Can we at least agree on this?

berg80

Diamond Member
Oct 28, 2017
20,728
17,346
2,320
Trump once said, “Then, I have an Article II, where I have to the right to do whatever I want as president.” It would appear no one in his admin or inner circle dared to inform him of his colossal misunderstanding of Article II powers. But he's finding out now.

But this thread isn't about the sordid MaL affair. It's about whether we all can agree the absolute power to pardon people possessed by the POTUS needs to be reformed?

One of the features of Trump's presidency was the extent to which he exposed weaknesses in the laws, rules, and protocols governing a prez's behavior. Weaknesses that existed because no one ever contemplated that a prez would so extensively exploit them. This article explores some of the areas in need of reform and suggests remedies to address them.


One of them being.............-Pardon reform. There can be little doubt of two things. First, as currently constructed, the president’s pardon power is nearly absolute. Second, President Trump’s use of the pardon power has transgressed the Founders’ expectations. Indeed, the idea that a president might pardon his own criminal confederates (as is arguably the case with Roger Stone) is exactly why George Mason opposed the pardon power altogether. At some point, Congress might give serious consideration to a constitutional amendment that, for example, makes pardons illegal for individuals personally known to the president and makes the misuse of the power judicially reviewable.

As the author points out, Stone is the most glaring example of an abuse because he possessed information that related to Trump's exposure in the Mueller investigation. After making it clear to Stone his silence would be rewarded Stone was in fact pardoned. I can think of no other example of a previous prez so manifestly abusing his authority.

The question at hand being, can we agree no POTUS should be allowed to pardon someone who could act as a hostile witness to the prez in a civil or criminal case or in an impeachment trial?
 
I cannot agree with this, it is clearly just partisan based on your part.

Trump is not the first one to do this, did you whine about it when Clinton pardoned his half brother or Marc Rich?

If not, then you have no standing to do so now
 
Good luck trying to amend the US Constitution on today's hyper-partisan playing field.
NFW doesn't begin to describe the odds of success.
Amending the Constitution is challenging, no doubt. But who would oppose a proposal to stop the prez from pardoning someone who has knowledge of an unethical or criminal act committed by the prez?
 
What law did Trump break?
Did he illegally use the IRS, DOJ and the FBI as political weapons?
Did he spy on Joe Biden's campaign?
Did he commit fraud with the FISA court?
Did be influence peddle with Iran, Russia and China?
Did he use his son to launder bribe money?
Did he violate the 1st amendment rights of Americans?
Did he violate the 4th amendment rights of Joe Biden?
The far left extremist Democrat Party is lawless, it doesn't respect the constitution, and it is a threat to our "democracy".
The Democrat obsession with Trump is crazy.
 
Amending the Constitution is challenging, no doubt. But who would oppose a proposal to stop the prez from pardoning someone who has knowledge of an unethical or criminal act committed by the prez?

Whatever party held the White House at the time would oppose it.
 
What law did Trump break?
Did he illegally use the IRS, DOJ and the FBI as political weapons?
Did he spy on Joe Biden's campaign?
Did he commit fraud with the FISA court?
Did be influence peddle with Iran, Russia and China?
Did he use his son to launder bribe money?
Did he violate the 1st amendment rights of Americans?
Did he violate the 4th amendment rights of Joe Biden?
The far left extremist Democrat Party is lawless, it doesn't respect the constitution, and it is a threat to our "democracy".
The Democrat obsession with Trump is crazy.

See?
 
I think pardons should only be used when someone has been cleared, or something like that.
They all abuse them. They all abuse their powers as much as they can.
I think it's fair to say many prez's have tried to exceed their authority. Lincoln surely did. Trump did it in record fashion. I take your response as being in favor of reform.
 
I cannot agree with this, it is clearly just partisan based on your part.

Trump is not the first one to do this, did you whine about it when Clinton pardoned his half brother or Marc Rich?

If not, then you have no standing to do so now
Marc Rich did not possess incriminating evidence on Clinton. That's the difference. But I would favor a judicial review of all controversial pardons to check for abuses.
 
Although it doesn't rise to the level of Stone's pardon, obviously Bannon was pardoned because he was engaged in a fraudulent activity Trump favored.......building the border wall. I doubt a review board would have approved it if for no other reason than the compelling evidence of Bannon's guilt.
 
Rich was equally as self serving.
There is no evidence to support that assertion. But even if there was it's beside the point. The point being the need for reform.
 
Trump once said, “Then, I have an Article II, where I have to the right to do whatever I want as president.” It would appear no one in his admin or inner circle dared to inform him of his colossal misunderstanding of Article II powers. But he's finding out now.

But this thread isn't about the sordid MaL affair. It's about whether we all can agree the absolute power to pardon people possessed by the POTUS needs to be reformed?

One of the features of Trump's presidency was the extent to which he exposed weaknesses in the laws, rules, and protocols governing a prez's behavior. Weaknesses that existed because no one ever contemplated that a prez would so extensively exploit them. This article explores some of the areas in need of reform and suggests remedies to address them.


One of them being.............-Pardon reform. There can be little doubt of two things. First, as currently constructed, the president’s pardon power is nearly absolute. Second, President Trump’s use of the pardon power has transgressed the Founders’ expectations. Indeed, the idea that a president might pardon his own criminal confederates (as is arguably the case with Roger Stone) is exactly why George Mason opposed the pardon power altogether. At some point, Congress might give serious consideration to a constitutional amendment that, for example, makes pardons illegal for individuals personally known to the president and makes the misuse of the power judicially reviewable.

As the author points out, Stone is the most glaring example of an abuse because he possessed information that related to Trump's exposure in the Mueller investigation. After making it clear to Stone his silence would be rewarded Stone was in fact pardoned. I can think of no other example of a previous prez so manifestly abusing his authority.

The question at hand being, can we agree no POTUS should be allowed to pardon someone who could act as a hostile witness to the prez in a civil or criminal case or in an impeachment trial?
I am more concerned about Presidents who “reward their friends” by pardoning their terrorists friends such as FALN, Rosenberg, and otherwise friends of Bill Ayers who get caught bombing or plotting to bomb Congress, military installations, and police stations; which, in all, make Democrats full-of-shit on their reaction to January 6th.

Democrats need the Pardon.
 

Forum List

Back
Top