# Could and would Trump Sr. pardon Trump Jr. **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [July 11, 2017, 3:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-and-would-trump-sr-pardon-trump-jr/791001 "2017-07-11T15:00:57Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 8
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2017, 5:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-and-would-trump-sr-pardon-trump-jr/791001/141 "2017-07-12T17:37:41Z")
> [@AK84](#): > > Well for you maybe. And me. However, for someone like Kushner, who was heavily involved in his professional capacity in meeting lots of people, including many foreigners, it would stand to reason that he would not be able to recall all of them off the cuff, or even without doing some digging. And still be unable to remember everything. > > Of course the flip side you can use a fact like that and try to explain away all sorts of things. The first time I filled out a security clearance form, it took me probably a week to gather all the necessary information before I could actually put pen to paper and start writing down answers. The idea that being a wealthy person, with all sorts of assistants, schedulers, attorneys, accountants, and so on working for him, relieves Kushner of the burden of accurately providing information under penalty of law, is patently absurd. ETA: not to mention the obvious factor that one’s financial commitments in other countries is even more important – not less important – in terms of being vulnerable to compromise by foreign intelligence services. If anything, Kushner had an even greater obligation to detail his foreign interests and contacts than, say, someone like me who had just recently graduated from college and had made a few foreign trips. Trump brags about how big his tax returns are, and how long it takes his people to fill them out. Kushner is under just as much obligation to fill out a security clearance form as accurately as his father in law’s tax returns. The reason why he doesn’t feel the need to is perfectly obvious. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2017, 6:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-and-would-trump-sr-pardon-trump-jr/791001/142 "2017-07-12T18:50:21Z")
> [@Superdude](#): > > From [§ 110.20 - Prohibition on contributions, donations, expenditures, independent expenditures, and disbursements by foreign nationals (52 U.S.C. 30121, 36 U.S.C. 510)](https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/11/110.20), perhaps? > > Adding your comment earlier about information being a thing of value, it certainly seems like Junior could be in violation of section B, which says > > I admit to not being an attorney (but bear in mind that I _did_ apply to law school. Twice), so there may be nuances and interpretations and distinctions I’m unaware of, but a layman read of that link seems like it applies, but I may be wrong. Nope. The value of services provided without compensation by any individual who volunteers on behalf of a candidate or political committee is not a contribution. See: > [@11 CFR § 100.74](#): > > Uncompensated services by volunteers. > The value of services provided without compensation by any individual who volunteers on behalf of a candidate or political committee is not a contribution. And: > [@](#): > > The Act and Commission regulations prohibit foreign nationals, directly or indirectly, from making a “contribution or a donation of money or other thing of value . . . in connection with a Federal, State, or local election.” 2 U.S.C. 441e(a)(1)(A); see also 11 CFR 110.20(b). However, the Act and Commission regulations also provide that the term “contribution” does not include “the value of services provided without compensation by any individual who volunteers on behalf of a candidate or political committee.” 2 U.S.C. 431(8)(B)(i); see also 11 CFR 100.74. (Quoting FEC Advisory Opinion 2007-22 (Hurysz); see also A.O. 2004-26 (Weller) (performance of campaign related activities by a foreign national without compensation, including soliciting funds and support for a Federal candidate, would not result in the making or receipt of a prohibited contribution), and 1987-25 (Otaola) (uncompensated volunteer services provided by a foreign national student would not constitute a prohibited contribution) ---
**Author:** ![Evil\_Economist](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/c89c15/32.png) [@Evil\_Economist](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Economist)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2017, 6:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-and-would-trump-sr-pardon-trump-jr/791001/143 "2017-07-12T18:53:56Z")
> [@Superdude](#): > > …section B, which says > > > [@](#): > > > > A foreign national shall not, directly or indirectly, make a contribution or a donation of money or other thing of value, or expressly or impliedly [sic] promise to make a contribution or a donation, in connection with any Federal, State, or local election. Just FYI, “impliedly” is a term of art, and shouldn’t have that [sic] appended. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2017, 7:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-and-would-trump-sr-pardon-trump-jr/791001/144 "2017-07-12T19:09:13Z")
