There is a difference

Ron Fournier’s AP piece on the Libby commutation is some of the worst piece of shit “journalism” that I have seen in a long, long time. In true inside the Beltway evenhandedness, Fournier blasts Bush for letting Libby walk and in the very next breathe unloads on Hillary for blasting Bush for letting Libby walk, because Bill pardoned Marc Rich. (Sidebar – Scooter represented Rich and argued for Rich’s pardon. Oh the irony.) The difference of course is that Clinton’s pardons were not acts of self-preservation or attempts to cover up a breach in National Security initiated by the White House. According to Fournier, that is not really relevant or something because they are all hypocrits.

In an interview with The Associated Press, the senator said Bill Clinton's pardons were simply a routine exercise in the use of the pardon power, and none was aimed at protecting the Clinton presidency or legacy. "This," she said of the Libby commutation, "was clearly an effort to protect the White House."

Indeed, there is ample evidence that Libby's actions were fueled by animosity throughout the White House toward opponents of the president's push to war against Iraq.

But Hillary Clinton will have a hard time convincing most voters that her brother-in-law would have gotten a pardon in 2001 had his name been Smith. Or that Rich's pardon plea would have reached the president's desk had he not been a rich Mr. Rich.

Fournier seems to argue that the President can never pardon anyone with whom he is connected. That seems pretty stupid. Who cares if Bill did a favor for some family? Does that equate to a conspiracy to cover up the outing of a covert spy? Hell no.

I think that it makes a difference if the pardon is intended to cover up criminal acts perpetrated by White House officials. So did James Madison (hat tip to KagroX @ DailyKos):

[I]f the President be connected, in any suspicious manner, with any person, and there be grounds [to] believe he will shelter him, the House of Representatives can impeach him; they can remove him if found guilty...

‘Nough said.