Who Should President Paul's first pardons be?

[Icymudpuppy]

If that was the position he took (and I don't think he'd be able to go home for Christmas and face his father if he took such a morally reprehensible position) he wouldn't get my vote (or support) for a second term. Weev's sentence (for doing math that embarrassed AT&T) will be over by then. Schiff's too, if he doesn't die in prison first. If he doesn't pardon Snowden his first term and loses his second, he's basically sentenced Snowden to a lifetime of exile. For Assange, it would be a lifetime of house arrest in London. These are people's lives we are talking about, not a political game. And even from a strictly political point of view pardoning the people I listed would be hailed by all of Rand Paul's most ardent supporters, ignored by most everybody else, and only cause rage in a few neocons who aren't going to like his Presidency anyway. So there is no excuse not to.

QFT!

 

[BuddyRey]

Kokesh in addition to everybody else mentioned already.

You're right...I don't know how I forgot about Kokesh.

 

[helmuth_hubener]

Bradley Manning
The kid who made a joke in an online game
Thousands upon thousands of non-violent drug offenders
All tax offenders
All insider traders

Post-release goodwill gestures?
Martha Stewart
Michael Milken
all draft refusers/resisters or deserters

 

[Christian Liberty]

All insider traders

I don't know much about this, so this question is from ignorance, but couldn't insider trading be fraud in at least some cases? And in virtually every case if deals are being made with the understanding that insider trading isn't tolerated?

 

[ronaldo23]

I don't know much about this, so this question is from ignorance, but couldn't insider trading be fraud in at least some cases? And in virtually every case if deals are being made with the understanding that insider trading isn't tolerated?

i think its a mistake for him politically to pardon someone before the last day of his second term. But on that day he should go all out, Snowden, Manning, war on drugs victims, and maybe even pull a Bill Clinton and pardon criminal donors

 

[mello]

Everyone ever convicted of any sort of possession charge.

That alone would save us 100 billion a year.

 

[DGambler]

http://www.libertariannews.org/2011...titutes-86-of-the-american-prison-population/

In light of that, let us review some statistics which demonstrate just how destructive the mass incarceration of victimless criminals has become to our society. The 2011 federal prison population consisted of:

Drugs 50.7%
Public-order 35.0%,
Violent 7.9%
Property 5.8%
Other .7%

 

[helmuth_hubener]

I don't know much about this, so this question is from ignorance, but couldn't insider trading be fraud in at least some cases? And in virtually every case if deals are being made with the understanding that insider trading isn't tolerated?

No. It couldn't be.

Except in the sense that washing your hands could be fraud if you signed a contract not to do it. Any human action could be fraud. But in and of itself, only fraud is fraud. And insider trading is not fraud.

It's a joke of a "law" anyway. Right up there with anti-trust.

 

[Carlybee]

Leonard Peltier...would piss the FBI off but garner support with Native Americans.

 

[dinosaur]

He is going to have to prioritize in order to get the maximum effect out of his time in office. We have a constitution to save, and his effectiveness will depend on his ability to connect with the people and outsmart the press. After dealing with finances and foreign policy, I'd like to see a push to get rid of federal guidelines for drug sentencing that will have some sort of retroactive effect on those already convicted. He's got to send the power back to the States, though. I'd like for it to be part of a larger effort that deals with federal overreach of judicial and police power. Its got to be done cleverly so that we are able to reach the larger goals in the most effective way possible.

 

[Matt Collins]

Ford pardoned Nixon (who hadn't been convicted of a crime) while Ford was serving his 1st term.

hmmmm I wonder what legal effect that would've actually had.

If the DOJ had pursued charges against Nixon, but the conviction didn't occur until after Ford had left office, what would have been the outcome?

 

[anaconda]

All tax offenses.

 

[dude58677]

The only person Rand Paul can't pardon is himself according to the Constitution. So there is really no limit to who he can pardon.

He can pardon everyone for tax evasion, drug crimes, gun crimes, etc.

