The Pardon: The Politics of Presidential Mercy

by Jeffrey Toobin

From New York Times bestselling author and CNN legal commentator Jeffrey Toobin comes a timely exploration of the most controversial presidential pardon in American history—Gerald Ford’s pardon of Richard Nixon—and its profound implications for our current political landscape.

In this deeply reported narrative, Jeffrey Toobin recreates the behind-the-scenes political melodrama during the tumultuous period leading up to and following Nixon’s resignation. The narrative features a rich cast of characters—including Alexander Haig, Nixon’s last chief of staff, who pushed for the pardon, and a young Justice Department lawyer named Antonin Scalia, who provided the legal justification. The Pardon also introduces you to a largely forgotten figure, Benton Becker, the Washington lawyer sent personally by Ford to negotiate the pardon with Nixon. Becker’s fresh reflections provide a startling and cinematic picture of the former President—who proved a master manipulator even in exile.

Ford’s shocking decision to pardon Nixon was widely criticized at the time, yet it has since been reevaluated as a healing gesture for a divided country even by former critics. Toobin anticipates the next turn in the debate by arguing that Ford’s pardon was a disaster—an unwise gift to an undeserving recipient, and one that creates an unsettling precedent that is likely to be tested by the next occupant of the Oval Office.

The Pardon is a must-read for anyone interested in American history, the complex dynamics of power within the highest office in the nation, and the implications of presidential mercy.

Genres: History, Politics, Nonfiction, Law, Audiobook, American History, American

304 pages, Hardcover

Published February 11, 2025

About the author

Jeffrey Ross Toobin (J.D., Harvard Law School, 1986; B.A., American History and Literature, Harvard University) is a lawyer, blogger, and media legal correspondent for CNN and formerly The New Yorker magazine. He previously served as an Assistant United States Attorney in Brooklyn, New York, and later worked as a legal analyst for ABC News, where he received a 2001 Emmy Award for his coverage of the Elian Gonzales custody saga.

Reviews

[Matt · Rating 5 out of 5]

Always one to enjoy the writing of Jeffery Toobin, I reached for this new book that explores presidential pardons. Toobin spends a great deal of time exploring the Watergate era and how Nixon sought to use pardons to change his personal legal troubles. This includes a segment of the book that explores the Ford pardon of Nixon and its fallout. Toobin later expands th discussion to other presidents and their pardons. Toobin peppers parallels between Nixon’s actions and the more recent situation Trump has used to bend the constitutional power to his own will throughout the tome, which makes for interesting reading. Toobin educates the reader and pulls no punches, as I would expect. A thrilling read that had me eager to see all I could learn about this political tool.

Jeffrey Toobin sets the tone of this book by developing a detailed and well-documented narrative surrounding the tense period known as the Watergate era. The political and criminal situations became increasingly problematic for many, none more so than President Richard Nixon. Toobin ensures that the reader understands the nuances of events, as well as how Nixon wanted to use presidential pardons to ensure certain people with ties to the Watergate mess would speak favorably when testifying, knowing their convictions could be wiped out. All the while, Nixon’s situation was getting by worse when Congress tightened the noose and impeachment became inevitable.

As the book progresses, Toobin turns discussions towards if and how Nixon might receive a pardon for anything he might have done, now that the president had decided to resign and let Gerald Ford take the reins of government. Constitutional debates and analyses helped shape the discussion around what should happen next.Toobin spends time exploring the sentiments of the many actors involved in the process, none more than President Ford. It would seem that the president hoped to use a pardon of Nixon to wipe the slate clean and allow the country to move on from the nightmare Watergate had crested. There are some interesting analytical views presented here, including by the author. One aspect that comes from a 1915 US Supreme Court case that Ford mentioned repeatedly was that a pardon insinuates that there was guilt needing cleansing and its acceptance heralded knowledge of wrongdoing.

