Pardon, Schmardon

Jerrold Nadler (D-NYC) is introducing legislation that would limit the right of sitting presidents to pardon officials for acts committed in their governmental roles.

That sounds great, but I doubt it's constitutional. The power of the president to pardon is pretty much absolute, but what I like about Jerrold Nadler's idea is that it will churn up the waves of public opinion. On that stage, folks won't just have to accept preemptive pardons. Because once a person is pardoned, there is no danger of indictment and incarceration. Guess what: then they have to speak under compulsion of subpoena.

That means that the inquiry into what happened: at Guantanamo, in those black sites throughout the world, with eavesdropping, inside the Justice Department, with energy companies, destruction of natural resources, refusal to deal with climate change, everything that has happened during the last eight years, is still on the table.

And it has to remain there. We must know. We have to know. Because if we as a people don't have the will to know, then any president, no matter his/her party, will have the opportunity to once again pull the wool over our eyes.

How did Henry Paulson get $700 billion plus for a bailout of the banks without any restrictions on how he used it, how it was used?

Because once again the Bush administration used fear to suppress questioning.

Now, suddenly, folks are asking questions about a bailout of the auto industry.

Well, collectively as a people, we have to insist on asking questions, whether or not there are pardons. The truth must come to light.