The fact that Trump is even looking into the business of pardoning either himself or others in his fold screams cognizance of guilt.
Great thread title, by the way.
Pardonburger
- Thread starter exGOPer
- Start date
Great thread title, by the way.
If true, How so?
Last edited:
You know, the last person to pardon a President ran for election . He didn't get elected. Most political scientists believe he wasn't elected because he pardoned Richard Nixon. The public wanted Tricky Dick to go to jail. Now, it is true that acceptance of a pardon, according to the Court, is an admission of guilt. But strangely the public ignored that. They didn't care whether the President said, in a round about way, "I'm guilty." They wanted the President to be treated the same way they would be treated. Can you blame them? Now if Pence pardons Trump, do you think that Pence will be re-elected? So, whether the President can get a pardon and thus be placed above the law that applies to you and me, will depend on the political ambitions of the one who pardons him. And the chances are substantial that Trump will insult Pence before this is over. Do not lose sight of our reality that we live with everyday: Our President has a serious personality disorder. Try to think a little more deeply, if you will please.
Last edited:
If there is anyone naive here, it is certainly you. How old are you anyway?
Last edited:
You've a lot to learn.
We all do!
Agreed.It is far from a sure thing Pence would pardon Trump,I think the odds are against it.
It's a right dead certainty. --But first there would have to be impeachment and conviction. So far I see nothing that would suggest that.
Impeachment and conviction of high crimes and misdemeanors are political events. A pardon is only germane if a crime has been committed. A President who is impeached and convicted in the Senate doesn't necessarily need a pardon to avoid prosecution. The Congress can remove a President for whatever reason they like, as high crimes and misdemeanors are left undefined. On the other hand, a President does not have to be impeached and convicted to be indicted for an alleged crime. The only question is whether a President can be indicted while still in office. This is a question for which there is no definitive answer. It is a topic on which the Court has never ruled and Constitutional and statutory law are both silent. It would seem implicit that the Founders expected the Republic to fall back on common sense in such matters.
I would think the vast majority of educated people would think that common sense would dictate that a President suspected of a crime making him unfit to serve, and one for which there is substantial evidence, should first be removed from office by the impeachment process and then be indicted and tried as a separate action.
Last edited:
Correct except for one item. There would not be an indictment as there would be a pardon granted prior to. You're beginning to understand how this works. --The president is the chief law enforcer in the land and is the sole member of the executive branch . As such , a sitting president cannot be indicted but can only be impeached and convicted by Congreff.