-Caveat Lector- [Alan Dershowitz has been Marc Rich's lawyer in the past, and, the check the last statement ... we taxpayers are indeed going to be providing living quarters in that 8,500 Sq. Ft. "office" on 57th street for Bill. --MS] CNBC News Transcripts SHOW: RIVERA LIVE (9:00 PM ET) January 30, 2001, Tuesday LENGTH: 1992 words HEADLINE: CLINTON'S PARDONING OF MARC RICH ANCHORS: GERALDO RIVERA REPORTERS: PETE WILLIAMS BODY: Representative DAN BURTON (Republican, Government Reform Chairman): (From "The News with Brian Williams"; MSNBC) That Marc Rich should never have been pardoned. The Democrats, when they were in control of the House back in the early '90s, were investigating--they--they even sent people over to investigate into Switzerland. They said he should have been brought back to stand trial. The man was involved in trading with Iran when we had our hostages held over there during the Carter administration. He evaded taxes--$ 48 million in income taxes. He's on the six most wanted list of international criminals, and for Bill Clinton to pardon him is just unbelievable. Whether or not Hillary Clinton had any--anything to do with the pardon I don't know. But it certainly should not have happened. GERALDO RIVERA, host: very time I see Dan Burton, he gives me the willies. I can't... Mr. CHRIS DARDEN (Former Prosecutor): Yeah, me too. RIVERA: I can't get over the image of him shooting that melon in his back yard to prove that the--Hillary's friend--What was his name? The White House aide who killed himself? Professor ALAN DERSHOWITZ (Law Professor, Harvard University): Foster. Foster. RIVERA: Who is it? Prof. DERSHOWITZ: Vince Foster. Mr. DAN PETROCELLI (Trial Attorney): Vince Foster, right. RIVERA: That he was--it really was murder, not a--he's a card-carrying Clinton hater, Congressman Burton is. He can't let go of the ex-president. But let's face it, ladies and gentlemen, whether you love the guy or hate the guy, Bill Clinton certainly handed all of his longtime enemies a whole batch of new ammunition on his very last day in office. The outgoing 42nd president's 11th hour pardon of fugitive financier Marc Rich continues to draw incredible heat, much of it deserved, with some on Capitol Hill now calling for hearings into the matter. I don't know about that. But there are certainly questions, and as NBC's Pete Williams reports, the controversy over this one pardon is raising questions about the constitutional power that allowed it to be granted in the first place. PETE WILLIAMS reporting: It's not the picture of the usual applicant for a pardon, a multimillionaire living in exile in Switzerland hitting the ski slopes. But Marc Rich, an international fugitive, got his pardon with just a few hours left in the Clinton presidency, the 17-year-old criminal charges now dropped of skirting oil price controls to evade nearly $ 50 million in federal taxes and to illegally buying oil from Iran while it was holding Americans hostage. Mr. Clinton's pardon stunned federal prosecutors, and some Republicans in Congress are calling for hearings, troubled by disclosures that Rich's ex-wife, who joined in calling for the pardon, has given nearly a million dollars to Democratic causes. But President Bush says while he finds it troubling, he'll do nothing to challenge the last-minute pardon by Mr. Clinton. President GEORGE W. BUSH: He had the right to do so, to make that decision, and he did, and I'm going to protect that privilege not only for me but for future presidents as well. WILLIAMS: The pardon power comes directly from the Constitution. For any federal crime, the president can forgive anyone completely or shorten the prison sentence. While most pardons are given to people after they've served time and turned their lives around, a pardon can come anytime after a crime is committed, even before indictment or trial, as, for example, when President Ford pardoned Richard Nixon for Watergate. Constitutional scholars say it's one of the rare powers that's the president's alone, with no checks or balances. Professor IRA ROBBINS (American University Law School): When the president issues a pardon, it is according to his sole discretion. There aren't any standards for it; there isn't any review of it. WILLIAMS: A power as old as the republic, now prompting new questions about whether to rein it in. Pete Williams, NBC News, Washington. RIVERA: Pete, thanks. Professor Alan Dershowitz, I know and we state for the record that I--at some level and for some matters you represented Marc Rich at some time, nothing to having to do with the pardon. Prof. DERSHOWITZ: Right. RIVERA: But here's the legal question I pose to you. In this country, if you have a private country club, you can accept or reject a member absolutely. You have absolutely no limits as long as your reasons are legal, and they're not because of race, color, creed or religion. Is th--is that what a pardon is? Can a president do it absolutely unless he's doing it for a payoff or a bribe or a political contribution? Prof. DERSHOWITZ: Tragically, he can do it even if he does it on racial or gender grounds. I'm not even sure it could be challenged if it's an obstruction of justice. Remember why George W. Bush is so supportive of this. His father, George Sr., gave probably the worst pardon in modern American history. He gave a pardon to Casper Weinberger, the man who could have testified against him. The New York Times reported yesterday that at the time... RIVERA: Hold it. Hold it. What The New York Times reported--I got to wait. I got to take a mandatory break. We'll hear what The New York Times... Prof. DERSHOWITZ: OK. This is very important now. RIVERA: Stay tuned. Parting Gifts. (Announcements) President BILL CLINTON: (From January 21) I spent a lot of time on that case; I think there are very good reasons for it, and I think I couldn't say them any better than Jack Quinn, Mr. Rich's attorney. You call him. I spent--I've spent a lot of personal time talking about it because of--it's an unusual case, but Quinn made a strong case, and I was convinced he was right on the merits. And that's all I can say. I've--others might disagree, but I think Quinn made a very compelling case on the merits. RIVERA: Alan, you were saying and--and state at the end of your completion of your thought from the previous segment whether or not you favor this pardon. Prof. DERSHOWITZ: Well, first of all, The New York