Judge Walton on Libby

When U.S. District Judge Reggie B. Walton disagreed with the probation office's sentencing recommendations and denied Scooter Libby's request to remain free during appeals, he brought on President Bush's commutation of Libby's 2 1/2 year prison sentence (the $250,000 fine, felony conviction and probation remained). Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald complained about Bush's use of the pardon power immediately.

Judge Walton has waited until now to express his opinion. He believes the president "has that authority" (the power to grant commutations), that the President "exercised it, and that that has to be respected." But Walton appears to have little respect for the President's decision making otherwise.

For example, Walton expresses the time-worn, boiler-plate concern that "there are a lot of people in America who think that justice is determined to a large degree by who you are and that what you have plays a large role in what kind of justice you receive." Of course, these perceptions are also present with respect to thinking about the recruitment process for federal judges, like Walton. What is more, political scientist John R. Schmidhauser, in his book Judges and Justices, has well-documented the validity of these perceptions. Now, what are we to do? Impeach 90 percent of the federal judiciary?

Judge Walton is also concerned about an oncoming rash of criminal activity since, people "won't follow" the law if they do not "respect it." I have not seen the data on the validity of this concern/predicted increase as of yet, and the commutation was granted last July. But I suspect the expressed concern/prediction is about as valid as the expressed concerns/predictions that the President's critics had with respect to so-called "Libby Motions" (see commentary here, here, here, here, and here).

Finally, Judge Walton is also proud of the fact that he does not give white-collar criminals "a pass." The irony here, of course, is that it is perfectly reasonable to guess that Libby's social status is what got him into federal court to begin with. That us to say, his background, "privileged" status and "contacts" were not the source of an advantage. They were a distinct liability!

Regardless, one hopes Judge Walton is not simply ignoring the considered recommendations of other sentencing authorities and over-sentencing white collar criminals so as to appear to be a "tough" guy. Most of the President's critics agree that we really don't need any more of that in the federal judiciary. See story here.

Read more!

The Market on Libby

According to a story here, NewsFutures.com is an Internet-based news prediction market that operates much like the stock market. Using a fake currency called X$, participants buy and sell shares at prices ranging from X$1 to X$100. Contracts are sold alongside shares for the opposite outcomes. If the event occurs, the shareholder receives X$100 for each share. The trading price of each share represents the probability traders collectively assign to the event occurring. If "President Bush will pardon Scooter Libby" is trading at X$73, for instance, it means participants believe there is a 73 percent chance the president will grant the pardon. Well, I guess that solves that.

Read more!

15 Pardons and 1 Commutation - No Libby

Today, President Bush granted 15 pardons and one commutation of sentence. See more details here. Scooter Libby was not among those graced with executive clemency, but the number and timing of the pardons suggests that the fourth year surge may very well be upon us. Developing ...

Read more!

Libby All Webbed Out?

I visited ScooterLibby.com today and, well, the site is gone and the domain name is up for sale. PardonLibby.com (owned by John in Utah) is the location of something in the "future." LibbyPardon.com (owned by Ernest in Oregon) has expired and is being considered for renewal or deletion. What does it all mean?

Read more!

Libby Disbarred

"Scooter" Libby (who had already been suspended from the practice of law) has been disbarred from practicing law in the nation's capital after being convicted of lying to a grand jury and investigators last year (Case No. 07-BG-170). The three-judge District of Columbia Court of Appeals wrote in its one-and-a-half page opinion, "When a member of the Bar is convicted of an offense involving moral turpitude, disbarment is mandatory." The judges (John R. Fisher, Anna Blackburne-Rigsby and Annice Wagner) were appointees of Presidents George W. Bush, Bill Clinton and Jimmy Carter. Of course, a portion of Libby's sentence was commuted by President Bush last July. According to the Washington Post:

Libby's disbarment is effective as of June 12, 2007, when he first filed a declaration saying he would voluntarily comply with the court's rules on professional ethics for lawyers. Libby, 57, could seek reinstatement to the bar five years from that date, in June 2012.

See story here. See the Court's full opinion here. See Washington Post report here.

Read more!

Buckley on Libby (and others)

Many of William F. Buckley's Firing Line debates and regular television programs were dedicated to the topic of the death penalty. And there was certainly little doubt as to where he stood on the issue. In an August 1989 editorial Buckley wrote, "My own opinion is that too few, not too many, people are being executed in America."

