Yes and Vindemsn is one of the people Trump wants to go after. Hence my view that a blanket pardon would greatly disarm Trump from his political assassination attempts.
No Jon, I can't agree with you on that premise. Assuming that Vindman ever did get a pardon, how would that stop Trump from going after him again. Authoritarians don't need a legitimate charge against someone; they simply manufacture one. It is the hallmark of an authoritarian.
Theoretically they could try to "Trump up" phony charges for after Jan 20 2025 but it would be difficult and would almost certainly be thrown out of court quickly. No charge for any conduct prior to the date of the pardon could be charged (that's what a pardon is for) and unless there was some real evidence or at least a modicum of evidence for after Jsn 20, such charges would never stand.
I suppose you're right on this point; after all, this is still the United States...even so it will be far less so under a tRump administration. And that's where the cracks in the system can go wrong. Under this administration, which is hardly trustworthy to the Constitution, cracks, I fear, can appear.
No argument on the risks of future abuse by Trump. But we do still have courts and processes that theoretically need to be followed. Even Hitler at least at the outset tried to follow "norms". My argument for the blanket pardon is to put up a road block using normal accepted processes which Trump would either have to work through which might be difficult or he would have to make a brazen and unprecedented attempt to simply ignore the constitution. Will that stop him? I don't know but I know that NOT trying to do ANYTHING certainly won't stop him. And doing something ourselves that is completely outside the norms like armed resistance will be just as bad maybe worse.
Armed resistance is an iffy situation, to be sure. Tea Party advocates, as I 'm sure you well know, protect their "right to bear arms" because they fear the "g'omment" will take over their lives. I have always argued that I have no problem with the 2A as a right to defend one's home. Going against the military regarding "armed resistance" to a cause would simply be foolhardy. However, it may appear that the shoe now is on the other foot. I'm not suggesting that this is even a reasonable possibility, but depending on how bad things get, there are some who will not have the tolerance to stay the course until this bozo is out of office. And even then, the residual effects of this administration may still send some over the edge. Of course, we'll all have to wait and see how this turns out. This is a very rough draft of my thoughts and I'm simply taking advantage of my time to think things through. At the age of 74 and in reasonably very good health, I'm simply mulling this all in my mind at the present.
Alexander Vindman
Yes and Vindemsn is one of the people Trump wants to go after. Hence my view that a blanket pardon would greatly disarm Trump from his political assassination attempts.
No Jon, I can't agree with you on that premise. Assuming that Vindman ever did get a pardon, how would that stop Trump from going after him again. Authoritarians don't need a legitimate charge against someone; they simply manufacture one. It is the hallmark of an authoritarian.
Theoretically they could try to "Trump up" phony charges for after Jan 20 2025 but it would be difficult and would almost certainly be thrown out of court quickly. No charge for any conduct prior to the date of the pardon could be charged (that's what a pardon is for) and unless there was some real evidence or at least a modicum of evidence for after Jsn 20, such charges would never stand.
I suppose you're right on this point; after all, this is still the United States...even so it will be far less so under a tRump administration. And that's where the cracks in the system can go wrong. Under this administration, which is hardly trustworthy to the Constitution, cracks, I fear, can appear.
No argument on the risks of future abuse by Trump. But we do still have courts and processes that theoretically need to be followed. Even Hitler at least at the outset tried to follow "norms". My argument for the blanket pardon is to put up a road block using normal accepted processes which Trump would either have to work through which might be difficult or he would have to make a brazen and unprecedented attempt to simply ignore the constitution. Will that stop him? I don't know but I know that NOT trying to do ANYTHING certainly won't stop him. And doing something ourselves that is completely outside the norms like armed resistance will be just as bad maybe worse.
Armed resistance is an iffy situation, to be sure. Tea Party advocates, as I 'm sure you well know, protect their "right to bear arms" because they fear the "g'omment" will take over their lives. I have always argued that I have no problem with the 2A as a right to defend one's home. Going against the military regarding "armed resistance" to a cause would simply be foolhardy. However, it may appear that the shoe now is on the other foot. I'm not suggesting that this is even a reasonable possibility, but depending on how bad things get, there are some who will not have the tolerance to stay the course until this bozo is out of office. And even then, the residual effects of this administration may still send some over the edge. Of course, we'll all have to wait and see how this turns out. This is a very rough draft of my thoughts and I'm simply taking advantage of my time to think things through. At the age of 74 and in reasonably very good health, I'm simply mulling this all in my mind at the present.