General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region Forums*****BREAKING*****WAPO- Trump considering pardoning himself and criminal associates
Some of President Trumps lawyers are exploring ways to limit or undercut special counsel Robert S. Mueller IIIs Russia investigation, building a case against what they allege are his conflicts of interest and discussing the presidents authority to grant pardons, according to people familiar with the effort.
Trump has asked his advisers about his power to pardon aides, family members and even himself in connection with the probe, according to one of those people. A second person said Trumps lawyers have been discussing the presidents pardoning powers among themselves.
Trumps legal team declined to comment on the issue. But one adviser said the president has simply expressed a curiosity in understanding the reach of his pardoning authority, as well as the limits of Muellers investigation.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trumps-lawyers-seek-to-undercut-muellers-russia-investigation/2017/07/20/232ebf2c-6d71-11e7-b9e2-2056e768a7e5_story.html?hpid=hp_hp-top-table-main_trumplegal-925pm%3Ahomepage%2Fstory&utm_term=.9529d2061349
riversedge
(69,727 posts)his aides and himself
Madam45for2923
(7,178 posts)Thrill
(19,178 posts)gldstwmn
(4,575 posts)to the New York Times as a diversion.
BobTheSubgenius
(11,535 posts)my feeling is that Jr. has way less legal exposure than many others. He didn't submit a background disclosure, did he?
It makes sense that he is better able to take the hit. That, and his sperm donor is a snake that would throw everyone he knows down a flight of stairs, rather than take a legal hit himself.
leftinalabama
(30 posts)Just saw on Rachael Maddow the New York Times is reporting the exact same thing. Twitler has asked his lawyers about how pardons work and even if he could Parden himself. Shit about to hit the fan.
dixiegrrrrl
(60,010 posts)Let's see how many Republicans walk away from him now...that will be key.
klook
(12,134 posts)are yoked to Trump. Every 2018 ad should hammer this point. Trump's party has shamelessly defended him, way past the point of sanity and normalcy. They should be made to pay the price. The Republican brand stands for corruption and incompetence.
Volaris
(10,260 posts)Unless peeps start getting charged with a Crime (s).
And not just any crime...it has to be severe enough and proofed enough that even Average Joe Citizen who can't be bothered to go vote or even pay attention, can understand the severity of it.
Then the GOP will pay a price for what they've enabled, and when THAT finally happens, the bill will be steep indeed.
Perseus
(4,341 posts)the same with Ryan, and McConnell, etc., etc...
keithbvadu2
(36,369 posts)groundloop
(11,488 posts)If/when 45* is booted from the White House we'll almost certainly get Pence. Unfortunately he'll have a better understanding of how things work in Washington and we're likely to see more right wing bullshit passed. (Of course that's not to say the 45*'s dismantling of the EPA, healthcare, and everything else good about our government isn't totally screwed up).
IthinkThereforeIAM
(3,072 posts)... they already have Pence on the Flynn thingy(s). Lying about meeting with him and knowing what was prospering...
Demsrule86
(68,352 posts)IthinkThereforeIAM
(3,072 posts)... they have the goods to take down Pence, too.
Demsrule86
(68,352 posts)Unless by the grace of God Nancy is speaker in 2018.
IthinkThereforeIAM
(3,072 posts)... all the GOP leadership is tainted with Russian connections except Hatch. Ryan does not want to be president by default. It will kill his political pay train, much like Ford after Nixon.
obamanut2012
(25,911 posts)No way Pence, McConnell, and Ryan aren't compromised.
jmowreader
(50,453 posts)After putting a double agent in the White House in 2016, the GOP ain't got the balls to do much more than keep the country running until 2020. The best thing they could possibly do is make Hatch the purported president, name the blandest Democrat they can as purported VP, then bring in Barack Obama as.a "special advisor" and let him run the country.
