Are Biden's issuance of presidential pardons going too far?

[Nostra]

Pardons do not prove someone is a criminal.

They could be! But not necessarily.

 

[struth]

Okay. They’re wrong.

Geez what else was the xiden admin wrong about? Now wonder so many needed blanket pardons

 

[martybegan]

Who is going to have standing to sue?

the DOJ if they want to prosecute one of these people for something.

 

[Marener]

the DOJ if they want to prosecute one of these people for something.

You think Trump’s DoJ will ask the courts to limit the president’s power?

 

[Nostra]

Okay. They’re wrong.

No stupid, you are. The Constitution says pardons are for offenses committed against the United States.

 

[martybegan]

You think Trump’s DoJ will ask the courts to limit the president’s power?

He's only got 4 years left. If he has to give up pre-emptive pardons to get a win, he will do it.

 

[Marener]

No stupid, you are.

The court says differently.

 

[Marener]

He's only got 4 years left. If he has to give up pre-emptive pardons to get a win, he will do it.

You think Trump wants to persecute his political enemies that bad?

 

[Nostra]

The court says differently.

You are lying again. It’s all you do.


The Constitution establishes the President’s authority to grant clemency, encompassing not only pardons of individuals but several other forms of relief from criminal punishment as well.1The power, which has historical roots in early English law,2 has been recognized by the Supreme Court as quite broad. In the 1886 case Ex parte Garland, the Court referred to the President’s authority to pardon as unlimited except in cases of impeachment, extending to every offence known to the law and able to be exercised either before legal proceedings are taken, or during their pendency, or after conviction and judgment.3 Much later, the Court wrote that the broad power conferred in the Constitution gives the President plenary authority to 'forgive’ [a] convicted person in part or entirely, to reduce a penalty in terms of a specified number of years, or to alter it with certain conditions.4

Despite the breadth of the President’s authority under the Pardon Clause, the Constitution’s text provides for at least two limits on the power: first, clemency may only be granted for Offenses against the United States,5 meaning that state criminal offenses and federal or state civil claims are not covered.6 Second, the President’s clemency authority cannot be used in Cases of impeachment.7

https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/artII-S2-C1-3-1/ALDE_00013316/

 

[Marener]

You are lying again. It’s all you do.


The Constitution establishes the President’s authority to grant clemency, encompassing not only pardons of individuals but several other forms of relief from criminal punishment as well.1The power, which has historical roots in early English law,2 has been recognized by the Supreme Court as quite broad. In the 1886 case Ex parte Garland, the Court referred to the President’s authority to pardon as unlimited except in cases of impeachment, extending to every offence known to the law and able to be exercised either before legal proceedings are taken, or during their pendency, or after conviction and judgment.3 Much later, the Court wrote that the broad power conferred in the Constitution gives the President plenary authority to 'forgive’ [a] convicted person in part or entirely, to reduce a penalty in terms of a specified number of years, or to alter it with certain conditions.4

Despite the breadth of the President’s authority under the Pardon Clause, the Constitution’s text provides for at least two limits on the power: first, clemency may only be granted for Offenses against the United States,5 meaning that state criminal offenses and federal or state civil claims are not covered.6 Second, the President’s clemency authority cannot be used in Cases of impeachment.7

https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/artII-S2-C1-3-1/ALDE_00013316/

That’s nice. Do you think that proves anything you’re saying?

 

[martybegan]

You think Trump wants to persecute his political enemies that bad?

I think he wants clarification from the SC on what constitutes a pardon at the federal level, just like the rest of us.

 

[Nostra]

That’s nice. Do you think that proves anything you’re saying?

Yes. It proves everything I said, including calling you a liar.

 

[Marener]

I think he wants clarification from the SC on what constitutes a pardon at the federal level, just like the rest of us.

Why would he want that? To persecute his political enemies of course.

 

[martybegan]

Why would he want that? To persecute his political enemies of course.

To correct the wrongs performed by the previous administration.

Elections have consequences, bottom *****.

 

[Marener]

To correct the wrongs performed by the previous administration.

Elections have consequences, bottom *****.

The consequence is the politicization of justice by a corrupt criminal.

Just what you always wanted!

I don’t think this is lucky. Trump is not going to willingly give up any power.

 

[Nostra]

Why would he want that? To persecute his political enemies of course.

On Day 1 Trump signed an order forbidding the DOJ from going after political opponents. So once again you are full of shit.

 

[martybegan]

The consequence is the politicization of justice by a corrupt criminal.

Just what you always wanted!

I don’t think this is lucky. Trump is not going to willingly give up any power.

Lawfare was started by your side, mouth breather.

 

[Marener]

On Day 1 Trump signed an order forbidding the DOJ from going after political opponents. So once again you are full of shit.

So why would he need the courts to take away the pardons of his political enemies?

 

[Nostra]

So why would he need the courts to take away the pardons of his political enemies?

See post 814 by Marty, dipshit.

Trump has to clean up the clusterfuck your Vegetable Messiah left behind.

 

[Marener]

Lawfare was started by your side, mouth breather.

Seeking justice for crimes isn’t lawfare. I don’t know where you got the belief that a former president can break laws with no consequences.