Yes, Trump Can Pardon Himself But He Should Not Do So

Below is my column in the Hill on the controversy over presidential self-pardons. Many academics have long expressed the view that a president can issue a self pardon. Judge Richard Posner discussed the issue in commentary and also concluded that such a pardon could occur. Posner stated “It has generally been inferred from the breadth of the constitutional language that the president can indeed pardon himself.”  This has been a long-standing debate and there is an honest and interesting debate on the issue. For some of us, there is a difference between condemning such self-pardons as self-dealing and declaring that the Constitution clearly bars such presidential acts. That does not change because the subject of the analysis is now President Donald Trump.

Here is the column:

It seems the subject of Donald Trump, like necessity, is the mother of invention, at least when it comes to legal analysis. From bribery statutes to constitutional provisions, legal experts routinely and unfailingly conclude that Trump or his family can be prosecuted or impeached for an endless array of misdeeds. Even theories denied by the Supreme Court are seen as valid when used against Trump. Now the same certainty has been declared on whether Trump can grant himself a pardon. One of the longest standing debates in constitutional law is dismissed as ill-informed by some of the same experts.

His role as a catalyst for clarity was apparent in an interview by Harvard professor Laurence Tribe. After host Lawrence O’Donnell said he believed a president could give himself a pardon, Tribe proclaimed such a view is “incoherent and incompatible” as a constitutional matter. The declaration likely surprised few on MSNBC. Tribe has been an outspoken critic of Trump, whom he has denounced as a “terrorist,” and he has supported a wide array of criminal and constitutional claims against him. These views are popular as are Tribe’s increasingly personal diatribes, including vulgar attacks on Republican leaders and even a false attack on Attorney William Barr for his Catholic faith.

For the record, I have maintained that a president can grant himself a pardon. I held that position before Trump took office. I also believe a president can be indicted in office. The reason is the same: The Constitution prohibits neither a self-pardon nor a presidential indictment. This is not the first time that Tribe and I have disagreed. Two decades ago, we testified together at the impeachment hearing of President Clinton.

At that time, Tribe was far more restrictive in his legal and constitutional interpretations, declaring that lying under oath in the Clinton case would not be an impeachable offense. While a federal court and Democrats agreed that Clinton knowingly committed perjury, Tribe insisted that a president could commit perjury in certain circumstances and not be impeached. Thus, a president can commit a felony for which thousands have been incarcerated, including those prosecuted by his own administration, but he should not be removed from office for the same act.

I maintained that perjury is a “high crime and misdemeanor” regardless of its subject. Conversely, I testified in the Trump impeachment that the issue was far more difficult because of the absence of such a clear criminal act as perjury. While I testified that Trump could be impeached on two of six suggested articles — the two ultimately adopted by the House — I felt the Judiciary Committee had not created a record for such impeachment and was moving prematurely.

People of good faith can disagree on such issues, including that of self-pardons. The language itself is clear. Article II, Section 2, of the Constitution defines the pardon power as allowing a president to “grant reprieves and pardons for offenses against the United States, except in cases of impeachment.” There is no language specifying who may or may not be pardoned. The president is simply given the power to pardon anyone, for any federal crime. Many courts would likely dismiss challenges to such a pardon as simply being nonjusticiable.  Indeed, absent an actual federal prosecution raising the issue, it is hard to imagine a litigant to pass muster on standing for such a challenge under current rules.

Tribe insists the clarity and coherence comes in a later provision referring to how a president “shall take care that the laws be faithfully executed.” Tribe notes: “It doesn’t say ‘except the criminal laws.’ It doesn’t say ‘except when he chooses to violate the criminal laws.’” The problem, however, is that these provisions have an inherent conflict: All pardons, for anyone, would mean that a president is negating the effect of criminal law. That is the point of a pardon. This includes preemptive pardons before any actual charge like the one given Richard Nixon. While Tribe is saying self-pardons are notably bad, any pardon for anyone would run afoul of the duty to “take care that the laws be faithfully executed.” Moreover, the fact is that the pardon power is itself part of the laws of the United States.

Tribe insisted — as he has in the past — that the Framers would never have assumed such presidential power because even George III did not have the power to self-pardon. It is a curious argument since the king of England was protected by an absolute rule of immunity: “The king can do no wrong.” There would be no need for a pardon of a king in a system where he could not be charged with a crime. It is certainly true that Magna Carta sought to limit the powers of the King. However, it was focused on recognizing the rights of individuals and principles of due process. Kings continued to rule with sweeping personal privileges and immunities. Indeed, for much of history, kings were deposed in a lethal, not a legal, sense. For instance, Charles I faced a problem of revolution, not prosecution, and the ultimate loss of his head was not for want of a pardon power.

