The President of the United States should not have the power to pardon anyone for crimes associated with his office, family, businesses or associates. Period. Reform is needed.
The President of the United States should not have the power to pardon anyone for crimes associated with his office, family, businesses or associates. Period. Reform is needed.
I don’t understand why the president has the power to pardon anyone for anything. It seems to me the very notion of a presidential pardon undercuts the integrity of our legal system.
I don't know the history or legal theory but it smells of a hold-out from monarchy. A pardon process, yes, but why leave to presidential whim? I never understood how the preemptive pardon of Nixon was considered legal. Irrespective of whether he should have been prosecuted or not. I see pardon as revisiting a questionable conviction, not capricious obstruction of justice.
Significant events are usually a convergence of preconditions, not just a single cause, but I think the "pardon" helped to launch a new level of institutionalized contempt in the Republican party for equal justice and rule of law.
It's only been by whim with Trjump. Usually, it's been a formal appeal for a pardon, with evidence why submitted, researched by the pardon office, and a recommendation given to the president. Two presidents abused it - Trump and Clibnton (surprise surprise) at least no Democrat ever did it.
The President of the United States should not have the power to pardon anyone for crimes associated with his office, family, businesses or associates. Period. Reform is needed.
I don’t understand why the president has the power to pardon anyone for anything. It seems to me the very notion of a presidential pardon undercuts the integrity of our legal system.
I don't know the history or legal theory but it smells of a hold-out from monarchy. A pardon process, yes, but why leave to presidential whim? I never understood how the preemptive pardon of Nixon was considered legal. Irrespective of whether he should have been prosecuted or not. I see pardon as revisiting a questionable conviction, not capricious obstruction of justice.
Significant events are usually a convergence of preconditions, not just a single cause, but I think the "pardon" helped to launch a new level of institutionalized contempt in the Republican party for equal justice and rule of law.
It's only been by whim with Trjump. Usually, it's been a formal appeal for a pardon, with evidence why submitted, researched by the pardon office, and a recommendation given to the president. Two presidents abused it - Trump and Clibnton (surprise surprise) at least no Democrat ever did it.
Agreed.
It's supposed to be the last chance for justice to be served. I emphasize the word "supposed"
Indeed....negates the DOJ.