robinlynne
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jul-11-08 12:28 PM
Original message |
just heard on Thom Hartmann, if Bush is being impeached he cannot pardon |
|
people (crooks)! I was unaware of that, but it is one more reason to DO IT!
|
whistle
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jul-11-08 12:29 PM
Response to Original message |
1. Yes, so more power to Congress to support impeachment |
LisaM
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jul-11-08 12:29 PM
Response to Original message |
2. Does that mean if it's in process? |
|
Because Clinton was impeached, and was reamed for his pardon of Marc Rich (which slays me, after Bush1 pardoned all the Iran-Contra traitors....)
|
robinlynne
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jul-11-08 12:32 PM
Response to Reply #2 |
zbdent
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jul-11-08 12:49 PM
Response to Reply #2 |
12. a side note ... during the impeachment of BC, the economy was going well |
|
and Rush Limbaugh, in an unintentional jab at Republicans, said that the Congress was doing nothing and the economy was booming ...
In other words, keeping the Republicans from doing any legislation was making for a good economy ...
Now, you have a U.S. congress which is handcuffed ... 49 Dems, 49 Repukes, and 2 "independents" (okay, Lieberman is actually a Republican now, but claimed he would caucus with the Dems) ... and the economy is going sour. Stalled "Dem-controlled" Congress, and the economy is going to hell. Bush vetoes anything that didn't have a Repuke as an original author ...
Of course, the Repukes try to say that this "Dem-controlled" Congress are causing the bad economy ... how? They can't get anything done - Repuke filibuster, Bush veto, Repuke refusing to override the veto ...
|
tekisui
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jul-11-08 12:30 PM
Response to Original message |
3. And Impeachment Hearings are immune to "executive privilege" claims. |
|
It is the only way to stop the war criminals.
|
Wizard777
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jul-11-08 12:58 PM
Response to Reply #3 |
14. Actually any criminal investigation is immune to executive privilege claims. |
|
Edited on Fri Jul-11-08 12:58 PM by Wizard777
It's just that Congress has not officially called their oversight a criminal investigation. The second they do. EP goes out the window.
|
liberal N proud
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jul-11-08 12:37 PM
Response to Original message |
5. But Nanc has not put it on the table |
|
Doubt she ever will. Even in light of the evidence of guilt with Rove fleeing, she will keep it out of Congress.
|
JustABozoOnThisBus
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jul-11-08 12:39 PM
Response to Original message |
6. Is he being impeached? |
|
Or is Congress merely looking into it?
And if Bush pardons someone after impeachment starts, who's going to reverse him? Nancy?
I wonder how long it will take him to pardon Rove.
:hi:
|
Indydem
(866 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jul-11-08 12:40 PM
Response to Original message |
7. No, he cannot pardon anyone UNDER impeachment. |
|
An ongoing impeachment does not change his executive powers under the constitution. However, if say, justice Roberts were being impeached for a miscarriage of justice, Bush could never pardon him.
"he shall have Power to Grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offences against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment" -Article 2 Section 2 US Constitution
|
Qutzupalotl
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jul-11-08 12:45 PM
Response to Reply #7 |
9. The wording seems ambiguous here... |
|
his own impeachment or someone else's?
|
exothermic
(570 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jul-11-08 12:47 PM
Response to Reply #9 |
11. It's not really ambiguous: if Bush were "under" impeachment, his Executive powers are not affected. |
|
If he should be -convicted- of articles of impeachment, they would obviously cease as he would no longer -be- the president.
|
Qutzupalotl
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jul-11-08 12:55 PM
Response to Reply #11 |
13. The constitution doesn't say "under impeachment" |
|
and that's not what I'm saying about its ambiguity. I mean that it's unclear to which party "in Cases of Impeachment" refers -- the president's impeachment or (for example) the chief justice's.
|
exothermic
(570 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jul-11-08 01:14 PM
Response to Reply #13 |
17. Well, "cases of impeachment" makes it pretty clear they were not talking about the President. |
|
If they were, they would have said so. :hi:
|
Qutzupalotl
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jul-11-08 01:32 PM
Response to Reply #17 |
22. If they had intended to exempt the president, |
|
I think they would have said so.