Demsrule86
(68,352 posts)court picks.
regnaD kciN
(26,035 posts)He pardons everyone involved and ends the investigation. Do you think the Republicans would impeach him? I don't. It would be "case closed, time to move on." And, frankly, I think most Americans would just shrug and switch to talking about what was going to happen next on Game Of Thrones.
dixiegrrrrl
(60,010 posts)!. He writes one of his Exec. Orders pardoning everybody.
It instantly is challenged, goes to court, and one side or the other will appeal the decision, thus it wends its way up to SCOTUS.
which takes time.
Investigation continues during this time.
Meanwhile, the NY state Attorney general, who has been working with Preet Bahra, can still charge the kids and Trump's associates on money laundering, which has a HUGE financial penalty, plus a slew of other charges.
Same thing if a law is put to Congress for a vote. It would never pass now that Trump has so severely damaged the GOP brand.
2. Less thinkable but still possible: He resigns.
As a no longer President, he is instantly open to State law...hello NY State Attorney.
Meanwhile, even today, Mueller is making a long list of who did what, and the Senate Intell committee and the Senate Judiciary Comm. are still holding hearings.
Dept. of Treasury and FBI have been investigating also, they turned their information over to Mueller.
Trump has not much room to maneuver.
onetexan
(12,994 posts)The idiot will not get away scottfree. those are realistic scenarios you've presented.
dixiegrrrrl
(60,010 posts)Unfortunately, Trump has shown us that he ignores the word NO.
onetexan
(12,994 posts)Demsrule86
(68,352 posts)dalton99a
(81,070 posts)harun
(11,348 posts)greatauntoftriplets
(175,698 posts)If he has nothing to hide (ha ha!), why stop the investigation and start issuing pardons? Doesn't he realize that the optics are terrible to all except his cultists?
Blue_true
(31,261 posts)Why worry about something if he is not guilty of felonies?
Tiggeroshii
(11,088 posts)Brought?
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,705 posts)Pardons aren't prospective.
marylandblue
(12,344 posts)But I don't think he can pardon himself.
Worktodo
(288 posts)Ford pardoned Nixon for any crimes against the United States "committed or may have committed or taken part in during the period from January 20, 1969 through August 9, 1974." This is before Nixon was charged with a crime.
So yes it is possible. However the catch is that once pardoned there would be a great legal argument that self incrimination is no longer possible -- and therefore would not apply. So pardoning Manafort for example might require him to provide testimony, and if that testimony was proven false, would be guilty of perjury.
marylandblue
(12,344 posts)They wanted to compel testimony from someone who pleaded the fifth amendment, so the President gave him a pardon. He refused the pardon, thereby asserting his innocence but retaining his right to plead the fifth. So if all the guilty parties accept pardons, they can all be compelled to testify. Once Trump hears that, he won't be pardoning anybody.
Cosmocat
(14,543 posts)And say I don't remember...
orangecrush
(19,236 posts)Will improve their memory!
Cosmocat
(14,543 posts)If they are pardoned?
Next time someone at that level is held in contempt will be the first.
keithbvadu2
(36,369 posts)DemocratSinceBirth
(99,705 posts)What are the parameters of the pardon:
-for federal offenses while serving in government
-for any federal offense the person granted the pardon ever committed or will commit
It seems you have to know what the person did before you pardon him or her.
FarPoint
(12,209 posts)I want to know too.
Catmusicfan
(816 posts)Beschloss on Rachel
Barack_America
(28,876 posts)Aiders and abettors of traitors.
Bettie
(15,998 posts)You bet they're OK with it! Better than OK, they are positively orgasmic about it.
SergeStorms
(18,901 posts)is yes, they'll be fine with this. As long as it isn't connected to them, they couldn't care less how badly Trump destroys America, as long as it's to their party's benefit, that is. Should Democrats and Liberals somehow benefit........now that's a different story. They'd be happy to jettison Trump, and their story line will be, "well, he was NEVER really one of us. He was NEVER a REAL Conservative". Like a "real" Conservative could have done anything more harmful to the country, and the people in it.
