View Poll Results: If Trump preemptively pardons Russiagate suspects.....is that Obstruction of Justice?

Voters
20. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    12 60.00%
  • No.

    7 35.00%
  • Not sure

    1 5.00%
Page 7 of 8 FirstFirst ... 5678 LastLast
Results 61 to 70 of 75
Thanks Tree57Thanks

Thread: If Trump preemptively pardons Russiagate suspects.....is that Obstruction of Justice?

  1. #61
    Undercovfefe Agents TennesseeRain's Avatar
    Joined
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    83,850
    Thanks
    53311

    From
    In the Witness Protection Program
    Quote Originally Posted by Babba View Post
    Exactly. Trump can pardon his pee-picikin' little heart out, it ain't gonna help. The states will be free to continue on their merry way.

    Also, legally, I don't believe Trump pardoning people can be seen as obstruction.
    It wouldn’t be, but pardoning people means they are acknowledging their guilt which means they are also waiving their right against self incrimination if subpoenaed to testify
    Thanks from Babba

  2. #62
    A Character Tennyson's Avatar
    Joined
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    2,178
    Thanks
    494

    From
    Barsoom
    Article II's presidential pardon power is plenary. The Constitution enumerates one exception that precludes the President's pardon power and that exception is someone in the midst of impeachment. Obstruction of justice is statutory, is not an Article II preclusion, and does not trump a constitutional power.

  3. #63
    Veteran Member Devil505's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    62,673
    Thanks
    19703

    From
    Mass and Florida
    Quote Originally Posted by Babba View Post
    Also, legally, I don't believe Trump pardoning people can be seen as obstruction.
    If the United States can prove a corrupt intent to obstruct justice was the purpose of a pardon, why would that be exempt from OoJ charges?

    Bottom line is do we have kings in this country or merely citizen reps and administrators as the founding fathers intended?

    Republicans think their presidents are kings while Dem presidents are merely elected citizens. (unless of course the Dem president is black in which case they aren't even legitimate presidents.....they are uppity slaves.
    Last edited by Devil505; 17th December 2017 at 07:18 AM.
    Thanks from EnigmaO01

  4. #64
    Veteran Member Devil505's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    62,673
    Thanks
    19703

    From
    Mass and Florida
    Quote Originally Posted by Tennyson View Post
    Article II's presidential pardon power is plenary. The Constitution enumerates one exception that precludes the President's pardon power and that exception is someone in the midst of impeachment. Obstruction of justice is statutory, is not an Article II preclusion, and does not trump a constitutional power.
    The SCOTUS interprets the meaning of the constitution, not you.
    Those "Opinions" can change over time but their force of law doesn't.
    Last edited by Devil505; 17th December 2017 at 07:23 AM.

  5. #65
    Veteran Member Southern Dad's Avatar
    Joined
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    35,957
    Thanks
    7366

    From
    Shady Dale, Georgia
    President George H W Bush pardoned 6 involved in the Iran Contra Affair. President Jimmy Carter pardoned all draft dodgers. I understand that it makes those who want to prosecute mad but it is a power that was given by our founding fathers to the executive branch as a check and balance. It is not obstruction of justice.
    Thanks from bmanmcfly

  6. #66
    A Character Tennyson's Avatar
    Joined
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    2,178
    Thanks
    494

    From
    Barsoom
    Quote Originally Posted by Devil505 View Post
    If the United States can prove a corrupt intent to obstruct justice was the purpose of a pardon, why would that be exempt from OoJ charges?

    Bottom line is do we have kings in this country or merely citizen reps and administrators as the founding fathers intended?

    Republicans think their presidents are kings while Dem presidents are merely elected citizens. (unless of course the Dem president is black in which case they aren't even legitimate presidents.....they are uppity slaves.
    There is no mens rea component to Article II's pardon power.

  7. #67
    Veteran Member Devil505's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    62,673
    Thanks
    19703

    From
    Mass and Florida
    Quote Originally Posted by Southern Dad View Post
    President George H W Bush pardoned 6 involved in the Iran Contra Affair. President Jimmy Carter pardoned all draft dodgers. I understand that it makes those who want to prosecute mad but it is a power that was given by our founding fathers to the executive branch as a check and balance. It is not obstruction of justice.
    That's your meaningless opinion.
    No one is above the law....not even a traitor president installed in office by a fgn enemy.

  8. #68
    A Character Tennyson's Avatar
    Joined
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    2,178
    Thanks
    494

    From
    Barsoom
    Quote Originally Posted by Devil505 View Post
    The SCOTUS interprets the meaning of the constitution, not you.
    Those "Opinions" can change over time but their force of law doesn't.
    There is no mention of interpreting the Constitution in Article III.

    Opinions can change over time, but the meaning and intent of the Constitution does not. That is the purpose of the Constitution and why it was created to protect against human nature.

  9. #69
    Veteran Member Devil505's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    62,673
    Thanks
    19703

    From
    Mass and Florida
    Quote Originally Posted by Tennyson View Post
    There is no mens rea component to Article II's pardon power.
    LOL....
    Mens rea eh?
    From where did you receive your law degree?
    How long have you practiced law?
    Are yo a member of the ABA?
    More likely, are you just someone who's watched a few episodes of Perry Mason?

  10. #70
    Veteran Member Devil505's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    62,673
    Thanks
    19703

    From
    Mass and Florida
    Quote Originally Posted by Tennyson View Post
    There is no mention of interpreting the Constitution in Article III.
    Watch what happens if Nixon....err Trump pardons Flynn or anyone involved in Russiagate.


    Quote Originally Posted by Tennyson View Post
    Opinions can change over time, but the meaning and intent of the Constitution does not. That is the purpose of the Constitution and why it was created to protect against human nature.
    The meaning and intent of the constitution has been interpreted by the SCOTUS since Marbury v Madison.

    Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. (1 Cranch) 137 (1803), is a landmark case by the United States Supreme Court which forms the basis for the exercise of judicial review in the United States under Article III of the Constitution.

Page 7 of 8 FirstFirst ... 5678 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. What is Trump engaging in "Obstruction of Justice" , Alex?
    By the watchman in forum Current Events
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 23rd August 2017, 11:32 AM
  2. Mueller Investigating Trump Possible Obstruction of Justice
    By HayJenn in forum Political Discussion
    Replies: 374
    Last Post: 17th June 2017, 07:52 PM
  3. Replies: 24
    Last Post: 11th June 2017, 12:40 PM
  4. Replies: 8
    Last Post: 23rd May 2017, 01:54 PM

Tags for this Thread


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed