Ask the Scholar
Document scope · 1 page
Scholar
Ask about this object, its catalog metadata, its source description, or the page inventory.
For page-specific OCR and visual context, open one of the page chats.
Scholar Source Context
Document identity
localId
12022007
label
Nixon Pardon and Papers - Press Conference, 1974/09/16 (Ford) (2)
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
12022007
sourceUrl
contentType
document
title
Nixon Pardon and Papers - Press Conference, 1974/09/16 (Ford) (2)
citationUrl
collections
Philip W. Buchen Files
Philip Buchen's General Subject Files
subjects
Nixon, Richard M. (Richard Milhous), 1913-1994
Watergate Affair, 1972-1974
Press conferences
largeImageUrl
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
12022007
coverageEndDate
logicalDate
1974-09-01
month
9
year
1974
coverageStartDate
logicalDate
1974-09-01
month
9
year
1974
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
63ec14951332ab5b
ocrText
The original documents are located in Box 35, folder "Nixon Pardon and Papers - Press
Conference, 1974/09/16 (Ford) (2)" of the Philip Buchen Files at the Gerald R. Ford
Presidential Library.
Copyright Notice
The copyright law of the United States (Title 17, United States Code) governs the making of
photocopies or other reproductions of copyrighted material. Gerald R. Ford donated to the United
States of America his copyrights in all of his unpublished writings in National Archives collections.
Works prepared by U.S. Government employees as part of their official duties are in the public
domain. The copyrights to materials written by other individuals or organizations are presumed to
remain with them. If you think any of the information displayed in the PDF is subject to a valid
copyright claim, please contact the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library.
Exact duplicates within this folder were not digitized.
Digitized from Box 35 of the Philip Buchen Files at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library
1. Equal Treatment for Watergate Defendants
2. Pardoning Watergate Defendants; "The Study"
3. Background: Usual Clemency Procedure
4. Outside Clemency Review
5. Getting the Facts Out
6. Knowing What Was Pardoned; Pardon Scope
7. Timing
8. Integrity of the Law
9. Judicial Determination of Standards
10. Your Credibility
11.
Change of Mind; Public Reaction; Agony Intensified
12. Nixon Health; Prepare the Public
13. "Deal"
FORD is LIBRARY
1. EQUAL TREATMENT FOR WATERGATE DEFENDANTS
(See also "Integrity of the Law" at page 8)
QUESTION: Is it an unjust denial of equal treatment to refuse to pardon
the Watergate defendants?
ANSWER: The situation of former President Nixon is very different
from that of the Watergate defendants, especially those awaiting trial. /
The Nixon situation is unique.
1. Previous Official Determination. Richard Nixon has already been
found unanimously by the House Judiciary Committee to have engaged in
substantial misbehavior.
2. Punishment Already Suffered. To resign from the Presidency is
a disgrace in history and in the eyes of the people. To be raised to this
office, especially by a landslide vote, is to be honored extraordinarily. To
leave it under the circumstances in which Richard Nixon did, is to be
punished more than any other American leader has. To be sure, there is
punishment in any fall from grace, but the depth of Richard Nixon's fall is
unique.
3. Public Contribution. In dispensing mercy we should look not only
to a man's transgressions but also to his contributions to the public welfare.
There may not be unanimous acclaim for Richard Nixon's policies, but perhaps
even his severest critics admit that some of his policies advanced the public
interest and contributed to world peace. Such contributions are a matter of
degree, but Richard Nixon's situation is unique.
4. Public Distress or Polarization. Many Americans would be distressed
over the indictment and the appearance "in the dock" of a former President. /
Because, moreover, a substantial number of Americans would feel strongly
alienated from any such proceedings, the possibility of political polarization
is real.
The cumulative effect is to make Richard Nixon's situation unique. Perhaps
some or many will disagree, but perhaps most Americans can understand why
I think the Nixon case is different.
ALTERNATIVE QUESTION: Since all the others were involved in the same
crime, ostensibly at the behest of their pardoned leader, how can you justify
trying them now?
ANSWER: We cannot know whether the facts about the role of these other
defendants are as you state them until there is a trial. When the facts become
known, they can be taken into account in the usual way after trial in sentencing
and in normal clemency procedures. Those who occupy a position of public
trust in the service of a President are morally responsible for their own actions.
FORD
/ and / on the following page
BRALD
-1-
Footnotes from 1.
*
You might be asked about the Watergate defendants' suggestion that an
1856 Supreme Court case implies that a pardon for one is a pardon for
all. You should not comment on a defendant's legal argument to the
court.
** / Some might think that such distress would reflect an excessive and
unwise mystique surrounding Presidents and former Presidents, but
it seems to be a fact.
-la-
FORD & TEBRARY BERRED
2. PARDONING WATERGATE DEFENDANTS: "THE STUDY"
QUESTION: Will you now pardon the Watergate defendants facing trial?
ANSWER: The normal processes of justice will be followed.
FOLLOWUP QUESTION: Does that mean you have decided against any future
clemency for (a) those already convicted who have either completed or are
now serving their sentences, or (b) those who may be convicted in the future?
ANSWER: The only thing I have decided is that the usual processes should
be followed. If I point out that those normal processes include published
regulations on Presidential clemency, please do not infer that I am
contemplating future clemency.
QUESTION: You said that pardon for Dean and other Watergate defendants
is being considered. Did you consider blanket pardoning? If not, what was
being studied? Is the study complete? What is the result?
ANSWER:
1. I never contemplated blanket pardons and certainly no general
pretrial clemency.
2. The Nixon case is unique. (See elaborated answer on this point.)
3. I did want an' examination of proper procedures for processing
any clemency petitions that are in fact received.
