It seems somewhat clear that, between Bill Clinton and Donald Trump, the pardon power has been used to reward political cronies and those who had their backs in criminal matters. So I believe that the pardon power needs some tweaking.
An option would be to make a pardon revocable by Congress. it shouldn't be easy to do, but it should be made possible. What I would propose is that a pardon could be revoked within sixty days of issuance by a vote of Congress. It could be a two-thirds vote of either house of Congress or a three-fifths vote of both houses.
Of course, this would need a constitutional amendment, which probably isn't going to happen.
A blog by a "sucker" and a "loser" who served her country in the Navy.
If you're one of the Covidiots who believe that COVID-19 is "just the flu",
that the 2020 election was stolen, or
especially if you supported the 1/6/21 insurrection,
leave now.
Slava Ukraini!
Tuesday, January 26, 2021
4 comments:
House Rules #1, #2 and #6 apply to all comments. Rule #3 also applies to political comments.
In short, don't be a jackass. THIS MEANS YOU!
If you never see your comments posted, see Rule #7.
All comments must be on point and address either the points raised in the blog post or points raised by commenters in response.
Any comments that drift off onto other topics are subject to deletion.
(Please don't feed the trolls.)
中國詞不評論，冒抹除的風險。僅英語。
COMMENT MODERATION IS IN EFFECT UFN. This means that if you are an insulting dick, nobody will ever see it.
Trump's pardons were not pardons. They were nullifications.
ReplyDeleteRight, the constitution can never be changed for the good because the hyper filthy rich like it just the way it was back (and is) in the late 18th century. The whole democracy thing was brand new back then and this stunning pardon power, ready made for corruption, was a remnant of royal power smeared on to our democratic republic like an incompetent ass wipe. Would we write a constitution in the 21st century with this yuge corruption loophole? No, a bipartisan commission is a great idea but, like most sensible measures leading to a more representational government, is anathema to our corporate overlords. It is to be gridlock forever for the USA because more democracy is perceived by our masters as bad for corporations, who are people too, remember Citizens United. Big money is like a big battalion, it usually wins. There will never be another constitutional amendment no matter the need or the percentage of voters who want it because gridlock works so well for our owners. Another tool to to subvert the public will so that the rich always rule. USA, fuck yea.
ReplyDeleteGiving Congress oversight on something like this could conflict with the Constitutional intent of checks and balances. It could check a corrupt act but it would unbalance the pardon power between too many people.
ReplyDeleteAnother possible solution is making a ban - upon penalty of minimum jail time for the President after he/she leaves office - that no pardon can be issued to a family member, to a personal business associate, to any person employed to that President's administration (making obstruction harder to commit), or to any person who provided any campaign funding to either the candidate/President or the party that President is a member of.
As an admission of guilt as an Alford plea. They got away with what you or I would not.
ReplyDeleteLike pleading the 5th: "yeah, I did it, but I'm not gonna' admit it."