Tribe’s argument then moved from the historical to the sensational. He noted that Trump once said he could shoot people on Fifth Avenue and get away with it. A self-pardon, Tribe insisted, “would make that literally true.” No, it would make it neither literally nor even figuratively true. Murder remains a state offense which is not in any way limited by federal pardon power. Trump could pardon himself from any and all crimes — but only those covered in the federal criminal code. He still could be prosecuted under state law for that body left on Fifth Avenue.

The stronger argument against a presidential self-pardon is not the textual one raised by Tribe but, simply, that the Constitution should be read to include a principle against self-dealing. Yet presidents regularly engage in all forms of self-dealing, from nepotism to favoritism to cronyism, without a hint of constitutional difficulty. Bill Clinton not only appointed his wife to head a major federal commission on health care but pardoned his own half-brother. The Framers did not bar such forms of self-dealing any more than they barred self-pardons.

This is why Trump can pardon himself, and why he should not do so. Just as I denounced Clinton for abusing the pardon powers, I believe such a step by Trump would be an even greater abuse. In other words, it would be as constitutional as it would be wrong.

Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University. You can find his updates online @JonathanTurley.

195 thoughts on “Yes, Trump Can Pardon Himself But He Should Not Do So”

  1. So let me get this straight:

    1. The president can not be indicted (on federal charges) while in office; thus he can commit crimes while in office, and then

    2. Before leaving office he(the president) can pardon himself of any and all of those crimes

    So Professor Turley, did the framers have an absolute monarch in mind for a president?

    I do not think so.


      1. It doesn’t matter. The argument boils down to “he can commit crimes while in office, and then before leaving office he (the president) can pardon himself of any and all of those crimes.” That would make the president above the law. The Founders did not want that.

      2. I know that, but that is the current position of DOJ!! I am just pointing to weakness of the rule of law, especially if we accept Prof Turley’s position. The only recourse left is impeachment, which is fundamentally a political act and not a legal act.

    1. This was the flaw in the whole Mueller investigation. Mueller accepted DOJ determination that President can’t be indicted while in office and thus he did not opine on whether President committed criminal obstruction of justice (but gave all kinds of facts pointing to him doing so). And in that gap Barr stepped in and said he thought no crime was committed and released his -rather than Mueller’s – conclusion to the public.

  2. The Impossibility Of A Joe Biden Win Without Ever Mentioning Fraud: Patrick Basham With Mark Levin

      1. “Basham studied political science at Carleton University, the University of Houston and University of Cambridge, earning B.A. and M.A. degrees from the former institutions.[2] Basham has claimed he holds a PhD from the University of Cambridge;[3] however, he withdrew from the University without gaining the qualification.[4] Issues with his credentials and academic claims have been highlighted in the The BMJ.[4][5]

        During the 2020 United States presidential election,…..the Daily Express published polls commissioned with Basham’s Democracy Institute showing that Trump would win with a landslide victory.[8]”

        Hmmmm, not a statistician, publisher of polls that were wrong!

        Great source!

  3. JUST IN!


    Georgia Recertifies Election Results, Affirming Biden’s Victory

    “We have now counted legally cast ballots three times, and the results remain unchanged,” Georgia’s secretary of state, Brad Raffensperger, a Republican, said at a news conference.

        1. There are some 250 election cases currently being investigated in Georgia, by the Secretary of State and the Georgia Bureau of Investigation. The cases include: double (and triple) voting, dead people voting, nonresidents voting, ballot stuffing, etc.

          1. They’ve already concluded the investigation for some of those cases. No evidence that the ballots in GA are generally fraudulent.

  4. Why are pardons by the president for the president being discussed at all? What is the charge? What is the sentence? What criminal act has he been found guilty of? Having the temerity to become and be President?

    1. Prairie, possible federal charges against Trump include the payoff case to Stormy Daniels for which Michael Cohen is doing time and in which Trump is referred to as “Individual 1”. The Mueller Report cited 10 acts it considered possible obstruction of justice violations..

      1. Let’s talk about “possible federal charges” for Biden Family, Inc which is bought and paid for by China, making the Clinton bribes look like chump change. Biden is compromised up his wazoo. Biden is the Big Guy getting 10%. Biden is senile. Let’s talk about senile Joe Biden’s corruption and incompetence that the media refuses to.

  5. Trump Calls Pennsylvania’s House Speaker..

    To Overturn State Election Results

    Speaker Forced To Explain That Trump Must First Win In Court

    Trump phoned Pennsylvania House Speaker Bryan Cutler demanding that the latter call a special legislative session to bypass the state’s election results. Trump wants Pennsylvania’s legislature to simply cast their Electoral Votes for Trump regardless of Biden’s victory. Biden beat Trump in the state by more than 80,000 votes.

