User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 2/25/2016 2:41:13 AM EDT
[#1]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Not sure he can give pre-emptive pardons. Yes he can. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/25/2016 2:44:52 AM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Not sure he can give pre-emptive pardons. He absolutely could. How do you think Nixon's pardon happened? |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/25/2016 3:02:42 AM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
He absolutely could. How do you think Nixon's pardon happened? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Not sure he can give pre-emptive pardons. He absolutely could. How do you think Nixon's pardon happened? Exactly. But why would he? What makes everyone so sure she "has something" on him? She's not the evil mastermind she's being made out to be. She's just a stupid narcissistic crook. He has the power to send her to prison. Granting her pardon would be his legacy, just like Nixon was to Ford. Even worse, because Nixon had at least been dethroned before he was pardoned, and that was over political games, not national security and lives. No chance he fears her so much that he would let her be his legacy. Besides, he want's Bill's gig. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/25/2016 3:29:12 AM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Exactly. But why would he? What makes everyone so sure she "has something" on him? She's not the evil mastermind she's being made out to be. She's just a stupid narcissistic crook. He has the power to send her to prison. Granting her pardon would be his legacy, just like Nixon was to Ford. Even worse, because Nixon had at least been dethroned before he was pardoned, and that was over political games, not national security and lives. No chance he fears her so much that he would let her be his legacy. Besides, he want's Bill's gig. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Not sure he can give pre-emptive pardons. He absolutely could. How do you think Nixon's pardon happened? Exactly. But why would he? What makes everyone so sure she "has something" on him? She's not the evil mastermind she's being made out to be. She's just a stupid narcissistic crook. He has the power to send her to prison. Granting her pardon would be his legacy, just like Nixon was to Ford. Even worse, because Nixon had at least been dethroned before he was pardoned, and that was over political games, not national security and lives. No chance he fears her so much that he would let her be his legacy. Besides, he want's Bill's gig. I think that's how she's gotten as far as she has, she has dirt on everyone because they are all together in a slimy corrupt orgy. Her strategy is, people can claim whatever they want about her and Willy but can they prove it in a court of law? To them, if you can't, it never happened. She may not be able to either, but the threat of exposure might be enough to keep people quiet, that and the mysterious coincidental hardly pass the laugh test suicides that happen to their enemies that don't play ball. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/25/2016 3:38:43 AM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Why would Obama pardon her? For the good of the Party, Comrade. And so she'd have a permanent black cloud over her... neither acquitted or convicted. It might not drive a stake through her heart right off, but she'd have to lay low for a long time - perhaps longer than she has left on the green side of the grass. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/25/2016 4:02:06 AM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Not sure he can give pre-emptive pardons. Gerald Ford did. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/25/2016 4:03:58 AM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
For the good of the Party, Comrade. And so she'd have a permanent black cloud over her... neither acquitted or convicted. It might not drive a stake through her heart right off, but she'd have to lay low for a long time - perhaps longer than she has left on the green side of the grass. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Why would Obama pardon her? For the good of the Party, Comrade. And so she'd have a permanent black cloud over her... neither acquitted or convicted. It might not drive a stake through her heart right off, but she'd have to lay low for a long time - perhaps longer than she has left on the green side of the grass. She doesn't care what anyone thinks about her so there is no such thing as black clouds, only people that are wrong about her. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/25/2016 10:07:41 AM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
For the good of the Party, Comrade. And so she'd have a permanent black cloud over her... neither acquitted or convicted. It might not drive a stake through her heart right off, but she'd have to lay low for a long time - perhaps longer than she has left on the green side of the grass. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Why would Obama pardon her? For the good of the Party, Comrade. And so she'd have a permanent black cloud over her... neither acquitted or convicted. It might not drive a stake through her heart right off, but she'd have to lay low for a long time - perhaps longer than she has left on the green side of the grass. It would not be for the good of the party. It would be very bad for the party. Bringing her to justice would be good for the party. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/25/2016 10:16:15 AM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Not sure he can give pre-emptive pardons. Gerald Ford, and Richard M. Nixon would have disagreed. A logical argument can be made that in part Ford's pardon of Nixon was the reason he failed to win election to the office of POTUS. There is a pretty good chance that Zero could do the preemptive thing with Hillary, after all he can't run for POTUS again..........and, the pardon might definitely screw her because it would be an admission that she was guilty as charged or uncharged as it were. