So... can Trump pardon himself?

[hollodero]

Since he himself allegedly asked that, I feel free to do so as well, it seems the question is not as bizarre as one might believe. Could he? And if he would pardon himself (and Flynn Manafort and whoever), what would happen then? That's that, everyone's going home?

Is a pardon selfie the ultimate joker then? Could he, like he implied he could do without losing support, actually shoot someone in the streets, quickly pull the pardon and get away with it?

Can a president who pardoned himself still plead the fifth in an impeachment hearing, although there's maybe no one to "incriminate"? Can he lie under oath without any legal repercussions?

This is all so weird...!

[Dill]

(07-21-2017, 03:59 AM)hollodero Wrote: Since he himself allegedly asked that, I feel free to do so as well, it seems the question is not as bizarre as one might believe. Could he? And if he would pardon himself (and Flynn Manafort and whoever), what would happen then? That's that, everyone's going home?

Is a pardon selfie the ultimate joker then? Could he, like he implied he could do without losing support, actually shoot someone in the streets, quickly pull the pardon and get away with it?

Can a president who pardoned himself still plead the fifth in an impeachment hearing, although there's maybe no one to "incriminate"? Can he lie under oath without any legal repercussions?

This is all so weird...!

Doubtful. But I think know one could no for sure until he did it. Then whatever he pardoned himself for, as soon as he was out of office, a prosecutor would have to bring charges. Then the legality would be sorted out in an actual trial.  At least that's how one of the talking heads on MSNBC explained it.

Also, if you accept a pardon, that is an admission of guilt.  Further, if you accept a pardon, or believe you have a pardon, then you cannot plead the 5th because you are not threatened with punishment.  All this was considered by Nixon, who apparently refused to do it. He thought it was "dishonorable."

If Trump is impeached, then that won't be like a regular courtroom trial. If it is the impression of enough Congressmen that he is guilty of high crimes and misdemeanors, then it won't matter if he refuses to speak or lies under oath.

Also, according to one reporter who had been speaking to Trump supporters, they didn't care if he is/was guilty of financial misdeeds with the Russians.  We do have Trump supporters in the forum who might give their views on this, but they haven't had much to say of late.

The bright side of Trump's recent shenanigans would be that Mueller appears to be delving into Trump's finances. Trump's desperate efforts to forestall that will more likely trigger impeachment than the actual high crimes, and sooner.

I know Trump knows nothing about government. But you'd think he'd know at least something about the law. Giving a Time interview in which he complains that his AG followed the law is another jaw dropper. I believe he also thought the FBI director reported directly to him.

[GMDino]

I asked the same question in the impeachment thread.

I don't know how it would work either.

[*michaelsean*]

He can't pardon himself from impeachment, but the rest is untested waters.

[Vlad]

You folks thirst for Trump to be guilty of something soooooooooooo bad you had to start another thread!

It's become comical!

[GMDino]

(07-21-2017, 09:10 AM)michaelsean Wrote: He can't pardon himself from impeachment, but the rest is untested waters.

I figured that.

If it is true that he is already asking about who who can pardon I fear that giving Trump more power than he ever had did not make him the better/more presidential person that his supporters thought might happen if he was elected. 

[Vlad]

(07-21-2017, 05:40 AM)Dill Wrote: I know Trump knows nothing about government. But you'd think he'd know at least something about the law. Giving a Time interview in which he complains that his AG followed the law is another jaw dropper. I believe he also thought the FBI director reported directly to him.

He demonstrated he knows something about the law when he said Hillary should be in jail.

Aside from that you're probably referring to when Trump said he would have not appointed Sessions had he known he would recuse himself from this Russian BS. Yes, recusal is governed by federal law and varies from state to state but even someone as knowledgeable as myself looked it up to be sure.

So here we have an example Jeff Sessions being forthright and abiding by the rule of law, while out of the other side of
 your mouth in another thread you folks will rant and rave about how evil and disingenuous the man is.

[GMDino]

(07-21-2017, 09:40 AM)Vlad Wrote: He demonstrated he knows something about the law when he said Hillary should be in jail.

Aside from that you're probably referring to when Trump said he would have not appointed Sessions had he known he would recuse himself from this Russian BS. Yes, recusal is governed by federal law and varies from state to state but even someone as knowledgeable as myself looked it up to be sure.

So here we have an example Jeff Sessions being forthright and abiding by the rule of law, while out of the other side of
 your mouth in another thread you folks will rant and rave about how evil and disingenuous the man is.

If Trump did know something and Clinton should be in jail why didn't he prosecute her?  Like he said he would.

