Donald Trump

[Magicpole]

Plus it’s not like Trump has pushed the boundaries of convention at all.

Perish the thought. I can’t understand what drove you to even bring that up.

Get with the programme.

 

[Magicpole]

I think your math is off. My father served in the Korean War. He died last year at age 86.

Were his parents at the funeral?

 

[Gareth Barry Conlon]

For Trump to pardon someone they have to be convicted first. If he pardons either Cohen or Manafort, then this will strengthen the case for obstruction of Justice against Trump. For these pardons to be effective they would had to have been agreed prior to their trials in order to buy their silence and protect Trump and his cohorts (Don Jr/Ivanka/Cushner & others).

The tricky part will be proving that both Cohen and Manafort withheld evidence on purpose to protect Trump on the promise of a pardon. That is of course unless Muller has statements from Cohen and Manafort already which implicate Trump, or the evidence from the documents ceased from Cohen's offices is so damning that it doesn't matter what either say in court.

Muller also knows that Trump can't negotiate pardons for everyone as he doesn't know who may have given evidence against him already. Also, the Special Council has the power to offer immunity from prosecution in return for evidence, so Trump will have no room for manoeuvre here. I bet there was a queue around the block to give evidence, as the list of people he has p**sed off in his life must be huge.

Tick-Tock.

The issues around Pardons are quite unclear. Nixon got a blanket preemptive pardon to avoid the spectacle of a former US President standing trial, however pardons can be challenged and there is a legal view that Nixons Pardon would have been thrown out if it had been challenged as it did not comply with the legislation. As it was not contested it is not a legal precedent. Note Nixons pardon was granted by his successor as it was essentially agreed he could not pardon himself and that if he resigns and is then pardoned this would bring closure to an otherwise long and messy court process. It was the most convenient end for all involved - hence no challenge.

Trump is a whole different ball game and his crimes are far greater and run far deeper. There will be no appetite for a convenient end to this.

 

[MillionMilesAway]

Didn't Nixon himself refuse to comment that he could pardon himself?
I had the impression that anything Congress agree to, such as to avoid a president being in court, can be done.

 

[Trevor Morley's Tache]

The issues around Pardons are quite unclear. Nixon got a blanket preemptive pardon to avoid the spectacle of a former US President standing trial, however pardons can be challenged and there is a legal view that Nixons Pardon would have been thrown out if it had been challenged as it did not comply with the legislation. As it was not contested it is not a legal precedent. Note Nixons pardon was granted by his successor as it was essentially agreed he could not pardon himself and that if he resigns and is then pardoned this would bring closure to an otherwise long and messy court process. It was the most convenient end for all involved - hence no challenge.

Trump is a whole different ball game and his crimes are far greater and run far deeper. There will be no appetite for a convenient end to this.

Even scratching the surface, the Trump organisations possible links to shady dealings, tax evasion and organised crime start to appear quite frequently, but it appears that there hasn't been any appetite to investigate any of these anomalies to a satisfactory conclusion.

I wonder how much money he has to make in the first place in order to have enough money to pay people off to keep quiet in order to make the whole thing worth his while?

The thing is, when you take a bribe, you are implicated in the crime. Charlatans like Trump know that the only have to offer just enough to make it worthwhile. Once you take that money, you are effectively screwed. I think one of the major problems for Trump in recent times is that he tried to do it legally to pay off women who he had relationships with by paying them to sign an NDA. In the Stormy Daniels case his poor admin let him down by the fact that he didn't sign the NDA, effectively making it null and void. Whilst what he did (cheated on his wife) isn't illegal, it does bear heavily on is character, and it will end up costing him a whole lot more in legal fees and compensation. It's the illegal bribes which will bury him eventually.

https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/05/donald-trump-2016-mob-organized-crime-213910

 

[FogBlueInSanFran]

For Trump to pardon someone they have to be convicted first. If he pardons either Cohen or Manafort, then this will strengthen the case for obstruction of Justice against Trump. For these pardons to be effective they would had to have been agreed prior to their trials in order to buy their silence and protect Trump and his cohorts (Don Jr/Ivanka/Cushner & others).

The tricky part will be proving that both Cohen and Manafort withheld evidence on purpose to protect Trump on the promise of a pardon. That is of course unless Muller has statements from Cohen and Manafort already which implicate Trump, or the evidence from the documents ceased from Cohen's offices is so damning that it doesn't matter what either say in court.

Muller also knows that Trump can't negotiate pardons for everyone as he doesn't know who may have given evidence against him already. Also, the Special Council has the power to offer immunity from prosecution in return for evidence, so Trump will have no room for manoeuvre here. I bet there was a queue around the block to give evidence, as the list of people he has p**sed off in his life must be huge.

Tick-Tock.

As I understand it a President does not have to wait for a conviction to pardon someone. Obviously Nixon wasn't convicted of anything. As noted, this does not apply in cases of impeachment (that's specifically spelled out in the Constitution), but where things get thorny is pardoning witnesses who might testify in an impeachment in advance of it actually happening.

 

[FogBlueInSanFran]

The issues around Pardons are quite unclear. Nixon got a blanket preemptive pardon to avoid the spectacle of a former US President standing trial, however pardons can be challenged and there is a legal view that Nixons Pardon would have been thrown out if it had been challenged as it did not comply with the legislation. As it was not contested it is not a legal precedent. Note Nixons pardon was granted by his successor as it was essentially agreed he could not pardon himself and that if he resigns and is then pardoned this would bring closure to an otherwise long and messy court process. It was the most convenient end for all involved - hence no challenge.

Trump is a whole different ball game and his crimes are far greater and run far deeper. There will be no appetite for a convenient end to this.

Nixon's lawyers thought he could in fact pardon himself legally, but not to avoid impeachment. It could only be done if he immediately resigned thereafter. See "The Final Days" by Woodward and Bernstein.

 

[Trevor Morley's Tache]

As I understand it a President does not have to wait for a conviction to pardon someone. Obviously Nixon wasn't convicted of anything. As noted, this does not apply in cases of impeachment (that's specifically spelled out in the Constitution), but where things get thorny is pardoning witnesses who might testify in an impeachment in advance of it actually happening.

I stand corrected, but a pardon either way immediately smacks of obstruction of justice.

I wonder if he has the power to pardon any of the indicted Russians? That would be very telling if he tried that. I think Muller has played a blinder here.

 

[SWP's back]

Reporter at the end

Her noise certainly turned me on a bit.

 

[dave_blue12]

Even if Trump does a deal with Cohen and pardons him from his Federal Crimes the NY State could prosecute him for related crimes (though not the same) under which Trump has no right of pardon.

Cohen is caught in a pincer between Mueller and Schneiderman and has little choice but to testify against his former client.

It is believed that Mueller will shape any charges leaving room for State charges should Trump pardon those who might finger him.