As term ends, Bush faces historic pardon choice

In the rhetorical clash of “please pardon” versus “don’t you dare pardon,” the essential fact is this: Other than holding hearings after the fact, as it did with Clinton’s pardons eight years ago, Congress can do nothing about pardons it dislikes.

What the Framers thought
The debates at the 1787 constitutional convention as well as Supreme Court rulings have made it clear that the president’s power to pardon is sweeping, covering those who have been convicted of violations of federal law, those who have been indicted but not yet stood trial, and even those who have not yet been indicted.

The constitutional convention debated and overwhelmingly rejected a proposal requiring that the Senate concur in any pardons.

In light of how much the Framers of the Constitution feared monarchical power, why did they give the president such unlimited power?

One of the Framers, Alexander Hamilton, argued for assigning the pardon power to the president alone because in times of rebellion against the government “there are often critical moments, when a well-timed offer of pardon to the insurgents or rebels may restore the tranquility” of the nation.

Convening Congress to debate pardons would take too long, he argued.

Ford, Bush, and Clinton weren’t worried about rebellions when they issued their famous pardons, although Ford did say he pardoned Nixon in order to avert a prosecution of the ex-president that would have divided the nation.

Recent presidents have used the pardon power to do justice as they saw it.

Pardons in Iran-contra affair
In 1992, Bush’s father President George H.W. Bush granted Christmas Eve pardons to former Defense Secretary Caspar Weinberger and five other former officials for their roles in the Iran-Contra affair.

INTERACTIVE Obama's new Cabinet? What are the key roles and who will be filling them.

In that mid-1980s episode, now mostly forgotten, Reagan administration officials arranged for weapons to be shipped to Iran in exchange for the release of U.S. hostages held by the Hezbollah militants in Lebanon.

But Bush said of Weinberger and the others accused in the Iran-contra episode, “their motivation — whether their actions were right or wrong — was patriotism.”

And he said those he pardoned “have already paid a price — in depleted savings, lost careers, anguished families — grossly disproportionate to any misdeeds or errors of judgment they may have committed.”

As contentious as the Iran-contra affair seemed in 1992, Bush was taking a step to make it history, to relegate it to place where people would no longer be debating it. He succeeded in doing that.

Whether his son could do something similar before his term ends on Jan. 20 is one of the intriguing final questions about the Bush presidency.

More from msnbc.com First Read: Palin on creationism, Clinton, Fey Ice addict heads for poles, Everest | Trek posts Daily Nightly: Tim McGraw helps neighbors in need Were you paying attention? Take our weekly quiz World Blog: China puts foot down on 'Oba Mao' T-shirts Stimulus tracker: See where millions of dollars went On Twitter: Breaking news updates | Weird and wild

MORE FROM THE WHITE HOUSE

The White House Section Front

Obama: Congress should wait on Fort Hood   Obama, Medvedev to talk weapons treaty   Obama hints at Pacific Rim trade pact White House says top lawyer to step down Obama 'so hot' in China ahead of trip Obama eyes domestic spending freeze Obama's Afghan decision sends messages Napolitano says U.S. border is more secure now Official: Obama rejects war options Obama remembers Fort Hood victims The White House Section Front   Add The White House headlines to your news reader: