pardon.
(no message)
(no message)
Half of them are already there!
(no message)
Do your own homework.
(no message)
(no message)
His behavior now is predictable, petulant, and embarrassing.
And his base is right with him, until the end, fuck the republic. Total bullshit patriotism.
A pardon merely sets aside the risk of punishment, regardless of whether such legal punishment is correctly given or injustly given. Ask yourself: Would a pardon protect him from an unjust prosecution? Of course it would. Therefore, it is not an admission.
I know at least one justice has said it may be an admission of guilt in the context of discussing whether or not a pardon could be turned down, but that is not a matter of law; it is a matter of opinion, which means it is not, legally, an admission.
And, why would he not just pardon himself in secret?...and keep the pardon in a safe place in case he is convicted of a crime for which he is unwilling to pay the penalty? That would be the smart thing to do. But, you have a point: he may be too arrogant to pardon himself.
(no message)
especially as it applies to this issue, of a person who wants to accept the pardon. Burdick relates to a situation in which the pardonee did not desire the pardon, and the question was whether the government could force a pardon on him (to later force him to testify on the matter which prompted the pardon). The court was looking for possible reasons a pardonee would turn down a pardon. They did not rule that accepting a pardon was an admission as a matter of law.
(no message)
(no message)
I don’t know if the cited language is dicta or not. The fact that the language is opinion as you originally posted though isn’t the deciding factor so long as its part of the holding.
You know, in case anyone wanted to pick nits.
You were wrong but won’t ever admit it.
You are really good at this "never agreeing with people even though you actually agree with them" thing.
Step by step explanation for you:
1) I said "not law, just an opinion" meaning a personal opinion and not binding.
2) You apparently read "not law, just binding law." Your reading of my post requires a contradiction, and therefore makes no sense. That would not be a preferred reading of any court case, must less an internet post. But you wanted to disagree with me, so you didn't worry about any other more reasonable interpretations that most people read.
3) I nonetheless clarified my meaning while you were posting, thinking someone like you might misinterpret "opinion" as "binding law." And, now, you actually agree with the content of my post, but that is totally unacceptable to you...you must maintain a constant level of criticism, so....
4) Now you criticize me for clarifying my post.
Again, well done. Mentally deranged, but very good mental derangement.
Your original post was that the case wasn’t law because it was an opinion, blatantly wrong. You then took 5 shots at trying to explain it was dicta which wasn’t your original thought at all.
Or D, Trump wins the election. I know you want to be fair about his whole process.
Is he presently under indictment? What for?
(no message)
What goes around comes around.
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
And, indeed, state law is another matter entirely. We are just talking about federal law in this thread.
(no message)
Or, will you just prosecute Trump and let Biden people go.
Oh, and I want you to support lying to the courts so we can spy on the Biden campaign people. Fair is fair. Or, do only Democrats get to do that?
(no message)
(no message)
As I recall, Gerald Ford pardoned Nixon for any federal crimes he might have committed as President while in office. If New York AG wants to get publicity for prosecuting Trump there is no pardon that can protect him. However, a Biden DOJ prosecution of his predecessor would set a precedent that Joe would never set... as he himself might be the object of revenge some day.
Link: https://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-supreme-court/71/333.html
(no message)
after four years of feeble minded gaffes we shall insist on a 5 G President.
(no message)