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/25/2016 10:23:06 AM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It would not be for the good of the party. It would be very bad for the party. Bringing her to justice would be good for the party. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Why would Obama pardon her? For the good of the Party, Comrade. And so she'd have a permanent black cloud over her... neither acquitted or convicted. It might not drive a stake through her heart right off, but she'd have to lay low for a long time - perhaps longer than she has left on the green side of the grass. It would not be for the good of the party. It would be very bad for the party. Bringing her to justice would be good for the party. Not that Obama really cares about the future of the party or Hillary for that matter.............. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/25/2016 10:46:49 AM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Not that Obama really cares about the future of the party or Hillary for that matter.............. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Why would Obama pardon her? For the good of the Party, Comrade. And so she'd have a permanent black cloud over her... neither acquitted or convicted. It might not drive a stake through her heart right off, but she'd have to lay low for a long time - perhaps longer than she has left on the green side of the grass. It would not be for the good of the party. It would be very bad for the party. Bringing her to justice would be good for the party. Not that Obama really cares about the future of the party or Hillary for that matter.............. Exactly. So why taint his own legacy? |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/25/2016 11:25:08 AM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Exactly. But why would he? What makes everyone so sure she "has something" on him? She's not the evil mastermind she's being made out to be. She's just a stupid narcissistic crook. He has the power to send her to prison. Granting her pardon would be his legacy, just like Nixon was to Ford. Even worse, because Nixon had at least been dethroned before he was pardoned, and that was over political games, not national security and lives. No chance he fears her so much that he would let her be his legacy. Besides, he want's Bill's gig. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Not sure he can give pre-emptive pardons. He absolutely could. How do you think Nixon's pardon happened? Exactly. But why would he? What makes everyone so sure she "has something" on him? She's not the evil mastermind she's being made out to be. She's just a stupid narcissistic crook. He has the power to send her to prison. Granting her pardon would be his legacy, just like Nixon was to Ford. Even worse, because Nixon had at least been dethroned before he was pardoned, and that was over political games, not national security and lives. No chance he fears her so much that he would let her be his legacy. Besides, he want's Bill's gig. She might not have something specific on him but he's knee deep in this email thing as well and nobody is talking about it. There's no possible way that he, as President, could not have known what was going on and that it was illegal. He's complicit as hell in this and if she goes to trial it will all come out. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/25/2016 11:31:44 AM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
She might not have something specific on him but he's knee deep in this email thing as well and nobody is talking about it. There's no possible way that he, as President, could not have known what was going on and that it was illegal. He's complicit as hell in this and if she goes to trial it will all come out. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Not sure he can give pre-emptive pardons. He absolutely could. How do you think Nixon's pardon happened? Exactly. But why would he? What makes everyone so sure she "has something" on him? She's not the evil mastermind she's being made out to be. She's just a stupid narcissistic crook. He has the power to send her to prison. Granting her pardon would be his legacy, just like Nixon was to Ford. Even worse, because Nixon had at least been dethroned before he was pardoned, and that was over political games, not national security and lives. No chance he fears her so much that he would let her be his legacy. Besides, he want's Bill's gig. She might not have something specific on him but he's knee deep in this email thing as well and nobody is talking about it. There's no possible way that he, as President, could not have known what was going on and that it was illegal. He's complicit as hell in this and if she goes to trial it will all come out. Naw, he found out about it on CNN. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/25/2016 11:36:28 AM EDT
[#14]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/25/2016 11:37:06 AM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Not sure he can give pre-emptive pardons. Quote HistoryQuoted: Not sure he can give pre-emptive pardons. Edit: I looked it up and by golly it was a pardon over multiple years. Hillary first has to break the law then a pardon is issued. If charges are not filed until 2017, no pardon. Now, therefore, I, Gerald R. Ford, President of the United States, pursuant to the pardon power conferred upon me by Article II, Section 2, of the Constitution, have granted and by these presents do grant a full, free, and absolute pardon unto Richard Nixon for all offenses against the United States which he, Richard Nixon, has committed or may have committed or taken part in during the period from July (January) 20, 1969 through August 9, 1974. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/25/2016 11:38:09 AM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I would "THINK" that the possibility of a Presidential Pardon is close to becoming toxic.... AND, Obama might feel that pardoning Hillary will damage his reputation in the future more than he's willing to risk..... What ever "HOLD" she has on him might NOT be enough....Or, he just won't care..... Can HE pardon himself??? OR, if he "FEARS" Her, could he resign in December, allow Biden to become president, so Biden can Pardon Obama, and not Hillary, that might take the wind out of her sails..... What do you think??? |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/25/2016 11:39:34 AM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