    Cutler had to awkwardly explain to Trump that in order to overturn Pennsylvania’s Popular Vote, Trump would have demonstrate in court that said vote was sufficiently tainted by irregularities to cast legitimate questions on the results. This principle was already explained to Trump by Michigan legislators and the Governor of Georgia; two other states where Trump made similar demands.

    Trump’s inability to grasp the election process suggests that nobody in his inner circle has successfully explained it. Which illustrates Trump’s fundamental problem as President: ‘He only hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest’. This handicap renders Trump a liability to the nation. But sadly Trump’s base shares this handicap. And that could mean serious trouble for America in the weeks to come.

  6. It would seem the sign of a healthy Christian conscience if the power of the pardon, including the promise and peril of self-pardon, weighs as heavily on the mind of President Trump as it must on the minds of President-elect Biden and his religious superior, Pope Francis.

    President Trump once called upon Attorney General Barr to indict Joseph Biden and Barack Obama. Should an outgoing President Trump now pardon them, instead?

    1. Trump has no desire to pardon them, nor the psychological capacity to consider it.

        1. No. If the DOJ determines that he’s committed crimes, he should be indicted. The rich and powerful should not be treated better by our legal system than the poor and powerless.

          1. “If the DOJ determines that he’s committed crimes, he should be indicted.”

            Which DOJ is most dispassionately able to determine that Trump did or did not commit crimes – an outgoing Republican-led DOJ, or an incoming Democrat-led DOJ?

            “The rich and powerful should not be treated better by our legal system than the poor and powerless.”

            And Republicans should not be treated worse by our legal system than Democrats.

            The wealth inequality aspect of your comment calls to mind this Sunday’s debate between Catholic Republican Senator Kelly Loeffler and Protestant Democratic challenger Raphael Warnock. While it’s not immediately clear whether Pope Francis is immensely rich or religiously poor, we have some idea where Loeffler and Warnock rank, relative to a Christian Senate’s wealth floor and ceiling. Catholic Biden and Protestant Obama offer us additional net worth frame of reference.

            1. The DOJ isn’t simply led by a Republican right now. It’s led by Bill Barr. We don’t yet know who Biden is nominating for A.G., so there is no way to answer your question about which DOJ is most dispassionately able to determine that Trump did or did not commit crimes.

              I can give you evidence that the rich and powerful are treated better by our legal system. There’s a lot written about this. One example is the book “The Rich Get Richer and the Poor Get Prison: Ideology, Class and Criminal Justice” by Jeffrey Reiman and Paul Leighton.

              Can you give me evidence that Republicans are treated worse than Democrats in our legal system? If not, then responding that “Republicans should not be treated worse by our legal system than Democrats” is rather empty.

              1. Are you suggesting on the basis of the evidence at your disposal that Democrats are treated worse than Republicans in the US legal system?

                The relationship between partisanship and justice is far from an empty concern.

                Jones appears to be the forerunner for Biden’s AG:


                Do you agree with Turley that Garland is likely to be more dispassionate than Yates or Jones?

                1. I have no evidence about a disparity on the basis of party, so I wouldn’t introduce a claim about it. If you have evidence about it, I’ll read it.

                  I haven’t seen Turley say anything comparing Garland and Doug Jones. Does Garland even want to leave the DC Circuit?

                  1. It’s my recollection that Turley has been strongly positive with respect to Garland, strongly negative with respect to Yates (although he may have reversed in more than jest on that recently), and mildly positive with respect to Jones. I don’t see any word on whether Garland or Jones want the job.

                    “A prospective top Justice Department nominee is expected before Christmas, a transition spokesperson said Monday”:


                    I appreciate your commitment to evidence-based claims. As it stands, are you suggesting that partisan balance requirements are meritless?


                    1. I’m not suggesting anything about partisan balance requirements and don’t know enough about the arguments to take a side.

                      When I said “The rich and powerful should not be treated better by our legal system than the poor and powerless,” I was talking about equity for the average alleged lawbreaker.

              2. Lawyers and judges are heavily Democrat. They are the system. They vote for the winning side, or who they think will win, the party owned and financed by the billionaires lock stock and barrel, the Democrats. so we see how they turn a blind eye to voter fraud. as expected!

                both these assertions — that lawyers and judges, are heavy Dem party; and the billionaires own the Dems, are well known facts

                but the people will go on strike and let these fancy pants silkstocking tyrants starve. you will see. you will have to pick sides.

                silkstocking Republicans who oppose the workers will get their due too.

                key question, are you against the billionaires and with us, the people, or are you a billie lackey slave bootlicker?

                if not then BOYCOTT YOUR TAXES

                Saloth Sar

        2. Why?

          Since when does one need a pardon for legally doing one’s job effectively?

