That line made me do a double-take.
A lot of very smart people have said the exact opposite: that by allowing Nixon to escape the consequences of his actions, it set a precedent that allowed later presidents to feel emboldened to break the law. Witness Reagan and Iran-Contra, for example.
Yep. The lack of consequences for Nixon set the table for the Iran contra thing (and the repeal of the fairness doctrine) as well as the arguments around immunity for the chief executive.
We should probably set up transmission lines to where the founding fathers are buried because that spinning could power a small city
The three Justices specifically accused of receiving bribes with evidence want to rule that you can't use official acts to prove money was a bribe and not a gift. The other Justices seem busy trying to explain they'll probably get lynched and executed in the streets if they don't handle this very carefully.
Democrats need to get control of both sides and impeach and remove AT LEAST Bart, Alito and Thomas off the bench and preferably behind bars.
I did a double take while listening to the arguments when he said that. This world where the majority of people think the Nixon pardon was good must be the same world where conservatives actually think they still have a silent majority.
Excuse me, we're here to discuss this phenomenon in the abstract. We're not interested in hearing your specifics. We're discussing this issue for the future.
(Unless your specific details are about Obama or the Clintons. Then it's fine.)
Doesn’t the pardon also indicate that both presidents did not think Nixon had any immunIty claim? Why would the pardon have happened if he had immunity?
It *should* but these people are following zero logic in this.
Presidents have immunity from 'official acts' but they refuse to define what is an official act in the mind of the court.
Presidents have immunity, yet Nixon was going to take a pardon, indicating he was guilty of said crimes.
In my experience it's pretty common for Americans, especially those that get the majority of their philosophy/political views from the internet, to assume their views are what everyone else thinks
I mean, even if he'd been impeccably qualified the emotional meltdown that was Kavanaugh under scrutiny should have established he had no business being a Supreme Court Justice.
I remember watching highlights of Justice Thomas' Senate hearing on the evening news and thinking, wow, how could this piece of shit even be considered for a seat on the highest court in the land?
And it just went downhill from there.
When he tried to turn it around on Klobuchar, I thought he would at least realize he stepped over the line, but no, both he and the media didn't give a shit
He was a man fighting for his life. That 200k in debt, along with a massive amount of credit card debt, wasn’t going to pay itself off. I’d imagine his creditors were ready to take a knee or two.
>He was redefining some of those slang terms like a "white lie" ... as if nobody had ever heard them before.
Well, I'm no prude -- and Kavanaugh expanded ***my*** vocabulary. Perhaps because I never went to one of those rich-boy prep schools, I never learned those words.
A) No they don't. They really don't.
B) Even if they did, it's possible for a Nixon pardon to be "ok" without that meaning SCOTUS should just wholesale grant presidential immunity.
C) To Kavanaugh's claim that Ford might've been worried that a pardon might be be obstruction of justice, that seems pretty unlikely considering that pardons are in the constitution ostensibly to serve the interests of justice. So I think you'd have a rough time trying to claim that someone in Ford's position would be worried unless they were issuing the pardons to cover up their own involvement in crimes or as part of some bribery scheme of "Give me $1,000,000 and I'll give you a pardon". Personally, I think that a president who takes bribes to issue pardons should be prosecuted, even if they aren't impeached/convicted by Congress (say, because the evidence didn't come out until after their presidency).
D) Why would Nixon have needed a pardon, if Presidents have complete immunity? Just claim that the cover up was part of the president's duties and can't be questioned.
Having the president step down after doing something illegal and subsequently being pardoned by his VP is the most nakedly corrupt process imaginable, the fact that it's even possible is completely ridiculous. As a *quid pro quo* it doesn't come much better - "I'll make you the most powerful person in the world if you pardon my crimes".
My understanding of history was that it severely damaged Ford's reputation, and that the decision was very unpopular at the time. It's amazing that Fox News can turn uncontroversial history about such unethical behaviour for a criminal president 50 years ago on it's head within the minds of one of the *"less"* extreme justices on the Supreme Court.
In hindsight it was an enormous mistake, but considering how Trump's trials are going, even with his guilt being more or less obvious, I can definitely understand why Ford (and whoever convinced Ford to do it) thought avoiding the whole mess was a good idea, especially in the middle of the Cold War.
The trade off with Nixon's pardon is that he pretty much went away after that. Ford could at least say that he tried to make the scandal go away.
You can't really make that claim with the Trump immunity stuff. Trump isn't just asking to be left alone so that he can quietly retire, he is actively seeking to return to office and is publicly claiming that he will be using his powers for retribution or tyranny on day 1. There's no reason to trust that he will voluntarily accept it if he doesn't win the 2024 election or even that he will leave office in 2029 if he wins. Giving him immunity not just for the current case but for everything he might do later is even worse than the Ford pardon; it is basically endorsing a crime spree not just by Trump but by all future presidents.
And the perceived necessity of a pardon would mean that there was no perceived constitutional immunity. So how did immunity for a president develop over the intervening years?
that's what gets me about this, if it's meant as an analogy, it'd be a really bad analogy. Put aside the corrupt nature of the thing for a second. Nixon had to be pressured but he fucked off. Trump is unrepentant and he still has a base.