The final portion of the book explores some of the pardons offered by other presidents, including an assessment of how effectively or useful these actions appeared to be. Toobin uses a great deal of analysis to educate the reader to see the bigger picture of what the pardons meant and how they were seen by the American people. All this inches forward to look at how President Trump used pardons (the man seems to want to do everything differently than others, usually falling on his face as he did so). Trump used pardons as currency, a tit-for-tat situation that would make the constitutional prerogative and power seem slimy, akin to some of Nixon’s earlier mentioned antics. Toobin does not delve too deeply into this, but does pull no punches when it comes to how these presidents sought to hijack the constitution and turn it into something one had to earn in ways unrelated to acceptance of responsibility, remorse, and atonement. That 1915 Supreme Court quote works well here, as many guilty people seem to flock towards the Complainer-in-Chief, as they did Tricky Dick! A stellar book well worth my reading time.

I have read many books by Jeffrey Toobin, some legal and others strictly tied to history. Toobin never fails to impress with his detailed analysis of events and thorough explanation of all things going on to ensure the reader feels educated. The form of writing Toobin uses begs for an entertaining aspect of things as well, which helps the material process with greater ease. Toobin's chapters connect well to one another, ensuring there will always be the needed momentum. While there are certainly some jabs here and there, the attentive reader will focus on the content and not need their soap box to proclaim one thing or another. I am eager to keep reading Jeffrey Toobin's work, as he never fails to impress.

Kudos, Mr. Toobin, for a gripping read that impressed me so much!

Love/hate the review? An ever-growing collection of others appears at:
http://pecheyponderings.wordpress.com/

[Rick Wilson · Rating 2 out of 5]

Not his best work

Promises to speak of pardons in a comprehensive way but only focuses on Fords pardon of Nixon with a few sparse vignettes on other topics. Moderately interesting but has been done better in other places.

[WM D. · Rating 4 out of 5]

The book I just finished reading takes the reader into how then president ford had to make a life changing decision on whether to pardon Former President Richard M Nixon and how this decision will impact the rest of his presidency. It also explains how President Ford had to get additional advice before making the final decision. It also provides some interesting insight into how the other presidents at the end of the terms used their pardon powers.

[Jim Zubricky · Rating 5 out of 5]

What an outstanding book! While most of the book is concerned about President Ford’s controversial pardon of President Nixon, this book also investigates the history of the pardon in America and how it has been used in the 50 years since Nixon’s pardon.

[John Yingling · Rating 2 out of 5]

The history of pardons in America, how presidents used this power, and the specific look at President Ford's pardon of Richard Nixon was good. But I can't emphasize enough how strenuously I disagree with the author's verdict that the pardon was wrong. His reasoning just doesn't work for me. The country was torn apart by the entire Watergate scandal, and a trial of Nixon would have dragged on and on and further frayed public opinions, as well as tying up money and resources. Nixon resigning, and the disgrace and humiliation he went through and had to live with for the rest of his life was punishment enough as far as I am concerned. Then the author's repeated assertions that the pardon was wrong flat out irritated me.

[Jonathan Brown · Rating 1 out of 5]

I have read a great number of this author’s books and usually always enjoyed them (including one on Trump’s first term impeachments). Jeffrey Toobin, in my opinion, had a partisan agenda with this book and it was not well executed. He tells the story of the pardon of Nixon by Gerald Ford in a way that was not original (the book 31 Days about this subject was much better). Then he somehow manages to argue that Ford was wrong for the pardon, even though history has clearly shown it was an act of courage by Ford which probably cost him the election (he acknowledges this by the way but still takes offense apparently). Then he parlays the entire discussion into Trump and his pardons (the real reason for the book likely) but manages to let Joe Biden off the hook (in a few sentences) for his pardons? Ridiculous and uneven and lost credibility fast. The pardon power, as the author tries hard to not point out at times, is absolute and belongs to the POTUS. I’m sure many will disagree but this was just bitter complaining to me and not balanced at all!

[Tommy Reads · Rating 4 out of 5]

i enjoyed this! I have been thinking about what a turning point Ford's pardon of Nixon was and this was exactly the book I was looking for. I really like Toobin's explanation on how pardons are windows into the soul of the powerful.

This was an interesting specific lens to see how this power has devolved over time in the US. From Washington/ Hamilton to Trump. and it was kind of fun to see the widely different ways in history they were used.