4. The proper procedure is that any convicted person may apply
through the Department of Justice in the usual manner.
is
Func
GERALD
-2-
3. BACKGROUND: USUAL CLEMENCY PROCEDURE
Under published regulations, after conviction and sentencing one ordinarily
applies for Executive Clemency through the Department of Justice. Upon
receipt of the petition, the Attorney General uses the Office of the Pardon
Attorney and reviews the request, conducts whatever investigation is
necessary, and then forwards recommendations to the White House.
Before petitioning for a pardon, one who has been imprisoned must ordinarily,
under existing regulations, wait three years -- or five in certain cases / --
after his release. (Nothing prevents the Attorney General from making
appropriate adjustments in this requirement or from amending his regulations
generally.) There is no fixed waiting period for requests for the commutation
of a sentence. (Commutation is usually granted only when other relief is not
available from a court or parole board, but exceptions are provided for in the
regulations.)
The President does not ordinarily review personally each clemency
recommendation from the Justice Department. There are too many of them.
Under past practice ** / Justice Department recommendations were reviewed
by White House counsel who could forward them for personal Presidential
attention where .necessary.
/
Such as perjury or the violation of a public trust involving personal
dishonesty.
We do not necessarily want to commit ourselves to preserving this
practice.
&
FORD
GERALD
- -3-
4. OUTSIDE CLEMENCY REVIEW
QUESTION: Would it not be better to have the Special Prosecutor's
Office or independent advisors outside of the government make recommendations
relating to clemency petitions from Watergate defendants?
ANSWER:
1. The Office of the Pardon Attorney was established to process petitions
for clemency so that the individuals who prosecute an individual are not the
same ones deciding whether he should get clemency. The prosecutorial role
of the Special Prosecutor could be inconsistent with the role of evaluating a
petition for clemency.
2. Processing petitions for clemency is not a part of the responsibility
of the Special Prosecutor as set forth in the regulations for the Department
of Justice.
3. Although outside review by persons outside of the government does
have certain advantages, there should be a presumption in favor of regular
procedures. And I have no reason to believe that this function is not best
performed by those persons who do it on a regular basis. They do,
incidentally, in the process of preparing their recommendations, solicit
the opinion of the prosecutor and make appropriate additional inquiries.
4. Note: As to any fear that the Pardon Attorney (who was appointed
during the Nixon administration) might be too lenient with regard to Nixon
administration officials involved in Watergate: I have no reason to think
SO. The Attorney General will, of course, take appropriate steps to insure
impartial consideration. Furthermore, Justice Department recommendations
will be reviewed in the White House.
5. Note: As to any fear that the usual standards for Justice Department
clemency recommendations are too restrictive or too harsh: I am confident
that the Justice Department administers its clemency responsibility
conscientiously and if any change in its procedures or standards are warranted,
I am sure that the Attorney General and the Deputy Attorney General will
consider them.
-4-
GERALD R. FORD
5. GETTING THE FACTS OUT
QUESTION: Does the pardon mean that the people and the history will
never know the full facts about Richard Nixon's possible crimes or other
misbehavior in office? / Is the pardon another coverup?
ANSWER:
1. The American people already know a great deal about the Nixon
Presidency.
2. The House Judiciary Committee has published its official findings
on Richard Nixon's behavior in office.
3. The pardon does not itself preclude any report on all matters within
the Special Prosecutor's jurisdiction, at a time and in a manner consistent
with his responsibilities.
(a) The Special Prosecutor alr eady has the materials
related to the Watergate coverup.
(b) Any other needed information may well be available in
connection with other proceedings and, wherever Mr. Nixon himself
is a witness, the pardon prevents any Fifth Amendment claim to
silence based on the possibility of incrimination under Federal law.
(c) It is possible that other arrangements for access to the
Nixon files might be worked out. I myself have long urged and will
continue to urge full disclosure by Mr. Nixon.
* / Another form for this question:
Do you agree with former Special Prosecutor Cox that "the guilt or
innocence of a high official charged with crime, especially a President,
should be determined once and for all by the established procedures
of justice in order to lay to rest claims of political vendetta. To
short circuit the process invites endless uncertainty and division. "
is
FORD
-5-
CHRALO
6. KNOWING WHAT WAS PARDONED: PARDON SCOPE
QUESTION: Was it wise to pardon Richard Nixon without knowing what,
if any, offenses he might have committed?
ANSWER: The Watergate coverup charges are pretty well known and I
did have information from the Special Prosecutor's office that not even
probable criminal guilt could be established with respect to an additional
10 specified allegations concerning Mr. Nixon.
FOLLOWUP QUESTION: Does that mean that evidence of crime in these
or any other now-unspecified matters might not turn up in the future?
ANSWER: One can never be certain what will appear in the future. /
QUESTION: A pardon for Watergate can be understood to serve a national
purpose, but why a pardon that covers possible tax fraud as well? Wouldn't
the nation be better served by a demonstration that even a President cannot
cheat on his taxes?
ANSWER: What really mattered was Watergate and the resulting harassment
of the former President. Anything less than a full pardon would have left
open the door to continued attacks and would have defeated my purpose
which is to put this whole affair behind us.
* / Note: This is a very troublesome point. It would be unwise to make any
predictions or estimates that additional and significant improprieties might
not yet appear.
-6-
BECALD
7. TIMING
QUESTION: Why did you grant the pardon when you did? Wouldn't it have
been better to wait (1) until indictment, if any, and trial of Nixon, (2) until
wider consultation with Congress and the public, or (3) until the jury in the
Watergate trials is sequestered?
ANSWER:
1. Once I had decided that Mr. Nixon should, as an act of mercy, be
spared any imprisonment, there seemed to be no reason to open him and
the American people to the distress of a trial. / Under these circumstances,
a trial seemed unnecessarily harassing and vindictive toward him and pardon
NOTE: See separate answers on
-- getting the facts out
-- getting a judicial determination of standards
-- what was pardoned
2. More consultation might have been preferable, **/ but I never
doubted the wide diversity of views on this subject. Consensus did not
seem possible.
