The Former Trump Presidency Thread

[noxiousdog]

Part of the racism issue is language. We used to use prejudice.Now we use racism for both. I still haven't adjusted and I don't plan on it even though I know I'm fighting a losing battle.

The other problem is that we don't have a good word for being critical of culture. We throw it under a racism blanket when it might be a religious sect or social culture. Often that's going to be colored by racial prejudice, but that doesn't mean it's the motivating factor or untrue.

[Paingod]

So he's pardoning someone who plead guilty to illegal campaign finance shenanigans?

Was there actually some kind of unfairness involved? I can't find it in my quick hunt.

[Smoove_B]

No, he admitted guilt and indicated he was aware he was breaking the law. This is all about sending a message and possibly rewarding someone that was vocally anti-Obama and anti-Hillary. It's gross. But hey, stiggin it to the libs, cry moar, etc...

[El Guapo]

Also in Trump's lizard brain, anyone who is pro-Trump and anti-Obama / anti-Clinton is by definition good, and therefore any hostility or punishment of them is by definition bad and/or unfair, ESPECIALLY if the punishment was by Obama and/or Clinton.

[pr0ner]

Yep, this one sets a really bad precedent. Admit to knowful wrongdoing, yet get pardoned for being a vocal, prominent Trump supporter. Ugh.

[Captain Caveman]

So he's pardoning someone who plead guilty to illegal campaign finance shenanigans?

Was there actually some kind of unfairness involved? I can't find it in my quick hunt.

It's not about that.. he's just making his usual bullshit excuse without caring about the merits of the case. What it is about is a flaunting of his power. It's a signal that the rule of law doesn't apply to him or those who have his back. It'll get worse.

[GreenGoo]

He's gonna get himself shot. By the same people who shot Kennedy.

[GreenGoo]

Part of the racism issue is language. We used to use prejudice.Now we use racism for both. I still haven't adjusted and I don't plan on it even though I know I'm fighting a losing battle.

The other problem is that we don't have a good word for being critical of culture. We throw it under a racism blanket when it might be a religious sect or social culture. Often that's going to be colored by racial prejudice, but that doesn't mean it's the motivating factor or untrue.

It's tough to separate culture and skin colour when the culture in question is predominantly made up of people with a different skin colour, but I fully agreed with your comment. Some aspects of many cultures are abhorrent to me.

[Remus West]

Dont want that out there.

[Paingod]

So the question becomes who can't he pardon. I think he just told people that loyalty is rewarded, even if you're admitting guilt.

Can this be seen as a not-so-subtle message to Cohen and others?

[tjg_marantz]

So the question becomes who can't he pardon. I think he just told people that loyalty is rewarded, even if you're admitting guilt.

Can this be seen as a not-so-subtle message to Cohen and others?

One would have to be blind to not see it that way.

I'm sure a few idiots will come and say different but it's clear.

[LordMortis]

He's gonna get himself shot. By the same people who shot Kennedy.

It's not something to even joke about. We are living a Shakespeare play.

... but god damn that tweet makes it feel like the Rubicon is in sight and the DOJ's ability to function's days are numbered.

[Zarathud]

Dinesh D'Souza is an asshole without shame. Pardoning him is a violation of the rule of law.

Trump has realized his pardons result in happy partisan loyalists and sycophants, and favorable FOX coverage. Probably graft, too, at minimum in additional campaign funds. He's not going to stop.

[Carpet_pissr]

Part of the racism issue is language. We used to use prejudice.Now we use racism for both. I still haven't adjusted and I don't plan on it even though I know I'm fighting a losing battle.

The other problem is that we don't have a good word for being critical of culture. We throw it under a racism blanket when it might be a religious sect or social culture. Often that's going to be colored by racial prejudice, but that doesn't mean it's the motivating factor or untrue.

Agree wholeheartedly, good point. The modern usage of the word itself is likely increasing the disconnect between our two countries on this issue. It's probably been too broadly used by the left, and not broadly enough by the right, if we are being honest, and both sides resent that, and push back.

[malchior]

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/sta ... 1599860736

JFC! This is insane but I guess he needs to wag that pardon power around to send a signal to others. Support me and you'll be fine, don't and you're fucked.

Don't worry - our very powerful system of checks and balances is just about to kick in and save us all.

[El Guapo]

So the question becomes who can't he pardon. I think he just told people that loyalty is rewarded, even if you're admitting guilt.

Can this be seen as a not-so-subtle message to Cohen and others?

One would have to be blind to not see it that way.

I'm sure a few idiots will come and say different but it's clear.

I'm not sure that we can know the extent to which this pardon is a message to Cohen and others, and the extent to which this is just a Trump lizard brain PEOPLE WHO LIKE TRUMP ARE GOOD AND ANY PUNISHMENT BY OBAMA IS BAD! kind of thing. It seems very likely to be a mix of both, and I'm not sure the exact mix is ultimately all that relevant.

