Pardonpalooza
-
@jon-nyc said in Pardonpalooza:
This one is kind of gross.
Dr. Salomon E. Melgen, 66, a major Democratic donor and eye doctor who ran a series of clinics in Florida that fraudulently told Medicare patients that they had eye diseases and then performed medically unnecessary tests and procedures, falsely billing the federal government at least $42 million, according to prosecutors. His remaining prison sentence was commuted.
He was the largest Medicare fraudster in history, performed unnecessary procedures on senior citizens and is still serving a sentence.
Yuck but a deep dive into this one is going to involve Sen. Bob Melendez.
-
wrote on 20 Jan 2021, 18:23 last edited by
I get all the theoretical arguments for using pardons as a pressure valve on errors made by the judiciary.
The theory is nice - but it seems like these disproportionately go to folks high-profile enough to get the ear of the President.
Maybe there should be some sort of veto against these... e.g., if all SC justices say no or something.. something.
-
I get all the theoretical arguments for using pardons as a pressure valve on errors made by the judiciary.
The theory is nice - but it seems like these disproportionately go to folks high-profile enough to get the ear of the President.
Maybe there should be some sort of veto against these... e.g., if all SC justices say no or something.. something.
wrote on 20 Jan 2021, 18:33 last edited by@xenon said in Pardonpalooza:
Maybe there should be some sort of veto against these... e.g., if all SC justices say no or something.. something.
That would require a Constitutional amendment.
Not gonna happen.
-
@xenon said in Pardonpalooza:
Maybe there should be some sort of veto against these... e.g., if all SC justices say no or something.. something.
That would require a Constitutional amendment.
Not gonna happen.
wrote on 20 Jan 2021, 18:57 last edited by xenon@george-k said in Pardonpalooza:
@xenon said in Pardonpalooza:
Maybe there should be some sort of veto against these... e.g., if all SC justices say no or something.. something.
That would require a Constitutional amendment.
Not gonna happen.
It seems like the bottleneck is that a sitting President has to ask for a curb to his power. Some of his party would fall in line, and the opposition would almost certainly oblige.
-
I get all the theoretical arguments for using pardons as a pressure valve on errors made by the judiciary.
The theory is nice - but it seems like these disproportionately go to folks high-profile enough to get the ear of the President.
Maybe there should be some sort of veto against these... e.g., if all SC justices say no or something.. something.
wrote on 20 Jan 2021, 19:26 last edited by@xenon said in Pardonpalooza:
but it seems like these disproportionately go to folks high-profile enough to get the ear of the President.
I’m not sure if that’s generally true or just true for Trump and/or true for just the cases that make the news.
-
@xenon said in Pardonpalooza:
but it seems like these disproportionately go to folks high-profile enough to get the ear of the President.
I’m not sure if that’s generally true or just true for Trump and/or true for just the cases that make the news.
wrote on 20 Jan 2021, 19:31 last edited by@jon-nyc said in Pardonpalooza:
@xenon said in Pardonpalooza:
but it seems like these disproportionately go to folks high-profile enough to get the ear of the President.
I’m not sure if that’s generally true or just true for Trump and/or true for just the cases that make the news.
My comment wasn't in the spirit of Trump - I'm reading his pardons as par-for-the-course (even with the handful of really gross ones in there).
I don't expect the vetoes (or whatever mechanism) to be used, unless it's a truly abusive pardon. And that in and of itself should hopefully curb those type.
-
wrote on 20 Jan 2021, 20:44 last edited by
No way
The dems wouldn't let even one Trump pardon pass.
They would say "truly abusive" all day long.
And vice versa.
No way.
-
wrote on 20 Jan 2021, 20:56 last edited by
@jon-nyc said in Pardonpalooza:
Right but Menendez doesn’t have pardon power or influence over Trump.
This one was probably just purchased. Unless there’s some connection via West Palm
Perhaps his letter on how wonderful he is had no impact but it exists and it’s a good place to start looking for why. Could be a dead end but Mendendez has a habit of being misunderstood. Lol
-
@jon-nyc said in Pardonpalooza:
@xenon said in Pardonpalooza:
but it seems like these disproportionately go to folks high-profile enough to get the ear of the President.
I’m not sure if that’s generally true or just true for Trump and/or true for just the cases that make the news.
My comment wasn't in the spirit of Trump - I'm reading his pardons as par-for-the-course (even with the handful of really gross ones in there).
I don't expect the vetoes (or whatever mechanism) to be used, unless it's a truly abusive pardon. And that in and of itself should hopefully curb those type.
wrote on 20 Jan 2021, 21:39 last edited by@xenon said in Pardonpalooza:
I don't expect the vetoes (or whatever mechanism) to be used, unless it's a truly abusive pardon. And that in and of itself should hopefully curb those type.
