Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

President asserts right to pardon himself

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • President asserts right to pardon himself

    ...which is what dictators do.

    https://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...-a8382586.html

    Two questions arise from this.

    1. Does the president have such a right? Should he exercise it? Should Clinton and Nixon have done so as well?

    2. My favorite and one that should resonate with a few here who are fond of asking the same question of the Mueller investigation: pardon himself of what?

  • #2
    He also wants to pardon people who don't actually need pardoning

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-44412422

    US President Donald Trump has said he may pardon boxing legend Muhammad Ali for a draft-dodging conviction, even though it has already been overturned.

    Comment


    • #3
      All US presidents will end their mandate with a blanket self pardon... just in case.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by budgie View Post
        ...which is what dictators do.
        A real Dictator doesn't give a rats ass and would ignore a indictment or order it ignored and have the persons who did it imprisoned or shot

        name 1 Dictator who willingly rendered himself over for trial?




        Originally posted by budgie View Post
        Two questions arise from this.

        1. Does the president have such a right? Should he exercise it? Should Clinton and Nixon have done so as well?
        IMO no he does not, but I am not a constitutional scholar on the US constitution .
        Nor do I believe IF he does in fact have that power should he use it
        That Nixon and Clinton did not use it shows to me they did not have the power. Nixon surely would have used it and Bubba could have used to to NOT be only the 2nd US POTUS in history to be impeached

        Originally posted by budgie View Post
        2. My favorite and one that should resonate with a few here who are fond of asking the same question of the Mueller investigation: pardon himself of what?
        Indeed, it's been over a year and Nothing tangible that says Trump committed any crime. For all the mental masturbation of poutraged lefty they still haven't been able to tie trump to any crime. In fact I believe most of the US left doesn't want trump indicted. they would much rather the investigation go on for years and use it to distract trump

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by BogT View Post
          All US presidents will end their mandate with a blanket self pardon... just in case.

          Take out a legal insurance policy before thinking about a campaign.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Linedoggie View Post

            IMO no he does not, but I am not a constitutional scholar on the US constitution .
            Nor do I believe IF he does in fact have that power should he use it
            That Nixon and Clinton did not use it shows to me they did not have the power. Nixon surely would have used it and Bubba could have used to to NOT be only the 2nd US POTUS in history to be impeached
            Yet if he does will you still support him? Should anyone?

            Originally posted by Linedoggie View Post
            Indeed, it's been over a year and Nothing tangible that says Trump committed any crime. For all the mental masturbation of outraged lefty they still haven't been able to tie trump to any crime. In fact I believe most of the US left doesn't want trump indicted. they would much rather the investigation go on for years and use it to distract trump
            I'd say it's been over a year and the dominoes keep falling on the collusion case. I agree the publicly available evidence - though pretty strong - is not conclusive. They haven't given us a smoking gun piece of evidence that trump ordered the meeting with the Russians yet. Doesn't mean Mueller doesn't have it or isn't getting closer. remember impeachment is a political process and the cowardly GOP will set the bar exceedingly high for fear of running afoul of the Trumpist wing of the party.

            On the other hand, he has committed the crime Obstruction of Justice: it is already blatantly obvious Trump did that when he fired Comey and McCabe and continues to do so almost daily, whenever he tweets misinformation about the case or threatens Rosenstein and Sessions. In fact he admitted it on live TV. Of course now we have Trumpies arguing it isn't a crime, but everyone knows he's as guilty as Nixon on that one.


            Comment


            • #7
              Quite honestly – and this comes from a person without a dog in the race – I'd find it outrageous if he had the right to pardon himself. It'd be outrageous for any president to do so even on the grounds of fabricated charges, counter-intuitively though it may seem. Why would any constitutional state go to the lengths of maintaing a separated trias politica with elaborate checks and balances if the head of government is free to ignore it in a whim?

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by muck View Post
                Quite honestly – and this comes from a person without a dog in the race – I'd find it outrageous if he had the right to pardon himself. It'd be outrageous for any president to do so even on the grounds of fabricated charges, counter-intuitively though it may seem. Why would any constitutional state go to the lengths of maintaing a separated trias politica with elaborate checks and balances if the head of government is free to ignore it in a whim?
                Purely a hypothetical. Every President has had the same right. Doing so would probably result in his immediate impeachment. Nothing to see here except more spastic alarm and manufactured outrage about absolutely nothing.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by riderboy View Post

                  Purely a hypothetical. Every President has had the same right. Doing so would probably result in his immediate impeachment. Nothing to see here except more spastic alarm and manufactured outrage about absolutely nothing.

                  He may have the 'right', but if he preemptively pardoned himself, and this is the fun part, pardon himself of what?