This in effect would be repealing these laws through the executive branch.

 

[RonPaulMall]

hmmmm I wonder what legal effect that would've actually had.

If the DOJ had pursued charges against Nixon, but the conviction didn't occur until after Ford had left office, what would have been the outcome?

The pardon is for the crime itself, and the legal effect is binding. You don't have to be charged with a crime at the time of a pardon to get a pardon. The Feds don't even have to know or even suspect you of a crime to receive a pardon. For example, Ford's pardon reads:

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

So Nixon could not be prosecuted for any Federal Crime he committed between the dates specified in the pardon. Even if they found out later that he running a interstate white slavery sex ring in 1973, he would be free and clear (at least of any Federal Charges). State charges are a different story of course.

Being able to grant full, free, and unconditional pardons is important, especially since we now have a Federal Criminal Code tens of thousands of pages deep that has made a potential criminal out of pretty much every human being in America. If you could only pardon for specific charges that have been filed, then prosecutors would just wait out the Presidency and then hit the accused up with a dozen different charges. Or take the case of Assange. The only "charges" he's facing are questioning in Sweden on allegations he had sex without a condom. But the reason he's holed up in the embassy is because he knows this is only a ruse to get him to a place where he can be extradited to the US on charges the US has yet to file. A full and unconditional pardon for all crimes against the US Government is the only way you can get Assagne out of the mess he's currently in.

 

[Christian Liberty]

The only person Rand Paul can't pardon is himself according to the Constitution. So there is really no limit to who he can pardon.

He can pardon everyone for tax evasion, drug crimes, gun crimes, etc.

This in effect would be repealing these laws through the executive branch.

What's the procedure for doing that though? Can he just say "Everyone who is a tax evader is pardoned" or would he have to do them individually?

 

[RonPaulMall]

What's the procedure for doing that though? Can he just say "Everyone who is a tax evader is pardoned" or would he have to do them individually?

You don't have to do it individually. General Pardons for piracy were common during the Golden Age of piracy. Jimmy Carter granted an almost blanket pardon to nearly all Vietnam era draft dodgers. But you can only pardon crimes that have been committed, not future crimes. So you can't in fact "change the law" through pardoning unless you kept on issuing pardons on a daily basis which might rightly earn you an impeachment since it would be a clear violation of the intent of the Constitution.

 

[Matt Collins]

The pardon is for the crime itself, and the legal effect is binding. You don't have to be charged with a crime at the time of a pardon to get a pardon. The Feds don't even have to know or even suspect you of a crime to receive a pardon. For example, Ford's pardon reads:

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

So Nixon could not be prosecuted for any Federal Crime he committed between the dates specified in the pardon. Even if they found out later that he running a interstate white slavery sex ring in 1973, he would be free and clear (at least of any Federal Charges). State charges are a different story of course.

That scares me. I wonder if that has been tested in court?


I mean it's kind of a blank check. I always thought it had to be after the fact, but again, I am not a lawyer.

 

[ObiRandKenobi]

Snowden

 

[specsaregood]

The only person Rand Paul can't pardon is himself according to the Constitution. So there is really no limit to who he can pardon.

He can pardon everyone for tax evasion, drug crimes, gun crimes, etc.

This in effect would be repealing these laws through the executive branch.

Only for federal crimes, not state or local level.

 

[dude58677]

You don't have to do it individually. General Pardons for piracy were common during the Golden Age of piracy. Jimmy Carter granted an almost blanket pardon to nearly all Vietnam era draft dodgers. But you can only pardon crimes that have been committed, not future crimes. So you can't in fact "change the law" through pardoning unless you kept on issuing pardons on a daily basis which might rightly earn you an impeachment since it would be a clear violation of the intent of the Constitution.

A President does not have to execute laws that are unconstitutional. So he can pardon till the law is repealed or he can issue executive order to stop enforcement of an unconstitutional law. Just because past presidents haven't done this doesn't mean it can't be done.