Mega-Thread: 2020 United States General Election

[masterhorus8]

Pardons can't apply to future crimes.

Do I remember someone mentioning that they can only work on crimes that are currently being charged in court?

[PhaelixWW]

Do I remember someone mentioning that they can only work on crimes that are currently being charged in court?

I think you can pardon any crime that has already happened, and that would include charges that are in process. Certainly, pardons are normally reserved for crimes that have already been adjudicated, so there's no point at which it's too late for a pardon.

[masterhorus8]

I think you can pardon any crime that has already happened, and that would include charges that are in process. Certainly, pardons are normally reserved for crimes that have already been adjudicated, so there's no point at which it's too late for a pardon.

My bad on my wording for the tense. But specifically, charges have to be involved and it can't just be "lol, you're good from all the crimes, even ones that they haven't caught that you did yet!"

[Eviscero]

Pardons can't apply to future crimes.

I see, I didn't realize there was an explicit temporal restriction. Was misled by the idea of a preemptive pardon; that it refers to crimes already committed but not yet charged.

[Zan15]

Is Trump allowed to just issue a blanket pardon for all 71M people who voted for him for all past and potential future crimes? Seems like the way some people talk about the pardon power Trump could create an army of 007s... with a lot less swagger.

Past crimes sure, i mean he can pardon anyone for anything.

Imagine the list of people committed of crimes against children/spouses that would be printed on 600 pages of the NY times the following week.

[Eviscero]

My bad on my wording for the tense. But specifically, charges have to be involved and it can't just be "lol, you're good from all the crimes, even ones that they haven't caught that you did yet!"

No, I think that it could, at least it's not so clear that charges have to be involved. But, thankfully, it does have to involve a crime that already took place:

The Supreme Court said as far back as 1866 that the pardon power applies “to every offense known to the law, and may be exercised at any time after its commission, either before legal proceedings are taken or during their pendency, or after conviction and judgment."

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/don...-been-n1249707

[PhaelixWW]

I see, I didn't realize there was an explicit temporal restriction. Was misled by the idea of a preemptive pardon; that it refers to crimes already committed but not yet charged.

Quite probably, though it's never been tested.

[cubby]

I think you can pardon any crime that has already happened, and that would include charges that are in process. Certainly, pardons are normally reserved for crimes that have already been adjudicated, so there's no point at which it's too late for a pardon.

It's never been tested in the court. Ford pardoned Nixon without any charges being levied.

- - - Updated - - -

MULTIPLE NEWS SOURCES ARE REPORTING THAT MCCONNEL SUPPORTS IMPEACHMENT EFFORTS AGAINST TRUMP.

Holy. fucking. shit.

- - - Updated - - -

No, I think that it could, at least it's not so clear that charges have to be involved. But, thankfully, it does have to involve a crime that already took place:

The Supreme Court said as far back as 1866 that the pardon power applies “to every offense known to the law, and may be exercised at any time after its commission, either before legal proceedings are taken or during their pendency, or after conviction and judgment."

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/don...-been-n1249707

The statement is true, but again, it's never been actually tested in a court of law.

[Timester]

https://edition.cnn.com/2021/01/12/p...iot/index.html

Bye bye "President" Trump. You will be just plain douchebag lunatic racist Trump on history books.

[PhaelixWW]

MULTIPLE NEWS SOURCES ARE REPORTING THAT MCCONNEL SUPPORTS IMPEACHMENT EFFORTS AGAINST TRUMP.

Your link is a text string, I think you meant this:

Business Insider: Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell is 'pleased' at the prospect of Trump being impeached, new report says

[cubby]

Your link is a text string, I think you meant this:

Business Insider: Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell is 'pleased' at the prospect of Trump being impeached, new report says

Yes. Yes I do.

Thanks.

[Zan15]

Your link is a text string, I think you meant this:

Business Insider: Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell is 'pleased' at the prospect of Trump being impeached, new report says

he might support it but he will do everything possible to delay it till it doesn't really matter anymore.

[cubby]

he might support it but he will do everything possible to delay it till it doesn't really matter anymore.

He can't now - he isn't the Majority Leader now. And if the GOP has any rational thoughts about the future, impeaching Trump is their best option. Bar him from future office and his entire power base is pulled out from under him.

[Timester]

he might support it but he will do everything possible to delay it till it doesn't really matter anymore.

Can it be voted by the Democratic-controlled Senate?

He can't now - he isn't the Majority Leader now. And if the GOP has any rational thoughts about the future, impeaching Trump is their best option. Bar him from future office and his entire power base is pulled out from under him.

Thank you, you just answered my question.

[Rasulis]

Pardons can't apply to future crimes.

Unfortunately he does have the power to grant blanket pre-emptive pardon for anybody who was at the Capitol on January 6. Yeah. The Presidential pardon power is that powerful. The more reason to kick him out as soon as possible.

[PhaelixWW]

Unfortunately he does have the power to grant blanket pre-emptive pardon for anybody who was at the Capitol on January 6. Yeah. The Presidential pardon power is that powerful. The more reason to kick him out as soon as possible.

Those are past crimes. You're confusing "future charges on past crimes" with "future crimes", which is what my statement was about.

[Zan15]

Can it be voted by the Democratic-controlled Senate?



Thank you, you just answered my question.

Yah it can, but they have to wait till the state finishes counting overseas ballots and certify results. they might finish it before trump's term is over.....but it won't matter because they need the VP to break any tie anyway which puts you back till trump is out of office.

[zealo]

he might support it but he will do everything possible to delay it till it doesn't really matter anymore.

He and the GOP has now lost control of both congress and the presidency by now. If they have any long term prospects in mind, it isn't a horrible idea for them to support something that takes Trump out of the equation for 2024.

[Zan15]

He can't now - he isn't the Majority Leader now. And if the GOP has any rational thoughts about the future, impeaching Trump is their best option. Bar him from future office and his entire power base is pulled out from under him.

umm the two senators from GA have not been seated yet because the results are not certified yet in GA.

Moscow Mitch is still technically in charge.

- - - Updated - - -

He and the GOP has now lost control of both congress and the presidency by now. If they have any long term prospects in mind, it isn't a horrible idea for them to support something that takes Trump out of the equation for 2024.

Lost control as of the 20th. maybe 22nd if certification takes that long in GA

[Thekri]

Can it be voted by the Democratic-controlled Senate?



Thank you, you just answered my question.

Ossoff and Warnock probably won't be seated until near the end of the month. So for the time being, there will be 50 GOP senators, 46 Democrats, and 2 Independents who always vote Democratic. Georgia has until the 22nd to certify its elections, assuming no recounts are triggered (Which should be safe, since both GOP contenders conceded, and both are out of recount margins). So the Senate can seat them after that. Technically I think McConnell remains majority leader until the Senate holds another election of its leadership, which won't happen until after the Democrats have the votes to actually replace him (It is a mostly ceremonial process, but they do need the votes for it).

Anyway, I don't see trial in the Senate happening before the 22nd, so it is safe to say both Ossoff and Warnock will cast votes. Harris is irrelevant here, because they need a 2/3s majority, not a 50/50, so she can't vote.

I actually don't know if Roberts will preside. I think he won't, assuming the trial starts after the 20th, since the Chief Justice only presides over an impeachment of a sitting president. I am pretty sure Schumer will run the show, although McConnell might actually get it started on the 22nd or 25th.