> [@Evil\_Economist](#): > > Just FYI, “impliedly” is a term of art, and shouldn’t have that [sic] appended. Yep. It means “implied biggly”. 😃 ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2017, 7:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-and-would-trump-sr-pardon-trump-jr/791001/145 "2017-07-12T19:11:08Z")
> [@Evil\_Economist](#): > > Just FYI, “impliedly” is a term of art, and shouldn’t have that [sic] appended. Just FYI, the word is “implicitly”, so yes it should. ---
**Author:** ![Evil\_Economist](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/c89c15/32.png) [@Evil\_Economist](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Economist)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2017, 7:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-and-would-trump-sr-pardon-trump-jr/791001/146 "2017-07-12T19:15:31Z")
> [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > Just FYI, the word is “implicitly”, so yes it should. [https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/impliedly](https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/impliedly) ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2017, 7:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-and-would-trump-sr-pardon-trump-jr/791001/147 "2017-07-12T19:19:12Z")
> [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > Just FYI, the word is “implicitly”, so yes it should. Not according to [the dictionary.](http://www.dictionary.com/browse/impliedly) **Related forms** impliedly [im-plahy-id-lee] (Show IPA), adverb unimplied, adjective well-implied, adjective **Note : Can be confused** explicit, implicit, implied. ---
**Author:** ![VinylTurnip](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/b2d939/32.png) [@VinylTurnip](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/VinylTurnip)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2017, 8:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-and-would-trump-sr-pardon-trump-jr/791001/148 "2017-07-12T20:45:51Z")
Yeah, well, it’s a stupid word. ---
**Author:** ![Okrahoma](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/90db22/32.png) [@Okrahoma](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Okrahoma)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2017, 9:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-and-would-trump-sr-pardon-trump-jr/791001/149 "2017-07-12T21:12:34Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > There is no doubt that Kushner was caught red-handed with serious deficiencies in his forms, which he corrected only after being called out. Apparently his correction came one day after he submitted his form. Was he “called out” during that one day? ---
**Author:** ![BobLibDem](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/boblibdem/32/3149_2.png) [@BobLibDem](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BobLibDem)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2017, 10:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-and-would-trump-sr-pardon-trump-jr/791001/150 "2017-07-12T22:01:24Z")
> [@Okrahoma](#): > > “Opposition intel” is. Information about criminal misdeeds of your opponent isn’t. What criminal misdeeds of his opponent? What is your standard of evidence required to believe that Hillary committed a crime? Does it have to be written on the walls of two restroom stalls or is one sufficient? ---
**Author:** ![Okrahoma](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/90db22/32.png) [@Okrahoma](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Okrahoma)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2017, 10:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-and-would-trump-sr-pardon-trump-jr/791001/151 "2017-07-12T22:05:20Z")
> [@BobLibDem](#): > > What criminal misdeeds of his opponent? What is your standard of evidence required to believe that Hillary committed a crime? Does it have to be written on the walls of two restroom stalls or is one sufficient? Obviously, criminal misdeeds of his opponent that he expected to receive. And didn’t. ---
**Author:** ![BobLibDem](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/boblibdem/32/3149_2.png) [@BobLibDem](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BobLibDem)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2017, 10:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-and-would-trump-sr-pardon-trump-jr/791001/152 "2017-07-12T22:09:33Z")
> [@Okrahoma](#): > > Obviously, criminal misdeeds of his opponent that he expected to receive. And didn’t. Let me try this one: you’re running the campaign of a guy running for dogcatcher. Someone emails you stating that he has evidence of criminal activity of your candidate’s opponent. Is the ethical thing: 1. Say “Great news! Let’s set up a meeting so we can exploit this!” 2. Forward the email to your local police department. ? ---
**Author:** ![Okrahoma](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/90db22/32.png) [@Okrahoma](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Okrahoma)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2017, 10:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-and-would-trump-sr-pardon-trump-jr/791001/153 "2017-07-12T22:11:21Z")
> [@BobLibDem](#): > > Let me try this one: you’re running the campaign of a guy running for dogcatcher. Someone emails you stating that he has evidence of criminal activity of your candidate’s opponent. Is the ethical thing: > > 1. Say “Great news! Let’s set up a meeting so we can exploit this!” > 2. Forward the email to your local police department. The ethical thing is to see the evidence. Then, if it is true, involve the police department. As well as publicize the hell out of the evidence. ---
