* Carbons sent to: Walter Luffman
-=> On 02-16-98  16:53, Robert Plett did testify and affirm <=-
-=> to Walter Luffman concerning Re: Dufus' Waterloo? <=-
 
 WL> Two questions:
 
 WL> (1) Is there any way we could legally ensure that Gore
 WL> would not pardon Clinton, or would any such prior agreement
 WL> be unconstitutional?  (I think Gore would sign such an
 WL> agreement in exchange for immunity from impeachment and
 WL> prosecution on the Templegate money-laundering charges --
 WL> but I want more than just his word on it.)
 RP> Don't know whether that would be possible or not in a
 RP> formal sense, but Congress could sure threaten him in
 RP> private and assure him of his own impeachment if he tried. 
Firstly, you don't *really* think that the Dufus is going
to resign without assuring a pardon from Gore by blackmail,
if nothing else?
Secondly, as far as threatening Gore with impeachment for
pardoning Clinton... ain't gonna happen. Pardon of the
Dufus falls within the lawful exercise of his Presidential
powers and is in no way an impeachable offense unless you
can demonstrate that there was a quid pro quo.  Even if you
seek an impeachment of Gore, the Democrat minority will
never go along. 
 WL> (2) If Clinton resigned and was not subsequently pardoned
 WL> by his successor, could the federal government then proceed
 WL> with ordinary indictment and criminal trial; or would we
 WL> still have to use the impeachment route because the
 WL> charges involve his actions while in office?
 RP> He definitely could be tried in criminal courts, impeached
 RP> or not. All impeachment does is remove him from office and
 RP> prohibit his occupying any public office whatsoever in the
 RP> future. 
Impeachment, in addition to removing him from office, also
prevents him from using his office, as executive head of
the Justice Department, to obstruct or quash criminal
prosecution.
Let me point out, though, that pardoning of the Dufus does
not grant him absolution. While the pardon does make him
immune to prosecution, that immunity ALSO strips him of any
recourse to 5th Amendment protection. After all, if one
can't be prosecuted then one cannot incriminate oneself.
IOW, if the Dufus is pardoned, he must then cooperate with
Starr's investigation without recourse to the 5th Amendment
on pain of prosecution for perjury or obstruction of
justice. At a minimum, the full story will be told and the
Dufus' place in history will be mercilessly accurate.
... Death is not the end - there remains the litigation...
___ Blue Wave/QWK v2.20
--- PCBoard (R) v15.22/5
---------------