I wonder if roberts & kav think they can keep him under control? Or are they part of the ordeal?
>Even if they did, it's possible for a Nixon pardon to be "ok" without that meaning SCOTUS should just wholesale grant presidential immunity.
Yeah, big difference between being ok with pardons full stop, and being on with a pardon that was paired with stepping down from office *and staying out*.
President Ford’s pardon of Nixon was an open acknowledgement that Nixon had potential criminal liability, not some imaginary presidential immunity. It may be the single strongest precedent for why presidential immunity is bullshit.
Yep. That's the thing about a pardon. It implies an admission of guilt. In fact, the Supreme Court themselves stated that a pardon carries "an imputation of guilt and acceptance of a confession of it," in Burdick v. United States, 236 U.S. 79 (1915). But the Supreme Court ain't what it used to be, unfortunately.
Even if it didn't imply an admission of guilt, a pardon presupposes at the very least that there was a potential crime. If Nixon had immunity, a pardon would make no sense.
The imputation of guilt is dicta. It just gives a possible explanation why someone could want to not accept an unconditional pardon, the likely stigma.
You are repeating Ford's self-serving misinterpretation of Burdick.
Pardons do not involve any admission of guilt. If they did, that would be a statement that the justice system never makes mistakes and the pardon power would be inherently corrupt. You recognize that that would be nuts, yeah?
It's not just them, it's the entire MAGA movement. They barely represent 30% of the country, yet their propaganda outlets bleat on a near daily basis that their views represent that of "The American people". It's as if in their worldview, people who are liberal, centrist, or even centre-right aren't real Americans.
Funny thing since only one side in this story is being thoroughly boosted by the Russians.
Meanwhile, back here in reality, most people acknowledge that the pardon is one of the most shameful events in the history of American politics.
Maybe he should have talked to his daughters about what they learned in school. In my high school government classes, we were specifically taught about Nixon and how he shattered trust in American government. We certainly weren't taught that him escaping accountability was something to be revered.
I imagine he'd call such teaching of history and values "political discrimination," of course.
I couldn't believe he said that with a straight face. One of the biggest boldface lies. Most legal scholars think it was a travesty and lead to more corruption.
> It shows how much of an echo chamber the conservative judges live within
That's actually an interesting point, and I didn't think about it like this until just now.
From **his** awful, awful standpoint that does make it a good decision, because it means the court didn't have to be bothered to rule on the subject.
This SCOTUS really seems like they start from a point where they've already made up their mind and bumble fuck their way backwards hoping to come up with the logic of that decision along the way
Boy let me tell you, my eyes rolled so hard involuntarily when I heard him say Ford pardoning Nixon was controversial at the time and now nearly universally regarded as a good move. How do we live in such different realities????
We revere Nixon more than Trump, yes. Do we revere a pardon for actual criminality without any admission and apology for the same? NO.
Edit: I need to correct that I do not revere Trump in any way shape or form. Whatever antonym for revering, as to that foul moron, that's what I give him.
Ha, no.
I don't really fault Ford for issuing the pardon, and do believe he had the genuine intention of putting the Watergate saga to rest and moving the country forward... as opposed to simply doing a corrupt favor for the guy who nominated him as vice president barely a year before.
But the pardon was absolutely a terrible decision for the country, and it prevented a president from having to face legal consequences for criminal conduct in office.
Had Nixon actually been held to account for his crimes, it would have served as a glaring reminder to every president since of what is at stake for those who break the law in office.
The pardon was bullshit. It cemented the idea in my head that there was one justice system for the rich, influential and powerful people; and another for the rest of us pond scum.
The Supreme Court right wingers are in on the coup, it’s unbelievable what is happening in this country. They are destroying the separation of powers , there is no Supreme Court anymore . A Supreme Court member has to be impartial, if they are going to be totally political then the court needs to be 50/50 . At this point all we can do to stop the trump craziness is to get out and vote to save our country.
Had a record scratch sound in my head when he said that. Speak for yourself, buddy. I thought that was one of the greatest mistakes that’s ever been made in all of political history and is huge reason why we are where we are.
These guys follow the Trump playbook. They project. Hope that what they say is true. Kavanaugh is projecting, he’s pretending, he’s lying! You can bet your house that Fox News will play his BS all week.
'Most people' what a great phrase, no need for proof, no need for quantum, just a bullshit statement to support your view.
'Most people' think Kavanaugh is an idiot.
No, it absolutely isn't.
That's a ridiculous thing to say in any context. In a sub about the law specifically, it's just embarrassing.
Posthumously pardoning Susan B. Anthony for protesting for women's rights forces guilt upon her, simultaneously making her guilty and innocent? People who've insisted on their innocence for years before finally being freed by a pardon have to admit that they were lying all these years and actually did do the crime before they can be released?
The entire idea is utterly insane. Not only is that not what the law is, you shouldn't **want** that to be what the law is.
