Because he already had a deal with Ford and knew Ford would pardon him.
but just like the right to bear arms or free speech have limits the pardon power can also have limits. Just like i cant go out and buy a nuke,a president cant pardon himself
The constitution would set the limits. It only limits a pardon of impeachment.
A president is not acting as a judge when he issues a pardon.
A judge cannot sit on a relative’s case, for example.
A president can pardon a relative. Clinton pardoned his brother.
Before Trump pardons himself, he has a couple of other people to take care of first.
He will continue to drain the swamp by giving a pardon to Martha Stewart, and either commute Rod Blago’s sentence or a complete pardon.
He seems to think pardons are a way to reward cronies or own the libs, not through merit or to correct an injustice.
Obama. to his credit, gave very few pardons. He did commute a lot of sentences, but with the exception of Manning (which was terrible IMO ) most of it was reducing sentences for drug offenses which many thought were too severe.
Trump so far has pardoned quite a few cronies who are best known for being butt kissers. Seems that’s all that is necessary.
But to get back to a president pardoning himself, it’s as ridiculous an idea as if a judge presided over his/her own trial and then declared themself to be not guilty.
1 Like
That is not, at all, what a pardon is.
There is no judgement in a pardon, the trial is already over.
Correct and a pardon does not expunge a guilty verdict. It only forgives the penalty
Opinions seem to vary based on whether or not the speaker wants to see the target punished to the point of destruction.
Judicial theory does not apply, pardons are extra judicial processes and that power belongs solely and unquestionably to the Executive and the Exec alone under our constitution.
I realize a pardon is erasing a prior convictiion, whereas in my case the judge decided he/she was not personally guilty. But it was the only comparison I could think of that is just as ridiculous.
A judge would not preside over his/her own trial for obvious reasons. And for equally obvious reasons a President should not pardon himself.
Doesn’t it wipe the slate clean? As though the conviction had not happened?
No. A pardon does not erase a conviction. You are incorrect from the start and the rest of your post does not merit a comment.
No. The acceptance of a pardon is an admission of guilt.
A pardon acknowledges guilt but forgives the penalty.
Why would this even be a point of discussion unless he knew he was guilty of something.
Moonshine brought the subject up. Ask him what he is guilty of.
Is it always an admission of guilt? Not in this case. One of the few pardons Trump has issued so far that was the right thing to do.
Over a century after Jack Johnson was convicted in 1913 of violating a federal law for transporting a white woman across state lines, President Donald Trump has granted the first black heavyweight boxing champion a full posthumous pardon.
With many boxing figures like current WBC heavyweight champion Deontay Wilder, Lennox Lewis and actor Sylvester Stallone in attendance for the ceremony, President Trump granted the rare pardon for what he said many felt was a racially motivated injustice.
https://www.cbssports.com/boxing/news/president-trump-announces-posthumous-pardon-for-heavyweight-champion-jack-johnson/
Clinton pardoned his brother; Carter was lucky- Billy beer wasn’t a crime, but close
Not necessarily.
What crime was Nixon convicted of when he received his pardon?
No. You and yours are creating this discussion in the first place.
1 Like
No, the conviction remains,t he penalties are revoked.