3. Some may think that a pardon for Nixon before the jury is sequestered
in the Watergate trials might possibly be thought prejudicial to the defendants,
but that is a matter for the courts to decide. Accordingly, further comment
on this point by me seems inappropriate.
*/Does not explain failur to wait for an indictment.
/ The Attorney General might appropriately have been consulted about
both substance or form, but you had advice of counsel and based your
judgment on your own fundamental conception of mercy and on broad
considerations of the national interest.
GERALD
-7-
8. INTEGRITY OF THE LAW
QUESTION: Doesn't the pardon mean that significant personages violate
the law with impugnity while the more humble suffer the law's full rigors? /
ANSWER: This concern is understandable but
1. All persons -- Presidents included -- are subject to the law.
And I believe that the law has triumphed in Watergate. It has routed out
and put a stop to the Watergate wrongs.
2. In a very real sense the nation has rendered a verdict on
Richard Nixon.
3. Clemency is also a part of our system of law. To pardon is to forgive
and not to excuse the conduct that may have been involved.
4. It is a unique act of mercy for a man
(a) whose conduct has already been found unacceptable but
(b) who has already suffered greatly
(c) who has surely contributed to the public interest in some
respects, and
(d) whose trial would have distressed many of the public.
5. The whole Watergate situation is unique.
ALTERNATIVE QUESTION: Is this pardon a precedent that no President
should ever be tried for his possible crimes?
FORD
and
-8-
9. JUDICIAL DETERMINATION OF STANDARDS
QUESTION: Doesn't the pardon mean that the courts will never have the
occasion to define appropriate standards of conduct for Richard Nixon and
other Presidents?
ANSWER:
1. The courts are not the exclusive instititution by which gover nmental
standards of conducted are determined. /
2. The courts may have occasion to consider such standards in other cases.
3. The House Judiciary Committee has already made historically
significant determinations of this sort.
4. The proper standards of behavior seem quite clear with respect to
most Watergate related matters. /
* / Constitutional history and other institutions have a very major role in
this process.
/ Whether this is true with respect to the ten other matters of the
Special Prosecution Force, most cannot be fully known at this stage.
-9-
10. YOUR CREDIBILITY
QUESTION:
What do you plan to do to restore your credibility and
regain the trust of the American people?
ANSWER: I hope that my credibility is not lost. The country knows that contro-
versial decisions are not always popular. And I have changed my mind on
this question. But I hope that even those who disagree with my decision
understand that every statement I have made on this subject represented my
genuine thinking at the time. Candor is the basis of trust, as I intend to
go on speaking sincerely, even when I change my mind.
FORD
-10-
11. CHANGE OF MIND: PUBLIC REACTION: AGONY INTENSIFIED
QUESTION: Do you now believe that you were correct at your last press
conference when you said a pardon now would be unwise and untimely?
ANSWER: As I have said, I reconsidered my earlier judgment and came to
believe that a pardon was a proper act of mercy that best serves the interests
of the nation. I fully understand that it would have been better for me
politically to have stayed with my earlier position, but that is not my criterion.
QUESTION: Did you consider or suspect the public reaction that actually
occurred to your pardon of former President Nixon?
ANSWER: I knew there would be great concern. I did not try to predict
its extent, because I believed and still believe that the grant of mercy was
the right thing for me to do.
QUESTION: Hasn't the pardon intensified national agony as much as
a trial of the former President would have?
ANSWER: Although the matter is not capable of clear proof either way, I
believe that the adverse national consequences of a Nixon trial and possible
additional punishment would have been much greater.
-11-
12. NIXON HEALTH: PREPARE THE PUBLIC
QUESTION:
Was the timing dictated by what you viewed as a health
emergency?
ANSWER: As I said in my speech, the former President's health was
a factor, but not in the sense of an emergency. My concern is for the
very long time needed to start and complete a trial, and once the decision
was made, the sooner the better.
FOLLOWUP QUESTION: If not, why did you not do something to prepare
the American public for your reversal instead of acting precipitously?
ANSWER: In a matter this controversial there is not much that can be done
to "prepare" the public as you put it. All I could do was to explain my
reasoning openly and candidly, which I did.
FORD
-12-
13. "DEAL"
QUESTION: The concern has been expressed here and there that the
pardon arose from some "deal. "
ANSWER: There was no deal. Had there been any such deal I would not
have indicated at my last press conference that indictment and other legal
process should probably precede a pardon.
QUESTION: Is it true, as reported in the press, that Haig and Kissinger
conveyed Nixon's desire for a pardon to you indirectly before he resigned?
Did you ndicate to him in any way that you would grant a pardon?
ANSWER:
QUESTION: When did you decide to pardon the former President?
ANSWER:
-13-
B 9/14 bess Conf
Glease fill
1. Equal Treatment for Watergate Defendants
2. Pardoning Watergate Defendants; "The Study"
3. Background: Usual Clemency Procedure
4. Outside Clemency Review
5. Getting the Facts Out
6. Knowing What Was Pardoned; Pardon Scope
7. Timing
8. Integrity of the Law
9. Judicial Determination of Standards
10. Your Credibility
11. Change of Mind; Public Reaction; Agony Intensified
12. Nixon Health; Prepare the Public
13. "Deal"
BERALD FORD FIBRARY
1
1. EQUAL TREATMENT FOR WATERGATE DEFENDANTS
(See also "Integrity of the Law" at page 8)
QUESTION: Is it an unjust denial of equal treatment to refuse to pardon
the Watergate defendants?
ANSWER: The situation of former President Nixon is very different
from that of the Watergate defendants, especially those awaiting trial. /
The Nixon situation is unique.
1. Previous Official Determination. Richard Nixon has already been
found unanimously by the House Judiciary Committee to have engaged in
substantial misbehavior.