Beartracks
(12,761 posts)"He's legit! He's, uh, just new at this! Yeah, that's it. And he's, uh, just really busy making the country great again! Please, please, pleeeeease don't get rid of him!!!"
==========
eleny
(46,166 posts)OliverQ
(3,363 posts)dgibby
(9,474 posts)only covers Fed. crimes, not state, so no doubt NY will finish him and his crime family off.
FarPoint
(12,209 posts)What a relief. Can Muller Investigation Team do the prosecution in New York?
smirkymonkey
(63,221 posts)And will.
FarPoint
(12,209 posts)Since it's been collected..is it acceptable?
smirkymonkey
(63,221 posts)has more than enough on Trump, but I don't see why Muller couldn't pass on his data if he was fired for some reason. Trump has been into criminal activity for years in NY and NJ. If they can't get him on the Russian thing, there are plenty of other offenses that he is guilty of.
dsc
(52,130 posts)R B Garr
(16,920 posts)forfeitures, like taking Trump Towers. Make Manhattan Great Again by closing Trump Towers. Not sure if that's what the penalty could be, but one can dream...
central scrutinizer
(11,617 posts)All of those assholes in Congress who did nothing can scurry to cover in the confusion. They may emerge unscathed.
still_one
(91,963 posts)thing, a pardon implies something another person has to do.
Second, the Constitution indicates that the President has the power to grant reprieves and pardons for offenses against the U.S., EXCEPT in Cases of Impeachment.
The main issue before the SC would be that the Constitution was setup so there is a system of checks and balances, and if the President was allowed to pardon himself, it would go against those checks and balances
Mr.Bill
(24,104 posts)file articles of impeachment? No one thought it had a chance of passing, but it would mean that impeachment proceedings are in process.
PoliticAverse
(26,366 posts)from being impeached by granting them a pardon. It doesn't mean that if the President
is being impeached that his pardon power becomes limited.
Mr.Bill
(24,104 posts)to him pardoning himself, wouldn't it?
PoliticAverse
(26,366 posts)to pardon themself.
Mr.Bill
(24,104 posts)but maybe not if he stays in office long enough to appoint a few more judges.
PoliticAverse
(26,366 posts)appointments would change the direction the decision went.
TexasBushwhacker
(20,044 posts)PoliticAverse
(26,366 posts)still_one
(91,963 posts)elehhhhna
(32,076 posts)PoliticAverse
(26,366 posts)MiddleClass
(888 posts)montana_hazeleyes
(3,424 posts)MiddleClass
(888 posts)think4yourself
(837 posts)We look out for each other on here!
More butter, anyone?
MiddleClass
(888 posts)It's the nature
Corgigal
(9,291 posts)that trump pardons himself and all his past criminal behaviors, but decides to stay president? Is that even possible?
Damn, got a headache now.
R B Garr
(16,920 posts)know what their fate is. Guilty as hell.
NightWatcher
(39,343 posts)We know impeachment won't work with the repuke congress.
R B Garr
(16,920 posts)The sooner, the better.
NightWatcher
(39,343 posts)R B Garr
(16,920 posts)This is amazing. I wonder if he's even safe in New York with the investigations into him there. He might need to go to Russia to escape it all.
Enoki33
(1,584 posts)dflprincess
(28,057 posts)And should Mueller or the New York State Attorney General (also investigating) find members of the crime family broke state law, they'll still be on hook for that.
R B Garr
(16,920 posts)many people, I bet a few would like a chance for justice.
sheshe2
(83,344 posts)Russia it is.
R B Garr
(16,920 posts)Demsrule86
(68,352 posts)Mrs. Overall
(6,839 posts)Oneironaut
(5,461 posts)R B Garr
(16,920 posts)ALBliberal
(2,304 posts)pardoned would resign their positions. But this crazy bunch? Would pardon and resignation necessarily be hand in hand in their minds? I know it's a big stretch to wonder about these things....but this administration seems to flaunt breaking the law and pushing bounds of normalcy. And with their cult following and congressional enablers....