But, if you look through the body of Buckley's work, especially his editorials, you cannot help but see that Buckley's view of the death penalty included an emphasis on the need for the intelligent use of the pardon power. For example, in the above mentioned editorial he also wrote:

But it makes very good sense to be as certain as circumstance allows that the right people go to the death chamber. Hang one man, prove the next day or year that he was in fact innocent, and you set back the case of the death penalty by a generation, with the result that hundreds who should be hanged eventually go back on the streets, and thousands who should live are killed by those who have every reason to scoff at the threat of the death penalty.

These attitudes were frequently displayed when Buckley discussed particular cases that had attracted his interest. He found it "strange," for example, that there was "very little commotion in the press" with regard to the impending execution of Ronald Monroe (in Louisiana) and wondered, "Where are the men of conscience?" He added:

Injustice is written into the human order and cannot be expunged from it. But such injustices as are the result of sheer inattention are injustices compounded.

In the case of Gary McGivern (New York), Buckley was annoyed that Vice President George Bush had made an "indefensible" criticism of Mario Cuomo for merely allowing any consideration of the possibility of clemency. McGivern had been convicted under the felony murder doctrine and had served as an "exemplary" prisoner for 18 years. Buckley wrote:

It has been said before, but it is worth repeating, namely that the Republican Party, in order to stress its devotion to law and order, oughtn't to deem itself insensible to the appeal for clemency.

Buckley also defended the decision making of Judge John Noonan who postponed the execution of the very notable Robert A. Harris. Buckley observed that, while "popular resentment" at "endless judicial review of cases" was a "legitimate complaint," the thing that guided Judge Noonan's decision making was the same thing that guided Mother Teresa to ask the Governor of California to extend clemency to Harris. Noonan believed Harris' "rights under the Constitution [had] have been violated " since the was a "substantial showing" that the jury was not able to hear from competent psychiatrists.

While he stopped short of making an explicit recommendation in the matter, Buckley was clearly intrigued by Karla Faye Tucker's plea for mercy from the Governor of Texas George W. Bush. Buckley's editorials of December 8, 1997, entitled "Dark Night for George W." suggested Tucker's appeal presented "a helluva problem." He noted Tucker was supported by the detective who arrested her, the prosecutors who sentenced her, a sister of one of the murder victims, Amnesty International, the Pope and Pat Robertson. Buckley also offered that her very troubled life (featuring drug use at a very young age and prostitution) was "contingently relevant." The strident manner in which Buckley eventually defended (or presented arguments to justify) Bush's ultimate decision (to do nothing) was more the result of attempts by inconsistent critics to make additional political hay out of the episode.

Note: With respect to notorious convicts, it is probably not well known that, in 1981, Buckley supported clemency for Abbie Hoffman, who sold $36,000 worth of cocaine to undercover police officers in 1973 and was a fugitive for six years before turning himself in and receiving a three-year sentence. He also supported clemency for Patricia Hearst saying that, if Jimmy Carter dd not see the "transcendant injustice" of her sentence, then it was only because he "affected not to see it." As far as Buckley was concerned, "the institution of clemency was established for such difficult cases." And, of course, he supported a pardon for Scooter Libby saying, "Mr. Bush will have to exhibit the courage for which he is loved and hated, by doing the right thing, and letting Mr. Libby get on with life."

Read more!

William F. Buckley, Jr. (1925-2008)

I want to extend my sympathy to family and friends of William F. Buckley, Jr., who passed away this morning. I also want to extend the same to the fine folks over at National Review, who were very generous with me in the past year, by providing a platform for my research and insights on the pardon power.

I first started reading Mr. Buckley's editorials in middle school and was a full-fledged addict by the time high school came around. Granted, I did not understand a fair amount of what I was reading. What really caught my attention, and sparked the interest in politics which led me all the way to a Ph.D., was Buckley's debate show Firing Line. To this day, I insist that those programs were the very height of television broadcasting. And I continue to buy recordings of them here and there as I can afford them - order here. I had the pleasure of seeing Mr. Buckley speak in Pensacola, Florida, on "The Hyperbolic Imperative in American Politics." He wittily asked, "If these people are not making a 'living wage,' then why aren't they all dead?" After the speech, I approached him for an autograph. With 500-600 people in the room, he would have been well justified to say "no." But he gave it to me anyway. To this day I look forward to seeing National Review in my mailbox. Buckley was a priceless treasure to both the conservative movement and the Nation.

