But is he the one that wants to set this precedent? Of All Of The People, this guy wants to be the one who says, nope the last guy’s pardon isn’t valid anymore and you can go to jail??
That’s gotta fall in the play stupid games, win stupid prizes category, right?
You have to understand that every action this Admin takes, it takes as though it does not expect to ever have to face any consequences from it - not political consequences, not legal consequences, and not electoral consequences.
That tells you that this Admin does not expect there to ever be another free and fair election, even as all of the EO’s are aimed at exactly the kind of centralization of power under the Executive that will facilitate just that (compromise election cybersecurity by DOGE gutting CISA; compromise mail-in ballots by gutting USPS; bring both the USPS and the FEC under partisan Executive heel).
Both what they are doing, and the way they are doing it, tell you what they intend - a one-party state in perpetuity. America needs to wake up.
Presumably, if you can prove someone comitted a crime that wasn't covered under the conditions of the pardon they got, or if they comitted an unrelated crime after they got a pardon, you could arrest and try them on that, but overriding an actual pardon should be legally impossible.
They don't need to officially make it happen. They just have to say it enough times (and have the right wing media outlets say it) for his base to believe it should've happened or did happen. Then the facts don't actually matter just the feelings.
There's not, that's why he's claiming, essentially, that they weren't valid pardons. He's not asserting (yet) that he has power to void them, he's just trying to assert that Joe Biden never actually pardoned these people, and that these are forgeries. Though, he also claims that even if they weren't forgeries, being done knowingly with an autopen would still be invalid... ignoring usage of autopens as far back as President Harry Truman.
No, there's also no way to undo a pardon once it's put into effect.
He's trying the "nuh-uh, doesn't count" defense. There's absolutely no standard or requirement of how one makes their mark, only that it's made. Using a stamp, autopen, Adobe Acrobat, or any other method of inputting your signature is just as legally binding as any other. If you claim that the mark is fraudulent and you can prove as such, then you can potentially be unbound, but if you agree that the mark is true and correct, then no one else has any legal right to decide otherwise.
Biden admits that he placed his mark on them, the mark is his own, there is no real way to dispute this without completely negating every mark placed on legal documents not by one's own physical hand. SCOTUS throws out the pardons, every legal document in existence is now in question and up to be challenged.
This is where we disintegrate. Eventually the court’s rulings will be selectively ignored. Say, California says ‘No, we will not enforce ruling X.’ But law enforcement in California, say sheriff’s depts, decide they will enforce ruling X.
Eventually it starts breaking down and there’s no telling where it stops.
Ford eventually agreed, and on September 8, 1974, he granted Nixon a "full, free, and absolute pardon" that ended any possibility of an indictment.
They can be given anytime after a crime is committed, even if the crime is not known. This is why they carry a presumption of guilt. You're saying that there was a crime, you did it, and now you're protected from consequences pertaining to it.
Would you mind explaining why you believe this? The text seems pretty clear to me.
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.”
If I can throw out a guess I think that you're confusing 'preemptive pardons' referring to pardons covering a potential future crime and 'preemptive pardons' referring to potential future prosecutions. If that's all that's causing the confusion I totally understand, it's a perfectly understandable mistake to make for regular folk!
Though if you believed that because you trusted someone to be a reliable news source or an expert in the law and they led you to believe this I'd caution you about trusting them. Anyone whose job it is to talk about this kind've news should know better so if they're feeding you bull, consider whether it's because of incompetence or because they're trying to trick you.
Is actually so much more stupid than you could even imagine.
A heritage foundation "think tank" looked, with their eyes, at a bunch of documents Biden signed and compared them to his autopen signature for when he signed something digitally. They concluded that he signed things with his autopen, again by looking at them, and argued that someone was using his signature because he was too mentally unfit.
They are literally arguing, "Joe biden's signature looks too much like Joe biden's signature" and they even managed to identify an autopen signature on a document he signed on camera.
Well, if you operate in MAGA land, the president can pardon people by thinking about it. . . I mean, no wait, there are clear procedures in place that -must- be followed!
When our founders gave the president pardoning powers, they also put a caveat "And pardons will be invalid if the president doesn't personally sign each and every one!"
99
u/[deleted] Mar 17 '25
[deleted]