• mosiacmango@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      60
      arrow-down
      1
      Ā·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      The presidentā€™s pardon power is so ill-defined, that might actually be legal. No one has so blatantly put it to the test before in 250 years, so we dont actually know.

      The conservative supreme court did rule that bribery is only bribery if you explicitly state ā€œi am bribing you for this, with thisā€ which makes a lot of sense when you see how many times Clarence Thomas has gotten ā€œfree loansā€ and ā€œhereā€™s a house, some tuition and some vacations, palā€ in his career. Not to mention the slightly lesser grifts by Roberts and Alito.

      Since the 2mil was for an ā€œaudienceā€ and not a pardon, I bet it actually wasent illegal. Just deeply, deeply immoral and ā€œshould be illegal, but the conservatives on the high court are on the takeā€ so its not.

      • KevonLooney@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        15
        arrow-down
        1
        Ā·
        1 year ago

        No, it would be illegal if the intent was clear. All the communications beforehand would establish that a pardon is needed. Things are not actually negotiated with a wink and nod.

    • Nobody@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      Ā·
      1 year ago

      The Constitution was written by a generation who lived and died on their reputation and integrity. It never occurred to them that a criminal with absolutely zero shame about being a criminal could get elected president. The system wasnā€™t designed to handle someone like Trump.