He absolutely could. How do you think Nixon's pardon happened? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Not sure he can give pre-emptive pardons. He absolutely could. How do you think Nixon's pardon happened? Yup. You are right. I forgot that he had not actually been impeached or had charges brought against him first. Of course it's a little different this time. Nixon resigned. Hillary is running for office. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/25/2016 11:39:39 AM EDT
[#18]
Page 43 and she is still walking free. I think she is truly above the law.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/25/2016 11:41:17 AM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Page 43 and she is still walking free. I think she is truly above the law. then we no longer have a republic. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/25/2016 11:45:36 AM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
then we no longer have a republic. The republic died the death of a thousand cuts some time ago. Most people haven't noticed that. It's a good bet that so long as the forms aren't altered, most never will. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/25/2016 11:45:53 AM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
She might not have something specific on him but he's knee deep in this email thing as well and nobody is talking about it. There's no possible way that he, as President, could not have known what was going on and that it was illegal. He's complicit as hell in this and if she goes to trial it will all come out. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Not sure he can give pre-emptive pardons. He absolutely could. How do you think Nixon's pardon happened? Exactly. But why would he? What makes everyone so sure she "has something" on him? She's not the evil mastermind she's being made out to be. She's just a stupid narcissistic crook. He has the power to send her to prison. Granting her pardon would be his legacy, just like Nixon was to Ford. Even worse, because Nixon had at least been dethroned before he was pardoned, and that was over political games, not national security and lives. No chance he fears her so much that he would let her be his legacy. Besides, he want's Bill's gig. She might not have something specific on him but he's knee deep in this email thing as well and nobody is talking about it. There's no possible way that he, as President, could not have known what was going on and that it was illegal. He's complicit as hell in this and if she goes to trial it will all come out. He claimed privilege on 6 emails, none of which contained classified info. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/25/2016 12:01:27 PM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
He claimed privilege on 6 emails, none of which contained classified info. It seems there's two directions charges could go: Mishandling classified information and Corruption in office (which relates solely to Clinton Foundation shenanigans). If the President feels he's sufficiently disentangled from the first one, then there's no reason at all for a pardon. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/25/2016 12:49:59 PM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It seems there's two directions charges could go: Mishandling classified information and Corruption in office (which relates solely to Clinton Foundation shenanigans). If the President feels he's sufficiently disentangled from the first one, then there's no reason at all for a pardon. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
He claimed privilege on 6 emails, none of which contained classified info. It seems there's two directions charges could go: Mishandling classified information and Corruption in office (which relates solely to Clinton Foundation shenanigans). If the President feels he's sufficiently disentangled from the first one, then there's no reason at all for a pardon. Yep. And don't forget, he has a large staff of people interested in preventing him from becoming entangled. ETA: ...meaning that just because she ignored the law doesn't mean he did. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/25/2016 1:23:00 PM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Not sure he can give pre-emptive pardons. History. How does it work? Was covered earlier in the thread. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/25/2016 1:37:26 PM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I would "THINK" that the possibility of a Presidential Pardon is close to becoming toxic.... AND, Obama might feel that pardoning Hillary will damage his reputation in the future more than he's willing to risk..... What ever "HOLD" she has on him might NOT be enough....Or, he just won't care..... Can HE pardon himself??? OR, if he "FEARS" Her, could he resign in December, allow Biden to become president, so Biden can Pardon Obama, and not Hillary, that might take the wind out of her sails..... What do you think??? Quote HistoryQuoted:
I would "THINK" that the possibility of a Presidential Pardon is close to becoming toxic.... AND, Obama might feel that pardoning Hillary will damage his reputation in the future more than he's willing to risk..... What ever "HOLD" she has on him might NOT be enough....Or, he just won't care..... Can HE pardon himself??? OR, if he "FEARS" Her, could he resign in December, allow Biden to become president, so Biden can Pardon Obama, and not Hillary, that might take the wind out of her sails..... What do you think??? August 1, 1974. As Richard Nixon's presidency rapidly neared its end, his aides outlined his options. One possibility discussed was for Nixon to pardon himself and then resign. His lawyers prepared a short Memorandum concluding that a self-pardon would be legal.' Nevertheless, Nixon decided against a self pardon, resigned, and left his fate in the hands of President Gerald Ford. Christmas Eve 1992. President George Bush had lost his bid for reelection and would be in office for only one more month. Special Prosecutor Lawrence Walsh had persisted in his pursuit of Iran-Contra suspects.