This past year, I communicated with David Frum and Jean Lopez at National Review Online concerning what I saw as a lack of proper focus in the national media on the President's options regarding Scooter Libby. As I saw it, there were numerous ways that Bush could utilize the pardon power to keep Libby out of prison short of granting a full, unconditional pardon. NR Online allowed me to write a piece on one of them (the respite), then placed individuals on various television programs (Hardball, the Situation Room and Meet the Press) who spread the news - albeit in the face of resistant hosts who were much more attracted to the fabricated drama of pardon / no pardon scenario.

Of course, the President utilized the pardon power to keep Libby out of prison, but it was not the particular option which I had focused on. Incidentally, to this day, I insist that the President should have done things my way. But that is another story. As if the first appearance were not enough glory for one career, NR Online let me to write a second piece, which allowed me to place the Libby commutation in historical context. It was such a pleasure to show off years and years of research in such a fun, respected, widely-read forum. I will be forever grateful.

So, rest in peace William F. Buckley, Jr. and thank you for all that you shared with us. Thank you National Review for carrying on his work. It is a sad day for us all, but also a day to be thankful that we saw him, listened to him, read his words and enjoyed his intelligence and wit. We are all so very fortunate to have had these opportunities.

P.S. Ruckman, Jr.

Read more!

Wexler on Pardons and Libby

The Philadelphia Jewish Voice has interviewed Florida Congressman Robert Wexler's, who is described by the Voice as "a nationally recognized advocate for the integrity of our election system." I am not certain who Wexler's opponents are on this front. But, along the way, this q and a took place:

PJV: Still on the matter of Constitutional checks and balances, should there be any limits on the President's ability to use his pardon power to insulate his administration from investigation?

Well, certainly he commuted Scooter Libby’s sentence, which I vehemently disagreed with because I thought the President was intellectually dishonest. He said that he thought Scooter Libby’s sentence was excessive, and then he cut it to zero. The President had the authority, and still does, to commute any sentence under whatever terms the President wishes. And he thought Scooter Libby’s sentence was excessive – I think he got 30 months – then he could have made it 22 months, or 19 months or whatever number of months the President thought appropriate, but he made it zero months, which I think, for any objective party indicates that he wasn’t serious about the excessiveness of the sentence. What he wished to do was protect Scooter Libby from any kind of prosecutorial penalty.

And the real question is, “Why did the President do it?” I think the answer is to insulate both himself, Vice President Cheney, Karl Rove and other important members of the administration. And that in and of itself, according to the founders of this country, in their original Constitutional document, is a grounds for impeachment. A President is using the pardon, or commutation powers, for the purpose of covering up a crime committed by him or by a chief member of his administration – that is an abuse of his Constitutional authority.

So, while yes, the President does have the power to pardon and commute, I think it appears this President it appears likely abused that power and that’s why I think we ought to have hearings regarding the Vice President and the administration.

See full interview here.

Read more!

Dems: McCain and Libby

CBS News reports that the Democratic National Committee, anxious to share some of the headlines with John McCain, who has found himself the probable Republican presidential nominee is sending out an e-mail which reads, in part:

Campaign McCain's "extreme makeover" may help him pander to the right wing, but the rest of America has figured out that a vote for John McCain is a vote for a third Bush term. Whether he is pining for a 100 year war in Iraq, calling for Roe v. Wade to be overturned, supporting efforts to make the same Bush tax cuts he once opposed permanent, supporting President Bush's veto of health care for 10 million children, or applauding the President's decision to commute Scooter Libby's sentence, John McCain has promised four more years of the same failed Bush policies that have undermined our economy and made America less secure.

See full story here.

Read more!

Obama is Scary on Libby

Jim Tynen has written a very on-point editorial, entitled "The Scary Side of Obama," in the Daily Herald today. Along the way it has this to say about Barack Obama's casual references to Scooter Libby in campaign stump speeches:

This kind of moral confusion leads to ideological confusion. To pick one example, Obama declaimed: "We have a [moral] deficit in this country when there is Scooter Libby justice for some and Jena justice for others."

White House aide I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby was accused in the CIA leak case. His career was ruined, he spent a fortune on his defense, and he was convicted. In Jena, La., the media may have badly distorted confusing incidents of teens fighting and a noose that may or may not have had racial implications. Legal cases are still pending, and the full story has yet to be made clear.

The point is that in both cases the truth is complex and can be debated. But Obama ignored the complexities and nuances. He couldn't resist the cheap shot, the flawed symbol. That is a dangerous weakness. It hints that his aura of being above the fray might not be durable.

See the full editorial here.

Read more!

