Are all of Biden’s pardons that were autopenned signed INVALID?

[ThisIsMe]

The pardons are valid no matter your idiotic wingnut noise machine tells you.

Not if a crime was not committed. Lol, you see, marener posts a link to define what a pardon is, now you all want to ignore that link...

My original statement was that a pardon is for someone who committed a crime, marener posted a link that affirms that, now you two are just wanting to ignore it.

 

[Marener]

If they didn't commit crimes, then the pardon is not valid and they can be investigated.

Why would they be investigated if they didn’t commit crimes? That doesn’t make sense.

 

[ThisIsMe]

It’s for whatever crime Trump’s cronies think they could try to prosecute against them.

That’s what makes it preemptive.

According to your link, there is no such thing as a preemptive pardon, if there were, then a president could pardon people for future crimes.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Calm down. We disagree. What is wrong with you that you can't accept that? And I might mention you've been wrong more than once during this exchange.

I am never wrong on this topic. I used to teach it! You can take my statements as the Gospel because I spent many years learning and teaching this crap!

 

[Marener]

According to your link, there is no such thing as a preemptive pardon, if there were, then a president could pardon people for future crimes.

The preemption refers to charges, not the crime. The pardon preempts the charges.

Charges come after a crime.

Preemptive pardons come between the crime and the charges.

 

[ThisIsMe]

At least you’re recognizing the fact that a pardon does not mean a crime has been committed.

A conviction has happened, and was wrongful, but the truth is, if they KNOW the person was wrongly convicted, a pardon isn't necessary, they just let them out of prison.

All I'm doing is using your own posted link as a source of information, which just so happens to coincide with my original argument

 

[ThisIsMe]

Preemptive pardons come between the crime and the charges.

Exactly! So this means a crime HAS been committed. That's all I'm trying to figure out..what federal crimes did the J6 committee commit?

 

[Marener]

A conviction has happened, and was wrongful, but the truth is, if they KNOW the person was wrongly convicted, a pardon isn't necessary, they just let them out of prison.

All I'm doing is using your own posted link as a source of information, which just so happens to coincide with my original argument

No. You’re misinterpreting things because you refuse to consider that your original argument could be wrong.

The Supreme Court’s decision in Ex Parte Garland (1866) is central to understanding the scope of this power. In this case, the Court unequivocally stated:
“The power of pardon conferred by the Constitution upon the President is unlimited except in cases of impeachment. It extends to every offence known to the law, and may be exercised at any time after its commission, either before legal proceedings are taken or during their pendency, or after conviction and judgment.”

Preemptive Pardons: Constitutional Authority and Real World Implications

A preemptive pardon is an act of clemency issued by a head of state or government before charges are formally brought against an individual. Though relatively rare, this type of pardon can ...

www.criminallawlibraryblog.com

 

[Marener]

Exactly! So this means a crime HAS been committed. That's all I'm trying to figure out..what federal crimes did the J6 committee commit?

It doesn’t matter.

Remember your two options? Neither of those circumstances results in the committee members being prosecuted.

The only way you think you can make the pardon invalid is by saying they committed no crimes, meaning they can’t be prosecuted.

 

[ThisIsMe]

Why would they be investigated if they didn’t commit crimes? That doesn’t make sense.

the investigation is to find out if any crimes had been committed.

You don't know until you investigate. Apparently biden has jumped the gun and assumed they did commit crimes and issued a pardon.

 

[Marener]

the investigation is to find out if any crimes had been committed.

You don't know until you investigate. Apparently biden has jumped the gun and assumed they did commit crimes and issued a pardon.

And what happens if they investigate and find out crimes were committed?

 

[ThisIsMe]

No. You’re misinterpreting things because you refuse to consider that your original argument could be wrong.

The Supreme Court’s decision in Ex Parte Garland (1866) is central to understanding the scope of this power. In this case, the Court unequivocally stated:
“The power of pardon conferred by the Constitution upon the President is unlimited except in cases of impeachment. It extends to every offence known to the law, and may be exercised at any time after its commission, either before legal proceedings are taken or during their pendency, or after conviction and judgment.”

Preemptive Pardons: Constitutional Authority and Real World Implications

A preemptive pardon is an act of clemency issued by a head of state or government before charges are formally brought against an individual. Though relatively rare, this type of pardon can ...

www.criminallawlibraryblog.com

I've read your link, it agrees with me....

It extends to every offence known to the law, and may be exercised at any time after its commission

 

[ThisIsMe]

It doesn’t matter.

Remember your two options? Neither of those circumstances results in the committee members being prosecuted.

The only way you think you can make the pardon invalid is by saying they committed no crimes, meaning they can’t be prosecuted.

But that could change. If this is argued up through the courts, this could be the first time a presidential pardon was reversed...because he did so not according to the law.

 

[Marener]

I've read your link, it agrees with me....

I agree too. Pardons can only cover things that already happened.

We all agree with that.

Biden’s pardons only covered things that happened before he issued the pardon

 

[Marener]

But that could change. If this is argued up through the courts, this could be the first time a presidential pardon was reversed...because he did so not according to the law.

The constitution does not place any of the limits on pardons that you think.

 

[buckeye]

I am never wrong on this topic. I used to teach it! You can take my statements as the Gospel because I spent many years learning and teaching this crap!

Yet you were wrong that noboy grants immunity. And you were wrong to use Nixon as a precedent of an example of a legal blanket pardon. Nobody ever challenged his pardon to check its legality. I think everyone agreed at the time that it was in the best interest of the US to let it go.

No such situation exists for the Biden blanket pardons and they will be challenged. Sticking to "nobody can ever challenge a presidential pardon" is simply bullshit. When the POTUS steps out of line this far, they can be and should be challenged.

 

[ThisIsMe]

And what happens if they investigate and find out crimes were committed?

first, bidens pardon is reversed because he made it to protect people from being investigated...which is not how pardons work, then, since the pardon is null, they are investigated, if found guilty, then they are sentenced to whatever sentence is appropriate.

even if it doenst change anything, at least we know they were guilty of committing federal crimes and that is known

 

[ThisIsMe]

The constitution does not place any of the limits on pardons that you think.

Can biden ignore the law? Or are you saying the power of the pardon is unconditional and not able to be challenged?

 

[Marener]

first, bidens pardon is reversed because he made it to protect people from being investigated...which is not how pardons work, then, since the pardon is null, they are investigated, if found guilty, then they are sentenced to whatever sentence is appropriate.

even if it doenst change anything, at least we know they were guilty of committing federal crimes and that is known

Let me get this straight. You want to declare the pardon invalid because they didn’t commit any crimes. Then you want to investigate, discover the crimes, and prosecute them.

Wouldn’t that invalidate your attempt to invalidate the pardon?

You’re trying to have it both ways. Claim they didn’t commit a crime to make the pardon null, then claim they did commit a crime to find them guilty.

 

[Marener]

Can biden ignore the law? Or are you saying the power of the pardon is unconditional and not able to be challenged?

Constitution doesn’t put any conditions on it, so SCOTUS really has no authority to say otherwise.