"The latest findings are from a Sept. 16-28 poll, which also finds differences among partisans’ perceptions on this measure – Democrats (72%) are much more likely than independents (35%) or Republicans (7%) to view themselves as “better off.” - Majority of Americans Feel Worse Off Than Four Years Ago
Look at this. 72% of democrats think they are better off today. Either the government is paying people to be democrats or they are lying. Only 7% of Republicans to. 93% say they are worse off. What is wrong is Democrats? Independents are at 65% who are worse off. The truth is most likely between 65% and 93% or 79%. Close to 80%.
The cost of living increases for social programs makes them think they are better off? The rent vouchers, food stamps and health care contributions pretty much take care of everything they need so they think they are “better off”.
It’ll be Gavin Newsom and it will back fire on Dems
harris…she was he heir apparent the entire time. She was supposed to step in once Biden won a second term, that was the strategy the entire time. Everyone thought that she would win after the debate that exposed Biden. She was all in. She also thought that she would be a major improvement after a dementia Biden term. Not a thing Dems could do in the end, Americans voted their store, gas, home bills.
and why I said from the get go, this will be a Trump win by a landslide.
It seems to me that the GOP is making the same mistake Biden did 4 years ago calling it a landslide.
Yes; undoubtedly a landslide in the electoral college. However, for being able to pressure Congress and get legislation the popular vote counts as well.
And the election results were not near a landslide in the popular vote or the nearly popular vote reflective House of Representatives majority.
The monarchical power of the Presidency lands safely in Trumps hands, though with the Senate not being cloture-proofed, his ability to appoint who he wants to clean up the bureaucratic state is still in question.
And the biggest weakness he had, speaking governmentally not personally, in his first term was bringing the bureaucracy to heel. This is likely to continue to be a headache for any reforming candidate until the popular vote swings widely for a reform candidate…always a dicey option in the winner take all duality of the American political system.
3 branches is a landslide. Trump will know what he is doing this second round, he also knows his cabinet this time around, the 1st go, he had to trust that his picks would be royalists, many were not. this time, he knows every appointee and will have them do his agenda. This 2nd term will be night and day.
So far Dems are picking fights with Trans issues, illegal deportation and sanctuary cities, The very fights that got them fired in the first place. Did they not learn a thing?
Until they do the scales will continue to lean increasingly against them.
Governing results matter, Newsom, Hochul, and Whitmer are sad examples. DeSantis, Abbot, and Shapiro are strong examples…Four years from now, assuming Obama is forced to keep his hands off the Democratic Party scales for the first time in what will then be a generation, we will finally be able to see strong candidates on both sides and a better future ahead.
Vance may break the mold.
Nixon, HW Bush, and Biden are the only VPs who’ve actually won the presidency post WWII.
Biden only because of Obama’s heavy hand on the Democratic Pary Primary system and Covid during the general election.
Vance v DiSantis will be interesting.
Depends on what Vance does as Vice-President. If he comes along as being out in the open and not like Trump’s last VP, he may end up the Republican candidate.
The thing that bothers me and I’ll yield to attorneys here is how can Biden pardon people that have not been charged and convicted of a crime? Would that hold up in a court of law?
Have you been paying attention to the news? That’s what his handlers are discussing out loud to protect those who Trump’s AG and FBI director will go after. There’s a long list including Biden’s brother.
No, I have more important things that listening to talking heads think is going happen.
A presidential pardon is a powerful act of clemency granted by the President of the United States. Here are the key criteria and guidelines for receiving a presidential pardon:
Eligibility: The individual must have been convicted of a federal crime. This includes convictions in a United States District Court, the Superior Court of the District of Columbia, or a military court-martial.
Waiting Period: Generally, a person must wait at least five years after completing their sentence before applying for a pardon. This includes any period of probation, parole, or supervised release.
Application Process: The individual must submit a formal petition to the Office of the Pardon Attorney at the Department of Justice. The petition should include detailed information about the conviction, the applicant’s conduct since the conviction, and reasons for seeking a pardon.
Review and Recommendation: The Office of the Pardon Attorney reviews the petition and makes a recommendation to the President. However, the President is not obligated to follow this recommendation.
Scope of Pardon: A presidential pardon can forgive the individual for the federal crime and remove some of the consequences of the conviction, but it does not imply innocence. It does not apply to state or local convictions.
Exceptions: The President cannot pardon individuals in cases of impeachment
Noted in the article is what President Ford did for President Nixon with a preemptive pardon. The question still is, can this actually be done? You listed what has to be in place for a pardon to be executed. A crime has to have been adjudicated. Although, I seriously don’t think # 2 on your list applies anymore. What about a convicted murderer awaiting the death penalty? Does that mean the person has to be executed for 5 years before applying or a pardon?
Absolutely…All draft dodgers during the Vietnam war by Jimmy Carter for instance…or more specific to Mormon history after the 1890 Polygamy Manifesto, President Cleveland pardoned men who had entered into polygamous marriages which allowed for Utah to enter the Union after decades of futile attempts. Some of the men were still in prison, some were still on the run, many had never been prosecuted because the Feds tended to only prosecute the leaders, not the more common church members.
Thousands more examples…but these immediately come to mind…
The specific clause from the US Constitution is not limited to anything other than only federal crimes and not impeachment.
Article II, Section 2, Clause 1:
The President … shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offences against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.
No limit other than political calculation and a President’s conscience.
The difference is these were convicted persons of crimes. What the Whitehouse staff are thinking about doing are pardons for people who have not been charged with or convicted of a crime and therefore are not and have not served a sentence in prison for their crimes. Nixon was given an absolute pardon. But, where does it say in the Constitution that the President can give a pardon in which the accused has not even been charged with a crme?
Spot on Harold.
That’s it guys! All the rest of the discussions, opinions, whether convicted or not, are not germane to discussing the President’s pardon power. I haven’t checked, but I doubt there is any case law or any other reasonable legal challenges to this power. Constitutional amendment would be required to change/limit. Or Supreme Court interpreting and providing ruling in a case brought before it.
End of discussion. It’s all moot.
It says the offense has to be against the United States. So, what is needed to be an offense against the United States? Sounds like treason? So, maybe not so fast.
To restate: an offense against the United States is simply something that is illegal under Federal law.
ie the President has no power to issue a pardon for violations of any state law.