Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

Who knew?

 

Article II, Section 2, Clause 1:

 

The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States; he may require the Opinion, in writing, of the principal Officer in each of the executive Departments, upon any Subject relating to the Duties of their respective Offices, and he shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offences against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.

 

Got that? Grant Reprieves and Pardons. Not "sign documents with quill pen and ink bottle rendering pardons unto his relatives ..."

  • Vomit 1
  • Haha (+1) 1
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, The Frankish Reich said:

Who knew?

 

Article II, Section 2, Clause 1:

 

The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States; he may require the Opinion, in writing, of the principal Officer in each of the executive Departments, upon any Subject relating to the Duties of their respective Offices, and he shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offences against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.

 

Got that? Grant Reprieves and Pardons. Not "sign documents with quill pen and ink bottle rendering pardons unto his relatives ..."

 

 

If the left can justify abortion through a privacy clause made up out of thin air, then our side is also going to justify which pardons are permissible under a manner in which it's signed. Competency and all being required too....

 

In fact I remember a doctor saying under the Biden administration that Biden wasn't competent and his answers didn't make sense. Seems like a perfectly rational explanation for why any pardon he granted is not lawful or justified....

 

And if Biden wasn't competent, then under whose authority were those pardons granted ??? that needs to be investigated too

 

Want to get silly, let's get silly 

Edited by Kelly to Allen
  • Agree 1
Posted

I’m just glad that we’re going to, somehow, survive the greatest scandal of the last 10,000 years. I lost five pounds from stress. There was wailing and gnashing of teeth. 

Posted
5 hours ago, Westside said:

Your opinion change’s depending on if there is a R or D in front of it. 

How do you feel about the validity of the J6 pardons?  

 

Also, it's changes, not change's.  And the textual reading of the constitution has nothing to do with politics.  FYI.  Nowhere is it mentioned that a pardon must be signed, or signed in a certain way, or even written. 

Posted

Ultimately we'll have to determine if Biden had the capacity to do much of anything while president.

Posted (edited)
7 hours ago, The Frankish Reich said:

Who knew?

 

Article II, Section 2, Clause 1:

 

The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States; he may require the Opinion, in writing, of the principal Officer in each of the executive Departments, upon any Subject relating to the Duties of their respective Offices, and he shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offences against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.

 

Got that? Grant Reprieves and Pardons. Not "sign documents with quill pen and ink bottle rendering pardons unto his relatives ..."

In the case of the pardons, the issue is was Biden present and aware of the signing off on the pardons with his signature. Or was somebody else pushing the button and "granting" the pardons which would amount to forgery. That's it. Its not a question of constitutional powers.

Edited by All_Pro_Bills
  • Agree 1
  • Thank you (+1) 1
×
×
  • Create New...