Bush decided to pardon several of them, leaving himself as the most prominent prosecutable figure. Several commentators speculated that Bush might pardon himself for his role in the scandal, and many assumed that such an act would be valid.' One stated, "[F]or a president to pardon himself would, admittedly, be an act of unprecedented chutzpah, but the Constitution does not forbid it, containing nothing that circumscribes the power.. The President's power to pardon is stated simply in the Constitution: The President "shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offences against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment."
By limiting pardons to "Offences against the United States," the Constitution means to place private civil and state criminal cases beyond the President's reach." By excepting "Cases of Impeachment," the Constitution stays the President's hand when Congress is doing the prosecuting instead of the executive branch. The President cannot stop the House from impeaching a federal official, nor can he undo the punishment the Senate doles out upon conviction." Other than these limitations, the President's power seems plenary and quite flexible. Pardons can be granted at any time after a crime has been committed: before federal criminal charges are brought, after conviction and sentencing, or any time in between. They can even be granted after the full sentence has been served, solely to restore the pardonee's civil rights. The President can give amnesty to a vast group of federal offenders, or he can pardon a single offender for a broad, unspecified range of crimes.' |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/25/2016 1:40:50 PM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I would "THINK" that the possibility of a Presidential Pardon is close to becoming toxic.... AND, Obama might feel that pardoning Hillary will damage his reputation in the future more than he's willing to risk..... What ever "HOLD" she has on him might NOT be enough....Or, he just won't care..... Can HE pardon himself??? OR, if he "FEARS" Her, could he resign in December, allow Biden to become president, so Biden can Pardon Obama, and not Hillary, that might take the wind out of her sails..... What do you think??? August 1, 1974. As Richard Nixon's presidency rapidly neared its end, his aides outlined his options. One possibility discussed was for Nixon to pardon himself and then resign. His lawyers prepared a short Memorandum concluding that a self-pardon would be legal.' Nevertheless, Nixon decided against a self pardon, resigned, and left his fate in the hands of President Gerald Ford. Christmas Eve 1992. President George Bush had lost his bid for reelection and would be in office for only one more month. Special Prosecutor Lawrence Walsh had persisted in his pursuit of Iran-Contra suspects.
Bush decided to pardon several of them, leaving himself as the most prominent prosecutable figure. Several commentators speculated that Bush might pardon himself for his role in the scandal, and many assumed that such an act would be valid.' One stated, "[F]or a president to pardon himself would, admittedly, be an act of unprecedented chutzpah, but the Constitution does not forbid it, containing nothing that circumscribes the power.. The President's power to pardon is stated simply in the Constitution: The President "shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offences against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment."
By limiting pardons to "Offences against the United States," the Constitution means to place private civil and state criminal cases beyond the President's reach." By excepting "Cases of Impeachment," the Constitution stays the President's hand when Congress is doing the prosecuting instead of the executive branch. The President cannot stop the House from impeaching a federal official, nor can he undo the punishment the Senate doles out upon conviction." Other than these limitations, the President's power seems plenary and quite flexible. Pardons can be granted at any time after a crime has been committed: before federal criminal charges are brought, after conviction and sentencing, or any time in between. They can even be granted after the full sentence has been served, solely to restore the pardonee's civil rights. The President can give amnesty to a vast group of federal offenders, or he can pardon a single offender for a broad, unspecified range of crimes.' She would do it in her inaugural address. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/25/2016 3:22:48 PM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
She might not have something specific on him but he's knee deep in this email thing as well and nobody is talking about it. There's no possible way that he, as President, could not have known what was going on and that it was illegal. He's complicit as hell in this and if she goes to trial it will all come out. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Not sure he can give pre-emptive pardons. He absolutely could. How do you think Nixon's pardon happened? Exactly. But why would he? What makes everyone so sure she "has something" on him? She's not the evil mastermind she's being made out to be. She's just a stupid narcissistic crook. He has the power to send her to prison. Granting her pardon would be his legacy, just like Nixon was to Ford. Even worse, because Nixon had at least been dethroned before he was pardoned, and that was over political games, not national security and lives. No chance he fears her so much that he would let her be his legacy. Besides, he want's Bill's gig. She might not have something specific on him but he's knee deep in this email thing as well and nobody is talking about it. There's no possible way that he, as President, could not have known what was going on and that it was illegal. He's complicit as hell in this and if she goes to trial it will all come out. He sent emails to her private server. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/25/2016 3:52:41 PM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
He sent emails to her private server. If they didn't contain classified information, who cares? |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/25/2016 4:00:40 PM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
If they didn't contain classified information, who cares? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
He sent emails to her private server. If they didn't contain classified information, who cares? Can a sitting President send an unofficial email? |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/25/2016 4:05:26 PM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
