Active Now

Shuhak
Discussion » Statements » Rosie's Corner » Do you think the Founding Fathers ever considered that a corrupt crooked criminal would pardon those who committed crimes to service him?
RosieG

Do you think the Founding Fathers ever considered that a corrupt crooked criminal would pardon those who committed crimes to service him?

Had they been able to foresee/anticipate that I bet they would have framed the authority to PARDON very differently don't you?

"The President has the absolute authority to pardon EXCEPT FOR THOSE CRIMINALS WHO COMMITTED CRIMES TO SERVICE HIM".

Now what would have been wrong with doing that? Nothing for an honest honorable just faithful patriotic president. But for duck? Well you see what he has been doing all along and more to come ever eviler and uglier and ungodlier than what we've seen so far. He has so little time and so much to corrupt by his existant presence. Away with you varlet. Walk the plank. Fall in the water. You do not swim? Too bad. How sad. So drown.

Posted - December 2, 2020
Tags : None

Responses


  • 6023
    I'm sure they did.
    After all, they came from a monarchy - and is a common practice for monarchs to favor their friends/allies, and act above the law.

    The first problem, is that the President doesn't have "absolute authority" to pardon.
    They can only pardon for federal crimes.
    At the time, federal crimes were few.  The massive (and partially unConstitutional) growth of the federal government has expanded the list of federal crimes - but the President still can't pardon for violations of state or local crimes.

    The second problem, is defining what is a "service" to the President.
    If the President orders someone to commit an act against federal law ... is it a "service" to him, even if he doesn't profit directly?
    What if it results in an increased approval rating?  Does that indirect benefit count as the President profiting?
      December 2, 2020 1:24 PM MST
    1

  • 113301
    If they anticipated it why didn't they provide for it by using language that would specifically prohibit it?. The prez has absolute power to pardon for federal crimes. So states can take a shot which we know New York has 3 separate types of cases waiting for him to become a civilian. How do we define profit? Benefit. Not in an abstract fuzzy implied way at all. Extort. Quid pro quo. You scratch my back I will scratch yours. When a prez involves himself in every aspect of government and insists on controlling the outcome? That is what duck does and has been getting away with it. Do such and such OR ELSE. When the employee disobeys "off with his head". The vicious attacks of which duck is quite capable are legendary and ugly. He benefits when what is done/said makes him happy. How it filters through his head I cannot tell you since I will NEVER understand what makes the mind of a madman tick. Do you? He believes he has complete authority to control all outcomes. People roll over for him, lie down for him beg for him lie for him and figuratively die for him. Why? Because if they don't they get hammered vilified attacked insulted and the duck never lets go. He keeps at it and at it and at it. That's what madness does. As he keeps insisting he won and it was a fraud like some babbling incoherent mental hospital patient he gets cheers. Did you know he has extorted $170 million so far and counting from his adoring worshippers to fight his way to victory? That's what the sales pitch is. In actually that money goes into a Super Pac for him...75% of it. Some of that if not all will absolutely find its way into his bank accounts. The other 25% goes to the Republican party if what I read is true. The guy is vermin. How much  damage can vermin do in 4 years? We will find out. Thank you for your reply Walt and Happy Thursday to thee and thine. This post was edited by RosieG at December 3, 2020 1:46 AM MST
      December 3, 2020 1:43 AM MST
    0