Today's word: Befehlsnotstand.
Because when conservatives say "pardon," they mean "Befehlsnotstand."
WaPo gives the historical background:
Pardons in recent times generally have been granted to people who were convicted years earlier -- not of violent crimes -- and who have completed their sentences and redeemed themselves. Bush has granted 113 pardons over six years, nearly a modern low, and has never pardoned anyone who had not been released from prison. He has commuted the sentences of three others.
What the conservatives want is for Bush to "pardon" Libby immediately after the jury's verdict--if not sooner.
"Our number one goal is to see Scooter's conviction wiped out by the courts and see him vindicated," attorney William Jeffress Jr. said in an interview. "Now, I've seen all the calls for a pardon. And I agree with them. To me, he should have been pardoned six months ago or a year ago."
I can't think of a precedent for a "President" simply setting aside a court verdict right after the decision came down. Even Bush I waited a decent interval before pardoning the Iran-Contra felons.
Where does it ever stop with these guys? What next? Bush gets an automatic signature machine like the one Rummy used to sign condolence letters to the troops, and starts churning out pardons on a daily basis?
Anyhow, Befehlsnotstand:
That means "blind obedience," where "The Decider's Fuhrer's words have the force of law."
Which is, when you come to think about it, exactly the situation the conservatives have managed to create in the country today, what with signing statements, the abolition of habeas corpus, warrantless surveillance, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera. To them, Bush's words have the force of law.
It's the conservatives' authoritarian mindset speaking. When the leader speaks, all must obey! Even juries.
Needless to say, authoritarianism has nothing to do with the common law, which holds that juries are a bulwark against tyranny, let alone with the Constitution system of government we used to have.
- lambert's blog
- Login or register to post comments
- 1+[CSE]+#b94+
Front page
Comments
too bad that one is such a mouthful
because your point is extremely important, and is worth remembering when examining authoritarian discourse.
in a very small and tiny way, i feel for old school republicans. once upon a time, they were the party of intellectuals, liberty, small government, etc. now they have a coke-addled baffoon who mangles the english language and history and every other human science as their chief representative. even the more shameless of the old guard must secretly, internally squirm, every time the republican hoardes come forth and argue that all much accept the latest absurdity, simply because it fell from the mouth of the chimp in chief.
Quite frankly I’ve found
Quite frankly I've found this Libby business very complicated, and a bit boring. Thankfully, Stephen Colbert explains it to me in this video: http://minor-ripper.blogspot.com/2007/03/stephen-colbert-explains-libby-verdict.html
Nazi jargon is like that, alas
The object is to conceal thought, and that's how they do it.
I suppose Frank Lunz goes 180 degrees on that one, concealing thought in words of one syllable.
Maybe I should adopt that tactic, or translate.
Regardless of the language, the mindset is the same.
No authoritarians were tortured in the writing of this post.
First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win. -- Mahatma Gandhi
Pardons?
Pardons in recent times generally have been granted to people who were convicted years earlier — not of violent crimes — and who have completed their sentences and redeemed themselves.
You mean like Mark Rich?
Libby's client, Marc Rich?
I'm assuming Clinton didn't pardon Marc Rich right after he got convicted. Am I wrong? Give a link.
No authoritarians were tortured in the writing of this post.
First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win. -- Mahatma Gandhi
Rich pardon
No, Clinton pardoned Marc Rich after Rich had been indicted and fled the country.
Oh, I'm sorry. The Marc Rich for whom Ehud Barak interceded
It's been so long since we were all obsessed with The Clenis
, that I've forgotten the details:
I'm prepared to concede that pardoning Marc Rich was not Clinton's finest hour.
That said, there's no equivalence between the Rich pardon and Bush pardoning a member of his own office, on a criminal matter that was run out of his office.
The Rich pardon is at least arm's length. A Libby pardon looks uncomfortably like the unindicted member of a criminal gang pardoning the convicted member.
So, I think you're Equivalating
. Anyhow, at the time Bush said "it's time to move on." So, The Leader has spoken, and all must now be silent....
No authoritarians were tortured in the writing of this post.
First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win. -- Mahatma Gandhi