Explainer: Can anything stop Trump from pardoning his family or even himself?

By Jan Wolfe

 

FILE PHOTO: (L-R) Eric Trump, Donald Trump Jr., and Ivanka Trump and Donald Trump attend the ground breaking of the Trump International Hotel at the Old Post Office Building in Washington July 23, 2014. REUTERS/Gary Cameron//File Photo

 

President Donald Trump on Wednesday granted pardons to his former campaign chairman Paul Manafort and former adviser Roger Stone, sweeping away the most important convictions from U.S. Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation into Russian meddling in the 2016 presidential campaign.

 

So far, Trump, who has 27 days left in the White House until President-elect Joe Biden is sworn in on Jan. 20, has issued 70 pardons since taking office.

 

The New York Times reported earlier this month that Trump had talked with his personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani about pardoning him, citing two people briefed on the matter. The Times also said that Trump has asked advisers about the possibility of “preemptively” pardoning his three eldest children - Donald Trump Jr., Eric Trump and Ivanka Trump.

 

In 2018, Trump even said he had the “absolute right” to pardon himself - a claim many constitutional law scholars dispute.

Here is an overview of Trump’s pardon power.

 

CAN A PARDON BE PREEMPTIVE?

Yes.

 

Most pardons are issued to people who have been prosecuted and sentenced. But pardons can cover conduct that has not resulted in legal proceedings, though they cannot apply to future conduct.

 

The Supreme Court said in 1866 that the pardon power “extends to every offense 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.”

 

Most famously, former President Richard Nixon was preemptively pardoned by his successor Gerald Ford in 1974 for all crimes he might have committed against the United States while he was in office.

 

In 1977, President Jimmy Carter preemptively pardoned hundreds of thousands of “draft dodgers” who avoided a government-imposed obligation to serve in the Vietnam War.

 

ARE THERE LIMITS ON A PRESIDENT’S PARDON POWER?

The pardon power, which comes from the U.S. Constitution, is one of the broadest available to a president. The nation’s founders saw the pardon power as a way to show mercy and serve the public good.

 

The president does not have to give a reason for issuing a pardon. In a 1981 case, the Supreme Court said pardons "are rarely, if ever, appropriate subjects for judicial review.”

 

The pardon power, however, is not absolute. Crucially, a pardon only applies to federal crimes.

 

COULD TRUMP PARDON HIS CHILDREN AND INNER CIRCLE?

It would be legal for Trump to pardon his inner circle, including members of his family.

 

In 2001, former President Bill Clinton pardoned his brother, Roger, who was convicted for cocaine possession in Arkansas.

 

Clinton pardoned about 450 people, including a Democratic Party donor, Marc Rich, who had earlier fled the country because of tax evasion charges.

 

HOW BROADLY WORDED CAN A PARDON BE?

It's unclear.

 

The pardon Nixon received from Ford was very broad, absolving Nixon for all criminal offenses he committed or may have taken part in during his presidency.

 

The U.S. Supreme Court has never ruled on whether such a broad pardon is lawful. Some scholars have argued the nation’s founders intended for pardons to be specific, and that there is an implied limit on their scope.

 

WHAT WOULD TRUMP PARDON HIS CHILDREN OR GIULIANI FOR?

Trump’s children have not been accused of any criminal wrongdoing, and it is unclear what Trump would pardon them for.

Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance, who enforces New York state laws, has been conducting a criminal investigation into Trump and his family company, the Trump Organization. Vance, a Democrat, has suggested in court filings that his probe could focus on bank, tax and insurance fraud, as well as falsification of business records.

 

It is unclear what stage the investigation is at. No one has been charged with wrongdoing.

 

Trump, a Republican, has called the Vance probe politically motivated harassment. A presidential pardon, which can only be granted for federal crimes, would not apply to this investigation.

 

Giuliani’s potential criminal exposure is unclear. Federal prosecutors in Manhattan have been investigating his business dealings in Ukraine. Giuliani has denied wrongdoing and denied that he spoke to Trump about a pardon.