She would do it in her inaugural address. Congress can still impeach her. She can't pardon herself from Congress. A very early impeachment process would be something realistically considered by even this Congress, since so many of them are new and she doesn't have the old FBI files on them like she did Gingrich and crew. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/25/2016 4:12:17 PM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Can a sitting President send an unofficial email? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
He sent emails to her private server. If they didn't contain classified information, who cares? Can a sitting President send an unofficial email? There is nothing illegal about here having her own server. I have one myself. Not preserving her emails for FOI requests is illegal. My guess is that BHO has every email that passed between them, Sending classified information on an unsecure system is illegal. That's the crime of anyone who sent, forwarded, or failed to report the receipt of classified information through unsecure systems. I'm sure there are a bunch of people in that group, but I'm betting BHO isn't one of them. Unless he did one of those illegal things, he has done nothing wrong. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/25/2016 4:14:24 PM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
There is nothing illegal about here having her own server. I have one myself. Not preserving her emails for FOI requests is illegal. My guess is that BHO has every email that passed between them, Sending classified information on an unsecure system is illegal. That's the crime of anyone who sent, forwarded, or failed to report the receipt of classified information through unsecure systems. I'm sure there are a bunch of people in that group, but I'm betting BHO isn't one of them. Unless he did one of those illegal things, he has done nothing wrong. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
He sent emails to her private server. If they didn't contain classified information, who cares? Can a sitting President send an unofficial email? There is nothing illegal about here having her own server. I have one myself. Not preserving her emails for FOI requests is illegal. My guess is that BHO has every email that passed between them, Sending classified information on an unsecure system is illegal. That's the crime of anyone who sent, forwarded, or failed to report the receipt of classified information through unsecure systems. I'm sure there are a bunch of people in that group, but I'm betting BHO isn't one of them. Unless he did one of those illegal things, he has done nothing wrong. This is incorrect. One cannot conduct official business on an unofficial server. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/25/2016 4:23:46 PM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
This is incorrect. One cannot conduct official business on an unofficial server. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
He sent emails to her private server. If they didn't contain classified information, who cares? Can a sitting President send an unofficial email? There is nothing illegal about here having her own server. I have one myself. Not preserving her emails for FOI requests is illegal. My guess is that BHO has every email that passed between them, Sending classified information on an unsecure system is illegal. That's the crime of anyone who sent, forwarded, or failed to report the receipt of classified information through unsecure systems. I'm sure there are a bunch of people in that group, but I'm betting BHO isn't one of them. Unless he did one of those illegal things, he has done nothing wrong. This is incorrect. One cannot conduct official business on an unofficial server. Okay. But how does that crime weigh against her crimes, or the impact of granting her pardon? If that is his only crime, there is no chance he would be charged. Zero fucks given. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/25/2016 4:26:14 PM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Okay. But how does that crime weigh against her crimes, or the impact of granting her pardon? If that is his only crime, there is no chance he would be charged. Zero fucks given. The only folks expecting any portion of this to affect Obama in any meaningful fashion are serial masturbators. I was correcting an incorrect assertion. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/25/2016 4:29:04 PM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The only folks expecting any portion of this to affect Obama in any meaningful fashion are serial masturbators. I was correcting an incorrect assertion. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Okay. But how does that crime weigh against her crimes, or the impact of granting her pardon? If that is his only crime, there is no chance he would be charged. Zero fucks given. The only folks expecting any portion of this to affect Obama in any meaningful fashion are serial masturbators. I was correcting an incorrect assertion. And I stand corrected. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/25/2016 7:17:47 PM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Tend to agree with you, or it's a blanket pardon, a get out of jail free card. It doesn't work that way Edit: I looked it up and by golly it was a pardon over multiple years. Hillary first has to break the law then a pardon is issued. If charges are not filed until 2017, no pardon. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Not sure he can give pre-emptive pardons. Edit: I looked it up and by golly it was a pardon over multiple years. Hillary first has to break the law then a pardon is issued. If charges are not filed until 2017, no pardon. Now, therefore, I, Gerald R. Ford, President of the United States, pursuant to the pardon power conferred upon me by Article II, Section 2, of the Constitution, have granted and by these presents do grant a full, free, and absolute pardon unto Richard Nixon for all offenses against the United States which he, Richard Nixon, has committed or may have committed or taken part in during the period from July (January) 20, 1969 through August 9, 1974. That's not at all how it works, and your quote doesn't support your position. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/25/2016 9:45:17 PM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Other than these limitations, the President's power seems plenary and quite flexible. Pardons can be granted at any time after a crime has been committed: before federal criminal charges are brought, after conviction and sentencing, or any time in between.
