USA Politics (redux)

Started by bhodges, November 10, 2020, 01:09:34 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Pohjolas Daughter

Quote from: Daverz on November 15, 2020, 12:19:28 PM
A pardon would be spun as thwarting the inevitable demoncrap witch hunt against Trump.  Take that, libtards!  It would also ensure Pence's place on the wingnut welfare gravy train.  But maybe Trump will try to cut out the middleman and pardon himself.
My gut level feeling (even though it's unchartered waters) is that it would declared unlawful (so I would prefer that he take this route--if at all).  Others here?  Agree/disagree? Thoughts, comments and/or questions.

PD
Pohjolas Daughter

Karl Henning

The GOP  has a long track record of spinelessness over Trump's crimes, so don't expect them to grow a spine now.
Karl Henning, Ph.D.
Composer & Clarinetist
Boston MA
http://www.karlhenning.com/
[Matisse] was interested neither in fending off opposition,
nor in competing for the favor of wayward friends.
His only competition was with himself. — Françoise Gilot

T. D.

Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on November 15, 2020, 01:51:53 PM
My gut level feeling (even though it's unchartered waters) is that it would declared unlawful (so I would prefer that he take this route--if at all).  Others here?  Agree/disagree? Thoughts, comments and/or questions.

PD
I'm no lawyer.
For much of my adult life, Laurence Tribe (Harvard) has been the most-cited Constitutional expert. GOP surely thinks he's a libtard, though.
https://www.msnbc.com/the-reidout/watch/laurence-tribe-explains-how-trump-probably-can-t-pardon-himself-95895109662
He said there's no precedent, but there's a well-known 410-year-old British ruling that one can't act as one's own judge.
Clip is too short to be conclusive. Perhaps a possibility of Pence giving the pardon?

T. D.

Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on November 15, 2020, 10:50:16 AM
Thanks for the links; I was able to read the CNN one.  Not particularly surprised (maybe a bit) how often both parties have tried to sway the electors, but the upshot of the CNN article is--not likely to sway enough to make a difference...the numbers are normally very few.
...

Here's a fairly detailed analysis
https://www.lawfareblog.com/how-hard-it-overturn-american-election
Concludes that the elector gambit is unlikely.

Pohjolas Daughter

Quote from: T. D. on November 15, 2020, 01:58:36 PM
I'm no lawyer.
For much of my adult life, Laurence Tribe (Harvard) has been the most-cited Constitutional expert. GOP surely thinks he's a libtard, though.
https://www.msnbc.com/the-reidout/watch/laurence-tribe-explains-how-trump-probably-can-t-pardon-himself-95895109662
He said there's no precedent, but there's a well-known 410-year-old British ruling that one can't act as one's own judge.
Clip is too short to be conclusive. Perhaps a possibility of Pence giving the pardon?
Thank you for mentioning him and the link.  One thing that kills me is that he could pardon family members.  And before Todd brings this up, yes, I know that Bill Clinton pardoned his half-brother...which I don't think is/was proper either.  Also, in terms of differences (to be fair), Pres. Trump had (still has) family members advising him in official duties at the White House (though unpaid).

Anyway, off to start on dinner.  Take care,

PD
Pohjolas Daughter

Todd

Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on November 15, 2020, 02:20:45 PMAnd before Todd brings this up, yes, I know that Bill Clinton pardoned his half-brother...which I don't think is/was proper either.


Whether or not it was or is "proper", whatever that means, it is constitutional.  That is literally the only thing that matters.  The Constitution itself sets the only limitation as cases of impeachment. 

No one knows whether a president can pardon him- or herself, because it has never been done, and no applicable case law exists. Hence the interest in finding out the Notorious ACB's stance on the subject during her hearings.  If Trump pardoned himself, it would be unprecedented, and may end up before SCOTUS.  Anyone who pretends that he or she knows the answers here is simply lying.
The universe is change; life is opinion. - Marcus Aurelius, Meditations

People would rather believe than know - E.O. Wilson

Propaganda death ensemble - Tom Araya

Pohjolas Daughter

Quote from: Todd on November 15, 2020, 02:50:02 PM

Whether or not it was or is "proper", whatever that means, it is constitutional.  That is literally the only thing that matters.  The Constitution itself sets the only limitation as cases of impeachment. 

