Pre-emptively pardon people to frustrate the Trump vengeance and retribution tour.

[waterwatcher123]

It might be a good time to use whatever options we all have available to ourselves to suggest to Democratic law makers that they encourage Joe Biden to per-emptively pardon anyone in Trump's cross hairs for his vengeance and vendetta tour (Kamala Harris, Liz Cheney, Nancy Pelosi, Eric Swalwell, Adam Schiff, General Mark Milley, General John Kelley, Justice Department Prosecutors, etc.). You may recall that Trump sycophants were requesting such pardons in 2019-2020 to cover up their involvement in the insurrection. If Biden were able to accomplish this goal before he departs, it would take the wind right out this mad man's sails (hard to prosecute someone who has a pardon).

[ForgedCrank]

2. How would

he magically go about doing that for people who haven't been convicted, and haven't been sentenced? Hell, they haven't even been charged. What would President Biden "preemptively pardon" them for?
What I think is that we should all reel it back in a bit and maybe start looking at realistic responses to real problems as they come up instead of playing games like this. Besides, IF what you suggest were even possible, it will be interpreted by most people as just political pot-shots. Not a good look, and President Biden is far too professional to engage in such antics.

[tritsofme]

3. The only real example is Ford's "full and unconditional pardon" of Nixon for all crimes

that may have occurred during his time in office, despite not being under indictment at that time.

[waterwatcher123]

10. Perhaps you have missed what Trump has said lately about politicians, generals, prosecutors, Liz Cheney, etc.

Quite a few Republican operatives and politicians who were deeply involved in January 6th were trying to get Trump to give them a blanket pardon for their involvement (e.g., Kenneth Chesebro, Kevin McCarthy, John Eastman, Jim Jordan, Marjorie Taylor Green and Loren Bobert to name a few). Trump has already made it abundantly clear he wants to use DOJ to go after his political opponents. So, if the goals is to prevent political persecution, who cares what it looks like in a news cycle? This would be a novel use of the pardon power to say the least. But, that does not mean that is not permissible under the Constitution (see below).

"The Constitution establishes the President’s authority to grant clemency, encompassing not only pardons of individuals but several other forms of relief from criminal punishment as well.1 The power, which has historical roots in early English law,2 has been recognized by the Supreme Court as quite broad. In the 1886 case Ex parte Garland, the Court referred to the President’s authority to pardon as "unlimited" except in cases of impeachment, extending to "every offence known to the law" and able to be exercised "either before legal proceedings are taken, or during their pendency, or after conviction and judgment."3 Much later, the Court wrote that the "broad power conferred" in the Constitution gives the President "plenary authority" to "'forgive’ [a] convicted person in part or entirely, to reduce a penalty in terms of a specified number of years, or to alter it" with certain conditions.4"
https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/artII-S2-C1-3-1/ALDE_00013316/

[ForgedCrank]

12. What does

this have to do with Trump? The same rules and issues will apply to that asshole when he takes office.

[supergrinch]

13. very easily

but obviously you are opposed to anything helpful to democrats

[ForgedCrank]

15. Is that so?

I'm a Democrat, and I am also opposed to stupid and ridiculous things. Stupid and ridiculous things hurt everyone that they come into contact with, including Democrats. Therefor it is wise to avoid such things. I get bashed a lot around here for rejecting hate and other ridiculous approaches to politics. It is of no matter to me, I am who I am.
I'm also opposed to behaving like MAGA as a result of the previously mentioned positions. If that rubs your fur the wrong way, my apologies.

[waterwatcher123]

17. OK - I get you do not agree with this concept. However, that does not make it a stupid and ridiculous idea.

[GP6971]

16. Hmmm...how are you liking DU so far??

[MichMan]

4. Would this apply only to specific past transgressions or is it a future get out of jail free card ?

[waterwatcher123]

6. It would be both -

It would be a past transgression according to Trump and his sycophants (which is pretty much following the law and your oath of office). It would be a shield against prosecution by Trump's DOJ or military tribunal.

[MichMan]

9. Life time immunity from prosecution for any and all crimes; cool

[Hotler]

5. He said he won't pardon his own kid.

[waterwatcher123]

7. I know - it just does not make sense in light of this new, lawless administration taking office.

[Takket]

8. not needed...

they can bluster all they want about investigations and persecutions but eventually they are going to have to actually bring evidence (which doesn't exist) in front of a grand jury if they want to indict someone. Witch hunts don't actually work.

[waterwatcher123]

11. I hope you are right.

The rule of law has held this man accountable to date.

[Meowmee]

14. Yes agree

Some of these people will be targets too possibly.