Pardons - Page 5

psionl0 · 20th January 2021, 03:39 AM

I don't get the fuss. Revoking or seriously modifying the President's power to issue pardons just because he might pardon the "wrong" people is nothing more than a trivial pursuit.

Firestone · 20th January 2021, 03:46 AM

The main problem is the self-dealing, I think.

If a president can just pardon people who commit crimes on his behalf (as Trump did with Manafort, Stone, ...), it effectively puts the president's team above the law.

Mumbles · 20th January 2021, 04:07 AM

Originally Posted by Firestone

The main problem is the self-dealing, I think.

If a president can just pardon people who commit crimes on his behalf (as Trump did with Manafort, Stone, ...), it effectively puts the president's team above the law.

That's really the only issue at hand - and the lesson shouldn't be "we need to get rid of pardons", since even Toupee Fiasco managed to pardon people who deserved it.

Rather, it's "Don't vote obvious bungling criminal sociopaths into office". That fixes that *actual* problem with Toupee Fiasco's pardons, and many other problems with the past four years.

DevilsAdvocate · 20th January 2021, 04:19 AM

Rudy is in a heap of trouble. That "trial by combat" thing isn't going to turn out well. At his criminal trial is he going to be represented by Lin Wood or Sydney Powell?

The Don · 20th January 2021, 04:30 AM

Originally Posted by DevilsAdvocate

Rudy is in a heap of trouble. That "trial by combat" thing isn't going to turn out well. At his criminal trial is he going to be represented by Lin Wood or Sydney Powell?

I'm not so sure.

IMO it will be difficult to get a 12-person jury to convict him because at least one will be an ardent Trump supporter who will find some way to excuse Rudy Giuliani's words and deeds.

catsmate · 20th January 2021, 04:56 AM

Originally Posted by DevilsAdvocate

In interesting legal matters, considering the very late hour, Biden could maybe theoretically revoke Bannon's pardon. It won't happen, but it possibly could.

Grant revoked two pardons granted by Andrew Johnson. The courts upheld the revocations because the prison warden had not delivered the pardon. Another revocation was upheld because the prisoner had physically received the pardon.

If Biden were to revoke Bannon's pardon, that may be upheld if, at that time, it has not been received by the clerks of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, or possibly even if the pardon has not been delivered, by some manner, to Bannon himself.

Probably won't happen. But an interesting idea.

Shades of Marbury v. Madison.

SuburbanTurkey · 20th January 2021, 05:18 AM

No pardons yet for Jan6 invaders.

Time's not out yet, but Trump seems on track to hang these goons out to dry.

What I wouldn't pay to be inside the minds of these people that got duped into raiding the Capitol and abandoned by the leader they did it for.

timhau · 20th January 2021, 05:37 AM

Originally Posted by DevilsAdvocate

Rudy is in a heap of trouble. That "trial by combat" thing isn't going to turn out well. At his criminal trial is he going to be represented by Lin Wood or Sydney Powell?

He'll represent himself. You know what they say about men who are their own lawyers.

Darat · 20th January 2021, 05:58 AM

Originally Posted by DevilsAdvocate

Rudy is in a heap of trouble. That "trial by combat" thing isn't going to turn out well. At his criminal trial is he going to be represented by Lin Wood or Sydney Powell?

Can they do that from jail?

turingtest · 20th January 2021, 06:11 AM

Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey

No pardons yet for Jan6 invaders.

Time's not out yet, but Trump seems on track to hang these goons out to dry.

What I wouldn't pay to be inside the minds of these people that got duped into raiding the Capitol and abandoned by the leader they did it for.

They've been listening to Trump make statements like these (Snopes), going back to Aug 2015-

-and thought they could actually get away with what their leader was telling them to do. Now they're finding out that they're not getting pardoned, and he's sure as hell not going to pay any of their legal fees. If they have any brains at all, they'll understand that the guy they thought they were using to send a message was using them for his own personal profit the whole time. And if they have any sense of consistency in the message they thought they were sending with "drain the swamp!" they'll get that this was betrayed too- that they will pay legal prices for acts which were incited by a politician who will probably end up paying no price at all; they will be the goats sacrificed on the altar of "unity."

Puppycow · 20th January 2021, 06:24 AM

The list of pardons seems to have one thing in common.

They are some form of white collar crime, and they are wealthy, or at least formerly wealthy people. Now they all owe him a favor.

The Don · 20th January 2021, 06:29 AM

Originally Posted by Puppycow

The list of pardons seems to have one thing in common.

They are some form of white collar crime, and they are wealthy, or at least formerly wealthy people. Now they all owe him a favor.

Well, yes and no.

Owing someone a favour is only a problem when there are consequences for not paying them back. If the case of certain Italian fraternal organisations, the consequences are clear but in President Trump's case, I'm not sure what he can do, apart from impotently threatening legal action, now that he's out of office.

Suddenly · 20th January 2021, 06:29 AM

Originally Posted by The Don

I'm not so sure.

