JOE BIDEN’S ‘GET OUT OF JAIL FREE’ CARDS ARE WORTHLESS – His Preemptive Pardons: Hunter Biden, Anthony Fauci, Mark Milley, Adam ...
ANALYSIS: Through the lens of RICO and Throckmorton, Joe Biden’s preemptive pardons aren’t worth the paper upon which they’re written.
You can't pardon someone who has not been imprisoned or charged.
You can't pardon someone "Just in Case", for future use, like a game of Monopoly. (Although Biden seems to thinks so)
If they are innocent they won't be charged. Innocent until proven guilty, etc.
However, the fact that he 'pardoned' them, means they were up to no good, and he knows it. So it is like a red flag waved in a bull's face.
Tick Tock.
...you have a firm grasp of the situational reality...
Biden and his handlers just spent the last 4 years using the DOJ and Soros' DAs to invent crimes to prosecute Trump both criminal and civil. They are scared Trump will do the same.
And they are double scared because they know damn well all the real crimes they did; it wasn't just mislabel payments, over value their house on a loan application, nor was it asking a rat to look into clear election fraud.
Poor boodoos. If they did dirty things, then it will be found out, by fact-hungry pepes, who have a main-line to folks around the president. The scared ones made up a bunch of crap to try and get rid of the red-headed wild-flower in their onion patch. Now, they are faced with the knowledge of their own misdeeds. REEeeeeEE
As an aside: the robo-accounting software, used by an accountant working for Trump, only had one place to put 'payments to lawyers' - that is: legal expenses. What other expense is it ? It sure ain't construction contractors, or utilities. And, there usually isn't a category for paying off filthy little blackmailers who are 'trying it on' for potential financial gain, especially given that the payments were through a lawyer. As far as the accountant was concerned, the money was going to a lawyer.
What the lawyer did with it is another story. And TBH, I don't know what himself the lawyer could have done, given the atmosphere of 'getting Trump'. Furthermore, the 'lawyer' played both sides: First he was protecting the president by paying off a dirty blackmailer 'out of his own pocker', and THEN he became outraged that he didn't become AG for his 'bravery', and wanted his money back, so he decided to switch sides.
So I don't even want to call it a mis-labelling. And also, Trump undervalued his house, AND the bank knew it, Just saying.
Not true:
Article II, Section 2 of the U.S. Constitution grants the president the “Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offenses against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.” This broad language has been interpreted to allow for pardons at any stage of the judicial process, including before charges are formally brought—a concept known as a preemptive pardon.
Agreed. This is the problem with writing policy. Re:
It sounds logical, but what is an 'offence against the United States', unless there is an objective proof attached to it? If the charges have not been formally brought yet, then on what basis does the nullifying pardon nullify anything? When one approaches it from the Innocent until proven Guilty angle, one could be 'pardoning' innocent people. And what's the point in that? "Well of course one must pardon innocents", would be a logical-ish statement. But not so fast: A pardon means there WAS an offence.
Traditionally, such 'offences' are determined by a judge or jury. In other words, the quote above means that the president can overturn a judge, or jury's decision.
In any case, the pre-emptive pardon IS used as a Get out of jail card, and now the decision seems completely unattached from objectivity, by placing it in a space whereby the president can intervene at any stage. And yet, pardons ARE subjective decisions from the president. He can decide upon such a thing all by himself, and without proof, even. The way the policy is written, indeed encourages it.
Nowadays, public opinion is held up as 'proof' of offending against the United States. However, we must be very careful, because public opinion can be easily manipulated. BTW: This is why the Democrats rode the impeachment drive twice (while manipulating public opinion via censorship), because they knew that subsequent presidents cannot overturn an impeachment, under Article II, Section 2.
When is a pardon not a pardon?
Answer: When you attained your office fraudulently.
^This
The fraud vitiates everything argument.
We’ll see if a judge will agree with this. Of course, it won’t be a Biden/Obama/Clinton appointed judge.
I hope this is true cuz otherwise we won’t have accountability
Well, there's always plan B. Trump can issue EO allowing extradition anywhere for the Biden pardonees. Russia, Russia, Russia wants most them.
I think Russia Russia Russia - gate provides a goldmine of people who were 'in' on the fraud of impeaching Trump. Just as the laptop yielded a nice list of 51 people to ban, from access to classified information.
Russia is centre-right-wing currently, so no. "Keep your filth to yourself", would be their likely response, if someone was 'escaping' Trump. I would conjecture to say that given the Democrat smears on that country, they won't consider it a bolt-hole. A more likely destination is lefty DEI-gripped 'Western rules' New Zealand or Australia.
Although I do not like the Right and Left 'wing' theory as the wings are attached to the same beast. If the beast is corrupt, one has a problem. I prefer the Right and Wrong division of things.
Actually, Russia wants anyone connected to the Ukraine bio-weapons program which includes Fauci, Hunter and a host of others. Remember, they got Siberia which is Gitmo frozen.
Noice
if he has a pardon he doesn't need millions of dollars in security right?