• @HorreC
    link
    288 hours ago

    how do you pardon people if there are no charges presented against someone, that by itself shouldnt be legal.

    • morgan423
      link
      English
      367 hours ago

      Blame Ford, he started it when he issued pardons for any previously-committed but uncharged crimes done by Nixon.

      • @HorreC
        link
        87 hours ago

        I just dont think that it is how the law is written to work, if I can forgive you for crimes not yet noted, then why not the other way around and charge you for crimes not actually done (read: thought crime).

        • @FlowVoid
          link
          English
          35 hours ago

          You are pardoned for an activity, not a particular charge.

          If it were the other way around, then prosecutors would simply refile the case with different charges.

          • @HorreC
            link
            12 hours ago

            But the pardon implys the activity was against the law at the time, and they were doing so knowingly.

            • @FlowVoid
              link
              English
              122 minutes ago

              No, pardons do not imply guilt.

              Pardons can be issued when someone is believed to be innocent of any wrongdoing.

          • IHeartBadCode
            link
            fedilink
            97 hours ago

            Yeah, this is exactly the point here everyone. The pardons work because nobody has asked anyone if these blanket pardons are indeed legit.

            So we can all sit here and try to mince the logic of such, but the real answer is that it exists in a superposition of legal and not legal until the various courts rule upon it.

            • @FlowVoid
              link
              English
              35 hours ago

              The SCOTUS has already answered your question:

              The power of pardon conferred by the Constitution upon the President is unlimited except in cases of impeachment. It extends to every offence known to the law, and may be exercised at any time after its commission, either before legal proceedings are taken or during their pendency, or after conviction and judgment.

          • @HorreC
            link
            16 hours ago

            Which is because they didnt wanna smear the office of the president, and they control the DOJ. We should just move that to a 6 year cycle election. But even then its not like election are by an informed people to start so I guess this is just fucking another thing that we can be like we are fucked on.

        • @essell
          link
          47 hours ago

          I guess because the outcomes are unaffected.

          Either they did the crime, and the pardon is doing what it was designed to do. Or they didn’t and it’s not having any effect.

          In this case, I imagine the pardons are “witch-hunt for revenge” immunity, given what’s possibly coming down the pipe.

          • @HorreC
            link
            37 hours ago

            oh I am 100% sure, but on the other hand the ‘news’ could claim ‘look Fiuci was guilty of making covid to start, they had to pardon him’

            • @essell
              link
              36 hours ago

              That’s true.

              But they could also do that without evidence sadly. The really sad part is that people would believe them either way