Should a Democratic President pardon an ex-President Trump?

[Casprings]

If Trump is convicted is a crime after he leaves office, would it makes sense for a Democratic President to pardon an ex-President Trump to help heal the nation?

I am just curious your reaction. If he is found guilty of crimes, how should a future democratic president handle it?

[Wounded Bear]

1. Seeing as how we never really recovered from the Nixon fiasco, I'll go with no...nt

[Casprings]

4. Yeah, but that was Ford..

That would have likely played out far differently if Ford allowed him to get convicted and Carter did it.

[CottonBear]

2. No.

Absolutely not.

[lapfog_1]

3. Didn't really work for Ford... why would it work for anyone

that follows the traitor Trump

[Casprings]

7. Different party. That would be the major difference.

Would appear to be a major act of "healing" by the democratic president. I think it would likely be popular.

[lapfog_1]

13. I want the traitor in jail for the rest of his miserable existence

[Casprings]

14. I want political advantage and increased chances of maintaining that advantage

[PoindexterOglethorpe]

5. What makes you think Trump will

be immediately followed by a Democratic President? If he leaves before 2020, then the next seventeen or so people in line are all Republicans.

And I don't know how old you are, but I was in my late 20's when the whole Watergate thing occurred, and I can tell you that there was general outrage that Ford pardoned Nixon, and a strong feeling that the fix had been in for the pardon when Ford became the new VP after Agnew resigned in disgrace.

I would sincerely hope that if Trump is convicted of any crime he serves out whatever full sentence or punishment is involved. The nation would best heal by Trump living out the rest of his miserable life in prison. Or exile somewhere.

[Casprings]

9. Yeah, but he was if the same party..

That would have played out differently if Carter did it. Of course, might not have Carter if he didn't pardon Nixon and if you don't have Carter, might have avoided Reagan.

[PoindexterOglethorpe]

23. I'm not sure I follow you.

It was Ford who pardoned Nixon a month or so after Nixon resigned. Carter wasn't elected until some two years later. It's hard to be sure that the pardon really made Ford unelectable. There's a good chance that Carter would have won anyway, because by 1976 people were quite ready to elect a Democrat.

What's really unknowable is what would have happened to Nixon without the pardon. Probably not much. There was, so far as I recall, no active prosecution in the works against him. The worst was that he'd been named an unindicted co-conspirator. No legal action was being set against him. He'd have still gone back to California, still have written his memoirs.

Without the pardon, I seriously doubt that a President Carter would have been bothered to issue a pardon two and a half years after Nixon's leaving office. There would have been no point.

At this point it's fruitless to speculate about pardoning Trump, because at this point absolutely no legal proceedings are in place against him. Various investigations, yes. Maybe something will result in an indictment. We need to wait and see how it plays out.

[Leith]

26. Oh Hell NO!

[Casprings]

27. I am saying the politics would have been different if Ford..

Didn't pardon him and Carter did. If Carter did, he could of sold a message of national healing because he wouldn't be from Nixon's party.

[PoindexterOglethorpe]

36. And I'm saying that Carter would not have pardoned Nixon.

Nope. And two years after the resignation, without a pardon, Nixon would have been living in quiet exile in California, largely forgotten. The country would have long since healed. Those high, angry feelings that were so strong in the summer of 1974 would have gone away in the next two years. Most people have a very short attention span. And our news media very directly feeds into that short attention span. There would not have been any strong feelings still hanging on, no need for a message of national healing. By election day 1976 we'd been through the Bicentennial, the best birthday party this country ever had. No one would have given a flying fuck about Richard Nixon at that point.

What I'm saying is that by January 1977 Nixon was, and would have been in the no-Ford-pardon scenario, largely forgotten.

[Casprings]

52. Or in prison... or getting ready to go to prison

It might still have been in the news. In fact, I think that is pretty likely.

[PoindexterOglethorpe]

85. I doubt he'd have gone to prison, alas.

He should have. He should have died in prison. But I think in the end there would have been no will to prosecute him. The general consensus would have been "He's suffered enough". Sort of like these days parents are never prosecuted for leaving loaded guns out where little kids can get ahold of them.

Perhaps, if your scenario is correct, and Nixon been in prison or getting ready to go to prison in 1977, and Carter had pardoned him, he'd have been seen as a kind humanitarian, and would then have swept his re-election in 1980.

That's actually a good jumping off point for an alternate history novel.

[Casprings]

88. I don't know about that..

Nixon was pretty hated by most of the American population when he left. I think if you don't have the Ford Pardon, there is a good chance that DOJ would keep digging and bring charges.