Cindy Sheehan On Scooter Libby

Cindy Sheehan and her supporters held a rally at the San Francisco Federal Building on January 14 and presented an aide to Nancy Pelosi with 8,000 signed letters urging impeachment of Vice President Dick Cheney and President George W. Bush. Sheehan, whose son Casey was killed in Iraq, said, "I believe that when George Bush commuted Scooter Libby’s sentence for a crime that he was complicit in, he committed treason. A president can commute sentences, a president can pardon people, but not when they are involved in the crime."

It is not certain what "crime" Sheehan is referencing. Prosecutors have yet to charge anyone with a crime in relation to Valerie Plame. If Sheehan means to say the President was "involved" in Libby's testimony, then U.S. Grant, Warren G. Harding, Harry Truman, Gerald Ford, George H.W. Bush and Bill Clinton should have all been impeached as well. See story here.

Read more!

Obama, Still Tuned In

Andrew Sullivan provides this transcript of Democratic presidential hopeful Barack Obama's speech this morning, in Atlanta

I’m not talking about a budget deficit. I’m not talking about a trade deficit. I’m not talking about a deficit of good ideas or new plans. I’m talking about a moral deficit ...

Obama then went on to list dozens of examples of the "deficit" that he has in mind. Right near the top of the list:

We have a deficit in this country when there is Scooter Libby justice for some and Jena justice for others; when our children see nooses hanging from a schoolyard tree today, in the present, in the twenty-first century.

One wonders if anyone will ever ask Obama for a detailed analysis of either case. I suspect not.

Read more!

Commentary on the Libby Case

Michael Berry has written an interesting piece over at the First Amendment Center online. Here are some excerpts:

When I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby dropped his appeal last month, the legal case against the former vice presidential aide officially closed. The legacy of Libby’s prosecution in the Valerie Plame leak case, however, remains open ...

... Just look at Libby’s case. A special prosecutor was appointed to investigate a supposed breach of “national security” and then used his subpoena power to pursue reporters’ sources. Yet the nation’s security was never at risk, and no national security crime was ever committed.

... Conservatives have often noted that Libby should never have been the subject of a criminal investigation, for no underlying crime was ever committed. As Libby’s legal battle draws to a close, it also remains clear that the Plame leak never should have sparked subpoenas to the press. That is one of the certain legacies of Libby’s case, and it should live on in a federal shield law with conservative support.

The complete article can be found here.

Read more!

Irony

Democratic presidential hopeful Barack Obama has never tired of promising his audiences an end to the "Scooter Libby era of justice." For that reason, the UK version of The Times probably had great fun constructing this passage:

The other potential threat to Obama comes from the indictment of one of his leading donors, Antoin “Tony” Rezko, a Syrian-born property developer in Chicago, who is accused of extortion. Rezko has been indicted by Patrick Fitzgerald - the prosecutor who brought down the White House official Lewis “Scooter” Libby and the press magnate Conrad Black - for seeking millions of dollars in kickbacks from companies bidding for state business in Illinois. He is due to appear in court on February 24.

See complete article here

Read more!

Marion Jones v. Scooter Libby

In today's New York Times, this article discusses the recent 6-month sentence of track star Marion Jones. Late to hop on the band wagon, the author notes:

No, the sanctimonious call for jail time doesn’t come easily when the government can so blithely spring one of its own (see President Bush’s commuting of Scooter Libby’s 30-month sentence for four counts of perjury in the Valerie Plame case).

The author, of course, does not offer one modicum of evidence to suggest that the Scooter Libby commutation in any way made anything more difficult for anyone. And with good reason. No so-called "Libby motion" has ever worked, and there is no reason whatsoever to think that one ever will. The attempt to spread Scooter Libby all over ever criminal case is as dumb as it was the first time it was suggested. Libby has nothing whatsoever to do with Marc Rich, Roger Clinton, Peter Yarrow, the FALN terrorists, the individuals who shot up the House of Representatives (and hit five congressmen) ... or Marion Jones.

What may have made things difficult is Jones' behavior. As she put it:

“Yes, I’ve made mistakes by lying. And I’ve admitted to these mistakes much later than I should have ... I truly hope that people will learn from my mistakes."

The critic will, of course, compound the whine, "so she admitted guilt and will be going to prison while Libby did not and has his sentence commuted." Admittedly, there is no answer to such reasoning that can be spelled out in an equally catchy sound-bite. The merchants of junior-high rhetoric are going to win that round. Ironically, they are the same people who constantly remind us that innocent people are convicted by the justice system all of the time! Perhaps, one day, when the sentence is long behind her, they will also claim Jones was forced to lie about lying, so as to satisfy "Scooter Libby justice."

