Discussion: Trump: 'I Have The Absolute Right To PARDON Myself'

[sickneffintired]

@greysea

If the president can pardon himself than we do not live in a democracy.

The nutshell

[codegen86]

Here’s what I hear: Yo! GOPer dumbfucks in Congress, yes you! I bet you won’t do anything and let me laugh in your face all I want! Tee hee!

[mattinpa]

@phlebas

That was sort of my question. Are there any “legal scholars” not currently being paid by Trump who say he could pardon himself? Or even one Constitutional scholar who believes that power was the intent of the founders?

I saw a piece earlier today that described the discussion as a “parlor game” among con law scholars. I don’t think anyone takes it seriously. The intent of the founders, even in the debate about how to address the new republic’s executive, was clearly that the president not be a king. The idea that they intended for him to be personally immune from any federal crime is ridiculous. What the founders didn’t envision was a majority party willing to subvert the constitution and thwart the will of the people. That’s a new thing.

[denisj]

And when you are impeached by the house and thrown out of office by the senate you will no longer have the power to do anything but follow the orders of your jailers

[seamus42]

I fully expect capitulation. I’d just rather go ahead and hit bottom and get the suspense over with. Tired of the dyspepsia, ya know?

[geofu54]

Imagine what would have happened had Obama uttered he had absolute power… had absolute power to pardon himself no less.

Of course, what’s happening now when the moron said exact that is a collective {:shrug:} of Congressional GOPers. Or even their collective bobblehead nodding.

[mattinpa]

The real question here is whether Trump is decompensating.

[benthere]

Mussolini would be proud!

[moodpost]

When have you ever heard him laugh?

[pluckyinky]

@brooklyndweller

I honestly don’'t believe that silent Clarence, Alito and house pet Gorsuch can be counted on for sanity.

Gorsuch has already sided against the administration at least once. And I’ve seen no indication he’s not simply a standard issue Republican. I think this would be either a 9-0 or 8-1 decision against PP. I doubt the Conservatives on the bench are hardcore Trumpers. They all strike me as being more in line with Bill Kristol and other Never Trumpers. Plus, I just don’t think there’s more than one or two who wouldn’t see the danger, from a Republican perspective, of creating this kind of precedent that could be used by a future Democratic president.

[geofu54]

@mattinpa

The intent of the founders, even in the debate about how to address the new republic’s executive, was clearly that the president not be a king.

Yeah, that was the whole point of having established the union in the first place, right? I’m not a constitutional scholar but that just seems so clear I honestly don’t see how there needs to be a debate. It’s just that clear.

[jonney_5]

@brooklyndweller

Even when we retake the House, a GOP Senate still won’t proceed for impeachment.

At this point u think they want Dems to take the house. This way, as per usual, dems clean up the mess. Republicans will have dems taking on the problem in THEIR ranks, then using the effort to fundraise against dems.

This way they can run against dem’s impeachment hearing to try and deliver 2020 and opportunity to redraw districts again.

[castor_troy]

You can only pardon someone for a crime. Since Trump has committed no crimes, per his own testimony, then he can’t possibly pardon himself.

Implying that he has the right to pardon himself implies he has committed some crime.

[sanni]

David Frum (davidfrum)

[brooklyndweller]

And that’s one of the biggest issues (if not THE issue) for SCOTUS to consider:

If POTUS can supposedly self-pardon for money laundering and obstruction of justice, where would it end? Would it be possible, as Ghouliani said, that Rump could have Comey killed and the get-out-of-jail card kicks in?

At the very least, I can see Gorsuch reverting to the scenario that you addressed that is, that future Dem presidents could call upon this as a precedent.

I still say it would be 7-2.

[rickjones]

In my opinion, you have the absolute right to GO FUCK YOURSELF.

[mattinpa]

@geofu54

I’m not a constitutional scholar but that just seems so clear I honestly don’t see how there needs to be a debate. It’s just that clear.

I’m not that either but everything I’ve ever learned about U.S. history relevant to this makes it clear that the president was envisioned as an executive with certain powers circumscribed in the same way that all the other federal officeholders were. A citizen with a job, basically. Not a monarch in any way, everything pointed away from that. Only a person as ignorant and ridiculous as Trump could think anything different.

[brooklyndweller]

Agreed with you on this.

[ur]

And the American People have the absolute right to know where their First Lady is right now…

[brooklyndweller]

But most of the Rethug base doesn’t believe in democracy. At all. The idea of Rump having full autonomous power over the country just isn’t stretch for them.

It’s only unheard of if POTUS is a Democrat. Not even joking on this.