But that said, who knows.

[whathehell]

65. I think those you you imagine it would please, would view it as weakness

I see no upside to it at all.

[Girard442]

20. I doubt that Ford pardoned Nixon out of the goodness of his heart.

Pretty sure a deal was struck to get Nixon to resign. Whether it was a good deal, people are still arguing.

[Casprings]

24. Who knows...

But dumb political move. Likely cost him the election to Carter.

[PoindexterOglethorpe]

30. I know that's the common wisdom.

I'm disinclined to believe that. Personally, I think Jerry Ford was a genuinely honest man, who was seen by the Republican Party as a very welcome change from Spiro Agnew, and the good man who could replace Nixon as President. I'm inclined to think that in the immediate aftermath of the resignation, when there was a strong wish for punishing Nixon, that Ford, Kissinger, and various others at the top, decided that a pardon would finally put an end to Watergate.

Ask yourself: if the pardon had been agreed to ahead of the resignation, why wait a month? Why not issue it within 48 hours or so? In addition, Ford's first press secretary, Jerry terHorst in protest over the pardon. Don't you suppose that if the pardon was a done deal, that terHorst would have known about it? And either not taken the press secretary position in the first place or stayed on the job?

[Takket]

6. I would demand the resignation of anyone who did that

[SweetieD]

8. Hell no

[tblue37]

10. No. nt

[Stinky The Clown]

11. No. I recall thinking there needed to be some Dem-derived consequences for Cheney/Bush

So NO. Never again.

This isn't about political opposition. It is about criminality.

[PoindexterOglethorpe]

25. The time for that was when Obama took office.

But he was far too willing to let bygones be bygones and not pursue any sort of action against either of those war criminals. I personally thought it was a mistake.

[Stinky The Clown]

28. Obama and Pelosi share that one.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

12. Hell to the fucking no. Maybe for someone in an isolated event - a moment of

stupidity. But not for this daily lying, unamerican, intellectually lazy, son of a bitch who called the White House a dump.

[Mme. Defarge]

15. This has some ideas for appropriate punishment.

Testimony of William Browder to the Senate Judiciary Committee on FARA violations
connected to the anti-Magnitsky Campaign by Russian government interests
July 26, 2017

-- Excerpt --

"That all changed in July 2003 when Putin arrested Russia’s biggest oligarch and richest man,
Mikhail Khodorkovsky. Putin grabbed Khodorkovsky off his private jet, took him back to
Moscow, put him on trial and allowed television cameras to film Khodorkovsky sitting in a
cage right in the middle of the courtroom. That image was extremely powerful because
none of the other oligarchs wanted to be in the same position. After Khodorkovsky’s
conviction the other oligarchs went to Putin and asked him what they needed to do to avoid
sitting in the same cage as Khodorkovsky. From what followed, it appeared that Putin’s
answer was, “Fifty per cent.” He wasn’t saying 50% for the Russian government or the
presidential administration of Russia, but 50% for Vladimir Putin personally. From that
moment on Putin became the biggest oligarch in Russia and the richest man in the world,
and my anti-corruption activities would no longer be tolerated."

[Girard442]

16. I think it would be appropriate to show Trump as much mercy as he has shown others.

[MyNameGoesHere]

17. What an odd question.

Brings me back to the golden oldie whatif.

What if grasshoppers had machine gunz?



Birds wouldn't fuck with em, of course.

[Casprings]

19. It's an online discussion forum

Isn't the purpose odd questions?

[MyNameGoesHere]

22. I'll have to ask the grasshoppers.

I don't know the answer to that.

[WinkyDink]

56. That's rather an odd assumption. Bizarre, even.

ACTUALLY, IT 'S ANNOYING.

[lkinwi]

18. After all the "lock her up" chants?

Absolutely not!

[lpbk2713]

21. He should be Ted Kaczynski's new neighbor.

For a long time.

[leanforward]

29. No

[IphengeniaBlumgarten]

31. Let's wait to see what the indictments are for, first. nt

[njhoneybadger]

32. A big fuck no

You don't pardon someone who sells out your country

[trueblue2007]

33. NO ...... A DEMOCRATIC PRESIDENT should make sure Trump goes to jail AS A REMINDER TO CRIMINALS

[Cicada]

34. Should Trump put Hillary in jail? No. Pardon him.

If we start locking up Republicans they will start locking up Democrats. You can argue he's guilty and she's not, but they will really believe she's guilty and they can probably find a way to lock her up. Once we start jailing opposing leaders our Democracy will be much much worse. As crooked as Trump is, as much as I genuinely believe he's a crook, for the good of the system we should pardon him. Jail or not for one person is a trivial price for protecting democracy itself.