2. Punishment Already Suffered. To resign from the Presidency is.
a disgrace in history and in the eyes of the people. To be raised to this
office, especially by a landslide vote, is to be honored extraordinarily. To
leave is under the circumstances in which Richard Nixon did, is to be
punished more than any other American leader has. To be sure, there is
punishment in any fall from grace, but the depth of Richard Nixon's fall is
unique.
3. Public Contribution. In dispensing mercy we should look not only
to a man's transgressions but also to his contributions to the public welfare.
There may not be unanimous acclaim for Richard Nixon's policies, but perhaps
even his severest critics admit that some of his policies advanced the public
interest and contributed to world peace. Such contributions are a matter of
degree, but Richard Nixon's situation is unique.
4. Public Distress or Polarization. Many Americans would be distressed
over the indictment and the appearance "in the dock" of a former President. /
Because, moreover, a substantial number of Americans would feel strongly
alienated from any such proceedings, the possibility of political polarization
is real.
The cumulative effect is to make Richard Nixon's situation unique. Perhaps
some or many will disagree, but perhaps most Americans can understand why
I think the Nixon case is different.
ALTERNATIVE QUESTION: Since all the others were involved in the same
crime, ostensibly at the behest of their pardoned leader, how can you justify
trying them now?
ANSWER: We cannot know whether the facts about the role of these other
defendants are as you state them until there is a trial. When the facts become
known, they can be taken into account in the usual way after trial in sentencing
and in normal clemency procedures. Those who occupy a position of public
trust in the service of a President are morally responsible for their own actions.
/ and ** / on the following page
-1-
Footnotes from 1.
*
You might be asked about the Watergate defendants' suggestion that an
1856 Supreme Court case implies that a pardon for one is a pardon for
all. You should not comment on a defendant's legal argument to the
court.
** / Some might think that such distress would reflect an excessive and
unwise mystique surrounding Presidents and former Presidents, but
it seems to be a fact.
-la-
2. PARDONING WATERGATE DEFENDANTS: "THE STUDY"
QUESTION: Will you now pardon the Watergate defendants facing trial?
ANSWER: The normal processes of justice will be followed.
FOLLOWUP QUESTION: Does that mean you have decided against any future
clemency for (a) those already convicted who have either completed or are
now serving their sentences, or (b) those who may be convicted in the future?
ANSWER: The only thing I have decided is that the usual processes should
be followed. If I point out that those normal processes include published
regulations on Presidential clemency, please do not infer that I am
contemplating future clemency.
QUESTION: You said that pardon for Dean and other Watergate defendants
is being considered. Did you consider blanket pardoning? If not, what was
being studied? Is the study complete? What is the result?
ANSWER:
1. I never contemplated blanket pardons and certainly no general
pretrial clemency.
2. The Nixon case is unique. (See elaborated answer on this point.)
3. I did want an' examination of proper procedures for processing
any clemency petitions that are in fact received.
4. The proper procedure is that any convicted person may apply
through the Department of Justice in the usual manner.
STATES
kand
-2-
3. BACKGROUND: USUAL CLEMENCY PROCEDURE
Under published regulations, after conviction and sentencing one ordinarily
applies for Executive Clemency through the Department of Justice. Upon
receipt of the petition, the Attorney General uses the Office of the Pardon
Attorney and reviews the request, conducts whatever investigation is
necessary, and then forwards recommendations to the White House.
Before petitioning for a pardon, one who has been imprisoned must ordinarily,
under existing regulations, wait three years -- or five in certain cases / ---
after his release. (Nothing prevents the Attorney General from making
appropriate adjustments in this requirement or from amending his regulations
generally.) There is no fixed waiting period for requests for the commutation
of a sentence. (Commutation is usually granted only when other relief is not
available from a court or parole board, but exceptions are provided for in the
regulations. )
The President does not ordinarily review personally each clemency
recommendation from the Justice Department. There are too many of them.
Under past practice / Justice Department recommendations were reviewed
by White House counsel who could forward them for personal Presidential
attention where .necessary.
/ Such as perjury or the violation of a public trust involving personal
dishonesty.
**/ We do not necessarily want to commit ourselves to preserving this
practice.
R. FC
GERALD
-3-
4. OUTSIDE CLEMENCY REVIEW
QUESTION: Would it not be better to have the Special Prosecutor's
Office or independent advisors outside of the government make recommendations
relating to clemency petitions from Watergate defendants?
ANSWER:
1. The Office of the Pardon Attorney was established to process petitions
for clemency so that the individuals who prosecute an individual are not the
same ones deciding whether he should get clemency. The prosecutorial role
of the Special Prosecutor could be inconsistent with the role of evaluating a
petition for clemency.
2. Processing petitions for clemency is not a part of the responsibility
of the Special Prosecutor as set forth in the regulations for the Department
of Justice.
3. Although outside review by persons outside of the government does
have certain advantages, there should be a presumption in favor of regular
procedures. And I have no reason to believe that this function is not best
performed by those persons who do it on a regular basis. They do,
incidentally, in the process of preparing their recommendations, solicit
the opinion of the prosecutor and make appropriate additional inquiries.
4. Note: As to any fear that the Pardon Attorney (who was appointed
during the Nixon administration) might be too lenient with regard to Nixon
administration officials involved in Watergate: I have no reason to think
so. The Attorney General will, of course, take appropriate steps to insure
impartial consideration. Furthermore, Justice Department recommendations
will be reviewed in the White House.
5. Note: As to any fear that the usual standards for Justice Department
clemency recommendations are too restrictive or too harsh: I am confident
that the Justice Department administers its clemency responsibility
conscientiously and if any change in its procedures or standards are warranted,
I am sure that the Attorney General and the Deputy Attorney General will
consider them.
R.
FORD
-4-
5. GETTING THE FACTS OUT
QUESTION: Does the pardon mean that the people and the history will
never know the full facts about Richard Nixon's possible crimes or other
misbehavior in office? / Is the pardon another coverup?
