Are there limits to Presidential pardon powers?

[Brad_ATX 13,654]

52 minutes ago, AU64 said:

I would not mind either and JMO but some day if they ever elect another president the dems are gonna regret the stuff they are doing now....gonna come back to bite them…...which is too bad in many ways.   

The tug of war in government is probably not good for the country though it appears that most Americans are not paying much attention this stuff....and just going about their business...doing their jobs, raising their kids and enjoying what the country has to offer them......like some college football. . 

It's not if the dems elect another president, it's when.  In fact, the dem candidate has won the popular vote in 6 of the last 7 elections.  Foolish to think there's even a microscopic chance they won't win again.  And it would be foolish to say the same about a republican if the situation was reversed.

Also, what are democratic lawmakers doing that can come back and bite them?  You do realize they have zero control of government right now, right?

[AU64 10,122]

4 hours ago, Brad_ATX said:

You do realize they have zero control of government right now, right?

What government are you talking about?

The dems basically control every aspect of the Federal Government.   Surely you don't think a few political appointees really run the DOJ or FBI or EPA or CIA do you? ...or even the top military...and certainly not the State Department just to mention a prime dem stronghold.  

Go ahead and name any alphabet agency you can think of ….because they are all really run by the civil service employees who depend on a big federal government for their jobs and life-style.  Just the unveiling of people like Comey, and his subordinates. co-conspirators should tell you all you need to know about the swamp.. 

[Brad_ATX 13,654]

46 minutes ago, AU64 said:

What government are you talking about?

The dems basically control every aspect of the Federal Government.   Surely you don't think a few political appointees really run the DOJ or FBI or EPA or CIA do you? ...or even the top military...and certainly not the State Department just to mention a prime dem stronghold.  

Go ahead and name any alphabet agency you can think of ….because they are all really run by the civil service employees who depend on a big federal government for their jobs and life-style.  Just the unveiling of people like Comey, and his subordinates. co-conspirators should tell you all you need to know about the swamp.. 

This right here is what someone who has no concept of reality looks like folks.

Republicans are in control of the White House, House of Representatives, Senate, and there's about to be a conservative majority on the Supreme Court.  All governmental power at the national level is in conservative hands.  To dispute this is beyond stupid.  You also complain about big government, but Congress has the power of the purse.  The Republican majority hasn't slowed that down one bit.

And by the way, Comey was a registered Republican until rather recently in his life, including donating to G.W. Bush and McCain's campaigns.  Try again.

[NolaAuTiger 3,295]

On 8/22/2018 at 4:14 PM, homersapien said:

Thanks for the response.

What I am confused about is the issue of executive immunity.  What's the point of lawsuits being filed by Maryland and DC if the president cannot be indicted?  Are these civil lawsuits?

Yes, these are civil lawsuits. The President can be sued with regards to private matters in federal court.  If the President does something in the course of his official duties, suit would have to be brought against the United States Government - assuming the existence of a legal mechanism through which the action could proceed (it depends on the basis of the lawsuit). Nonetheless, the President is shielded from actions arising out of his Executive authority.

When you see the last name of a President listed as a "Defendant" in a lawsuit, and the suit arises from an act performed pursuant to Executive authority, the Defendant is really "his office." 

Does that make sense? 

[AU64 10,122]

23 minutes ago, Brad_ATX said:

This right here is what someone who has no concept of reality looks like folks.

Republicans are in control of the White House, House of Representatives, Senate, and there's about to be a conservative majority on the Supreme Court.  All governmental power at the national level is in conservative hands.  To dispute this is beyond stupid.  You also complain about big government, but Congress has the power of the purse.  The Republican majority hasn't slowed that down one bit.

And by the way, Comey was a registered Republican until rather recently in his life, including donating to G.W. Bush and McCain's campaigns.  Try again.

Sorry Brad but you are naïve beyond words to even think that because the GOP has elective offices that they control the government.  You are the one living in the alternate reality. 

The federal government is run by people who write regulations, interpret laws, evaluate tax exemptions,  and decide who to pursue for legal transgressions.   Comey" was"    so what.? He personally let HC off the hook ….and check down the line of mid-level managers in all agencies...there have been numerous surveys and polls over things like that and of course it indicates nothing that 76% of voters in Wash DC are registered as dems and less than 10 as GOP?     Intrenched civil service dems fighting DT every step of the way but I accept that it is not all personal....Bush had the same problems and was suckered by his intelligence agencies, etc. 

https://freebeacon.com/politics/federal-government-workers-donating-overwhelmingly-democrats/

[homersapien 11,370]

2 hours ago, AU64 said:

What government are you talking about?

The dems basically control every aspect of the Federal Government.   Surely you don't think a few political appointees really run the DOJ or FBI or EPA or CIA do you? ...or even the top military...and certainly not the State Department just to mention a prime dem stronghold.  

