• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Do you believe there should be limits on the President's power to issue pardons for federal crimes?

Do you believe there should be limits on the President's power to issue pardons for federal crimes?

  • Pardons should only be issued at the end of a President's term.

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    65
Why would I read your post? It's an opinion so what is the big deal?
Because I started the thread and you accused me of hypocrisy. Which was disproven in post #5, if you bothered to read the thread. 🤷‍♀️
 
Because I started the thread and you accused me of hypocrisy. Which was disproven in post #5, if you bothered to read the thread. 🤷‍♀️
Why would a reply to another hate Trump thread without a rebut about all the sleazy pardons other president did? What is your thought on those pardons?
 
Why would a reply to another hate Trump thread without a rebut about all the sleazy pardons other president did? What is your thought on those pardons?
I started the thread. I posted in the thread about other pardons. I suggest you find another hill to die on. This one is an ant hill.
 
Other

Presidents will retain the right to pardon people at any point of their term, but:

The limit:
People who cannot be pardoned ever:
- Elected officials of all gov't levels convicted of any felony or committing crimes of any kind connected to their office (abuse of power, influence peddling, embezzling, etc)

- Anyone convicted of spying of any kind or treason

- Anyone convicted of threatening violence/committing violence against elected officials, appointed officials like Cabinet/agency heads on any level (local, state, Fed) or judges. This also includes intentionally targeting & damaging the property of the above.

- Cop killers
 
Other

Presidents will retain the right to pardon people at any point of their term, but:

The limit:
People who cannot be pardoned ever:
- Elected officials of all gov't levels convicted of any felony or committing crimes of any kind connected to their office (abuse of power, influence peddling, embezzling, etc)
So you are saying the Hunter and Joe family were illegal pardons?
- Anyone convicted of spying of any kind or treason

- Anyone convicted of threatening violence/committing violence against elected officials, appointed officials like Cabinet/agency heads on any level (local, state, Fed) or judges. This also includes intentionally targeting & damaging the property of the above.

- Cop killers
 
Until Trump came along presidential pardons weren't a problem

But under trump it has become all in your ability to pay.

Now we are going to have to limit a lot of the powers of the president.
 
Unfortunately, needed change would require a constitutional amendment.

I would take away the President's unilateral power of pardon and commutation and set up a bipartisan passed board of pardons and commutation.

The board would have a partisan balance and a supermajority would be required to grant a pardon or commutation.

In addition, no person could either be pardoned or have their sentence commutated until their conviction is final and they have either completed their direct appeals or the period for bring direct appeals has expired.

Also, because pardon is essentially an act of grace, no person could be pardoned who denies their guilt and who has not expressed genuine remorse for their actions. The act of granting a pardon would be considered an imputation of guilt and the act of accepting a pardon would be considered a confession of guilt.

Additionally, neither the President nor any principal or inferior Officer of the United States could ever be pardoned for acts committed while in office, even after they have left office.
 
I woukd require a more deliberative bipartisan body than the executive before issuing a pardon.
 
Under the U.S. Constitution, the President has the power to grant pardons for federal crimes. This poll asks your opinion on whether that power should be limited.
As a rule, even if presidential pardon power is on occasion abused, I do not have a problem with pardon power. I do have a problem with pardon power by way of autopen. I do not feel that autopens should be allowed anywhere in government.
 
I do.

Every single pardon issued by Biden.
Of course, you also believe that the 2020 election was stolen and the Cyber Ninjas in Arizona are going to blow the lid off the whole scheme.

What do these things you believe have in common?

NO EVIDENCE!

That's kind of Mycroft's thing.
 
Do you think Trump has personally reviewed and signed the 1500+ pardons he has issued since he took office?

I believed based on Trump very publicly signing executive orders and pardons, that they were reviewed and he signed them. I do not see him as a fan of autopens. As for the 1500 number, I assume that it was not 1500 individual pardons, many were lumped into a much lesser number of documents. And when the late president Jimmy Carter pardoned the draft dodger that fled to Canada, they were not all on individual pardon documents.
 
I think a Presidential pardon should only be valid for crimes a person was actually convicted of and not crimes they might have committed in the past or future.
I was around when Gerald Ford issued the preemptive unconditional pardon to Richard Nixon "for any and all crimes he may have committed." This was shocking to me, because it seemed every day there were more revelations of more egregious crimes committed by Nixon and his cronies. They had actually discussed murdering certain individuals. Did they actually kill anyone? We'll never know, because the pardon put an end to all the investigations.

So, I agree. The presidential pardon should be limited to persons actually convicted of crimes.
 
I believed based on Trump very publicly signing executive orders and pardons, that they were reviewed and he signed them. I do not see him as a fan of autopens. As for the 1500 number, I assume that it was not 1500 individual pardons, many were lumped into a much lesser number of documents.
He pardoned all the people convicted of J6 crimes plus dozens of others.
"I believe", "I do not see him" "I assume" mean nothing.
If you have sources that can corroborate your musings about the specifics of how clemency is granted by a President, please share them.
 
As a rule, even if presidential pardon power is on occasion abused, I do not have a problem with pardon power. I do have a problem with pardon power by way of autopen. I do not feel that autopens should be allowed anywhere in government.
You only believe this because you were told to believe this. Trump uses the autopen all the time.
 
I believed based on Trump very publicly signing executive orders and pardons, that they were reviewed and he signed them. I do not see him as a fan of autopens. As for the 1500 number, I assume that it was not 1500 individual pardons, many were lumped into a much lesser number of documents. And when the late president Jimmy Carter pardoned the draft dodger that fled to Canada, they were not all on individual pardon documents.
Mass pardons on one piece of paper are different than an autopen how?
 
Unfortunately, needed change would require a constitutional amendment.

I would take away the President's unilateral power of pardon and commutation and set up a bipartisan passed board of pardons and commutation.

The board would have a partisan balance and a supermajority would be required to grant a pardon or commutation.

In addition, no person could either be pardoned or have their sentence commutated until their conviction is final and they have either completed their direct appeals or the period for bring direct appeals has expired.

Also, because pardon is essentially an act of grace, no person could be pardoned who denies their guilt and who has not expressed genuine remorse for their actions. The act of granting a pardon would be considered an imputation of guilt and the act of accepting a pardon would be considered a confession of guilt.

Additionally, neither the President nor any principal or inferior Officer of the United States could ever be pardoned for acts committed while in office, even after they have left office.
Actually, according to one SCOTUS justice, accepting a pardon inferes (admits) guilt.

I know of one case where the convict refused to accept the pardon, because a pardon effectively strips away one's 5th amendment protection against self-incrimination, so they would have to testify truthfully, implicating others. This would put a target on his back and shorten his life expectancy so he refused the pardon, choosing to do his time rather than risk angering some very powerful people.
 
You only believe this because you were told to believe this. Trump uses the autopen all the time.
Ayup.
Programmed regurgitation.
 
Back
Top Bottom