Teslag said:

---

bobbranco said:

---

HTownAg98 said:

---

bobbranco said:

---

HTownAg98 said:

---

bobbranco said:

---

BMX Bandit said:

---

Quote:

---

The Constitution states the President has the power to pardon people convicted of crimes.

---

where you getting this version of the constitution? temu?


its saying nothing about convictions:

Quote:

---

The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States; he may require the Opinion, in writing, of the principal Officer in each of the executive Departments, upon any Subject relating to the Duties of their respective Offices, and he shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offences against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.

---

---

Asking a stupid question. How do you classify it as an offense if no lawsuit is filed?

---

Just has to be an act.

---

An act that has not been legally determined to be a crime?

---

A court decides that.

---

Yes. If a court does not decide, how is it an offense?

Now we are going in circles.

---

Nixon's pardon also included crimes that weren't charged. It's common.

---

I believe the fact that Nixon was impeached and forced to resign was considered more than sufficient punishment for the 'crimes' he was committed. It's no excuse, the same 'crimes' his predecessors committed were ignored.

Teslag said:

---

bobbranco said:

---

HTownAg98 said:

---

bobbranco said:

---

HTownAg98 said:

---

bobbranco said:

---

BMX Bandit said:

---

Quote:

---

The Constitution states the President has the power to pardon people convicted of crimes.

---

where you getting this version of the constitution? temu?


its saying nothing about convictions:

Quote:

---

The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States; he may require the Opinion, in writing, of the principal Officer in each of the executive Departments, upon any Subject relating to the Duties of their respective Offices, and he shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offences against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.

---

---

Asking a stupid question. How do you classify it as an offense if no lawsuit is filed?

---

Just has to be an act.

---

An act that has not been legally determined to be a crime?

---

A court decides that.

---

Yes. If a court does not decide, how is it an offense?

Now we are going in circles.

---

Nixon's pardon also included crimes that weren't charged. It's common.

---

common = 50 yrs and 7 presidents ago

KerrAg76 said:

---

Teslag said:

---

bobbranco said:

---

HTownAg98 said:

---

bobbranco said:

---

HTownAg98 said:

---

bobbranco said:

---

BMX Bandit said:

---

Quote:

---

The Constitution states the President has the power to pardon people convicted of crimes.

---

where you getting this version of the constitution? temu?


its saying nothing about convictions:

Quote:

---

The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States; he may require the Opinion, in writing, of the principal Officer in each of the executive Departments, upon any Subject relating to the Duties of their respective Offices, and he shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offences against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.

---

---

Asking a stupid question. How do you classify it as an offense if no lawsuit is filed?

---

Just has to be an act.

---

An act that has not been legally determined to be a crime?

---

A court decides that.

---

Yes. If a court does not decide, how is it an offense?

Now we are going in circles.

---

Nixon's pardon also included crimes that weren't charged. It's common.

---

common = 50 yrs and 7 presidents ago

---

As long as it's legal and precedence has been set, that's all that matters. This is why when a president does anything that hasn't been done before, while it can be good for the short-term, that same thing can be done in the future that might not be seen as a good. thing.

Strategically, I would terminate their retirements (for some reason). That will force them to court. There I would tie them up for years. Adam Show can he be pardoned for a crime and still serve as a senator? I would hammer that dude forever!!

bobbranco said:

---

Teslag said:

---

bobbranco said:

---

HTownAg98 said:

---

bobbranco said:

---

HTownAg98 said:

---

bobbranco said:

---

BMX Bandit said:

---

Quote:

---

The Constitution states the President has the power to pardon people convicted of crimes.

---

where you getting this version of the constitution? temu?


its saying nothing about convictions:

Quote:

---

The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States; he may require the Opinion, in writing, of the principal Officer in each of the executive Departments, upon any Subject relating to the Duties of their respective Offices, and he shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offences against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.

---

---

Asking a stupid question. How do you classify it as an offense if no lawsuit is filed?

---

Just has to be an act.

---

An act that has not been legally determined to be a crime?

---

A court decides that.

---

Yes. If a court does not decide, how is it an offense?

Now we are going in circles.

---

Nixon's pardon also included crimes that weren't charged. It's common.

---

I believe the fact that Nixon was impeached and forced to resign was considered more than sufficient punishment for the 'crimes' he was committed. It's no excuse, the same 'crimes' his predecessors committed were ignored.

---

Splitting hairs but Nixon wasn't technically impeached, the impeachment process had started and he resigned to keep,from getting removed

bobbranco said:

---

Teslag said:

---

bobbranco said:

---

HTownAg98 said:

---

bobbranco said:

---

HTownAg98 said:

---

bobbranco said:

---

BMX Bandit said:

---

Quote:

---

The Constitution states the President has the power to pardon people convicted of crimes.

---

where you getting this version of the constitution? temu?


its saying nothing about convictions:

Quote:

---

The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States; he may require the Opinion, in writing, of the principal Officer in each of the executive Departments, upon any Subject relating to the Duties of their respective Offices, and he shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offences against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.

---

---

Asking a stupid question. How do you classify it as an offense if no lawsuit is filed?