                  Sounds like an admission of guilt to me. If he was innocent, the smart thing would be sit tight and wait to be exonerated.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Be amazingly funny if he did. "FBI, you are fake news, I hereby pardon myself on the authority of myself, by the power vested in me by myself. Come at me bro."

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Corrupt View Post
                      He also wants to pardon people who don't actually need pardoning

                      https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-44412422

                      [/SIZE][/FONT][/COLOR]
                      In 2009 Sen. John McCain and the niece of Coretta King asked President Obama to pardon Muhammad Ali (and Jack Johnson). Obama declined for political reasons, not because Ali's conviction had already been overturned. There have been numerous requests for such gestures over the decades.
                      Last edited by RobertKLR; 09-06-2018, 08:46 AM. Reason: My mistake, not Coretta King but her niece ...

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by riderboy View Post

                        Purely a hypothetical. Every President has had the same right. Doing so would probably result in his immediate impeachment. Nothing to see here except more spastic alarm and manufactured outrage about absolutely nothing.
                        If US presidents have this constitutional right as an oversight in the text, you should amend the US constitution at the mere mentioning of such an idiotic course of action. Now is the first time this is considered, now it's time to push for this change.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by budgie View Post

                          Yet if he does will you still support him? Should anyone?
                          IF it was LEGAL he would not need support from anyone


                          Originally posted by budgie View Post
                          I'd say it's been over a year and the dominoes keep falling on the collusion case. I agree the publicly available evidence - though pretty strong - is not conclusive. They haven't given us a smoking gun piece of evidence that trump ordered the meeting with the Russians yet. Doesn't mean Mueller doesn't have it or isn't getting closer. remember impeachment is a political process and the cowardly GOP will set the bar exceedingly high for fear of running afoul of the Trumpist wing of the party.

                          On the other hand, he has committed the crime Obstruction of Justice: it is already blatantly obvious Trump did that when he fired Comey and McCabe and continues to do so almost daily, whenever he tweets misinformation about the case or threatens Rosenstein and Sessions. In fact he admitted it on live TV. Of course now we have Trumpies arguing it isn't a crime, but everyone knows he's as guilty as Nixon on that one.

                          <sigh> Again, no direct link after a year looking for Russians, Mueller now looks into a porn star from the USA while investigating a accusation of election wrongdoing.

                          Honestly I have no doubts Russia tried to fuck over Hillary. Afterall Hillary and Bill tried to fuck over Russia and meddled in Russian internal elections, so why wouldn't Russia want revenge?

                          Obama tried to interfere in Israeli elections directly against Netanyahu, where were the Investigations?

                          But buying facebook ads doesn't mean a single illegal vote was cast
                          No one says the Electoral reps were bribed, or even coerced to voting for trump

                          Face it Hillary lost because she didn't win where she needed to using a system she knew to be in place since 1803 IIRC Lefty the yellow curs still cannot accept that fact

                          Trump has all the morals of a rutting goat but he's still better than that Duplicitous **** Hillary


                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Linedoggie View Post
                            IF it was LEGAL he would not need support from anyone


                            [COLOR=#252C2F][FONT=Helvetica][SIZE=13px] <sigh> Again, no direct link after a year looking for Russians, Mueller now looks into a porn star from the USA while investigating a accusation of election wrongdoing.

                            Honestly I have no doubts Russia tried to fuck over Hillary. Afterall Hillary and Bill tried to fuck over Russia and meddled in Russian internal elections, so why wouldn't Russia want revenge?

                            Obama tried to interfere in Israeli elections directly against Netanyahu, where were the Investigations?

                            But buying facebook ads doesn't mean a single illegal vote was cast
                            No one says the Electoral reps were bribed, or even coerced to voting for trump

                            Face it Hillary lost because she didn't win where she needed to using a system she knew to be in place since 1803 IIRC Lefty the yellow curs still cannot accept that fact

                            Trump has all the morals of a rutting goat but he's still better than that Duplicitous **** Hillary


                            I'm not interested in relitigating the election. Yes there are a dozen other reasons Clinton lost, most of her own making.

                            But Talking about Clinton at this point is a deflection. Russia is interfering. Don't take my word for it: ask National Intelligence Director Coates.

                            http://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs...antic-alliance

                            The fact remains members of the Trump campaign met with Russians to get dirt on their opponent. It is possible, though I grant you not conclusive yet, that they did this at Trump's own direction. And since the FBI started investigating that, Trump himself has been very publicly trying to obstruct them. He is obviously guilty of obstruction at the very least.

                            Last edited by budgie; 09-06-2018, 11:11 PM.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by budgie View Post


                              ...

                              But Talking about Clinton at this point is a deflection. Russia is interfering. Don't take my word for it: ask National Intelligence Director Coates.

                              http://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs...antic-alliance

                              ...
                              So, a known liar from an organisation with a very long history of lying. Well you've convinced me, it must be true.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X