Mr.Bill
(24,104 posts)Not committing any more crimes is an impossibility for these people. And state AGs would pounce on them all over the country. Anywhere they've done business.
ALBliberal
(2,304 posts)angrychair
(8,594 posts)They could just keep committing crimes and keep pardoning themselves as they go. The way it's written there is nothing stopping them...sure isn't congress or voters.
Generic Brad
(14,270 posts)They are shameless, after all.
PoliticAverse
(26,366 posts)grantcart
(53,061 posts)Yes well the President is well known for being an intellectually curious fellow
flibbitygiblets
(7,220 posts)Who knew?
Apparently he thinks we don't know "Russian adoptions" is code for "sanctions due to Magnitsky Act". Shhhh, it's a secret!!
NastyRiffraff
(12,448 posts)Going back to Nixon, he didn't (couldn't?) pardon himself. Of course, Ford did it for him. It's still an open question--CAN a president pardon himself? If so, what next? He stays in office? Impeachment? Do we revisit the idea that a president cannot be criminally prosecuted? That's an idea that has been accepted, but constitutionally, is it possible?
We've seen nothing like this before. Watergate is the closest, but even that pales beside what we're seeing now. And we haven't seen all of it yet.
PoliticAverse
(26,366 posts)a President to pardon themself.
Beartracks
(12,761 posts)CentralMass
(15,265 posts)Akamai
(1,779 posts)would be the end of democracy and the start of the monarchy.
PoliticAverse
(26,366 posts)Akamai
(1,779 posts)yourself does not pass muster them I think pardoning your family is tantamount to pardoning himself.
world wide wally
(21,719 posts)something else.
ancianita
(35,813 posts)ecstatic
(32,567 posts)needs a serious overhaul. Unbe-fckn-lievable!
onetexan
(12,994 posts)Maybe it takes something like this to warrant a review of the U.S. Constitution.
roamer65
(36,739 posts)Gov. Cuomo won't pardon and Dump's pardon is useless against them.
ALBliberal
(2,304 posts)Angle is cheering me up!
Marcuse
(7,399 posts)benld74
(9,889 posts)Best_man23
(4,890 posts)If Trump fires Mueller, or (I would imagine) pardons his family or himself, then 2018 immediately becomes a referendum on Russia. His presidency will in essence and fact be all but over.
BainsBane
(53,003 posts)AgadorSparticus
(7,963 posts)I used to think the gop sold their soul to the devil. Now I am pretty sure his name is Vlad.
burrowowl
(17,606 posts)Is this a guilty plea?
PoliticAverse
(26,366 posts)TomSlick
(11,035 posts)A pardon has to be accepted by the pardoned person to be effective AND if accepted is an admission of guilt. If Trump attempts to pardon himself, that act alone would be an admission of guilt of something - even if it is later found that a President cannot pardon himself.
I think there is a really good reason for Trump to not pardon anyone. If someone is pardoned - say Jered - there is no potential for self-incrimination and, therefore, no 5th Amendment right to refuse to testify.
PoliticAverse
(26,366 posts)For example suppose the President pardoned you for any crimes you committed during the
years 2014-2015. The President could do that even if no one has accused you of committing
a federal crime during that time. If you accept the pardon does that mean you committed a
federal crime during that time? Couldn't you just say "thanks for the pardon even though I don't
need it".
Remember Burdict v US was about the right to reject a pardon not so much about what
accepting a pardon really meant legally.
Although a pardon would prevent someone using their 5th amendment right to refuse to testify
they could always say "I don't recall" during testimony and who could disprove that?
A prosecutor would have greater leverage over someone who wasn't pardoned but could be
prosecuted as the prosecutor could demand a proffer agreement in return for an immunity offer.
TomSlick
(11,035 posts)the discussion of the effect of accepting a pardon was too central to the decision to be mere dicta. The confusing bit was what is required to accept a pardon. It can be argued that a pardon is only accepted if pled as a bar to a criminal charge. If that's correct, Nixon never accepted his pardon.
