Stabbing Incident in Pattaya Leaves Japanese Tourist Dead; Suspect Caught
-
Recently Browsing 0 members
- No registered users viewing this page.
-
Topics
-
Popular Contributors
-
Latest posts...
-
170
Banged up: Thai prison nightmare exposed by British tourist
Why are you guys going back and forth over the USA prison system? This more run is from the UK. Not America!!! -
162
Biden pardons Fauci, Miley and Jan 6 committee staffers!
An interesting discussion on the legality of the pardons between Tylor Nixon and Samuel Terpening on X: The TL;DR: Samuel points out the historical precedents for preemptive pardons, and Tyler responds as to why this is different and unique. It is instructive to remember the pardon power of the presidency extends from his role as Commander-In-Chief, not as the chief executive of the country: Ford preemptively pardoned Nixon - Nixon already had presidential immunity, so the pardon was superfluous for public consumption, and the courts never took up the argument as to whether it was legitimate. Lincoln preemptively pardoned soldiers in the Civil war, and Carter preemptively pardoned Vietnam draft evaders - these were both done during a wartime setting, and were intended to heal wounds after the war was complete. This is exactly the context for which the pardon power was written in the Constitution Bush preemptively pardoned Caspar Weinberger over Iran-Contra - Weinberger was specifically indicted before the pardon, and the preemptive pardon, issued before the trial could begin, was narrowly tailored. Weinberger was not given blanket retroactive immunity for all crimes committed over a decade. Sadly, SCOTUS never took up the challenge to determine whether this pardon was, in fact, legitimate. In short, Tyler argues this is a very different situation, and the Constitution does not give the President to authority to elevate someone completely above the law. It's useful to read the exact clause which confers the power of pardon to the president to get context: Notice that the writers assumed this power would be used in the context of crimes committed during war, not ordinary, peace time criminal activity, which is why it is included as the right of the Command-In-Chief, not the President. Historical precedent has allowed this power to be used for non wartime crimes as well, however the US Supreme Court is not bound by precedent. They can reverse poor precedent at any time, and this particular case may be so brazen that they just might do that. -
60
Pitbull mauls monk to death in gruesome Nonthaburi temple attack
Bit of a harsh assessment of the orange robed fraternity…. -
3
REBCO: The Wonder Material Paving the Way to Limitless Energy
I am sure that fusion will be achieved soon. The next step will be how to tap the superheated plasma without damaging the reactor, to make electricity. That will not be easy, never hear much about that. Still 50 years away from commercial usefulness. -
121
Trump just said he is going to pardon the J6 "hostages".
You're the obsessed one, you tell me. -
121
Trump just said he is going to pardon the J6 "hostages".
How about a law that convicted criminals can't be president? Or would that be too radical?
-
-
Popular in The Pub
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now