Can we get rid of Presidential pardons? Trump knew he and his associates could get away with anything because of the pardons. I bet if the pardons were not there, they would have thought twice about some of the stuff they did.
It's improbable because you would have to amend the Constitution. I could see that happening if Trump pardons the Capitol invaders.
I've seen this discussed by several legal analyst have debated this recently regarding pardons of people like Roger Stone. The reasoning is that since they are no longer liable to prosecution claiming the 5th Amendment regarding a crime doesn't apply because they can't be prosecuting anymore for that crime. This doesn't mean you lose your 5th Amendment protections but just regarding that specific crime. That said this hasn't been tested yet and there is debate about it but with Trump and ongoing investigations it is something to be looked into. Here's a piece from Time on this. https://time.com/4868418/donald-trump-presidential-pardons-backfire/ How a Presidential Pardon Could Backfire President Trump is considering pardoning family members and staffers caught up in the Russia investigation, but legal experts warn that it could backfire by making it harder for them to avoid testifying. Under the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution, Americans are protected against self-incrimination, but people who have been pardoned are no longer under any legal jeopardy, Harvard Law School Professor Laurence Tribe told TIME. “Anyone pardoned by Trump would lose most of the 5th Amendment’s protection against compelled testimony that might otherwise have incriminated the pardoned family member or associate, making it much easier for DOJ and Congress to require such individuals to give testimony that could prove highly incriminating to Trump himself,” Tribe said in an email. Still, that could lead to another constitutional standoff, if the recipients of the Trump pardons refused to testify before Congress. Mark Osler, a University of St. Thomas Law School professor who has written about the president’s pardon powers, said Congress might respond by holding them in contempt, leading to a second pardon. “We could go to a second round of the abuse of the pardon power,” Osler said. “I mean if you’re willing to do it in the first place and abuse it that way I don’t see what the break would be in doing it at the second level.” A pardon would also strip special counsel Robert Mueller of a tool that prosecutors often use to get witnesses to cooperate: the plea bargain. In exchange for cooperation and an admission of guilt, targets of an investigation can get a more lenient charge and reduced sentence. “It takes the hammer away,” Osler said. “It would deprive Mueller of the ability to use cooperative defendants.” “I don’t know if he would want to do that because that could suggest guilt exists,” said Yale Law School Professor Cristina Rodríguez. “So, politically and strategically it would not be good for anyone involved.” So would pardons be a strategic move for the President? Osler says that in the long run, it will catch up with Trump. “I think it’s playing chess thinking one move ahead,” he said. “And I think Robert Mueller thinks three and four moves ahead. The legal minds on the Mueller team have considered this long ago.”
I think pardoned people can be compelled to testify before Congress. And if they lie there that's another chargeable offense.
The problem I see is the Republican stacked Supreme Court. They might though, since we now have a Democrat as President.
Changing the constitution isn't something the Supreme Court can stop, afaik. I guess they could interpret it so poorly that it is a waste of time? The Supreme Court says what is or isn't constitutional.... and getting the states to ratify a constitutional amendment literally changes the operating system, as it were.
I'm sorry, but Tribe has lost credibility after he intentionally misquoted the constitution to write that other article (about the president's ability to pardon after impeached). What about state crimes? "I plead the 5th." "But Mr. Kushner, you've already been pardoned. There is no way you can incriminate yourself." "I've been advised by my attorney that presidential pardons only impact federal crimes. And that I'm invoking my 5th amendment right against self incrimination." "But Mr. Kushner, we're asking you about this specific crime, not state crimes." "I'm neither confirming nor denying that my compelled answer could be connected to state crimes. So I'm invoking my constitutional right to not self incriminate." It's another aspirational argument about what the law should be and not what it is. And the arguments are full of "Congress might do this" and "maybe that could happen" - so much couching just to get something published. The Mueller report was extensive and crazy from all the shenanigans McGhan revealed. But they lost the political chess game when Barr pulled his stunt. And Trump still used his pardon power to impact convictions arising from that criminal investigation into the actions of a president...and nothing happened (as in no challenges in court). So, yeah, I hope this plays out because as I've stated. Trump is the ultimate Constitutional stress test, and we need it. It's like Bar Rescue when Taffer floods the bar with a thousand people and the bar is overwhelmed. That's Trump. You never think you'll need to prepare for something so crazy until crazy happens x10. If he were competent, he could have done so much more damage. Unfortunately, I think competent lawyers would make it easy for courts to preserve the 5th Amendemnt and pardon powers. The courts and SCOTUS are full of originalist judges. The 5th has already been incorporated to the states (at least the self-incrimination part), so pleading it will be easy in any congressional hearing.
It's too bad that the Supreme Court has totally neutered federal bribery laws. There are laws on the books designed to prevent this sort of thing but proving the actual presence of a quid pro quo is nearly impossible (unless one party had it in writing or is recorded). I don't think you have to necessarily change the pardon power to limit this (which would require a constitutional amendment) as Congress could pass stronger anti-bribery laws for public officials (although you probably need a more liberal supreme court for that).
