Why Biden’s Pardons Are Unconstitutional and VOID

The only pardon that has any real validity is that for Hunter. All of these “preemptive” pardons are not valid. The Supreme Court made this issue very clear. Granted, President Ford pardoned President Nixon. That was not really constitutional again as a preemptive pardon. However, nobody pressed the issue because it would have torn the country apart. So they let sleeping dogs lie, as they say. It is by no means a precedent for Biden, but this showed that everyone he pardoned is, in fact, guilty of high crimes and misdemeanors.

The Supreme Court explained very clearly in Burdick v United States, 236 US 79 (1915) that the acceptance and grant of a pardon is essential to its validity. The person must “accept” the pardon, for the court has no power to force it on him (see also United States v. Wilson, 32 U.S. 7 Pet. 150 (1833).

The question before the court was whether the President of the United States may exercise the pardoning power before conviction. A witness may refuse to testify on the ground that his testimony may have an incriminating effect and assert the Fifth Amendment. The President can offer a pardon for any offense connected with the matters in regard to which he is asked to testify. However, he can refuse. It cannot be forced upon him.

Nevertheless, here is the issue. The Court made it very clear that there are substantial differences between legislative immunity (Amnesty) and a pardon. They explained that a PARDON carries an imputation of guilt and acceptance of a confession of it, whereas legislative immunity (Amnesty) is noncommittal and tantamount to silence of the witness. This is a huge difference, so every Biden Pardon means they are guilty of high crimes and/or misdemeanors.

There is a distinction between Amnesty and Pardon; the former overlooks the offense and is usually addressed to crimes against the sovereignty of the state and political offenses. That was the objective of Biden’s Pardons, but he only has the power to grant Pardons – not Amnesty. However, a Pardon remits punishment and condones infractions of the peace of the state.

Biden’s legal advice was desperate to cover up the crimes of his own family and protect the Democrats who abused their power with the January 6th Commission destroying evidence all part of this lawfare scheme to prevent Trump from ever taking the White House again. Milley to Liz Chaney and Garland to Kinzinger are all guilty of high crimes by accepting a Pardon.

The panel was comprised of seven Democrats and two Republicans, who House Speaker Nancy Pelosi appointed. She previously rejected several GOP members who had been originally selected for the panel by House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy because they were not anti-Trump. Pelosi was behind the 2020 Coup, and that, with her “investing,” should have landed her in prison for inside trading and treason. Pelosi invoked COVID rules to prevent any challenge to 7 states that were in dispute. How she can even look at herself in the mirror and be proud is unfathomable. You can’t take it with you, honey.

Pelosi’s son-in-law even proudly posted this picture. He, too, was there with the other 1500 JanSixers who are in prison. I guess the DOJ looked the other way on this one, along with the hundreds of FBI people who were there in the crowd.

The recent interrogation of Trump’s nominee for Attorney General by Adam Schiff, demanding she say Trump lost the 2020 election, was part of Schiff’s ongoing cover-up of the 2020 Coup. Any dispute to any state MUST be debated before the full floor. Pelosi imposed her COVID rules, limiting only 53 people from being on the floor at any one time.

The two pretend impartial Republicans were Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzerger, who came out Republicalsn for Kamala because he is a vile NEOCON who claims we can invade and conquer Russia in 3 days. Cheney and her father, the man who was really acting president to start the Iraq War over lies, endorsed Kamala. The RINOS Pelosi picked were pro-World War III and against peace and were selected to rig the committee to ensure they found Trump guilty on every count.

QUESTION: You said that Biden’s pardons are probably unconstitutional. Please explain this since nobody in the press has taken that position.

ANSWER: The only pardon that has any real validity is that for Hunter. All of these “preemptive” pardons are not valid. The Supreme Court made this issue very clear. Granted, President Ford pardoned President Nixon. That was not really constitutional again as a preemptive pardon.

However, nobody pressed the issue because it would have torn the country apart. So they let sleeping dogs lie, as they say. It is by no means a precedent for Biden, but this showed that everyone he pardoned is, in fact, guilty of high crimes and misdemeanors.