 

“Never had the discussion they falsely attribute to an anonymous source,” Giuliani said on Twitter on Dec. 1, referring to the New York Times report.

 

CAN PARDON RECIPIENTS "PLEAD THE FIFTH"?

Under the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, individuals can decline to speak to investigators if doing so might lead to self-incrimination. If someone receives a pardon and no longer faces legal jeopardy on the federal level, it may make it more difficult for them to assert this constitutional right.

 

However, since a presidential pardon applies only to federal crimes, pardon recipients can still lawfully refuse to cooperate if the conduct they have been pardoned for can also be prosecuted as a state crime.

 

CAN TRUMP PARDON HIMSELF?

There is not a definitive answer. No president has tried it before, so the courts have not weighed in.

 

“When people ask me if a president can pardon himself, my answer is always, ‘Well, he can try,’” said Brian Kalt, a constitutional law professor at Michigan State University. “The Constitution does not provide a clear answer on this.”

 

Many legal experts have said a self-pardon would be unconstitutional because it violates the principle that nobody should be the judge in his or her own case.

 

Trump could try to pardon himself preemptively to cover the possibility of prosecution for federal crimes after he leaves office. No pardon could protect him against prosecution for any crimes by a U.S. state.

 

For a court to rule on the pardon’s validity, a federal prosecutor would have to charge Trump with a crime and Trump would have to raise the pardon as a defense, Kalt said.

 

(Reporting by Jan Wolfe; Editing by Noeleen Walder and Leslie Adler)

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2020-12-25

 

- Whatever you're going through, the Samaritans are here for you

- Follow Thaivisa on LINE for breaking COVID-19 updates

He already pardoned his daughter's father in law. 

25 minutes ago, webfact said:

The pardon power, which comes from the U.S. Constitution, is one of the broadest available to a president. The nation’s founders saw the pardon power as a way to show mercy and serve the public good.

BS , how does  a president pardoning his cronies serve the public good? 

Don' t anyone see the problem with presidential pardons? For instance, Aid:  "sir I can't do that it's illegal and I could go to jail" President,: "Don't worry I will pardon you" 

Son: "Dad that illegal , what if I get caught" President "don't worry son if you get caught I will pardon you"

He is going to do it because at this  point there is zero downside to doing it. If it works and provides protection then he wins, the only way it won't work is if challenged and invalidated in the courts, which would be the same as if he never did it. Nothing to lose....but America loses. Two Justice systems...one for rich and elite and another for the rest of us idiots....shame on America.

 

The very second it was decided that he had lost this election the boofhead should have been removed from office.

Here's a 'reduction to the ridiculous' to show why the courts will rule that a President cannot pardon himself...

 

If a POTUS could pardon himself, President Joe Biden could execute 45 and his entire family, then simply say, "Pardon me".

 

In essence, such a power would create a monarch, not just above the law, but who is the law. The US specifically does not have a monarch. The Founders could have used the Magna Carta as a base document for the US, which states all are equal under the law except the monarch, but instead Madison and Jefferson wrote the Constitution.

 

Self-pardon will fail in the courts.

 

The pre-emptive pardon may also fail in the courts. Ford's pardon of Nixon was not challenged, so there is not a legal precedent (Nixon wasn't charged with a crime, so his pardon was pre-emptive, just never challenged.). Such a thing, if 45 decides to use it on his grifting family, is fraught with danger. It means ANYONE working for the government, including those with access to classified intelligence, could spend 4 years obtaining and selling intel to, for example, Russia, China or iran, even sharing some of the money with the POTUS, and then POTUS could pre-emptively pardon them (if the crime hasn't come out yet) and pardon himself.

 

The courts will not want to US to go down that rabbithole.

 

As for the pardons already given to convicted felons manafort, stone and flynn, they are not out of the woods yet. Because they were pardoned, they cannot incriminate themselves, so they cannot refuse to answer questions put to them by a grand jury. If asked about 45, what he did and what he knew, they must answer. If they fail to do so, they can be held in contempt, which would be a new charge for which they could face jail time. If they lie, that's perjury, also a new crime for which they can be jailed.