          Are you saying Democrats are trying to injure others by lying, cheating and committing perjury like they did with Kavanaugh?

          1. One area to look at pardon possibilities: Trump’s campaign finance crimes in his Stormy Daniels episode.

            Another: the 10 possible obstructions by Trump detailed in the Mueller report. Remember, contrary to what you hear on this blog often, the reason Mueller’s investigation fizzled was not because nothing was found but rather that Mueller was operatiing and investigating under the premise that a president couldn’t be charged while in office. And investigation into trump’s financial realm was also a blocked pathway in the Mueller report.

            All of this was clouded heavily by Barr’s active attempts to squash the report once it was released.

            Clearly, as is shown by the way trump is handling pardons in general, trump himself is showing heavy concern over how best to utilize pardons to escape what he knows is a likely legal battlefield upon his leaving office and giving up the protections afforded to him as a sitting president,

            Elvis Bug

            1. “the reason Mueller’s investigation fizzled was not because nothing was found but rather that Mueller was operatiing and investigating under the premise that a president couldn’t be charged while in office.”


              1. “the reason Mueller’s investigation fizzled was not because nothing was found but rather that Mueller was operatiing and investigating under the premise that a president couldn’t be charged while in office.”



                Elvis Bug

            2. no prosecutor could win any of those trifles. not worth bothering

              watch and see, this is all much ado about nothing

              saloth sar

            3. You take political fantasy to a new level. Nothing new, nothing right, nothing to bother with.

              Keep writing. It will keep you busy so you won’t accept the offer to buy the Brooklyn Bridge.

              1. Hey Allan, you responded by John to mistake on another column. Those kinds of mistakes give you away.

                What a little wanker you are now with all of your new names, after you spent months harassing others who don’t post under a single name.

                1. It was a response to Bug, but I read your posts and you have been consumed by this list and the aliases that are on it.

                  Get to a psychiatrist.


                  1. Bug didn’t post on the other page. You responded to John by mistake, and then you noted your mistake.

                    You should discuss your abusive behavior with a psychiatrist. But I doubt you will.

                    1. I didn’t write to John, but then I am talking to a crazy person who is in need of a psychiatrist and has delusions about different persons on the blog. I probably had too many windows open looking to understand what was being said with a comment memorized and responded in a different window without realizing it.

                      You can continue to talk but I will pretend you are howling through the bars of your rubber room and won’t listen. Keep screaming for the rest.

  7. It seems that some of the most ignorant posters that have posted garbage for years are upset at articles being posted from the populist press.

    In the past those on the right had to disprove the leftist articles of the Washington Post and the NYT and have gotten good at it. But now the leftist goons are trying to do the same but aren’t as good. In fact the anonymous poster Anonymous asked some questions which are easily answered by looking at the Constitution. But we already know he doesn’t comprehend what he reads. His understanding of the world is very limited and likely limited to his low level job at a computer screen.

    Remember, if you want news that is frequently wrong or intentionally wrong read the Washington Post or NYTimes.

    If you want news that is mostly correct where the writers are ethical doing their best to provide the best news possible try the Epoch Times. Right now it is free, but will return to a paywall after the election is totally over. Who knows when that will be? When there is fraud there is generally confusion.

    1. Allen, what’s the circulation of the Epoch Times and how many Pulitzer Prizes have they won? Who are their best known writers? What is the profile of their readers for advertising purposes? The answers to all these questions could tell us very quickly how reputable The Epoch Times really is.

      Most newspapers today have very little budget for foreign bureaus and bureaus around the country. But the NYT and WaPo have that kind of reach only because they’re owned by the richest sugar daddies. Such is the state of newspapers today; ‘they’re generally not that profitable’. Gone forever are the days when newspapers around the country could make a steady profit from local ads.

      1. The Epoch Times / Wikipedia

        Opening Paragraphs:

        The Epoch Times is a far-right international multi-language newspaper and media company affiliated with the Falun Gong new religious movement, based in the United States. The newspaper is part of the Epoch Media Group, which also operates New Tang Dynasty (NTD) Television. The Epoch Times has websites in 35 countries but is blocked in mainland China.

        The Epoch Times opposes the Chinese Communist Party, and promotes far-right politicians in Europe, and backs President Donald Trump in the U.S. a 2019 report by NBC News showed it to be the second-largest funder of pro-Trump Facebook advertising after the Trump campaign. The Epoch Media Group’s news sites and YouTube channels have spread conspiracy theories such as QAnon and anti-vaccination propaganda. The organization frequently promotes other Falun Gong affiliated groups, such as the performing arts company, Shen Yun.