[DLevine]

55. How are we protecting democracy if we allow a criminal to go free

just because he holds a high office? If someone is convicted of a crime, they must pay the penalty for that, just as you or I would. If we decide no president should ever be held accountable for criminal acts, that will destroy what's left of our democracy.

[Cicada]

76. Many guilty people are freed to avoid great harm

We grant the number 2 mobster immunity to get the number 1 mobster. We do not prosecute a spy to prevent Russia from knowing we have cracked their spy ring, or to use him as a double agent. We do not prosecute a jay walker to avoid big court costs. Every President has broken laws. Every single one. There are thousands and thousands of laws. Under your proposal every single President would be jailed. Without "prosecutorial discretion" criminal law would collapse. We must balance cost against reward to avoid huge net costs.

[DLevine]

82. You say every president has broken the law,

but obviously not every president has been convicted of a crime. The op is talking about pardoning a president who has been convicted. Frankly, if Trump is ever convicted of a crime and is then pardoned by a Democratic president "for the greater good", there will be justifiable outrage.

[Cicada]

84. WHY hasn't every President been convicted?

We consider gain vs harm in deciding whether to prosecute someone. It does more harm to prosecute two 15 year olds for having sex than it does good, even though in some states they have each committed the crime of having sex with a minor. All of us are tax felons, having sold something without reporting it as income on our tax returns. This idea of choosing not to fully carry out the law when doing so would cause society more harm than good strikes me as an obviously good idea. This concept of restraint from fully carrying out the provision of the criminal law when that is in our best interest applies to granting a pardon as well as to the decision to not prosecute you for tax fraud. Some crimes by a President surely would be fairly prosecuted but we are not legally required to do that if it would cause us tremendous harm. And I am pretty certain that jailing Trump would greatly increase the odds of purely political prosecutions of future Presidents. Jailing him is not worth it. Obama gave ambassadorships to some big donors. Quid pro quo, bribery. Should President Pence send Obama to jail when his base clamors for it?

[DLevine]

86. A "President Pence" can't convict anyone of anything,

no matter how much his base clamors for it. I'm sure Republicans would love to see Obama and/or Clinton in jail, but neither was ever convicted of anything. If Trump is ever convicted, and then pardoned, Republicans won't be any less inclined to target Democrats in the future. It's what they do.

[Cicada]

89. A prosecutor can indict a ham sandwich, so too Pence could indict Obama

You claim Republicans will try to jail Democrats no matter what. Why hasn't Hillary been indicted? Why hasn't Obama been indicted?

Because we have strong norms against doing that. I do not want those norms weakened. Even if the odds of my view being true are only 10% and the odds of your view being true are 90% then it still is not worth the risk of jailing Trump unless there is widespread bipartisan support for doing that.

[WinkyDink]

57. Where to begin with this lunacy?

[Cicada]

79. With an analysis of cost vs gain

It apparently will surprise you to learn that every President commits crimes - lots of them. Every single President. Indeed every one of us commits crimes. Any prosecutor who fails to use prosecutorial discretion to not charge various guilty people would be a monstrous tyrant.

Obama no doubt named various donors to be ambassadors. That is bribery. Without the donation they would not have become an ambassador. Should we jail Obama? Should we have jailed every President since the first who also rewarded supporters? Every single one took an official act in return for prior political support. Quid pro quo. Bribery.

We are not required to shoot our democracy in the foot to pristinely enforce law.

[WinkyDink]

90. "Indeed every one of us commits crimes." ??????????? WTBloodyHell nonsense.

[Cicada]

94. Have you ever sold something yet failed to report it on a tax return?

If so you have committed tax fraud. Have you ever smoked dope? We have thousands and thousands of laws and each and every one of us has violated some. A prosecutor must choose to prosecute only those crimes where the prosecution produces more good than harm. A prosecutor must choose to not prosecute countless crimes. Have you ever downloaded copyrighted materials? A prosecutor can indict you, me, anyone, even a ham sandwich if he or she wants to. My fear is that if we start prosecuting Presidents then they will all be prosecuted. This happens in some countries. The President of the Ukraine, who is represented by Amal Clooney, was sent to prison by the person who replaced her as the leader of the Ukraine. The losing candidate in Venezuela was arrested right after losing the election this past week. This is a real danger in democracies and you should understand that is becoming a real danger here. Chants of "lock her up" should give you chills. In my opinion chants of "lock him up" should also give you chills. We must show extreme restraint in locking up our political opponents or our political opponents will soon lock us up.