I did not know a lot of the nuances and machinations that surrounded the pardon and Ford's naivety was really highlighted. The reasoning and justification he finds in the obscure supreme court case that guilt has to be admitted in order to accept the pardon and how little that actually means is just such a noble and foolish idea. And it's laughable that no one remembers this despite being his whole justification. and comparing that with the modern pardons where no wrongdoing is ever admitted.

This reasoning along with the withholding of the lack of charges being brought against Nixon and Nixon's inside man, Hague, Nixon playing up his illness. Ford got played hard.

But Toobin does a good job keeping Ford sympathetic and his reasoning from his POV sound. Good intentions bad choice with bad consequences. And this sets the stage for where we are now which is highlighted by key figures in our modern age in this account, really getting their start here as interns, assistants, etc. And this event for those who grew up really set the stage for the norms we are now trapped in similar to Sulla to Caesars generation as a transformative time in a dying Republic.

Nixons downturn is interesting and the way he is left with nothing once he is out of power is telling . I liked the bit about his golf course falling to ruin. the fact that he could never really take accountability is so frustrating. and the way he would blame everyone. he could not have had a better outcome and he was still resentful. good politician but what a bastard.

I saw a lot of Nixon love recently online and was a bit horrified to see the revisionist history. I feel like if our country saw an example of a powerful person held accountable, we would be better off. and future presidents would have some more caution before breaking the law. Nixon was given an inch and now we have jumped a mile in terms of presidential immunity. the lead prosecutor seeing the US as a banana Republic if we put a president through the legal proceedings seemed so backwards to me. dictatorships don't have checks in power but democracies should.

I was surprised to hear giving more power to the executive was so intentional. I like that Toobin gave Trump some credit on prison reform, wasn't totally partisan. and I didn't know about Bill Clinton brother or the drama between Bush and Cheney surrounding a pardon and the advice he gave to Obama. this made me respect Obama more has his pardons were all pretty above board. also the guy who got pardoned by Carter killing someone in Oxon Hill too killing pardons for a bit before being brought back by Clinton.

the book was very detailed. Toobin has a clear POV but I appreciate the way of going through primary sources and presenting a compelling narrative. I could have used more details in other places. We spent a ton of time in Watergate and I would enjoy more time spent between Watergate and the present. good book though, I think this is really important stuff.

in terms of how to mitigate pardon power in USA to avoid blatant corruption for the rich and well connected, I like what Hamilton said about pardoning groups of people so it's not just a status thing. pardoning whiskey rebelling and confederate soldiers (not leaders) makes sense. and avoids pardons going to just well connected

but not a perfect solution. oversight and more transparency and avoiding doing them at the end of the term to avoid accountability, and maybe a ban on pardoning close friends and family? are legal system is not perfect and I think pardons are worthy to help the little guys but it's so easily corrupted.


this isn't really a review anymore but this one made me think

[Michaela Kollin · Rating 3 out of 5]

This book isn’t really about what it claims to be about. I picked it up thinking it would be a history of how various presidents have exercised the pardon power when it’s mostly a history of the Watergate scandal and Ford’s pardon of Nixon. It’s a fairly interesting story but I don’t feel like I came out of this book with a very strong grasp of how presidential pardons work or how they reflect on the presidents who granted them. There were only a few chapters that even touched on those topics. They were well-written, as was the rest of the book, I just wish there’d been a little bit more.

[Daniel · Rating 4 out of 5]

Excellent political/constitutional legal history with everything you all wanted to know about pardons, amnesty, etc. Constitutional background and history of executive clemency and its uses by various modern presidents, but especially Nixon, Ford, and Trump. Great overview of the Watergate mess, and resulting investigations and changes in law: both judicial and legislative.

[Ed Schmauder · Rating 4 out of 5]

Earlier this year I read a history of Watergate. This book covers the month between Nixon’s resignation and Ford’s pardon a month later.

The author contends, and I agree, that Ford’s action was botched in all ways:

Bad decision
Unnecessary decision (he wouldn’t have been indicted, most likely)
Bad timing (too fast)
Didn’t build support in advance
Announcement itself was weirdly written

[Davi Kladakis · Rating 3 out of 5]

This was a very interesting history of the pardon.