No one knows whether a president can pardon him- or herself, because it has never been done, and no applicable case law exists. Hence the interest in finding out the Notorious ACB's stance on the subject during her hearings.  If Trump pardoned himself, it would be unprecedented, and may end up before SCOTUS.  Anyone who pretends that he or she knows the answers here is simply lying.
Re your first point:  I know that, but I still don't think that it's right...maybe time to make some changes?  I do realize that it won't happen in the immediate future and would require a lot of legal thought/work/voting (demand?) by the populace that this matter be addressed?  I don't know, but it's something to look into in my view.  Do you agree?  Seriously, I'd like to hear your thoughts on the matter as well as others here.

I don't think that it's a case of "pretending that he or she knows", but am curious as to others who specialize in constitutional law ...what their thoughts are and why.  I'm quite curious--and interested.  :)

PD
Pohjolas Daughter

Todd

Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on November 15, 2020, 03:10:10 PMDo you agree?


The pardon power exists in its current form for a variety of reasons, including the fact that people are unfairly prosecuted and have been under all legal systems, at all times, in all places, and the inclusion in the Constitution was a very wise choice.  The general population cares less about this than the Electoral College, and neither will change anytime soon, if ever.  The pardon power is less likely to be changed because presidents of all parties in the history of the republic have used it, and today both Democrat and Republican presidents use it for political purposes - and sometimes they even use it to achieve a degree of justice.  The power is an essential one.


Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on November 15, 2020, 03:10:10 PMI don't think that it's a case of "pretending that he or she knows", but am curious as to others who specialize in constitutional law ...what their thoughts are and why.  I'm quite curious--and interested.


They do not know, either.  Mr Tribe, a definite scholar on the subject, is also ideologically inclined and can offer only one outlook - and one that will almost certainly not sway SCOTUS as a whole if they must decide one the matter.
The universe is change; life is opinion. - Marcus Aurelius, Meditations

People would rather believe than know - E.O. Wilson

Propaganda death ensemble - Tom Araya

MusicTurner

The Princeton professor Werner Mueller's current article on 'de-Trumpification' has been reprinted in many newspapers world-wide.

https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/truth-commissions-to-investigate-trump-and-democratic-vulnerabilities-by-jan-werner-mueller-2020-11

vandermolen

Quote from: MusicTurner on November 16, 2020, 12:19:31 AM
The Princeton professor Werner Mueller's current article on 'de-Trumpification' has been reprinted in many newspapers world-wide.

https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/truth-commissions-to-investigate-trump-and-democratic-vulnerabilities-by-jan-werner-mueller-2020-11
Interesting article. Thanks for posting it.
"Courage is going from failure to failure without losing enthusiasm" (Churchill).

'The test of a work of art is, in the end, our affection for it, not our ability to explain why it is good' (Stanley Kubrick).

ritter

Quote from: Todd on November 15, 2020, 02:50:02 PM

Whether or not it was or is "proper", whatever that means, it is constitutional.  That is literally the only thing that matters.  The Constitution itself sets the only limitation as cases of impeachment. 

No one knows whether a president can pardon him- or herself, because it has never been done, and no applicable case law exists. Hence the interest in finding out the Notorious ACB's stance on the subject during her hearings.  If Trump pardoned himself, it would be unprecedented, and may end up before SCOTUS.  Anyone who pretends that he or she knows the answers here is simply lying.
What from a foreign perspective is hard to understand is a "blanket" pardon being hypothetically granted by the current POTUS to himself (or by his successor in the--even more hypothetical--case he abruptly resigns and the current VP becomes POTUS). In other legal systems where the pardon exists as a prerogative of the executive, the pardon has to be granted for an act that has been prosecuted and resulted in a conviction. "Preemptive pardons" are not contemplated to the best of my knowledge, as these would be equivalent to granting immunity from prosecution (which is a step that would require the passing of a law). And, AFAIK, the current POTUS has not been convicted of any crime.