Read more!

Obama Not Letting It Go

There are some who look with amusement upon blogs like this, and others that continue to pay attention to Scooter Libby, the topic of presidential pardons and related issues. As one participant wrote over at the Sentencing Law and Policy blog:

... the pardon/clemency issue is irrelevant to most voters. It won't be a campaign issue unless an opponent pulls a "Willie Horton" on Huckabee. The Scooter Libby pardon, though most Americans opposed it, had its 15 minutes of fame, and is now history to all but legal scholars and pundits.

But, when Barack Obama stepped into a standing room only crowd at the Yanitelli Center at St. Peter's College two days ago, he had Scooter Libby on his mind and mentioned Libby by name - as he has done throughout the entire campaign. What are we to make of this? Doesn't Obama know Libby is old news, yesterday's lettuce, so last year?

Well, it just isn't that complex. The Libby case was certainly one of the major stories of the past year, but it is clearly not over in the sense that Valerie Plame and her husband will continue to yell and all eyes are on the president's use of the pardon power. Witness the headlines that followed the last round of pardons (in December) ... "Pardon, But No Libby." When is the last time a pardon was that much anticipated? It seems reasonable enough to think that, as we head into the last year of the Bush administration, the focus will both remain and increase.

Second, by continuing to focus on Libby, I believe it is possible that Obama is sending the signal that he sees the pardon power (and other issues related to the criminal justice system) differently than his opponents. While they may be content to comment and point fingers when the next "episode" arises, Obama would like to address systematic problems that he sees with formal processes (like sentencing, for example). He appears to lean toward change in advance, as opposed to seasons of distraction followed by the paralytic effects of delayed reactions to seemingly random "controversies."

Read more!

Introducing a New Blog: Pardon Power

Sure, I have been asked, "What happens after Libby is pardoned? Then what? What happens to the blog?" And, after giving it some thought, I have decided to prepare for the transition well in advance. This week, I have started a new blog PARDON POWER, which can now be found at http://pardonpower.com.

At the PARDON POWER blog, I am going to focus on news items related to both federal executive clemency and the exercise of clemency powers at the state level. This will allow me to broaden the discussion of presidential use of the pardon power to all previous administrations and delve even more into history and data. Mr. Libby will thus be a very small slice of the pie over there. The debate between Republican candidates Huckabee and Romney also made me more keenly aware of how little systematic analysis there is on pardons at the state level. It seems to me that we are in need of a blog that provides a more rich context in which to judge gubernatorial behavior.

In addition, I will open PARDON POWER to responses from readers, an idea that I never really got altogether comfortable with here. We'll just have to see how all of that goes.

So, if you have found this blog interesting, please consider stopping by PARDON POWER every now and then as well and, if you like, leave a comment.

best, P.S. Ruckman, Jr.

Read more!

Pardon My Testosterone

Yes, it looks like there is still yet more testosterone to be injected into the world of clemency (apologies to Mr. Clemens)! First, it was California Governor - and former Terminator - Arnold Schwarzenegger (see post here). Then it was former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee and his pal, "Mr. Roundhouse kick," Chuck Norris (see posts here and here). Now, just when we thought we could unclench our fists and catch our breath, the door is smashed to pieces and into the rooms walks Steven Seagal!

It started in March of 2002 when Julius Nasso sued Seagal, his former neighbor and fellow movie producer, for $60 million dollars. Three months later, F.B.I. agents nabbed Nasso and he and 16 others were charged with conspiracy and extortion. Nasso plead guilty and was sentenced to one year in prison. He served his time and now, according to this story in the Staten Island Advance :

More important than the money, Nasso said, is a letter signed by Seagal and addressed to the Office of the Pardon Attorney, Department of Justice. According to Nasso, the letter reads: "I am writing this letter to indicate that I have no objection to and would support the application (when it is timely) of Julius R. Nasso for a Presidential pardon." Nasso hopes that simple sentence will someday clear his record completely. "It speaks volumes that [Steven] has agreed to support my application for a presidential pardon in the future," he said.

So, how about that? It appears the violent film action figures are generally softening up in their old age and pushing the whole pardon thing. I will add Nasso's name to the "pardon watch list" and wonder who Scooter Libby might dig up to assist him in the future? I mean, who is left? Jackie Chan?

Read more!

Chuck Norris: Back Atcha!