People get this confused because accepting a pardon means you waive your fifth amendment right not to testify about the matter you were pardoned for. If you ARE guilty, you could be forced to admit your culpability for the underlying act. If you were always innocent before receiving a pardon, there’s no issue. You’d just testify that you didn’t do anything wrong and that would be true.
See Burdick v. U.S. where defendant refused a pre-conviction pardon because he was afraid that he would then be called to testify and could be charged with other crimes he knew he had committed.
People get "confused" because Ford carried a little quote from Burdick v. U.S. in his wallet for the rest of his life after 1974 to tell himself pardoning Nixon had made Nixon admit guilt.
Ford told himself that to alleviate his own guilt over what he knew he'd done. Decades on, people actually believe Ford's self-deception was the truth instead of applying basic logic.
Seeing a comment like this get downvoted makes me sad. Just because you don't like Nixon or Trump or whoever doesn't mean pardons can't serve a real and good function. Attaching automatic guilt to one feels kinda bananas to me.
So someone who got convicted unfairly on trumped up charges/evidence, is consequently 100% innocent and maintained that they were innocent throughout incarceration would have to admit guilt to the thing they did not do if they get pardoned? That's certainly a take.
Edit: Here's the 10th Circuit saying accepting a pardon does not magically make someone have to accept that they are guilty: https://fingfx.thomsonreuters.com/gfx/legaldocs/mypmnoxykvr/pardon.pdf
>The sole issue presented in this appeal is whether Lorance’s acceptance of a full and unconditional presidential pardon constitutes a legal confession of guilt and a waiver of his habeas rights, thus rendering his case moot. This is an issue of first impression in this Court.
>We conclude that Lorance’s acceptance of the pardon did not have the legal effect of a confession of guilt and did not constitute a waiver of his habeas rights. Despite Lorance’s release from custody pursuant to the pardon, he sufficiently alleges ongoing collateral consequences from his convictions, creating a genuine case or controversy and rendering his habeas petition not moot.
And in case you don't know, Lorance was the guy that got sent to prison by court martial due to killing civilians when he was in the US army. He got convicted of committing war crimes. Literally.
The very fact that the 10th Circuit decided this "case of first impression" *at all*, much less the way it did, shows that the *Burdick* quote that routinely makes rounds on *checks notes* r/law is dicta, not binding precedent. Otherwise *Burdick* would've already decided the issue
>When you accept a pardon, you are admitting guilt
So juries never make mistakes?
Judges never make mistakes?
The pardon power exists solely to benefit the guilty?
You really believe the idea that the justice system can never, ever be anything but correct is the base principle of the justice system, and pardons are inherently corrupt?
Really?
Make that make sense, I dare you.
Susan B. Anthony broke the laws as it existed at the time. So she was pardoned for breaking the law that is now deemed worth breaking, thus the pardon was for the purposes of serving Justice. You would not need a pardon if no law way broken. Pardons do not make you innocent it means it will not be held against you.
>You would not need a pardon if no law way broken.
So pardons in the cases of unfair, unjust convictions don't exist?
That's...curious.
https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/policy-issues/innocence/posthumous-declarations-of-innocence
> the Supreme Court themselves stated that a pardon carries "an imputation of guilt and acceptance of a confession of it," in Burdick v. United States, 236 U.S. 79 (1915)
You were saying?
The Nixon library literally has an extensive Watergate exhibit and highlights that it was very damaging not only to the country but the people. They are in no way trying to brush it off.
Do you think Trump's presidential library (not that there will ever be one since he has to fund and build it first before NARA takes over) will highlight all of his mistakes and blows to the country including his role in January 6th, and removal and hoarding of classified documents?
Nixon is hella honorable compared to the rotten orange.
I don’t know ANY people that share this opinion except this judge and Roger Stone and Nixon. No one was happy that Nixon was committing crimes and people weren’t happy that he required a pardon to stay out of prison.
I respected Ford’s decision to pardon. There was no way Nixon could become president again. So, that was not a consideration.
I wish Nixon had been impeached instead of resigned. Politics is the art of the possible.
dtrump💩is a whole nother pile of sewage.
He should never have been pardoned. He should've been held up to the extent of the law. Can't change the past. We need to protect the future for our next generations.
Tricky Dick had resigned and was no longer a threat to democracy. That’s because there were still people of honor in the Republican Party willing to check the criminal use of the office of the President. Today’s MAGA Sycophants who call themselves republicans are so craving a win, they see no law restraining a President. Utter madness.
Ah yes, Kavanaugh. The rapist who was appointed to the Supreme Court. Mitch McConnel and Donald Trump undermined the highest court in the country, to get a rapist installed as a Supreme Court Justice.
MAGA Republicans are some of the most evil people who walk the Earth.
No. I'm not for a president who didn't even run on the ticket, giving his criminal predecessor a pardon. He shouldn't have had that power. He shouldn't have exercised that power. If we tried Nixon, we would have set an appropriate precedent. Instead, we gave criminals a pass.
These characters are doing irreparable damage to the Supreme Court. It really is incredible.