On the other hand, assume the following scenario:
(1) Jared is pardoned for all federal crimes before the date of the pardon.
(2) Jared is called to testify before Congress, Grand Jury, or trial.
(3) He attempts to invoke under the 5th Amendment but the invocation is challenged on the basis of the pardon.
I think at that point Jared would have to specifically decline the pardon or testify.
Now the hard question: Where is it written that a pardon has to be made public? Why couldn't Jared be given a secret pardon?
PoliticAverse
(26,366 posts)in court have you accepted it yet? According the court's opinion it seems the answer is no.
So it seems before the question is raised in court the pardoned person's accept or reject
option remains.
Interesting question about the secret pardon. To be invoked the recipient would have to tell someone
(judge or prosecutor) and at that point it seems it would become public knowledge.
Suppose a President gives a "secret pardon" to someone while president and after they are no longer
President that person is being accused of a crime and they produce the pardon letter at that time - would
the court accept it? Would the ex-President have to testify as to the validity of that pardon?
Wouldn't that be subject to abuse allowing an unscrupulous ex-president to grant pardons after
their presidential term ended?
TomSlick
(11,035 posts)is that the way the Court wrote in 1915 is so different than the language we use today that it is really difficult to parse.
Turbineguy
(37,212 posts)If you have any curiosity, you quietly research the subject and let nobody know....
The question in this case is more revealing than the answer. It betrays total guilt as well as profound ignorance.
This post courtesy of the Turbineguy Course on "How to be President, a Guide for the Compleat Idiot".
Luciferous
(6,067 posts)gldstwmn
(4,575 posts)he must be impeached. It's that simple.
gademocrat7
(10,623 posts)Hekate
(90,202 posts)We can only hope and pray
orangecrush
(19,236 posts)DallasNE
(7,392 posts)Surely the Congress will not put up with that. And the lawyers performing this "service" will rightfully see their careers go over the cliff.
OliverQ
(3,363 posts)Trump is freaking out about Mueller having access to them.
Shoonra
(518 posts)Back when the Constitution was first being adopted, in 1788, a comment in the debates in the Ratification Convention in Virginia explained that the President's use of his pardoning power to cushion his henchmen in some nefarious scheme would be sufficiently offensive to justify his impeachment and removal from office. I'm just saying ......
Pachamama
(16,875 posts)....and Pence is part of it....
Puzzler
(2,505 posts)I knew Trump would be appalling, truly appalling, but I did not expect utter chaos from Day One.
Trump seems to have deteriorated so much in his (so far) short term, that I seriously question if he is even aware what fucking year it is. I'm serious.
One thing is for sure, regardless of what happens, something huge has to change in the US system of government. This should never happen again. The US, and the rest of the world cannot be held hostage every 4 years, to whichever nutjob happens to be running for the Presidency.
-Puzzler
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)Dude is acting more guilty by the second
Gothmog
(143,999 posts)Roland99
(53,342 posts)Fucking disgusting piles of rat scum!!
Lint Head
(15,064 posts)Midnight Writer
(21,548 posts)He stepped down not because he thought he would be removed, but because he didn't want his beloved country to endure the international spectacle and internal divisiveness of an impeachment trial.
WinkyDink
(51,311 posts)PoliticAverse
(26,366 posts)who were charged with crimes.
Lint Head
(15,064 posts)Hieronymus
(6,039 posts)himself and his family.
WinkyDink
(51,311 posts)Hieronymus
(6,039 posts)WinkyDink
(51,311 posts)octoberlib
(14,971 posts)were committed and that people are going to be convicted.
Eliot Rosewater
(31,097 posts)with murderous dictators, his base will love him even more.
He will NEVER lose what is in reality well over 40% of those who VOTE. You see the number of people who support him or dont doesnt matter unless they VOTE. And most of them VOTE.
eShirl
(18,466 posts)"High crimes and misdemeanors" are whatever Congress decides they are, I'm told.
