Doesn't Trump have Constitutional authority

(no message)

quote:

---

To pardon Flynn? If so, isn't it OK

---

Swamp question bro

If he wants to pardon someone he should sack up and pardon them like an alpha boss, not perform some backdoor swamp maneuver

quote:

---

I'm an attorney

---

Trump's attorney claimed with a straight face that it was impossible in the eyes of the law to rape your spouse. Lucky for you, there is no IQ test required to be a lawyer.

Constitution? That old butt rag? That scrap of parchment those lessor mortals fought and died for?

(sarcasm veterans, pure sarcasm. appreciate every single one of you! even appreciate those veterans who vote the wrong way every damned time )

At the time trump raped his wife, there was no spousal rape law in New York, so trumps attorney was 100% correct.

Not saying he should pardon. Just saying wanting to put the BS muh Russia narrative to bed so he can MAGA isn't a crime.

The ability of a politician (president, governor) to issue a pardon does not make it okay for said politician to try to influence an investigation.

There should be an investigation, there should be a trial, and if found guilty, there should be a sentence including jail time.

A pardon does not eradicate a conviction. For example of Flynn were to be charged and convicted, even if trump pardons him, he is still a convicted felon. I am not sure how this would affect his benefits and such.

But just because ultimately he might be pardoned does NOT grant a politician impunity to interfere with the investigation. Besides, I'd say Flynn weren't convicted until 2020, trump won't be around to pardon him. It is still obstruction.

Your legal analysis is severely lacking.

So the Obama Administration clearly interfering in the Congressional investigations of the IRS, Fast and Furious, Benghazi AND Hillary's e mails (tarmac) is just fine?

It seems to me that the president has the authority to tell the FBI what they should and shouldn't investigate. The FBI works "at the pleasure of the president" (that's how it's written in the statute). The law (to my knowledge) says nothing about how the president is to interact with the FBI. The agency is completely under his control.

So how do we keep the president in check and ensure he isn't misusing the FBI? Good question. Congress certainly has the authority to investigate and impeach if necessary. But Congress is hardly an impartial body. One party would impeach the president of the other party at the drop of a hat. We saw it with Clinton in 1998 and we're seeing it today with Trump.

So how do we get an independent body to investigate the president? There isn't a way under current law to my knowledge. The special counsel is appointed by the AG and the AG is appointed by the president. This means the special counsel would essentially be investigating his boss. Congress no longer has the authority to appoint special counsels and that was by their OWN design (they let the law expire after Clinton was impeached).

So it seems it is solely up to Congress to hold hearings and call witnesses, etc.

I am not a lawyer, so someone please correct me if I am wrong.

Bush pardoned Casper Weinberger et al. on the eve of trial that could have implicated Bush. He has constitutional authority to pardon. The excercise of that authority cannot be a crime because making it a crime would be in itself unconstitutional. It might not have been smart to pardon Flynn, but he didn't do that. All he did was say this whole investigation into Flynn and muh Russians is a political attack that is interfering with the agenda that the people voted for. That is what Comey briefed Trump about on 1/6/17. Asking Comey to let the country move past the BS narrative and obstructionism isn't a crime.