Trump's Pardoning Powers Could Be Limited After Mueller's First Indictment

Newsweek via Yahoo ^ | October 29th, 2017 | Jason Silverstein

[Mariner]

With the first indictment looming from the federal Trump-Russia investigation, President Donald Trump is getting a reminder: His pardoning pardons can’t fix everything.

“I don't think the president's power is all that absolute, as people have been suggesting,” California Representative Adam Schiff, the top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, told ABC News’ “This Week” Sunday.

“The president cannot pardon people if it's an effort to obstruct justice, if it's an effort to prevent Bob Mueller and others from learning about the President's own conduct. So, there are limitations.”

Special Counsel Robert Mueller, who has been investigating the Trump campaign’s potential Russia ties, is expected to unseal his first criminal charges as early as Monday.

Schiff said he has not been told who will be hit by the indictments, but he believes based on press reports that it will either be former Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort or former national security adviser Michael Flynn. Both men resigned from their positions after controversy over their ties to foreign governments, which Mueller has been scrutinizing.

If Trump tries to pardon whoever faces charges, he could several major hurdles.

The Constitution allows the president broad powers to pardon people for “Offenses against the United States." There is no precedent for a sitting president pardoning people tied to his campaign, as will likely be the case for Mueller’s debut indictment.

[Strac6]

Schiff is legally totally wrong.

The power is so absolute, to the extent that if it was proved, or even admitted that Def bribed the President to get the pardon, the pardon would remain in effect.

BTW, there is little doubt in DC that some of Clinton’s late night pardons were bribe-driven.

[SJackson]

I doubt you’ll see any pardons in the near term. But I’d suggest the Congressman is ignoring something a man in his position should be aware of. It’s my understanding that like immunity, a pardon strips the beneficiary against the privilege against self incrimination. Whoever is charged Monday, were he to be pardoned, could be compelled to testify. Just as though he were given immunity.

[Newbomb Turk]

Maybe the lame stream news could buy themselves a clue by looking into who Obama’s pardoned and what state and federal crimes they were convicted of.

Then get back to me because President Trump can pardon anyone.

[Mariner]

But NOBODY could make them remember Jack.

[Newbomb Turk]

Lot of difference between an indightment and a conviction. Right now Trump doesn’t need to pardon anyone.

[Captain Jack Aubrey]

The president can pardon anyone from any federal charge for any reason.

That’s pretty broad, but that is the law.

[rdcbn]

I think we went through this with Obama’s ability to pardon Hillary Clinton.

Presidential pardon power all but unlimited.

[SJackson]

But NOBODY could make them remember Jack.

Depends on the question. Immunity is a powerful tool, not used all that frequently. Presuming the final target Mueller is pursuing is Trump or close associates, a pardon at this time presents Mueller of the opportunity of compelling testimony, under pain of perjury or contempt. Yes, can forget, but one can't forget everything. I doubt you'll see any pardons anytime soon. Pardons protect Trump or his associates who might be implicated from nothing. And there are also the political ramifications. BTW, I don't mean to suggest that whoever is being charged next week and in following weeks has anything to say about the President.

[Nifster]

Hard to imagine

[Coronal]

For convictions of Federal crimes, yes. Convictions of state offenses are beyond his reach.

[Coronal]

No he can’t do that. State offenses can only be pardoned by a Governor.

[eddie willers]

I don't think the president's power is all that absolute, as people have been suggesting

Only the people that can read.

[CodeToad]

“Yes Virginia, they really do make people this stupid.”

We know. We call them liberals. They call themselves “journalists”.

[SaveFerris]

[California Representative Adam Schiff, the top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee]

A lying liberal? Did the Sun come up again this morning?

[Eleutheria5]

They actually think that Mueller is on to something, and Trump is running scared, and will have to pardon somebody to keep himself in the clear. This is psychotic.

[upchuck]

From the Constitution, Article II Section 2 Clause 1:

1: The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States; he may require the Opinion, in writing, of the principal Officer in each of the executive Departments, upon any Subject relating to the Duties of their respective Offices, and he shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offences against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.

Bolding mine. That pretty well sums it up.

[Rashputin]

So, Mueller indicts Donald Jr. in hopes the President will pardon him at once or at least give them the most to chatter about for the week prior to long planned democrat Nov 4th "huge" protest & festivities.

I knew the first indictment would be the week before their planned BS I just don't know who it would be that would generate the best drumbeat to incited the usual crazies. I actually don't see how it could be Donald Jr. but I do wonder who they think Trump would instantly pardon.

[dila813]

Fantasy land, they just want to rewrite the laws as is convenient.

[Mariner]

I would like to see him pardon Manafort or Flynn, assuming one of them is indicted.

It would cause one of the great displays of stupidity in human history.