The founders never saw him coming.

You can't preemptively pardon someone for a crime they haven't even been charged with yet. Pardons are only for federal crimes. Trump can't pardon himself or his family for any crimes brought forth by the State of New York.

 

Yes you can. It was done with Nixon. Like you said, he can't pardon anyone for a state crime, but he absolutely will preemptively pardon his family for any federal crimes they committed.

 

Take it up with SCOTUS. They are the group that makes the claim.

 

I already knew that but thanks anyway.

 

Pure drivel. It's hard to imagine how much lower the left can go- they have already become all the despicable things they try to label Trump with, but you can bet they will continue to embarrass us all to the world to even lower levels. They attack and insult the flag, the constitution, justice, integrity, honesty, the enforcement of law and order, they abuse people who have no power and refuse to control thugs who threaten everyone. The corruption in practice is only exceeded by the corruption in thought.

Never in history has there been such pompous, unscrupulous hatred for the nation- or such total deceit, all self-wrapped in claims of righteousness.
For any who have been so tolerant as to cut them some slack, now we see the true colors showing-- and no political group has ever been this ugly or devoid of morality.

There is a line of limits and tolerance for such rotten behavior- and hell to pay for crossing it. They stand at it right now.

 

What causes the founders to roll over in Grave - was folks like Mueller - and the fear mongering "Russiagate" used to take away liberty.

Now - this is not to say that Dirty Donald does not have his moments - but - you might want to take that big log out of your own eye prior to picking speck out of brothers Donald's eye.

Your putting Reagan on a Pedestal is preposterous - What crimes of Rotten Ronnie are we referring to - and what policy was he following - and how was there no personal gain involved.

 

Why?

 

Why what ? Why is Blue using fear to take away liberty ? is this what you asking.

 

So..........when Rosenstein decided to appoint a special counsel to investigate the Trump campaign's contacts with Russians (he found a lot of them) he was taking away liberty? What the heck are you talking about?

https://www.lawfareblog.com/collusi...-senate-intelligence-committee-find#Agalarovs

 

Because innocent men are sometimes maliciously prosecuted.

 

I have told you numerous times what I am talking about - unfortunately you are blind to Blue's violations - the above not being one of them.

Try harder - "Using fear to take away Liberty" - how has Blue done this ?!

 

Great, then get a Constitutional Amendment passed that limits the Presidents pardon powers. Until that is done, POTUS's pardon powers are unlimited, and not subject to any oversight.

Boy, I hate repeating myself, but I guess I have to. Congress can only propose a Constitutional Amendment to fix these "problems" that you think you have found. Then it requires 2/3rds of the Congress to approve the proposed Amendment, and 3/4ths of the States to concur. Then, and only then, will your concerns be alleviated, assuming the language of the Amendment actually addresses your concerns.

Constitutional Amendment.

I really thought you guys would stop whining about Trump when he was no longer POTUS. Granted, he still is until 1/20/21, but that's not relevant to what you're whining about here.

I really hope he just pardons himself, so you guys might just give it a rest. As bad as the whining was when he was POTUS, I don't want to continue hearing about it for the foreseeable future after he's gone. And it almost makes me hope that he actually does run again and wins in 2024, if for no other reason than to see y'alls heads explode.

 

If someone has been maliciously prosecuted, and all attempts at appeal denied, then yes, I'd agree. I'm guessing these instances are rare. That would preclude pre-emptive pardons, though, which I have a problem with, and was referring to. These proposals sum up my opinion on limiting pardon power:

We have seen a train of abuses of the pardon power. Future such abuses could be remedied through a bipartisan constitutional amendment. It is a straightforward matter to make it explicit that a president cannot pardon himself, and it should not be hard to take pardons of immediate family members off the table as well. It should also not be difficult to require that pardons be issued only after conviction, or that pardons cannot be issued during the lame-duck period after a presidential election and before a president-elect has been inaugurated.

I don't see it happening, but I would welcome it.

Time to Amend the Presidential Pardon Power - Lawfare (lawfareblog.com)

 

Many Trump folks have justified Don's actions along the lines of them not expressly being illegal, or by virtue of the authority he has as prez. Like firing IG's who are investigating members of his admin. Or refusing to testify for Mueller. Or blocking the testimony of others. Or pardoning someone as a reward for their silence in a criminal probe involving Don.
That's not a defense. It's dodging the question of whether he should have taken the actions.

