Friday, June 1, 2018

The Memo: Trump flexes power of pardon

   
The Memo: Trump flexes power of pardon
© Getty Images
President Trump’s use of the presidential power of the pardon is under scrutiny once again, after he announced on Thursday he would erase the conviction of conservative commentator Dinesh D’Souza.
The decision for D’Souza came on top of recent pardons for the late heavyweight boxing champion Jack Johnson as well as Lewis "Scooter" Libby, a former chief of staff to Vice President Dick Cheney during the George W. Bush administration. 
D’Souza had pleaded guilty to making illegal campaign contributions, though he claimed that he had been the victim of a politically-motivated prosecution by the Obama-era Department of Justice (DOJ). The judge at his September 2014 sentencing hearing memorably described his claimsas “all hat, no cattle.”
In addition to the D’Souza and Libby pardons, Trump pardoned another staunch conservative, Joe Arpaio, the former sheriff of Maricopa County, Ariz., in August 2017. 
Arpaio, known for his extremely hard line on immigration issues, had been convicted of criminal contempt of court for ignoring a judge’s orders to stop detaining migrants who were not suspected of a crime.
The political nature of some of Trump’s pardons disquiets his critics — especially when set against the backdrop of his jabs at the Department of Justice (DOJ), FBI and special counsel Robert Mueller.
“It makes us increasingly worried,” said Lisa Gilbert of Public Citizen, a not-for-profit watchdog group. “Trump’s feeling that people who say the right things or show some kind of loyalty or play on his team should be pardoned is completely antithetical to how our justice system works.”
Grant Reeher, a professor of political science at Syracuse University, also asserted that, compared to other recent presidents, Trump’s pardons appear “more politically oriented. He is focusing on people whose political actions are consistent with his own, in that they have been advancing points of view that he shares, or working toward his goals.”
Defenders of the president argue that he is not unusual in this regard. One of the most controversial pardons issued by President Clinton benefited Marc Rich, a fugitive financier whose ex-wife, Denise Rich, was a major fundraiser for the Democratic Party.
Trump backers also note that, when asked about the pardon of D’Souza by reporters on Thursday, the president indicated he had also been mulling pardons for businesswoman Martha Stewart and Rod Blagojevich, the former governor of Illinois.
Stewart is not overtly political and Blagojevich is a Democrat.
“I think he is trying to use the pardon power to right wrongs that he sees,” said Matt Mackowiak, a Republican strategist. “The fact that he is seriously looking at Blagojevich and Martha Stewart is a sign that he is not focused exclusively on partisan background.”
The other question that has dogged Trump’s pardons is whether he is seeking to send a signal to erstwhile aides who are now feeling the heat from Mueller’s investigation into allegations of collusion with Russia.
One theory commonplace in liberal circles is that Trump is displaying his willingness to issue pardons so that people who might otherwise feel pressure to cut a deal and cooperate with Mueller might be less inclined to do so.
There is, however, no hard evidence to support that theory.
Observers across the political spectrum, however, did raise the issue of whether Trump might have a bias in favor of celebrities, or celebrity-backed causes, over more anonymous figures.
The Jack Johnson pardon was prominently backed by actor and director Sylvester Stallone.
Trump told reporters on Thursday that he did not know D’Souza personally but “I read the papers, I see him on television.”
The pardon of D’Souza also came the day after Trump had received an Oval Office visit from Kim Kardashian. In additional to advocating for the broader cause of prison reform, Kardashian is seeking a pardon for Alice Marie Johnson, a 63-year-old woman serving a life sentence for drug offenses. 
“The narrative may build that he’s only focused on famous people,” Mackowiak said. “Often, famous people have the best legal defense money can buy and others don’t have that opportunity.”
The GOP strategist added that he would encourage Trump to be deliberative in how he approaches the pardon process “so that people who don’t have a famous friend or a famous family member who can get into the Oval Office can still get considered.”
White House Deputy Press Secretary Hogan Gidley pushed back on suggestions that the president was mostly focused on celebrity pardons when he spoke to reporters on board Air Force One on Thursday. 
“Look, there are plenty of people the president is looking at right now under the pardon process,” Gidley said.
Still, the fact that Trump had tended to issue pardons without going through the usual process of review at the DOJ concerns some skeptics.
While they acknowledge that a president has expansive power to pardon, they worry about Trump’s propensity to flout norms.
“There is a process set up for pardoning people and he is ignoring it,” Gilbert said. “I am not saying he is running afoul of the Constitution. But this is off-the-cuff, and he is doing things that a DOJ that he is simultaneously attacking might not be that into.”
Meanwhile, the reverberations from the decision to pardon D’Souza will continue to be felt.
Late Thursday, the lead prosecutor in his case, Carrie H. Cohen, released a statement plainly critical of Trump's decision.
“D'Souza pled guilty because he was guilty,” Cohen said.
The Memo is a reported column by Niall Stanage, primarily focused on Donald Trump’s presidency.
   