In any event, it's been pretty clear for awhile now that Trump was willing to throw pardons around to help supporters and the right kinds of lawbreakers. The real constraint on the pardon power (unless and until GOP leaders are ousted or acquire a sense of shame) is the New York Attorney General, to the extent that Trump associates committed crimes within their jurisdiction.

[Captain Caveman]

Don't worry - our very powerful system of checks and balances is just about to kick in and save us all.

What's the check here? Is it only impeachment? If so, that's such a long shot that Trump may have (not unreasonably) concluded he can pardon whomever he wants with minimal consequence. "Who's gonna stop me?"

[Holman]

If you're D'Souza, you got to be asking yourself, "Am I just a message to Cohen and Manafort, or did I truly *earn* this pardon on the merits of my bigotry?"

[El Guapo]

Don't worry - our very powerful system of checks and balances is just about to kick in and save us all.

What's the check here? Is it only impeachment? If so, that's such a long shot that Trump may have (not unreasonably) concluded he can pardon whomever he wants with minimal consequence. "Who's gonna stop me?"

Pretty much. The Constitution doesn't spell out any limitations on the pardon power, other than that it only applies to federal crimes ("crimes against the United States"). Any limitation other than that is one that has to be read into what constitutes a "pardon" or drawn from other parts of the constitution. I have read arguments that say that the nature of a "pardon" means it has to be of someone else, so that a President cannot pardon himself, but who knows how that would play out in court if that became a live issue.

Otherwise, the only real limit here (other than impeachment) is a state prosecution for the pardoned crime.

[Isgrimnur]

And then there's always the threat of new charges after the winds change.

[El Guapo]

And then there's always the threat of new charges after the winds change.

You couldn't be charged subsequently for federal charges based upon the conduct that was pardoned.

[El Guapo]

Prosecutors hid a ton of video evidence in their prosecutions of inauguration-day protestors.

Some pretty serious shit.

[Isgrimnur]

And then there's always the threat of new charges after the winds change.

You couldn't be charged subsequently for federal charges based upon the conduct that was pardoned.

I guess if he goes preemptive, and there's no reason to think he won't just attempt to blanket anyone and everyone.

[Sepiche]

Prosecutors hid a ton of video evidence in their prosecutions of inauguration-day protestors.

Some pretty serious shit.

The recordings, which were made by employees of the right-wing Project Veritas

Why am I not surprised to see those goons are involved.

I suppose it's possible the prosecutors were mislead by Veritas, but if they had any hand in the deception they should be fired.

[El Guapo]

And then there's always the threat of new charges after the winds change.

You couldn't be charged subsequently for federal charges based upon the conduct that was pardoned.

I guess if he goes preemptive, and there's no reason to think he won't just attempt to blanket anyone and everyone.

I guess I'm not totally clear what you are saying. If the President pardons someone for X conduct, then no future president could press charges against the pardoned person for X conduct.

If the President pardons someone for X conduct, but then that person commits *new crimes* after the pardon, then of course future presidents could press charges based upon that new conduct. I don't think there's much of an argument that a President could pardon crimes that have not yet been committed.

I suppose there could be a broadly-written pardon, and then conduct that already occurred but which is only discovered after the pardon is issued. I don't think you can pardon un-discovered conduct, unless there's an argument that it's actually part of the conduct that was pardoned.

[LawBeefaroni]

And then there's always the threat of new charges after the winds change.

You couldn't be charged subsequently for federal charges based upon the conduct that was pardoned.

I guess if he goes preemptive, and there's no reason to think he won't just attempt to blanket anyone and everyone.

I guess I'm not totally clear what you are saying. If the President pardons someone for X conduct, then no future president could press charges against the pardoned person for X conduct.

If the President pardons someone for X conduct, but then that person commits *new crimes* after the pardon, then of course future presidents could press charges based upon that new conduct. I don't think there's much of an argument that a President could pardon crimes that have not yet been committed.

I suppose there could be a broadly-written pardon, and then conduct that already occurred but which is only discovered after the pardon is issued. I don't think you can pardon un-discovered conduct, unless there's an argument that it's actually part of the conduct that was pardoned.

Someone tell that to Trump, please. He'll then produce evidence of undiscovered conduct and then pardon it. He may even do this for himself. Save us all a lot of time and money.

[LawBeefaroni]

Prosecutors hid a ton of video evidence in their prosecutions of inauguration-day protestors.

Some pretty serious shit.

The recordings, which were made by employees of the right-wing Project Veritas

Why am I not surprised to see those goons are involved.

I suppose it's possible the prosecutors were mislead by Veritas, but if they had any hand in the deception they should be fired.

Prosecutors had it. They hid it. See the filing linked in the article.

[Captain Caveman]

I just saw a tweet that I figured was a joke but it turns out to be true. Trump just said he's considering pardons for Martha Stewart and Rod Blagojevich!

[Skinypupy]

Great, the toddler-in-chief has found a new toy.

[malchior]

So the question becomes who can't he pardon. I think he just told people that loyalty is rewarded, even if you're admitting guilt.

Can this be seen as a not-so-subtle message to Cohen and others?

One would have to be blind to not see it that way.