Really dude.

[avebury]

61. If someone commits a crime that person should face the

consequences of that action(s). I think that, in the long run, Ford pardoning Nixon was a disaster. Look that how bad the behavior of the Republicans have become. The lesson of Watergate became we can do as we please because, for the most part, nobody will do anything about it.

If it can be proven in a court of law that Trump, his family and him minions (perhaps as far as the Republican leadership in Congress) have committed crimes (past and present) and the Democrats become part of the process of letting them walk away from facing the consequences of their actions I don't think that I could ever forgive the Democrats for that.

What good is it to have laws if you refuse to uphold them. I am tired of the hypocricy.

[Cicada]

83. You are a criminal. We all are. Should we all be in jail?

Have you sold something and failed to report it as income on your tax return? Should you be jailed for tax fraud? Did you ever commit some sort of sexual act - get to third base - with someone under the age of consent. Even if you did that when you were 15 years old it was a sex crime. Should you be on the sex offender's list for life?

Some crimes should be punished, obviously. But it should be equally obvious that we should NOT punish a huge number of crimes. We should weigh cost and benefit in pursuing crimes.

We should be very slow to prosecute a President because that will greatly increase the chance that Presidents in the future will be jailed for political reasons rather than for reasons of properly enforcing law.

Obama appointed some big donors as ambassadors. Without the donation they would not have become ambassador. That is quid pro quo, bribery. Do you seriously argue Trump should prosecute and jail Obama? We should always balance cost and benefit in prosecutions.

[WinkyDink]

91. No. No. And nyet. MOREOVER, THIS IS STUPID, your equating CITIZEN OFFENSES

to the CONSTITUTIONALLY-RECORDED "HIGH CRIMES AND MISDEMEANORS" as a UNIQUELY PRESIDENTIAL definition of offenses leading to impeachment.

But you go on with your funny self, trying to find an argument not to impeach this ASTOUNDINGLY IGNORANT GREED-HEAD TRAITOR who sullies our White House and our national soul.

You know what they say: Raise Straw-men while the sun shines.

[Cicada]

96. I want him impeached too, that is appropriate

I merely do not want him jailed because it is so easy for a corrupt or politically motivated prosecutor to put someone in jail. Don't want to give Repubs an excuse to start that.

I think we should also play the Russian National Anthem at all his appearances.

[awesomerwb1]

35. LOL

Ok, now a serious answer: LOL

[liberaldemocrat2024]

37. Trump suggests he wants to pardon himself

Trump suggested he has the powers of a presidential pardon and can pardon himself and family members and staff

[Casprings]

47. He can certainly do it in his family members

And that is likely, depending on how this goes.

[Snackshack]

38. No

Not holding people responsible for their actions virtually assures that it will happen again.

IMO- Two of President Obama's 4 biggest mistakes was not holding those in government responsible for what was clearly torture and not holding those in the financial sector responsible for their actions in the 2008 economic melt down.

As for Nixon, President Johnson should have arrested and tried Nixon for treason before he ever became President.

[bullimiami]

39. One of the reasons we're in this mess is failure to prosecute the powerful

History has shown them they can get away with anything.

So F no! Let him rot.

[whathehell]

64. Thank you....Many already think Democrats are "too nice" and some

misread it as "weakness"....I see no advantage to pardoning Trump.

[Judi Lynn]

42. Of absolutely course not. Good grief. "National healing?" Please.

Trump should attend to "national healing" immediately by resigning now, not a moment later.

No one has ####ed this country the way the pResident has ####ed us, just as Karl Rove hoped to do to a political enemy when he uttered the immortal Republican words:

".... We will fuck him. We will ruin him. Like no one has ever fucked him!”

[Casprings]

48. Yeah, but he will still likely have 25% or so support

And mostely concentrated (in rural areas). Doesn't seem healthy to me

[ecstatic]

43. That would not heal the nation. Trump has put most of us through hell for over 2 years

Lock his fat ass up!

[MyNameIsKhan]

44. Hell no but letting him die of natural cause before any criminal trial is better for country...

He should be subjected to 3 times fast food meal... a day...