And impeachment is a political thing, not a justice thing.
and Separation of Powers too, also
bucolic_frolic
(42,676 posts)pardoning all these criminals or firing the Special Prosecutor or even replacing him
is to make the Rule of Law defunct - kaput, so yesterday!
This is coming to a head very quickly.
So your input - planning ahead - all members here - is important
What will happen if he does either, or more likely, BOTH of those things - pardons
a slew of comrades and fires Bob Mueller?
How will it play out? How will the country react? What will you do, what can you do?
Texin
(2,585 posts)By his actions he's admitted that he and his family syndicate have broken the laws foreign and domestic.
misanthrope
(7,405 posts)Sure the GOP on the Hill could shock us and do the right thing, but I'm not betting on it. Without the cooperation of Republicans in the House and Senate, nothing gets done.
Texin
(2,585 posts)After hearing this stunning report (at least it would have been stunning if he's able to actually do anything now that does have the power to stun), that's the only conclusion I can actually make in this circumstance. Obviously, he can't pardon himself. And from everything I know about how the pardon process actually works, the individual being granted a pardon must first have been prosecuted and convicted of a crime for which there has been an actual sentence and/or damages rendered. In other words, how can he pardon himself or anyone else until the full legal process is concluded. He can't preemptively pardon himself or anyone else.
It sounds as if he is beginning to resign himself to an inevitable process that will (probably) drive him out of office in the face of possible actions on his part, i.e., firing Mueller, and maybe Rosenstein (or forcing his resignation), which would then (probably) result in a formal process of impeachment. It just sounds like he is thinking of stalling and casting a life preserver to Don Jr. and anyone else involved in this investigation and then resigning and allowing Pence to pardon him, and he may be considering having conversations with key repuke legislators in order to effect this.
Srkdqltr
(6,129 posts)He knows they will be charged and convicted. A pardon is an admission of guilt. One has to be guilty of something to be pardoned.
bucolic_frolic
(42,676 posts)can't walk that back
matt819
(10,749 posts)I mean, really, can they top this?
Response to DemocratSinceBirth (Original post)
Jake Stern This message was self-deleted by its author.
red dog 1
(27,648 posts)What a joke!
K&R
apkhgp
(1,068 posts)Starring every last asshole, dum jerk, and moron that can lower themselves to serve in a 45 administration.
ffr
(22,649 posts)Let me repeat. He has no ties to Russia. It's all fake news.
So why would even entertain such thoughts? It makes completely no sense from that perspective, doesn't it!
FairWinds
(1,717 posts)in the Iran-Contra scandal.
He got away with it.
NYT "But in a single stroke, Mr. Bush swept away one conviction, three guilty pleas and two pending cases, virtually decapitating what was left of Mr. Walsh's effort, which began in 1986. Mr. Bush's decision was announced by the White House in a printed statement after the President left for Camp David, where he will spend the Christmas holiday.
Mr. Walsh bitterly condemned the President's action, charging that "the Iran-contra cover-up, which has continued for more than six years, has now been completed.""
hamsterjill
(15,214 posts)Surely there is some legal repercussion - SOMETHING - that forbids this. Otherwise, we have never really had a democracy. It's absurd.
Raster
(20,996 posts)...and that would be Ivanka*. Don Jr. can go pound sand, wet the bed, whatever. And maybe Jar-Jar*, after all, he is the Golden Child*s mate.
BlancheSplanchnik
(20,219 posts)Oh...wait... Oh right, he IS a carny side show.
mobeau69
(11,079 posts)BlancheSplanchnik
(20,219 posts)❤️ President Obama!
Dopers_Greed
(2,640 posts)That would be beyond fucked
calimary
(80,699 posts)Why do we ask about whether we can pardon ourselves, your lordship?