[Linda · Rating 4 out of 5]

Mostly covers President Gerald Ford’s pardon of Richard M. Nixon, but then uses that to reflect on more recent uses (and abuses) of the presidential pardon.

[Alyssa · Rating 4 out of 5]

I really enjoyed learning more about how presidents have used their pardons and the reasoning behind some of them. A lot of about Nixon, understandably, but I would have liked a deeper dive into some of the other stories as well. They felt a little glossed over at the end.

[Will Leszinske · Rating 3 out of 5]

Well researched and compellingly written, it still bothered me that this book isn’t really about the history of presidential pardons and is instead mostly about watergate. Interesting, yes, but not really why I picked it up. Tell me the story of when Abraham Lincoln pardoned a man for attempted bestiality that’s way funnier than relitigating the Watergate scandal

[Robert Federline · Rating 4 out of 5]

The issue of the power of a President to issue pardons is currently in the news, and is always newsworthy. This book is interesting for giving a broad-stroke history of presidential pardons. It also gives a more detailed account of the pardon of Richard M. Nixon by Gerald R. Ford. This was quite controversial at the time and still stirs emotions on both sides of the question of whether or not such a pardon should have been granted.

The book need be read with a degree of caution. There are many opinions mixed with the reporting of facts. History is not always viewed from the same perspective. Having lived through this time, and having followed it through the reports released contemporaneously with the event, some of the subtleties may be viewed differently.

For example, Jeffrey Toobin has obvious and very strong feelings that the pardon of Nixon was improper and should never have occurred. He chooses not to accept the explanation of the time (and which is shared by other historians still today) that the pardon was necessary to help the nation move past the outrageous scandal created by the corruption then in the White House. He focuses instead on the rule of law that no man is greater than the law and that Nixon should have been punished along side his subordinates.

While there is much to be said for his position, it does not appear that he has, or is willing to, explore the consequences of what a trial of an immediate past president could mean to this country, or its faith in the three branches of our government.

His political opinions are also evident in other portions of the book. Some facts may be selectively presented in order to bolster his views, rather than being objectively presented. For example, without directly saying so, he appears to support the debunked proposition that Donald J. Trump was engaged in some sort of collusion with the Russians during his first presidential campaign, despite the fact that the evidence demonstrated that it was Hillary Clinton (and possibly Barak Obama as well) who colluded and who manufactured false evidence of Trump's involvement.

The book is also noteworthy for what it does not discuss. There were many controversial pardons throughout this country's history. They are noteworthy for being ignored in this book.

An unexamined issue in the field of presidential pardons is what one may call the "pocket pardon." Much is made in the current media of President Trump stating he would prosecute political enemies (not an accurate quote, but the summary of the media), yet he has mostly not done so.

For example, He did threaten to send Hillary R. Clinton to prison for certain criminal acts, such as her use of a private email with confidential government documents and secrets, in clear and express violation of a law which she helped to pass. Yet, when he became President, Donald J. Trump did not pursue her criminally. There was obviously sufficient evidence there for this crime and many implications of other crimes. Donald Trump did not pursue her even though she had weaponized the government against him. One may view this as a "pocket pardon." He had the Justice Department stand down and ignore her trespasses, even though many pursued him for crimes, real or imagined, such as his possession of confidential documents following his presidency. (This particular issue becomes interesting when viewed in the light of the question of who may be the owner of presidential papers discussed in the context of Richard M. Nixon.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion. This also leads to varying interpretations of facts to support or oppose those opinions. This is where a discerning reader needs to understand when to accept or reject, or delve deeper into any particular author's opinions. This book is a good start on the questions and broad history of presidential pardons, but is too slim a volume to treat all of the questions which may arise concerning it. It may serve as a jumping off point for an examination of the subject.

[Socraticgadfly · Rating 4 out of 5]

A solid 4-star effort.

Side notes: First, the 1-star review and one of the 2-stars are by wingnuts. Second, on the matter of the focus of the book, two of the other three 2-stars are wrong. Toobin expressly notes that the Nixon pardon wasn't the only reason Ford lost — and he's right.

