"Trump won’t discuss a pardon for Flynn – yet"

[rubato]

I don't think he can anymore. He cannot pardon in case of impeachment.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-wont-d ... 46544.html

Trump has fewer options than he thinks he does.


yrs,
rubato

[Lord Jim]

He cannot pardon in case of impeachment.

That refers to a President attempting to pardon themselves from an impeachment and conviction. (ie, removal from office) A President cannot issue a pardon to themselves for that, nor is there any legal appeal for an impeachment conviction.

Nothing legally prevents Trump from pardoning Flynn, (or Junior or Jared) however if a President uses their pardon power for the purpose of obstructing justice, that can certainly constitute an impeachable offense, (contrary to what the Trumpanzee Alan Dershowitz claims.)

Also, anyone Trump pardons would no longer be able to claim 5th Amendment protections, (since they would not face criminal liability) and could therefore be jailed for contempt if they refused to testify, (and also face perjury charges if they failed to testify truthfully.)

And since a President can only pardon for federal crimes, they would still face liability for any possible state charges.

Issuing pardons is not a "get out of trouble free card" for Trump or any of his cohorts. He could easily cause more problems for himself than he would solve.

(That of course doesn't mean he won't do it; causing more problems for himself than he solves is pretty much how Trump rolls...)

[rubato]

Does not say that:

, though he or she may grant reprieves and pardons except regarding Congressional impeachment of himself or other federal officers.

It says he cannot pardon in case of impeachment which would include witnesses needed to impeach. And he can't pardon Flynn except for the charges which he has already confessed to.


yrs,
rubato

[Lord Jim]

Does not say that:

, though he or she may grant reprieves and pardons except regarding Congressional impeachment of himself or other federal officers.

It says he cannot pardon in case of impeachment which would include witnesses needed to impeach. And he can't pardon Flynn except for the charges which he has already confessed to.


yrs,
rubato

That refers to other "federal officers" who have been impeached under the Constitutional provisions for impeachment (like a federal judge or the Vice President) ...

A President cannot pardon their impeachment convictions either...

It has nothing to do with witnesses who may or may not have evidence to provide that could result in article of impeachment being brought...

Article 2, Section 4

The President, Vice President and all Civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.

Article 2, Section 2

... he shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offenses against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.

http://constitutionus.com/

he can't pardon Flynn except for the charges which he has already confessed to.

I don't know where you're getting this stuff from, but that's wrong too...

Many (probably most) people who have received Presidential pardons never "confessed" to anything, and many more were never even convicted of anything. (Clinton pardoned Marc Rich who was never convicted...because he fled during his trial...and Carter pardoned 1000s of Vietnam era draft dodgers who had fled to Canada who had never received a criminal conviction, to give just two of many examples.)

Gerald Ford pardoned Richard Nixon when he had never even been indicted for anything:

Now, Therefore, I, Gerald R. Ford, President of the United States, pursuant to the pardon power conferred upon me by Article II, Section 2, of the Constitution, have granted and by these presents do grant a full, free, and absolute pardon unto Richard Nixon for all offenses against the United States which he, Richard Nixon, has committed or may have committed or taken part in during the period from January 20, 1969 through August 9, 1974.

http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=4696

Now, there's a division of opinion as to whether the sweeping nature of the Nixon pardon would have held up if it had been challenged, but the idea that somebody can't be pardoned except for a crime they have "confessed" to, is way wide of the mark...

[rubato]

That refers to other "federal officers" who have been impeached under the Constitutional provisions for impeachment

It does not say that.

Ford was not pardoning someone who was a material witness to his own impeachment. Not a useful analogy.

Even if Trump had pardoned Flynn back in February it would not help him. Once pardoned Flynn would have to testify and could no longer take the 5th.

yrs,
rubato

[Lord Jim]

It says he cannot pardon in case of impeachment which would include witnesses needed to impeach.

That refers to other "federal officers" who have been impeached under the Constitutional provisions for impeachment

It does not say that.

Okay rube...

What is the "it" you keep referring to?

"It" obviously isn't the US Constitution, since I've posted the relevant sections, and anyone can see there isn't a single word in there about witnesses, so what is the "it" you're talking about? (Your source for this isn't in the article you linked to in the OP either)

Where are you getting this idea from that there are some sort of unique standards or restrictions on a President's power to pardon individuals that might be witnesses in an impeachment proceeding against them?

As I've pointed out, issuing such a pardon could easily constitute an impeachment charge of obstruction, but I am unaware of any court decision or (any Constitutional law expert either) that would back up what looks like a completely novel claim that you are making.

So please post the link to wherever you are getting this from. (And you might want send it to Jeffery Toobin too, since I'm pretty sure he's never heard of this either.)

Or is this just some theory that you've pulled out of your...uhh...hat?

[Big RR]

I agree--the reason the president cannot pardon impeached officers is because impeachment is a power reserved to Congress. Whether he can pardon those who might testify against him to induce their silence is questionable, but I seriously doubt it violates the law (although he may well be impeached for it). SFAIK, the courts have never addressed this question directly, but there was a USSC case in the 20s (Grossman, dealing with a bootlegger who repeatedly violated a court order and was held in contempt) that stated the president has broad power to pardon whether such pardon is in the interest of the public or not. The threat of impeachment would provide a suitable check on that presidential power.

However, granting of pardons to buy silence might still be obstruction of justice (just as accepting cash for pardons would be bribery) for which the president could be prosecuted. and if those getting the pardons bargained their silence for it, a conspiracy case may well be contstructed.