ANSWER:
1. The American people already know a great deal about the Nixon
Presidency.
2. The House Judiciary Committee has published its official findings
on Richard Nixon's behavior in office.
3. The pardon does not itself preclude any report on all matters within
the Special Prosecutor's jurisdiction, at a time and in a manner consistent
with his responsibilities.
(a) The Special Prosecutor alr eady has the materials
related to the Watergate coverup.
(b) Any other needed information may well be available in
connection with other proceedings and, wherever Mr. Nixon himself
is a witness, the pardon prevents any Fifth Amendment claim to
silence based on the possibility of incrimination under Federal law.
(c) It is possible that other arrangements for access to the
Nixon files might be worked out. I myself have long urged and will
continue to urge full disclosure by Mr. Nixon.
* / Another form for this question:
Do you agree with former Special Prosecutor Cox that "the guilt or
innocence of a high official charged with crime, especially a President,
should be determined once and for all by the established procedures
of justice in order to lay to rest claims of political vendetta. To
short circuit the process invites endless uncertainty and division.
"
=
FOND
-5-
6. KNOWING WHAT WAS PARDONED: PARDON SCOPE
QUESTION: Was it wise to pardon Richard Nixon without knowing what,
if any, offenses he might have committed?
ANSWER: The Watergate coverup charges are pretty well known and I
did have information from the Special Prosecutor's office that not even
probable criminal guilt could be established with respect to an additional
10 specified allegations concerning Mr. Nixon.
FOLLOWUP QUESTION: Does that mean that evidence of crime in these
or any other now-unspecified matters might not turn up in the future?
ANSWER: One can never be certain what will appear in the future. * /
QUESTION: A pardon for Watergate can be understood to serve a national
purpose, but why a pardon that covers possible tax fraud as well? Wouldn't
the nation be better served by a demonstration that even a President cannot
cheat on his taxes?
ANSWER: What really mattered was Watergate and the resulting harassment
of the former President. Anything less than a full pardon would have left
open the door to continued attacks and would have defeated my purpose
which is to put this whole affair behind us.
* / Note: This is a very troublesome point. It would be unwise to make any
predictions or estimates that additional and significant improprieties might
not yet appear.
-6-
7. TIMING
QUESTION: Why did you grant the pardon when you did? Wouldn't it have
been better to wait (1) until indictment, if any, and trial of Nixon, (2) until
wider consultation with Congress and the public, or (3) until the jury in the
Watergate trials is sequestered?
ANSWER:
1. Once I had decided that Mr. Nixon should, as an act of mercy, be
spared any imprisonment, there seemed to be no reason to open him and
the American people to the distress of a trial. / Under these circumstances,
a trial seemed unnecessarily harassing and vindictive toward him and pardon
NOTE: See separate answers on
-- getting the facts out
-- getting a judicial determination of standards
-- what was pardoned
2. More consultation might have been preferable, **/ but I never
doubted the wide diversity of views on this subject. Consensus did not
seem possible.
3. Some may think that a pardon for Nixon before the jury is sequestered
in the Watergate trials might possibly be thought prejudicial to the defendants,
but that is a matter for the courts to decide. Accordingly, further comment
on this point by me seems inappropriate.
* /Does not explain failur e to wait for an indictment.
**/ The Attorney General might appropriately have been consulted about
both substance or form, but you had advice of counsel and based your
judgment on your own fundamental conception of mercy and on broad
considerations of the national interest.
-7-
8. INTEGRITY OF THE LAW
QUESTION: Doesn't the pardon mean that significant personages violate
the law with impugnity while the more humble suffer the law's full rigors? /
ANSWER: This concern is understandable but
1. All persons -- Presidents included -- are subject to the law.
And I believe that the law has triumphed in Watergate. It has routed out
and put a stop to the Watergate wrongs.
2. In a very real sense the nation has rendered a verdict on
Richard Nixon.
3. Clemency is also a part of our system of law. To pardon is to forgive
and not to excuse the conduct that may have been involved.
4. It is a unique act of mercy for a man
(a) whose conduct has already been found unacceptable but
(b) who has already suffered greatly
(c) who has surely contributed to the public interest in some
respects, and
(d) whose trial would have distressed many of the public.
5. The whole Watergate situation is unique.
ALTERNATIVE QUESTION: Is this pardon a precedent that no President
should ever be tried for his possible crimes?
FOND
GENRED
-8-
9. JUDICIAL DETERMINATION OF STANDARDS
QUESTION: Doesn't the pardon mean that the courts will never have the
occasion to define appropriate standards of conduct for Richard Nixon and
other Presidents?
ANSWER:
1. The courts are not the exclusive instititution by which gover nmental
standards of conducted are determined. * /
2. The courts may have occasion to consider such standards in other cases.
3. The House Judiciary Committee has already made historically
significant determinations of this sort.
4. The proper standards of behavior seem quite clear with respect to
most Watergate related matters. ** /
*
/ Constitutional history and other institutions have a very major role in
this process.
** / Whether this is true with respect to the ten other matters of the
Special Prosecution Force, most cannot be fully known at this stage.
-9- -
:
FORD
THE
10. YOUR CREDIBILITY
QUESTION:
What do you plan to do to restore your credibility and
regain the trust of the American people?
ANSWER: I hope that my credibility is not lost. The country knows that contro-
versial decisions are not always popular. And I have changed my mind on
this question. But I hope that even those who disagree with my decision
understand that every statement I have made on this subject represented my
genuine thinking at the time. Candor is the basis of trust, as I intend to
go on speaking sincerely, even when I change my mind.
-10-
11. CHANGE OF MIND: PUBLIC REACTION: AGONY INTENSIFIED
QUESTION: Do you now believe that you were correct at your last press
conference when you said a pardon now would be unwise and untimely?