With that, let's dig in.

I'm old enough to remember the pardon. I had not read the details about Al Haig's machinations, so that part is new to me.

I knew bits of Ford's naivete behind issuing the pardon, but forgot the public parts were that bad, and didn't realize the private parts were that bad.

Even more on the bad thinking behind having to do it that soon. Ford would have been better off letting Nixon rot and Jaworski stew. Of course, if Jaworski resigns, that throws it back in Ford's lap.

Toobin also well notes how Ford's secrecy backfired, in not having supporters rounded up in advance.

As for modern times? He's totally right that the ruling by Blind Umpire Angel Hernandez and five other people in black robes on "Trump v United States" was a crock of shit, especially when explicitly compared with the 1974 ruling on the Watergate tapes — and the Burger Court's expedited hearing, as well. (Note to wingnuts: I'm not a Democrat, and I am also not a never-Trumper Republican.)

Although pardons were rarely issued in the 19th century, the book doesn't look at any beyond Jefferson's, over Alien and Sedition Act convictions, and a bit at Lincoln's.

Also, contra Toobin and JFK's "Profiles in Courage" ghostwriter, Kansas Senator Edmund G. Ross is all that. There's at least a modest amount of circumstantial evidence, that he, like the rest of the "sinful seven," got some "assistance," perhaps indirectly more than directly, from Andy Johnson.

Finally, Wiki says Howard Baker was Ford's third choice for Veep after Rocky and Poppy Bush; Toobin doesn't even list him.

So, solid, but never in contention to be a 5-star.

[Ted Hunt · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is a relatively short (about 260 pages), accessible book about presidential pardons. I think that the title has a double meaning, because it examines the generic subject of "the pardon" through the lens of the most famous presidential pardon in American history: Ford's pardon of Nixon for the latter's Watergate crimes. The book really takes a microscope to the machinations that led to Ford becoming Vice President (through an unprecedented Senate confirmation hearing), the Nixon resignation, and then the Ford pardon a month later. As could be expected, there was a huge flurry of activity going on behind the scenes of Ford's first month as president: meetings, letters, secret visits to San Clemente. I was previously unaware of just about all of these details, so the narrative was very interesting to read. While previous examples of presidential pardons are sprinkled throughout the book, Toobin really digs into the records of the post-Watergate presidents, pointing out actions that he finds defensible (non-violent criminals in jail for marijuana possession) and indefensible: the first president Bush and Casper Weinberger, Clinton and Mark Rich, President Biden and his son Hunter, to name a few. But the author saves his "big guns" for the Trump I pardons (the books was published before Trump II got started), which, according to Toobin, were entirely wrapped up in self-interest and vengeance. It is clear that Toobin is not a fan of the presidential pardon, and he believes that Ford's pardon of Nixon was completely unwarranted, as it did not "bring the country together" (if anything, it exacerbated divisions) and it was unlikely that Nixon was ever going to be indicted by Special Prosecutor Leon Jaworski. And while the consensus these days is that Ford did the right thing, Toobin has not changed his view one iota. For readers who like legal history and presidential history, this book needs to be on your wish list.

[David · Rating 3 out of 5]

Interesting history of Ford's pardon of Nixon, and of Watergate generally. Lots more detail than you need for the ostensible topic of Presidential pardons (e.g., p. 64 re how annoyingly slow and difficult it was for a non-typist like Fred Buzhardt to try to help Rosemary Woods type up a transcript of the audio from Nixon tapes with unidentified people talking over one another........).

It's not a self-help book as such, but it did help me figure out what happened in 1973-4 besides my starting a new school in 7th grade. I know I was glued to the TV for Watergate hearings in summer '73, and I know Nixon resigned in August '74, but it's always seemed odd to me that i recall these as if there was nothing between them, let alone a full year. Toobin reminds me that a lot of that year was given over to sort of boring incremental progress on court cases about the tapes. Once Supreme Court said the "smoking gun" tape had to be made public, it went quickly.

