Well it seems incredibly short-sighted / illogical. It doesn't have to even be a con-man. At its base, the idea that a system could potentially be more unjust the one man doesn't make any sense. It completely neuters the entire idea of having a system in the first place. Why have any legal system?
Yeah thats not true in the least bit. Its exactly why we have checks and balances and the presumption of innocence.
I do believe its one of those perks of being President that is very often abused. I wasn't exactly ecstatic that Obama pardoned the traitor named Private Manning, however at the end of the day, it matters little.
Looks like Trump is trying to catch up with the others. Didn't realize the numbers were so high. July 2019 Franklin D. Roosevelt: 2,819 pardons Harry S. Truman: 1,913 pardons Dwight D. Eisenhower: 1,110 pardons Woodrow Wilson: 1,087 pardons Lyndon Johnson: 960 pardons Richard Nixon: 863 pardons Calvin Coolidge: 773 pardons Herbert Hoover: 672 pardons Theodore Roosevelt: 668 pardons Jimmy Carter: 534 pardons John F. Kennedy: 472 pardons Bill Clinton: 396 pardons Ronald Reagan: 393 pardons William H. Taft: 383 pardons Gerald Ford: 382 pardons Warren Harding: 386 pardons William McKinley: 291 pardons Barack Obama: 212 pardons George W. Bush: 189 pardons George H.W. Bush: 74 pardons Donald J. Trump: 10 pardons*
There is a difference between pardoning them based on ideology in what you think is in the best interest of America vs self-interest and personal reasons. Obama pardoning Manning was not a self interest pardon. He wasn't pardoning a friend. You disagree with his decision which is perfectly fine and reasonable but you can't question the motive as being corrupt. You made a comment about checks and balances. I think the founders assumed the checks and balances would work assuming that a informed electorate would always exist. But what happens when news media is divided where more than half the country is in America bubble that only listens to pro-"president in power" news and only look at sources online that only defend the president? Congressional check on the Executive branch relies on an informed electorate as things like impeachment can never succed regardless of the severity of the president's abuses of power if not enough political will power exists for 60% of US senators to vote to remove the president. Do you think the founders overlooked that hypothetical scenerio of a misinformed public?
if Blago’s past history is any indication, most probably, he Has already made a f***king gold mine out of this, For a fee, promising his fellow cell mates That he’d talk to Putin’s useful idiot about granting more pardons
Im going to try to be as objective as I can here. I do not believe the founders were antiquated individuals with no vision of the future. I believe they were highly intelligent and very thoughtful and largely free from corruption due to obligation (IE: modern politics). Sure, there are many aspects they could never have dreamed of, but as far as human nature, I believe they were well aware of what could happen. I do believe they fully understood the power of propaganda and how detrimental a block of uneducated voters could be. I also believe they felt the government should move slow. The 2/3's voting power was intended to allow enough progress when absolutely needed but not make it so difficult the country couldn't evolve. You brought up impeachment and this is a great example. I dont think the framers would want a President removed because he lied to congress under oath for diddling with the intern. I think its a bad idea and creates serious instability if we could simply remove the will of the people by utilizing 50% of Congress. Its the Executive branch that keeps the Judicial Branch in check. W/out the Executive branch, the judicial branch could self legislate. If the Framers could change certain aspects, one would be term limits, especially with SCOTUS. I also believe they would put provisions in to protect the country from corporations
2 big reasons behind Trump’s pardon of former San Francisco 49ers owner Eddie DeBartolo Jr. Continued here: You might Google "DeBartolo & mafia" when you have some free time too...
Presidents can and have pardoned questionable people...but you should have a reason better than this: “He seems like a very nice person,” Trump told reporters. “I watched his wife on television.”
Michael Milken was indicted on a boatload but they at the end got him to plead guilty to not filing 13-D's (disclosure when you own in excess of 5% of a public company). No ONE in history had ever been charged with this crime and it was a small process crime. Why did Milken agree to pleading guilty? Because they went after his brother and his parents who had money in a pooled fund of his and so if he didn't agree his parents would be charged with receiving illegal proceeds (though it wasn't illegal). Then it was a bait and switch and they threw the book at him during the sentencing. What was Michael Milken's real crime? He found a new source of leveraged capital that allowed corporate raiders to take over storied American businesses. His success overturned the established order on Wall Street and Corporate America and they crucified him for it. I despise Rudy Guliani for his tactics then and even Rudy (who prosecuted this) pushed for the pardon. He should also get an end to his ban on serving public companies or being involved with investment companies from the SEC. Its a travesty what happened to one of the greatest financial minds in a generation.
I'm going to post an excerpt if you don't mind.. The Paul Pogue case is just slap in the face of anyone who wants to drain the swamp. This is just nuts to me.. Can a Democratic candidate please bring these pardons up during a debate in the most bitingly clear way and put away any notion that Trump is someone willing to fight the so called swamp? Which president did anything this egregious before him?! Now that the Senate has approved Trump's "perfect" quid-pro-quos with foreign nations, the flood gate has apparently been open where he will pardon people for reelection campaign contributions. Oh and we really can't have Blagojevich stay behind bars for something that Trump is doing in broad day light. Bad for optics: https://www.thedailybeast.com/trump-grants-clemency-to-another-round-of-people-he-saw-on-fox-news In August alone, Ben Pogue donated $85,000 to Trump Victory while Ashleigh Pogue contributed $50,000 that month. The following month, Ben Pogue made an in-kind air travel contribution of $75,404.40. The couple also made several large donations to the Republican National Committee and each donated $5,600 to Donald Trump for President Inc. On the day of their first donation to the Trump campaign, Ashleigh posted an Instagram photo of her and her husband posing with Donald Trump Jr. and his girlfriend, Kimberly Guilfoyle, at the Hamptons. Prior to the Pogues’ sudden significant donating spree to Trump and the Republicans, the couple was not seen as big campaign spenders