ANSWER: As I have said, I reconsidered my earlier judgment and came to
believe that a pardon was a proper act of mercy that best serves the interests
of the nation. I fully understand that it would have been better for me
politically to have stayed with my earlier position, but that is not my criterion.
QUESTION: Did you consider or suspect the public reaction that actually
occurred to your pardon of former President Nixon?
ANSWER: I knew there would be great concern. I did not try to predict
its extent, because I believed and still believe that the grant of mercy was
the right thing for me to do.
QUESTION: Hasn't the pardon intensified national agony as much as
a trial of the former President would have?
ANSWER: Although the matter is not capable of clear proof either way, I
believe that the adverse national consequences of a Nixon trial and possible
additional punishment would have been much greater.
FORD
-11-
12. NIXON HEALTH: PREPARE THE PUBLIC
QUESTION:
Was the timing dictated by what you viewed as a health
emergency?
ANSWER: As I said in my speech, the former President's health was
a factor, but not in the sense of an emergency. My concern is for the
very long time needed to start and complete a trial, and once the decision
was made, the sooner the better.
FOLLOWUP QUESTION: If not, why did you not do S omething to prepare
the American public for your reversal instead of acting precipitously?
ANSWER: In a matter this controversial there is not much that can be done
to "prepare" the public as you put it. All I could do was to explain my
reasoning openly and candidly, which I did.
FORD
10017
-12-
13. "DEAL"
QUESTION: The concern has been expressed here and there that the
pardon arose from some "deal. "
ANSWER: There was no deal. Had there been any such deal I would not
have indicated at my last press conference that indictment and other legal
process should probably preceded pardon.
QUESTION: Is it true, as reported in the press, that Haig and Kissinger
conveyed Nixon's desire for a pardon to you indirectly before he resigned?
Did you indicate to him in any way that you would grant a pardon?
ANSWER:
QUESTION: When did you decide to pardon the former President?
ANSWER:
-13-
be bach 11:30 -12:00
Phil -
"
Relevance of
talke about Niran Health - bad to
pandar- not final reason
occassion for thinking about pardan earler
not decis are
2. Characterize Nixon state of health in
last few days
3. annesty & pardan were they linked in
you maid - Haldeman request f parden
hear end - other proposal was annesty * parden
# together-
4 Various forms discuss up any one
19
before- did Nixan people mentan
it before
Did you give any thought to possibility
of pardoning Pres? Nixan before your became
l read newspaper- t was
GERALD ? FORD
debuted there -
E.
Nixin family servans
6. Ash authairitin to GSA to pay
whose paying Dr. Tkach 7
Anything touching Richard Nixon is
Super charge
8. Can impeachment catinue after reign
& wan't tell Cargres what to do.
9. What did you learn form ecoumane
meeting last weels ?
what is your action Plan?
10. Why Harg to NATO over Datch
opposition ?
11, ter Hort 7 article - P RB
R. CIA in Chile -?
(1) Not my admin
(2) Past practices have mychication
(3) I haven!! had line to goint
1970 years?
B, Do you behave Mrs Chardies
will y use atamic energy for
Hc why W Viel name is annesty conditional
GREATOR FORD LIBRA
MEMORANDUM
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
Letter agreement
1, Public interest protected
through safegurrels
5. Not gotting in middlo
3. Fairness to RN + third parties
Othorquestions wouldbg reterred to counsel.
- full disclosure posture
b)mandate )RN of low
c) now lopis/ation ?
Fairness of walking off wish materials
2) Historical precedents
b) Could be ustd.
c) Future thoughts
FORD s LIBRAR SERALD
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
September 13, 1974
MEMORANDUM TO:
Al Haig
Bob Hartmann
Jack Marsh
Phil Buchen
Bill Timmons
Jack Hushen
From calls I have received from a number of candidates, e.g.,
Paul Laxalt of Nevada (Senate) and Senator Henry Bellmon,
R-Okla., the pardon issue is playing tough and two principal
questions need to be addressed from here:
1.
The reason for the determination by President Ford
that the pardon should be granted now rather than
later;
4.
The effect on President Ford's decision of the former
President's state of health.
I trust these will be covered at the next press conference.
Dean B Hurch
FORD i LIBRARY GERALD
POSSIBLE PRESS CONFERENCE QUESTIONS
Q.
Mr. President, why did you pardon Richard Nixon before he had been
charged with any crimes.
before the legal process had even started?
Q.
Polls taken since you pardoned former President Nixon indicate the
American people were overwhelmingly opposed to such action in
advance of prosecution. Do you now regret having issued the pardon?
Q.
Mr. President, why have you asked Congress for $244, 000 more in
transition funds for former President Nixon than are required by law ?
Q.
Senators Montoya and Hatfield have asked why the tapes and documents
could not be stored in some secure federal office building instead of in
a special $100,000 Watergate tapes vault. Would you comment on that,
please ?
Q.
Mr. President, how do you reconcile asking Congress for $850, 000 for
Mr. Nixon while urging the American people to tighten their belts ?
Q.
Mr. President, did you personally approve the agreement which gives
Mr. Nixon the right to deny requests for access to the Watergate tapes
and to wage a court fight against any subpoenas for such material?
Q.
Mr. President, do you believe the remaining Watergate defendants
can get a fair trial ?
FORD & 03RV70 LIBRARY
-2-
Q.
Mr. President, was the question of pardoning the remaining Watergate
defendants a trial balloon?
Q. Mr. President, the latest report is that Democratic congressional
leaders are planning a lame duck session of the Congress. How do
you feel about such a session? Do you think it would accomplish
anything? If so, what?
Q.
Mr. President, do you agree with those observers who say your pardon
of Mr. Nixon has damaged Republican prospects for November ?
Q.
Mr. President, is continued aid to Turkey legal ?
Q.
Mr. President, don't you think your chances for delaying the congres-
sional pay raise have been damaged by your pardon of Mr. Nixon?
a
Mr. President, labor leaders and many economists are urging a
relaxing of the tight money policy. Do you favor such action?