 

@Lee Atwater The founding father of USA were fully aware of the existence of demagogues, because, from what I red on them, they studied in an extensive manner the history of the roman republic and athenian democracy.
Even if it happened after the american revolution, Jefferson and Madison lived through the french first revolution, the rise of the first republic, the terror, the fall of the republic and the rise and fall of Napoleon.

They exactly knew the nature of republics and democracy, and its dangers, and if you think they weren't aware of that, you seriously underestimating their intelligence and kowledge of history, especially as classical antiquity was then much more studied than now. That's very likely they all have red Plato, and especially the "republic".

If you think furthermore that the existence of a demagogue is your own epoch is something exceptionnal, then I can only advise you to read much, much more, because it's a phenomenon known since the fifth century BC (Alcibiades).

 

I'd argue the founders never envisioned a prez who would exploit every opportunity to assume and or abuse presidential powers that were not expressly given or prohibited by law. Being aware of the potential of a demagogue was addressed by their assumption the electors would be a deliberative body and prevent the election of one. They did not envision traitorous acts like extorting the leader of another country for political gain, then refusing to cooperate with a congressional impeachment inquiry, and ultimately being protected by senators of his own party despite his obvious guilt.
Having read extensively about the period of time around the Constitutional Convention and the things the founders took........and did not take........in to consideration I assure you I'm more informed on the matter than you are.

 

You have conflated two things here - being maliciously prosecuted - and all attempts at appeal being denied.
Instances of malicious prosecution are not rare - unfortunately. Not sure about the all attempts at appeal.

Don't know that we have seen a train of abuses of the pardon power .. do you have a few examples ?

 

I'm saying cases of malicious prosecution should be dealt with through the court system before requesting a pardon.

I'm not aware of the rate of incidence of malicious prosecution; perhaps you could provide that statistic. What I'm also not aware of is this being a pressing issue, which is why I assume it is rare.

It's from the article. Not a bad article. Here's a relevant paragraph.

But Trump is hardly alone in issuing dubious pardons. Notoriously, George H.W. Bush pardoned former Defense Secretary Casper Weinberger, saving him from charges stemming from the Iran-contra scandal. Bill Clinton pardoned financier Marc Rich, Whitewater investigation resister Susan McDougal and his own half-brother. There is a long history of dubious pardons issued to friends and allies of sitting presidents. As in most things, Trump is particularly crude and brazen, but his pardons share some familial resemblance to those of his predecessors.

 

Flynn, Stone, which were extraordinary abuses of the power, and...https://www.cnn.com/2020/02/19/politics/trump-pardons-commutations/index.html

 

When I was a young man I used to read those volumes of letters of the founders. There was a lot of concern for the character of the executive. Jefferson pushed the idea of having a three person executive, so that if one went rouge, the other two could restrain him. In the end though, it was the character of George Washington that was on their minds when they crafted the position of the presidency.

 

The drivel continues- how long, atwater???

 

'

The above is somewhat painful. The point of a Pardon is because the court system has not worked.

You can start with these fellows - who are now suing scum buck Mueller who has a long track record of malicious prosecution.

https://www.usnews.com/news/article...leblowers-seek-100-million-for-their-troubles

Malicious prosecution under Obama can be found here
http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/arc...-panel-at-ron-paul-institute-conference-2017/

These are just a few examples from the past.

If you want more examples .. just look at what happened to Stone, Papadopulous, Flynn and so on.

 

It's a well known fact that the founding father were extremely knowledgeable in ancient history. Alcibiade almost destroyed the athenian democracy, the roman republic ended to be overthrown by Augustus.

The risk that things could be turned as a mob rule was considered also, as Plato hate democracy as the death of his beloved teacher was decided in a democratic manner.

They totally knew the risk, the weakness of democracies.

Are you pretending that they weren't litterate enough to know the story of Alcibiade ? Do you really think they were naive enough to not think that an american alcibiade was possible ?

 

Of course these things occurred to them!

George Mason Presidents “ought not to have the power of pardoning, because he may frequently pardon crimes which were advised by himself. It may happen, at some future day, that he will establish a monarchy, and destroy the republic. If he has the power of granting pardons before indictment, or conviction, may he not stop inquiry and prevent detection? The case of treason ought, at least, to be excepted. This is a weighty objection with me.”

Madison thought the power of impeachment sufficient to forestall the objection.

As far as" gutting the bastard" goes. you will just make a martyr out of Trump and exacerbate divisions in the country.

 

Yes .. I realize that the investigation and prosecution of Stone and Flynn were extraordinary abuses of Power -

Did you enjoy the video of the whistle blowers I posted ?