r/benshapiro • u/wang_li • 29d ago

Blanket pardons? Ben Shapiro Show

Back when they were debating the US Constitution there was debate about whether there should be impeachment or whether the President should be completely untouchable. Anecdotally Ben Franklin mentioned that the traditional way to remove a head of state is assassination. At which point the opposition to impeachment withdrew their objections. One wonders if these people pushing for blanket pardons have considered what options they are leaving to the American people to justly desire the rule of law. State level prosecution?

Honestly, given the general pardon that was given to Hunter Biden, I think another constitutional amendment should be that pardons must be particularized and any pardon of a generalized nature requires that the pardoned individual appears before Congress and details the complete list of crimes that they committed. Anything unmentioned is not covered regardless.

24 Upvotes

83% Upvoted

View all comments

7

u/KevtheKnife 29d ago

I think an Amendment needs to put a moratorium on the President's ability to pardon for the remainder of their Term after being voted out of office.

6

u/wang_li 29d ago

Good idea, except I'd go even further. No pardons within a month leading up to an election. If they lose, no further pardons.

3

u/derechtelmarotter Facts don’t care about your feelings 29d ago

same goes for supreme justice picks!

2

u/Never_Forget_711 28d ago

Well Lindsay says it’s no picks in an election year, and then we know how that turned out.

3

u/cplusequals 28d ago

You mean McConnell. And it wasn't "no pick in an election year" it was "we're so close to the election don't have to approve your pick we don't like." No idea why you think they wouldn't approve a pick they did like. Garland was a horrible nominee and he's been a horrible AG.

1

u/Never_Forget_711 28d ago

No I mean Lindsay. They didn’t even take a vote on Obama nominee which is their constitutional duty to do so. They said it was about letting the voters choose not that they just didn’t like the nominee. There’s not a nomination that McConnell or Graham would have liked over letting a republican pick one. Then Trump was in the exact same position and like always they dropped to their knees, mouths gaping wide.

3

u/cplusequals 28d ago

That was McConnell. He was senate majority leader. They didn't have the votes to even vote lmao. Looks like they did their constitutional duty and said "nah, pick someone else." Obama could have appointed Gorsuch and they probably would have confirmed him, yeah? Lolol

Then Trump was in the exact same position

No he wasn't. Trump nominated a candidate the senate wanted to approve. That's a big difference. Barrett was a conservative judge nominated to a conservative senate. Garland was a progressive judge nominated to a conservative senate. That's checks and balances. Obama got checked.

2

u/Quang_17 25d ago

I like it when people explain the politics very clearly. Thank you.

0

u/Madinogi 21d ago

there is a big difference.

in 2016 the republicans blocked ALL of obamas nominations not just garland, 9 months out from the election, citing "it is an election year, the american people should decide via the next president"

and then in 2020 in like 2 months from the election they rammed through a supreme court pick because they could get a conservative judge on the bench,
not giving a rats arse about the fact they made themselves clear as day hypocrites,
they 100% did it for power because as always republicans are more corrupt then democrats.

its ok to admit this, its more then ok to admit when youre side of the political isle is acting ina clearly corrupt way, just like i admit bidens pardon of his son is corruption, even tho the constitution says he can do it, i still find it corrupt.

youre defendning the 2 events because it benefits youre political side, regardless of optics or working for americans it s exclusively for gaining more power through corrupt measures. just admit that.

1

u/cplusequals 20d ago

Brother, Garland was the only nominee. My last post is a direct refutation to this reply. Just wanted to point out you made yourself look stupid with that attempt to pivot. Zero shot the senate would have block a Gorsuch nomination. This isn't a moral issue. It's a rules and procedures issue. You lost. I will always savor the salt so by all means keep making the same mistakes and don't learn from them.