SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Submitted via IRC for Bytram
Amid relentless scrutiny over possible ties between his presidential campaign and Russia, an extraordinary suggestion has emerged - that Donald Trump could pardon himself or his family.
Source: BBC News
US President Donald Trump has insisted he has the "complete power" to pardon people, amid reports he is considering presidential pardons for family members, aides and even himself.
A Democratic Party spokesman has called the reports "extremely disturbing".
The US authorities are probing possible collusion between the Trump team and Russia. Intelligence agencies think Russia tried to help Mr Trump to power.
Russia denies this, and the president says there was no collusion.
The Washington Post reported on Thursday that Mr Trump and his team were looking at ways to pardon people close to him.
Source: BBC News
(Score: 3, Insightful) by TheRaven on Monday July 24 2017, @12:12PM (3 children)
sudo mod me up
(Score: 2) by martyb on Monday July 24 2017, @12:53PM (2 children)
From what I've read on presidential pardons, the president is able to pardon for offenses that have not even been charged. In other words, could pardon a priori.
What I am wondering is this: Assuming president Trump pardons himself, what would the follow-on effect be to all his properties and holdings? Would it tank in value?
His name would be, presumably, tarnished. Who would be willing to pay big money to stay at his hotels and avail themselves of his other products/services? In large part, his name is what allows him to charge premium prices for what he sells. Right?
I could well see a pardon causing him to go bankrupt (again).
Then again, based on this report on Frontline [pbs.org], I suspect that, knowing full well that this might happen, he might be willing to try, anyway. (Say something enough so that people will believe it, and even when you lose, claim victory.)
Wit is intellect, dancing.
(Score: 2) by ikanreed on Monday July 24 2017, @06:05PM (1 child)
The one element of case law you're missing in those "a priori"(I don't think you're using that in the legal sense) cases is that the supreme court has established that accepting a pardon is admission of guilt, for the purposes of establishing fact. I'm not sure of the exact nuances that implies, but I've heard from bullshit internet lawyer types that means potentially waiving the 5th amendment against self-incrimination, meaning people could be compelled to testify about their actions under oath? Not sure I believe that, but fuck it, literally treasonous presidents really ought to be kicked out by congress regardless of who they pardon.
(Score: 2) by martyb on Thursday July 27 2017, @09:54PM
Yes, I was probably not using the term correctly -- I appreciate your gentle correction!
Wasn't aware that accepting a pardon assumed acceptance/presumption of guilt. TIL!
Wit is intellect, dancing.