IMO it will be difficult to get a 12-person jury to convict him because at least one will be an ardent Trump supporter who will find some way to excuse Rudy Giuliani's words and deeds.

The AUSA office will probably spend more resources on jury selection than anything else.

Not that it would be hard. Most of the ardent Trump supporters proudly state so on their facebook page.

BobTheCoward · 20th January 2021, 06:54 AM

The pardon power puts the president above impeachment.

"I have a pardon here for every American for every crime Ever. Signing this will immediately release 150,000 inmates. Vote to impeach me and I sign it."

SuburbanTurkey · 20th January 2021, 06:54 AM

Quote:

A 71-year-old supporter of President Donald Trump was reportedly shocked when Trump recently commuted the 40-year sentence of a man who stole his life savings in a Ponzi scheme.

leopards, faces, etc.

https://www.newsweek.com/trump-suppo...scheme-1562797

ponderingturtle · 20th January 2021, 07:00 AM

Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey

leopards, faces, etc.

https://www.newsweek.com/trump-suppo...scheme-1562797

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA

zooterkin · 20th January 2021, 07:05 AM

Originally Posted by BobTheCoward

The pardon power puts the president above impeachment.

"I have a pardon here for every American for every crime Ever. Signing this will immediately release 150,000 inmates. Vote to impeach me and I sign it."

And yet...

Mader Levap · 20th January 2021, 07:32 AM

Originally Posted by Puppycow

The list of pardons seems to have one thing in common.

They are some form of white collar crime, and they are wealthy, or at least formerly wealthy people. Now they all owe him a favor.

I bet most of them is 2mln$ poorer. Rest is cover to make all pardons more acceptable.

ahhell · 20th January 2021, 07:47 AM

Originally Posted by Mumbles

That's really the only issue at hand - and the lesson shouldn't be "we need to get rid of pardons", since even Toupee Fiasco managed to pardon people who deserved it.

Rather, it's "Don't vote obvious bungling criminal sociopaths into office". That fixes that *actual* problem with Toupee Fiasco's pardons, and many other problems with the past four years.

Even the best of Presidents have had...controversial pardons. I think reasonable limits are a good idea without repealing the power all together. That would be in line with the rest of the Constitution, which is designed to limit the impact of less than honorable actors.

SuburbanTurkey · 20th January 2021, 07:58 AM

Originally Posted by ahhell

Even the best of Presidents have had...controversial pardons. I think reasonable limits are a good idea without repealing the power all together. That would be in line with the rest of the Constitution, which is designed to limit the impact of less than honorable actors.

The lame-duck pardon is a known monster. Presidents and governors that have pardon power and no accountability to the public in the lame duck period have no reason not to wield this power capriciously.

It's especially a problem for presidents, because it's usually a career ending position. There's no other elections to worry about if you're leaving the Presidency, so it's no problem at all to tarnish your reputation by handing out personal favors.

Sherman Bay · 20th January 2021, 07:59 AM

According to this TeamJustice lawyer, presidential pardons are not absolute, and may be subject to review or cancellation by the courts. He makes a case that this is what could happen if Trump pardoned a member of his family. Ref: Burdick vs. US.: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burdick_v._United_States (1915)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=baWkPCQzgoQ

JoeMorgue · 20th January 2021, 08:00 AM

Also "President" is a big enough position that other things are likely to overshadow it.

Sure we could argue the pros and cons of this or that pardon or the pardon concept itself, but I think we all know that no President's legacy is going to wind up being based their pardons, they will always be a footnote.

SuburbanTurkey · 20th January 2021, 08:02 AM

Originally Posted by Sherman Bay

According to this TeamJustice lawyer, presidential pardons are not absolute, and may be subject to review or cancellation by the courts. He makes a case that this is what could happen if Trump pardoned a member of his family. Ref: Burdick vs. US.: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burdick_v._United_States (1915)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=baWkPCQzgoQ

Good thing we don't have a 6-3 conservative SCOTUS that takes a sweeping view of executive power.

Oh wait.

Craig4 · 20th January 2021, 08:05 AM

Oh to be a fly on the wall of Q Shaman's cell when he found out he didn't make the cut. All those morons Trump had storm the Capitol, thinking there was a pardon coming. Heh...heh...heh. Some of them threw their lives away for nothing. I am darkly amused.

slyjoe · 20th January 2021, 08:05 AM

Originally Posted by JoeMorgue

Also "President" is a big enough position that other things are likely to overshadow it.

Sure we could argue the pros and cons of this or that pardon or the pardon concept itself, but I think we all know that no President's legacy is going to wind up being based their pardons, they will always be a footnote.

This is true, except maybe for the case of Ford with the Nixon blanket pardon.

What I would worry about if I was Bannon is that accepting the pardon is "essentially" an admission of guilt (no I don't want to get into the legal nuances of that here).

An admission of guilt would probably not be to the pardonees' advantage when the lawsuits start flying.