LOAD COMMENTS (3,634)

How Philadelphia closed homeless 'heroin camps' amid US opioid crisis

As the epidemic moves to cities, evictions at site raise concern over loss of community and shortage of alternative housing
A couple carry their possessions out as police move in to clear an encampment in Philadelphia.
 A couple carry their possessions out as police move in to clear an encampment in Philadelphia. Photograph: Matt Rourke/AP
First came the warnings, then the deluge.
The city of Philadelphia moved to clear out two notorious underpass encampments of heroin users in the rundown Kensington district this week after a monthlong effort by city agencies and outreach groups to convince residents to seek treatment or go to shelters.
Residents have long complained that homelessness coupled with open drug use amounts to a serious public health hazard in the densely populated residential neighborhood. They welcomed the evictions on Wednesday and the removal of tents, mattresses and detritus.
The pilot program focused on connecting people to social services so they could lead more stable lives. For four weeks, social workers and police flocked to the bridges and offered help. The night before the move, some groups held prayer vigils; others, protesting the city’s action, pointed to posters that read “Eviction = Death”.
“It needed to go. It wasn’t right for kids to see that,” said a nearby resident, Lisa Kahn. “They light fires, throw their trash and dirty needles on the ground. We’re supposed to be the city of brotherly love. But they’re the ones living under a bridge, taking drugs and they’re ones getting help ...”
But the men and women who called the camps on Tulip Street and Kensington Avenue home were less than impressed. Some spoke of being pressed to accept drug detox or addiction treatment.
Jason Carmine, left, and his father Kevin Carmine, who say they both are addicted to heroin, carry their belongings from an encampment on Wednesday.
Pinterest
 Jason Carmine, left, and his father Kevin Carmine, who say they both are addicted to heroin, carry their belongings from an encampment on Wednesday. Photograph: Matt Rourke/AP
“They want to send everybody to rehab, but rehab is only good for people who want to go,” said Jay, 41, who was cooking heroin in preparation for a hit. Christopher, aged 29, had just taken one. He said sometimes he’d had “the gumption to go but two or three days later you don’t want to”.
Another on the avenue, who gave his name as Bruce, said he’d been using drugs in the neighborhood for 25 years.
“I live under the bridges to keep out of the elements. But I’m not ready for treatment. I’m not denying I don’t need it. I’m just not ready.” He joked that when they left the camp, he might just go sleep on the mayor Jim Kenney’s porch.
But for many, the joking has long since ended.
Tom Farley, the Philadelphia health commissioner, said there had been 1,200 fatal overdoses in the city last year, an increase of 300 over 2016, making the city one of the worst-hit in the country. Farley said that for each fatal overdose, there were probably eight to 10 non-fatal events. It is estimated that between 50,000 and 70,000 Philadelphians are addicted to opioids.
The encampments “are just one manifestation of the opioid crisis”, Farley told reporters. “Our job is to keep the people alive until they’re ready to go into treatment.”
The city’s managing director, Michael DiBerardinis, added that Philadelphia was “committed to fixing the problem. However, it won’t be easy because the opioid crisis is far from over.”
Philadelphia’s spiking opioid death rate is largely associated with fentanyl, the potent, often Chinese-manufactured, synthetic opioid. The drug is so problematic that many drug users said they chose to inject in company so they could be revived in the event of an overdose.
“We don’t see heroin around too much,” says Bruce. “Most people have switched to fentanyl. But it’s extremely dangerous. Half a nickel ($5) bag can kill you.”
