Jump to content

U.S. Politics


maqroll

Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, villakram said:

Hearings in the House via the relevant committee. He has been impeached. This has occurred without any discussion or presentation of evidence, unless of course one thinks some of what went on yesterday counts towards that. Yesterdays events bore more similarity to a show trial than one should be comfortable with. 

There has been lots of talk, wailing and gnashing, about how democratic norms and institution have been damaged by the Trump presidency, here is an example and it is Pelosi and the democrats who did the deed.   

 House members submit the articles, and a majority vote sends it to Senate, where evidence is presented. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, bickster said:

Not true, President Nixon says hi

Thing is, the next president can undo the pardons, just like Bush did with Toussie. It would be a bad idea of Trump because Kamala and Biden would just undo all their pardons days later. I also somehow doubt that the FBI are disclosing the names of their investigations as of yet - amongst others especially the reps (Gosar, Brooks++++) because these are likely to be censured and incarcerated.

It should be mentioned that supreme court have not discussed this issue at length, but Bush was able to overturn a pardon on short notice and I see no reason they would object if Trump were to pardon a bunch of seditionists.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, villakram said:

Yup, penning Biden in.

This is a large part of the reason they are trying to delete Trump from the history books, because they know he will not obey standard decorum and will sling missiles and more from the sidelines at the Biden admin.

He'd need Twitter for that though, he's being censored without it, you know. ;) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, magnkarl said:

Thing is, the next president can undo the pardons, just like Bush did with Toussie. It would be a bad idea of Trump because Kamala and Biden would just undo all their pardons days later. I also somehow doubt that the FBI are disclosing the names of their investigations as of yet - amongst others especially the reps (Gosar, Brooks++++) because these are likely to be censured and incarcerated.

It should be mentioned that supreme court have not discussed this issue at length, but Bush was able to overturn a pardon on short notice and I see no reason they would object if Trump were to pardon a bunch of seditionists.

He can simply say he pardons anyone involved in the events at the Capitol on Jan 6th, he doesn't even have to name each individual. There is also precident for this when Jimmy Carter pardoned all Vientnam War Draft Resisters

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, magnkarl said:

Thing is, the next president can undo the pardons, just like Bush did with Toussie

This is actually untested, the only reason Bush could do that is because it was only the day after and it hadn't been signed. There is no current precident for the recinsion of a fully executed pardon, especially by another President

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, bickster said:

He can simply say he pardons anyone involved in the events at the Capitol on Jan 6th, he doesn't even have to name each individual. There is also precident for this when Jimmy Carter pardoned all Vientnam War Draft Resisters

True, but do you really think Supreme Court is going to overturn a decision to scrap pardons for people involved in domestic terrorism, incitement ++? Even though Trump instated many of the judges there, they are conservative Christian republicans, the last thing they want is an attack on the republic, and calls for hanging a comrade like Pence. The stink will be too much to touch.

The war draft example, or even Toussie's example doesn't come close. And tbh I don't even think Trump will pardon these people as he's already distanced himself from them several times. 

Oh and even if Trump pardons them Washington DC/other states can still prosecute at a state level. These guys are effed either way.

Edited by magnkarl
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can Trump pardon all rioters? Yes, yes he can

Interestingly, he raises the points that as Washington DC isn't its own state, therefore all DC "state" crimes are federal so they can also be pardoned as well. 

Edited by cyrusr
Calrifying specific to DC regarding state crimes
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, cyrusr said:

Can Trump pardon all rioters? Yes, yes he can

Interestingly, he raises the points that as Washington DC isn't its own state, all "state" crimes are federal so they can also be pardoned as well. 

AFAIK, a pardon only applies to federal crimes. For example for the weird guy with the horns, Arizona could well charge him with incitement to violence locally without Trump having any word in the matter. There's no plausible reach in a presidential pardon that mitigates that. For example most, if not all of these offenders can be charged for planning a criminal offense in their home states. They're not getting away. 

D.C has local rules and laws too. They're not federal laws.

 

Quote

The District of Columbia Home Rule Act is a United States federal law passed on December 24, 1973 which devolved certain congressional powers of the District of Columbia to local government, furthering District of Columbia home rule.

 

Edited by magnkarl
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, magnkarl said:

AFAIK, a pardon only applies to federal crimes. For example for the weird guy with the horns, Arizona could well charge him with incitement to violence locally without Trump having any word in the matter. There's no plausible reach in a presidential pardon that mitigates that. For example most, if not all of these offenders can be charged for planning a criminal offense in their home states. They're not getting away. 

D.C has local rules and laws too. They're not federal laws.

True with the point about Arizona, but that's what he is saying is that whilst DC has its own laws, as it is not its own state, it doesn't get that exemption in the constitution and so therefore they are technically "federal" crimes. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, cyrusr said:

True with the point about Arizona, but that's what he is saying is that whilst DC has its own laws, as it is not its own state, it doesn't get that exemption in the constitution and so therefore they are technically "federal" crimes. 

I don't think many of the protestors were from D.C anyway and local courts will be chomping at the bit to throw any crime they can at all these idiots. For example, the representatives can sue for local cases in their home states as they can argue that the criminals travelled to D.C. to target them. Airlines can go after them for using them to travel to commit crimes, local police and get them for fleeing a crime and so on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, magnkarl said:

I don't think many of the protestors were from D.C anyway and local courts will be chomping at the bit to throw any crime they can at all these idiots. For example, the representatives can sue for local cases in their home states as they can argue that the criminals travelled to D.C. to target them. Airlines can go after them for using them to travel to commit crimes, local police and get them for fleeing a crime and so on.

Again, that is correct, but currently the charges against the rioters is under either federal or DC law so for those, the pardon will likely apply. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also, another musician, King 810's (awful band) David Gunn, has admitted to attending the riots last week to film a music video... 

 

King 810’s David Gunn Says He Attended U.S. Capitol Building Protest To Film Music Video

To be fair he wasn't pictured inside the building but he's pretty close... suggests he has already been spoken to by the police. 

Still no word about Jon Schaffer being arrested yet either though. He's done a lot better than a load of ex-military people at avoiding being arrested. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...
Â