Go ahead and name any alphabet agency you can think of ….because they are all really run by the civil service employees who depend on a big federal government for their jobs and life-style.  Just the unveiling of people like Comey, and his subordinates. co-conspirators should tell you all you need to know about the swamp.. 

good grief  

You cannot be serious.  That's totally insane.

[homersapien 11,370]

On 8/24/2018 at 3:27 PM, NolaAuTiger said:

Yes, these are civil lawsuits. The President can be sued with regards to private matters in federal court.  If the President does something in the course of his official duties, suit would have to be brought against the United States Government - assuming the existence of a legal mechanism through which the action could proceed (it depends on the basis of the lawsuit). Nonetheless, the President is shielded from actions arising out of his Executive authority.

When you see the last name of a President listed as a "Defendant" in a lawsuit, and the suit arises from an act performed pursuant to Executive authority, the Defendant is really "his office." 

Does that make sense? 

How is that a private matter?  Doesn't a party to a civil law suit have to show damages to have standing for such a suite? 

 

[Brad_ATX 13,654]

2 hours ago, AU64 said:

Sorry Brad but you are naïve beyond words to even think that because the GOP has elective offices that they control the government.  You are the one living in the alternate reality. 

The federal government is run by people who write regulations, interpret laws, evaluate tax exemptions,  and decide who to pursue for legal transgressions.   Comey" was"    so what.? He personally let HC off the hook ….and check down the line of mid-level managers in all agencies...there have been numerous surveys and polls over things like that and of course it indicates nothing that 76% of voters in Wash DC are registered as dems and less than 10 as GOP?     Intrenched civil service dems fighting DT every step of the way but I accept that it is not all personal....Bush had the same problems and was suckered by his intelligence agencies, etc. 

https://freebeacon.com/politics/federal-government-workers-donating-overwhelmingly-democrats/

Oh, so because a large number of voters in D.C are dems, then that must mean they all work for the government, right?  You can't be that dumb.  The actual percentage of people who live in D.C. and work for the government is 38%.  Not all of that includes federal (local is mixed in as well).  Most federal workers there live outside of city limits in either Virginia or Maryland.

https://news.gallup.com/poll/141785/gov-employment-ranges-ohio.aspx

Surveys have shown that the split of Republican vs Democrat leaning workers in government are pretty evenly split.

https://www.govexec.com/oversight/2015/08/there-are-more-republicans-federal-government-you-might-think/119138/

But again, let's not let the truth get in the way of your fun little fantasy world. 

[homersapien 11,370]

16 hours ago, Brad_ATX said:

Oh, so because a large number of voters in D.C are dems, then that must mean they all work for the government, right?  You can't be that dumb.  The actual percentage of people who live in D.C. and work for the government is 38%.  Not all of that includes federal (local is mixed in as well).  Most federal workers there live outside of city limits in either Virginia or Maryland.

https://news.gallup.com/poll/141785/gov-employment-ranges-ohio.aspx

Surveys have shown that the split of Republican vs Democrat leaning workers in government are pretty evenly split.

https://www.govexec.com/oversight/2015/08/there-are-more-republicans-federal-government-you-might-think/119138/

But again, let's not let the truth get in the way of your fun little fantasy world. 

And let's not overlook the long and traditional history of liberalism in the FBI, starting with J. Edgar Hoover. 

[NolaAuTiger 3,295]

On 8/24/2018 at 3:19 PM, homersapien said:

How is that a private matter?  Doesn't a party to civil law suit have to show damages to have standing for such a suite? 

 

All civil suits are considered "private disputes" because they only involve the parties named in the lawsuit, whereas criminal suits are concerned with a harm done to society as a whole, and as you know are penal in nature. "Private dispute" doesn't literally mean that the public has no interest. Take EPA regulations, for example. The public has an inherent interest in the environment. The statutory schemes (such as Clean Water Act) typically have clauses that provide for "citizen suits," which allows a private citizen to commence an action for various reasons (the enforcement of a statute, compliance with the statute, to force a person to stop doing something, etc.). Although the public would likely have a interest in such suit, it's still a "private dispute." 

A party to civil suit must show a remedy under the law. If they file a complaint for which the law provides no remedy, usually the opposite side will file a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. In essence, that's the "standing" requirement in civil court. 

Damages are more complicated, as you can probably imagine. For example, in a contract dispute, when the plaintiff has availed himself/herself of the option to retain liquidated damages after an alleged breach, they won't be able to recover anything else. If you have ever purchased/sold real estate, you've probably come across one of these clauses before (and maybe even x'd one out of the contract!).

[AU64 10,122]

On ‎8‎/‎25‎/‎2018 at 10:38 AM, homersapien said:

And let's not overlook the long and traditional history of liberalism in the FBI, starting with J. Edgar Hoover. 

This is not about liberalism...it is about people in government using the powers of their office secretly and improperly.....and indeed Hoover did that as have some other folks over the years including James Comey.      