Breaking down the camps could spur drug users to go back to using drugs alone.
Philadelphia officials are in discussions over setting up safe consumption sites. Farley has said he supports the measure if it saves lives. But numerous state and federal regulations make that problematic. One issue is that injecting, supervised or not, is illegal. Safe consumption sites, DiBerardinis said, were “a long way off”.
From a logistical standpoint, the city’s main issue is not a lack of treatment facilities but a shortage of alternative housing. Philadelphia’s office of homelessness services was only able to guarantee shelter for 110 people living in the encampments and who had registered as homeless early in the program.
“It’s very painful for us to say we don’t have beds for everybody, but it’s part of the reality of the homeless system,” said Liz Hersh, director of Philadelphia’s office of homeless services. 
In contrast, four dozen homeless people with opioid abuse issues took the rehab option during the pilot program. Hersh described the encampments as one of the most “complex and challenging” aspects of the opioid issue, which demanded “new solutions”.
Hersh said the city had made had chosen a policy of “intensive daily outreach” and the program had begun with a voluntary assessment of 300 campers, most of whom were newly homeless. She said more had accessed treatment in the first two weeks of the program than had in the previous six months.
“As a system, this is as close as we’ve ever come to treatment on demand. That is what people have been telling us we need to have, so when people feel they are ready to seek treatment we have to be able to seize that moment.
“When we offer what people need and want, they take advantage of the opportunity,” Hersh added.
But Hersh also acknowledged that the city lacked funds to close down two other camps under bridges, on Emerald Street and Frankfort Avenue, and some displaced camp dwellers were likely to move there.
Sanitation workers clear debris left behind by people evicted from an encampment.
Pinterest
 Sanitation workers clear debris left behind by people evicted from an encampment. Photograph: Matt Rourke/AP
That may leave the city playing a grim game of a whack-a-mole. Some wondered if the closure of the original camp in the Gurney Street train gulch, known as El Campamento, now seemed like such a wise idea.
They point, variously, to pressures applied by the rapidly gentrifying adjacent neighborhood of Fishtown, the expansion of Temple University and Philadelphia’s pending application to become Amazon’s HQ2.
“It’s a tough issue,” the city councillor Mark Squilla said. “But to say that it’s OK for people to live in squalor, amongst urination and defecation, with human trafficking and rape that’s going on, is unconscionable to us as a city. We know that unless we take action we won’t be able to handle it. The opioid crisis is getting worse, if we don’t act on this people will be living in tents all over the city.”
But he dismissed the idea that the city was only now paying attention to the drug crisis because the camps had become a national symbol of the opioid epidemic’s rapid urbanization.
“Gentrification hasn’t reached this far,” he pointed out. “A lot of poor working people live here and they don’t want to live with this stuff going on.”
But as the two camps were dispersed, some outreach groups said they were concerned that whatever the encampments’ drawbacks, the groups had developed a sense of community and support.
Sister Betty Scanlon, who runs the nearby Community Center at Visitation, said two groups in the neighborhood, Prevention Point and Project Home, had done “a wonderful job” making sure that the homeless were safe and focusing on harm-reduction.
“We know the folks here, and we know they’re extremely vulnerable. Living here is not ideal but it’s also tough for them to lose their community.”

Contact Form

Name

Email *

Message *