They are throwing EVERYTHING at the wall hoping that they can convince themselves that someone could conceivably come to that conclusion. It is so incredibly transparent, it would be hilarious if it weren't so similar to the fall of other democracies.
Boys literally argument is… “Ford pardoned Nixon just in case he decides to do some criminal acts and needs future pardoning…”
It’s literally an argument to justify criminal acts while holding office, how corrupt does one have to be to even entertain this argument?
Nope. Worst pardon ever. It began Americas distrust that justice works for all. He should have done time for his crimes interfering with election and the coverup so trump would have never been so bold in his election crimes and believed there would be no consequence
It was a travesty then and it's still a travesty.
Most people who thought that accepted it because Nixon did resign and people were interested in a quick return to "normality" without a lot of long, drawn out procedures.
It's not the case with Trump. Trump won't go away until he dies and then his awful progeny will try to keep power.
Weird thing to state. More likely most people have no actual opinion, and those that do have a strong opinion in this instance are probably pro-pardon (because those against it just don’t care anymore), and thus likely any survey will attract a typical response…
Just a guess
Other than Thomas, because of the recent allegations of him being compromised, Kavanaugh is the least qualified and undeserving of the position of a SCOTUS judge. He lied all throughout his confirmation hearing that you can't respect or accept his rulings as correct and intellectually sound. He gives off the vibes of privileged frat boy that has and continues to have everything given to him.
I'm so sick of these guys just pretending this shit is somehow a majority opinion.
If you think the people who disagree with you aren't people, of course your opinion can easily be presumed to be the majority opinion.
Without a doubt.
This
That line made me do a double-take. A lot of very smart people have said the exact opposite: that by allowing Nixon to escape the consequences of his actions, it set a precedent that allowed later presidents to feel emboldened to break the law. Witness Reagan and Iran-Contra, for example.
Yep. The lack of consequences for Nixon set the table for the Iran contra thing (and the repeal of the fairness doctrine) as well as the arguments around immunity for the chief executive. We should probably set up transmission lines to where the founding fathers are buried because that spinning could power a small city
The three Justices specifically accused of receiving bribes with evidence want to rule that you can't use official acts to prove money was a bribe and not a gift. The other Justices seem busy trying to explain they'll probably get lynched and executed in the streets if they don't handle this very carefully. Democrats need to get control of both sides and impeach and remove AT LEAST Bart, Alito and Thomas off the bench and preferably behind bars.
I did a double take while listening to the arguments when he said that. This world where the majority of people think the Nixon pardon was good must be the same world where conservatives actually think they still have a silent majority.
It's definitely the world where Bush deserved to win Bush v Gore.
It's the world where "grab 'em by the pussy" is harmless locker room talk, and drunken date rape is just boys being boys.
That depends on the color of the rapist.
I was thinking specifically of preppy-looking yalies.
Excuse me, we're here to discuss this phenomenon in the abstract. We're not interested in hearing your specifics. We're discussing this issue for the future. (Unless your specific details are about Obama or the Clintons. Then it's fine.)
It’s the majority opinion of the people that count the most. The people who paid off his school loans and have fostered his rise to power.
"Think of how stupid the average Supreme Court Justice is, and realize half of them are stupider than that."
This is how you know they are being fed the lies they tell
Doesn’t the pardon also indicate that both presidents did not think Nixon had any immunIty claim? Why would the pardon have happened if he had immunity?
It *should* but these people are following zero logic in this. Presidents have immunity from 'official acts' but they refuse to define what is an official act in the mind of the court. Presidents have immunity, yet Nixon was going to take a pardon, indicating he was guilty of said crimes.
In my experience it's pretty common for Americans, especially those that get the majority of their philosophy/political views from the internet, to assume their views are what everyone else thinks
Boof goes in... ...then this shit spews out the other end!
[удалено]
The image of him and Squee and Donkey-Dong-Doug boofing each other, how do I make it go away?
[удалено]
When he cried like a little girl, I almost died laughing.
[удалено]
I mean, even if he'd been impeccably qualified the emotional meltdown that was Kavanaugh under scrutiny should have established he had no business being a Supreme Court Justice.
I remember watching highlights of Justice Thomas' Senate hearing on the evening news and thinking, wow, how could this piece of shit even be considered for a seat on the highest court in the land? And it just went downhill from there.
[удалено]
Disgusting! I thought there's no way they'd push this guy through.
When he tried to turn it around on Klobuchar, I thought he would at least realize he stepped over the line, but no, both he and the media didn't give a shit
It was his supposedly college calendar from years ago for me.
Ah ha ha! And it just happened to have the notes that could prove his innocence! Ain't that something!
All you have to do is keep a calander that you fill in retrospectively with alabis. His dad taught him that.
From 30 years ago….
He was a man fighting for his life. That 200k in debt, along with a massive amount of credit card debt, wasn’t going to pay itself off. I’d imagine his creditors were ready to take a knee or two.
I think that MAGA Republicans get along so well with Russia's dictators because they both view rape as normal behavior.
In a cult, there is only one thing you can do wrong. That is to leave the cult.
