Trump gives full pardon to conservative fraudster

[Czarcasm]

He gave a full pardon to yet another conservative criminal, Dinesh Dsouza, who was

indicted earlier that year on charges that he illegally used straw donors to contribute to Republican Senate candidate Wendy Long in New York in 2012.

…and as usual Trump did not go through the department’s Office of Pardon Attorney.
Interesting, but not surprising,

Though past presidents have waited until the end of their term for controversial pardons, Trump has granted clemency to four people during his first 16 months in office. His pardons include former Vice President Dick Cheney’s chief of staff I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby, who was convicted of perjury and obstruction of justice in an investigation into leaking the identity of a CIA officer, and former Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio, who was convicted of criminal contempt in a case related to his hard-line tactics with undocumented immigrants.

It’s good to be the king.

[Snowboarder_Bo]

It’s good to be on the king’s side, too, apparently.

[Covfefe]

You’d think CNN would mention the other one. He pardoned Jack Johnson last week.

[Czarcasm]

The assistant White House press secretary, Raj Shah, said

He’s accepted responsibility and the President believes it’s appropriate that he receive a pardon after community service, paying a fine, and doing other things that the judge has required,"

Really? Is that all it takes to get a pardon nowadays-Just do what the court orders you to do, and then you get a full pardon? Boy howdy, his hands are going to be tired after signing thousands of pardons due all those that have fulfilled those oh-so-stringent requirements.

[Czarcasm]

@Covfefe

You’d think CNN would mention the other one. He pardoned Jack Johnson last week.

Try again-here is CNN’s article about the man and his pardon.

[Inigo_Montoya]

So, why does the POTUS even have this power?
And does Trump’s (apparent) abuse of the power support extinguishing it forever?

[Ludovic]

@Covfefe

You’d think CNN would mention the other one. He pardoned Jack Johnson last week.

Every other President who was asked for the pardon said “maybe”, but that pretty much always means no.

[Shodan]

@Inigo_Montoya

So, why does the POTUS even have this power?

Because the Founding Fathers thought it was a good idea.

And does Trump’s (apparent) abuse of the power support extinguishing it forever?

Not IMO. Future Presidents should not be deprived of this power, even if you think Trump should be.

It’s one of the checks the President has on the judiciary. Should Gerry Ford not have been able to pardon Nixon, or Clinton Mark Rich? Should Trump not pardon the grandmother who is supposedly in prison for marijuana?

Regards,
Shodan

[ElvisL1ves]

@Inigo_Montoya

So, why does the POTUS even have this power?

Hamilton, Federalist #74.

Humanity and good policy conspire to dictate, that the benign prerogative of pardoning should be as little as possible fettered or embarrassed. The criminal code of every country partakes so much of necessary severity, that without an easy access to exceptions in favor of unfortunate guilt, justice would wear a countenance too sanguinary and cruel. As the sense of responsibility is always strongest, in proportion as it is undivided, it may be inferred that a single man would be most ready to attend to the force of those motives which might plead for a mitigation of the rigor of the law, and least apt to yield to considerations which were calculated to shelter a fit object of its vengeance. The reflection that the fate of a fellow-creature depended on his sole fiat, would naturally inspire scrupulousness and caution; the dread of being accused of weakness or connivance, would beget equal circumspection, though of a different kind. On the other hand, as men generally derive confidence from their numbers, they might often encourage each other in an act of obduracy, and might be less sensible to the apprehension of suspicion or censure for an injudicious or affected clemency. On these accounts, one man appears to be a more eligible dispenser of the mercy of government, than a body of men.

Um, Alex, it ain’t exactly working out that way, fella.

And does Trump’s (apparent) abuse of the power support extinguishing it forever?

No, there still has to be a way to let someone get on with his life after paying his debt to society. But Trump’s abuse of the power for his political allies does make a good case for putting the power elsewhere, such as back in the court that issued the conviction or an appeals court above it, or perhaps in a board like some states have.

[octopus]

@Inigo_Montoya

So, why does the POTUS even have this power?
And does Trump’s (apparent) abuse of the power support extinguishing it forever?

From the US Constitution

“Section 2.

The President shall be commander in chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the militia of the several states, when called into the actual service of the United States; he may require the opinion, in writing, of the principal officer in each of the executive departments, upon any subject relating to the duties of their respective offices, and he shall have power to grant reprieves and pardons for offenses against the United States, except in cases of impeachment.”

And if you hope that President Trump’s actions are going to lead to new amendments limiting the executive branch I think you will be disappointed.

[Inigo_Montoya]

He he he, I knew WHERE the power came from, it was the WHY that escaped me. (thanks Elvis)

Hamilton’s verse seems a bit naïve, or perhaps he had a different perspective than we do today. I mean, it makes a certain amount of sense to give someone the power to ‘Nope’ the judicial system, just to provide relief for someone truly screwed by a bad court. But it seems those are not the ones who tend to benefit from pardons. So whatever it’s high and mighty intent, the practical application appears to serve primarily unrepentant big crooks with big friends.

