Unclebaldrick
Well-Known Member
Nothing to see here.
Fake news.
Fake news.
FBI Raids Manafort residence.
- Thread starter Unclebaldrick
- Start date
SneekyNinja
Well-Known Member
Wait until the screws start turning for his followers...
It's going to be fucking majestic.
And if Trump pardons a traitor, isn't he then committing treason?
Unclebaldrick
Well-Known Member
No need to really. He would be gone long before that.
On a side note; the Secret Service recently bailed out of the 49th floor (one floor under the Trump golden monstrosity of a residence (according to John Oliver: a cross between C3PO's colon and a museum where nobody has ever learned anything) and set up camp in a trailer due to the Trump Corporation fucking them on the lease (big surprise there, eh?)
SneekyNinja
Well-Known Member
Imagine they couldn't reach the 50th floor in time all because they got fucked on the lease...
greg nr
Well-Known Member
Nah, he wants to play with the nukes first. Ain't nobody gonna throw out a pres in the middle of a war......
TacoMac
Well-Known Member
No. A presidential pardon is absolute. There is no crime that can't be pardoned by the President. Not even Murder, War Crimes and Crimes Against Humanity.
SneekyNinja
Well-Known Member
You mean the nuclear war he's so desperately trying to start?
If even one of NK's missiles wasn't intercepted...millions of dead Americans, itd literally be like 9/11 times times 1000.
greg nr
Well-Known Member
Well, he is limited to crimes against the united states. He couldn't issue a pardon that would be valid in a state court or in the court of any other country or international court.
But it's plenty powerful even at that.
TacoMac
Well-Known Member
It will be years, possibly decades before North Korea is going to be capable of doing that, IF they ever manage it at all.
SneekyNinja
Well-Known Member
Yeah until there's blood on the streets because he's pardoning traitors.
TacoMac
Well-Known Member
Actually, no he isn't. So long as the individual is on U.S. soil, his pardon is absolute. That person though can never leave the jurisdiction of the United States, or he takes his life in his own hands.
SneekyNinja
Well-Known Member
They have 60 warheads capable of striking the entire western half of the country.
Two weeks ago we didn't even think they had even one. 12 weeks before that we didn't think they had missiles capable of reliably hitting Japan.
TacoMac
Well-Known Member
LOL!
Panic more.
Fact is, they have at best enough material to make 8. Maybe 10. But they have no rocket to deliver them, not even close. About the farthest they can reach right now is MAYBE mainland Japan, and that would be iffy...and in all likelihood totally inaccurate.
rkymtnman
Well-Known Member
not true.
One limitation is that a pardon cannot be issued for a crime that has not yet been committed. Pardons also don't affect civil cases, or state or local cases. Pardons are meant to dismiss sentences stemming from affronts to the United States through the breaking of laws. They're not intended to relieve an individual from his responsibility to make restitution to a victim's family, for example, which would be considered a personal affront. So a presidential pardon of a criminal sentence would not relieve the defendant from paying restitution from a related civil case.
Pardons also don't work unless the person to whom the pardon is granted accepts the pardon
greg nr
Well-Known Member
It will likely be a pre-emptive (surprise) attack by the US. NK probably can't hit the us with a missile at this point unless it's sub launched, and I'm guessing their subs can probably be tracked from port to sea very easily; I'm surprisede they haven't started to go missing at sea.
More likely they would try to hit a military base like guam or a civilian center like Soul. Either of those would make trump wildly popular as he wraps himself in a flag and claims to be defending the world.
We probably know where they keep their toys. The military probably has a pretty good threat assessment and has had plans on the shelf for years. They would hit the bases/labs/launch/command/control sites and try to take out the ability to launch in a first wave. Probably with underground or battlefield level nukes.
The messy part would be ground forces trying to pour over the border.
It just takes a maniac to order one of those plans with tactical nukes to be used.
TacoMac
Well-Known Member
I don't recall ever talking about civil suits or crimes that haven't been committed.
I'm talking about criminal cases only.
Anything Mannafort is found guilty of with regard to the Russians, it's not going to matter. He'll never turn on Trump because he knows Trump can simply pardon him and that's that.
I'm talking about criminal cases only.
Anything Mannafort is found guilty of with regard to the Russians, it's not going to matter. He'll never turn on Trump because he knows Trump can simply pardon him and that's that.
rkymtnman
Well-Known Member
furthermore,
But Congress does have one relief from the president's power to pardon. Ironically, this relief was first elucidated by a former president.
Ex parte Grossman was a 1924 case that was heard by a Supreme Court lead by Chief Justice William Taft, who had left the White House just 11 years before. In the majority opinion, Taft said that the court's ability to charge its witnesses in contempt existed outside the president's ability to pardon [Source:Cornell University Law School].
Congress, like the courts, has the power to compel witnesses to testify before them. Should any witness refuse, Congress is granted the power to hold these witnesses in contempt. By proxy, the power granted to Congress to hold in contempt anyone who refuses to testify also exists outside the pardoning power. This means, that if the executive branch orders any of its administration not to testify before the legislative branch, Congress may hold that person in contempt, without the possibility of that witness being granted a pardon. In this manner, witnesses are more likely to cooperate with Congress, especially in cases where the executive branch is being investigated.
But Congress does have one relief from the president's power to pardon. Ironically, this relief was first elucidated by a former president.
Ex parte Grossman was a 1924 case that was heard by a Supreme Court lead by Chief Justice William Taft, who had left the White House just 11 years before. In the majority opinion, Taft said that the court's ability to charge its witnesses in contempt existed outside the president's ability to pardon [Source:Cornell University Law School].
Congress, like the courts, has the power to compel witnesses to testify before them. Should any witness refuse, Congress is granted the power to hold these witnesses in contempt. By proxy, the power granted to Congress to hold in contempt anyone who refuses to testify also exists outside the pardoning power. This means, that if the executive branch orders any of its administration not to testify before the legislative branch, Congress may hold that person in contempt, without the possibility of that witness being granted a pardon. In this manner, witnesses are more likely to cooperate with Congress, especially in cases where the executive branch is being investigated.