Pohjolas Daughter

Quote from: Todd on November 15, 2020, 03:20:53 PM

The pardon power exists in its current form for a variety of reasons, including the fact that people are unfairly prosecuted and have been under all legal systems, at all times, in all places, and the inclusion in the Constitution was a very wise choice.  The general population cares less about this than the Electoral College, and neither will change anytime soon, if ever.  The pardon power is less likely to be changed because presidents of all parties in the history of the republic have used it, and today both Democrat and Republican presidents use it for political purposes - and sometimes they even use it to achieve a degree of justice.  The power is an essential one.
Yes, I agree that it is essential, but maybe there is another course of action to take?  What about coming up with some further guidelines/restrictions/procedures for judging who should be eligible and why?  Just some thoughts.  :)

PD
Pohjolas Daughter

Pohjolas Daughter

Quote from: vandermolen on November 16, 2020, 01:37:25 AM
Interesting article. Thanks for posting it.
+1 A lot of food for thought!
Pohjolas Daughter

71 dB

ME: "In less than 10 weeks Trump has left the White House and Biden is inaugurated. The boring corporate status quo nothing-will-fundamentally-change presidency starts for the next four years. Time to finally tune out of (American) politics after four exhausting years."

DAVID PAKMAN: "This is NOT the Time to Tune Out of Politics"

https://www.youtube.com/v/g_KIOiwsBbg
Spatial distortion is a serious problem deteriorating headphone listening.
Crossfeeders reduce spatial distortion and make the sound more natural
and less tiresome in headphone listening.

My Sound Cloud page <-- NEW Jan. 2024 "Harpeggiator"

Todd

Quote from: ritter on November 16, 2020, 02:02:12 AMAnd, AFAIK, the current POTUS has not been convicted of any crime.


There is already precedent for a president pardoning a former president.  Ford granted Nixon a full and unconditional pardon for crimes Nixon may have committed.  Perhaps Trump extends that to a president pardoning him- or herself.  Could be fun.
The universe is change; life is opinion. - Marcus Aurelius, Meditations

People would rather believe than know - E.O. Wilson

Propaganda death ensemble - Tom Araya

ritter

Quote from: Todd on November 16, 2020, 04:32:57 AM

There is already precedent for a president pardoning a former president.  Ford granted Nixon a full and unconditional pardon for crimes Nixon may have committed.  Perhaps Trump extends that to a president pardoning him- or herself.  Could be fun.
Indeed. I was aware of that Ford pardon of Nixon, but it still strikes me (as a foreigner) as odd: as you say, the pardon was for crimes Nixon "may have committed", not for any actual convictions.

Todd

Quote from: ritter on November 16, 2020, 05:04:55 AM
Indeed. I was aware of that Ford pardon of Nixon, but it still strikes me (as a foreigner) as odd: as you say, the pardon was for crimes Nixon "may have committed", not for any actual convictions.


Correct.  I believe the whole Watergate scandal was a long national nightmare, or some such, and Ford put an end to it.  Nice guy.
The universe is change; life is opinion. - Marcus Aurelius, Meditations

People would rather believe than know - E.O. Wilson

Propaganda death ensemble - Tom Araya

JBS

Quote from: ritter on November 16, 2020, 05:04:55 AM
Indeed. I was aware of that Ford pardon of Nixon, but it still strikes me (as a foreigner) as odd: as you say, the pardon was for crimes Nixon "may have committed", not for any actual convictions.

But Nixon's acceptance of the pardon was, at least in the legal sense, an admission that he has committed crimes which needed a pardon.

Hollywood Beach Broadwalk

Herman

The most likely turn-of-events will be that Trump steps down in December, Pounds will be a one-month president, just to pardon Trump and the Trumpkins, which won't make a lotta difference since there are state charges, too.

And then Biden will be #47.

Todd

Quote from: Herman on November 16, 2020, 05:44:50 AMThe most likely turn-of-events will be that Trump steps down in December, Pounds will be a one-month president, just to pardon Trump and the Trumpkins, which won't make a lotta difference since there are state charges, too.

And then Biden will be #47.


It was also all but certain that Trump would steal the election.
The universe is change; life is opinion. - Marcus Aurelius, Meditations

People would rather believe than know - E.O. Wilson

Propaganda death ensemble - Tom Araya