 

In a sense, 45 shot himself in the foot, because the pardons may lead to his own indictment, conviction and incarceration at the Federal level, not just what the NY AG has in store for him. For example, manafort could be asked if he was ever promised a pardon if he kept his mouth shut. If he answers 'yes', that proves the obstruction Mueller noted in his report, and the sole thing preventing Mueller from indicting 45 was the silly OLC 'opinion' which says a sitting POTUS cannot be indicted. After 20 January 45 will not be the 'sitting POTUS'. If manafort refuses to answer that question, it's contempt. If he answers with a lie, it's perjury.

 

On 20 January the US gets a real AG again. That new AG will serve the people, not the POTUS. After 20 January it would not be a good time to be 45 or any member of his family or wider crime family. It can be called a crime family accurately because of all the close associates of 45 who were indicted, tried and convicted of crimes.

People are surprised by this ?

The man is a criminal - always was, always will be.

 

 

A President is neither above or below the law, therefore, why would they have any less right to a pardon than anyone else?

1 hour ago, webfact said:

Explainer: Can anything stop Trump from pardoning his family or even himself?

presidential pardons are a terrible flaw in the usa version of democracy

Post reported and removed.

 

27 minutes ago, Walker88 said:

President Joe Biden could execute 45 and his entire family, then simply say, "Pardon me".

You've likely just started the new QAnon rumour......:(

Why can't you give yourself a billion dollar package, full immunity, wipe away all your debts, and in the 10,000 page bill everyone who voted for you will get paid as well.  isn't this how it works?

 

does the common man actually think he wins, ever?   he gets to complain, troll, comment, post.....and that's it.  thousands get super, super rich, while millions type away on their keyboard.  who really wins?  

 

How many people are still trolling Clinton?  nobody, and he got super, super, rich.   you get to troll for a few years and then they laugh at us forever.    thanks for playing.  

His family yes himself not so sure that beeing said trumps had a lifetime of suing and beeing sued he’s expert in using the courts to his own ends.imo he will try and if challenged in court he will drag it out until he croaks now the state charges are another matter lol

Well, Morals will not stop him...because he does not have any.

regards Worgeordie

19 minutes ago, Ventenio said:

does the common man actually think he wins, ever? 

Never -

Remember the Golden Rule - He Who has the Gold Makes the Rules

Once the pope ruled the world, now the President of USA rules, and those who rule, have different rules than others who do not rule. 

 

Next it might be China who is in lead, how will that be do you think? They will also have their rules to play by. 

 

Will it be worse or better? The same? 

 

Im just glad I do not have kids, and have  to worry about their future as I grow older. 

1 hour ago, canthai55 said:

People are surprised by this ?

The man is a criminal - always was, always will be.

 

 

Source?

4 minutes ago, Kelsall said:

Source?

Hmself. Trump uni, trump charities.

3 minutes ago, Kelsall said:

Source?

No need to quote a source, well detailed with proof many many times in court actions and well detailed in many respected media reports.

1 hour ago, Pattaya Spotter said:

A President is neither above or below the law, therefore, why would they have any less right to a pardon than anyone else?

Who else has a right to pardon? Doesnt that make him above?

1 hour ago, Pattaya Spotter said:

A President is neither above or below the law, therefore, why would they have any less right to a pardon than anyone else?

Because his pardon to himself puts himself above the law.

 

 

The question is, why would he feel the need to pardon himself. 

8 minutes ago, Kelsall said:

Source?

If Trump and his spawn haven’t broken the law they won’t need a Pardon, simples.

