a Kennedy, and a Blogo appointee in as new senators should draw some attention to the sorry state of our democracy….oh that’s right, they are all the HopeyChangey people. Never mind.
In the whirl of events surrounding the Rod Blagojevich scandals, it’s instructive that the only person who seems to be keeping his head, and acting with complete confidence, is Blagojevich himself. That shouldn’t be too surprising. For one thing, he is obviously shameless, which will get you through many an angry breakfast with your mistress, not to mention an impeachment hearing.
More important, Blagojevich remains – it can be hard to remember this – the governor of Illinois. That gives him the power to do things like appoint Barack Obama’s replacement in the Senate over the objections of virtually everyone in the state and national establishment of the Democratic Party.
Many have hinted loudly that Blagojevich is crazy. They wish. What Blagojevich is doing, and has been doing, is engaging in some of the most naked and aggressive acts of pure power by a US politician that we have seen in a long time. He is not doing this to “save the environment,” or “to make the world safe for democracy,” or even “to protect the children.” He is acting solely in his self-interest, using the power of his office, and the tools that the law has given him, to regain his base and save his skin. He can appoint the U.S. Senator from Illinois, and by God, he will exercise that right. I can’t wait to see what he has planned next, but I imagine that public school teachers will be involved.
Liberal pundits have issued weighty news analyses with headlines like “Tough Calculus for Blagojevich.” These analyses dance around a lot, trying to suss out what he is up to, as if Blagojevich was a triangulating Bill Clinton clone trying to pass NAFTA. They dance around because what is happening is an ugly reminder of the dark side of the Democratic coalition; that it is made up of disparate groups that can be mollified with favors, appointments, and politically correct pronouncements. It should come as no surprise that Blagojevich went to an impromptu sit-down strike on the night before his arrest. A Democrat can never go wrong defending a union against faceless management and stingy banks.
It should also come as no surprise that Blagojevich would call upon former Black Panther Bobby Rush – the only man to ever defeat Barack Obama in an election – to take the lead in a race baiting news conference in which Blagojevich announced his choice for Illinois’ new Senator. Announcing that Illinois now has a “black” Senate seat will go a long way towards support from the civil rights crowd, no matter how undeserved that support might be.
What Blagojevich is doing is what “normal” politicians call shoring up their base. Clinton did it during Lewinski-gate, using Jesse Jackson and assorted feminists to accomplish what Rod is trying to do; hold on when the evidence and good morals say you should leave (worked with Spitzer…). Republicans in trouble do it every time they wrap themselves in a flag and head to Bob Jones University. Usually, there is a veneer of respectability over these things, illusory though they might be. With Blagojevich, there is no illusion, just a naked power grab.
One has to wonder what the Prius driving, white progressives in Evanston, Hyde Park and other enclaves of the Illinois liberal intelligencia think of all of this. Their political views are based, essentially, on the idea that they are the Enlightened Ones, who have joined with minorities and union workers to pursue The Cause; bringing the patriotic, Protestant, entrepreneurial America to heel. They provide the Democratic Party with its brains, if not its brawn. Are they embarrassed by this (and by their earnest voting patterns that have enabled this corruption)? Or are they waiting for their turn at the next Blagojevich press conference? Hey! How about some new funding for Bill Ayers’ education reforms!
Where is the Illinois legislature on impeaching Blagojevich? This should be a no-brainer. This one is squarely on the shoulders of the Illinois voters. Congratulations, folks. Representative government.
Burris is in favor of reparations.
Psota has a lot of the thing correct. I would add that I don’t see Blago getting impeached until he is convicted of something or cops a plea. He doesn’t look like a guy contemplating a plea, to me. He has now groomed the Chicago jury pool to acquit him of any charges that are brought there. He can go on like this indefinitely as he knows that the other side in the Democratic party is made up of nancy boys and other assorted goo goos. I wouldn’t be surprised to see him serve out his term unless Obama offers him ambassador to Serbia or something. It certainly is something to brighten up an otherwise grim January.
blago is Tom Delay smiling in the mugshot. Fitz probably has no case (asking for more time to indict? why?), the idea was to embarrass him and shame him into quitting, but he flipped the script. Bluff called and raised. Hilarious- the post-modern contortions our betters are going to go through to explain this one…
Politico is out with a story that Burris as AG pursued the execution of a man he knew was wrongfully convicted, a case where his deputy AG resigned rather than carry out Burris’s grisly orders. Burris was looking for re-election, and thought he needed a scalp. Even an innocent one would do.
There is no political spectacle more disgusting than Democrats acting “tough on crime.” It always ends up in situations like this.
I think Burris has a perfect right to the Senate seat, the IL legislature having failed to act to take the power away from him in time. I suppose Republicans are best just letting this happen, and throwing a spotlight on him from time to time. What a maroon!
Well done, Psota, and I’ve bookmarked your blog, too.
As for the embarrassment, or lack of it, on the part of the Illinois or national intelligentsia, I think it’s safe to conclude that Blagojevich’s antics confirm their cynicism about “the system.” Their readiness to use government shouldn’t be confused with respect for it: They are entirely supportive of the idea of a government that serves their political ends, but, in their own way, even in their idealism about the way things ought to be, they are generally at least as cynical as any radical anti-government conservative about the way things actually are. In their minds, I believe, their movement makes use of the Blagos and Rushes, and if the Blagos and Rushes get something in return, it’s not very important in the grand progressive scheme of things. Ditto in re the Democratic Party. To all of the groups that make up the coalition of the impossibly more intelligent, and to the larger number of voters and activists who gravitate around them, Harry Reid and Barack Obama and Princess Caroline and Rod Blagojevich are practical conveniences, to be discarded without regrets once their usefulness is at an end. In the meantime, the Hyde Park types neither claim nor concede ownership or responsibility. They probably consider us on the right more responsible for the system and state of affairs that produce, and requires them to seek alliances with, people like Blago.
wasn’t there a new release for this?