Page 1
Page 1
Started By
Message

“Preemptive pardons are proof of guilt”

Posted on 1/20/25 at 4:57 pm
Posted by hawgfaninc
https://youtu.be/torc9P4-k5A
Member since Nov 2011
48575 posts
Posted on 1/20/25 at 4:57 pm
Posted by udtiger
Over your left shoulder
Member since Nov 2006
105989 posts
Posted on 1/20/25 at 4:59 pm to
Hmmmm...
Posted by Big EZ Tiger
Member since Jul 2010
25046 posts
Posted on 1/20/25 at 5:20 pm to
The laughs keep coming at the expense of the dumb left.
Posted by Indefatigable
Member since Jan 2019
32041 posts
Posted on 1/20/25 at 5:22 pm to
It certainly implies guilt. More importantly, it removes the possibility of invoking the Fifth Amendment for the pardoned act(s)
Posted by Seldom Seen
Member since Feb 2016
45140 posts
Posted on 1/20/25 at 5:23 pm to
It's (D)ifferent.
Posted by Lsut81
Member since Jun 2005
82464 posts
Posted on 1/20/25 at 5:25 pm to
Would have been better if ended with Biden’s Larsons of Hunter and All other family members and then Curb Your Enthusiasm music playing
Posted by Godfather1
What WAS St George, Louisiana
Member since Oct 2006
84099 posts
Posted on 1/20/25 at 5:26 pm to
quote:

It certainly implies guilt. More importantly, it removes the possibility of invoking the Fifth Amendment for the pardoned act(s)


At the federal level.

They’ll still clam up for fear of state charges.
Posted by Stealth Matrix
29°59'55.98"N 90°05'21.85"W
Member since Aug 2019
9270 posts
Posted on 1/20/25 at 5:27 pm to
The Law of Projection strikes again.
Posted by Indefatigable
Member since Jan 2019
32041 posts
Posted on 1/20/25 at 5:32 pm to
quote:

They’ll still clam up for fear of state charges.

FWIW, none of these people were ever going to be prosecuted regardless, but wouldn't any of their actions have taken place in DC?
Posted by Godfather1
What WAS St George, Louisiana
Member since Oct 2006
84099 posts
Posted on 1/20/25 at 5:34 pm to
quote:

FWIW, none of these people were ever going to be prosecuted regardless, but wouldn't any of their actions have taken place in DC?


I suppose that would depend upon what they were charged with.
Posted by thebigmuffaletta
Member since Aug 2017
14556 posts
Posted on 1/20/25 at 5:35 pm to
SFP will be along shortly to explain how this is (D)ifferent
Posted by KiwiHead
Auckland, NZ
Member since Jul 2014
31708 posts
Posted on 1/20/25 at 5:35 pm to
Removes the reason, not the ability from a legal standpoint. Since a person is pardoned they have no real practical reason to not answer since they cannot ostensibly incriminate themselves. But the ability to invoke it is still there. It would be illegal and unconstitutional to assert that by receiving a pardon you sacrifice your 5th Amendment Rights even on the particular issue. It's tantamount to a quid pro quo in receiving a pardon.
Posted by Don Quixote
Member since May 2023
3039 posts
Posted on 1/20/25 at 5:37 pm to
quote:

At the federal level. They’ll still clam up for fear of state charges.


and Milley can be recalled to active duty to face a military tribunal and stripped of his rank and pension
Posted by Locoguan0
Baton Rouge, LA
Member since Nov 2017
5827 posts
Posted on 1/20/25 at 5:37 pm to
"There’s no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren’t enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws."

Preemptive pardons are necessary in today's political world. Crimes can be created.
Posted by KiwiHead
Auckland, NZ
Member since Jul 2014
31708 posts
Posted on 1/20/25 at 5:41 pm to
I was thinking though that Cheney and Fauci should never have been offered pardons. There was no need....especially in Cheney's case.
Posted by Indefatigable
Member since Jan 2019
32041 posts
Posted on 1/20/25 at 5:48 pm to
quote:

It would be illegal and unconstitutional to assert that by receiving a pardon you sacrifice your 5th Amendment Rights even on the particular issue.

Why? You can no longer incriminate yourself, or have your property forfeited as a result of that action.
quote:

It's tantamount to a quid pro quo in receiving a pardon.

between who? The POTUS and the Congress?
Posted by UncleFestersLegs
Member since Nov 2010
13109 posts
Posted on 1/21/25 at 7:50 am to
quote:

Fauci should never have been offered pardons.
fauci's pardon is unconditional back to 2014. Ask yourself why 2014
Posted by BuckeyeGoon
Member since Jan 2025
90 posts
Posted on 1/21/25 at 8:03 am to
A lot of states, especially the bigger ones like Texas and Florida, will likely have some kind of nexus with high ranking federal officials/employees.

Fauci's pardon for example is basically an admission that his gain of function research created covid 19. Could the state of Texas for example indict or sue him for the damages covid caused in their state? I'm honestly not sure if that would be legal or possible but there has to be stuff like that the states could still do.
Posted by UncleFestersLegs
Member since Nov 2010
13109 posts
Posted on 1/21/25 at 8:04 am to
quote:

Fauci's pardon for example is basically an admission that his gain of function research created covid 19.
exactly. It was banned in 2014
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 1Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram