President Clinton's Eleventh Hour Pardons
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
S. HRG. 107–194 PRESIDENT CLINTON’S ELEVENTH HOUR PARDONS HEARING BEFORE THE COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY UNITED STATES SENATE ONE HUNDRED SEVENTH CONGRESS FIRST SESSION FEBRUARY 14, 2001 Serial No. J–107–3 Printed for the use of the Committee on the Judiciary ( U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 76–344 WASHINGTON : 2001 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800 Fax: (202) 512–2250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402–0001 COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY ORRIN G. HATCH, Utah, Chairman STROM THURMOND, South Carolina PATRICK J. LEAHY, Vermont CHARLES E. GRASSLEY, Iowa EDWARD M. KENNEDY, Massachusetts ARLEN SPECTER, Pennsylvania JOSEPH R. BIDEN, JR., Delaware JON KYL, Arizona HERBERT KOHL, Wisconsin MIKE DEWINE, Ohio DIANNE FEINSTEIN, California JEFF SESSIONS, Alabama RUSSELL D. FEINGOLD, Wisconsin SAM BROWNBACK, Kansas CHARLES E. SCHUMER, New York MITCH MCCONNELL, Kentucky RICHARD J. DURBIN, Illinois MARIA CANTWELL, Washington SHARON PROST, Chief Counsel MAKAN DELRAHIM, Staff Director BRUCE COHEN, Minority Chief Counsel and Staff Director (II) C O N T E N T S STATEMENTS OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS Page DeWine, Hon. Mike, a U.S. Senator from the State of Ohio ................................ 11 Durbin, Hon. Richard J., a U.S. Senator from the State of Illinois .................... 15 Feingold, Hon. Russell D., a U.S. Senator from the State of Wisconsin ............. 12 Feinstein, Hon. Dianne, a U.S. Senator from the State of California ................. 10 Hatch, Hon. Orrin G., a U.S. Senator from the State of Utah ............................ 1 Leahy, Hon. Patrick J., a U.S. Senator from the State of Vermont .................... 3 Kyl, Hon. Jon, a U.S. Senator from the State of Arizona .................................... 14 McConnell, Hon. Mitch, a U.S. Senator from the State of Kentucky .................. 18 Schumer, Hon. Charles E., a U.S. Senator from ther State of New York .......... 17 Sessions, Hon. Jeff, a U.S. Senator from the State of Alabama .......................... 15 Specter, Hon. Arlen, a U.S. Senator from the State of Pennsylvania ................. 7 Thurmond, Hon. Strom, a U.S. Senator from the State of South Carolina, prepared statement .............................................................................................. 103 WITNESSES Adams, Roger, Pardon Attorney, Department of Justice, Washington, DC ........ 20 Becker, Benton, Professor of Constitutional Law, University of Miami, Pem- broke Pines, FL .................................................................................................... 45 Gormley, Ken, Professor of Constitutional Law, Duquesne University, Pitts- burgh, Pennsylvania ............................................................................................ 48 Holder, Eric H., Jr., Former Deputy Attorney General, Department of Justice, Washington, DC ................................................................................................... 29 Quinn, Jack, Attorney, Quinn and Gillespie, Washington, DC ........................... 65 Schroeder, Christopher H., Professor of Law and Public Policy Studies, Duke University, Durham, NC ..................................................................................... 57 QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS Responses of Sheryl L. Walter, Acting Assistant Attorney General, Depart- ment of Justice, to questions from Senator Feinstein ....................................... 88 Response of Ken Gormley to a question from Senator Leahy .............................. 88 SUBMISSIONS FOR THE RECORD Hubbard, Joseph D., District Attorney, State of Alabama, Anniston, AL, let- ter .......................................................................................................................... 97 Interpol, red notice for the arrest of Marc Rich .................................................... 98 Love, Margaret Colgate, Attorney, Washington, DC, statement ......................... 92 Stanish, John R., Attorney, Hammond, IN, statement ........................................ 