|
exothermic
(570 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jul-11-08 01:40 PM
Response to Reply #22 |
24. No doubt. When you're nominated to the Supreme Court, I promise to support you 100% |
Occulus
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jul-11-08 01:45 PM
Response to Reply #13 |
25. If it's unspecified, couldn't it mean ANY cases of impeachment? n/t |
JDPriestly
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jul-11-08 10:43 PM
Response to Reply #13 |
28. I would interpret that to mean that a president could not pardon |
|
a government official for an offense for which the official is being impeached -- not until the impeachment is completed.
|
merh
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jul-11-08 01:03 PM
Response to Reply #7 |
16. that is what I thought. |
|
God, I wish it were true though.
|
Ghost in the Machine
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jul-11-08 12:43 PM
Response to Original message |
8. That's what I've been hollering for at least a year... trying to get through to the anti impeachment |
|
crowd. This is why impeachment is SO important... it takes away pardon power so the asshole can't issue a blanket pardon on his way out the door...
K&R!
Ghost
|
exothermic
(570 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jul-11-08 12:46 PM
Response to Original message |
10. I'm 99.72% certain that's not true. |
hootinholler
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jul-11-08 01:21 PM
Response to Reply #10 |
18. Well reading the Constitution should help then... |
|
Article II, Section 2: "..., and he shall have Power to Grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offenses against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment."
Thus any pardon related to an act that was included in a successful impeachment proceeding negates the pardon.
-Hoot
|
exothermic
(570 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jul-11-08 01:33 PM
Response to Reply #18 |
23. Can we look at that sentence... |
|
"Thus any pardon related to an act that was included in a successful impeachment proceeding negates the pardon." How does a pardon negate -itself-? How much of itself can a snake swallow? Sorry but your "thus" is way premature and illogical. :-)
|
hootinholler
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jul-11-08 02:20 PM
Response to Reply #23 |
26. Replace the "negates the pardon" with "is rendered null." |
|
You are correct in that I mis-spoke. I doubt the premature applies though.
Sheesh, English is my first language too. :P
-Hoot
|
dsc
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jul-11-08 10:49 PM
Response to Reply #18 |
30. that means he can't pardon people who have been Impeached |
|
but he can pardon them before they are impeached and he can still pardon them criminally but just can't prevent their, or his, Impeachment.
|
Jeff In Milwaukee
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jul-11-08 11:23 PM
Response to Reply #30 |
31. I agree with your reading.... |
|
If Bush is impeached he can still pardon any of his gang -- he just can't reverse their impeachment (or his own).
|
JBoris
(675 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jul-11-08 01:01 PM
Response to Original message |
15. If both Cheney and bush are impeached and convicted, wouldn't that make Pelosi POTUS? n/t |
TexasObserver
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jul-11-08 01:22 PM
Response to Original message |
19. That's correct. The president cannot pardon anyone from impeachment. |
|
Impeachment has only one remedy: Upon conviction by the senate, the impeached person is removed from office.
The president can pardon criminal matters. Impeachment is a POLITICAL action.
|
Crabby Appleton
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jul-11-08 02:47 PM
Response to Reply #19 |
27. This is the correct answer. nt |
Ichingcarpenter
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jul-11-08 01:24 PM
Response to Original message |
20. Thom Hartman just mention our DUer Dave Swanson |
|
as one the patriots that has worked so hard on impeachment.
|
Cleita
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jul-11-08 01:26 PM
Response to Original message |
21. This and many other reasons, |
|
mainly that will keep BushCo from doing any more damage to this country and the Constitution while he is being impeached during the rest of his term.
|
dsc
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jul-11-08 10:47 PM
Response to Original message |
|
Now they can Impeach him for doing the pardons but his pardon power is absolute until he leaves office.
|
NYC Liberal
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jul-11-08 11:34 PM
Response to Original message |
32. No it just means he cannot reverse an impeachment (or subsequent conviction in the Senate) |
|
by means of a pardon.
He can still pardon them for the crimes that led to the impeachment (so that they won't be arrested, indicted and tried when they leave office).
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Fri Apr 26th 2024, 01:54 AM
Response to Original message |