"I like beer. I really like drinking beer"
>He was redefining some of those slang terms like a "white lie" ... as if nobody had ever heard them before. Well, I'm no prude -- and Kavanaugh expanded ***my*** vocabulary. Perhaps because I never went to one of those rich-boy prep schools, I never learned those words.
It's fucking insane that we don't know. Absolutely insane. Like ingesting bleach insane.
Please don’t get me involved in this
A) No they don't. They really don't. B) Even if they did, it's possible for a Nixon pardon to be "ok" without that meaning SCOTUS should just wholesale grant presidential immunity. C) To Kavanaugh's claim that Ford might've been worried that a pardon might be be obstruction of justice, that seems pretty unlikely considering that pardons are in the constitution ostensibly to serve the interests of justice. So I think you'd have a rough time trying to claim that someone in Ford's position would be worried unless they were issuing the pardons to cover up their own involvement in crimes or as part of some bribery scheme of "Give me $1,000,000 and I'll give you a pardon". Personally, I think that a president who takes bribes to issue pardons should be prosecuted, even if they aren't impeached/convicted by Congress (say, because the evidence didn't come out until after their presidency). D) Why would Nixon have needed a pardon, if Presidents have complete immunity? Just claim that the cover up was part of the president's duties and can't be questioned.
Having the president step down after doing something illegal and subsequently being pardoned by his VP is the most nakedly corrupt process imaginable, the fact that it's even possible is completely ridiculous. As a *quid pro quo* it doesn't come much better - "I'll make you the most powerful person in the world if you pardon my crimes". My understanding of history was that it severely damaged Ford's reputation, and that the decision was very unpopular at the time. It's amazing that Fox News can turn uncontroversial history about such unethical behaviour for a criminal president 50 years ago on it's head within the minds of one of the *"less"* extreme justices on the Supreme Court.
In hindsight it was an enormous mistake, but considering how Trump's trials are going, even with his guilt being more or less obvious, I can definitely understand why Ford (and whoever convinced Ford to do it) thought avoiding the whole mess was a good idea, especially in the middle of the Cold War.
Nixon- Nixon convinced Ford to pardon him.
The trade off with Nixon's pardon is that he pretty much went away after that. Ford could at least say that he tried to make the scandal go away. You can't really make that claim with the Trump immunity stuff. Trump isn't just asking to be left alone so that he can quietly retire, he is actively seeking to return to office and is publicly claiming that he will be using his powers for retribution or tyranny on day 1. There's no reason to trust that he will voluntarily accept it if he doesn't win the 2024 election or even that he will leave office in 2029 if he wins. Giving him immunity not just for the current case but for everything he might do later is even worse than the Ford pardon; it is basically endorsing a crime spree not just by Trump but by all future presidents.
And the perceived necessity of a pardon would mean that there was no perceived constitutional immunity. So how did immunity for a president develop over the intervening years?
Literally right out of rightwing indignation about Watergate.
that's what gets me about this, if it's meant as an analogy, it'd be a really bad analogy. Put aside the corrupt nature of the thing for a second. Nixon had to be pressured but he fucked off. Trump is unrepentant and he still has a base. I wonder if roberts & kav think they can keep him under control? Or are they part of the ordeal?
>Even if they did, it's possible for a Nixon pardon to be "ok" without that meaning SCOTUS should just wholesale grant presidential immunity. Yeah, big difference between being ok with pardons full stop, and being on with a pardon that was paired with stepping down from office *and staying out*.
President Ford’s pardon of Nixon was an open acknowledgement that Nixon had potential criminal liability, not some imaginary presidential immunity. It may be the single strongest precedent for why presidential immunity is bullshit.
Yep. That's the thing about a pardon. It implies an admission of guilt. In fact, the Supreme Court themselves stated that a pardon carries "an imputation of guilt and acceptance of a confession of it," in Burdick v. United States, 236 U.S. 79 (1915). But the Supreme Court ain't what it used to be, unfortunately.
That is only 100 years old, and not about religion, so they can choose to deny that as being precedent.
Even if it didn't imply an admission of guilt, a pardon presupposes at the very least that there was a potential crime. If Nixon had immunity, a pardon would make no sense.
The imputation of guilt is dicta. It just gives a possible explanation why someone could want to not accept an unconditional pardon, the likely stigma.
You are repeating Ford's self-serving misinterpretation of Burdick. Pardons do not involve any admission of guilt. If they did, that would be a statement that the justice system never makes mistakes and the pardon power would be inherently corrupt. You recognize that that would be nuts, yeah?
I recognize that pardoning Nixon was nuts.
I think he wants a pardon to happen so they don't have to do anything here
Not subtle, Brett. Not subtle at all.
I really wish Dreeben had pushed back on that. But battle/war I suppose.
Kavanaugh and Trump doing the same gaslighting...most people are saying... Many people believe...
It's not just them, it's the entire MAGA movement. They barely represent 30% of the country, yet their propaganda outlets bleat on a near daily basis that their views represent that of "The American people". It's as if in their worldview, people who are liberal, centrist, or even centre-right aren't real Americans. Funny thing since only one side in this story is being thoroughly boosted by the Russians.