SuburbanTurkey · 20th January 2021, 08:14 AM

Originally Posted by Craig4

Oh to be a fly on the wall of Q Shaman's cell when he found out he didn't make the cut. All those morons Trump had storm the Capitol, thinking there was a pardon coming. Heh...heh...heh. Some of them threw their lives away for nothing. I am darkly amused.

I was thinking the same thing.

The writing is already on the wall, but when 1201 hits, all these Jan6 CHUDs will know, for certain, that they have been abandoned.

ahhell · 20th January 2021, 08:21 AM

Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey

The lame-duck pardon is a known monster. Presidents and governors that have pardon power and no accountability to the public in the lame duck period have no reason not to wield this power capriciously.

It's especially a problem for presidents, because it's usually a career ending position. There's no other elections to worry about if you're leaving the Presidency, so it's no problem at all to tarnish your reputation by handing out personal favors.

Originally Posted by JoeMorgue

Also "President" is a big enough position that other things are likely to overshadow it.

Sure we could argue the pros and cons of this or that pardon or the pardon concept itself, but I think we all know that no President's legacy is going to wind up being based their pardons, they will always be a footnote.

I agree with both of those statements.

Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey

Good thing we don't have a 6-3 conservative SCOTUS that takes a sweeping view of executive power.

Oh wait.

As a rule, conservative judges/justices don't actually have a sweeping view of executive power. At least not based on their stated philosophies, mostly because with a few exceptions, like pardons, the constitution doesn't take a sweeping view of executive power. They typically have a fairly dim view of Chevron Deference for instance. People being who we are, I'm sure they can find a work around.

JoeMorgue · 20th January 2021, 08:34 AM

Originally Posted by slyjoe

This is true, except maybe for the case of Ford with the Nixon blanket pardon.

Fair point. That certainly is a valid exception. Ford is certainly the only President that comes to mind where if you going to do like a bullet-point level, quick snapshot of the major events, both highlights and lowlights, of their Presidency the word "pardon" would even show up at all. Maybe Carter's mass pardon of draft avoiders is a borderline case, but I wouldn't go so far as to say that pops into people's heads when you mention Jimmy Carter the same way the pardon of Nixon does if you mention Gerald Ford.

But pardoning a President (to say nothing of your immediate predecessor) after the biggest scandal in American political history as pretty much your first act and then having a, let's be fair, rather short, boring and milquetoast placeholder Presidency after that makes for a rather extreme example. Not helped by Gerald Ford not exactly being a ball of fiery charisma so he doesn't really have any place in America's pop-culture psyche. Which to his credit is what American needed after Nixon. In way him pardoning Nixon being the most dramatic thing he did speaks well of the man. I actually think I had a good finger on the pulse of country, for better or worse.

There's plenty of things that could have happened during Ford's Presidency that would have overshadowed his pardoning of Nixon but just didn't. Ford's more a case of just nothing else about his Presidency being interesting then the pardon itself being all that interesting, although again I will admit it is by far the most interesting pardon from a political perspective.

Thermal · 20th January 2021, 09:10 AM

Originally Posted by ahhell

I agree with both of those statements.
As a rule, conservative judges/justices don't actually have a sweeping view of executive power. At least not based on their stated philosophies, mostly because with a few exceptions, like pardons, the constitution doesn't take a sweeping view of executive power. They typically have a fairly dim view of Chevron Deference for instance. People being who we are, I'm sure they can find a work around.

And for as lockstep as the conservative justices are perceived, they told the President to go pound sand in the recent electoral challenges. They do adhere to principles of law when the mood strikes.

Suddenly · 20th January 2021, 10:06 AM

Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey

Good thing we don't have a 6-3 conservative SCOTUS that takes a sweeping view of executive power.

Oh wait.

As of about ten minutes ago conservatism switched to being wary of both the power of the executive and also deficits.

Nessie · 20th January 2021, 10:13 AM

I get the President pardoning a turkey at Thanksgiving. Otherwise, it is corruption in plain site.

Craig4 · 20th January 2021, 10:47 AM

Originally Posted by Nessie

I get the President pardoning a turkey at Thanksgiving. Otherwise, it is corruption in plain site.

I'd like to see the power modified so it could only be used if someone had been found guilty. If the intent is to right a miscarriage of justice, we should give justice a chance to be miscarried.

JoeMorgue · 20th January 2021, 10:52 AM

That's why I proposed earlier the idea of replacing pardon power in its current from with the ability of the President to just order a "do over" if he thinks justice wasn't served.

Person A is found guilty of a crime and the President thinks this is a miscarriage of justice. For a second backburner the discussion of whether or not the President should be able to act on this (not to say it's not a valid question, we'll just shelve it for now) the President could have the ability to just null and void that trial and make it have to be done again; perhaps with some (well within legal framework) modifications like change of venue. The trial would then just happen again, the legal system would still make the final say. The President would just be limited to, basically, going "Are sure that's your final answer?"

Purely symbolic pardons done after the person has died and many years have passed I could still see being retained.