10 minutes ago, Kelsall said:

Source?

https://bipartisanreport.com/2020/09/27/the-daily-beast-reveals-russian-money-funnel-through-trump-property/

 

https://crooksandliars.com/2020/09/trumps-not-failed-businessman-hes-money

 

https://www.rawstory.com/2020/09/new-book-details-the-way-russians-funneled-money-through-trumps-real-estate-empire-using-a-money-laundering-middleman/

 

https://www.foxnews.com/media/donald-trump-russian-asset-msnbc

 

https://newrepublic.com/article/143586/trumps-russian-laundromat-trump-tower-luxury-high-rises-dirty-money-international-crime-syndicate

 

https://www.metro.us/russians-bought-86-trump-properties-all-in-cash-totaling-109-million/

 

https://www.newsweek.com/trump-drugs-corruption-panama-hotel-money-laundering-714891

 

Says 5 minutes on google, even from Fox

7 minutes ago, scorecard said:

No need to quote a source, well detailed with proof many many times in court actions and well detailed in many respected media reports.

If you are talking about Russia,Russia,Russia or Ukraine-gate , the 2 biggest failed investigations during the last 4 years, there was no guilty verdict nor any reason for Trump to give himself a pardon. If you are talking about some other alleged crime, a link would certainly be helpful as well as being in line with forum rules.

 

11 minutes ago, kwonitoy said:

https://bipartisanreport.com/2020/09/27/the-daily-beast-reveals-russian-money-funnel-through-trump-property/

 

https://crooksandliars.com/2020/09/trumps-not-failed-businessman-hes-money

 

https://www.rawstory.com/2020/09/new-book-details-the-way-russians-funneled-money-through-trumps-real-estate-empire-using-a-money-laundering-middleman/

 

https://www.foxnews.com/media/donald-trump-russian-asset-msnbc

 

https://newrepublic.com/article/143586/trumps-russian-laundromat-trump-tower-luxury-high-rises-dirty-money-international-crime-syndicate

 

https://www.metro.us/russians-bought-86-trump-properties-all-in-cash-totaling-109-million/

 

https://www.newsweek.com/trump-drugs-corruption-panama-hotel-money-laundering-714891

 

Says 5 minutes on google, even from Fox

Not one of these shows a criminal conviction in a court of law.  You are unable to provide proof Trump has ever been convicted of a criminal offense because non exists.

If I were a perfectly innocent person and someone offered me a pardon Id refuse, as it IMPLIES im guilty

 

Innocent people have no need for pardons, only guilty people do..........truth is a singular..lies are plural

1 hour ago, Walker88 said:

Here's a 'reduction to the ridiculous' to show why the courts will rule that a President cannot pardon himself...

 

If a POTUS could pardon himself, President Joe Biden could execute 45 and his entire family, then simply say, "Pardon me".

 

In essence, such a power would create a monarch, not just above the law, but who is the law. The US specifically does not have a monarch. The Founders could have used the Magna Carta as a base document for the US, which states all are equal under the law except the monarch, but instead Madison and Jefferson wrote the Constitution.

 

Self-pardon will fail in the courts.

 

The pre-emptive pardon may also fail in the courts. Ford's pardon of Nixon was not challenged, so there is not a legal precedent (Nixon wasn't charged with a crime, so his pardon was pre-emptive, just never challenged.). Such a thing, if 45 decides to use it on his grifting family, is fraught with danger. It means ANYONE working for the government, including those with access to classified intelligence, could spend 4 years obtaining and selling intel to, for example, Russia, China or iran, even sharing some of the money with the POTUS, and then POTUS could pre-emptively pardon them (if the crime hasn't come out yet) and pardon himself.

 

The courts will not want to US to go down that rabbithole.

 

As for the pardons already given to convicted felons manafort, stone and flynn, they are not out of the woods yet. Because they were pardoned, they cannot incriminate themselves, so they cannot refuse to answer questions put to them by a grand jury. If asked about 45, what he did and what he knew, they must answer. If they fail to do so, they can be held in contempt, which would be a new charge for which they could face jail time. If they lie, that's perjury, also a new crime for which they can be jailed.

 

In a sense, 45 shot himself in the foot, because the pardons may lead to his own indictment, conviction and incarceration at the Federal level, not just what the NY AG has in store for him. For example, manafort could be asked if he was ever promised a pardon if he kept his mouth shut. If he answers 'yes', that proves the obstruction Mueller noted in his report, and the sole thing preventing Mueller from indicting 45 was the silly OLC 'opinion' which says a sitting POTUS cannot be indicted. After 20 January 45 will not be the 'sitting POTUS'. If manafort refuses to answer that question, it's contempt. If he answers with a lie, it's perjury.

