Steve Schmidt Calls For Every Republican Who Asked For A Preemptive Pardon To Be Expelled From Congr

[babylonsister]

https://www.politicususa.com/2022/06/10/steve-schmidt-republicans-expelled.html

Posted on Fri, Jun 10th, 2022 by Jason Easley
Steve Schmidt Calls For Every Republican Who Asked For A Preemptive Pardon To Be Expelled From Congress


Steve Schmidt responded to the revelation that Republicans in Congress requested preemptive pardons for participating in Trump’s coup by suggesting that they all be expelled.

Schmidt tweeted:

Link to tweet

As Adam Schiff pointed out to Rachel Maddow, people don’t seek out preemptive pardons unless they think that they have broken the law. Legally, seeking out a preemptive pardon might not be evidence of a crime committed, but it is a red flag that when waved by members of Congress requires more investigation from law enforcement.

Every member of Congress who requested a preemptive pardon from Trump should be viewed by the DOJ as holding up a sign saying please, investigate me.

Anyone who requested a pardon from Trump before he left office has no business being in Congress because they are so corrupt that they are unable to represent the interests of their constituents.

Expulsion would be letting these Republicans off easy, and it needs to happen.

[2naSalit]

1. Expulsion doesn't mean...

That they can't be prosecuted for their crimes as well.

[sop]

2. Expulsion requires a two-thirds vote. (Article 1, Section 5, Clause 2 of the Constitution)

[no_hypocrisy]

5. After the humiliation of Nixon,

I honestly doubt Republicans would ever vote against their own no matter what.

They can privately believe the bad actor is guilty as Hell, but they will not EVER vote to convict or to expel.

Don't believe me? The Republican Party carried the taint of Nixon even though many of them voted to impeach him. That vicarious stench lasted until the election of Ronald Reagan and the Republicans have not looked back, not once.

[Jarqui]

40. Which hopefully can be flipped into an election issue

"vote these crooks out!" (or whatever good slogan one can come up with - probably better than that ..)

This group already had two chances to impeach Trump. Instead they got behind a coup.

[FakeNoose]

42. That's certainly the mindset of Mitch McConnell

... and probably many others. Thank goodness at least a few Repukes haven't completely lost their minds.

I still think we're witnessing the slow-motion dissolution of the Republican Party. After Chump it will never be the same. It's not even a "party" anymore in the political sense, it's a cult. Most of them are going down with Chump.

But I agree with you, that Ronald Reagan was the beginning of the end. Well, Nixon was the real beginning but Reagan gave them "plausible deniability" which led to the collective insanity we're seeing now.

When it comes down to it, this was all about racism from the get-go. Not to say that we Dems have a clean conscience in that regard, but we ARE trying to make amends honestly after 200+ years of evil. The Repukes aren't even trying, and they're fighting us every step of the way.

[towerbum]

61. well shit ! they wanted Cawthorn gone ! why ---

not bang -bang & empty head ?

[bucolic_frolic]

16. That might not be the end of it

there is the 14th Amendment and the discretion of the Speaker, which was cited in some cogent post somewhere. It can all be litigated.

Dems and DOJ need to plumb and use the Constitution. There are unexplored clauses, old cases, clauses never litigated. It just operated as it was used, as a system. Until 2016

[sop]

17. Voters might expel them come November.

Jordan? Gaetz? Greene? Boebert? Gosar? Anyone else?

[COL Mustard]

31. Don't hold your breath

But then again I may be a member of the Wet Blanket Brigade. I hope the voters make different decisions, but we shall see.

[HubertHeaver]

65. Keep your powder dry and your blanket wet

[lastlib]

41. Brooks. Perry come to mind.

Last edited Fri Jun 10, 2022, 09:21 PM - Edit history (1)

There is at least one other asshole, whose name escapes me for now.

ETA Andrew Biggs (AZ) is one--not sure he's the one I was trying to think of.

[Katcat]

62. Lee?

[Bev54]

44. Perry, Brooks, Gosar and Biggs so far

[BumRushDaShow]

50. Someone oughta bring up AL Sen. Tommy Tuberville

IIRC when snippets came out last year, he was supposedly "dialed in" relaying messages from McCarthy and talking directly with 45.

January 6 Committee: Former President Trump actions to be focus of hearings

Anthony Zurcher
North America reporter

Published
1 day ago

(snip)

Pieces of testimony, and of the documents and text messages from Mr Trump's circle, have already leaked to the public. But there may be new information that can help fill in details.

Select committee aides have said they plan to unveil "a whole lot of new material" including previously unseen documents, video and audio they have obtained.

In particular, investigators have been trying to find out what the president was doing during a three-hour period on that day - from the start of the Capitol attack to the time when he recorded a video address telling rioters to leave the Capitol.

White House logs offer sparse details, but the president made several phone calls - including to House Minority Leader McCarthy and Alabama Senator Tommy Tuberville. The committee has spoken with numerous people who were around the president during that time - and perhaps their hearings will reveal what they learned. It has also subpoenaed Mr McCarthy about his conversation with the former president, but the congressman has refused to comply.