When you get this group of cons & Grifters together the pardon list is surely going to have very close ties to their corruption, lies, and money train. "Trump met Sunday with his son-in-law, Jared Kushner, daughter Ivanka Trump and other aides for a significant amount of the day to review a long list of pardon requests..." https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...57969c-5905-11eb-a976-bad6431e03e2_story.html
I agree it's not a completely solid argument but if applied narrowly I could see how it works. Consider pardon as basically a grant of immunity which we see prosecutors frequently use to compel testimony. In this case if the investigation has a narrow focus Congress could compel testimony on an issue of specifically Federal concern, such as what was done during Trump's time in office. If the person who has pardoned invokes the 5th they just hold them in contempt of COngress since the subject matter of the investigation has already been pardoned. Congress has no say over state charges and Trump isn't there to pardon them further for contempt of Congress.
Trump loves The White Collar Criminals https://www.nj.com/politics/2021/01...nter-of-sen-menendez-scandal-report-says.html On his final day in office, President Donald Trump is eyeing clemency for Dr. Salomon Melgen, the currently imprisoned Florida ophthalmologist who was tied to Sen. Robert Menendez’s corruption case, according to a new CNN report. Trump, who will be leaving office Wednesday, will be granting pardons to roughly 100 people, ranging from criminal justice reform-related pardons to political allies, CNN reported Monday, citing three anonymous sources. The president is able to issue pardons up until he leaves office at noon, and it has traditionally been among the final actions before a presidency ends. Melgen, 66, is currently in prison after being convicted on dozens of counts of health care fraud, including submitting false claims and falsifying patient files. In 2018, he was sentenced to 17 years after he was found guilty of stealing $73 million from Medicare. The disgraced eye doctor may be most well-known for his lavish gifts and donations to Menendez, a Democrat, which landed the doctor in court over charges of fraud and bribery in 2013. The pair met at a fundraiser in 1993, when Menendez had been recently sworn in as New Jersey’s first Hispanic congressman. Melgen, a wealthy eye doctor who specialized in surgery of the vitreous and retina, had offices in Florida that were no stranger to celebrities. They kept in touch over the years. Melgen told Bloomberg News they were “like brothers, like friends” in 2013. In 2017, prosecutors alleged Melgen had provided Menendez with six-figure campaign contributions, luxury gifts and private plane flights in exchange for Menendez’s intervention on the doctor’s behalf in an $1.9 million Medicare dispute, as well as the visa applications of the doctor’s girlfriends and a contested port security contract in the Dominican Republic, where Melgen is originally from. After a contentious 11-week trial that ended with a deadlocked jury, a federal judge declared a mistrial and the case was never retried. Menendez has maintained his innocence since the Justice Department announced the indictment against the longtime friends on April 1, 2015. According to CNN, Trump’s pardon shouldn’t be a surprise solely based on Menendez’s politics, but because Melgen is seen as a wealthy and influential resident of South Florida. Following a violent siege on the Capitol and dozens of corporations cutting ties with the president, Trump is reportedly planning to spend his post-presidency months at the Mar-a-Lago club in Palm Beach. During his time in office, Trump has granted clemency to more than 90 people, including Charles Kushner, the father of Jared Kushner and the disgraced-developer who was prosecuted by then-U.S. attorney Chris Christie. CNN reported that neither Wikileaks founder Julian Assange, who is being held in a London prison, nor the president himself, are currently believed to be on the pardon list. Allies have also reportedly warned against pardoning supporters charged with breaking into the Capitol on Jan. 6.
Yeah, I'm no legal expert, but it's disappointing to watch Turley and Tribe carted out over and over again only to see -- what do you know -- their arguments always support their respective "teams." Not doing their credibility any favors, though maybe it helps build social media following. *Barfs*
Okay, I can see the logic there. I'm still unconvinced because Kushner, for example, could plead the 5th (because it's his Constitutional right) and say anything Congress compells him to talk about could be used as evidence against him in a state criminal proceeding. They can't prove that statement false. He'll just plead the 5th and if Congress holds him in contempt, he can sue to say they're violating his constitutional rights and he'll win. Either way, I really hope this crazy scenario plays out. Trump has shown the weaknesses of norms and our institutions, and we need to continue to adapt.
True this would likely be litigated but claiming the 5th Amendment over any potential future charge I'm not sure works otherwise granting immunity for testimony wouldn't work as a strategy. Again I think any testimony and investigation regarding this would have to be narrowly focused.
Tiger King star Joe Exotic's camp has celebration planned amid hopes President Donald Trump will pardon him from 22-year sentence in murder-for-hire conviction https://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowb...-hopes-President-Donald-Trump-pardon-him.html
When a witness is granted immunity to testify, that witness is voluntarily cooperating. And whatever testimony that witness has still may be used against him in a court of law where the immunity didn't extend to.