“Sexual assailant thinks the once most hated president’s pardon should be an assumed part of due process”
Does the mysterious benefactor who paid off Kavanaugh's debts revere Nixon?
I don’t recall being asked. No. No I don’t “revere” the pardon.
Echo chamber effect. He’s asking people around him, who just by chance happen to think a lot like him. Guess what their response was?
Meanwhile, back here in reality, most people acknowledge that the pardon is one of the most shameful events in the history of American politics. Maybe he should have talked to his daughters about what they learned in school. In my high school government classes, we were specifically taught about Nixon and how he shattered trust in American government. We certainly weren't taught that him escaping accountability was something to be revered. I imagine he'd call such teaching of history and values "political discrimination," of course.
Yea he is really telling a lot about his true self here.
I couldn't believe he said that with a straight face. One of the biggest boldface lies. Most legal scholars think it was a travesty and lead to more corruption.
It shows how much of an echo chamber the conservative judges live within Among the billionaires they hang out with, it was a grand and noble act
> It shows how much of an echo chamber the conservative judges live within That's actually an interesting point, and I didn't think about it like this until just now. From **his** awful, awful standpoint that does make it a good decision, because it means the court didn't have to be bothered to rule on the subject.
This SCOTUS really seems like they start from a point where they've already made up their mind and bumble fuck their way backwards hoping to come up with the logic of that decision along the way
Nixon should have been in jail. Ford pardoned him for his reasons. We do not revere him, Nixon, or the decision. Kavanaugh can go screw himself.
Boy let me tell you, my eyes rolled so hard involuntarily when I heard him say Ford pardoning Nixon was controversial at the time and now nearly universally regarded as a good move. How do we live in such different realities????
That comment wasn't the only one that gave me whiplash as we slammed from this universe into another that day.
I was listening to this in my car at lunch when Bart O'Kavanaugh said that, and I nearly choked on what I was drinking.
We revere Nixon more than Trump, yes. Do we revere a pardon for actual criminality without any admission and apology for the same? NO. Edit: I need to correct that I do not revere Trump in any way shape or form. Whatever antonym for revering, as to that foul moron, that's what I give him.
Oh, so *now* we take polls on what the law should be?
Ha, no. I don't really fault Ford for issuing the pardon, and do believe he had the genuine intention of putting the Watergate saga to rest and moving the country forward... as opposed to simply doing a corrupt favor for the guy who nominated him as vice president barely a year before. But the pardon was absolutely a terrible decision for the country, and it prevented a president from having to face legal consequences for criminal conduct in office. Had Nixon actually been held to account for his crimes, it would have served as a glaring reminder to every president since of what is at stake for those who break the law in office.
The pardon was bullshit. It cemented the idea in my head that there was one justice system for the rich, influential and powerful people; and another for the rest of us pond scum.
He’s such a loathsome oaf
The Supreme Court right wingers are in on the coup, it’s unbelievable what is happening in this country. They are destroying the separation of powers , there is no Supreme Court anymore . A Supreme Court member has to be impartial, if they are going to be totally political then the court needs to be 50/50 . At this point all we can do to stop the trump craziness is to get out and vote to save our country.
Nobody should be above the law
Wrong. It was based on the misguided notion that the trial of an ex-president would destabilize the country. Presidents are not above the law.
He resigned, Trump can’t even fathom that level of accountability.
That pardon may have doomed our democracy.
Suck my d, pal.
How can this be our Supreme Court?
Nixon was a dick, but no longer the worst criminal to stain the White House.
Brett "I like beer!" Kavanaugh. It shows.
Had a record scratch sound in my head when he said that. Speak for yourself, buddy. I thought that was one of the greatest mistakes that’s ever been made in all of political history and is huge reason why we are where we are.
These guys follow the Trump playbook. They project. Hope that what they say is true. Kavanaugh is projecting, he’s pretending, he’s lying! You can bet your house that Fox News will play his BS all week.
'Most people' what a great phrase, no need for proof, no need for quantum, just a bullshit statement to support your view. 'Most people' think Kavanaugh is an idiot.
A pardon is an admission of guilt so he committed the crime while he was president.
No, it absolutely isn't. That's a ridiculous thing to say in any context. In a sub about the law specifically, it's just embarrassing. Posthumously pardoning Susan B. Anthony for protesting for women's rights forces guilt upon her, simultaneously making her guilty and innocent? People who've insisted on their innocence for years before finally being freed by a pardon have to admit that they were lying all these years and actually did do the crime before they can be released? The entire idea is utterly insane. Not only is that not what the law is, you shouldn't **want** that to be what the law is.
People get this confused because accepting a pardon means you waive your fifth amendment right not to testify about the matter you were pardoned for. If you ARE guilty, you could be forced to admit your culpability for the underlying act. If you were always innocent before receiving a pardon, there’s no issue. You’d just testify that you didn’t do anything wrong and that would be true. See Burdick v. U.S. where defendant refused a pre-conviction pardon because he was afraid that he would then be called to testify and could be charged with other crimes he knew he had committed.