Actor Chuck Norris has decided to respond to the Mitt Romney ad which I discussed previously here. Among other things, Norris writes (in a World Net Daily piece that can be read in its entirety here):

Mitt, of course, never mentions that as governor he had only 100 requests for commutations and 172 for pardons. What Mitt also never discusses is that this 2003 Associated Press report is focused upon his "most noteworthy pardon denial: His rejection of the request of an Iraq war veteran who was trying to become a police officer after his National Guard service" (unlike Huckabee who enthusiastically supports our veterans through the "Veterans' Bill of Rights").

It's amazing to me that Romney even jabs at Huckabee's fight on crime, when Mike initiated a toll-free hotline to report tips on government corruption, has proven he's a passionate advocate of the Second Amendment gave permission 16 times for executions to proceed - more than any governor in the history of Arkansas.

... Now I can take a joke as good as the next guy – after all, it was Huck and I who introduced the humorous political parodies in this race. I almost wish that Romney's broadcasted roundhouse had a little more kick, but it (like his campaign) is simply falling flat in the ring. Even reviews disclaimed it as "all somewhat disjointed.

... The real problem with this Internet bit goes beyond the fact that it is a non-humorous marketing dud. It truly plummets political-commercial negativism into an abyssal low by maligning a candidate's supporter and deliberately distorting his words. The gravest grief in that now we know Mitt will pay millions in producing and airing 14,000 ads to even twist my words – and I'm not even running for president!

... So did Romney's Internet-transmitted roundhouse connect with Mike or me? While he tried to kick both of us, he ended up only creating a whiff of air by his bypassing foot, which propelled him spinning around like an inexperienced martial arts fighter and getting clocked by Huckabee's left hook in Iowa!

... Incidentally, Romney's ad ends with the narrator asking, "Chuck Norris, Mike Huckabee, now who deserves the roundhouse kick?" The ad answers the question by manipulating my photo, which delivers a blow to Huckabee's head with the cartoonish lettering "POW!" Of course my real response would be quite to the contrary. I think you can guess where my heel might land. POW!

There you have it. Romney has pardoned less people than Huckabee, but Huckabee has executed more people than Romney!

Read more!

2008: Looking Forward

Currently, if you type the words "Libby" and "pardon" into Google, this blog is the first site that is returned in the search. Thus, I have little doubt that my work here contributed a great deal to my appearances with National Review online, National Journal, The Hill, the New York Times, the Los Angeles Times and other newspapers of note. Last month, I had the highest number of visitors (13,000 plus) since I began this blog early last year. I think all of this suggests there are many more positive things to come. So, I thought I would use this entry to forecast ahead. Here goes:

First, I do believe that President Bush will pardon more people in the last year of his presidency than he has in any of the other seven years that he has been in office. I may be wrong, but the source of my belief is purely empirical. Most of the Nation's presidents have done the very same thing (see discussion and several charts here).

I also believe President Bush will grant the highest number of pardons in the month of December. Again, the source of my belief is purely empirical. He has clearly emphasized December to date (see chart here) and the same has been true for recent presidents (see discussion and several additional charts here).

To many, of course, the question is whether or not Bush will grant a full and unconditional pardon to Scooter Libby. The very existence of this blog suggests that it is reasonable to expect such a pardon, but I am not (and never have been) nearly so certain about that as many others. For example, from the very beginning, I guessed Bush would grant a respite, delaying any more elevated decision as long as possible. I also reasoned that, if the Republicans were to somehow win the White House in 2008, Bush would not be granting a pardon at all. Of course, if the Democrats win, it is another ball game. Still, I think the situation that Ronald Reagan found himself in with respect to Oliver North might be worth remembering.

Finally, there is my "pardon watch list" (here). Do I expect everyone on the list to be pardoned? Certainly not. But what I have done (and will continue to do) is provide, in one place, a list of individuals whose cases have received more attention than others and who enjoy organized support and public calls for clemency. It will certainly be interesting to see what the impact of these efforts will be when all is said and done.

As always, I will employ data and my knowledge of the history of federal executive clemency to news items and editorial commentary as they arise. I will also spell out - after long delay - what I see as the proper path to clemency reform, what I have dubbed "the political path" (see initial commentary here and here).

If this blog interests you and you have contact with a publisher, please contact my agent, Sam Fleishman. We have a clean, finished, readable and highly praised manuscript ready to go. And I promise discussions of the pardon power will never quite be the same after the printing of my book.

P.S. Ruckman, Jr.

Read more!