The Rev. Jesse Jackson is calling for President Barack Obama to issue a presidential pardon to Secretary Hillary Clinton before he leaves office? President-elect Trump has said he will prosecute her for the crimes already proven in the various e-mail investigations. The question of a pardon had never occurred to me before, but it is an excellent one.
Mrs. Clinton lost to Trump; that fact makes her a tragic figure. The thinking is that she is a victim of an unjust system that failed to recognize she deserved to be president; she outspent Mr. Trump 2 to 1 and had all the proper media support, and her loss was a tragedy. So, as a tragic figure how do we kick her when she is down, how do we not pardon her for crimes committed in public office?
Mrs. Clinton violated the law and that is a slam dunk fact; the criminal justice system opted to refuse to prosecute, and that is their privilege. However, it does not change the facts. The defenders of Mrs. Clinton will tell us that the documents provided by WikiLeaks were illegally hacked and thus are not admissible evidence. The fruits of the poisonous tree doctrine basically states that all evidence that stems from illegal law enforcement activity is not admissible. If the search is illegal, all evidence branching from the search is not admissible in court; the fruit of the search is poisoned.
An outside party acting completely independently of law enforcement such as the news media or WikiLeaks breaks into an e-mail file or private home and uncovers evidence that a crime has occurred. That evidence is presented to law enforcement (once again the break-in was not directed or known of by law enforcement) and is admissible. The criminal acts of the media or WikiLeaks in this example are punishable by law, but the evidence uncovered is admissible in court.
If Obama pardons Mrs. Clinton, the folks who mold opinion, the media, will cheer the act. President Obama’s actions would be entirely legal, but the question is one of morality, decency, fairness and honor, not law. The left wing 90% of the media will cheer him and praise his actions as 
an example of his Saul-like wisdom. The illegal activities of the Clinton family and the white collar out-and-out robbery of a charity will be forgotten. The illegal activities in the pay-to-play case will be downplayed as “everyone does it.”
The excellent question of the pardon however needs to be expanded to ask: will he also pardon President William Clinton and daughter Chelsea? The Clinton Foundation is operated by all three Clintons; their names are on the masthead and the pay-to-play activities could see all three indicted. The illegal activities involving highly classified documents is a cross for Mrs. Clinton to bear, but the Clinton Foundation investigation will affect all three and many more.
To think that the pardon process is not being planned or discussed in the oval office is naïve; the political appointees in the White house and at Justice and the FBI surely have a pile of research, study and press releases ready to drop. Catastrophes are being researched to be discovered days before and after the pardons. The actions of Iran in the Strait of Hormuz, the Russians bombing civilians in Syria, the murders, enslavement and rape of Christians and children by ISIS/ISIL/DAESH will suddenly be a crisis in the eyes of the media and our government.
As we have seen so many times before, the media working in concert with the left wing political establishment will act as carnival barkers directing the American people’s attention away from the pardons of the Clinton family to selected, studied, focus-grouped disasters designed to bury the pardons on the page 23 below the fold of the Washington Post and New York Times.
President Obama has tied his legacy to the Clinton family; he must pardon them or be tainted by their convictions. The Democrat Party needs to erase the stain; a pardon or three will be forthcoming. Oddly enough, the best thing for President-elect Trump would be a pardon of the Clintons, clearing the way for the new direction our nation so desperately needs to take.
In all fairness, I tend to disagree, for a couple of reasons.
First off, there was no cry for a pardon of Gen. Patraeus, who served many years honorably, in defense of our country. And how about the sailor that took a few pictures on a submarine.? The whole point is, why do we feel that Hillary should be an exception, because her travails prevented her from becoming President? Why should politicians be given more leniency and pity than any other citizen? After all, should they not know better than most?
I can see the pardon of an individual that was wrongly convicted. And I believe that was the whole point of pardons. But, over time, politicians expanded that recourse to injustice, as a means of providing favors (some being paid for) and a means to protect the pardoner, if he/she was an unknown or not yet revealed accomplice to criminal activity.
And, one of Trump’s promises to the electorate was a new era of law enforcement. And we should also consider the motivation for her acts of criminality. It was motivated by political ambition and greed, unlike the soldier found guilty and punished for revealing classified information, while trying to save the lives of fellow combatants. No pardon for him.
And finally, if Trump were to pardon Hillary (or all the Clintons), do you really think that Democrats would ease up on Trump or his political activities? I say not and it may even cause more division, as he would have caused some strife with those that voted for him, because he championed the rule of law as part of his promise to Americans.
To pardon Hillary (or all the Clintons) would just give further license to political graft and criminal activity. I say, it is time that those that commit the crime, do the time, just like the common citizen.
Mr. Moras,
Bob,
As usual an argument well stated and very well made.
Thank you for the comment.
How many hours did Hillary Clinton testify while under investigation, with no indictment forthcoming?
Maybe the president should pardon PE Trump for the self admitted sexual assault behavior, a felony. I’m thinking of what he admitted to while talking on an open mic, but it seems that was not an isolated event. This is silliness.
You are so correct, it is silly to think of Obama pardoning Hillary Clinton when she hasn’t been charged with a crime. That’s like pardoning someone for nothing! She is free and clear to keep doing what she does best – lie, cheat, steal – the only thing she and Bill know how to do anything. I hope they keep up the good work so maybe in the future they will finally get caught and receive the prison sentence both deserve.
As for Trump, he’s never been charged either, so he’s just as free as the Clinton’s.
Mr. Basura,
Thank you for the comment, sir.
First, Secretary Clinton did testify in front of Congress, however the time she spent was not all spent testifying. Long breaks for votes were numerous as were other parliamentary procedures. Testifying in front of Congress doesn’t excuse a person’s crimes. The Congress doesn’t charge and convict, Justice does.
Mrs. Clinton is guilty, a slam-dunk fact; her case was too hot and politically sensitive to handle by those in charge of DOJ at that time, so Justice declined to prosecute. If taken to trial, she will lose; the crimes she committed are not intent crimes, and the physical evidence is overwhelming.
Please do yourself a favor and consider getting assistance for Trump Derangement Syndrome.
Thanks again for the comment.