In an interview with the German Magazine Spiegel the other day President Obama said this about the question of pardoning Edward Snowden :
OBAMA: ‘I can’t pardon somebody who hasn’t gone before a court and presented themselves, so that’s not something that I would comment on at this point. I think that Mr. Snowden raised some legitimate concerns——–‘
George Washington University Professor Jonathan Turley has pointed out that Obama is completely wrong on this point . This issue was adjudicated by the Supreme Court
In 150 Ex Parte Garland (1865), the Supreme Court said:
‘The power of pardon conferred by the Constitution upon the President is unlimited except in cases of impeachment. It extends to every offence known to the law, and may be exercised at any time after its commission, either before legal proceedings are taken or during their pendency, or after conviction and judgment. The power is not subject to legislative control.’
Why do I point this out now, you ask? Well , lying at any time is still lying and he is still President of the USA.
And perhaps more importantly , if some other leading political figure , especially an opposition figure had said this , Obama and his media surrogates would be all over it snivelling at how ignorant that person was , not knowing the basics of the law on Presidential Pardon. Can’t you just hear the New York Times or Washington Post in their elitist way demeaning the education level of that person and how unfit for office they are.
Of course, this is further heightened in its misrepresentation given that Obama is , lets not forget it, a Harvard trained lawyer , and they know all, didn’t you know?
Just one further fact to show the sheer level of non fact ( is this a real phrase) of the Obama statement. Gerald Ford pardoned Richard Nixon. Nixon had not ‘presented himself to the court .’