US Politics: Biden our time while Trump's on the stump

[Jace, Extat]

17 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

No.

Also, there will be no 'mutiny'. Time was, journalists hesitated to report some shit they heard because if nothing happened they would lose credibility.

[Martell Spy]

1 hour ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

Will Trump fire AG Barr?

https://www.salon.com/2020/07/09/bill-barr-warns-of-mutiny-at-department-of-justice-if-trump-commutes-roger-stones-sentence-rpt_partner/

And the Senate Republicans will emerge from Trump's asshole, where they have been lodged for several years.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

1 hour ago, Jace, Basilissa said:

Also, there will be no 'mutiny'. Time was, journalists hesitated to report some shit they heard because if nothing happened they would lose credibility.

No, there won't be, and debatable, as most have lost it already. 

[DMC]

Barr ain't gonna resign and Trump ain't gonna make him.  It's just one article.

[Larry of the Lawn]

6 hours ago, Jace, Basilissa said:

Also, there will be no 'mutiny'. Time was, journalists hesitated to report some shit they heard because if nothing happened they would lose credibility.

See: most of the Russia / Trump stuff

[Tywin Manderly]

7 hours ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

He’ll do worse before he leaves office or is removed from office.

This is good news for Ghislaine Maxwell since I wouldn't put it past Trump to pardon her.

[Larry of the Lawn]

Louisville folks with a smoothly executed stealth flash protest here:

 

 

 

[Guest]

Ann Coulter is stumping for Amy McGrath. We really are living in the End of Days.

[Gaston de Foix]

10 hours ago, DMC said:

The president pardoning himself has yet to be determined as legitimate by SCOTUS - because it's so ridiculous even the Framers never fathomed a president would try to do it until now.  I'm inclined to be cynical by the current composition, but I think Roberts and/or Gorsuch might have a problem if the case ever needs to be decided with Trump.

In some ways a self-pardon may be the trigger needed for Congress to seek to regulate, by statute, the exercise of the pardon power.  The constitutionality of any such statute will of course be challenged, but Trump is hardly the first president to abuse the power (See Clinton's pardon of Marc Rich and George HW Bush's pardon of Iran-Contra figures). He's just the most egregious by far.  It would be great to get a constitutional amendment reducing the scope of the power as well, but for obvious reasons that seems unlikely. 

Let's not also lose sight of Lindsay Graham's despicableness in running interference for Trump by stating, wrongly, that Roger Stone was a 70+ man who had just committed his first crime.  The chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, ladies and gentleman, the man who styles himself John McCain's political heir.  Republicano delenda est. 

 

 

[The Anti-Targ]

3 hours ago, Tywin Manderly said:

This is good news for Ghislaine Maxwell since I wouldn't put it past Trump to pardon her.

Trump surely thinks Maxwell has dirt to convict Hillary and Bill, so why would he pardon her when she can dish on the Clintons and finally have them locked up forevers?

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

I'm not even sure when a self pardon would apply. A pardon only applies to federal crimes, and the president can't be charged with a federal crime while in office, thus negating the need to pardon one's self. I guess you could argue they are pardoning themselves before any charges were filed, but I thought you had to wait for charges to be filed to issue a pardon. Maybe I'm missing something, but it seems like a bit of a moot point.

[Ormond]

4 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

I'm not even sure when a self pardon would apply. A pardon only applies to federal crimes, and the president can't be charged with a federal crime while in office, thus negating the need to pardon one's self. I guess you could argue they are pardoning themselves before any charges were filed, but I thought you had to wait for charges to be filed to issue a pardon. Maybe I'm missing something, but it seems like a bit of a moot point.

Gerald Ford pardoned Richard Nixon for any crimes he might have committed while in office. So although the legality of self-pardons is still problematical, it would seem that a President can indeed pardon someone for federal crimes before charges are filed.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

12 minutes ago, Ormond said:

Gerald Ford pardoned Richard Nixon for any crimes he might have committed while in office. So although the legality of self-pardons is still problematical, it would seem that a President can indeed pardon someone for federal crimes before charges are filed.

