 
     |
| Presidential Pardons? (Page 2/7) |
|
RandomTask
|
JAN 17, 09:50 PM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by williegoat:
The problem is that if Trump pardons himself, the left will proclaim that as an admission of guilt. They will never leave him be, even long after he has shuffled off this mortal coil.
He came so close to dismantling their dastardly dominion, and still may. They cannot allow that to happen.
|
|
I think the issue arises from being held accountable. Imagine a president who did whatever they wanted, however unconstitutional, and just constantly pardoned himself after they did it. . . I'm sure that's not what the founders intent was.
|
|
|
|
blackrams
|
JAN 17, 10:07 PM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by RandomTask:
I think the issue arises from being held accountable. Imagine a president who did whatever they wanted, however unconstitutional, and just constantly pardoned himself after they did it. . . I'm sure that's not what the founders intent was. |
|
I don't think there's any question about whether or not he should, the question is, if he could. Having gone through the section of the constitution applicable, about the only thing I see is he can't "over rule" an impeachment. Some would consider such a pardon an admission of guilt and some would simply see it as a way to get the dogs off his ass.
I'm convinced the leadership (if it could be called that) of the Democrat Party is trying to do two things, pile as much crap on him as possible and keep him from ever being able to run for President again.
Should President Trump pardon himself from any future federal charges, I have no doubt it would go to SCOTUS eventually.
Rams[This message has been edited by blackrams (edited 01-17-2021).]
|
|
|
|
sourmash
|
JAN 17, 11:35 PM
|
|
|
Not sure how he could ever win an election if he ran? Most of the voters in polls have the opinion he won this one.
|
|
|
|
blackrams
|
JAN 17, 11:47 PM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by sourmash:
Not sure how he could ever win an election if he ran? Most of the voters in polls have the opinion he won this one. |
|
HRC or Pelosi running.............................
Rams
|
|
|
Patrick
|
JAN 18, 01:08 AM
|
|
Whoever imagined that being elected POTUS might give that person a Get Out Of Jail Free card to use on themselves?  Hopefully, saner heads will prevail.
|
|
|
|
randye
|
JAN 18, 02:46 AM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by rinselberg:
If he were to be indicted on federal charge(s) and were granted immunity by a judge on the grounds that he is pardoned, then it opens the possibility of him being compelled to testify about the matter(s) in question and possibly disclose or attest to self-incriminating or other embarrassing information, under the threat of prosecution for perjury if his testimony is ruled to be demonstrably false.
|
|
Did you just make that up or is it more MSLSD stuff you were fed, because either way it's hilariously dumb.
Indict someone for a crime and then give them immunity from prosecution = NO CASE = NO TESTIMONY
Hilariously dumb proposition fantasy from someone that has no clue how the law works....like Lefties
 [This message has been edited by randye (edited 01-18-2021).]
|
|
|
|
rinselberg
|
JAN 18, 03:10 AM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by randye:
Did you just make that up or is it more MSLSD stuff you were fed, because either way it's hilariously dumb.
Indict someone for a crime and then give them immunity from prosecution = NO CASE = NO TESTIMONY
Hilariously dumb proposition fantasy from someone that has no clue how the law works....like Lefties
|
|
Here's something else that's hilariously dumb.
Was that a message from "rinselberg" that forum member randye read and responded to? Or a message from some other forum member whose screen name starts with an "m"..?
Did you ever get the brain transplant you were so sorely in need of?
A rhetorical question for sure.[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 01-18-2021).]
|
|
|
|
randye
|
JAN 18, 04:28 AM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by rinselberg:
Did you ever get the brain transplant you were so sorely in need of?
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by rinselberg:
I'm not usually so blunt, but I guess this is kind of me filling in for the recently banned 'dawg. (Boondawg.)
|
|
Keep right on "filling in"[This message has been edited by randye (edited 01-18-2021).]
|
|
|
|
rinselberg
|
JAN 18, 04:58 AM
|
|
I've seen one "talking head" after another assert that if someone is granted a pardon and uses that pardon to immunize himself from being prosecuted in relation to a specific investigation, he is as a consequence not entitled to claim Fifth Amendment protection against self-incrimination, and so may be compelled, under penalty of perjury, to testify about whatever matter or event is the subject of an investigation.
If President Trump were able to grant himself a pardon, I believe he could likewise be compelled to testify under penalty of perjury, like any other person who is granted a pardon and uses it to immunize himself against a possibility of being prosecuted.
That's for the other forum members who are actually part of this discussion.[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 01-18-2021).]
|
|
|
|
olejoedad
|
JAN 18, 08:03 AM
|
|
Many of the talking heads work under the premise of 'If we say it enough times people will believe it's the truth'.
It's been used successfully for the last century.
It worked very well in Europe in the 1930's........
|
|
|