Thor_MN
(11,843 posts)He is running scared, he knows that if the truth comes out, he is done.
jmowreader
(50,453 posts)Some sovereign citizens believe they can dismiss their own court cases. They have two theories. One says if the judge puts the court in recess the highest official in the room is the "man" on trial and he, as the administrator for the trust that got caught traveling freely (aka driving without a license) he can dismiss the case. The other is that you can just refuse to consent to the court's jurisdiction and walk out a free man. None of this actually works.
Trump pardoning himself would be similar. I think if he tried it we'd find out if you really can pardo a ham sandwich.
Zing Zing Zingbah
(6,496 posts)Awsi Dooger
(14,565 posts)There is no reason to believe otherwise. Don't underestimate the stupidity and blind loyalty of his followers. My Republican aunt today told me that Democrats were "subhuman" for failing to allow Trump to do his job and fix the country. I've never even heard her use that word but today it applied to all Democrats.
After we argued briefly about that she changed the subject and wanted to talk about O.J. Simpson being released from prison. We live in Miami so local news continues to cover the possibility that O.J. might return here. That O.J talk was even more unbelievable. She said she read on her smart phone that O.J. never would have gone to jail except for Mark Fuhrman. Somehow she thought he was related to the second O.J. trial, not the first. When I tried to correct her on that she snapped at me and said, "Oh sure. I'm wrong again. You know everything."
Then she hung up in disgust.
That's the caliber we're dealing with. The Republicans in congress have zero risk in pretending Trump has done nothing wrong. The legions will willingly look away and with right wing media help pretend Mueller was at fault. The billionaire GOP supporters will fuel it further with relentless ad campaigns, on television and all the online sources.
Rachel can uncover the truth every weeknight but it leads nowhere.
Shoonra
(518 posts)The President's pardoning power is nearly unlimited. Just like Congress's impeachment power.
In June 1788, at the Virginia state convention called to ratify the proposed National Constitution, George Mason said:
"Now, I conceive that the President 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 except. This is a weighty objection with me. ..."
To which James Madison answered:
"There is one security in this case to which gentlemen may not have adverted; if the President be connected in any suspicious manner with any person, and there be grounds to believe he will shelter him, the House of Representatives can impeach him, they can remove him if found guilty.... This is a great security."
[Jonathan Elliot, Debates in the several State Conventions on the Adoption of the Federal Constitution, vol. 3 (1901, Phil., Lippincott) pages 497-498.]
Orcrist
(73 posts)You have to have a congress willing to impeach him for such blatant behavior. We have one that not only wouldn't impeach him but would actively defend him instead. And they will suffer no consequences for their failure to counter such abuse of power by the president because the people voting for them don't give a shit either.
I live in Alabama among these Trump hardcore bastards. They think every negative word spoken about Trump is fake news. They still love him. Don't believe any of the Russian stuff. That being the case the elected officials from here in Alabama would risk nothing by ignoring any abuse of power. In fact doing the right thing would be the move that cost them votes. Maybe even get them defeated by a primary challenger in the next election.
There aren't enough people of integrity left in the Republican party to impeach Trump just because he deserved it and it was the right thing to do. Fear of the wrath of their voters back home is the only thing that could motivate most of them and I just do not see that happening. The Trump voters live in their own Fox News, Rush Limbaugh, bubble of misinformation that is virtually impossible to penetrate. If after all that we have seen of Trump and his shady dealings so far these people still love the bastard what can happen that will take them to a point where they are pressuring their representative to impeach? I just don't see it.
The only hope I see is the 2018 elections. Take back congress and then we are in business. Even if the republicans hold the senate, losing the house would be a wake up call.
logosoco
(3,208 posts)I just want tRump, his greedy selfish family and all of the backward cabinet members to leave and go far, far away from where they have any way to impact our country and the government.
Just go away now and never come back.
Madam45for2923
(7,178 posts)Madam45for2923
(7,178 posts)bucolic_frolic
(42,676 posts)One cannot pardon the innocent
A plenary indulgence is the closest thing, but it's an other-worldly power
Is this a game of Monopoly?
Get out of Jail Free