But at that point Nixon had specific legal exposure. If a president can self-pardon against future crimes, then in theory he or she could pardon themselves for all future federal crimes they'll ever commit. 

[Fez]

4 hours ago, Tywin Manderly said:

This is good news for Ghislaine Maxwell since I wouldn't put it past Trump to pardon her.

It depends on what the q-anon folks think of her; and I have no idea what that might be. 

[Tywin Manderly]

1 hour ago, The Anti-Targ said:

Trump surely thinks Maxwell has dirt to convict Hillary and Bill, so why would he pardon her when she can dish on the Clintons and finally have them locked up forevers?

To spite the SDNY just before leaving office.

[Ormond]

15 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

But at that point Nixon had specific legal exposure. If a president can self-pardon against future crimes, then in theory he or she could pardon themselves for all future federal crimes they'll ever commit. 

Well yes, no one can be pardoned for future crimes. But that wasn't what your initial post said -- it thought one couldn't be pardoned from future filing of charges on past crimes, which is what I was referring to.

[Gaston de Foix]

24 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

But at that point Nixon had specific legal exposure. If a president can self-pardon against future crimes, then in theory he or she could pardon themselves for all future federal crimes they'll ever commit. 

Here's how I think about "pre-emptive pardons".  I'm not a criminal or constitutional lawyer mind you... 

A president can preemptively pardon another individual for actions taken prior to the issuance of the pardon that might or might not result in federal criminal exposure.  A pardon can wipe clean any potential legal consequences without requiring an investigation, indictment, conviction or exhaustion of appeals.  That was basically Ford's pardon of Nixon.  it's possible that that pardon was also constitutionally dubious for a variety of reasons, although it's hard to see who would have locus standi to successfully challenge it. 

When the office of the Presidency is held, a president, pursuant to an OLC opinion of dubious constitutionality, may not be indicted.  Since the Justice Department ultimately decides whether to bring any federal criminal proceedings, and it is in principle bound by the OLC opinion, it is expressed as a rule that a president may not be indicted while in office but nonetheless may be investigated.  I think it's a bit more tentative than that but let's assume that's the rule for now. 

So even a president who can self-pardon can only self-pardon for crimes that were committed or under investigation but not for any future crimes, let alone future crimes that might be committed when they no longer held the presidency.  And of course if Trump were to self-pardon it would be the most compelling example possible for restraining the exercise of the pardon power as the courts have done in the UK and in India (but never in the US).  

I don't think he will self-pardon, mind you, because I think his principal exposure lies in state courts and not in federal courts.  And I think Barr is acting to get his stooges in place in the EDNY and SDNY for that very reason so he can get them to drop investigations into Trump and his companies before he leaves office.  

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

1 minute ago, Ormond said:

Well yes, no one can be pardoned for future crimes. But that wasn't what your initial post said -- it thought one couldn't be pardoned from future filing of charges on past crimes, which is what I was referring to.

Fair. But conceptually if a president can self pardon future charges for crimes currently being committed or crimes in the past, then they could do whatever they wanted so long as it didn't break any state laws. 

[Gaston de Foix]

This insinuation that Ghislaine Maxwell has "dirt" on the Clintons or Trump is rank speculation.  You can say, given Virginia Giuffre's allegations, that Prince Andrew is a special case.  But flying on a jet or hanging out socially doesn't make someone a pedophile.  We need to live in the world of facts and evidence not conspiracy theories.  When Fox is broadcasting such guff, you can be damn sure it's because it's harmful to the health of the republic. 

[DMC]

59 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

Fair. But conceptually if a president can self pardon future charges for crimes currently being committed or crimes in the past, then they could do whatever they wanted so long as it didn't break any state laws. 

Like @Ormond said, it would conceivably be a blanket pardon - just as Ford's was for Nixon.  It would not account for future crimes and, yes, state rather than federal prosecutors could still go after him.  But the question of a president issuing a blanket pardon for himself is yet to be resolved.