Segnosaur · 20th January 2021, 10:57 AM

Originally Posted by Craig4

I'd like to see the power modified so it could only be used if someone had been found guilty. If the intent is to right a miscarriage of justice, we should give justice a chance to be miscarried.

So, in the case of something like the Vietnam War draft dodgers... you would want to see them live the rest of their lives with the threat of prosecution over their heads, just because "We can only pardon you if you are found guilty"?

BobTheCoward · 20th January 2021, 11:10 AM

Originally Posted by Segnosaur

So, in the case of something like the Vietnam War draft dodgers... you would want to see them live the rest of their lives with the threat of prosecution over their heads, just because "We can only pardon you if you are found guilty"?

Yes. They should have all been prosecuted.

Mader Levap · 20th January 2021, 11:12 AM

Originally Posted by Segnosaur

So, in the case of something like the Vietnam War draft dodgers... you would want to see them live the rest of their lives with the threat of prosecution over their heads, just because "We can only pardon you if you are found guilty"?

Implying blanket pardon is only way to deal with draft dodgers. I think it is wrong.

You always could make law/bill/whatever that decriminalizes draft dodging from that period. I guess blanket pardon was simply easiest solution with least amount of hassle.

Segnosaur · 20th January 2021, 11:20 AM

Originally Posted by Mader Levap

Quote:

So, in the case of something like the Vietnam War draft dodgers... you would want to see them live the rest of their lives with the threat of prosecution over their heads, just because "We can only pardon you if you are found guilty"?

Implying blanket pardon is only way to deal with draft dodgers. I think it is wrong.

You always could make law/bill/whatever that decriminalizes draft dodging from that period.

And if the senate or house is currently under the control of a party that opposes those actions?

Quote:

I guess blanket pardon was simply easiest solution with least amount of hassle.

In general, I think pardons are an imperfect solution to a problem, for which all alternatives are even more imperfect.

(Not that I wouldn't be opposed to seeing them modify the rules...)

Skeptic Ginger · 20th January 2021, 11:22 AM

Originally Posted by DevilsAdvocate

No. See my post above about court rulings on whether a pardon can be revoked before it is delivered. That is all we have.

The rest would be up to the courts. A secret pardon would almost certainly be considered not valid. A self pardon would almost certainly be considered not valid whether secret or not.

I think if Trump had pardoned himself or his kids we'd have heard by now. And now it's too late.

I suspect Trump either took it seriously that pardoning himself would be evidence for state charges, it would show knowledge of guilt.

Or, he such a sick narcissist he simply doesn't believe they can convict him. He's always gotten away with things before.

Giuliani made a point of saying no pardon because he hadn't broken any laws. That might be true and might have also influenced Dump's decision.

As for Bannon, I copied this from a search rather than bothering to read the article:

Quote:

https://www.newsweek.com/trump-pardo...harges-1562984
Despite Donald Trump Pardon, Steve Bannon Could Still Face State ...
5 hours ago ... "What Bannon did likely violated state financial crime laws so he may still face criminal charges in multiple states as well as civil lawsuits for his ...

He's still toast.

dudalb · 20th January 2021, 11:32 AM

Trump's pardon of Bannon is a professonal from one Grifter to another.

Craig4 · 20th January 2021, 11:49 AM

Originally Posted by Segnosaur

So, in the case of something like the Vietnam War draft dodgers... you would want to see them live the rest of their lives with the threat of prosecution over their heads, just because "We can only pardon you if you are found guilty"?

It's the statute of limitations. You can also modify prosecution guidelines to not pursue such charges.

20th January 2021, 03:39 AM	#161
psionl0 Skeptical about skeptics Join Date: Sep 2010 Location: 31°57'S 115°57'E Posts: 17,007	I don't get the fuss. Revoking or seriously modifying the President's power to issue pardons just because he might pardon the "wrong" people is nothing more than a trivial pursuit.
	__________________ "The process by which banks create money is so simple that the mind is repelled. Where something so important is involved, a deeper mystery seems only decent." - Galbraith, 1975

20th January 2021, 03:46 AM	#162
Firestone Proud Award Award recipient Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Belgium Posts: 2,997	The main problem is the self-dealing, I think. If a president can just pardon people who commit crimes on his behalf (as Trump did with Manafort, Stone, ...), it effectively puts the president's team above the law.
	__________________ The method of science is tried and true. It is not perfect, it's just the best we have. And to abandon it, with its skeptical protocols is the pathway to a dark age. -- Carl Sagan

20th January 2021, 04:07 AM	#163
Mumbles Philosopher Join Date: Dec 2008 Posts: 8,427	Originally Posted by Firestone The main problem is the self-dealing, I think. If a president can just pardon people who commit crimes on his behalf (as Trump did with Manafort, Stone, ...), it effectively puts the president's team above the law. That's really the only issue at hand - and the lesson shouldn't be "we need to get rid of pardons", since even Toupee Fiasco managed to pardon people who deserved it. Rather, it's "Don't vote obvious bungling criminal sociopaths into office". That fixes that actual problem with Toupee Fiasco's pardons, and many other problems with the past four years.
Mumbles Philosopher Join Date: Dec 2008 Posts: 8,427