Q.
Mr. President, does the drive to lift OAS sanctions against Cuba have
your approval?
Q.
Mr. President, the public is angry over skyrocketing health care costs.
Are you planning to take any action which would bring greater federal
controls over the practice of medicine ?
&
FORD
GERALD
LIBRARY
-3-
Q.
Mr. President, Mrs. Ford has said her views on abortion are closer
to those of Mr. Rockefeller than Senator Buckley. Is that also your
position?
Q.
Mr. President, violent crime has risen 47 per cent in just five years.
Are you planning to do anything about it ?
Q.
Mr. President, Senator Jackson has declared that the decision to
supply nuclear reactors to Egypt should be reconsidered. Are you
reconsidering that decision?
Q.
Mr. President, Benton Becker is looked upon by many people as a
person of questionable reputation. Why did you employ Mr. Becker
as a liaison person in connection with your pardon of Mr. Nixon?
Q.
Mr. President, White House aides have said that certain of your
advisers lied to Jerry terHorst when he asked if you were considering
a pardon for Mr. Nixon. Had you instructed them to lie if they were
asked that question? And do you believe they were right in lying
about it ?
Q.
Mr. President, did concern about the physical and mental health of
Mr. Nixon play a key role in your decision to pardon Mr. Nixon?
And did Julie Eisenhower appeal to you to pardon her father ?
-4-
&
Mr. President, the wholesale price index rose nearly 4 per cent in
August -- the second biggest increase in 28 years. Are you still
going to wait until January to do something about inflation?
Q.
Mr. President, you have repeatedly said you are opposed to forced
busing. Are you in favor of the busing boycott going on in Boston?
Q.
Leon Jaworski has said he "probably will" issue a comprehensive
report on the Watergate scandal that will include the role of former
President Nixon. Do you favor such action, Mr. President?
Q.
Mr. President, there is said to be a secret Watergate memo which
provided you with a major reason for pardoning Richard Nixon. Is
that report true ? And if so, what was in the memo ?
Q.
Mr. President, are you considering a pardon for John Connally ?
Q.
Mr. President, some Americans are calling your pardon of Mr. Nixon
a coverup of the coverup. Do you have any comment?
Q.
Mr. President, at your August 28 press conference you said you could
make no commitment regarding a pardon for Mr. Nixon because the
legal process had not even started yet. Two days later, according to
reports, you instructed Mr. Buchen to gather information regarding
a pardon. What happened in those two days to make you change your
FORD
mind?
--5-
Q.
Mr. President, an Environmental Protection Agency official says
catalytic converters will emit a fine mist of sulfuric acid, which
could develop into a health hazard in two years. Are you doing
anything about this?
Q.
The Palestine Liberation Organization is seeking direct talks with
the United States. Do you favor such talks ?
Q.
Mr. President, the continued operation of lotteries by 13 states is
threatened because of action taken by Attorney General Saxbe. Do
you favor action by Congress to legalize State-operated lotteries ?
Q.
Mr. President, what is your position on the tax bill the House Ways
and Means Committee is working on? Do you favor tax cuts for the
poor ?
Q.
Mr. President, a congressional investigator has alleged improprieties
in the Law Enforcement Assistance Administration and says they may
be part of a wholesale subversion of civil service regulations. Are
you taking any action to get at the truth of this matter ?
Q.
Mr. Ford, is Charlie Goodell one of your closest advisers ? And was
he influential in your decision to nominate Nelson Rockefeller for
Vice President?
GERALD
-0- -
Q.
Mr. President, is it going to continue to be the United States' policy
to intervene in a clandestine way in the operations of a democratically-
elected government if that government happens to be Socialist or
Communist ?
R.
FORD
GENALD
DATING YOUR DECISION
QUESTION: When did you decide to pardon the former President?
ANSWER:
RALE 4 FORD
UNFAIR DISTINCTIONS WITHIN A SINGLE "CONSPIRACY"
QUESTION: It has been said that the situation of the other Watergate
defendants is different because none of them was President, and
because none has suffered as much. This may be true, and might
explain pardoning Nixon and not them if their crimes were different;
but since they were all involved in the same crime and ostensibly
at the behest of their pardoned leader, how can you justify trying
them now? Is it only a concession to the public uproar?
ANSWER: We cannot know whether the facts about the role of these
other defendants are as you state them until there is a trial. When
the facts become known, they can be taken into account in the usual
way after trial. * Those who occupy a position of public trust in the
service of a President cannot avoid the moral responsibility for their
own actions.
CORD
In sentencing and in normal clemency procedures.
AGONY PROLONGED
Question: Will not this long trial, in the context of a pardoned,
alleged co-conspirator, keep Watergate in the national attention
and cause just as much division as a trial of the former President?
Answer: There will be some prolonging of the agony, but
in my judgment not of the same magnitude as a trial of the
former President.
NIXON HEALTH: PREPARE THE PUBLIC
Question: Was the timing dictated by what you viewed as a
health emergency?
Answer: As I said in my speech, the former President's
health was a factor, but not in the sense of an emergency.
My concern is for the very long time needed to complete a
trial, and once the decision was made, the sooner the better.
Follow-up Question: If not, why did you not do something to
prepare the American public for your reversal instead of
acting precipitously?
Answer: In a matter this controversial there is not much
that can be done to "prepare" the public as you put it. All
I could do was to explain my reasoning openly and candidly,
which I did.
CONSULTATION WITH JUSTICE
Question: Why didn't you consult with the Attorney General?
Answer: I did have legal advice from my counsel. My
decision was based on considerations of the national interest
that go beyond the special competence of the Attorney General.
Follow-up Question: Even if you had already made up your
mind to grant the pardon, might he not have been able to
give helpful advice on how to go about it?
Answer: I am sure there are many people who could have
given such advice. I have been hearing from them all week.
