Establishment Dems: Well, OK. Just this once.
Yes, but only for federal crimes, not state charges. It’s kind of a moot act for official acts, because the Supreme Court already stated presidents are immune to prosecution for official acts, so they’d have to pardon themselves for personal criminal acts. Most of those can be charged by a state or on a local level, non federal, so it would be risky. However, practically the US doesn’t have a great appetite for charging and prosecuting Presidents.
That bud needed to be nipped at Nixon.
To be an American President, is to be a criminal. Every last one of them.
Edit: Ok downvoters, lets play a game. You name the president and I will name their crimes. Anyone is free to join. By crime, I mean where the rule of law was bent and ignored, thus neither blind nor just, and only tolerated legally due to the corruption and double-standards of the powerful at the time.
William Henry Harrison
Funny.
Welp, you failed then.
Every human is a criminal. Every baby, a criminal. Even plants? You guessed it. Criminals.
Believe it or not, straight to jail.
I knew I got bad vibes from my succulents.
They’re the worst criminals of all!
They horde and monopolize water!
See, this is how Judge Death got his start.
I could use some schooling this morning. What was Carter’s crime?
The Carter doctrine was just an expansion and intensification of militarily defending their “national interests” in other people’s countries. More US imperialism.
Arming and training the Afghanis against Russia, who would later become the Taliban. Because the shaw of Iran’s CIA operations blowback didn’t teach anyone any lessons.
Arming the North Yemeni against the Marxist south during the south Yemeni war.
The Camp David Accords that settled the fighting between Egypt and Israel by settling palestinian lands without involving the Palestinians. It was condemned by the UN for not involving the palestinians and for egypt acting on behalf of the arab league without their agreement. It divided the arab league. Denied palestine statehood and avoided international consensus. Look where this lead us today.
There is more, but I have errands to run.
Fwiw, an Afghani is a unit of currency. An Afghan is a person from Afghanistan.
What crime are you referring to? Giving weapons is not a crime. You could argue it backfired.
Accessory to murder. But hey, its ok when governments do it.
What would you call it if it were done to you? Terrorism.
It actually is ok when governments do it. I am anti death penalty, but it is not a crime when a government executes a criminal. Your definition of crime is wildly expansive.
Slavery was not a crime, until it was. The death penalty was condemned widely by civilized nations, Amnesty International, a breach of human rights under international law. Your definition of crime is blind.
What did John Quincy Adams do? I thought he was cool :(
Seminole War.
He oversaw 30 “treaties” with natives as part of America’s systematic removal of people from his lands.
History writes him as being an advocate who fought for voluntary removal, not the forced relocations, but he was still responsible for stolen native land and colonialism. Bit of a whitewash here as colonialism is colonialism, and he only differed in degree, not principle.
He signed the Treaty of Indian Springs and later admitted the natives were under duress and it was not in good faith. Later treaties added compensation, but was a pittance of the lands true value and Quincy did not believe in Native property rights to begin with, or understand the native concept of land stewardship.
You see, that’s the fun part about spending years ignoring the courts. Others can do the same! We could send him to CECOT. No due process? No problem!
100% sure they can try and one will.
I have a feeling this one’s gonna try
It’s an unanswered question, but the SCOTUS immunity ruling makes it mostly moot anyway. A President can’t be charged with crimes related to “official business.” Which specific acts count as official vs unofficial depends on the interpretation of a judge/justice, and probably gets extremely messy and inconsistent, which is why the ruling is considered problematic by most.
They can NOT pardon to protect themselves from impeachment.
I would like to see this immunity tested thoroughly very soon
Hopefully it can be established that granting favors and adding to their personal wealth are not official business. Really is any criminal act official business, I think not.
Not going to make a top level comment since this may be considered sort of a tangent, but there is chatter about lots of White House staff asking for pardons, since they aren’t necessarily immune. The thing is, once someone gets a pardon, and they no longer face prosecution, there is no danger of self-incrimination, and the 5th Amendment right to not speak largely disappears. I.e. they could be compelled to testify against Trump.
So does Trump throw all these people under the bus by making them face criminal prosecution for his crimes, or does he make them immune and increase the risk (even if only reputational) to himself? Investigators could easily offer immunity in exchange for testimony even without a pardon. I think we know which he’ll choose, but it leaves both sides pitted against one another.
The snake may be about to eat itself.
Hasn’t been tested but apparently most constitutional lawyers say yes.
Don could pardon JD for all crimes on their last day in office. Then Trump resigns and JD becomes President and pardons Don.
For trump its more like how fast can they pardon themselves before they commit another felony, you can’t pardon yourself for the future.
We don’t know. Nobody has ever tried it before. Common law would suggest no, but really it’s anyone’s guess with the current make up of the supreme court.
God damn it whenever I see a question like this it immediately is thought up by the GOP too
They can certainly try
deleted by creator
I think it’d go 7-2 no. The midrange Republicans aren’t going to go for something so obviously unfounded in history that would just lead to lawlessness.
Not from a next president’s executive order.