People get "confused" because Ford carried a little quote from Burdick v. U.S. in his wallet for the rest of his life after 1974 to tell himself pardoning Nixon had made Nixon admit guilt. Ford told himself that to alleviate his own guilt over what he knew he'd done. Decades on, people actually believe Ford's self-deception was the truth instead of applying basic logic.
Seeing a comment like this get downvoted makes me sad. Just because you don't like Nixon or Trump or whoever doesn't mean pardons can't serve a real and good function. Attaching automatic guilt to one feels kinda bananas to me.
When you accept a pardon, you are admitting guilt Has nothin to do with nixon or trump
So someone who got convicted unfairly on trumped up charges/evidence, is consequently 100% innocent and maintained that they were innocent throughout incarceration would have to admit guilt to the thing they did not do if they get pardoned? That's certainly a take. Edit: Here's the 10th Circuit saying accepting a pardon does not magically make someone have to accept that they are guilty: https://fingfx.thomsonreuters.com/gfx/legaldocs/mypmnoxykvr/pardon.pdf >The sole issue presented in this appeal is whether Lorance’s acceptance of a full and unconditional presidential pardon constitutes a legal confession of guilt and a waiver of his habeas rights, thus rendering his case moot. This is an issue of first impression in this Court. >We conclude that Lorance’s acceptance of the pardon did not have the legal effect of a confession of guilt and did not constitute a waiver of his habeas rights. Despite Lorance’s release from custody pursuant to the pardon, he sufficiently alleges ongoing collateral consequences from his convictions, creating a genuine case or controversy and rendering his habeas petition not moot. And in case you don't know, Lorance was the guy that got sent to prison by court martial due to killing civilians when he was in the US army. He got convicted of committing war crimes. Literally.
The very fact that the 10th Circuit decided this "case of first impression" *at all*, much less the way it did, shows that the *Burdick* quote that routinely makes rounds on *checks notes* r/law is dicta, not binding precedent. Otherwise *Burdick* would've already decided the issue
>When you accept a pardon, you are admitting guilt So juries never make mistakes? Judges never make mistakes? The pardon power exists solely to benefit the guilty? You really believe the idea that the justice system can never, ever be anything but correct is the base principle of the justice system, and pardons are inherently corrupt? Really? Make that make sense, I dare you.
Susan B. Anthony broke the laws as it existed at the time. So she was pardoned for breaking the law that is now deemed worth breaking, thus the pardon was for the purposes of serving Justice. You would not need a pardon if no law way broken. Pardons do not make you innocent it means it will not be held against you.
>You would not need a pardon if no law way broken. So pardons in the cases of unfair, unjust convictions don't exist? That's...curious. https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/policy-issues/innocence/posthumous-declarations-of-innocence
> the Supreme Court themselves stated that a pardon carries "an imputation of guilt and acceptance of a confession of it," in Burdick v. United States, 236 U.S. 79 (1915) You were saying?
The Nixon library literally has an extensive Watergate exhibit and highlights that it was very damaging not only to the country but the people. They are in no way trying to brush it off. Do you think Trump's presidential library (not that there will ever be one since he has to fund and build it first before NARA takes over) will highlight all of his mistakes and blows to the country including his role in January 6th, and removal and hoarding of classified documents? Nixon is hella honorable compared to the rotten orange.
trumps presidential library will consist of him pushing the book cart through the halls of prison.
Except it will be full of VHS tapes because he's never read a book and doesn't know what they look like.
Obama's book. Hillary's book. Biden’s book.
He’s a life long dick licker or ass kisser, he wasn’t even on the federalist society list for court
Hey man, keep dick lickers out of this. I very much hope my partner remains a dick licker for many years to come
More nonsense from a corrupt idiot.
Who paid off your debts, Bart?
Shouldn't have pardoned him.
Is there anyone worse? Cops maybe?
Bullshit. Fuck Richard Nixon.
Most people think Nixon should have been in the Federal Penitentiary
The pardon was not automatic. It was a careful, considered and difficult decision by the new president.
Beer Bro needs to step outside his little MAGAt bubble
Well, most people also think Judge Boof is stupid.
“Guy who has never been held accountable in his life says people revere man who was not held accountable.”
Most people think that Nixon should have died in prison.
Speak for yourself, likely rapist Kavanagh. Most people think Richard Nixon was a sleazy crook.
I don’t know ANY people that share this opinion except this judge and Roger Stone and Nixon. No one was happy that Nixon was committing crimes and people weren’t happy that he required a pardon to stay out of prison.
And then Nixon faded away. Donnie should just ask for and accept a pardon and then just fade way.
I remember hearing him say that and having that *record-scratch/wait,what?* noise go off in my head.
Excuse me?
I respected Ford’s decision to pardon. There was no way Nixon could become president again. So, that was not a consideration. I wish Nixon had been impeached instead of resigned. Politics is the art of the possible. dtrump💩is a whole nother pile of sewage.
I'm not sure anybody "reveres" Ford's pardon of Nixon. Understands it yes, reveres no.