[ProudLib72]

45. You are assuming a quick fix to heal the nation

That isn't going to happen. This divide has been around a long time, and no band aid solutions are going to work. The RW will not suddenly give up trying to get and maintain all the political power, and (is should be obvious from the responses so far) liberals are not going to forgive and forget the hell that has been forced upon us. When tRump is in prison, there is no more freedom caucus, and teabaggers are extinct, then we can start to heal. Until the far right vanishes, fuck healing.

[Casprings]

49. It wouldn't be a band aid

It would be a huge symbolic move. The freedom caucus isn't going away until people stop supporting people in it.

[WinkyDink]

58. You are giving too much credit and thought.

[Alice11111]

46. No, not DT. Never. 100s of offenses. Nothing to do w his

being a Republican. He has just committed treason, fraud, on and on, with intent to deceive.

[Hieronymus]

50. No

[DLevine]

51. Of course not. Lock him up.

No one should be above the law.

[avebury]

53. NO!!!

The only lesson that the Republicans learned from Ford pardoning Nixon was that actions do not have consequences. Republican behavior has only worsened on a skyrocketing basis since then.

[WinkyDink]

54. Really? I mean REALLY? Good grief.

[sunonmars]

59. No, an hard example must be set, so this shit is not tried again.

[SamKnause]

60. No.

White collar criminals should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law.

Nixon should not have been pardoned.

Bush and the Bush administration should have been prosecuted for illegally invading Iraq.

If found guilty they should have been jailed.

The Wall Street titans should have been prosecuted and if found guilty jailed.

We can't claim to be a country that abides by the rule of law when it only applies to certain people.

When judges, prosecutors, lawyers, and police break the law their sentences should be doubled.

My reasoning is because it is their job to uphold and enforce the rule of law.

With Liberty and Justice For All is nothing more then a slogan.

Our jails are filled with people who should not be there.

Our government, police forces, court rooms, and boards rooms are filled with people who should be in jail.

[Historic NY]

62. Nyet....

[madokie]

63. Turn his back on tRumps sorry ass

Would be what I'd hope to see. tRump is not a good person in any way shape or form. He's a sorry asshole

[whathehell]

66. No and Hell No.

Many didn''t even like it when Pelosi took impeachment off the table for the Bush administration and I was one of them.

[Warren DeMontague]

67. no

[Foamfollower]

68. Nope, but a President Pence WILL.

[Casprings]

70. Maybe, but that will ensure a dem in 2020

I think Pence wants to be President more then he likes Teump.

[Foamfollower]

72. Catch 22

If he doesn't pardon Trump, he won't get the nomination.

If he does pardon Trump, he won't win the GE.

[Not Ruth]

81. But he and Obama get to be surviving ex Pressidents for a few decades

His mom wife can pal around with Michelle

[Orrex]

69. Would a Republican President have pardoned Clinton?

[bluecollar2]

71. no...

[JHB]

73. What on earth makes you think that would heal anything?

Nothing that's being investigated right now is tiddly-winks stuff. Collusion with a foreign power for domestic political advantage. Money laundering for gangsters.

He's 71 years old. If convicted, these are things that should put him in jail for longer than he's likely to live. That deserve sentences that long.

I mean, what gesture by the Republicans would happen to "help heal the nation"? The resignation of each and every conservative Supreme Court justice? And a good chunk of the district court ones?

Restoring progressive taxation beyond its current anemic level?

What's happening on the other side? I hope you're not depending on them to do the right thing out of the goodness of their hearts.

[CozyMystery]

74. Absolutely not!

[Orsino]

75. Well, it wouldn't have to be a blanket pardon.

I would naturally be suspicious of a new Democratic president eager to "move forward" by pardoning a Reoublican predecessor...but, maybe? I dunno.

Might be cool to pardon him for certain federal offenses while leaving him to face several states' Attorneys General.

[Guy Whitey Corngood]

77. .

[Progressive dog]

78. Lock him up

Let the justice system deal with Trump and his co-conspirators.

[Not Ruth]

80. Louise has said that "they" (Mueller?) are looking at the death penalty for Bannon and Trump

Pardon after execution might fly.

[geek tragedy]

87. adsf

[CakeGrrl]

92. NO

He's impeachable NOW and for good reason.

His conviction, if we were lucky enough to see one, should serve as a lesson. Bad deeds can sometimes receive the appropriate punishment.

There should be no appeasing low-information, racist Trump defenders. Let them learn and move forward, or stay and wallow.

[mercuryblues]

93. If they do, I will no longer be a Democrat

[octoberlib]

95. No. Most of the nation will be glad to see him in jail.