General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsBefore Biden leaves office he must "pardon" Jack Smith
Not that Jack did anything wrong, but Chump will make his life miserable, maybe even have him killed. MAGA-cultists have threatened his entire family.
Also Biden should "pardon" Dr. Anthony Fauci for the same reason. He hasn't done anything wrong but Chump will make Fauci's life miserable once he's back in the White House.
Chump's only goal is revenge.
JohnSJ
(96,907 posts)sop
(11,875 posts)FakeNoose
(36,184 posts)They would be turning cartwheels trying to figure out what to charge him with.
sop
(11,875 posts)JohnSJ
(96,907 posts)body guards for his whole family.
It is only fitting and pardon all who was a patriot while he is at it like Liz and Adam as well as others..
Ocelot II
(121,844 posts)When Ford pardoned Nixon, he granted "a full, free, and absolute pardon .... for all offenses against the United States which he, Richard Nixon, has committed or may have committed or taken part in during the period from January 20, 1969 through August 9, 1974." A similar pardon could be granted to the "enemies" for unspecified offenses they committed or may have committed or taken part in. That way nobody has to confess to anything (just like Nixon never confessed to anything).
kerry-is-my-prez
(9,454 posts)dalton99a
(85,166 posts)ancianita
(39,036 posts)Weissman/Murray book, The Trials of Donald Trump. Even if the convicted criminal Trump disregards the pardons. As president it's the right thing for Biden to do.
RockRaven
(16,606 posts)prevent any of that but the last step, the trial. If the DOJ/FBI really are going to be corrupted and politicized then they will still engage in unjustified investigations, leaks and smears, demand documents and interviews, cause massive legal expenses, etc.
The pardon only becomes specifically useful once they land in a courtroom. Everything which the DOJ/FBI does up to that point they can also do to a person who has been pardoned, under the guise that they have useful information about other peoples' crimes.
Pardons aren't a magical blanket protection from the DOJ/FBI -- not without norms and procedures to make them so, and norms and procedures can be changed.
hadEnuf
(2,844 posts)See how bold the MAGATs are then.
Diraven
(1,110 posts)Pretty sure there have to at least be some charges first. Otherwise we're going to get into a cycle where every outgoing president is literally going to pardon thousands of people in their administration and their party members on their way out of office. And Republicans will look at this as a blank check to commit every crime they think they can get away with hiding for 4 years.
FakeNoose
(36,184 posts)Also Dr. Fauci as well as the House Select Committee for Investigating January 6th.
Chump WILL get his revenge on these innocent people. This can't be allowed.
soldierant
(8,075 posts)but it was a thing in England for centuries. It was customary to give such a pardon to anyone leaving the King's service, for this exact reason = tp prevent later authorities from taking real or imagined revenge.
And, apparently, at the time, it worked.
Rstrstx
(1,578 posts)I think it was more like he decided they weren't going to bother to keep investigating so everyone could forget about the whole embarrassing thing.
Ocelot II
(121,844 posts)When Ford pardoned Nixon, the pardon applied to "all offenses against the United States which he, Richard Nixon, has committed or may have committed or taken part in during the period from January 20, 1969 through August 9, 1974." In other words, the crimes don't have to be specified or even charged, and they can include any that the person may have committed or participated in. If a president has an actual enemies list and has specifically threatened to prosecute the people on it, pardoning them in this fashion is probably the only way to protect them, even though they haven't actually committed any crimes - "may have" is good enough. And no, accepting a pardon doesn't constitute a confession; that's a common misinterpretation of Burdick v. United States.
explanation.
Diraven
(1,110 posts)It doesn't mean that's how the law actually works. It was never tested legally.
Martin Eden
(13,644 posts)I highly doubt Jack Smith would accept a pardon.
Paladin
(29,074 posts)It is preposterously obvious that innocence is no protection whatsoever against trump's insane need for mindless vengeance. Smith and Fauci are among many worthy public servants who need pardons---regardless of what the MAGA assholes (and their NY Times enablers) might think. I repeat: This is preposterously obvious.
Martin Eden
(13,644 posts)If President Biden granted sweeping pardons to everyone on Trumps enemies list, outrage in the MSM would make the brouhaha over Hunter's pardon a minor footnote.
In the rightwing media landscape, the pardons would be touted as proof positive that Biden ran a criminal organization in collusion with corrupt media that conspired in a witch hunt and weaponization of the Justice Dept against Trump and conservatives in general.
And a large segment of the gullible public would believe that narrative. Mainstream media would wallow in bothsiderism, blunting any negative coverage of the Trump regime.
Provided with tacit acknowledgment of crimes inherent in Biden's pardons, the Rethug Congress would conduct endless hearings and investigations to deflect attention from the real crimes being committed by Trump and his rogues gallery of villains.
But rest assured, Biden will not issue such pardons.