        No wonder Trumpers love this paper. The Epoch Times is more than happy to spread Trump conspiracies, including Q’Anon. The article goes on to say the paper’s financing is somewhat mysterious. A byzantine web of non-profits contributes to the funding. Article notes that Trump friend and donor, Robert Mercer, has helped keep the paper afloat.

      2. Not only that they have journalistic editorial guidelines at Wapo and NYT that prohibit publishing without multiple source backup. Not so at Fox…, or the Epoch Times.

        And Allan suffers from flagrant idiocy.

        1. Anonymous, states that the Times and the Post have “won more Pulitzer Prizes” as some sort of badge of honor or “rightness”. The Times won Pulitzers for their Russian “collusion” reporting???? The Times won PULITIZERS for their coverage of Stalin in the 30s????? Did they ever return said prices?

          Populist makes great points and Anonymous just inundates with garbage post after garbage post. What Populist says is sort of like how the media treats the left so softly and timidly that when a slightly hard question comes their way they gad mad and want to challenge the interlocutor to a push up contest of they demand the reporter take a drug test-Biden. The lefty may get caught going against her own rules requiring salons to be shut down and masks to be worn by being on video in a salon without a mask only to then claim she was “set up”-Pelosi.

          The left cannot answer a tough question because they have no practice doing so and the weaker and weaker the candidates or office holders become the more and more protective the leftist media is required to be.

          PS. Professor Turley’s column is correct (in my opinion) and it is shown through his continued use of logic, the actual documents and history. The little people like Anonymous that read the column every day and then try to “debate” the good Professor need to go back to “” where they will be more comfortable.

          1. Thank you hullbobby.

            The anonymous group on the left as a whole is non thinking. The left has to keep correct information hidden. The Epoch Times has a track record of honesty that is high. Not so for the NYT and Washington Post who do not use multiple sources anymore. They use non existent sources and one another for confirmation on many of their articles. These leftists can’t stand it that other news sources are proving the NYT and Washington Post are inept and biased.

      3. This reply was to me so I will answer.

        You read the news from those that satisfy your politics. What you print on the net you can’t prove yet others prove you wrong all the time.

        That should tell you that you haven’t learned anything from your news media.

        What has the Epoch Times lied about. You must have an answer because you have made comments about their truthfulness many times.

        If you cannot demonstrate the lies you claim the Epoch Times writes then it means, at best, you don’t know what you are talking about or you are a liar.

        We all await your proof.

  8. The professor professes “… Murder remains a state offense which is not in any way limited by federal pardon power. Trump could pardon himself from any and all crimes — but only those covered in the federal criminal code. ..”

    Generally, the crime of murder is prosecuted in state courts as a state crime.

    But does not murder become a federal crime when it occurs in the violation of federal law or on federal land or territory?

    Is the murder of a federal judge a federal crime, of murder, federal murder?
    Is the murder of a federal law enforcement official a federal crime, of murder, federal murder?
    Is the murder of a human being during the commission of a bank robbery, a federal crime, federal murder?

    On another issue(s) of the professor’s many:

    Metaphors are like three (3) legged tables. You can’t rest on them too heavily or they will fall down

    That which is not prohibited is permitted.

    Yes, the President of the United States can pardon him or herself for murder, depending on the answer to the aforementioned questions.
    dennis hanna

    1. On Jan 20, a president could go to federal property and murder anyone they want, and then pardon themselves before noon. It would be the perfect crime because legally nothing could be done. Hell, they could do any crime. They could do lines cocaine off a hookers ass, commit tax fraud, violate arms control laws, anything they want. I don’t know why every president does not do this.

  9. Anti American Trump Haters “Bomb Another America Supporter”

    Remember people like Kyle Rittenhouse that stood up for your worthless azzes?

    Another Patriotic American has his family Life Threatened Violently Attacked & “Bombed just like Kyle Rittenhouse was Ph’in Bombed!!!!”.

    The American Hating Commie/Nazi Azzholes are attacking the Hell out of us with the FBI/DOJ’s help by standing down to American’s Aid in it’s hour of need!!! ( Their Rep is Gone forEvere!!!) Will Not you Ph’in Cowards a least stand up & depend your families against these Azzhole? Likely Not , but that’s why you’re know as Scum!

    1. see Oky civil war is underway… shifting into higher gear, climbing speed like a semi on the interstate, working through its gears, slowly

      no need to fire shots except in defense however– the best way to hit at the enemy– billionaires–and not waste energy on all their multitudes of mercenaries– is for a nationwide general strike to occur in April in the form of #TAXPROTEST2020

      with tens of millions a peaceful protest like this will bring the rotten system and its billionaire oligarchs to its knees

      Saloth Sar

      1. Anon/IE:,

        I’m not sure what’s happening now or the outcome, but I can see it happening & the results of the Anti-American Azzholes violent mur.ders & other attacks upon all of us Americans & property.