Virtually every source has pointed out that in that Times interview Trump made several mistakes that the POTUS should not make.

I'm sure some of it is his not caring to learn, some comes from his very limited vocabulary, and some is because he truly thinks he is completely in charge and can do whatever he wants.

[Belsnickel]

In theory, he could pardon himself if he was not removed from office by Congress upon any sort of criminal prosecution and conviction. But, the waters of prosecuting the Executive are untested. The SCOTUS almost took up this issue with Nixon, but he resigned before it was brought before the court and it became moot.

[Vlad]

(07-21-2017, 05:40 AM)Dill Wrote: The bright side of Trump's recent shenanigans would be that Mueller appears to be delving into Trump's finances. Trump's desperate efforts to forestall that will more likely trigger impeachment than the actual high crimes, and sooner.

 Riiiight "shenanigans".  lol

No Trump can't pardon himself, but he can fire Mueller and his posse.

As well he should.

The job of Mueller and the special council is to find fault somewhere. They are prosecutors and prosecute is what they do. They will find wrongdoing no matter how petty or unreasonable the finding....enter your shenanigans.
There has never been an instance in which a special council hasn't. This will be the most in depth and massive investigation ever.

What would be the justification for firing Mueller?

Muellers team is comprised of over a dozen prosecutors and their assistants, each one a scumbag Hillary or Obama supporter and donor.

Enough said.




Muellers buddy is Comey too.
Mueller should be as ingenious as Sessions and recuse himself.

[Belsnickel]

(07-21-2017, 10:11 AM)Vlad Wrote:  Riiiight "shenanigans".  lol

No Trump can't pardon himself, but he can fire Mueller and his posse.

As well he should.

The job of Mueller and the special council is to find fault somewhere. They are prosecutors and prosecute is what they do. They will find wrongdoing no matter how petty or unreasonable the finding....enter the shenanigans.
There has never been an instance in which a special council hasn't. This will be the most in depth and massive investigation ever.

What would be the justification for firing Mueller?

Muellers team is comprised of over a dozen prosecutors and their assistants, each one a scumbag Hillary or Obama supporter and donor. Muellers buddy is Comey.

Enough said.

Only Rosenstein can fire Mueller, and only for cause. Trump could fire Rosenstein, or he could seek repeal of the special counsel regulations that make this the case.

Also, the idea that all of Mueller's team are Clinton or Obama supporter is false. It's fake news, to use a term so popular these days. You should do some fact checking before regurgitating it. Some of the team have made no political contributions, one has made contributions to both Democrat and Republican candidates. But, since the Hatch Act allows federal employees to make political contributions and do not trigger a bias issue, this is a moot point, regardless.

[Griever]

(07-21-2017, 09:40 AM)Vlad Wrote: He demonstrated he knows something about the law when he said Hillary should be in jail.

Aside from that you're probably referring to when Trump said he would have not appointed Sessions had he known he would recuse himself from this Russian BS. Yes, recusal is governed by federal law and varies from state to state but even someone as knowledgeable as myself looked it up to be sure.

So here we have an example Jeff Sessions being forthright and abiding by the rule of law, while out of the other side of
 your mouth in another thread you folks will rant and rave about how evil and disingenuous the man is.

he said that only to get the votes, he all but admitted when he said at a rally after he won that "it sounded good then, but now we dont care"

he played you for fools

[GMDino]

(07-21-2017, 10:25 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: Only Rosenstein can fire Mueller, and only for cause. Trump could fire Rosenstein, or he could seek repeal of the special counsel regulations that make this the case.

Huh....has that ever happened before?

(07-21-2017, 10:25 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: Also, the idea that all of Mueller's team are Clinton or Obama supporter is false. It's fake news, to use a term so popular these days. You should do some fact checking before regurgitating it. Some of the team have made no political contributions, one has made contributions to both Democrat and Republican candidates. But, since the Hatch Act allows federal employees to make political contributions and do not trigger a bias issue, this is a moot point, regardless.

Really I just assumed it was false. Trump has become the boy who cried wolf. Can't believe anything he says.

[Dill]

(07-21-2017, 09:40 AM)Vlad Wrote: He demonstrated he knows something about the law when he said Hillary should be in jail.

Aside from that you're probably referring to when Trump said he would have not appointed Sessions had he known he would recuse himself from this Russian BS. Yes, recusal is governed by federal law and varies from state to state but even someone as knowledgeable as myself looked it up to be sure.

So here we have an example Jeff Sessions being forthright and abiding by the rule of law, while out of the other side of
 your mouth in another thread you folks will rant and rave about how evil and disingenuous the man is.

