Im Gipper said:

---

Quote:

---

Yuge news. That means Hunter and Fauci can be prosecuted.

---

While it would be nice, the House Committee has no power to declare this.

They cannot decide who can be prosecuted or not.

(By the way, Hunter didn't get the autopen)

---

Exactly. Auto pen has even been used for legislation while the president has been out of the country. Any prosecution of someone covered by an auto pen pardon will result in quick dismissal.

I wouldn't say that.

It might put some pressure on DoJ to do something.

They would need to indict and arrest Fauci (for example) and let a Court decide if the autopen pardon is valid.

Rapier108 said:

---

Going to be up to the Supreme Court to decide if this is true or not.

---

I doubt it even makes it there.

They're not null. That's not what the article says. We would have a long way to go even if Bondi went after this.

Conservatives on the committee advise Bondi that the 4,245 presidential pardons and commutations issued by the Democrat, 82, should therefore be placed under review and could be considered invalid

JP Court Magistrate in Kalawao County Hawaii just issued a galaxy wide injunction against all Republican House Oversight findings. The magistrate's order stated, "Republicans in Congress should stay in their lane and not overstep their constitutionally limited role."

Quote:

---

They're not null. That's not what the article says.

---

Need a staph edit on the OP

Im Gipper said:

---

Quote:

---

(By the way, Hunter didn't get the autopen)

---

---

Well that's weird, it's almost like they expected the Republicans to challenge the authenticity of POTATUS' thousands of pardons.

Who knows if this ends up being a nothing burger, but those that received pardons and joey b's "handlers" and "enablers" will have to defend and explain the actions around the pardons. Discovery will be a *****.

Will be a joy to see the June 6th TDS-afflicted commission members spin their wheels, spend money on lawyers... esp. Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger.

The committee has that opinion. That is accurate. What is yet to be determined is if that opinion is found to be valid and prevails.

Sims said:

---

Im Gipper said:

---

Quote:

---

(By the way, Hunter didn't get the autopen)

---

---

Well that's weird, it's almost like they expected the Republicans to challenge the authenticity of POTATUS' thousands of pardons.

---

EXACTLY!!

Trajan88 said:

---

Who knows if this ends up being a nothing burger, but those that received pardons and joey b's "handlers" and "enablers" will have to defend and explain the actions around the pardons. Discovery will be a *****.

Will be a joy to see the June 6th TDS-afflicted commission members spin their wheels, spend money on lawyers... esp. Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger.

---

It will be dismissed well before discovery

At any rate, we'll be having a Presidential funeral for Biden before any of this truly shakes out.

I'm betting that it will be before Trump leaves office. And then, we'll see...

Im Gipper said:

---

Quote:

---

Yuge news. That means Hunter and Fauci can be prosecuted.

---

While it would be nice, the House Committee has no power to declare this.

They cannot decide who can be prosecuted or not.

(By the way, Hunter didn't get the autopen)

---

That's not how it works. You subpoena the person to testify.

Then you criminally refer the person.

Then the DOJ brings charges.

Then it's kicked to the SCOTUS ultimately.

That's not how what works?

Committees can't declare pardons invalid.

They want DoJ to investigate the autopen issue.

This likely never sees SCOTUS

Who has the burden of proof that the autopen pardons are legit?

To start, a pardon does not have to even be signed.

As for burden, I don't think there is a clear answer. But my guess is that the pardon document will be considered prima facie evidence and the DoJ will have to rebut it as being valid.

TexAgs91 said:

---

Who has the burden of proof that the autopen pardons are legit?

---

Those saying it's invalid. Courts have already said pardons don't even have to be signed. You also have a republican White House legal counsel memo from 20 years ago saying that autopen is valid for both pardons and legislation.

The biggest hurdle is Biden saying that he authorized the pardons and with the deference presidents are given it's going to be impossible to counter that. You can't claim he was inept because the only constitutional determination of that is the 25th amendment.

Im Gipper said:

---

That's not how what works?

Committees can't declare pardons invalid.

They want DoJ to investigate the autopen issue.

This likely never sees SCOTUS

---

So if DOJ investigates and brings charges against a pardoned individual, nothing happens?!

Ya, it gets dismissed or doesn't even make it out of grand jury because they have a pardon. It would be the DC district and draw a DC federal judge.

Quote:

---

So if DOJ investigates and brings charges against a pardoned individual, nothing happens?!

---

Where did I say anything to suggest that?


What happens is, the person files a motion to dismiss the indictment. The District Court then makes a ruling. It would be an uphill battle to survive the dismissal, but without knowing all the facts, one cannot say for sure what would happen!


For Tesla: the grand jury would not hear about a pardon

And not a thing will happen. Yawn

Doesn't this whole controversy fall apart if Biden just says, yes I approved all of those?

It would be very juicy if he looked at a list, and said NO to some of them!

This is another Comer and Jordan thing right? Yawn.

Hunter's is legit seemingly, but .................

Just indict Fauci and let the process begin. WWDD?

Well, they would be arresting every R out there just to put them through the process.

In Fauci's case, we have endless smoking guns. Pick one and let's get the ball rolling. American history deserves this.

x pardons

couple issues on the pardons would be broad-based pre-emptive and validity (based on signature/authority)

not sure if Brookings is left, center or right-leaning, but my suspicion is that there are a LOT of left leaning writings out there (written in the context of trump doing this) saying a broad-based pre-emptive pardon is invalid They would have to be read with the understanding that the reasoning is likely flawed (as we see with most TDS thought processes). There are probably a small amount of right-leaning writings of course saying the opposite. Nonetheless, broad-based pre-emptive pardons (not pre-emptive, but broad-based pre-emptive) remains unanswered it seems. ("There are several reasons to expect that a broad pre-emptive pardon would be held invalid."). https://www.brookings.edu/articles/presidential-pardons-settled-law-unsettled-issues-and-a-downside-for-trump/#:~:text=Although%20the%20Constitution%20speaks%20of,crime%20the%20thief%20commits%20tomorrow.

Then it comes to authority. Not aware of it being tested in courts. Inclination is that it would be treated like an affirmative defense after indictment. It would be a generally easy to burden to reach, with a lot of presumptions built in to the validity. Discovery could be interesting, but Courts would probably be very hesitant to undo it. Autopen versus wet signature probably wouldn't matter. Whether the "President" issued the pardon would be. Congress would have little to no say in any of it. Inclination.

Not expecting any of this to be tested or addressed except in soundbites and tweets.

The pardons were a roadmap to corruption, so its unfortunate nothing will likely happen.

Theoretically you could be anyone with access to the president in a setting without witnesses and once the president is incapacitated or passes you could claim to have been pardoned and nobody could contest the claim, because the constitution doesn't required it to be documented or witnessed.