(snip)

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-61735605

[Bev54]

51. Yes there are certainly more that I expect will be carefully looked at, including

Tuberville, Hawley, Cruz, Boebert, Jordan, Gaetz, MTG and others.

[allegorical oracle]

25. In these times of gun massacres and a prior corrupt POTUS, our Constitution appears

woefully naive -- a verbally vague, tattered relic constructed in simpler times. And the only repairs available require amendments that are sadly beyond the public's grasp given the current political divide.

[Mad_Machine76]

54. You know

I can appreciate that the framers probably thought it best to not make it TOO EASY for things like impeachment, expulsion, etc., so that they can't just be used casually and for naked political retribution, but part of me also thinks that they probably unintentionally made it TOO HARD to do it as well, especially when the perps are partially running the show. I don't know what the solution is, but mechanisms to hold our leaders accountable aren't very useful if they're nearly impossible for the good guys to use to confront dangers to our democracy from bad leaders.

[rurallib]

3. Do we know who these people are? Is there a public record?

[SleeplessinSoCal]

6. Apparently the select committee does.

Stay tuned.

[Hugin]

10. This should be interesting...

We may finally find out the carrots and sticks TFG was using to get his way. The carrots were the pardons and the sticks were a variety of criminality. No wonder it seems like every last GrOPper is evading conviction.

[NCLefty]

4. I think Jared said he was busy working on pardons.

And couldn't be bothered with the "whiners" about how Trump was breaking the law.

Son of a felon, y'all.

[Ford_Prefect]

8. A Pinstriped pimp selling access and pardons.

[Scrivener7]

9. I thought the way Cheney said, "Whining" after the film of that was perfect.

Nothing more, just "whining."

[Botany]

7. And the expulsion should be for all the Congressional members who gave pre coup tours of the ...

... Capitol, pointed out weak spots in the building such as the few un-reinforced windows out of the
600 + hardened windows, or helped in the turning off the panic buttons in some democratic congress
members offices too.

And this guy should be expelled because he is an asshole, cheered on the thugs, and thinks he should
be President too.

[dalton99a]

11. +1

[Botany]

18. C. Pierce, "I Don't Believe in This Kind of Luck" ... Trump's shock Troops knew the weak spots

https://www.democraticunderground.com/100216783777

[paleotn]

56. Expulsion? That's just the beginning of what I'm thinking of....

Most congress critters are lawyers and they have a pretty good idea where the criminal line is and if they've crossed it. If Justice doesn't indict them for the crimes they wanted pardons for, and didn't get, then we have some pretty serious problems on our hands. I may be forced to join the "Debbie Downers", since the evidence will show that indeed we are fucked. For all practical purposes, the republic is no more.

[Dark n Stormy Knight]

66. Agreed. Also, because there is something inexplicably creepy about

his face.

[AntivaxHunters]

12. Who needs expulsion

when the DOJ can simply arrest them.
It's a bit hard to be an effective member of Congress sitting in a prison cell.
Sweet. Short. Effective.
Throw away the damn key and done.

[Hugin]

20. Legislators have some weird and arcane legal immunities.

It is almost as bad as diplomats.

Like, ironically, participating in the certification of an election.

So, it is better to expel them and then arrest.

[Hugin]

36. I would like to see similar immunity extended to voters as they were...

Under the voter rights acts the criminals like Moscow Mitch have been so keen on stripping from the citizens of this country.

[msfiddlestix]

26. ✔️ ✔️ ✔️ ✔️ ✔️ n/t

[ancianita]

39. The DOJ must have evidence of criminal acts & laws broken before it can arrest ANYone,

nevermind congress people. Can we just stop acting like the DOJ is some legal arm of simple opinion?

You're talking outside Rule of Law here. Too much heat, not enough light.

[AntivaxHunters]

52. Evidence like what was presented last night?

Liz Cheney literally said there are several members of Congress who were involved in trying to overturn the election and sought out pardon's from Trump after the attack to excuse them from any criminal wrong doing.

[ancianita]

55. Yes. The tangible basis of what was presented orally.

But what many heatedly say is that the DOJ can just simply expel or arrest them without the time required for the due process part
-- so Schmidt is adding noise when he calls for expulsions that he and we all know won't happen if we think it through.

We need keep our radar out for how this actually works, not how we want it to work. Running around with our hair on fire until November and beyond might make us all feel better, but feeling is not going to advance our cause.