 

On 20 January the US gets a real AG again. That new AG will serve the people, not the POTUS. After 20 January it would not be a good time to be 45 or any member of his family or wider crime family. It can be called a crime family accurately because of all the close associates of 45 who were indicted, tried and convicted of crimes.

Just your opinion i am afraid as laws are written but the US constitution like the current Thai Constitution is written to allow such pardons and the constitution which was drafted hundereds of years ago would need to be changed by adding an amendment. However, that would only be for any new cases that violated the provisions and not those new provisions written after the violations occurred. There is no law which would allow a prosecution on something that was not illegal before, and the new provisions could only undo those convicted of a violation of the prior constitution if that was newly added.

2 minutes ago, Kelsall said:

Please provide a document that shows the charge, the date of conviction, and the sentence.

 

This argument makes no sense.  There have been MANY dictators who have NEVER been convicted of a crime.  LOLOLOL.  Of course.   Tens of millions died because of their orders, and no convictions.   what does this even mean????

 

I wouldn't call Trump a criminal now.  Immoral, maybe.  Unethical, probably.  Criminal in a civil court, likely.  But not a criminal as we are inferring.

 

 

The GOP senate could have and should have stopped this maniac. But the power hungry and spineless GOP politicians didn't want to do that. Just like the politicians of any other banana republic.

25 minutes ago, TopDeadSenter said:

If you are talking about Russia,Russia,Russia or Ukraine-gate , the 2 biggest failed investigations during the last 4 years, there was no guilty verdict nor any reason for Trump to give himself a pardon. If you are talking about some other alleged crime, a link would certainly be helpful as well as being in line with forum rules.

 

As I am forever pointing out, you did not read the Republican-produced SSCI 1000 page report on Russia.

 

In the report SSCI noted more than 140 contacts between Russian operatives and 45's campaign, where the campaign not only welcomed Russia's help but knew in advance when, for example, wikileaks would be releasing the emails that were hacked from the DNC and Podesta. Emails obtained in the roger stone trial proved 45 knew not only what wikileaks had, but also when they would announce. The campaign, via stone, worked with assange to slowly release the emails to maximize the impact and keep them in the news.

 

SSCI also noted that just after being named campaign manager, manafort flew to Spain to meet with GRU asset Konstantin Kilimnik to give the Russian internal polling data, which was then passed to the Internet Research Agency in ST Pete, who then manufactured fake stories about HRC's health, Uranium One, etc., which were microtargeted to specific voters in swing States in the hope of influencing their vote.

 

SSCI also reported that 45 lied on his written answers to Mueller, claiming he was not aware of what wikileaks had and when they would release it. Finally, at least 10 instances of obstruction of justice by 45 were detailed, but noting the OLC 'opinion' that a sitting POTUS could not be indicted.

 

The pardons of manafort and stone close the loop on that obstruction, and the new AG will likely use those pardons in a future indictment of 45. the pardoned people will be called as witnesses and cannot refuse, because the pardon prevents self-incrimination, but demands answers to questions posed to them by a court. If they refuse, they will be jailed for contempt. If they lie, they will be jailed for perjury. Both will opt to save themselves and throw 45 under the bus.

 

Ukraine is similar. All the evidence points to a quid pro quo, but barr and the enabling and complicit repubs quashed it.  Still, 45 was impeached.

 

If 45 had competent counsel, rather than the clowns he currently employs, they would have advised him not to pardon stone and manafort, as now he is likely to face indictment not only at the State level (he's already an un-indicted co-conspirator in the Stormy illegal payoff (he is called "individual One" in that) for insurance and bank fraud, but also at the Federal level for obstruction and 'conspiracy against the United States' for what he did in the 2016 campaign.

 

Justice is coming. Finally. I would say the odds of 45 avoiding incarceration of quite long. IMO, he will be jailed.