Times reported yesterday that when Bush pardon Weinberger, Bush was, quote, "the subject of an investigation which he managed to shut down, an investigation which could have involved him. So he may have obstructed justice which was much worse. As far as Rich is concerned, I represented him five or six years ago in an effort to get the Justice Department to simply listen to two prominent tax lawyers, Professor Bernard Wolfman of Harvard and Marty Ginsberg, the wife--the husband of the justice Ginsberg, both of whom concluded independently that Marc Rich had not committed any tax crimes at all. The Justice Department wouldn't listen. Marc Rich lived not as a fugitive, but as somebody living in Switzerland who was subject to extradition. The Swiss courts ruled that he was not extraditable because what he was accused of was not a crime in Switzerland. And so whether one agrees or disagrees, there are two sides to this story. What concerns me, of course, is that the president gave some pardons; didn't give other pardons. I thought that Milken deserved a pardon as well. I thought that Jonathan Pollard deserved a pardon. Reasonable people can agree or disagree. I hope there are hearings, and if there are hearings, let's talk about the pardon power, let's talk about George Bush's pardon of Casper Weinberger, and let's see if there are any constitutional amendments that should put limits on the presidential pardon. But right now there are no limits. RIVERA: Ironically, Casper Weinberger, Iran-Contra dealing with the same rogue country as Marc Rich allegedly was. The difference is, of course, he was a member of the United States Cabinet. OK, Gerry, you heard Professor Dershowitz say conditionally he approves because the power is absolute, and you know, let the hearings happen so we can see the ugly--you know, how they make sausage. But what are your feelings? Mr. GERRY SPENCE (Trial Attorney): Well, my feeling is this, that we're not talk--we don't see presidents pardoning poor people. We don't see pardon--people pard--presidents pardoning people who are really not guilty of crimes and have been improperly prosecuted. And I--in my case, I--I asked the president to pardon a poor man, a poor lawyer who got caught in a--in a vice--he wou--he wouldn't give up his client. He was an ethical lawyer who wouldn't give up his client, wouldn't plead, and finally got caught by--by a prosecutor who did a good job prosecuting him and he wouldn't--he wouldn't cut him loose. Mr. DARDEN: Damn prosecutors. Mr. SPENCE: Now let me just say something about this. My concern is that--that pardons are to do justice, not to create injustices. And it seems to me that if you're not rich, if there isn't something in it for the president, if there isn't some political gain or some self-promotion or some money thing, that helps the president, we do not see the president using the pardon for its proper purposes. And that's what's--that's what worries me. Prof. DERSHOWITZ: Gerry, I got a--I got a pardon--I helped get a pardon for a woman named Susan Rosenberg who is obscure, nobody knows about her, hasn't been much in the press. The president did it after getting a letter from Elie Wiesel and from me and from other people because this woman was serving a way, way excessive sentence because Rudy Giuliani believed she did something, which he wouldn't charge her for. And, you know, you shouldn't have to go RIVERA: Was that the terrorism case? Prof. DERSHOWITZ: That was a terrorism case from the '60s. She had served a very long time. Her co-defendant had gotten out. She was serving because Rudy Giuliani wouldn't try her. You know, you shouldn't have to go to the Justice Department to get permission to give a pardon. The Justice Department prosecuted these people. Mr. SPENCE: Yeah, that's right. Mr. DARDEN: But at the same time, you shouldn't--you shouldn't... RIVERA: Chris Darden. Mr. DARDEN: ...be allowed to buy a pardon by paying a million dollars to the president. Mr. SPENCE: That's exactly right. RIVERA: So--so, Chris, you think this is hinky, too, even though you're a Cli--a Clinton man? Mr. DARDEN: Well, you know, I'm a Republican, Geraldo. RIVERA: Oh, that's right. Mr. DARDEN: That's right, number one. But number two, it sends the wrong message, I think, when you look at all the money that Rich and his wife and the--and the--and the relationship between Jack Quinn and Richard's lawyer and the president. RIVERA: Were you on the stage dancing at the convention with those other people? Mr. DARDEN: Me and Colin Powell, yeah. RIVERA: Dancing--no, just kidding. Mr. DARDEN: And Condoleeza Rice. You know, we're--we were all there. But it really does send the wrong message, and--and--and the message is, is that you can buy your freedom, you can buy a pardon for a million dollars... Mr. SPENCE: Yeah, that's right. RIVERA: It is the wrong message, Dan Petrocelli. Let's face it. Mr. PETROCELLI: Well, put--putting aside the merits of this. My--my reflection... RIVERA: And I love Denise Rich, his ex-wife. She's a wonderful philanthropic person and I think she's very gentle and innocent and naive, but... Mr. PETROCELLI: But my--my reflection is really--with Bill Clinton at this point and watching that clip, I mean, his story is really a tragedy, and apparently it's--it's not completed. A brilliant man, a highly effective president, and his legacy will forever be marred because of lapses of judgment like this, and this seems to be another example. RIVERA: Wow! Let's watch him as a private citizen living on 57th Street. That should be interesting. Thank you, wonderful panel. Thank you, ladies and gentlemen. See you tomorrow from Los Angeles. http://www.idg.net/go.cgi?id=409212 <A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/">www.ctrl.org</A> DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER ========== CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. ======================================================================== Archives Available at: http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html <A HREF="http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html">Archives of [EMAIL PROTECTED]</A> http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ <A HREF="http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/">ctrl</A> ======================================================================== To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