20th January 2021, 04:19 AM	#164
DevilsAdvocate Philosopher Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 6,449	Rudy is in a heap of trouble. That "trial by combat" thing isn't going to turn out well. At his criminal trial is he going to be represented by Lin Wood or Sydney Powell?
	__________________ I don't need to fight to prove I'm right. - Baba O'Riley

20th January 2021, 04:56 AM	#166
catsmate No longer the 1 Join Date: Apr 2007 Posts: 23,869	Originally Posted by DevilsAdvocate In interesting legal matters, considering the very late hour, Biden could maybe theoretically revoke Bannon's pardon. It won't happen, but it possibly could. Grant revoked two pardons granted by Andrew Johnson. The courts upheld the revocations because the prison warden had not delivered the pardon. Another revocation was upheld because the prisoner had physically received the pardon. If Biden were to revoke Bannon's pardon, that may be upheld if, at that time, it has not been received by the clerks of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, or possibly even if the pardon has not been delivered, by some manner, to Bannon himself. Probably won't happen. But an interesting idea. Shades of Marbury v. Madison.
	__________________ As human right is always something given, it always in reality reduces to the right which men give, "concede," to each other. If the right to existence is conceded to new-born children, then they have the right; if it is not conceded to them, as was the case among the Spartans and ancient Romans, then they do not have it. For only society can give or concede it to them; they themselves cannot take it, or give it to themselves.

20th January 2021, 04:30 AM	#165
The Don Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Sir Fynwy Posts: 31,360	Originally Posted by DevilsAdvocate Rudy is in a heap of trouble. That "trial by combat" thing isn't going to turn out well. At his criminal trial is he going to be represented by Lin Wood or Sydney Powell? I'm not so sure. IMO it will be difficult to get a 12-person jury to convict him because at least one will be an ardent Trump supporter who will find some way to excuse Rudy Giuliani's words and deeds.

20th January 2021, 05:18 AM	#167
SuburbanTurkey Philosopher Join Date: Apr 2018 Location: Massachusetts, USA Posts: 8,012	No pardons yet for Jan6 invaders. Time's not out yet, but Trump seems on track to hang these goons out to dry. What I wouldn't pay to be inside the minds of these people that got duped into raiding the Capitol and abandoned by the leader they did it for.
	__________________ Gobble gobble

20th January 2021, 05:37 AM	#168
timhau NWO Litter Technician Join Date: May 2004 Location: Looks like Finland. Smells like Finland. Quacks like Finland. Where the hell am I? Posts: 14,474	Originally Posted by DevilsAdvocate Rudy is in a heap of trouble. That "trial by combat" thing isn't going to turn out well. At his criminal trial is he going to be represented by Lin Wood or Sydney Powell? He'll represent himself. You know what they say about men who are their own lawyers.
	__________________ When I was a kid I used to pray every night for a new bicycle. Then I realised that the Lord, in his wisdom, doesn't work that way. I just stole one and asked Him to forgive me. - Emo Philips

20th January 2021, 05:58 AM	#169
Darat Lackey Administrator Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: South East, UK Posts: 97,062	Originally Posted by DevilsAdvocate Rudy is in a heap of trouble. That "trial by combat" thing isn't going to turn out well. At his criminal trial is he going to be represented by Lin Wood or Sydney Powell? Can they do that from jail?
	__________________ I wish I knew how to quit you

20th January 2021, 06:11 AM	#170
turingtest Mistral, mistral wind... Join Date: Aug 2013 Location: Embedded, reporting from Mississippi Posts: 4,678	Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey No pardons yet for Jan6 invaders. Time's not out yet, but Trump seems on track to hang these goons out to dry. What I wouldn't pay to be inside the minds of these people that got duped into raiding the Capitol and abandoned by the leader they did it for. They've been listening to Trump make statements like these (Snopes), going back to Aug 2015- -and thought they could actually get away with what their leader was telling them to do. Now they're finding out that they're not getting pardoned, and he's sure as hell not going to pay any of their legal fees. If they have any brains at all, they'll understand that the guy they thought they were using to send a message was using them for his own personal profit the whole time. And if they have any sense of consistency in the message they thought they were sending with "drain the swamp!" they'll get that this was betrayed too- that they will pay legal prices for acts which were incited by a politician who will probably end up paying no price at all; they will be the goats sacrificed on the altar of "unity."
	__________________ I'm tired of the bombs, tired of the bullets, tired of the crazies on TV; I'm the aviator, a dream's a dream whatever it seems Deep Purple- "The Aviator" Life was a short shelf that came with bookends- Stephen King

20th January 2021, 06:24 AM	#171
Puppycow Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Yokohama, Japan Posts: 25,744	The list of pardons seems to have one thing in common. They are some form of white collar crime, and they are wealthy, or at least formerly wealthy people. Now they all owe him a favor.
	__________________ A fool thinks himself to be wise, but a wise man knows himself to be a fool. William Shakespeare

20th January 2021, 06:29 AM	#172
The Don Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Sir Fynwy Posts: 31,360	Originally Posted by Puppycow The list of pardons seems to have one thing in common. They are some form of white collar crime, and they are wealthy, or at least formerly wealthy people. Now they all owe him a favor. Well, yes and no. Owing someone a favour is only a problem when there are consequences for not paying them back. If the case of certain Italian fraternal organisations, the consequences are clear but in President Trump's case, I'm not sure what he can do, apart from impotently threatening legal action, now that he's out of office.