[nelliebly]

@Shodan

Because the Founding Fathers thought it was a good idea.Not IMO. Future Presidents should not be deprived of this power, even if you think Trump should be.

It’s one of the checks the President has on the judiciary. Should Gerry Ford not have been able to pardon Nixon, or Clinton Mark Rich? Should Trump not pardon the grandmother who is supposedly in prison for marijuana?

Regards,
Shodan

Should Ford have been able to pardon Nixon BEFORE Nixon was even charged with wrongdoing? I think that’s a far more interesting question. Perhaps Trump should pardon criminal cronies before they’re even charged. Think of the time he’d save and the satisfaction he’d get from preempting the judicial system!

I’m not convinced pardoning Nixon was necessary. Jaworski said he was convinced Nixon could not have received a fair trial and had already been punished enough by Nixon’s fall from power. And there was some concern about the toll a trial would have had on Nixon’s health.

And I certainly don’t think Clinton should have pardoned Mark Rich.

Is Trump considering pardoning a grandmother in prison for smoking weed? Does Sessions know? And was Gramma a big campaign contributor?

Of course, you asked if these presidents should be ABLE to do these things. Sure, but like other checking powers in the Constitution, it, too, should be checked, and Trump’s pardon of D’Souza and Clinton’s pardon of Rich, among others, offer good reasons for doing so. That, however, would require an amendment, which won’t happen while Trump’s in office and is likely to be forgotten if we get a president who uses the power to pardon sparingly and more judiciously judiciously.

[hajario]

@Ludovic

Every other President who was asked for the pardon said “maybe”, but that pretty much always means no.

Jack Johnson was allegedly a serial wife beater. That was the hold up with him.

I just read that he is considering pardoning Martha Stewart and Rob Bogoyovitch next.

[Inigo_Montoya]

@Ludovic

Every other President who was asked for the pardon said “maybe”, but that pretty much always means no.

Maybe this time he might just let it go.

Sorry it took so long. That one was a little subtle.

[Miller]

@Shodan

It’s one of the checks the President has on the judiciary. Should Gerry Ford not have been able to pardon Nixon, or Clinton Mark Rich?

I’m not sold on stripping the office of the President of the ability to grant pardons, but your examples are about halfway to convincing me its a good idea.

[octopus]

@Inigo_Montoya

He he he, I knew WHERE the power came from, it was the WHY that escaped me. (thanks Elvis)

Hamilton’s verse seems a bit naïve, or perhaps he had a different perspective than we do today. I mean, it makes a certain amount of sense to give someone the power to ‘Nope’ the judicial system, just to provide relief for someone truly screwed by a bad court. But it seems those are not the ones who tend to benefit from pardons. So whatever it’s high and mighty intent, the practical application appears to serve primarily unrepentant big crooks with big friends.

Intent and application have always been the conundrum to solve regarding the powers of institutions.

[Shodan]

@nelliebly

Is Trump considering pardoning a grandmother in prison for smoking weed? Does Sessions know? And was Gramma a big campaign contributor?

I was mistaken - it was cocaine, not weed. And Kim Kardashian, of all people, is lobbying Trump for her pardon, and for prison reform.

Obama apparently turned her down for clemency, although I don’t know why.

Regards,
Shodan

[Inigo_Montoya]

@Shodan

I was mistaken - it was cocaine, not weed. And Kim Kardashian, of all people, is lobbying Trump for her pardon, and for prison reform.

Obama apparently turned her down for clemency, although I don’t know why.

Regards,
Shodan

So, just to hijack the bejimminy out of this thread, is possession typically a FEDERAL crime that could be pardoned by the president, or is it more routinely a state level thing requiring the governor’s pardon?

In any event it looks like she was jailed for her role in a DISTRIBUTION ring, which is different from piddlin, first time offender for personal use. Her first “offense” could easily have been the first time she was caught following a long time of involvement. I have to wonder if free gear is something she is promising to Kim & Don in exchange for their efforts.

[Shodan]

I don’t care enough to do much research, but I assume this woman is guilty of a federal offense or she wouldn’t be applying for clemency or a pardon. She applied under Obama, so I assume her offense is something a President can affect.

But yes, her offense is nothing like some poor shlub spending twenty years in stir for smoking a joint.

Regards,
Shodan

[aceplace57]

I wouldn’t object to commuting Blagojevich’s sentence. He’s done enough prison time imho. Getting him out of office is what mattered. Rod can’t run for office again.

I don’t have a problem with pardoning Martha Stewart. She served her time. She’s rebuilt her brand. Clearing her record now makes no difference.

I never heard of the guy Trump pardoned.