About those pardons
3/12/20 18:50![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
nairiporter posting in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
talkpoliticsThere are numerous accounts in the media right now that the president is considering granting pardons to himself, Eric, Don Jr., Ivanka and Jared Kushner and Rudy Giuliani. The question I have is, wouldn't you only grant pardons if you knew they had all committed crimes for which they could all incur legal criminal punishment?
Can he even issue a pre-emptive pardon? Doesn't it have to be for something specific that already happened? Otherwise, the person with the pardon could go on a wild crime spree without consequence. I am not an expert, so please enlighten me on this.
And while we are about pardons... One suggestion for pardons has been for Edward Snowden and Julian Assange. These men exposed that the government was covertly and illegally spying on the American citizens. Was that disclosure illegal? Technically yes. But to know of it and keep quiet smacks heavily of aiding and abetting the crime as well as being patently offensive. Both of these people have already been extensively punished by the fact they have had to live in exile for years, having no normal life or family interactions. I think that is more than enough, but the people who were exposed still think revenge is due.
Persecution for exposing something that is patently wrong and offensive in the first place is a vindictive action designed to intimidate others who might do the same. That would seem to be the prime reason they continue to hound such whistleblowers. It insures that such covert offenses can continue without oversight or transparency.
Prosecution lately has often become persecution, and pardons prevent that. We need to be able to trust the system, and until we can - it makes sense to prevent persecution.
Thoughts?
Can he even issue a pre-emptive pardon? Doesn't it have to be for something specific that already happened? Otherwise, the person with the pardon could go on a wild crime spree without consequence. I am not an expert, so please enlighten me on this.
And while we are about pardons... One suggestion for pardons has been for Edward Snowden and Julian Assange. These men exposed that the government was covertly and illegally spying on the American citizens. Was that disclosure illegal? Technically yes. But to know of it and keep quiet smacks heavily of aiding and abetting the crime as well as being patently offensive. Both of these people have already been extensively punished by the fact they have had to live in exile for years, having no normal life or family interactions. I think that is more than enough, but the people who were exposed still think revenge is due.
Persecution for exposing something that is patently wrong and offensive in the first place is a vindictive action designed to intimidate others who might do the same. That would seem to be the prime reason they continue to hound such whistleblowers. It insures that such covert offenses can continue without oversight or transparency.
Prosecution lately has often become persecution, and pardons prevent that. We need to be able to trust the system, and until we can - it makes sense to prevent persecution.
Thoughts?
(no subject)
Date: 3/12/20 21:47 (UTC)And Trump is the consequence of letting Nixon walk. If we let him walk away from this, whoever comes up next will be worse.
(no subject)
Date: 3/12/20 23:27 (UTC)As for Snowden and Assange - Trump is going to get in 1-4 'fuck yous' before he gets out - what they will be and who they will be directed towards is anyones guess - but it's to be expected.
(no subject)
Date: 5/12/20 00:56 (UTC)