I'm sure a few idiots will come and say different but it's clear.

I'm not sure that we can know the extent to which this pardon is a message to Cohen and others, and the extent to which this is just a Trump lizard brain PEOPLE WHO LIKE TRUMP ARE GOOD AND ANY PUNISHMENT BY OBAMA IS BAD! kind of thing. It seems very likely to be a mix of both, and I'm not sure the exact mix is ultimately all that relevant.

In any event, it's been pretty clear for awhile now that Trump was willing to throw pardons around to help supporters and the right kinds of lawbreakers. The real constraint on the pardon power (unless and until GOP leaders are ousted or acquire a sense of shame) is the New York Attorney General, to the extent that Trump associates committed crimes within their jurisdiction.

NY considers this double jeopardy right now. The NYAG (prior to his downfall at least) asked the legislature to change this. There is practically no chance considering the makeup of the NY legislature.

[Smoove_B]

I just saw a tweet that I figured was a joke but it turns out to be true. Trump just said he's considering pardons for Martha Stewart and Rod Blagojevich!

Anything to keep people from continuing to question where Melania is, I suppose.

[$iljanus]

I just saw a tweet that I figured was a joke but it turns out to be true. Trump just said he's considering pardons for Martha Stewart and Rod Blagojevich!

Anything to keep people from continuing to question where Melania is, I suppose.

They're just making a few adjustments to her host programming

[El Guapo]

So the question becomes who can't he pardon. I think he just told people that loyalty is rewarded, even if you're admitting guilt.

Can this be seen as a not-so-subtle message to Cohen and others?

One would have to be blind to not see it that way.

I'm sure a few idiots will come and say different but it's clear.

I'm not sure that we can know the extent to which this pardon is a message to Cohen and others, and the extent to which this is just a Trump lizard brain PEOPLE WHO LIKE TRUMP ARE GOOD AND ANY PUNISHMENT BY OBAMA IS BAD! kind of thing. It seems very likely to be a mix of both, and I'm not sure the exact mix is ultimately all that relevant.

In any event, it's been pretty clear for awhile now that Trump was willing to throw pardons around to help supporters and the right kinds of lawbreakers. The real constraint on the pardon power (unless and until GOP leaders are ousted or acquire a sense of shame) is the New York Attorney General, to the extent that Trump associates committed crimes within their jurisdiction.

NY considers this double jeopardy right now. The NYAG (prior to his downfall at least) asked the legislature to change this. There is practically no chance considering the makeup of the NY legislature.

I was googling earlier today to see the current status of this. Is it really dead in the water? The Democrats have the governorship and the house, and the Republicans currently have a one-vote senate majority (due to rogue democrats, I believe). Given how unpopular Trump is in New York, I would think it wouldn't be too hard to get a Senate majority on the fix.

I am also inclined to expect that the Democrats will have a Senate majority (in New York) after the 2018 election. If so there would be nothing to stop New York from passing the fix in January 2019, and then immediately instituting state criminal charges.

[El Guapo]

I just saw a tweet that I figured was a joke but it turns out to be true. Trump just said he's considering pardons for Martha Stewart and Rod Blagojevich!

At some point doesn't the benefit to Trump (of messaging to his associates in legal trouble) start to get outweighed by a growing public perception that "Trump is willing to pardon criminals"? Couldn't that wind up hurting him when he winds up in a pardon dispute that really matters?

[malchior]

NY has always been an odd duck split between upstate and the 'city'. I wouldn't count on any midterm ducks just yet. There or in Congress.

[Smoove_B]

James Comey is the person that prosecuted Martha Stewart? Amazing.

[LawBeefaroni]

So I just saw that some comedian called Ivanka a "cunt". All the Trump supporters are screaming whataboutism and making parallels to Rosanne, Obama's daughters and whatever else. Very few, if any, have made a coherent condemnation of what was said. I mean this is where we are. It's not about what is happening, but about how what happens can be used to make a partisan tweet.

Bravo, America. Bravo.

[pr0ner]

So I just saw that some comedian called Ivanka a "cunt". All the Trump supporters are screaming whataboutism and making parallels to Rosanne, Obama's daughters and whatever else. Very few, if any, have made a coherent condemnation of what was said. I mean this is where we are. It's not about what is happening, but about how what happens can be used to make a partisan tweet.

Bravo, America. Bravo.

We've been trending that way as a country for years thanks to the rise of social media and ever growing partisan divides. Trump in office has only accelerated the process due to his normalization of it all.

[LawBeefaroni]

A Martha Stewart pardon is meaningless. She served her time and is doing fine. It just expunges her record, right (right?). She can vote. Everyone knows her past so it doesn't hide anything for practical purposes. Maybe she's prohibited from owning firearms? She gets that right back. Yay?


But Blago still has like 6 years left to serve for absolutely abusing the public trust, his office, and the law. It's a slap in the face of an entire state and the integrity of our system. So par for the course for Trump I guess.

[Unagi]

I would have thought that Blago crimes would be Illinois based? I guess not.