Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Tuesday, December 01, 2020

Rudolph W. Giuliani, President Trump's lawyer who has led the most extensive efforts to damage his client's political rivals and undermine the election results, discussed with the president as recently as last week the possibility of receiving a pre-emptive pardon before Mr. Trump leaves office, according to two people told of the discussion. It was not clear who raised the topic.



Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

Such a broad pardon pre-empting any charge or conviction is highly unusual but does have precedent. George Washington pardoned plotters of the Whiskey Rebellion, shielding them from treason prosecutions. In the most famous example, Gerald R. Ford pardoned Richard M. Nixon for all of his actions as president. Jimmy Carter pardoned thousands of American men who illegally avoided the draft for the Vietnam War.
Could someone remind me again why an innocent person would need a presidential pardon?

#1 | Posted by tonyroma at 2020-12-01 11:08 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

Neatly explains why Rudy has been acting so -------. ------- is how to prove to Trump you're loyal.

#2 | Posted by Zed at 2020-12-01 11:16 AM | Reply


Trump Has Discussed With Advisers Pardons for His 3 Eldest Children and Giuliani

President Trump has discussed with advisers whether to grant pre-emptive pardons to his children, to his son-in-law and to his personal lawyer Rudolph W. Giuliani, and talked with Mr. Giuliani about pardoning him as recently as last week, according to two people briefed on the matter.

Mr. Trump has told others that he is concerned that a Biden Justice Department might seek retribution against the president by targeting the oldest three of his five children - Donald Trump Jr., Eric Trump and Ivanka Trump - as well as Ms. Trump's husband, Jared Kushner, a White House senior adviser.

Donald Trump Jr. had been under investigation by Robert S. Mueller III, the special counsel, for contacts that the younger Mr. Trump had had with Russians offering damaging information on Hillary Clinton during the 2016 campaign, but he was never charged. Mr. Kushner provided false information to federal authorities about his contacts with foreigners for his security clearance, but was given one anyway by the president.

#3 | Posted by tonyroma at 2020-12-01 08:44 PM | Reply

Man, Tiffany gets the ---- end of the stick UH-gain.

#4 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2020-12-01 10:58 PM | Reply


Hold power broker family in the dark and Twitter glows from smartphones.
Hold nepotism spawn up to a light and they are children.

#5 | Posted by LesWit at 2020-12-02 07:06 AM | Reply

Will Presidentent Fredo charge his own children for their pardons?

#6 | Posted by Docman at 2020-12-02 08:12 AM | Reply

" pre-emptive pardon"

In other words a license to break the law. These people working for Trump have no morality, ethics or decency. Giuliani wants a license to break the law, Trump is going to leave the WH and Giuliani is going to pass into obscurity they day Trump leaves. Whatever remnants of his reputation he had left is now gone and he will just be remembered as a crook and a pathetic joke.

#7 | Posted by danni at 2020-12-02 08:57 AM | Reply

Ummmm don't you have to be convicted of a crime to be pardoned?

#8 | Posted by truthhurts at 2020-12-02 09:18 AM | Reply

Wouldn't this mean that they have no protections from testifying in an investigation of the administration?

Force them to tell all then. At least we won't have to buy a book.

Also, I wonder if Giuliani is the party involved in selling POTUS pardons...

#9 | Posted by jpw at 2020-12-02 11:57 AM | Reply

Ummmm don't you have to be convicted of a crime to be pardoned?


Technically yes. But they can offer blanket pardons which essentially say they are pardoned of all crimes whatever they are.

Here is where it gets tricky: Pardons have to be accepted.

SO WHAT IF: Feds charge someone with a crime after the pardon and the party says "I'm not guilty!" Well, then they didn't accept the pardon, did they? On the other hand, if they use the Pardon as a defense in Court, its an admission of guilt. But it doesn't stop civil cases or state cases. The Civil Court or State Court could introduce the Pardon used in Federal Court as evidence.

#10 | Posted by Sycophant at 2020-12-02 07:00 PM | Reply

On top of that, any and all pardoned individuals can be called before other court proceedings or congressional committee hearings and be asked questions under oath regarding their pardoned actions - without any 5th Amendment rights. They have to answer truthfully or they will be subject to new charges not covered under their pardon.

In actuality, if Trump pardons himself and his family, all of them would be forced to tell the truth about all of their actions covered by the pardons - something Donald would never, ever do. Pardons might be the best way to actually guarantee solid charges can be brought against all of them if they don't openly admit all their criminal acts - which might finally burst the believers' bubble.

Take a pardon, admit your sins. Can't admit your sins(?), reject/cancel the pardon and see you in court. Can't have it both ways, and you knew what the pardon entailed when you accepted it.

#11 | Posted by tonyroma at 2020-12-02 07:27 PM | Reply

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2021 World Readable

Drudge Retort