20th January 2021, 06:29 AM	#173
Suddenly No Punting Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Not In Follansbee Posts: 4,118	Originally Posted by The Don I'm not so sure. IMO it will be difficult to get a 12-person jury to convict him because at least one will be an ardent Trump supporter who will find some way to excuse Rudy Giuliani's words and deeds. The AUSA office will probably spend more resources on jury selection than anything else. Not that it would be hard. Most of the ardent Trump supporters proudly state so on their facebook page.

20th January 2021, 06:54 AM	#174
BobTheCoward Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Nov 2010 Posts: 20,239	The pardon power puts the president above impeachment. "I have a pardon here for every American for every crime Ever. Signing this will immediately release 150,000 inmates. Vote to impeach me and I sign it."

20th January 2021, 06:54 AM	#175
SuburbanTurkey Philosopher Join Date: Apr 2018 Location: Massachusetts, USA Posts: 8,012	Quote: A 71-year-old supporter of President Donald Trump was reportedly shocked when Trump recently commuted the 40-year sentence of a man who stole his life savings in a Ponzi scheme. leopards, faces, etc. https://www.newsweek.com/trump-suppo...scheme-1562797
	__________________ Gobble gobble

20th January 2021, 07:00 AM	#176
ponderingturtle Orthogonal Vector Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 50,461	Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey leopards, faces, etc. https://www.newsweek.com/trump-suppo...scheme-1562797 BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA
	__________________ Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody "There shall be no poofing in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin

20th January 2021, 07:05 AM	#177
zooterkin Nitpicking dilettante Administrator Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Berkshire, mostly Posts: 48,463	Originally Posted by BobTheCoward The pardon power puts the president above impeachment. "I have a pardon here for every American for every crime Ever. Signing this will immediately release 150,000 inmates. Vote to impeach me and I sign it." And yet...
	__________________ The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts.Bertrand Russell Zooterkin is correct Darat Nerd! Hokulele Join the JREF Folders ! Team 13232 Ezekiel 23:20

20th January 2021, 07:32 AM	#178
Mader Levap Graduate Poster Join Date: Dec 2012 Posts: 1,576	Originally Posted by Puppycow The list of pardons seems to have one thing in common. They are some form of white collar crime, and they are wealthy, or at least formerly wealthy people. Now they all owe him a favor. I bet most of them is 2mln$ poorer. Rest is cover to make all pardons more acceptable.
	__________________ Sanity is overrated. / Voting for Republicans is morally equivalent to voting for Nazis in early 30's.

20th January 2021, 07:47 AM	#179
ahhell Illuminator Join Date: Feb 2017 Posts: 3,417	Originally Posted by Mumbles That's really the only issue at hand - and the lesson shouldn't be "we need to get rid of pardons", since even Toupee Fiasco managed to pardon people who deserved it. Rather, it's "Don't vote obvious bungling criminal sociopaths into office". That fixes that actual problem with Toupee Fiasco's pardons, and many other problems with the past four years. Even the best of Presidents have had...controversial pardons. I think reasonable limits are a good idea without repealing the power all together. That would be in line with the rest of the Constitution, which is designed to limit the impact of less than honorable actors.
ahhell Illuminator Join Date: Feb 2017 Posts: 3,417	Last edited by ahhell; 20th January 2021 at 07:48 AM.

20th January 2021, 07:58 AM	#180
SuburbanTurkey Philosopher Join Date: Apr 2018 Location: Massachusetts, USA Posts: 8,012	Originally Posted by ahhell Even the best of Presidents have had...controversial pardons. I think reasonable limits are a good idea without repealing the power all together. That would be in line with the rest of the Constitution, which is designed to limit the impact of less than honorable actors. The lame-duck pardon is a known monster. Presidents and governors that have pardon power and no accountability to the public in the lame duck period have no reason not to wield this power capriciously. It's especially a problem for presidents, because it's usually a career ending position. There's no other elections to worry about if you're leaving the Presidency, so it's no problem at all to tarnish your reputation by handing out personal favors.
	__________________ Gobble gobble

20th January 2021, 07:59 AM	#181
Sherman Bay Master Poster Join Date: May 2002 Location: Wisconsin, USA Posts: 2,331	According to this TeamJustice lawyer, presidential pardons are not absolute, and may be subject to review or cancellation by the courts. He makes a case that this is what could happen if Trump pardoned a member of his family. Ref: Burdick vs. US.: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burdick_v._United_States (1915) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=baWkPCQzgoQ

20th January 2021, 08:00 AM	#182
JoeMorgue Self Employed Remittance Man Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Florida Posts: 30,692	Also "President" is a big enough position that other things are likely to overshadow it. Sure we could argue the pros and cons of this or that pardon or the pardon concept itself, but I think we all know that no President's legacy is going to wind up being based their pardons, they will always be a footnote.
	__________________ Yahtzee: "You're doing that thing again where when asked a question you just discuss the philosophy of the question instead of answering the bloody question." Gabriel: "Well yeah, you see..." Yahtzee: "No. When you are asked a Yes or No question the first word out of your mouth needs to be Yes or No. Only after that have you earned the right to elaborate."