        I fully expect no Rino Repubs & not even Sen Rand Paul to stand up for American America at this point I’m sad to say.

        I’m not a piano guy nor do I understand fully what this song is about yet I like the piano rip towards the end.

      2. Pro America Rally planned in DC elsewhere 12/12/20. It’s supposed to be on.

        We’ll all see if they can still draw the massive crowds ( around a Million) they did a few weeks back, save rough weather?

      1. see how much it all matters if the tax protest comes together

        the rotten federal kleptocracy can be crushed at its very foundations, by citizens merely refusing to pay taxes

        it will happen

        not a shot need be fired, not one. then let’s see how the transfer-recipient lumpen riot squads like it when their rations get cut off by an insolvent US government– and see how Bezos and his crowd like it when bad finally bounces back on them as they watch their portfolios of Treasuries melt down in agony

        Time to cut Uncle Sugar off. the covid plus the election is an abundance of moral justification for it.
        it is feasible and nonviolent. let’s make it happen


        Saloth Sar

        1. This idea is gaining steam.
          A good number of people are not only vowing not to pay their taxes, they are vowing not to file taxes as well.

      1. We all read newspapers and we know that a lot of the news that arrives on our tables that is brand new is wrong and some is right. The accuracy of the print press has been terrible in recent years especially the NYTimes and the Washington Post but we still read them and they are reported on this blog daily. Their sources are inadequate (anonymous sources) and their spin amazing since the news in these papers is geared in one direction.

        The is not all that different except it leans right and some of their news comes from the The Epoch Times which also leans right but on political matters has proven to be more correct than either the Washington Post or the NYT.

        In any event thank you for permitting me to advertise the populist press and the Epoch Times an additional time for those that like to read both sides of the spectrum.

        Let me know what the Washington Post says and let us know if this article proves to be right or wrong. Your article talked about the loss in the Superior Court but this article is talking about the appeal to the Supreme Court.

    1. “Populist” is one of Allan’s new names. He keeps posting links to the news aggregator Populist, even though it doesn’t have the full articles. Maybe he never reads the full articles before posting links, so he doesn’t know. Or maybe he’s being paid by the Populist site.

  10. Sidney Powell Releases The Smoking Gun In Georgia
    Ware County, Georgia has broken the Dominion algorithm:

    Using sequestered Dominion Equipment, Ware County ran a equal number of Trump votes and Biden votes through the Tabulator and the Tabulator reported a 26% lead for Biden.

    37 Trump votes used in the equal sample run had been “Switched” from Trump to Biden. In actual algorithmic terms this means that a vote for Trump was counted as 87% of a vote and a vote for Biden was counted as 113% of a vote.

    1. Sequestered where?
      Observed by whom?

      “In actual algorithmic terms” would only be used here by someone who doesn’t understand the meaning of “algorithmic.”

      1. Fair questions. I have questions as well, but this article is all I have seen to date. The article was probably written by a non-technical person just like most news articles are from all the news media.

        We have to give the story time. It will then prove to be something or not.

        1. What story?

          The one you didn’t link to?

          The one you do not reference by any conventional means?

      1. here’s a fact the bootlicking mass media sycophants like Molly would have a hard time debunking

        a massive collapse in tax revenues that will leave the US government, “Uncle Sugar,” and his dollar, in financial distress, and Treasuries sent into the dumps.

        come april DO NOT PAY YOUR TAXES

        by any means necessary, do not feed the beast

        that is the easiest simplest and most effective thing we can do

        Saloth Sar

  11. “Dershowitz Says Supreme Court May Rule to Let Legislators Pick Alternate Electors

    Attorney Alan Dershowitz said on Sunday that he believes the Supreme Court may get involved in adjudicating on whether state legislators have the power to pick alternate Electoral College electors who would vote for President Donald Trump if legislatures determine there was voter fraud, even after an initial slate of electors has cast its votes on Dec. 14.

    “That is a constitutional question we don’t know the answer to, and the Supreme Court may get to decide that question if a state legislature decides to determine who the electors should be and changes the electors from Biden to Trump—that will be the key constitutional question,” Dershowitz said.

    1. No legislature has determined that there was fraud.
      No court has determined that there was fraud.
      Trump lost over a month ago. Get over it Allan.

      1. “No legislature has determined that there was fraud.
        No court has determined that there was fraud.”

        Declare those who blindly follow the opinions of others.