---

Just has to be an act.

---

An act that has not been legally determined to be a crime?

---

A court decides that.

---

Yes. If a court does not decide, how is it an offense?

Now we are going in circles.

---

Nixon's pardon also included crimes that weren't charged. It's common.

---

I believe the fact that Nixon was impeached and forced to resign was considered more than sufficient punishment for the 'crimes' he was committed. It's no excuse, the same 'crimes' his predecessors committed were ignored.

---

Agree, but he resigned. And the draft dodgers were uh - individuals who dodged the draft - which is a crime.

Those examples they keep tossing out to justify this are not comparable at all.

Also no pensions paid by taxpayers should be paid. That should be a consequence. Any official needing a pardon has forsaken the public trust. Any recompense from the public should go with it.

On another aspect, still believe the comparisons to Nixon's rather specific situation are very forced. The analog to draft dodgers by Carter seems closer.

What can the Trump administration do to make sure that none of these awful people can ever get back into positions of power? They, unfortunately, won't be punished for their actions, but there has got to be a way to keep them from ever working in the federal government again.

Hubert J. Farnsworth said:

---

What can the Trump administration do to make sure that none of these awful people can ever get back into positions of power? They, unfortunately, won't be punished for their actions, but there has got to be a way to keep them from ever working in the federal government again.

---

Other than not hire them? Not much.

But fear not!

It will be 2033 before another Dem is in the White House (at the earliest). So they ain't coming back! LOL

Biden and his crew are liars, hypocrites and cowards. Just go away.

Needs to be illegal for anyone with a presidential pardon to:

- Receive any federal pension funds
- Be employed by the federal government
- Hold a security clearance

this tells you what the scum on the left did...



Hopefully every one of those American Disgraces find themselves behind bars.. for the rest of their lives and serve as a warning for Marxists and scum everywhere what happens when you lie, murder, steal and betray.

dmart90 said:

---

HTownAg98 said:

---

dmart90 said:

---

Cromagnum said:

---

You cant pardon someone that isn't convicted of anything. I would investigate those POS's anyways.

---

Yes, the President can. And accepting pardons are generally considered an admission of guilt by the DOJ. Not that that amounts to anything.

---

More fake news, and we have an appellate court that ruled on this very issue. https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca10/20-3055/20-3055-2021-09-23.html

---

Quote:

---

The Justice Department has long construed acceptance of pardons as an admission of guilt, even though it's legally disputed. Prosecutors recently warned that Jan. 6 defendants who accept pardons from Trump would similarly be admitting guilt, and some of them have signaled their intent to turn down clemency to continue fighting their convictions.

---

https://www.politico.com/news/2025/01/20/biden-pardons-fauci-milley-jan-6-committee-00199244

---

So now we're going to believe everything the Biden DOJ has to say on things. Strange times we live in. Sorry, but I'd rather rely on something a court has adjudicated rather than something some pinhead at DOJ wrote.

1. This can't possibly stand up in the courts.
2. The President should lose all power to issue executive orders, pardons and any other tools that bypass checks and balances during the dead period between the election and the inauguration.

Didn't Fauci say that we did not sanction or fund any gain of function research in Senate hearings? That i believe has been proven false . So he's pardoned for perjury? Is that the crux of it for him?

titan said:

---

Also no pensions paid by taxpayers should be paid. That should be a consequence. Any official needing a pardon has forsaken the public trust. Any recompense from the public should go with it.

On another aspect, still believe the comparisons to Nixon's rather specific situation are very forced. The analog to draft dodgers by Carter seems closer.

---

This would be an interesting way to force them to use the pardon. They'll have to go back to the actual pension rules that define why a pension can be taken away and then depend on the court decisions that say a pardon isn't an admission of guilt OR depend on the theory that a pardon restores all your rights as though you were never convicted of the crime.

halfastros81 said:

---

Didn't Fauci say that we did not sanction or fund any gain of function research in Senate hearings? That i believe has been proven false . So he's pardoned for perjury? Is that the crux of it for him?

---

He administered the GOF research responsible for the deaths of millions. His crime was murder.

flakrat said:

---

1. This can't possibly stand up in the courts.
2. The President should lose all power to issue executive orders, pardons and any other tools that bypass checks and balances during the dead period between the election and the inauguration.

---

That's confusing. The pardon is a check on the judicial branch. And doesn't that essentially make the term shorter by 2.5 months? Not sure I'm on board with that. How would you have liked if Trump couldn't do anything from November 2020 to January 2021?

Far and away the most corrupt administration in the history of the US. Gives true banana republics a run for their money.

Picard said:

---

It's an admission of their guilt

---

Absolutely. Trump's team needs to figure a way around these things and get these mother****ers. Fauci is a mass murderer in Cheney is a complete liar, participated in a cover-up and traitor. They also need to go after Kinzinger and Schiff.

You don't give pardons to people if they haven't done anything wrong.

I thought it was against the law to actually fund it, which is why he was lying about it. One crime to cover up another?

Wabs said:

---

You shouldn't be able to "pre-pardon" anybody for anything. What have any of them been charged with?