20th January 2021, 08:02 AM	#183
SuburbanTurkey Philosopher Join Date: Apr 2018 Location: Massachusetts, USA Posts: 8,012	Originally Posted by Sherman Bay According to this TeamJustice lawyer, presidential pardons are not absolute, and may be subject to review or cancellation by the courts. He makes a case that this is what could happen if Trump pardoned a member of his family. Ref: Burdick vs. US.: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burdick_v._United_States (1915) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=baWkPCQzgoQ Good thing we don't have a 6-3 conservative SCOTUS that takes a sweeping view of executive power. Oh wait.
	__________________ Gobble gobble

20th January 2021, 08:05 AM	#184
Craig4 Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: I live in a swamp Posts: 22,581	Oh to be a fly on the wall of Q Shaman's cell when he found out he didn't make the cut. All those morons Trump had storm the Capitol, thinking there was a pardon coming. Heh...heh...heh. Some of them threw their lives away for nothing. I am darkly amused.

20th January 2021, 08:05 AM	#185
slyjoe Master Poster Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Near Harmonica Virgins, AZ Posts: 2,561	Originally Posted by JoeMorgue Also "President" is a big enough position that other things are likely to overshadow it. Sure we could argue the pros and cons of this or that pardon or the pardon concept itself, but I think we all know that no President's legacy is going to wind up being based their pardons, they will always be a footnote. This is true, except maybe for the case of Ford with the Nixon blanket pardon. What I would worry about if I was Bannon is that accepting the pardon is "essentially" an admission of guilt (no I don't want to get into the legal nuances of that here). An admission of guilt would probably not be to the pardonees' advantage when the lawsuits start flying.
	__________________ "You have done nothing to demonstrate an understanding of scientific methodology or modern skepticism, both of which are, by necessity, driven by the facts and evidence, not by preconceptions, and both of which are strengthened by, and rely upon, change." - Arkan Wolfshade

20th January 2021, 08:14 AM	#186
SuburbanTurkey Philosopher Join Date: Apr 2018 Location: Massachusetts, USA Posts: 8,012	Originally Posted by Craig4 Oh to be a fly on the wall of Q Shaman's cell when he found out he didn't make the cut. All those morons Trump had storm the Capitol, thinking there was a pardon coming. Heh...heh...heh. Some of them threw their lives away for nothing. I am darkly amused. I was thinking the same thing. The writing is already on the wall, but when 1201 hits, all these Jan6 CHUDs will know, for certain, that they have been abandoned.
	__________________ Gobble gobble

20th January 2021, 08:21 AM	#187
ahhell Illuminator Join Date: Feb 2017 Posts: 3,417	Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey The lame-duck pardon is a known monster. Presidents and governors that have pardon power and no accountability to the public in the lame duck period have no reason not to wield this power capriciously. It's especially a problem for presidents, because it's usually a career ending position. There's no other elections to worry about if you're leaving the Presidency, so it's no problem at all to tarnish your reputation by handing out personal favors. Originally Posted by JoeMorgue Also "President" is a big enough position that other things are likely to overshadow it. Sure we could argue the pros and cons of this or that pardon or the pardon concept itself, but I think we all know that no President's legacy is going to wind up being based their pardons, they will always be a footnote. I agree with both of those statements. Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey Good thing we don't have a 6-3 conservative SCOTUS that takes a sweeping view of executive power. Oh wait. As a rule, conservative judges/justices don't actually have a sweeping view of executive power. At least not based on their stated philosophies, mostly because with a few exceptions, like pardons, the constitution doesn't take a sweeping view of executive power. They typically have a fairly dim view of Chevron Deference for instance. People being who we are, I'm sure they can find a work around.
ahhell Illuminator Join Date: Feb 2017 Posts: 3,417

