It's going to be done legally, which I hope means rolling back years of unconstitutional laws and regulations, including pardons issued by illegitimate residents of the WH.
That will take a while, though. We want our pound of flesh right now after having to endure the Obama and Biden years. I understand doing it legally means waiting for the prosecutions in the future. ugh.
I read somewhere that being "pardoned" causes them to lose the "taking the 5th" option, because they can't incriminate themselves/ have consequences, so they must tell the court the truth, or be held in contempt.
Acknowledging how rights are inalienable — rights cannot be stripped from an American unless said American is a convicted criminal, so nobody should lose their 5th since nobody has been convicted.
While going through a judicial proceeding, rights are supposed to be acknowledged and respected, but, these days, the judicial system is a giant messy swamp, so it is easy to misunderstand what is what.
Long story short, Americans are supposed to be innocent until proven guilty, so losing the 5th is unrealistic.
A judge could threaten a person all a judge wants, but nobody loses their right to stay silent, because where a person is coerced into speaking, a person’s testimony becomes compromised.
Nah, the 5th only applies to Criminal cases, not Civil cases. Defendants in Civil cases have no 5th amendment rights.
Typically though defendants in civil cases use the 5th if it can be claimed they could be in criminal jeopardy. Where they have been pardoned though, that is no longer a defense.
The big question is whether a preemptive pardon is really a thing. It implies that a pardoned individual has absolute immunity, which even the President doesn't have, so how can the President confer something he doesn't have?
It’s always Civil and/or Criminal, but the distinctions between the two worlds shouldn’t ever negate an individual’s inalienable right to remain silent.
However, to elaborate upon your point: say an individual worked under a specific contract, and it was the individual’s duty to manage specified information or a specified inventory or a specific task — that individual could be COMPELLED, by his own contract, to speak upon what should be substantive details, except, that doesn’t mean the individual MUST speak, and if the individual doesn’t speak, the civil matter may escalate into a criminal matter.
Any individual may choose to stay silent and accept the consequences which come their way. Perhaps, it’s not always wise to stay silent, but that doesn’t mean an individual doesn’t have the right to remain silent.
First of all, there is no such thing as 5th A rights. It is a right, period. Yes, you have that right at all times involving government. Civil, or criminal.
It's a good question and that's why it needs to be forced to the Supreme Court's table. Because then we can play that game too, and we are all better gamers than them.
interesting, because if they are called as a witness, do they have fifth amendment protections if they have been pardoned? if not, then they can be compelled to give testimony. and if the lie, they get charged with perjury?
Exactly! My husband and I were just discussing this issue. Pardoning someone of a crime they haven’t been convicted of shouldn’t even be a thing/allowed..for either side.
Review ALL signatures on Biden’s executive orders. If not matching Biden’s signature declare them fraudulent, or if the 2020 election is proved fraudulent then everything is fraudulent. Don’t forget Biden took the oath of office prior to the appointed time and DJT never conceded.
It's going to be done legally, which I hope means rolling back years of unconstitutional laws and regulations, including pardons issued by illegitimate residents of the WH.
That will take a while, though. We want our pound of flesh right now after having to endure the Obama and Biden years. I understand doing it legally means waiting for the prosecutions in the future. ugh.
Well, remember the 540k+ sealed indictments. Much has already been done behind the scenes.
exactly
I read somewhere that being "pardoned" causes them to lose the "taking the 5th" option, because they can't incriminate themselves/ have consequences, so they must tell the court the truth, or be held in contempt.
That’s a misunderstanding.
Acknowledging how rights are inalienable — rights cannot be stripped from an American unless said American is a convicted criminal, so nobody should lose their 5th since nobody has been convicted.
While going through a judicial proceeding, rights are supposed to be acknowledged and respected, but, these days, the judicial system is a giant messy swamp, so it is easy to misunderstand what is what.
Long story short, Americans are supposed to be innocent until proven guilty, so losing the 5th is unrealistic.
A judge could threaten a person all a judge wants, but nobody loses their right to stay silent, because where a person is coerced into speaking, a person’s testimony becomes compromised.
Nah, the 5th only applies to Criminal cases, not Civil cases. Defendants in Civil cases have no 5th amendment rights.
Typically though defendants in civil cases use the 5th if it can be claimed they could be in criminal jeopardy. Where they have been pardoned though, that is no longer a defense.
The big question is whether a preemptive pardon is really a thing. It implies that a pardoned individual has absolute immunity, which even the President doesn't have, so how can the President confer something he doesn't have?
It’s always Civil and/or Criminal, but the distinctions between the two worlds shouldn’t ever negate an individual’s inalienable right to remain silent.
However, to elaborate upon your point: say an individual worked under a specific contract, and it was the individual’s duty to manage specified information or a specified inventory or a specific task — that individual could be COMPELLED, by his own contract, to speak upon what should be substantive details, except, that doesn’t mean the individual MUST speak, and if the individual doesn’t speak, the civil matter may escalate into a criminal matter.
Any individual may choose to stay silent and accept the consequences which come their way. Perhaps, it’s not always wise to stay silent, but that doesn’t mean an individual doesn’t have the right to remain silent.
First of all, there is no such thing as 5th A rights. It is a right, period. Yes, you have that right at all times involving government. Civil, or criminal.
It's a good question and that's why it needs to be forced to the Supreme Court's table. Because then we can play that game too, and we are all better gamers than them.
interesting, because if they are called as a witness, do they have fifth amendment protections if they have been pardoned? if not, then they can be compelled to give testimony. and if the lie, they get charged with perjury?
IANAL? bruh...
Leave the sexual preferences at the door...
Kek.
Seriously though, exactly.
If Biden was never a legitimate president, and that can be conclusively proven in a court of law, then none of his pardons stand.
Also true
How do you pardon someone who has not been convicted? Makes no sense. The very definition of a pardonis this.
Exactly! My husband and I were just discussing this issue. Pardoning someone of a crime they haven’t been convicted of shouldn’t even be a thing/allowed..for either side.
Fitton should have a position in the new administration, he has been stalwart through it all
Prosecute them anyway and make the supreme court rule on pre-emptive pardons.
Also, if they're executed for treason, they can't really appeal from Hell, now can they?
Review ALL signatures on Biden’s executive orders. If not matching Biden’s signature declare them fraudulent, or if the 2020 election is proved fraudulent then everything is fraudulent. Don’t forget Biden took the oath of office prior to the appointed time and DJT never conceded.
I want to see the legality of the pardons adjudicated by the Supreme Court.
Extradite all those who Biden pardoned to Ukraine or Russia.