Started By
Message

Tom Fitton Says IGNORE THE PARDONS, PROSECUTE

Posted on 1/20/25 at 2:37 pm
Posted by Major Dutch Schaefer
Central American jungle
Member since Nov 2011
34573 posts
Posted on 1/20/25 at 2:37 pm
Posted by LSUwag
Florida man
Member since Jan 2007
17613 posts
Posted on 1/20/25 at 2:39 pm to
The better strategy would to have state prosecutors go after them like they did against Trump.
Posted by VoxDawg
Glory, Glory
Member since Sep 2012
68032 posts
Posted on 1/20/25 at 2:41 pm to
Posted by FLTech
the A
Member since Sep 2017
19499 posts
Posted on 1/20/25 at 2:42 pm to
I just want to see them all squirm and have to admit to everything they did. If they are pardoned the. I don’t care if the go to jail. I just want the truth to come out. I feel this has to be done to turn down the temperature with all of the TDS people going forward
Posted by SlowFlowPro
Simple Solutions to Complex Probs
Member since Jan 2004
443896 posts
Posted on 1/20/25 at 2:43 pm to
If there was no crime committed then the part in the ceremonial

Either way you can't prosecute. If there was a crime then it's part and if there was not a crime there's nothing to prosecute
Posted by Wire Road 2
Member since Jul 2022
103 posts
Posted on 1/20/25 at 2:43 pm to
quote:

The better strategy would to have state prosecutors go after them like they did against Trump.


Why not both…Force them to use up their ill gotten gains on legal fees if nothing else.
Posted by Aubie Spr96
lolwut?
Member since Dec 2009
42878 posts
Posted on 1/20/25 at 2:43 pm to
I'd make someone prove to me that I could pardon someone without a known or proven crime committed. It seems insane to me.
Posted by Decatur
Member since Mar 2007
29879 posts
Posted on 1/20/25 at 2:51 pm to
The same Tom Fitton that advised Trump not to cooperate with the National Archives, leading to a criminal indictment of Trump. Yeah, let’s keep listening to this guy.
Posted by Gifman
Member since Jan 2021
13805 posts
Posted on 1/20/25 at 2:52 pm to
quote:

The same Tom Fitton that advised Trump not to cooperate with the National Archives, leading to a criminal indictment of Trump.


they were going to indict him regardless idiot
Posted by Nosevens
Member since Apr 2019
13415 posts
Posted on 1/20/25 at 2:53 pm to
“ except in cases of impeachment “
While I would believe it is for those who have committed a possible violation that can be deem impeachable I’m curious enough to see if it could also be used against those who seek out an impeachment using false accusations or fabricated evidence such as Liz Cheney has done
Posted by Hetfield
Dallas
Member since Jun 2013
8234 posts
Posted on 1/20/25 at 2:54 pm to
The problem is no AG in a Blue State will go after these people.
Posted by Bunk Moreland
Member since Dec 2010
60533 posts
Posted on 1/20/25 at 2:54 pm to
This board is wasting time melting down over the pardons.

I think the COVID stuff is complicated and they would never make anything stick against Fauci.

Was the J6 committee devious and a TV show? Yes. Criminal? IDK.

The only thing I am still super butthurt over and want retribution for is Russiagate. But, the best we got is Durham, and I would guess the statute of limitations has passed on most of the dirty deeds.
Posted by Trevaylin
south texas
Member since Feb 2019
7834 posts
Posted on 1/20/25 at 2:55 pm to
did you misspell "part" and mean pardon
Posted by ruzil
Baton Rouge
Member since Feb 2012
17704 posts
Posted on 1/20/25 at 2:58 pm to
quote:

If there was a crime then it's part and if there was not a crime there's nothing to prosecute


How can you determine if a crime did or did not exist if an investigation was not conducted?

Just curious.
Posted by TigerMyth36
River Ridge
Member since Nov 2005
40177 posts
Posted on 1/20/25 at 3:01 pm to
Can a person with dementia enter a binding contract?
Posted by POTUS2024
Member since Nov 2022
19684 posts
Posted on 1/20/25 at 3:02 pm to
quote:

Was the J6 committee devious and a TV show? Yes. Criminal? IDK.


Definitely criminal. At a minimum, Frauds Against the United States.
Posted by AlxTgr
Kyre Banorg
Member since Oct 2003
83547 posts
Posted on 1/20/25 at 3:06 pm to
I would argue that unless a crime was identified by the President, no pardon occurred.
Posted by KiwiHead
Auckland, NZ
Member since Jul 2014
31791 posts
Posted on 1/20/25 at 3:09 pm to
Fitton does realize that he's not a lawyer? His organization can file whatever they chose. Does not mean it has merit from a legal standpoint. Presidents pardons is pretty absolute as it applies to the federal level.
Posted by Bjorn Cyborg
Member since Sep 2016
30917 posts
Posted on 1/20/25 at 3:14 pm to
quote:

Presidents pardons is pretty absolute as it applies to the federal level.


I think everyone agrees with that. It's the blanket, preemptive pardons where the constitutionality gets murky.

This was a big issue during Ford's pardon of Nixon, but the country was ready to move on and no one challenged it - but it was discussed heavily and many scholars believed a blanket pardon for uncharged crimes was unconstitutional.
Posted by Von
Wichita Falls, TX
Member since Feb 2019
2417 posts
Posted on 1/20/25 at 3:14 pm to
quote:

Why not both

This. Yes, going through the states is a way around them but blanket pardons covering 10 years for "no crimes" needs to be challenged or everyone will be doing it in the future.
It's complete bullshite, stop it now.

Remember in 2020 when the left said that Trump was going to do that and they said it was not possible?
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 3Next pagelast page

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