Impeachment pending?

[clean]

Can pardons be reversed. 
No.  A pardon is a check (or balance) on the judicial branch.

(However, IF the pardon were granted and found to be granted based on bribery, it probably could be.  Normally, though, there is no mechanism to reverse one).

[ergative]

Murder is a state crime, so the pardon would NOT have covered it.  Presidential pardons cover federal crimes.  Remember, governors can pardon too, but not pardon federal crimes, only state crimes. 

But, yes, murder is a pardonable offense. 

I dont remember the specific crime, but Trump pardoned some Blackwater folks for crimes committed in Iraq.

What if the murder took place in DC, which is not under the jurisdiction of any state? If Prez shoots someone on 5th Avenue, the state of NY could prosecute him (perhaps only after he leaves office). But if he murders someone in the Oval Office, which state would have jurisdiction?

[ciao_yall]

Can pardons be reversed. 
No.  A pardon is a check (or balance) on the judicial branch.

(However, IF the pardon were granted and found to be granted based on bribery, it probably could be.  Normally, though, there is no mechanism to reverse one).

Well, let's say a pardon was for tax evasion. "I pardon X for tax evasion."

But if it turned out they bribed to get the pardon, then the bribing itself is a crime that could be punished since the pardon was only for tax evasion.

[ciao_yall]

Murder is a state crime, so the pardon would NOT have covered it.  Presidential pardons cover federal crimes.  Remember, governors can pardon too, but not pardon federal crimes, only state crimes. 

But, yes, murder is a pardonable offense. 

I dont remember the specific crime, but Trump pardoned some Blackwater folks for crimes committed in Iraq.

What if the murder took place in DC, which is not under the jurisdiction of any state? If Prez shoots someone on 5th Avenue, the state of NY could prosecute him (perhaps only after he leaves office). But if he murders someone in the Oval Office, which state would have jurisdiction?

If the murder takes place on federal land, then it's a federal crime. I mean, it's not like murder is legal in Washington DC out on the streets.

[ergative]

Murder is a state crime, so the pardon would NOT have covered it.  Presidential pardons cover federal crimes.  Remember, governors can pardon too, but not pardon federal crimes, only state crimes. 

But, yes, murder is a pardonable offense. 

I dont remember the specific crime, but Trump pardoned some Blackwater folks for crimes committed in Iraq.

What if the murder took place in DC, which is not under the jurisdiction of any state? If Prez shoots someone on 5th Avenue, the state of NY could prosecute him (perhaps only after he leaves office). But if he murders someone in the Oval Office, which state would have jurisdiction?

If the murder takes place on federal land, then it's a federal crime. I mean, it's not like murder is legal in Washington DC out on the streets.

Yes, of course. I was unclear; sorry. I mean, would it be the case that a pardon for federal crimes would not rule out subsequent state murder charges in NY, but would rule out any further charge if he murdered someone in the Oval Office?

[spork]

Articles of impeachment will be issued Monday morning if Trump doesn't resign first, which he almost certainly won't, given his sociopathic nature.

The Senate will probably refuse to reconvene for an impeachment trial before inauguration. But there is the possibility of a trial after Biden becomes president. The ability of the Senate to hold an impeachment trial of a former president is not a matter of settled constitutional law.

[ciao_yall]

Articles of impeachment will be issued Monday morning if Trump doesn't resign first, which he almost certainly won't, given his sociopathic nature.

The Senate will probably refuse to reconvene for an impeachment trial before inauguration. But there is the possibility of a trial after Biden becomes president. The ability of the Senate to hold an impeachment trial of a former president is not a matter of settled constitutional law.

It would also need bipartisan support, otherwise it would backfire into a partisan s***show.

[writingprof]

Articles of impeachment will be issued Monday morning if Trump doesn't resign first, which he almost certainly won't, given his sociopathic nature.

The Senate will probably refuse to reconvene for an impeachment trial before inauguration. But there is the possibility of a trial after Biden becomes president. The ability of the Senate to hold an impeachment trial of a former president is not a matter of settled constitutional law.

Biden wasting his "hundred days" on a post-presidency impeachment of his predecessor sounds about right. Otherwise, he might have to waste it on covid nonsense. Carry on.

[dismalist]

Suppose Trump is impeached, now, or ex post. Further suppose that the Senate convicts after January 20th. The only punishment is removal from office, but Trump will no longer be in office. Thus, the Senate, just by considering conviction, would be violating the rules of logic.

This is just a show, like the first impeachment. But it does show that the Democrats need Trump.

[Parasaurolophus]

I'm glad they're proceeding, and hope they have the stomach to follow through.

The only punishment is removal from office, but Trump will no longer be in office.

You're forgetting that conviction results in being barred from federal office.

[clean]

The only punishment is removal from office, b

Recent news articles note that he would also lose his presidential pension AND Secret Service Protection (as well as being banned from running for office), though these would require a separate vote that would carry with a simple majority.

[dismalist]

I'm glad they're proceeding, and hope they have the stomach to follow through.

The only punishment is removal from office, but Trump will no longer be in office.

You're forgetting that conviction results in being barred from federal office.

That's up to the Senate. And it doesn't seem binding to me: Trump is not going to be elected to anything in future.

Thus, a charade to keep Trump in the limelight.

[mahagonny]

I would like to see him barred from running in 2024. The republicans have good talent around and will have more by then. Having a good candidate would mean a better debate. Hopefully a black man or woman. If Trumps runs you'll get democrats saying 'oh they're running the racist again' and the democrat will get elected no matter how lame they are.

[writingprof]

I would like to see him barred from running in 2024. The republicans have good talent around and will have more by then. Having a good candidate would mean a better debate. Hopefully a black man or woman. If Trumps runs you'll get democrats saying 'oh they're running the racist again' and the democrat will get elected no matter how lame they are.

Hilariously, Trump being a "racist" is like the twentieth worst thing about him now.  Get in line, Trump's "racism."

[mahagonny]

I would like to see him barred from running in 2024. The republicans have good talent around and will have more by then. Having a good candidate would mean a better debate. Hopefully a black man or woman. If Trumps runs you'll get democrats saying 'oh they're running the racist again' and the democrat will get elected no matter how lame they are.

Hilariously, Trump being a "racist" is like the twentieth worst thing about him now.  Get in line, Trump's "racism."

Not only that, if they run a black candidate the democrats will just say he's an Uncle Tom.

the last republican candidate that maybe, just maybe,
didn't get called a racist was Gerald Ford.