The ability to "pardon" is not without limits.

[kentuck]

Last edited Fri Jun 1, 2018, 09:36 AM - Edit history (1)

Taking into account that there is a process set up within the Justice Department to recommend pardons to the president and that the trump has ignored this process, there are few that would deny the president's right to pardon.

However, a president cannot legally pardon someone that may be connected to him in a criminal investigation. That would be like pardoning himself.

For example, if the evidence in the present investigation shows that Michael Cohen was conspiring with Donald Trump to commit crimes, Donald Trump becomes part of that investigation and is guilty of a crime himself. He cannot legally pardon Michael Cohen in that instance, in my opinion.

A president cannot legally pardon anyone that has not yet been charged with a crime, although Trump abused his power with the pardon of Joe Arpaio. And Gerald Ford did pardon Richard Nixon, it was done so in the national interest, according to President Ford.


The power to pardon is not without limits. But, with Donald Trump, the limits have to be clearly defined for him.

[Crutchez_CuiBono]

1. He does this shit

about wed now to get in front of Mueller making the news on Fridays, and to get 'crowd sourced' advice online and in the news, to see what to do next. The Nation is in a deep state of depression. imo.

[kentuck]

2. I don't think he gets enough credit for his master propagandizing and his understanding of the media

He knows who supports him and what issues will keep them on his side. It is all about division.

[Crutchez_CuiBono]

5. Thing is..

like any corporation...he does 5%, and the people we pay...does the rest. He's a mouthpiece w bad hair and an absent wife.

[kentuck]

7. Yes. The Republican Party is complicit.

...in this assault upon our democracy and the rule of law.

[Cosmocat]

6. YEP - during the campaign Maher had some guy on who was a hypnotist

or something like that, and he relayed that what Trump would do at his rallies was market test things.

Illustrated how he tested out who slander to use for Rubio based on crowd response, did it a few times then went with what he got the most response from.

Did the same thing with Hillary - settled on crooked at a rally like that ...

When it comes to his instincts on the lesser aspects of the human spirit, he is unparalleled.

[LuvNewcastle]

11. I agree.

Trump exudes negativity, and he uses that negativity to accomplish his goals. He's possessed by the Demiurge. If he ever had a soul, he sold it long ago. I think Trump truly believes that he can have his very own reality if he repeats his lies often enough. These are dangerous times. People aren't able to tell who's reality to accept. Sometimes I feel like the world is sliding into a black hole, and we're headed to a place where everything is absurd.

[Cosmocat]

16. I don't get it

I know SO many otherwise decent, intelligent people who fall for not only his, but the conservative bullshit.

It is like a genetic thing. It is stone cold obvious lies and bullshit to us, but some people just some kind of vulnerability that they get sucked into it.

Exasperating.

[tazkcmo]

3. But

Who enforces those limits? A complicit GOPee Congress.

[kentuck]

4. Eventually, if it happens at all, it will be decided in the Judicial system...

in my opinion.

[brooklynite]

8. Wrong...

A pardon can absolutely apply to crimes for which an indictment has not yet been made.

NOW, THEREFORE, I, GERALD R. FORD, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES, pursuant to the pardon power conferred upon me by Article II, Section 2, of the Constitution, have granted and by these presents do grant a full, free, and absolute pardon unto Richard Nixon for all offenses against the United States which he, Richard Nixon, has committed or may have committed or taken part in during the period from January 20, 1969 through August 9, 1974.

[Demit]

9. Thank you.

He could only pardon Nixon for any federal crimes he might've committed, and the pardon was controversial at the time, but it was still in Ford's power to do it.

[kentuck]

10. Yes.

Ford later explained to Bob Woodward that it was done for "national security" and economic reasons. In my opinion, that would not be a precedent for every pardon. Just my opinion.

https://constitutioncenter.org/blog/the-nixon-pardon-in-retrospect-40-years-later

<snip>
In a July 2014 panel hosted by the Post, Woodward called the pardon “an act of courage.” He had talked with Ford decades after the pardon and said the former President made a “very compelling argument” for his actions based on national security and economic needs. At the same event, Bernstein said the pardon took “great courage,” echoing public comments he made in 2011 on a TV show.

[onenote]

14. The precedent for pardoning someone before they are charged dates back to 1866

Ex Parte Garland, where the Supreme Court stated: "The power of pardon conferred by the Constitution upon the President is unlimited except in cases of impeachment. It extends to every offence 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. The power is not subject to legislative control."

[kentuck]

15. Then, in that case....

We have the perfect guy in office to screw us all. Sad.

[Gothmog]

12. From the former head of the RNC

Link to tweet

[onenote]

13. If you are suggesting that there types of pardons that would be ineffective, you are wrong

The limitation on the pardon power that you describe simply does not exist. The only limitation is that a pardon cannot be used to undo the effectiveness of an impeachment (or to prevent an impeachment from taking place). That doesn't mean that Congress couldn't react to a particular pardon by seeking to impeach the president who issued it, but that's basically all that could be done. The pardon would still take effect.

And the Supreme Court has said exactly the opposite of what you claim is the law with regard to pardons issued to someone not charged with a crime. In Ex Parte Garland (1866), the Court descried the constitutional pardon power as follows: "The power of pardon conferred by the Constitution upon the President is unlimited except in cases of impeachment. It extends to every offence 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. The power is not subject to legislative control."

[kentuck]

17. Are we to assume that this would also include obstruction of justice?

Could he pardon someone in the middle of a criminal investigation where he, himself, is a target of the investigation. If so, the founders were some dumb mf'ers!

[onenote]

18. Yes he could

And the person would remained pardoned. It would be up to Congress to address the obstruction of justice through an impeachment proceeding.

As has been pointed out in other threads, the person on the receiving pardon would, absent some potential state law criminal liability, no longer be able assert their 5th amendment right not to testify.