99 (III) PRESIDENT CLINTON’S ELEVENTH HOUR PARDONS WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 14, 2001 U.S. SENATE, COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY, Washington, DC. The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:07 a.m., in room SD–226, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Orrin G. Hatch, Chairman of the Committee, presiding. Present: Senators Hatch, Specter, Kyl, DeWine, Sessions, McCon- nell, Leahy, Kohl, Feinstein, Feingold, Schumer, and Durbin. OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. ORRIN G. HATCH, A U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF UTAH Chairman HATCH. We will begin. Good morning. I would like to welcome everyone to today’s hearing on the pardons granted by President Clinton just before he left office on January 20, 2001. I would like to thank all of the witnesses who have come here today or who have submitted statements for the record. The pardons and commutations granted by former President Clinton have been the subject of much debate and public com- mentary. I think virtually everyone who has examined them has been left with some serious questions as to whether some of them were appropriate. Moreover, I think virtually everyone agrees that the pardons given to Marc Rich and Pincus Green were particularly outrageous, because they were fugitives who had never taken re- sponsibility for their actions, or even appeared in court to challenge them. In fact, the Justice Department had Mr. Rich listed as an international fugitive wanted by the FBI. Moreover, these pardons allegedly were preceded by lavish gifts, political contributions, and pledged donations to the Clinton Presi- dential library. As we have come to find out over recent days, Marc Rich and Pincus Green were indicted in the largest tax evasion case in U.S. history. The record is replete with their stonewall tactics and refus- als to produce documents responsive to numerous grand jury sub- poenas. Former prosecutors in the case have even described an ef- fort by Mr. Rich and Mr. Green to ship subpoenaed documents out of the country in steamer trunks—a plan which was thwarted by law enforcement, after a tip allowed them to stop the airplane with the documents on it before it took off. We have also learned that Mr. Rich’s ex-wife, Denise Rich, has donated large sums of money to the Democratic Party, reportedly pledged $450,000 to the Clinton Presidential library, and gave ex- (1) 2 pensive furniture to the President at the end of his term. These gifts and donations raise obvious questions and they deserve an an- swer. Pardons to individuals such as these, and under these cir- cumstances, raise serious questions in the public’s mind about what does go on in the pardon process, how such decisions are made, and who can be held accountable. Similar questions arose in the summer of 1999 when numerous members of the FALN and Los Macheteros were also granted clemency by President Clinton. This committee examined the process that led to that decision and discovered that, while proponents of the clemency were granted meetings with very high-level government officials, victims were shut out of the process. The concerns of law enforcement were also apparently not heard or were disregarded. For example, many vio- lent acts for which the FALN had claimed credit were never solved. A co-defendant in one case, a man named Victor Gerena, was never brought to justice and remained on the FBI’s Ten Most Wanted list. Despite this, none of the individuals granted clemency was asked to provide information to law enforcement on the unsolved cases or the whereabouts of Gerena. As pointed out by a Washington Post editorial on Monday, there are legitimate questions about some of the last-minute pardons, in- cluding the Rich and Green pardons, that ‘‘warrant a full account- ing.’’ The Post suggests that President Clinton should volunteer a full explanation. I agree. I am one of those who believes that the President’s pardon power under the Constitution is absolute, and there is nothing we can do to change what has happened in these particular cases. That being said, I also believe that there is a need in the public interest to have a full explanation of what has gone on so that if there are any improprieties, they will never happen again. There are many appropriate ways President Clinton could do that, in a variety of settings, that would respect the office he used to hold, as well as to help the public understand what has happened. Our focus at today’s hearing will be process. Today we will con- tinue the earlier examination of the pardon process we began dur- ing the FALN controversy and examine the role—or lack of role— played by the Justice Department. It appears that as many as 47 of President Clinton’s final grants of clemency did not go through the normal process. Many were not investigated or vetted by the Justice Department to any significant degree, and I think we have seen some of the potential problems that can occur when that hap- pens. Today’s hearing will identify for the American people what proc- ess is in place and what is the normal role of the Justice Depart- ment. We will then turn to a few examples of pardons that did not go through that process and try to understand how they came to be. Finally, we have some distinguished scholars to discuss con- stitutional and other legal issues that could arise from legislative efforts to revise the current system which members may suggest in the future. I have delegated authority to Senator Specter to