Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Little did he know that Nixon had total immunity for most of what they accused him of doing.Nixon was an unindicted co-conspirator when he was still POTUS. So after he resigned they would have indicted him, and it was known what the allegations would be.
Little did he know that Nixon had total immunity for most of what they accused him of doing.
it works for you,,You believe whatever you want to believe.
Evidence has nothing to do with it.
at least there were a list of crimes he was being accused of,,Little did he know that Nixon had total immunity for most of what they accused him of doing.
Mostly. In fact, the prosecution would have a hard time getting testimony against Nixon given he was discussing these matters with his close advisors which is not allowed in the prosecution of former presidents.No, not what SCOTUS ruled in 'Trump'. Nice try, no cigar, no parting gifts.
Haven’t seen any evidence here, so there’s nothing for me to dismiss.it works for you,,
evidence means everything and why youre trying to dismiss it,,
but as I said hopefully the pardons will be thrown out or his family will be forced to testify to what crimes they got pardoned for,, or both,,
Mostly. In fact, the prosecution would have a hard time getting testimony against Nixon given he was discussing these matters with his close advisors which is not allowed in the prosecution of former presidents.
Never charged because it was a blanket preemptive pardon.at least there were a list of crimes he was being accused of,,
ignorance is always a lame excuse,,Haven’t seen any evidence here, so there’s nothing for me to dismiss.
You say something dumb, and once we point it out, you just move on to the next dumb thing.
exactly why it should be thrown out,,Never charged because it was a blanket preemptive pardon.
I have doubts that tape would be admissible because SCOTUS said testimony or private records of the president and his advisors can’t be admitted at trial.Not what they said in 'Trump'.
Also, Nixon was on tape.
So you want to change the rules again.exactly why it should be thrown out
Where does it say that?The constitution says that people can't be investigated for no reason also.
by definition there has to at least be a crime to get a pardon,, charge or conviction,,So you want to change the rules again.
Pardons are for offenses. The constitution does not say crimes, charges or convictions.by definition there has to at least be a crime to get a pardon,, charge or conviction,,
a blanket pardon is off the charts for corruption and tells me that many crimes are in play,,
you should really buy dictionary,,Pardons are for offenses. The constitution does not say crimes, charges or convictions.
Do you still think someone had to be convicted before getting a pardon?
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.you should really buy dictionary,,
but as you said you prefer to remain ignorant on things,,
And biden says the people he pardoned did nothing wrong.!!!!!!!!!!!!Pardons are for offenses. The constitution does not say crimes, charges or convictions.
Yes. So?And biden says the people he pardoned did nothing wrong.!!!!!!!!!!!!
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.