[randr]

13. Excellent start to a national healing and cleansing

[durablend]

14. So hoping Dougie M is implicated

He can share a cell with this BFF Scott Perry

[bucolic_frolic]

19. Yes, baby!

He is as dangerous a slime ball as DePsycho himself

[LetMyPeopleVote]

15. Steve Schmidt is right

Perry and these assholes need to be expelled

[NewHendoLib]

21. None of the "big lie" congress hacks should be allowed to keep their office

[LittleGirl]

22. Absolutely! Nt

[vlyons]

23. which ones asked for preemptive pardon?

nt

[doc03]

24. I have heard of Pocket Pardons. Could they already have pardons? nt

[jimfields33]

28. They has to be some

Ivanka and Jared so freely went and sat in front of the January 6th committee? Of course they have pardons.

[Mr. Ected]

35. Question is, can a President issue pardons

For crimes in which he is a co-conspirator?

[Ligyron]

27. I wonder who actually got pardons?

You know, the undisclosed ones. Guess we may find out if DOJ gets involved.

Can’t pardon future crimes though and many were emboldened and just kept committing them.

[AllaN01Bear]

33. we also need to go after every r congress critter and gov who signed the az lawsuit as well.

[Traildogbob]

37. They asked for......

Did Trump actually blanket Pardon them? Is this why they laugh at subpoenas? And what the hell was the Jarod smug ass segment. 2 billion dollars, plus 650 million while SERVING makes such a prick pretty damn smug.
Expose every damn one.

[FakeNoose]

45. I don't believe such a pardon would mean anything

... so, no he couldn't do that. Pardons are only given to someone who's been charged with a crime and in most cases, convicted of the crime. These insurrectionists (and most of them knew they were breaking the law) weren't charged with anything while Chump was still in office. Therefore Chump couldn't pardon them. As for the legislators who participated in the "Big Lie" and who tried to prevent the confirmation of Biden on Jan. 6th - well, that's what this hearing is all about. What did they do and how bad was it?

Jared Kushner used his relationship with Chump to make a private deal with MBS and other wealthy Arabs for the $2 billion loan. It's a business deal, having nothing to do with the US government. Yes that's a blatant abuse of power and it should be investigated separately from the insurrection/coup attempt. Ivanka and Jared are both obviously guilty of major corruption, but they'll probably say they weren't working for the US government, they were "volunteers" or some such bullshit. As far as we know, neither Ivanka nor Jared participated in the insurrection - they had already left the White House and were planning a move to Florida.

[Traildogbob]

46. I take solace in your detailed

Explanation. But we do no, laws are much different for GQP. As per alternative facts Queen, KAC, in her book she says trump approached her and offered, “Honey, can I give you a pardon, everybody needs a pardon”. And the Mush was swamped with writing pardons, had no time for the whining staff threatening resigning.

[FakeNoose]

49. At that point he believed he would steal the Presidency back from Biden

Didn't happen that way.

I hope Chump never sets foot in our White House again. We need to make sure that he never does.

[Traildogbob]

53. Truer words

Never spoken. Him our any of his coharts, like DeSatan, Rick Scott, Hawley, Cotton or any damn one with Pardons. Wouldn’t be surprised if trump would pick a certain Pardoned General Flynn as VP. Or worse a Pardoned MTG, with Flynn as SOS.
Cheers to you. Let’s savor the moment and look forward to what’s coming with future hearings. They are locked in on trump like Tom Cruises Maverick on an enemy jet.

[ReluctanceTango]

57. Not true.

As per Ex parte Garland, a pardon can be issued at any point in the commission of a crime. This includes crimes for which a party hasn’t even been charged, never mind tried or convicted.

So, no, you don’t need to be convicted of a crime to get a pardon. You’re eligible for a pardon as soon as you commit a crime.

See: Nixon.

[Brother Buzz]

58. What was Nixon charged with?

Proclamation 4311 was a presidential proclamation issued by president of the United States Gerald Ford on September 8, 1974, granting a full and unconditional pardon to Richard Nixon, his predecessor, for any crimes that he might have committed against the United States as president. In particular, the pardon covered Nixon's actions during the Watergate scandal. In a televised broadcast to the nation, Ford, who had succeeded to the presidency upon Nixon's resignation, explained that he felt the pardon was in the best interests of the country and that the Nixon family's situation was "a tragedy in which we all have played a part. It could go on and on and on, or someone must write the end to it. I have concluded that only I can do that, and if I can, I must."

After Ford left the White House in 1977, he privately justified his pardon of Nixon by carrying in his wallet a portion of the text of Burdick v. United States, a 1915 U.S. Supreme Court decision that stated that a pardon carries an imputation of guilt and that its acceptance carries a confession of guilt.

[world wide wally]

43. It may be up to their Dem opponents to expose them during the campaign

[lindysalsagal]

47. Dems gotta grow some nasty for that. Not likely.

[Ilsa]

48. I hope we can get a list, but I bet we know who most of them are. nt

[Gore1FL]

59. Expelling them would be difficult, I suspect.

Not seating them in the next congress might be easier.

[housecat]

60. If we have elections and if the votes are really counted, they are already expelled

[Hekate]

63. From his lips to God's ears

[Martin68]

64. Yes. Nothing short of admitting they committed a crime.

[librechik]

67. Yes please