There's a lot more you need to "look up." LOL All the whataboutery in the world won't throw Mueller off track.

So here we have an example of Sessions caught "forgetting" his meetings with the Russian ambassador. Then, when he is outed, he abides by the law--and Trump publicly disses him for that, speaking as if the AG's job were to protect Trump's nefarious interests.

The issue is not that Sessions is "forthright," but rather that Trump preferred an AG beholden to him personally, not the Constitution, which the AG is sworn to uphold.  What is jawdropping is that Trump did not seem to know what he was saying. His supporters still don't.

[Dill]

(07-21-2017, 09:13 AM)Vlad Wrote: You folks thirst for Trump to be guilty of something soooooooooooo bad you had to start another thread!

It's become comical!

Trump isn't laughing--not when a special counsel is looking into the financial information he withheld during the campaign.

When a guy who thinks in public starts figuring out ways to shut down the Russia investigation, we can only wonder at the absence of situational awareness, shared by his supporters.

B-b-b-but Hillary this or that!!! Or something?

[Mike M (the other one)]

(07-21-2017, 10:29 AM)Griever Wrote: he said that only to get the votes, he all but admitted when he said at a rally after he won that "it sounded good then, but now we dont care"

he played you for fools

No doubt Hillary never said anything to get votes either...
Why waste taxpayer dollars on something that will be tied up for years in court? She's already a proven liar.

Bye Bye Spicer.

[GMDino]

(07-21-2017, 02:12 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: No doubt Hillary never said anything to get votes either...
Why waste taxpayer dollars on something that will be tied up for years in court? She's already a proven liar.

I think point is if someone wants to use the "Clinton should be in jail" as proof that Trump ever got something right/told the truth then he looks even worse for not prosecuting her.

It's not like Trump is afraid to litigate any one at any time.

[Dill]

(07-21-2017, 10:11 AM)Vlad Wrote: No Trump can't pardon himself, but he can fire Mueller and his posse.

As well he should.

The job of Mueller and the special council is to find fault somewhere. They are prosecutors and prosecute is what they do. They will find wrongdoing no matter how petty or unreasonable the finding....enter your shenanigans.
There has never been an instance in which a special council hasn't. This will be the most in depth and massive investigation ever.
What would be the justification for firing Mueller?
Muellers team is comprised of over a dozen prosecutors and their assistants, each one a scumbag Hillary or Obama supporter and donor.
Enough said.
Muellers buddy is Comey too.
Mueller should be as ingenious as Sessions and recuse himself.

But prosecutors were doing the Lord's work when they went after Hillary, no matter how petty or unreasonable the finding. No "scumbag" Republican supporters on the Benghazi committees, right?

This post just has to be a prank. Not hard to believe that a flailing Trump-in-trouble blows smoke in every direction--but why does that work this well on Trump supporters?

Even Republican lawmakers extol the reputation of their fellow Republican Mueller, who got into his position through decades of work which earned him a reputation of even handedness and effectiveness. Now you talk about him like you are writing for Pravda, repeating every bit of Trump disinformation.

Once again, your argument rests mainly upon adjectives.

[hollodero]

(07-21-2017, 10:11 AM)Vlad Wrote: each one a scumbag Hillary or Obama supporter and donor.

Enough said.

Indeed.

(07-21-2017, 10:25 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: Only Rosenstein can fire Mueller, and only for cause. Trump could fire Rosenstein.

...or Sessions, right? A new Attorney General would not be recused, hence could also fire Mueller. Or am I getting this wrong.
If I don't, it would be a viable explanation for Trump's recent attacks on him.

(07-21-2017, 09:05 AM)GMDino Wrote: I asked the same question in the impeachment thread.

Oh sorry, wasn't aware. Just thought this is a fascinating possibility. The world would laugh at that so hard.

[Dill]

(07-21-2017, 02:12 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: No doubt Hillary never said anything to get votes either...
Why waste taxpayer dollars on something that will be tied up for years in court? She's already a proven liar.

Bye Bye Spicer.

Hillary is not presently under investigation for colluding with a foreign adversary to throw the US elections. And the FBI and AG do not drop a case because it will "waste taxpayer dollars" and tie up the courts; wouldn't the Mafia, drug cartels, and deep-pocketed corporate miscreants love that!  No, they drop it because there is no basis for prosecution.

"Hillary is a proven liar"--what does that even mean when you support someone who is everyday a proven liar--and about matters of state, a man who would never release his tax returns, as "crooked" Hillary did for decades.

Trump is "thinking out loud" about how to shut down an FBI investigation into his Russian connections. What in the world did Hillary EVER do that rises to that level?