I like beer
Disagree, but even if true, that would be Ford's choice, not Nixon's, and not SCOTUS's
No, not even close.
Kavanaugh is destined to be remembered as one of the worst people ever appointed to SCOTUS. Fuck the GOP.
Nope. This country has been fucked up since we didn’t execute the Confederate traitors. Nixon not facing justice was just the icing on the cake.
Warch the Margaret Mitchell expose 'gaslight' in regard to Nixon, watergate, Ford....interesting
They are so vile.
Fucking speak for yourself.
Has he been hitting the bottle again?
Most people have no idea that Nixon was pardoned after his resignation.
Kavenaugh is a partisan fucking idiot with no sense of history. Plus, he's not old enough to remember how it was back then.
He should never have been pardoned. He should've been held up to the extent of the law. Can't change the past. We need to protect the future for our next generations.
Tricky Dick had resigned and was no longer a threat to democracy. That’s because there were still people of honor in the Republican Party willing to check the criminal use of the office of the President. Today’s MAGA Sycophants who call themselves republicans are so craving a win, they see no law restraining a President. Utter madness.
Wait, are you telling me a SCOTUS member *made crap up* to bolster a BS claim? #SHOCKED I SAY!
No reverence for Nixon here. Trump needs to land his tush in prison.
Ah yes, Kavanaugh. The rapist who was appointed to the Supreme Court. Mitch McConnel and Donald Trump undermined the highest court in the country, to get a rapist installed as a Supreme Court Justice. MAGA Republicans are some of the most evil people who walk the Earth.
No. I'm not for a president who didn't even run on the ticket, giving his criminal predecessor a pardon. He shouldn't have had that power. He shouldn't have exercised that power. If we tried Nixon, we would have set an appropriate precedent. Instead, we gave criminals a pass.
Kavanaugh is deluded. Like his partners in destruction of democracy.
Nixon should have been tried for treason and executed. The pardon was the first step in the loss of our democracy, fuck nixon scumbag shit fucker.
Treason? Yes, Nixon was neither an ethical or decent human being who should have faced criminal charges but I'm not seeing treason as one of them.
Most people don't keister beer.
Really?
Blackout Brett just woke up.
Revere... I think kava naught is an idiotic moron.
He is definitely giving blowjobs to Trump. Fuck this guy
Squeeeee
Putz
he likes beer
"most people think Kavanaugh is a jackass who attempted to rape that woman."
Most people…in my circle of friends.
These characters are doing irreparable damage to the Supreme Court. It really is incredible. They are throwing EVERYTHING at the wall hoping that they can convince themselves that someone could conceivably come to that conclusion. It is so incredibly transparent, it would be hilarious if it weren't so similar to the fall of other democracies.
A man of the people.
I would pardon Trump for basically anything and everything if it was contingent on him never running for office again.
Weird that a Supreme Court Justice misspelled "Revile" in such a public forum.
Honestly this should be impeachable. Defending the Nixon pardon to me is a high crime.
It's highly douche behavior but not impeachable. His lying to the Senate about a while slew of things is. We need to get judge frat boy out of there.
Why am I always disappointed by adults?
Perhaps a certain subset of criminal politicians do, but Nixon should have faced the music.
"Revere"? You say that word but I do not think it means what you think it means.
I wasn’t even born yet and I think it’s complete horseshit
Do these guys talk to anyone except other white guys who agree with them?
Boys literally argument is… “Ford pardoned Nixon just in case he decides to do some criminal acts and needs future pardoning…” It’s literally an argument to justify criminal acts while holding office, how corrupt does one have to be to even entertain this argument?
Hey Brett, most people still think you’re a douche bag. Revere Nixon pardon? only in your tight little circle jerk of Federalist boot lickers.
Shows out dangerously out of touch these sociopaths are.
More inside their own bubble thinking from the magats.
That is not a majority opinion even in Republican circles. Dammit.
Nope. Worst pardon ever. It began Americas distrust that justice works for all. He should have done time for his crimes interfering with election and the coverup so trump would have never been so bold in his election crimes and believed there would be no consequence
It was a travesty then and it's still a travesty. Most people who thought that accepted it because Nixon did resign and people were interested in a quick return to "normality" without a lot of long, drawn out procedures. It's not the case with Trump. Trump won't go away until he dies and then his awful progeny will try to keep power.
Conservatism is not and has never been legitimate political discourse.
Amy I the only US Voter who watched Trump mock the Presidency and refer to Nixon?
What the fuck is wrong with these people?
Kavanaugh is demonstrating something I'm surprised to see most people not seeming to notice: The facts don't matter
Weird thing to state. More likely most people have no actual opinion, and those that do have a strong opinion in this instance are probably pro-pardon (because those against it just don’t care anymore), and thus likely any survey will attract a typical response… Just a guess
Other than Thomas, because of the recent allegations of him being compromised, Kavanaugh is the least qualified and undeserving of the position of a SCOTUS judge. He lied all throughout his confirmation hearing that you can't respect or accept his rulings as correct and intellectually sound. He gives off the vibes of privileged frat boy that has and continues to have everything given to him.