[TitanTiger 20,479]

On 8/24/2018 at 3:12 PM, homersapien said:

good grief  

You cannot be serious.  That's totally insane.

Don't bother asking for any data on it either.  Things like this have become an article of faith.

[TexasTiger 12,848]

49 minutes ago, TitanTiger said:

Don't bother asking for any data on it either.  Things like this have become an article of faith.

If Trump can’t snap his fingers and instantly get what he wants, it’s because Democrats run the deep state. These guys want nothing short of an authoritarian regime— as long as it targets those they oppose.

[TitanTiger 20,479]

1 hour ago, TexasTiger said:

If Trump can’t snap his fingers and instantly get what he wants, it’s because Democrats run the deep state. These guys want nothing short of an authoritarian regime— as long as it targets those they oppose.

They have become what they once despised.

[homersapien 11,370]

16 hours ago, AU64 said:

This is not about liberalism...it is about people in government using the powers of their office secretly and improperly.....and indeed Hoover did that as have some other folks over the years including James Comey.      

Comey = Hoover??

So Comey transformed the FBI into a bastion of liberalism?

[homersapien 11,370]

These crazy theories about the "deep state" or systemic political bias would be better directed toward the complicity of the Republican Party:

 

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/opinion-john-mccain-republicans-trump_us_5b82df26e4b0348586018d2c

Republicans Can Honor John McCain By Putting America Before Trump

The death of Senator John McCain throws into relief a new and even more alarming phase of the crisis facing American democracy. McCain was one of the few Republican senators willing to publicly warn Donald Trump of the bright lines that he must not cross.

Last week, as the latest successful prosecutions of Trump associates connected more dots between the criminal misconduct of his underlings and the president personally, we all waited for Republican leaders to distance themselves from Trump and to repeat warnings that Trump must not attempt to fire Attorney General Jeff Sessions or his deputy Rod Rosenstein, much less special counsel Robert Mueller.

But few such declarations were forthcoming. On the contrary, Sen. Chuck Grassley actually walked back a previous red line warning.

Grassley, as chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee, declared last summer, seconded by South Carolina Senator Lindsey Graham, that he would not hold hearings to confirm a new attorney general if Sessions were fired.

Now, with Trump working himself into an anti-Sessions frenzy. Grassley says he could make time for confirmation hearings.

After a couple of days of Trump hunkering down and seeming off his game, the deafening Republican silence served as a signal for Trump to pursue his usual strategy of doubling down ― this time in an even more reckless way. Trump intensified his attacks on the very legitimacy of the criminal justice system for having the temerity to investigate and prosecute his cronies.

It has become conventional to refer to Trump and his gang as grifters — small-time con artists who have somehow ascended to the most powerful office in the world. The description fits Trump all too well, but as more than one commentator has observed in light of Trump’s latest outbursts, maybe that description is too modest. A better description is mobster.

In his comments on Sessions, on his former fixer Michael Cohen and on his former campaign manager Paul Manafort, Trump reverted to an idiom familiar to viewers of “The Godfather” or “The Sopranos.” This is not about criminal wrongdoing, it’s about loyalty. Who is a rat, who flips, and who courageously refused to break under pressure from cops and prosecutors.

Sessions, according to Trump, is a disaster because he was supposed to be loyal; instead he is enforcing the law and defending the institution of the Justice Department. How outrageous!

The entire framing of who is loyal and who is flipping is of course the vocabulary of a guilty man. If Trump, as he keeps insisting, were innocent of the allegations of criminal corruption and of colluding with the Russians to steal the 2016 election, he would not have to worry about who was flipping; he would not have pressured prosecutors like James Comey to take a dive on his behalf.

Keep in mind, all this is from the president of the United States, sworn to uphold the law and the Constitution. But Trump is more than willing to take down America if that’s what it takes to save his own neck.

That should not be a surprise. What continues to stun is the degree to which the Republican Congress is willing to let him.

And so the stakes have been raised one more time. There will be one winner and one loser in the endgame. Either American democracy will win, or Trump will win.

For now, Republicans seem to be proceeding less on the basis of what is needed to prevent a deeper slide into corrupt tyranny and more on the basis of Benjamin Franklin’s famous warning to the signers of the Declaration of Independence: “We must all hang together or surely we will all hang separately.”

But of course it is one thing to vow unity in the face of peril in order to create a republic ― and quite another to pledge common allegiance to a thug who is destroying it.

As the waters keep rising around Trump and he becomes even more unhinged, he will be more and more tempted to fire Sessions, then Rosenstein and then Mueller.

To head off a Saturday Night Massacre, those Republicans who have been contributing an outpouring of fatuous tributes to the integrity and courage of John McCain should draw on his example.

They should intensify their warnings to Trump to stop trashing the American system of criminal justice, and to keep his hands off the Mueller investigation. Perhaps the memory of McCain will give the Republicans a moment of pause and shame.