[bots]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

It's ridiculous that they would give one person the power to do something like that, at the very least people guilty of serious or violent crimes should be off the table. What if he decided he wanted to free a serial killer or something, would that be allowed?

It's a fundamental problem with democracy. At some point it relies on "good faith" and Trump is one who most certainly doesn't abide by anything good faith and never has.

Just to complete the picture a bit, both Clinton and Bush pardoned people serving their own interests rather than those of the country. Nothing like the nonsense pardons from Trump, but they set the precedent. In a similar way, at Trumps certification, several Dems objected to the vote of states at that time, with no basis for doing so. So while Trump has taken things to a new level of absurdity, the dems actually did these things first

[ChristmasNeeve]

Originally Posted by bitontheslide

It's a fundamental problem with democracy. At some point it relies on "good faith" and Trump is one who most certainly doesn't abide by anything good faith and never has.

Just to complete the picture a bit, both Clinton and Bush pardoned people serving their own interests rather than those of the country. Nothing like the nonsense pardons from Trump, but they set the precedent. In a similar way, at Trumps certification, several Dems objected to the vote of states at that time, with no basis for doing so. So while Trump has taken things to a new level of absurdity, the dems actually did these things first

My comment wasn't specific to Trump though, I don't believe any President should be allowed pardon any criminal. That's what the justice system is there for, allowing 1 person (who most likely has vested interests) the power to over rule that system is a joke and actually a massive **** you to any victims of whichever person is freed

[Ammi]

...if someone was in any way deserving or entitled to a pardon then it would have been or be done through the justice system so that it’s not open to abuse...

[Ammi]

...and the irony/mockery of Trump specifically having that power...is that even though the Central Park 5 were freed for their innocence, not because of a pardon situation....he still didn’t and hasn’t acknowledged their innocence or that he asked for the death penalty for innocent men...

[bots]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

My comment wasn't specific to Trump though, I don't believe any President should be allowed pardon any criminal. That's what the justice system is there for, allowing 1 person (who most likely has vested interests) the power to over rule that system is a joke and actually a massive **** you to any victims of whichever person is freed

the reason for giving the president pardon capabilities was to allow the rectification of a serious miscarriage of justice, which could apply to a criminal. For example, some black people found in position of a tiny amount of cannabis have been sentenced to life imprisonment with no parole. Previous presidents have exercised pardons in those circumstances. The reality of course is that the justice system should be able to right that wrong, but typically in America, if its a federal crime you are ****ed

[ChristmasNeeve]

Originally Posted by bitontheslide

the reason for giving the president pardon capabilities was to allow the rectification of a serious miscarriage of justice, which could apply to a criminal. For example, some black people found in position of a tiny amount of cannabis have been sentenced to life imprisonment with no parole. Previous presidents have exercised pardons in those circumstances. The reality of course is that the justice system should be able to right that wrong, but typically in America, if its a federal crime you are ****ed

Obviously this is the way wrongs in the justice system should be righted

[Vicky.]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

My comment wasn't specific to Trump though, I don't believe any President should be allowed pardon any criminal. That's what the justice system is there for, allowing 1 person (who most likely has vested interests) the power to over rule that system is a joke and actually a massive **** you to any victims of whichever person is freed

Indeed. Seems a weird 'law' or whatever. In theory, they seemingly could release like..terrorists or serial killers on a whim. Seems wrong. There really should be some form of safeguard in place there, rather than 'oh the president has woken up and decided that the boston bomber should be let out tday, there you go' and such

Is the theory that the president could (not likely though but interesting) pardon each and every criminal and empty out the prisons completely correct?! Thats the first thing stepson said when he heard of this.

[ChristmasNeeve]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

Indeed. Seems a weird 'law' or whatever. In theory, they seemingly could release like..terrorists or serial killers on a whim. Seems wrong. There really should be some form of safeguard in place there, rather than 'oh the president has woken up and decided that the boston bomber should be let out tday, there you go' and such

Is the theory that the president could (not likely though but interesting) pardon each and every criminal and empty out the prisons completely correct?! Thats the first thing stepson said when he heard of this.

Well yeah exactly. Could a president have decided to free Ted Bundy?

[The Slim Reaper]

Originally Posted by bitontheslide

It's a fundamental problem with democracy. At some point it relies on "good faith" and Trump is one who most certainly doesn't abide by anything good faith and never has.

Just to complete the picture a bit, both Clinton and Bush pardoned people serving their own interests rather than those of the country. Nothing like the nonsense pardons from Trump, but they set the precedent. In a similar way, at Trumps certification, several Dems objected to the vote of states at that time, with no basis for doing so. So while Trump has taken things to a new level of absurdity, the dems actually did these things first

The levels involved here are completely different, and I'm not defending Clinton. For starters, just dangling pardons so folks wouldn't work with/give testimony to Mueller, versus Clinton appearing at his own impeachment. There is no precedent for how Trump has used pardons, taking either bush or Clinton into consideration.