Only for money fraud. And not for lying about a hooker payoff. I want a bunch of forensic accountants pouring over all the contracts he made to see how much he got in kickbacks. That two person company in North Dakota that got a billion dollars to build a wall . Contracts cancelled for military planes then reissued. $$$
And follow the money on the PPE taken from the states and “redistributed” by Jared K
I was not privy to discussion between Obama and his AG sadly.
I just find it inconceivable that a bank as big as HSBC was given a free pass because Eric Holder, all by himself, decided to just let them go. There is no way Holder just did that of his own accord (internal recommendation in the DOJ was to prosecute).
If nothing else, if Holder really, truly did that of his own volition with no communication with Obama then Obama, as Holder’s boss, should have called him up and had a “WTF?” conversation with Holder and probably should have replaced him. We see no evidence of any of that.
He is saying he will be hands off. Not just any Office of the Pardon Attorney recommendation. “It’s hands off completely.”
I expect that, in order to get confirmed by a GOP senate, the Attorney General nominee will have to pledge to let any decisions about Trump be made by career staff, not Democratic political appointees. And I agree with that. But even if they don’t get that pledge from the AG, I expect Biden to abide by his hand-off pledge.
What Biden should do, IMHO, is say he will hand his AG the Mueller Report which details actual crimes committed by Trump, evidence more than sufficient to get anyone else in court to stand trial, and then after reviewing it explain to the nation why he/she will or will not prosecute Trump.
“Hands off” is a dodge cuz he doesn’t want to do it. There already exists enough evidence to bring Trump to trial.
I’d be plenty happy if his pardon didn’t work. I don’t doubt he’d make the deal with Pence to resign if he thought self-pardons would not hold up. But I don’t see any reason why he can’t pardon himself, there is no such restriction in the Constitution.
This would violate one of Biden’s best campaign promises and turn Donald Trump into a political prisoner.
If there is a legitimate case against Trump with real jury appeal, I expect that career public corruption or tax fraud prosecutors will pursue it. If they don’t think they can get a conviction, they should drop it.
I hope the jury would acquit if it knew the prosecution had been ordered by a political adversary. I can hardly think of a situation where jury nullification is more justified.
I was going to say “no - let it go for the good of the country” but the OP changed my mind.
Biden should not appear personally invested in going after Trump, but “the system” should be allowed to do its work without being impeded.
Just as “the system” should operate now - whatever legal steps the Trump campaign is entitled to take to contest the election, they should do so within the confines of the law. Let objective justice prevail.
I totally agree resigning on January 19, 2021 and having Pence become president and pardon him is totally possible and would work (legally). Of course, Pence could tell him to f-off once Pence was president which would be pretty epic. Not sure Trump can trust anyone that much.
But yeah…it would definitely work (assuming pre-emptive pardons are ok which also have not been tested…they have happened but not tested).
And while the constitution does not say you can’t do it it doesn’t say you can do it either. IANAL but I think there is a legal principle about arriving at absurd outcomes which boils down to…don’t go there. Being able to pardon yourself leads to absurd outcomes in a country that, supposedly, prides itself on the rule of law. This would be the opposite of that.
I’d be surprised if even the new supreme court could stomach that one. They’d be making a dictator.
There is a legitimate case against Trump. It is in the Mueller Report. Really. Mueller showed that Trump met all the criteria for bringing a case.
Mueller did the investigation…a legal one. Done by law enforcement officers. The whole shebang. There is evidence…all that stuff. It is just sitting there. Right now. Done. No witch hunt. No wishful thinking.
It does not mean Trump is guilty but it is MORE than sufficient to put him on trial. The only reason it hasn’t happened is Mueller felt that presidents are immune from prosecution (really).
I am not sure what “jury appeal” has to do with it or should have to do with it.
And the Mueller Report doesn’t even cover every possible thing but it is a helluva start.
If it was a politically motivated hit job then sure.
But it isn’t. There is a lot of criminal evidence already out there. Evidence that would put ANY American citizen on trial.
Giving Trump a pass on that is the real crime.
What absurd outcomes? The Supremes will say that the Constitution provides the solution to creating a dictator through impeachment. The ‘Founders’ weren’t idiots, they realized what the language left open, and maybe intentionally to give the president the means of avoiding political prosecution. If the issue wasn’t one directly involving the Judicial Branch I doubt they’d find a question to resolve.
my understanding is that new York DAs and the AG in New York realize that prosecuting trump is a good way to advance their careers. so irrelevant of what Biden wants they may move ahead. Letitia James wants to become senator, governor or NYC mayor someday.
in America we have put governors, senators and speakers of the house in prison and nobody bat’s an eye. it should be the same if a president goes to prison.
It would literally give the president the ability to commit any federal crime whatsoever with impunity.
For which he can be removed from office and no longer do that.
Yeah- the State of NY is ready, willing and able.
And this just shows what idiots trump and Rudy are- trump is gonna need that money he is pissing away on frivolous legal challenges.
He would still be immune from committing a federal crime until they removed him.
It is a waste of public funds to put people on trial who probably will be acquitted. And I think that subjecting people to trial, who you think won’t be convicted, is, or should be regarded as, prosecutorial misconduct.
While prosecutors shouldn’t pay any attention to this next consideration, an acquittal would be a good way to get Trump re-elected in 2024. His approval lows from before impeachment never were matched afterwards, even in face of an economic depression. I attribute this to his being acquitted at his Senate trial. A jury acquittal, or dropping of a case after a hung jury, would be another vindication from the POV of median voters.
Really?
If there was a black man lynched in the south would it be prosecutorial misconduct to put the murderers on trial if the prosecutor knows the good-old-boys likely to be on the jury wouldn’t convict their buddy?
Right. That’s what it says in the Constitution. I agree it’s distasteful, it shouldn’t be allowed, but the language is clear. OTOH there is nothing in the Constitution saying the chief executive can’t be prosecuted for crimes in office either but people consider a justice dept. opinion produced simply to shield a corrupt president from prosecution to have the strength of actual law.
He’s personally responsible for over a 150 thousand American deaths. He should die in jail.