        1. No, I declared it because it’s a fact. There are isolated instances of fraud, like the Republican in PA who requested a ballot for his dead mother. But there’s no evidence of significant fraud as determined by any legislature or court.

    2. Allen, why should state legislatures override Popular Votes? Should ordinary voters not have a say in elections?? Should presidential elections be decided by only legislatures???

  12. March 20, 2020

    “Eleven months ago, January 20, 2020 – a date which will live in infamy – the United States of America was suddenly and deliberately attacked by the Communist People’s Republic of China.

    “The United States was at peace with that nation and, wittingly or unwittingly, through criminal dereliction and negligence and attempting to obtain the cloak of plausible deniability, the People’s Republic of China released on the world the COVID-19 biological weapon.

    “China has, therefore, undertaken a surprise offensive extending throughout the World. The Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy has directed his entire Cabinet that all measures be taken for the defense of the United States.

    “With confidence in the United States Center For Disease Control and with the unbounding determination of the American people the Untied States will gain the inevitable triumph so help us God.

    “Congress must declare that since the unprovoked and dastardly attack by China on January 20, 2020, a state of war has existed between the United States and China.”

    – President Donald J. Trump

    1. China must pay commensurate and appropriate reparations and damages to each and every nation on the planet for its witting or unwitting release of COVID-19 from its Wuhan Institute of Virology, and for its failure to facilitate the ability of and to assist all other nations to immediately assess and address the threat from the novel coronavirus, which originated in Wuhan, China.

  13. If Trump wants to have fun with pardons, he should of course pardon himself “for the good of the nation” as per Gerald Ford/Nixon, this time to prevent the inevitable pogrom coming out of the Democrats. Then for a really ironic last shot at the Democrats (I am a Liberal btw) he should issue a pardon of Hillary Clinton, getting a last satirical word on, “lock her up.” This again, for the good of the nation!

    1. It wasn’t “for the good of the nation” with Nixon and it wouldn’t be with Trump. Nixon’s pardon was never challenged in court, but if Trump tries to pardon himself, it will be challenged.

    2. John Smith, you’re not a liberal so just shut up with this crap. You’re the regular troll of this blog.

  14. If Trump pardons himself and his crime family, it won’t surprise anyone. Trump and his supporters love failure and incompetence, they see the leading cause of death in America today as Trump’s victory. And I’m sure when they find out how much money Trump made from the American taxpayers, it will seen as a victory. Trump will leave this nation in a fiscal and health-care crisis and they will cheer and wave their Trump flags and wear their red hats to prove to the world how much they loved what Trump did to this country. Trump will make himself above the law, and they will cheer.

  15. With all that has happened in the past 4 years: Steele Dossier, Russia Russia Russia, government spying on citizens, groundless impeachment attempt, lies each day by “press” organizations, a Presidential election which half the country has no faith in, reconciliation programs, disbarment of attorneys who seek truth, we now come to considering an American President having to pardon himself?
    Seriously guys?

    You better believe if you’re an American all that has happened and all that is coming will sooner or later have a negative impact on you and your family. Regardless of your political affiliations. Hell, Stalin and Mao killed their most ardent supporters.

    These “things” that have happened and going to happen are not American! I think everyone Republican, Democrat and Independent, all Americans better give pause and think about what’s going on.

    Americans don’t do business like this!

    1. V V, Trump has acted like a complete a..hole since day one – a predictable event – up to and including throwing a fit because he lost the election. Do you hang out with people who behaves like that in your real life? Always has to be right, always bragging, putting himself and his weak ego first, and then lying CONSTANTLY. I don’t think you would and you would probably avoid him. How did you think it would turn out when a guy our mothers would tell us not to bring home for dinner was elected President?

  16. The 2020 election has been totally corrupted and is irredeemable and without remedy.

    The 2020 election must be referred to Congress by the electors.

    12th Amendment

    “…The person having the greatest Number of votes for President, shall be the President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of Electors appointed; and if no person have such majority, then from the persons having the highest numbers not exceeding three on the list of those voted for as President, the House of Representatives shall choose immediately, by ballot, the President. But in choosing the President, the votes shall be taken by states, the representation from each state having one vote;…”

    1. You will be sorely disappointed when the Electoral College votes for Biden and Congress accepts it and Biden is inaugurated in January.

  17. HUGE! WE CAUGHT THEM! Conspiracy Revealed — 3rd Suspect in GA “Suitcase Scandal” is Also the Same Man Who Spread Lies that Water Main Broke in State Farm Center!

    Ralph Jones, Sr. was identified as the third suspect in the Fulton County Georgia suitcase scandal.

    ** Ralph led a team of operatives in carrying out a massive voter fraud scandal on election night at the State Farm Center in Atlanta, Georgia.