**Author:** ![running\_coach](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/running_coach/32/15836_2.png) [@running\_coach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/running_coach)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2017, 10:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-and-would-trump-sr-pardon-trump-jr/791001/154 "2017-07-12T22:14:57Z")
> [@Okrahoma](#): > > The ethical thing is to see the evidence. Then, if it is true, involve the police department. As well as publicize the hell out of the evidence. Why do _you_ need to see the evidence? How would you know it’s true? Isn’t that the job of the police? ETA: And if it turns out the evidence is false? ---
**Author:** ![Okrahoma](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/90db22/32.png) [@Okrahoma](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Okrahoma)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2017, 10:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-and-would-trump-sr-pardon-trump-jr/791001/155 "2017-07-12T22:39:51Z")
> [@running\_coach](#): > > Why do _you_ need to see the evidence? Because if there is none, you’d look pretty stupid running to the police. > [@](#): > > How would you know it’s true? That’s your judgement. > [@](#): > > ETA: And if it turns out the evidence is false? Then you don’t give it to the police and don’t publicize it. ---
**Author:** ![BobLibDem](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/boblibdem/32/3149_2.png) [@BobLibDem](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BobLibDem)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2017, 10:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-and-would-trump-sr-pardon-trump-jr/791001/156 "2017-07-12T22:50:50Z")
Call me crazy, but if someone tells me they have evidence of a crime I tell the police who told me and how to contact them. If they have no evidence, then they look stupid, not me. And if they do have evidence, the police are better equipped than I to handle it. ---
**Author:** ![running\_coach](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/running_coach/32/15836_2.png) [@running\_coach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/running_coach)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2017, 10:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-and-would-trump-sr-pardon-trump-jr/791001/157 "2017-07-12T22:52:44Z")
> [@Okrahoma](#): > > Because if there is none, you’d look pretty stupid running to the police. > That’s your judgement. > Then you don’t give it to the police and don’t publicize it. You go to the police/FBI/whoever and tell them you were told this material is evidence of a crime, hand it over and you’re done with it. How does a private citizen determine if the evidence is valid? Let law enforcement do their job. It’s not your call what to do beyond let law enforcement do their job. ---
**Author:** ![Okrahoma](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/90db22/32.png) [@Okrahoma](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Okrahoma)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2017, 10:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-and-would-trump-sr-pardon-trump-jr/791001/158 "2017-07-12T22:58:13Z")
> [@BobLibDem](#): > > Call me crazy, but if someone tells me they have evidence of a crime I tell the police who told me and how to contact them. Call me crazy, I would like to see the evidence first. ---
**Author:** ![Okrahoma](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/90db22/32.png) [@Okrahoma](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Okrahoma)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2017, 10:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-and-would-trump-sr-pardon-trump-jr/791001/159 "2017-07-12T22:59:14Z")
> [@running\_coach](#): > > You go to the police/FBI/whoever and tell them you were told this material is evidence of a crime, hand it over and you’re done with it. In order to hand something over, you need to get the evidence first. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2017, 11:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-and-would-trump-sr-pardon-trump-jr/791001/160 "2017-07-12T23:05:03Z")
The police analogy doesn’t work, because in this case we are talking about a foreign country that employs extremely aggressive intelligence operations against Americans. It is colossally fucking stupid to meet with people who are linked to such governments who are offering shady deals. There is no damn way that Don Jr. and other Trump people should have taken that meeting at all, because even a reasonably smart person shouldn’t deal with such situations alone. And here we are talking about two people - Don Jr. and Kushner - who are utterly naive dilettantes who greatly overestimate their intelligence. And then there is Manafort, who is in the tank already, so he probably has the least to lose with such meetings anyway. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-and-would-trump-sr-pardon-trump-jr/791001.md?page=7) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-and-would-trump-sr-pardon-trump-jr/791001.md?page=9)