I consulted with as many people as I thought appropriate in
this case. As I said in my speech, I viewed this decision
as one which I alone had to make.
FORD
LIBRARY
PUBLIC REACTION
QUESTION: Did you consider or suspect the public reaction that
actually occurred to your pardon of former President Nixon?
ANSWER: I knew there would be great concern. I did not try to
predict its extent, because I believed and still believe that the
grant of mercy was the right thing for me to do.
YOUR CREDIBILITY
Question: What do you plan to do to restore your credibility
and regain the trust of the American people?
[Very important. Nixon was caught completely unprepared
for this one. ]
Answer: I do not believe that my credibility is lost.
Presidents sometimes have to make controversial decisions
and when they do they lose popularity. And I have changed
my mind on this question, as I freely admitted. But I think
even those who disagree with my decision understand that
every statement I have made on this subject represented my
genuine thinking at the time. Candor is the basis of trust,
as I intend to go on speaking sincerely, even when I change
my mind.
CHANGE OF MIND
Question: Do you now believe that you were correct at
your last press conference when you said a pardon now
would be unwise and untimely?
Answer: As I made clear in my speech, I reconsidered
that judgment after I stated it and I no longer believe that
was the best course. I fully understand that it would have
been better for me politically to have stayed with my earlier
position, but that is not my criterion.
&
FORD
072833
DEAL
Question:
The concern has been expressed here and there
that the pardon arose from some "deal. "
Answer:
There was no deal. Had there been any such deal
I certainly would not have indicated at my last press conference
that the legal process should precede a pardon.
is
FORD
,RALD
DEAL II
Question: Is it true, as reported in the press, that Haig and
Kissinger conveyed Nixon's desire for a pardon to you indirectly
before he resigned? Did you indicate to him in any way that
you would grant a pardon?
Answer:
OUTSIDE REVIEW
Question: Would it not be better to have some prestigious
advisors outside of the Justice Department make recommendations
relating to clemency petitions from Watergate defendants?
Answer: Although outside review does have certain advantages,
there should be a presumption in favor of regular procedures.
And I have no reason to believe that this function is not best
performed by those persons who do it on a regular basis. They
do, incidentally, in the process of preparing their recommendations,
solicit the opinion of the prosecutor and make appropriate additional
inquiries.
LIBRARY
RELY ON SPECIAL PROSECUTOR
QUESTION: Would it not be better to have the Special Prosecutor's
Office process any Watergate-related petitions for clemency rather
than the Pardon Attorney at the Department of Justice?
ANSWER: I do not believe so for two reasons: (1) The Office of the
Pardon Attorney was established to process petitions for clemency
so that the individuals who prosecute an individual are not the same
ones deciding whether he should get clemency. The prosecutorial role
of the Special Prosecutor would be inconsistent with the role of evaluating
a petition for clemency.
(2) Processing petitions for clemency is not a part of the responsibility
of the Special Prosecutor as set forth in the regulations for the
Department of Justice.
FORD
NORMAL PROCEDURE TOO LENIENT
QUESTION: Might the Pardon Attorney (who was appointed during
the Nixon Administration) be too lenient with regard to Nixon
Administration officials involved in Watergate?
ANSWER: I have no reason to think SO. He knows that his
recommendation will be reviewed both in the Justice Department
and in the White House.
FORD LIBRA
NORMAL PROCEDURE TOO HARSH
QUESTION: Are not the procedures for processing petitions for
clemency unduly restrictive?
ANSWER: I have no reason for believing that they are. (A petition
for commutation of sentence has no restrictive waiting
period. If the waiting period for pardons is considered to be
too long, the Attorney General could amend his regulations
to shorten or eliminate the period.)
NORMAL PARDON PROCEDURE
QUESTION: When can a petition for a pardon be filed?
ANSWER: One who has been imprisoned must, under existing
regulations, wait three years -- or five in certain cases * / --
after his release. But this waiting period does not apply to
requests for the commutation of a sentence.
/
Such as perjury or the violation of a public trust involving personal
dishonesty.
JUND
LIBRARY
USUAL COMMUTATION PROCEDURE
QUESTION: When can a person apply for a commutation of sentence?
ANSWER: A petition for commutation of sentence may be filed
after the imposition of the sentence when other relief is not
available from the court or a Board of Parole. Exceptions are
made for unusual circumstances.
USUAL WAITING PERIOD
QUESTION: Is not three or five years after release from prison a long
time to wait for filing a petition for a pardon?
ANSWER: Perhaps, but nothing prevents the Attorney General from
amending his regulations generally for any appropriate category of
persons other than Watergate - related defendants as such).
PERSONAL REVIEW
QUESTION: Do you personally review each recommendation of the
Attorney General?
ANSWER: I am told that because of the volume of petitions for clemency,
time would not permit me personally to review each recommendation.
Each one is reviewed, however, by White House counsel, who will
then forward to me those cases which they believe warrant my
personal attention. Since becoming President, I have not reviewed
any recommendations of the Attorney General.
USUAL CLEMENCY PROCEDURE
QUESTION: How does one ordinarily apply for Executive Clemency?
ANSWER: One ordinarily applies for Executive Cleme ncy in the
manner set forth in the regulations of the Department of Justice.
This requires the filing of a petition on forms provided upon request
by the Pardon Attorney. Upon receipt of the petition, the Attorney
General reviews the request, conducts whatever investigation he
believes necessary, and then forwards his recommendations to
the White House.
FORD
PARDON FOR ONE IS PARDON FOR ALL
QUESTION: Does a pardon for Richard Nixon automatically serve
as a pardon for the Watergate defendants? Some of their lawyers
have noted an 1856 Supreme Court case suggesting that it does.
ANSWER: It is not for me to comment on a defendant's legal
arguments pending before the courts.
Note:
(Comment on 1856 case
for our information)
B.FORD TiB