Can't keep up with today's noteworthy news...Hannity and Trumps advisors laying the groundwork for a Trump self-pardon. However, Presidential pardons do not provide protection against state or local crimes; N.Y. federal and state cases ongoing.
Sean Hannity said Monday that President Trump should pardon himself and the rest of his relatives before a Democratic administration can pursue criminal charges against members of the first family.
Mr. Hannity made the suggestion during the conservative commentator’s radio show while speaking with Sidney Powell, a lawyer for retired Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn, Mr. Trump‘s former national security adviser and now the recent recipient of a presidential pardon.
“I’m like, the president out the door needs to pardon his whole family and himself, because they want this witch hunt to go on in perpetuity,” Mr. Hannity said on his show.
President Trump has discussed with advisers whether to grant pre-emptive pardons to his children, to his son-in-law and to his personal lawyer Rudolph W. Giuliani, and talked with Mr. Giuliani about pardoning him as recently as last week, according to two people briefed on the matter.
Mr. Trump has told others that he is concerned that a Biden Justice Department might seek retribution against the president by targeting the oldest three of his five children — Donald Trump Jr., Eric Trump and Ivanka Trump — as well as Ms. Trump’s husband, Jared Kushner, a White House senior adviser....
Thank you for that point. If pre-emptive pardons is a thing in our justice system (it is not since it has not been tested in court, as you have pointed out), hopefully it will be shot down by the Supreme Court.
[...]
While the outcome remains to be seen if Mr. Trump were to do this, preemptive pardons are, in fact, "a thing, and have been "tested in court."
Quote
While pardons are typically given to people who have been prosecuted, they can cover conduct that has not resulted in legal proceedings.
A pardon cannot apply to conduct that has not yet occurred.
The U.S. Supreme Court clarified this in a 1866 case, saying the pardon 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.”
Thanks for this. Within your reference it actually has not been tested in court (The court in question is the US Supreme Court):
HOW BROADLY WORDED CAN A PARDON BE?
This is unclear. The pardon former president Richard Nixon received from his successor Gerald Ford was very broad, absolving Nixon for all criminal offenses he committed or may have taken part in during his presidency.
But the U.S. Supreme Court has never ruled on whether such a broad pardon is lawful. Some scholars have argued the nation's founders intended for pardons to be specific, and that there is an implied limit on their scope.
=====================================
So this is not a thing. I am sure Trump will try to preemptively pardon whoever, but it does not make his actions a thing until it is tested by the US Supreme Court. Just like Trump was free to file law suits to overturn our lawfully free and fair democratic election for president by attempting to throw out votes of majority black and brown voters throughout the country (basically the actions of a racist autocrat), our courts had and have the final say. Trumps lawsuits are being thrown out or he has lost arguments (no evidence) left and right in federal courts.
We are a democracy and so our courts uphold our US Constitution and will have the final say on preemptive pardons, not Trump and not his supporters. On the other hand, if he is allowed to preemptively pardon his corrupt kids and crooked friends, it will only apply to federal laws. It will not apply at the state level, where his kids and many of his cronies are being investigated and may be indicted, such as in the beautiful State of New York. ?
Specializes in NICU, PICU, Transport, L&D, Hospice.
2 hours ago, SummerGarden said:
Thanks for this. Within your reference it actually has not been tested in court (The court in question is the US Supreme Court):
HOW BROADLY WORDED CAN A PARDON BE?
This is unclear. The pardon former president Richard Nixon received from his successor Gerald Ford was very broad, absolving Nixon for all criminal offenses he committed or may have taken part in during his presidency.
But the U.S. Supreme Court has never ruled on whether such a broad pardon is lawful. Some scholars have argued the nation's founders intended for pardons to be specific, and that there is an implied limit on their scope.
=====================================
So this is not a thing. I am sure Trump will try to preemptively pardon whoever, but it does not make his actions a thing until it is tested by the US Supreme Court. Just like Trump was free to file law suits to overturn our lawfully free and fair democratic election for president by attempting to throw out votes of majority black and brown voters throughout the country (basically the actions of a racist autocrat), our courts had and have the final say. Trumps lawsuits are being thrown out or he has lost arguments (no evidence) left and right in federal courts.
We are a democracy and so our courts uphold our US Constitution and will have the final say on preemptive pardons, not Trump and not his supporters. On the other hand, if he is allowed to preemptively pardon his corrupt kids and crooked friends, it will only apply to federal laws. It will not apply at the state level, where his kids and many of his cronies are being investigated and may be indicted, such as in the beautiful State of New York. ?
It's important to remember that Trump has 2 very grateful but poorly qualified justices on the SCOTUS. One of them has already made unsolicited and very flawed arguments in the public square.
toomuchbaloney
16,040 Posts
It is amusing, however, that the conversation evolved from Hunter Biden is a criminal to the Trump children need pardons.