All this talk that dRump might pardon the mob . . . Is it possible that the delayed impeachment

[Liberal In Red State]

could include an invalidation of any actions taken by dRump in say maybe the last 14 days of his presidency?

[TwilightZone]

1. That's not an option.

The only options for conviction are:

1) Removal from office

2) Forbidding him from running for future office

[lapfog_1]

2. sorry... separation of powers

only a quick trial and conviction in the Senate...

much better for Pence to ask "mother" where she keeps his testicles and then invoke the 25th

[PoliticAverse]

5. The 25th requires also...

a majority of either the principal officers of the executive departments or of such other body as Congress may by law provide

[lapfog_1]

14. It has been suggested that congress could for

a commission and if 51% along with Pence agree to remove... it would take more than the 10 days remaining to have SCOTUS review the constitutionality of such a move. By that time Biden is sworn in and Trump would be arrested for sedition.

[PoliticAverse]

3. Nope...

Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States: but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to Law.

[SCantiGOP]

4. I'm pretty sure

that he can only pardon named individuals, not a group like "everybody who stormed the Capitol."
And besides, what would it gain him? He has only pardoned people who could get him in trouble or who have done him favors.

[PoliticAverse]

9. Blanked pardons of unnamed individuals are apparently allowed as Jimmy Carter (all "draft dodgers")

and Andrew Johnson (general amnesty for Confederates) both granted them.

[StarfishSaver]

15. That was very different

He pardoned unnamed people for one specific crime.

I think he could pardon one or maybe a few people for unnamed crimes they may or may not have committed during a certain period (ala Nixon), and he could pardon a large number of identifiable people for committing one particular crime, e.g., refusing to report for the draft.

But here, there were too many crimes committed by a countless number of people for them to all be pardoned - I don't think a court would uphold a pardon of thousands of unnamed, unidentified and unidentifiable people for anything and everything they did on a given day.

[Yonnie3]

6. I don't think he can pardon the mob.

He can only pardon named individuals. I don't think he gives a damn about the individuals, they are just pawns.

If there was a conspiracy and people who could get him in trouble are charged then the pardons would flow.

[Turin_C3PO]

7. But didn't Jimmy Carter

pardon all who avoided the Vietnam draft, without naming names.

[StarfishSaver]

10. Yes, but he pardoned them for one specific crime.

In order to actually work and not leave any loopholes for prosecutors, pardoning these people would require pardoning thousands of unidentified people for anything they did on a given day. I don't think any court would uphold that.

[PoliticAverse]

13. Andrew Johnson gave general amnesty to unidentified confederates participating in a multi-year war.

[StarfishSaver]

16. But they were all identifiable and the crime was one very specific crime

This is very different.

Also, those past general pardons were never challenged and courts never ruled on them.

[Turin_C3PO]

19. Good to know!

Thanks.

[Liberty Belle]

11. Yes, Carter did issue a blanket pardon.

To stop Trump from doing this, maybe Pence is the key.

Pence may not have the votes in the cabinet for the 25th amendment. But he could tell Trump that if he pardons any of the capitol terrorists, he will invoke the 25th or if need be, vote in the Senate for impeachment and publicly call on other Republican Senators to do so to since Trump instigated would-be assassins trying to kill Pence.

If Trump believed he could be impeached and lose his pension, Secret Service protection and be banned from running again, he might decide pardoning low-life criminals isn't worth it.

[Yonnie3]

18. Oh my!

Yes he did in the 70s, so there is a precedent. I don't know if that was challenged in court.

There was a general amnesty after the Civil War as well.

So much for my memory.

Edit to add:

I don't think a pardon for anyone who did anything at the Capitol that day would be viable.

[PoliticAverse]

12. Blanked pardons of unnamed individuals are apparently allowed as Jimmy Carter (all "draft dodgers")

and Andrew Johnson (general amnesty for Confederates) both granted them.

[StarfishSaver]

17. They were unnamed in the pardon, but they were all identifiable

The government knew exactly who had defied the draft. They had records of who had received draft induction notices and who didn't report. They were also all pardoned for one specific crime, not a wide range of crimes. Trump would have to pardon everyone who was within a particular geographic area for any crime they may have committed while there - whether they were a staffer who got caught that morning stealing office supplies or an insurgent who beat a police officer to death. I think a court would find that is not really even a pardon.

This is very different.

[StarfishSaver]

8. No.

[farmbo]

20. The power of pardon is not allowed..."in cases of impeachment".

The Article ll presidential power of pardon has one huge exception ...”except in cases of impeachment”.

It does NOT say ...” in cases of impeachment where the Senate has voted to convict”. The most reasonable interpretation of this ( which will probably go to the SCOTUS) is...” of course a President can’t pardon himself out of his own impeachment trial by pardoning all the fact witnesses”.

This is Pelosi’s gambit, and it should work.

[StarfishSaver]

21. That's not what it means.

That language simply means the president's pardon power doesn't extend to pardoning impeachments - i.e., he can't use his pardon power to stop an impeachment. He can still pardon people for crimes, even if he's been impeached. He's already done it. So did Clinton.

[farmbo]

22. Clinton didn't try to pardon witnesses to his impeachment trial.

EOM

[StarfishSaver]

23. I didn't say he did

I'm trying to explain the pardon power to you and what the impeachment language means.

The constitution does not prevent a president from pardoning people who may be witnesses in an impeachment proceeding against him. It means he cannot pardon anyone from being impeached.

[farmbo]

24. Agree to disagree...

I would think the strongest ‘guardrail’ against presidential pardon abuse which the drafters of the constitution considered would be preventing a corrupt president from avoiding he’s/her own impeachment by dangling and granting pardons to co-conspirators ...not to prevent him/ her from pardoning some congressperson or judge to prevent their removal.

[StarfishSaver]

25. There's nothing to disagree about

I'm telling you a fact. It is a fact that the Constitution does not prohibit a president from granting a pardon to anyone he wants, even if it's someone who could testify against him in an impeachment proceeding.

You may not like it. But it is what it is.