The President's power to pardon is constitutionally guaranteed. It is plenary, and without an amendment (and that's one high bar), irrevocable.
-
wrote on 21 Jan 2021, 04:09 last edited by
Wouldn't it be fun if Trump were to have pardoned everybody. Open the jailhouse doors. Kinda like a "Reset" or something. "You're all free to go!" And then encourage those released on where they should go.
We start over.
Another of my great ideas ignored. Oh well.
-
@horace said in Pardonpalooza:
Lots of destruction of the republic going around.
I didn't post Mason's argument to support any position of mine, but because I thought it was interesting in its own right.
I don't know enough about the prez pardon to have a position.
wrote on 21 Jan 2021, 12:39 last edited by@catseye3 said in Pardonpalooza:
@horace said in Pardonpalooza:
Lots of destruction of the republic going around.
I didn't post Mason's argument to support any position of mine, but because I thought it was interesting in its own right.
I don't know enough about the prez pardon to have a position.
Educate thyself.
-
Wouldn't it be fun if Trump were to have pardoned everybody. Open the jailhouse doors. Kinda like a "Reset" or something. "You're all free to go!" And then encourage those released on where they should go.
We start over.
Another of my great ideas ignored. Oh well.
wrote on 21 Jan 2021, 13:09 last edited by@rainman said in Pardonpalooza:
Another of my great ideas ignored. Oh well.
But keep on keepin' on, Rainman! One of them is bound to capture the imagination of
weus the people.
-
Wouldn't it be fun if Trump were to have pardoned everybody. Open the jailhouse doors. Kinda like a "Reset" or something. "You're all free to go!" And then encourage those released on where they should go.
We start over.
Another of my great ideas ignored. Oh well.
wrote on 21 Jan 2021, 13:27 last edited by Doctor Phibes@rainman said in Pardonpalooza:
And then encourage those released on where they should go.
Palm Beach, FL?
-
wrote on 21 Jan 2021, 13:53 last edited by jon-nyc
I’m sure the guys that were arrested with Bannon are pretty jealous right now. They did the same thing, and they weren’t pardoned, after all.
But I wonder if it has occurred to them that they’re extra fucked now? Bannon can’t plead 5th amendment protection from self-incrimination so he can be compelled to testify against his co-conspirators. And if he lies that’s a new federal crime not covered by the pardon.
-
I’m sure the guys that were arrested with Bannon are pretty jealous right now. They did the same thing, and they weren’t pardoned, after all.
But I wonder if it has occurred to them that they’re extra fucked now? Bannon can’t plead 5th amendment protection from self-incrimination so he can be compelled to testify against his co-conspirators. And if he lies that’s a new federal crime not covered by the pardon.
wrote on 21 Jan 2021, 16:43 last edited by@jon-nyc said in Pardonpalooza:
I’m sure the guys that were arrested with Bannon are pretty jealous right now. They did the same thing, and they weren’t pardoned, after all.
But I wonder if it has occurred to them that they’re extra fucked now? Bannon can’t plead 5th amendment protection from self-incrimination so he can be compelled to testify against his co-conspirators. And if he lies that’s a new federal crime not covered by the pardon.
I guess the reality is you have a weird case or two which is a high contrast to what an imagined pardonpalooza would have looked like.
-
wrote on 21 Jan 2021, 16:49 last edited by
Did you read the McCarthy piece?
-
@jon-nyc said in Pardonpalooza:
I’m sure the guys that were arrested with Bannon are pretty jealous right now. They did the same thing, and they weren’t pardoned, after all.
But I wonder if it has occurred to them that they’re extra fucked now? Bannon can’t plead 5th amendment protection from self-incrimination so he can be compelled to testify against his co-conspirators. And if he lies that’s a new federal crime not covered by the pardon.
I guess the reality is you have a weird case or two which is a high contrast to what an imagined pardonpalooza would have looked like.
wrote on 21 Jan 2021, 16:51 last edited by Catseye3@loki said in Pardonpalooza:
And if he lies that’s a new federal crime not covered by the pardon.
Might not be so bad. If he gets jugged, he could get tips from Martha Stewart on Houseplants That Don't Need Sunlight and Twelve Uses for Leftover Hockey Puck Hamburgers.
-
wrote on 21 Jan 2021, 17:49 last edited by
@jon-nyc said in Pardonpalooza:
Did you read the McCarthy piece?
I did. I’ve seen so many shady people get pardoned in my life that it was hard to be moved. What I will most likely remember of all is that fractional numbers of people got pardoned vs what was predicted. I believed the predictions myself but it turned out to be off base. Not for him, not for his family and then they made us read that Capitol protesters could get pardoned.
Not blaming anyone just noting it was largely miscast.
-
wrote on 21 Jan 2021, 18:22 last edited by
Seems like if you had read the McCarthy piece you’d know it wasn’t one or two suspect pardons.