Anyway, much appreciated for that and for some of the backstage machinations involving schemers like Alexander (of "I'm in charge here" during Reagan assassination attempt fame) Haig as Ford considered and settled on pardon details. Beyond that, the perfunctory brief segments bringing pardon review up to date thru Trump and Biden admins and pronouncing Toobin's verdict on how each President handled the responsibility/power (Obama comes off well; most do not) were not that compelling. It's more political than legal; it's sometimes used to reward friends/family/supporters etc. I think that's well-known.

[Andrew Chandler · Rating 2 out of 5]

Toobin focuses on the pardon of Nixon by President Ford, and uses this event to discuss the history of the pardon, and its recent use by presidents. I thought this was a great structure, and I liked how Toobin addressed the challenge Ford was facing.

Tying the Nixon pardon to current events is where Toobin looses credibility. If you've seen Toobin on TV, you know what he thinks of Trump, and he doesn't stretch the truth much when Trump is covered. He severely downplays Bidens abuses, limiting it to only the pardoning of his son,and ignoring the pardoning of people with violent pasts.

Whats perhaps more upsetting is that Toobin glosses over the opinions expresses in the Trump vs U.S. Supreme Court case (a case that is very important to the story) and edges the reader into the idea that the Supreme Court is so partisan that its decisions can no longer be trusted. While I didn't like the decision in that case, I have read enough to understand that there were legal (not partisan) reasons why the justices could come to that conclusion. A lawyer like Toobin could have guided us through the legal merits of this decision, but the book would have lost some of the partisan bite that Toobin relishes. Come on Toobin, we are adults- we can handle complexity.

In summary, a good review of the Nixon pardon, but Toobin lacks the credibility for his grander efforts to have been effective.

[Regan · Rating 5 out of 5]

What a fabulous read. I'm surprised I haven't seen or heard more about this book. I'm glad I found it.

Being a journalist you have to expect that Toobin would be a marvelous writer -- but he is a step above many. He writes in an engaging voice, not talking down to lay people who are "new" to law and politics but still writing in a way for those of us with experience in those fields or near to them don't get bored. He lays out in clear, but not dry, terms of the history of Pardons -- how they were included in the constitution, for Ford came to be Vice President and made his decision about pardoning Nixon and how we ended up with where we are today. He touches on Biden pardoning Hunter and the issues around Trump's rash pardons.

As I read about how Alexander Haig was essentially, to me, the power behind Nixon's throne and, again in Reagan's. I saw parallels between Haig and a combination of Steve Bannon and Steven Miller. Are they the "real" power behind Trump and his often decisions that change day by day. I'd love to see a book comparing them and their effect on their decisions akin to how Toobin describes Haig's actions.

Really a marvelous read.

[Jennifer Delarosa · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book is mostly about Watergate and the ultimate pardon of Richard Nixon. For a political and legal junkie like myself, this was fascinating. I learned a lot! The book is also about Trump and his despicable abuse of the pardon power, which I knew more about and therefore found less interesting. There is some discussion about the founding fathers and the debate about the pardon power when drafting the US Constitution, and a few other interesting vignettes about the good and bad uses of the pardon power by other presidents, but mostly this is about Watergate and, to a lesser extent, Trump. The title of this book may thus be overly general and slightly misleading.

I found this to be very interesting, but I'm not sure how much it would appeal to those who are not especially interested in politics and the law. Four stars for me, but perhaps less for others.

[Dave · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book was highly readable, even though it is a bit of a Frankenstein text: Toobin combines an hour-by-hour recap of the events surrounding Ford's decision to pardon Nixon with a survey of Presidential pardons.

In a book about mercy, Toobin is merciless in his criticism of most of Nixon's staff. I loved the detail of the back-and-forth and agonizing of Ford and his staff as they considered a pardon for Ford's predecessor.

Yet what makes the book most compelling is the comparisons of Ford's pardon of Nixon with Trump's outrageous abuse of the pardon power. It is sobering that Ford's pardon of Nixon threw the nation into turmoil, yet Trump's hundreds of more egregious pardons (both in his first and second terms) have barely caused a ripple.