Pelosi Son in law Jan 6thThe panel was comprised of seven Democrats and two Republicans, who House Speaker Nancy Pelosi appointed. She previously rejected several GOP members who had been originally selected for the panel by House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy because they were not anti-Trump. Pelosi was behind the 2020 Coup, and that, with her “investing,” should have landed her in prison for inside trading and treason. Pelosi invoked COVID rules to prevent any challenge to 7 states that were in dispute. How she can even look at herself in the mirror and be proud is unfathomable. You can’t take it with you, honey.

The committee chairman, Bernie Thompson, introduced legislation to strip Donald Trump of all Secret Service protection as a Felon, which some view as trying to clear the way for his assassination. Not a single member of that committee was impartial.

I do not see under Burdick that Biden’s Pardons of this committee were constitutional since a Pardon is for a crime they must confess. His “preemptive” Pardons are NOT constitutional, for they are, at best, Amnesty, which he had no authority to grant.

Trump should have the entire January 6th Committee arrested and put on trial and let WE THE PEOPLE judge their guilt or innocence. They are entitled to a trial where they must put on their defense. This is not Game of Thrones, where we can say off with their head. Next!

Every single one of these people was out to deny the people any fair election and was selected to protect the corruption that has consumed Washington DC like cancer from within. It is time to clean house and take our country back. This is NOT retribution for Trump; it is a vindication of the Constitution and We The People.

History Demands the January 6th Committee stand for trial, and the Pardons are Unconstitutional.

The Deep State has engaged in Treason and should be appropriately judged as an enemy within.

Burdick v. United States, 236 U.S. 79 (1915)
The only pardon that has any real validity is that for Hunter. All of these “preemptive” pardons are not valid. The Supreme Court made this issue very clear.

Pure, total, utter bull pucky by Martin Armstrong.

The Burdick court at 263 U.S. 87 explicitly stated: "In our view of the case it is not material to decide whether the pardoning power may be exercised before conviction.

The Burdick court expressly offered NO OPINION about whether the pardon power may be exercised before conviction. Martin Armstrong simply avoided mentioning that truth, and never mentioned the existence of the truth of the Garland court which directly addressed and decided the issue.

https://www.loc.gov/item/usrep071333/

Ex parte Garland, 71 U.S. 333, 380 (1866)

Syllabus

9. 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. The power is not subject to legislative control.
10. A pardon reaches the punishment prescribed for an offence and the guilt of the offender. If granted before conviction, it prevents any of the penalties and disabilities consequent upon conviction from attaching; if granted after conviction, it removes the penalties and disabilities and restores him to all his civil rights. It gives him a new credit and capacity. There is only this limitation to its operation: it does not restore offices forfeited, or property of interests vested in others in consequence of the conviction and judgment.
11. The petitioner in this case, having received a full pardon for all offences committed by his participation, direct or implied, in the Rebellion, is relieved from all penalties and disabilities attached to the offence of treason, committed by such participation. For that offence, he is beyond the reach of punishment of any kind. He cannot, therefore, be excluded by reason of that offence from continuing in the enjoyment of a previously acquired right to appear as an attorney and counselor in the Federal courts.

- - - - -

Opinion of the Court at 71 U.S. 380-381:

The Constitution provides that the President "shall have power to grant reprieves and pardons for offences against the United States, except in cases of impeachment."
The power thus conferred is unlimited, with the exception stated. 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. This power of the President is not subject to legislative control. Congress can neither limit the effect of his pardon nor exclude from its exercise any class of offenders. The benign prerogative of mercy reposed in him cannot be fettered by any legislative restrictions.
Such being the case, the inquiry arises as to the effect and operation of a pardon, and on this point all the authorities concur. A pardon reaches both the punishment prescribed for the offence and the guilt of the offender, and when the pardon is full, it releases the punishment and blots out of existence the guilt, so that, in the eye of the law, the offender is as innocent as if he had never committed the offence. If granted before conviction, it prevents any of the penalties and disabilities consequent upon conviction from attaching; if granted after conviction, it removes the penalties and disabilities and restores him to all his civil rights; it makes him, as it were, a new man, and gives him a new credit and capacity.
There is only this limitation to its operation: it does not restore offices forfeited or property or interests vested in others in consequence of the conviction and judgment.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.