20th January 2021, 08:34 AM	#188
JoeMorgue Self Employed Remittance Man Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Florida Posts: 30,692	Originally Posted by slyjoe This is true, except maybe for the case of Ford with the Nixon blanket pardon. Fair point. That certainly is a valid exception. Ford is certainly the only President that comes to mind where if you going to do like a bullet-point level, quick snapshot of the major events, both highlights and lowlights, of their Presidency the word "pardon" would even show up at all. Maybe Carter's mass pardon of draft avoiders is a borderline case, but I wouldn't go so far as to say that pops into people's heads when you mention Jimmy Carter the same way the pardon of Nixon does if you mention Gerald Ford. But pardoning a President (to say nothing of your immediate predecessor) after the biggest scandal in American political history as pretty much your first act and then having a, let's be fair, rather short, boring and milquetoast placeholder Presidency after that makes for a rather extreme example. Not helped by Gerald Ford not exactly being a ball of fiery charisma so he doesn't really have any place in America's pop-culture psyche. Which to his credit is what American needed after Nixon. In way him pardoning Nixon being the most dramatic thing he did speaks well of the man. I actually think I had a good finger on the pulse of country, for better or worse. There's plenty of things that could have happened during Ford's Presidency that would have overshadowed his pardoning of Nixon but just didn't. Ford's more a case of just nothing else about his Presidency being interesting then the pardon itself being all that interesting, although again I will admit it is by far the most interesting pardon from a political perspective.
	__________________ Yahtzee: "You're doing that thing again where when asked a question you just discuss the philosophy of the question instead of answering the bloody question." Gabriel: "Well yeah, you see..." Yahtzee: "No. When you are asked a Yes or No question the first word out of your mouth needs to be Yes or No. Only after that have you earned the right to elaborate." Last edited by JoeMorgue; 20th January 2021 at 08:42 AM.

20th January 2021, 09:10 AM	#189
Thermal Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2016 Location: East Coast USA Posts: 13,527	Originally Posted by ahhell I agree with both of those statements. As a rule, conservative judges/justices don't actually have a sweeping view of executive power. At least not based on their stated philosophies, mostly because with a few exceptions, like pardons, the constitution doesn't take a sweeping view of executive power. They typically have a fairly dim view of Chevron Deference for instance. People being who we are, I'm sure they can find a work around. And for as lockstep as the conservative justices are perceived, they told the President to go pound sand in the recent electoral challenges. They do adhere to principles of law when the mood strikes.
	__________________ We find comfort among those who agree with us, growth among those who don't -Frank A. Clark Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect -Mark Twain

20th January 2021, 10:06 AM	#190
Suddenly No Punting Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Not In Follansbee Posts: 4,118	Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey Good thing we don't have a 6-3 conservative SCOTUS that takes a sweeping view of executive power. Oh wait. As of about ten minutes ago conservatism switched to being wary of both the power of the executive and also deficits.

20th January 2021, 10:13 AM	#191
Nessie Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jun 2012 Posts: 13,007	I get the President pardoning a turkey at Thanksgiving. Otherwise, it is corruption in plain site.
	__________________ Audiophile/biker/sceptic

20th January 2021, 10:47 AM	#192
Craig4 Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: I live in a swamp Posts: 22,581	Originally Posted by Nessie I get the President pardoning a turkey at Thanksgiving. Otherwise, it is corruption in plain site. I'd like to see the power modified so it could only be used if someone had been found guilty. If the intent is to right a miscarriage of justice, we should give justice a chance to be miscarried.

20th January 2021, 10:52 AM	#193
JoeMorgue Self Employed Remittance Man Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Florida Posts: 30,692	That's why I proposed earlier the idea of replacing pardon power in its current from with the ability of the President to just order a "do over" if he thinks justice wasn't served. Person A is found guilty of a crime and the President thinks this is a miscarriage of justice. For a second backburner the discussion of whether or not the President should be able to act on this (not to say it's not a valid question, we'll just shelve it for now) the President could have the ability to just null and void that trial and make it have to be done again; perhaps with some (well within legal framework) modifications like change of venue. The trial would then just happen again, the legal system would still make the final say. The President would just be limited to, basically, going "Are sure that's your final answer?" Purely symbolic pardons done after the person has died and many years have passed I could still see being retained.
	__________________ Yahtzee: "You're doing that thing again where when asked a question you just discuss the philosophy of the question instead of answering the bloody question." Gabriel: "Well yeah, you see..." Yahtzee: "No. When you are asked a Yes or No question the first word out of your mouth needs to be Yes or No. Only after that have you earned the right to elaborate."

20th January 2021, 10:57 AM	#194
Segnosaur Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Canada, eh? Posts: 17,122	Originally Posted by Craig4 I'd like to see the power modified so it could only be used if someone had been found guilty. If the intent is to right a miscarriage of justice, we should give justice a chance to be miscarried. So, in the case of something like the Vietnam War draft dodgers... you would want to see them live the rest of their lives with the threat of prosecution over their heads, just because "We can only pardon you if you are found guilty"?
	__________________ Trust me, I know what I'm doing. - Sledgehammer I'm Mary Poppin's Y'all! - Yondu We are Groot - Groot

20th January 2021, 11:10 AM	#195
BobTheCoward Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Nov 2010 Posts: 20,239	Originally Posted by Segnosaur So, in the case of something like the Vietnam War draft dodgers... you would want to see them live the rest of their lives with the threat of prosecution over their heads, just because "We can only pardon you if you are found guilty"? Yes. They should have all been prosecuted.