---

This. Doesn't seem legal to me.

WolfCall said:

---

Mentioned before but:
Biden's wrecking ball, scorched earth actions since the election cry out to shorten the period of time after future presidential elections to limit the amount of damage a future president can do to our Country.

Our Founding Fathers never envisioned a President as dark and sinister dumb, easily manipulated, and incompetent as Joe Biden residing in the Oval Office.

---

I improved your otherwise good post.

Here are the actual pardons. Scroll down to the bottom of the page. For the individuals, they go back 10 years. https://www.justice.gov/pardon/pardons-granted-president-joseph-biden-2021-present

annie88 said:

---

Wabs said:

---

You shouldn't be able to "pre-pardon" anybody for anything. What have any of them been charged with?

---

This. Doesn't seem legal to me.

---

The constitution says "offences." It doesn't say conviction, charges, or anything of the sort. You can certainly try to challenge a pardon, but you'd be better off giving a cat a bath. At least you would accomplish something productive doing that.

Pinochet said:

---

flakrat said:

---

1. This can't possibly stand up in the courts.
2. The President should lose all power to issue executive orders, pardons and any other tools that bypass checks and balances during the dead period between the election and the inauguration.

---

That's confusing. The pardon is a check on the judicial branch. And doesn't that essentially make the term shorter by 2.5 months? Not sure I'm on board with that. How would you have liked if Trump couldn't do anything from November 2020 to January 2021?

---

Nah, I would trade that for the abolition of the lame duck period entirely. No Obama meddling with Trump's incoming Nov 2016-January 2017, no Biden doing what he has done since Nov 5.

For Fauchi:


FOR ANY OFFENSES against the United States which he may have committed or taken part in during the period from January 1, 20 I 4, through the date of this pardon arising from or in any manner related to his service as Director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, as a member of the White House Coronavirus Task Force or the White House COVID-19 Response Team, or as Chief Medical Advisor to the President.

Milley:

FOR ANY OFFENSES against the United States, including but not limited to any offenses under the United States Code or the Uniform Code of Military Justice, which he may have committed or taken part in during the period from January l, 2014, through the date of this pardon arising from or in any manner related to his service as Chief of Staff of the U.S. Army or Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

Im Gipper said:

---

Milley:

FOR ANY OFFENSES against the United States, including but not limited to any offenses under the United States Code or the Uniform Code of Military Justice, which he may have committed or taken part in during the period from January l, 2014, through the date of this pardon arising from or in any manner related to his service as Chief of Staff of the U.S. Army or Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

---

Is this saying was a seditionist even starting with Obama????

Wow. That's incredible. What a dirtbag.

ETA: Trump should order his portrait removed and destroyed from the pentagon, as well as any other honorariums that have been put up regarding him.

Wonder if Biden is smart enough to pardon himself. All these people he's protecting can now testify against him with no repercussions.

No doubt it lead to many unnecessary deaths. Not trying to argue that point at all. I'm no legal beagle but Murder to me suggests you had some sort of motive to kill those that died tho and there were many screwy steps made by others that caused the release of the virus that I certainly don't if he know he had anything to do with or not.

I think the guy is very shady and did a lot of things wrong, but I am trying to sort thru what could they legally pin on him

Burdick v. United States (1915): In this case, the Supreme Court clarified that accepting a pardon implies an admission of guilt. George Burdick, a newspaper editor, was granted a pardon by President Woodrow Wilson but refused to accept it, arguing that acceptance would be an admission of guilt. The Supreme Court agreed, stating that a pardon "carries an imputation of guilt; acceptance a confession of it." This ruling underscores that a pardon cannot be forced upon someone; it must be accepted to be effective, and acceptance has implications for the perception of guilt.
[url=https://www.scotusblog.com/2021/01/the-supreme-court-and-the-presidents-pardon-power/amp/][/url]
[url=https://www.scotusblog.com/2021/01/the-supreme-court-and-the-presidents-pardon-power/amp/][/url]

BMX Bandit said:

---

From sock CinC:

President Biden issues pre-emptive pardons.

“That is why I am exercising my authority under the Constitution to pardon General Mark A. Milley, Dr. Anthony S. Fauci, the Members of Congress and staff who served on the Select Committee, and the U.S. Capitol and D.C. Metropolitan…

— Manu Raju (@mkraju) January 20, 2025

Quote:

---

That is why I am exercising my authority under the Constitution to pardon General Mark A. Milley, Dr. Anthony S. Fauci, the Members of Congress and staff who served on the Select Committee, and the U.S. Capitol and D.C. Metropolitan police officers who testified before the Select Committee. The issuance of these pardons should not be mistaken as an acknowledgment that any individual engaged in any wrongdoing, nor should acceptance be misconstrued as an admission of guilt for any offense. Our nation owes these public servants a debt of gratitude for their tireless commitment to our country.

---

I see this issue as a cover up of wrong doing and preventing any meaningful investigation into crimes these people committed.

I encourage dialogue from others.

\More info here

---

Is this a historical precedent? I do not ever remember an entire government appointed committee receiving pardons. And has the head of the NIH ever been pardoned?