They can even be granted after the full sentence has been served, solely to restore the pardonee's civil rights. The President can give amnesty to a vast group of federal offenders, or he can pardon a single offender for a broad, unspecified range of crimes.' I wonder if a pardon for future acts that haven't even been committed yet would be kosher. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/25/2016 10:17:16 PM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I wonder if a pardon for future acts that haven't even been committed yet would be kosher. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Other than these limitations, the President's power seems plenary and quite flexible. Pardons can be granted at any time after a crime has been committed: before federal criminal charges are brought, after conviction and sentencing, or any time in between.
They can even be granted after the full sentence has been served, solely to restore the pardonee's civil rights. The President can give amnesty to a vast group of federal offenders, or he can pardon a single offender for a broad, unspecified range of crimes.' I wonder if a pardon for future acts that haven't even been committed yet would be kosher. There's essentially no limit to the President's power to pardon. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/26/2016 1:57:32 AM EDT
[#39]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/26/2016 8:34:03 PM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The only folks expecting any portion of this to affect Obama in any meaningful fashion are serial masturbators. I was correcting an incorrect assertion. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Okay. But how does that crime weigh against her crimes, or the impact of granting her pardon? If that is his only crime, there is no chance he would be charged. Zero fucks given. The only folks expecting any portion of this to affect Obama in any meaningful fashion are serial masturbators. I was correcting an incorrect assertion. Not all of us serial masturbators expect her to see any charges. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/26/2016 10:55:29 PM EDT
[#41]
Another Clinton email dump happened today, Friday. 88 of those emails were classified. One more email dump next week.
Total classified emails from her server now top 1,818. link At least 1,818 emails that Hillary Clinton sent or received contained classified material, according to the State Department’s latest update from its ongoing review of more than 30,000 emails.
The State Department released a new batch of 1,589 pages of Clinton’s emails Friday evening in response to a court order. Of those, 88 contain classified information. All are at the confidential level, which is the lowest level of classification. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2016 12:05:58 AM EDT
[#42]
Was this info classified when it was sent, or later found on review to be classified? Lots of these email were retroactively classified by DoS during the review. Some were classified to start with, but the numbers are not as bad as they sound. But, she is a felon for the ones that were classified.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2016 12:16:50 AM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Was this info classified when it was sent, or later found on review to be classified? Lots of these email were retroactively classified by DoS during the review. Some were classified to start with, but the numbers are not as bad as they sound. But, she is a felon for the ones that were classified. It doesn't even matter at this point. The single email that had the name of a source in it is enough. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2016 12:24:15 AM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
That's not at all how it works, and your quote doesn't support your position. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Not sure he can give pre-emptive pardons. Edit: I looked it up and by golly it was a pardon over multiple years. Hillary first has to break the law then a pardon is issued. If charges are not filed until 2017, no pardon. Now, therefore, I, Gerald R. Ford, President of the United States, pursuant to the pardon power conferred upon me by Article II, Section 2, of the Constitution, have granted and by these presents do grant a full, free, and absolute pardon unto Richard Nixon for all offenses against the United States which he, Richard Nixon, has committed or may have committed or taken part in during the period from July (January) 20, 1969 through August 9, 1974. That's not at all how it works, and your quote doesn't support your position. So what prevents a president from just pardoning their cabinet members as part of the swearing in ceremony? |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2016 12:28:32 AM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
There's essentially no limit to the President's power to pardon. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Other than these limitations, the President's power seems plenary and quite flexible. Pardons can be granted at any time after a crime has been committed: before federal criminal charges are brought, after conviction and sentencing, or any time in between.
