- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Winter Olympics
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Shouldn’t “preemptive’ pardons be unconstitutional?
Posted on 1/20/25 at 8:05 am to SlowFlowPro
Posted on 1/20/25 at 8:05 am to SlowFlowPro
Biden has shown the way.
Trump can hire hitmen to take out all of Biden's pardons and then pardon himself and the hitmen.
Seems reasonable.
Trump can hire hitmen to take out all of Biden's pardons and then pardon himself and the hitmen.
Seems reasonable.
1
Posted on 1/20/25 at 8:05 am to David Fellows
quote:
It's preemptive, dumbass, because no charges have been filed.
Covered in the psot you replied to
quote:
There is no limitation in the Constitution that the pardon power arises once an investigation begins.
Where does the wording of the Constitution mandate charges have to be filed prior to pardons being effective?
quote:
doesn't mean a pardon for any future crimes.
Pardons are only retroactive, and this has nothing to do with the conversation.
Posted on 1/20/25 at 8:05 am to SlowFlowPro
I understand how broad the pardon powers of the President are
It doesn’t mean I have to agree they are wide open.
Show me in the Constitution where it says I can’t own a tank.
Show me where it says in the Constitution where lsunurse can terminate her pregnancies.
Do you think the framers intended the pardon powers to be used to pardon people not accused of a crime?
It’s a very debatable subject and worthy or discussion.
Haven’t you yourself said “nobody is above the law”?
It doesn’t mean I have to agree they are wide open.
Show me in the Constitution where it says I can’t own a tank.
Show me where it says in the Constitution where lsunurse can terminate her pregnancies.
Do you think the framers intended the pardon powers to be used to pardon people not accused of a crime?
It’s a very debatable subject and worthy or discussion.
Haven’t you yourself said “nobody is above the law”?
This post was edited on 1/20/25 at 8:08 am
Posted on 1/20/25 at 8:06 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Trump issues silly pardons 4 years ago.
Which ones?
Posted on 1/20/25 at 8:06 am to texag7
Ask him. He should have no reason to lie. I may even have his website saved somewhere.
Posted on 1/20/25 at 8:07 am to Geekboy
frick no, man. Just because a charge hasn’t been brought yet doesn’t meant it won’t. The parson is for actions and not for charges anyway.
You pardon someone’s conduct.
You pardon someone’s conduct.
Posted on 1/20/25 at 8:07 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
There is no limitation in the Constitution that the pardon power arises once an investigation begins.
Therein lies the problem. Someone not convicted of a crime (much less not even charged with one) is considered innocent until proven guilty in our judicial system. That said, how can someone be pardoned for something which hasn't technically happened?
I'm not disagreeing with your assessment, I think it's probably (and unfortunately) accurate as this seems to be legal ground never covered and enough of the actors in this drama who would make such a decision will likely err on the political side that causes less strife in the swamp (and thus for them as well).
Pardons should at least be limited to crimes which have been charged.
Posted on 1/20/25 at 8:08 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
if the crime was already committed, how is it "preemptive"?
Idiot.
So you think Hunter can now legally commit any crime he wants in the future.
You're a true retard.
Posted on 1/20/25 at 8:09 am to Free888
quote:
and find a state AG to go after them (
The issue is you'd have to find these crimes committed in those states for jurisdiction. I imagine all of the alleged crimes occurred in DC, which is federal.
Also, since the nature of the proceeding was federal, associated crimes like witness tampering likely would also need to be federal.
Posted on 1/20/25 at 8:09 am to Geekboy
It's an open question. Only ones are Nixon and Hunter and they never been challenged.
Posted on 1/20/25 at 8:09 am to Bard
quote:
I'm not disagreeing with your assessment, I think it's probably (and unfortunately) accurate
Nothing about his 'assessment' is accurate.
He thinks a 'preemptive' pardon refers to a crime that hasn't been committed yet. He doesn't even know the basic definition of the word.
Posted on 1/20/25 at 8:10 am to Geekboy
And just like that, Joe Biden made Richard Nixon look like a choir boy.
Posted on 1/20/25 at 8:11 am to captainFid
Richard Nixon didn't molest his own daughter.
Posted on 1/20/25 at 8:11 am to captainFid
quote:
And just like that, Joe Biden made Richard Nixon look like a choir boy.
Barack Obama did that a long time ago.
Posted on 1/20/25 at 8:12 am to Geekboy
It’s the dumbest thing I’ve ever seen. An eroding of our democracy from both parties.
Posted on 1/20/25 at 8:17 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Also, since the nature of the proceeding was federal, associated crimes like witness tampering likely would also need to be federal.
My point with witness tampering was simply to test the current pardon power in court. It seems to be one of the most obvious charges they could make, and this could at least clear up any ambiguity on pardons.
I read a paper by Richard Epstein (prominent liberal lawyer) and his take was that in most cases prior to Hunter (Nixon, Vietnam draft dodgers) the charges were obvious. Hunter’s pardon was so broad that Epstein suggested that it should be challenged in court since it encompassed anything and see whether the court felt the “broadness” was a violation of the power (I’m paraphrasing here, he was much more specific).
Posted on 1/20/25 at 8:17 am to Bard
quote:
Someone not convicted of a crime (much less not even charged with one) is considered innocent until proven guilty in our judicial system.
They're presumed innocent. It seems small but is a major distinction from being "considered" innocent.
quote:
. That said, how can someone be pardoned for something which hasn't technically happened?
But the (purported/alleged) crime has happened.
quote:
enough of the actors in this drama who would make such a decision will likely err on the political side that causes less strife in the swamp (and thus for them as well).
I think the "them as well" is more accurate, as it would be incredibly costly, politically, especially if they lose.
Posted on 1/20/25 at 8:18 am to Free888
quote:
Epstein suggested that it should be challenged in court since it encompassed anything and see whether the court felt the “broadness” was a violation of the power (I’m paraphrasing here, he was much more specific).
This is where the political costs come into play.
Posted on 1/20/25 at 8:18 am to Scruffy
quote:
He hides his partisanship behind his definition of “legal analysis”
Yup every single time. His TDS is unreal
Posted on 1/20/25 at 8:21 am to Geekboy
quote:
Shouldn’t “preemptive’ pardons be unconstitutional?
Not according to this article. Apparently the SCOUS addressed this back in 1866. Link to FindLaw article. I don't know jack about this, just googled and this came up. LINK to Find Law article
from article....
The U.S. Supreme Court clarified presidential pardon power in an 1866 case (Ex Parte Garland) challenging the pardon of a former Confederate soldier by President Andrew Johnson. In its opinion, the Court stated that this power "extends to every offense known to the law, and may be exercised at any time after its commission, either before legal proceedings are taken or during their pendency, or after conviction and judgment."
Presidents also may issue pre-emptive pardons -- or rather, a pardon for any crimes an individual may have committed or may have been charged with. For example, President Gerald Ford issued a pardon to outgoing President Richard Nixon even though Nixon had not been charged with any federal crimes at that point.
Page 3 of 7
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News