Trump

[sydney]

whats happening to civil liberties in 8 weeks? who and where is affected?

are you not finding your civil liberties a tad diminished already...? , nonsensical rulings on which retailers can open , how many people can do this or that .....?? and he'll be gone in 8 weeks , do you think things will be back to normal by then ...?? i doubt it . what you have at the moment is a ridiculous game of simon says with an absolute fool calling the shots.

 

[sydney]

Brexit?

yes that too just to heap the misery on ......where are the new passports getting printed and what is the wait time ....i'll have a go at Malaysia and 6-9 months.

 

[Stat Brother]

The Donald doing his best to see off The Red Wave:-

[tweet]1332596478062317568[/tweet]

 

[Greg Bobkin]

Just saw that Trumpo has made $170m in donations from people who want to 'stop the steal'. However, as mentioned on here before, only a fraction of that will be used for that purpose and the rest of it ($150m, apparently) goes straight into the pockets of good old Donald.

What a guy!

 

[Blue Valkyrie]

Just saw that Trumpo has made $170m in donations from people who want to 'stop the steal'. However, as mentioned on here before, only a fraction of that will be used for that purpose and the rest of it ($150m, apparently) goes straight into the pockets of good old Donald.

What a guy!

#StopTheStupid

 

[Rodney Thomas]

Just saw that Trumpo has made $170m in donations from people who want to 'stop the steal'. However, as mentioned on here before, only a fraction of that will be used for that purpose and the rest of it ($150m, apparently) goes straight into the pockets of good old Donald.

What a guy!

Or, it would seem, some of that may be used to buy a pardon.

 

[Gwylan]

Or, it would seem, some of that may be used to buy a pardon.

I think it's the other way round - there's suspicion that money has been funnelled into the WH to buy pardons - although at the moment it's only a suspicion.

But he's got a couple of months left to work out ways to keep the money flooding in

 

[Rodney Thomas]

I think it's the other way round - there's suspicion that money has been funnelled into the WH to buy pardons - although at the moment it's only a suspicion.

But he's got a couple of months left to work out ways to keep the money flooding in

That is what I meant. Some of that donated money may have been used 'buy' pardons. If, of course, the allegations are substantiated.

 

[Greg Bobkin]

What I don't quite get is how he pardons people (Rudy, his family) when they haven't (AFAIK) been convicted of anything, let alone had any charges brought against them?

 

[Icy Gull]

I imagine he’ll snuff it quite soon after leaving the White House.

 

[Blue Valkyrie]

I imagine he’ll snuff it quite soon after leaving the White House.

I guess the people needing pardons hope it isn't before they've been granted !

 

[Lyndhurst 14]

What I don't quite get is how he pardons people (Rudy, his family) when they haven't (AFAIK) been convicted of anything, let alone had any charges brought against them?

They're calling it a pre-emptive pardon. As you say they haven't been charged or convicted of anything, does this mean that they can now commit some crimes as they have been pre-pardoned.

Whatever is going on this whole business of pardoning cronies and buddies has to be reviewed and changed - and it's not just Trump - Clinton, Ford, Nixon etc. all used and abused the system

 

[Gwylan]

What I don't quite get is how he pardons people (Rudy, his family) when they haven't (AFAIK) been convicted of anything, let alone had any charges brought against them?

He hasn't yet. All the pardons he's given have been for people convicted of a crime. But he is talking about giving pardons to people for unspecified crimes.

It does sound bizarre but there is a precedent in the US: Ford gave Nixon a pardon before he'd even been charged for any crime, let alone convicted.

And, as has been pointed out on here, pardons are for federal crimes only, people can still be charged for felonies under state law

 

[Greg Bobkin]

He hasn't yet. All the pardons he's given have been for people convicted of a crime. But he is talking about giving pardons to people for unspecified crimes.

It does sound bizarre but there is a precedent in the US: Ford gave Nixon a pardon before he'd even been charged for any crime, let alone convicted.

And, as has been pointed out on here, pardons are for federal crimes only, people can still be charged for felonies under state law

Sorry - that's what I meant. I know he's already pardoned people who have served time/been convicted (nothing new there, I know that has been done by probably every president). What I thought was weird is that he's jumping straight to the pardon before anything to be pardoned for has even come to light (and then [MENTION=10885]Lyndhurst 14[/MENTION] clarified the situation). CLEARLY some dodgy stuff has gone on, which I guess we might or might not hear about in the near future.

On another Trump note, I read that he was apparently planning to announce his intention to run in 2024 on Inauguration Day and he won't be attending, nor will he invite Biden to the WH for the traditional handover. Knowing Trumpo, he's lying and when someone in the press brings it up he will claim it is 'fake news'.

 

[CHAPPERS]

Sounds like he's doing nothing but harm to the Republicans' chances in the Senate run off, which is nice.

 

[Gwylan]

Whatever is going on this whole business of pardoning cronies and buddies has to be reviewed and changed - and it's not just Trump - Clinton, Ford, Nixon etc. all used and abused the system

Neither Nixon nor Clinton pardoned people for crimes that had not yet been committed

 

[Mellotron]

Sounds like he's doing nothing but harm to the Republicans' chances in the Senate run off, which is nice.

He's put McConnell in an absolutely impossible position at the moment, which is lovely to see.

They created this monster, it's now turning on them.

 

[Lyndhurst 14]

Neither Nixon nor Clinton pardoned people for crimes that had not yet been committed

Didn't say they had. I said they used the system for their own convenience

 

[Gwylan]

Didn't say they had. I said they used the system for their own convenience

No, but you were replying in response to a question about pre-emptive pardons.

As for Nixon, I'm not fully au fait with the people that he pardoned but I'm pretty sure that none of them were "buddies" of the president. In fact, many of Nixon's associates (whom he could have pardoned) went to chokey.

You're right about Clinton though, he did pardon a Democrat donor and his own brother so he did have some form

We talk about pardons but in most cases, these were acts of clemency - in other words, they were still guilty but had sentences reduced.

And you're right that many presidents abuse the system, most recent example being George Bush Senior's pardon of the main actors in the Iran/Contra scandal. But pre-emptive pardons seem to be breaking all the rules

 

[Lyndhurst 14]

No, but you were replying in response to a question about pre-emptive pardons.

No - you are still misreading my response