[Morgan · Rating 4 out of 5]

An impeccably-timed history of and reflection on the presidential pardon power and its long evolution from the framers’ original intent to its modern day manifestation as a political tool (and weapon). Most of the book is spent covering Ford’s pardon of Nixon and the crisis that precipitated it: Watergate. Its admirably thorough coverage in a book about presidential pardons more generally makes sense when viewed as the watershed (ha) moment that set pardons on their fifty-year journey to what they’ve become today, which is always political and rarely honorable. The epilogue to the book was particularly prescient, as it predicted Trump’s use of pardons in a way that not even Nixon could have imagined.

[Carrie]

An interesting listen on a topic I knew very little about. I expected more of a general overview of the presidential pardon, but almost the entire book was about Gerald Ford's pardon of Richard Nixon and its aftermath (which Toobin believes to have been a disastrous mistake). When I realized this, I was kind of disappointed, but I think Toobin believes that this pardon is such a pivotal point in this history that it deserves most of the focus.

There were a lot of interesting takeaways, but I think the most enlightening fact was that if the Trump Vs. United States Supreme Court case on presidential immunity had happened BEFORE the Watergate scandal, Nixon would not have even needed a pardon because he couldn't have indicted on anything he did anyway.

[Robert Stevens · Rating 5 out of 5]

Prior to reading this book, I did not know much about the process and the thought that went into President Ford's pardon of President Nixon. For that, I am thankful as knowledge is power. Additionally, I have heard arguments against the pardon power of the US President, which I found to be persuasive. While there are merits to the pardon power, it is also problematic as we have seen under the Biden and Trump administrations. This book is solidifying this opinion because they are political in nature and can be linked to the power of monarchs. I appreciated the juxtaposition of the Nixon-Ford time and how that has impacted recent history and now.

I recommend this book.

[Natalie Richmond · Rating 5 out of 5]

I am unfamiliar with the authors previous works, but I was impressed at his ability to narrate through political waters with less of a divisive stance but rather a thorough focus on the institution of a presidential pardon. At 43, I am accustomed to the idea that these are “favors”; I hadn’t considered the original intent of a pardon. I knew they were all abused. It seems foreign to think of an era where politicians considered mercy and justice to be primary motivators. Quick easy read but well researched and objectively presented!

[Joshua John · Rating 5 out of 5]

really enjoyed this book! incredible analysis historically and journalistically profound. i liked hearing all of different arguments for an against the pardon that arose with time and history. it seems to me that interests converged in almost a fateful way to align the dominos that led to nixon’s pardon. i love it the book!

only criticisms: at times slow and dragging. marketed and appears to be a book on pardons generally whilst the vast majority of the book focuses on ford’s pardon of nixon (or better stated, nixon and his team vying for a pardon and ford debating himself on that front).

[Kyle · Rating 4 out of 5]

I enjoyed reading the nitty gritty things that went on during Watergate and the Ford pardon. It's very interesting to see how much influence every decision hinges on, and how many players are in the game.
There was a bit of an effort to explain the history of pardons, and how pardons have evolved since (particularly with the Biden and Trump pardons). But that context was sloppily shoehorned in. It would've been better if it just stuck all that context at the beginning and end, and kept the comparative references out of the main narrative.

[William Leroux · Rating 4 out of 5]

A good history of Ford's pardon of Nixon. It's readable, interesting, and informative. -1 star because, while it does say right on the cover that this is about Nixon and Ford, and it does cover other presidents' use of the pardon, the book implies, with that big all caps PARDON, and by circling "The politics of presidential mercy, " that this book has a wider scope. There were missed opportunities to discuss the pardon power more broadly, which would have been more interesting than a relatively slim book about Nixon.

[C Manuel Contente · Rating 2 out of 5]

"The Pardon" primarily covers the end of Water Gate and President Gerald Ford's decision to pardon Nixon. While the "inside baseball" was interesting to read about this book suffers from two principal issues. Firstly, it clearly has a modern political agenda attached to it. It would have worked better had Toobin left it as a historical account. Secondly, and somewhat more importantly, Toobin's thesis about the Ford's pardon being a mistake is just plain wrong.