They can even be granted after the full sentence has been served, solely to restore the pardonee's civil rights. The President can give amnesty to a vast group of federal offenders, or he can pardon a single offender for a broad, unspecified range of crimes.' I wonder if a pardon for future acts that haven't even been committed yet would be kosher. There's essentially no limit to the President's power to pardon. I would not be surprised if our current AG when confronted with enough evidence to indict will pass on it. I would not be surprised if the WH grants a pardon in the spirit allowing the first viable female presidential candidate to run. Should that happen, we will cease to be a nation of laws, and should Hillary be elected she will rightfully believe herself to be beyond the reach of the law, set apart from the citizenry. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2016 12:30:40 AM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
So what prevents a president from just pardoning their cabinet members as part of the swearing in ceremony? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Not sure he can give pre-emptive pardons. Edit: I looked it up and by golly it was a pardon over multiple years. Hillary first has to break the law then a pardon is issued. If charges are not filed until 2017, no pardon. Now, therefore, I, Gerald R. Ford, President of the United States, pursuant to the pardon power conferred upon me by Article II, Section 2, of the Constitution, have granted and by these presents do grant a full, free, and absolute pardon unto Richard Nixon for all offenses against the United States which he, Richard Nixon, has committed or may have committed or taken part in during the period from July (January) 20, 1969 through August 9, 1974. That's not at all how it works, and your quote doesn't support your position. So what prevents a president from just pardoning their cabinet members as part of the swearing in ceremony? And at the same time, nothing prevents Congress from impeaching the President. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2016 12:33:33 AM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It would not be for the good of the party. It would be very bad for the party. Bringing her to justice would be good for the party. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Why would Obama pardon her? For the good of the Party, Comrade. And so she'd have a permanent black cloud over her... neither acquitted or convicted. It might not drive a stake through her heart right off, but she'd have to lay low for a long time - perhaps longer than she has left on the green side of the grass. It would not be for the good of the party. It would be very bad for the party. Bringing her to justice would be good for the party. That implies Democrats have a shred of honor left in the entire crowd. They don't. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2016 12:39:28 AM EDT
[#48]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
That implies Democrats have a shred of honor left in the entire crowd. They don't. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Why would Obama pardon her? For the good of the Party, Comrade. And so she'd have a permanent black cloud over her... neither acquitted or convicted. It might not drive a stake through her heart right off, but she'd have to lay low for a long time - perhaps longer than she has left on the green side of the grass. It would not be for the good of the party. It would be very bad for the party. Bringing her to justice would be good for the party. That implies Democrats have a shred of honor left in the entire crowd. They don't. Maybe/ maybe not. There is a good chance that stuff on that server and emails that are involved in the corruption part of investigation could be fully entwined with the party. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2016 12:50:43 AM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted: And at the same time, nothing prevents Congress from impeaching the President. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: So what prevents a president from just pardoning their cabinet members as part of the swearing in ceremony? And at the same time, nothing prevents Congress from impeaching the President. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2016 12:53:25 AM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
This is incorrect. One Government employees cannot conduct official business on an unofficial server. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
He sent emails to her private server. If they didn't contain classified information, who cares? Can a sitting President send an unofficial email? There is nothing illegal about here having her own server. I have one myself. Not preserving her emails for FOI requests is illegal. My guess is that BHO has every email that passed between them, Sending classified information on an unsecure system is illegal. That's the crime of anyone who sent, forwarded, or failed to report the receipt of classified information through unsecure systems. I'm sure there are a bunch of people in that group, but I'm betting BHO isn't one of them. Unless he did one of those illegal things, he has done nothing wrong. This is incorrect. One Government employees cannot conduct official business on an unofficial server. FIY. Contractors most certainly can conduct"official" business with the gov using their contractor-owned servers. And I'm not entirely certainthe gov employee restriction is not just "policy" vice law. Now, in Clinton's case, she most certainly could have had a SCIF with JWICS and SIPR terminals installed in her house at taxpayer expense if she asked for it. I'd bet WHCA installed a STE as a matter of course for Cabinet members. She had to deliberately try to do what she did. ETA - and I heard GEN Hayden (former DIRNSA/DCI) on the radio this evening say that he would lose all respect for a lot of foreign intelligence agencies if they had not sucked her personal server dry. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