    ** Ralph and his team plotted to remove ALL elections observers (Republicans) from the counting room so they could roll out their suitcases full of Joe Biden ballots and run them through the machine.

    ** Ralph Jones told local Atlanta news channel 11Alive that a water main broke at the State Farm Arena and counting would be suspended. — This was a lie.

    ** Then Ralph Jones, Sr., Ruby Freeman and her daughter Shaye Ross went to work rolling out the hidden suitcases of ballots stashed under the table and hidden from view.

    ** It was their actions that gave Joe Biden the spike in unexplained votes in Georgia on Wednesday morning.

    ** It was a conspiracy to lie to the public including local news, to remove observers from the center and then to commit their hidden suitcase ballot fraud.

    – Jim Hoft

  18. This entire post points to one inescapable truth: the Framers never envisioned someone so thoroughly unqualified and un-patriotic becoming president solely for the power, glory and attention. The Framers risked their lives to create a new nation “conceived in liberty and dedicated to the proposition that all men (except black and brown ones) were created equal.” They assumed that any president would put the nation, its values, and its collective best interests ahead of his own because they had. Little could they dream of a monster like Trump, cheating his way into office with the help of a hostile foreign government that pays bounties for killing Americans,and which bombarded American diplomats with microwaves without consequences, who would need to pardon himself, much less take this into account in drafting the Constitution.

    I also knew that Turley would criticize Tribe for his stance on the pardon power. Ask yourself this: did the Framers consider the need for the president to pardon himself when drafting the words of the Constitution? If they didn’t, and if Tribe’s view of the Constitution is correct, then Trump can’t pardon himself. Everyone agrees he shouldn’t. Turley’s contrary reasoning is contorted–it’s clear that none of the founding fathers even considered the possibility of a malignant narcissist crook like Trump in the White House. Look for him to resign about 11:00 a.m. on January 20 and have pathetic Mikey Pence pardon him to remove any doubt.

    1. “one inescapable truth: the Framers never envisioned someone so thoroughly unqualified and un-patriotic becoming president”

      aye, but for many that man is Barry O the dronestrike president.

    2. please, the Founders were all adventurers, who multiplied their fames and fortunes massively by winning the War of Independence

      They were not saints

      and if they’d have lost then King George might have hung them

      but they made a shrewd gamble and won

      its time to quit pretending they were all angels

      Saloth Sar

      1. I never said they were saints-but they weren’t malignant narcissists who craved power and attention, either. They had high ideals, and they would have been hung as traitors if the Revolution had failed. They were motivated to get out from under England’s tyrannical rule, and to set up a new country that granted rights to citizens as well as protections against government abuse


      There you go again!

      Nutchacha falls on her face with her first point.

      You can read, am I right?

      Article 2, Section 1, written and adopted by the American Founders (i.e. “framers”) enumerates the “qualifications” for president as age 35, 14 years U.S. residence and “natural born citizen.”

      You may rest assured they deliberately included precisely that which they intended, excluding that which they did not, without any desire for any form of assistance from freedom-hating, parasitic hyphenates such as yourself.

      You may also have noticed that, within the year of the adoption of the Constitution, the Founders (i.e. “framers”) restricted immigration, in four iterations, to “…free white person(s)…” and the vote generally to: Male, European, 21, 50 lbs. Sterling/50 acres, while deliberately engineering a turnout of 11.6% in the first presidential election, that of George Washington. I gonna conjecture that you’re in the wrong country.

      President Trump is eminently constitutionally qualified.

      Neither Barry Soetoro nor Commie-Lie Ho-riss, who couldn’t raise a dollar and couldn’t get a vote in the primary, will ever be a “natural born citizen” or eligible for the office of president, as their parents were not citizens at the time of the candidate’s birth.

      Carry on, Nutchacha. You are infinitely amusing.

      Article 2, Section 1

      No person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States, at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that office who shall not have attained to the age of thirty five years, and been fourteen Years a resident within the United States.

  19. This morning Judge Batten dismissed the GA kraken lawsuit in a ruling from the bench. Another judge ruled against them in the MI kraken suit.

    As lawyers, Sidney Powell and Lin Wood are not all they were kraked up to be.

    1. Supreme Court much, ChiCom?

      (BTW, your social credit score is plunging. You should start begging Pooh Bear for a pardon).

      1. Rhodes the Russian troll, when the Supreme Court grants cert to one of Powell’s and Wood’s suits, you let me know. Those kraken eggs you’re counting don’t exist.

    2. Thank you Echo, for reposting what anyone would learn simply looking at any news source.

      1. Glad you agree, John, that simply by reading at any news source, people would learn that Sidney Powell and Lin Wood are not all they were kraked up to be.

Comments are closed.