It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Andrew Napolitano: Mrs. Clinton’s folks are preparing for the worst.

page: 12
55
<< 9  10  11    13 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 14 2016 @ 01:27 PM
link   
a reply to: Profusion

You link another thread you started and that's your back up huh?




posted on May, 14 2016 @ 01:27 PM
link   
a reply to: Profusion

You link another thread you started and that's your back up huh?



posted on May, 14 2016 @ 02:35 PM
link   
So if an elected Presidential candidate is pardoned after the election (Nov.8) and before Inauguration Day (Jan. 20) while the old President is still in power...Nothing happens to them?

Do they still retain their security clearance?
Do they have to step down...and their V.P. takes over after Jan. 20?



posted on May, 14 2016 @ 02:49 PM
link   
a reply to: IAMTAT

some possibilities....

President-elect succession


In cases where a president has not been chosen by January 20 or the president-elect "fails to qualify," the vice president-elect becomes acting president on January 20 until there is a qualified president. If the president-elect dies before noon January 20, the Twentieth Amendment states the vice president-elect becomes president.


could get complicated and very debatable !!!



posted on May, 14 2016 @ 02:54 PM
link   
THE QUESTION:


If a presidential candidate is indicted and convicted and ALSO elected President, would they be able to pardon them-self?


THE ANSWER:


Note also that the sitting President has the unquestionable power to prevent his or her own prosecution, as he can simply order the Attorney General to not pursue the prosecution or to drop the charges, and he can also order the Attorney General to fail to enforce any sentence imposed.
This would seem to be a failure to "faithfully execute the laws", but there is already a remedy for that: impeachment. Being convicted of a felony is not a disqualification for the office of President, so even if convicted the President (or President-Elect) could continue to hold (or assume) office.

However, pardon does not prevent impeachment (either under the common law, due to the Settlement Act of 1701, or under the power granted to the Executive in the Constitution), and our felonious executive officer could still be removed on that basis.

www.quora.com...



posted on May, 14 2016 @ 02:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: IAMTAT
So if an elected Presidential candidate is pardoned after the election (Nov.8) and before Inauguration Day (Jan. 20) while the old President is still in power...Nothing happens to them?

Do they still retain their security clearance?
Do they have to step down...and their V.P. takes over after Jan. 20?





I have wondered that myself. Personally, I believe that the state of the clearance should be governed by the granting agency, unfortunately the State Department in this case. Once the FBI has completed their part, the State Department should immediately suspend the clearances of all involved and re-open their security review. That's what should happen....probably not what will happen.

Clearances are difficult to get re-instated once they are pulled for misconduct. It's an entirely separate issue from the FBI investigation. I don't even think a Presidential Pardon could interfere with the suspension of a clearance.

When you get a clearance, you are always asked if you have ever had a clearance suspended or revoked and if so why...After that it is up to the Chief Security Officer to review your information and then go forward or he/she can stop it right there if he/she feels that the reason you lost it the first time is sufficient for denial a second time.

Another way of looking at it is this: Suspension/Revocation of a individual's security clearance is strictly an administrative type action and not a legal action against an individual.
edit on R112016-05-14T15:11:02-05:00k115Vpm by RickinVa because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 14 2016 @ 03:28 PM
link   
A President can only issue a pardon / reprieve to a person who was found guilty of a crime. A Pardon for Clinton can only occur if she is charged, tried and convicted.

A President can in fact pardon himself however it would end their political career and would result in impeachment, the only "crime" that is explicitly exempted by pardon.

And just to clarify -
Only the US House of Representatives can impeach.
Only the US Senate can try the person impeached.

Essentially an impeachment is a statement of fact outlining the accusation. Bill Clinton was impeached when he was in office by the House. The Senate did not "convict" him.

edit on 14-5-2016 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)

edit on 14-5-2016 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 14 2016 @ 04:24 PM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra

According to this, a person can be pardoned before convicted.



Presidential pardons can be granted anytime after an offense has been committed including before, during, or after a conviction for the offense. If granted before a conviction is given, it prevents any penalties from attaching to the person. If granted after a conviction, it removes the penalties, and restores the person to all his or her civil rights. However, a pardon can never be granted before an offense has been committed – because the president does not have the power to waive the laws.


www.legalflip.com...



posted on May, 14 2016 @ 05:25 PM
link   
a reply to: queenofswords

Yeah my mistake.. The DOJ requires a person wait 5 years after conviction before applying for a pardon (although the President can skip that part). Apparently a pardon requires the person to admit their criminal wrong doing before its applied (which seems odd but makes sense).

Granting a pardon to Clinton before anything is done would not be a good idea as it would scream politics.

You are correct so my apologies.



posted on May, 14 2016 @ 05:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: queenofswords

Yeah my mistake.. The DOJ requires a person wait 5 years after conviction before applying for a pardon (although the President can skip that part). Apparently a pardon requires the person to admit their criminal wrong doing before its applied (which seems odd but makes sense).

Granting a pardon to Clinton before anything is done would not be a good idea as it would scream politics.

You are correct so my apologies.


Can you just imagine! The FBI has the goods on her....it goes to DOJ and they recommend prosecution....then before anything can go any further, Obama pardons her!

I wonder if she would be allowed to continue her run for the presidency? I suppose she would be. Then if the Dems take over the Senate and House and decide to do nothing about Hillary, The American People will watch as our White House is turned into a den of thieves. Surely The People would not elect her after all that, but her diehard supporters don't seem to care.
edit on 14-5-2016 by queenofswords because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 14 2016 @ 06:49 PM
link   
a reply to: queenofswords


Surely The People would not elect her after all that, but her diehard supporters don't seem to care.


I wonder how much of her support is manufactured?

I see very few people voicing support on my Facebook newsfeed, and I've got a huge cross section of people/age group/ political persuasion on my freinds list, so if there's as much support as her press says there is, I ain't seeing it.

When I look at the comments section of any Hillary election related posts, comments that tear her to shreds have many more likes than supportive ones do. And if you look at the accounts of many of the pro Hillary posts, they are so obviously fake as to be downright laughable; new within the last couple of months, no friends, no photos beyond the profile pic, no other posting history, no group membership, etc.

There are a tiny few around here, and they can be downright obnoxious; not all of them demonstrate this, but the ones that do...wow!

And then I look at her demeanor, and that of her supporters and think that we're gping to be cursed with madame president.

(shudders)
edit on 14-5-2016 by jadedANDcynical because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 14 2016 @ 06:54 PM
link   
a reply to: jadedANDcynical

What I wonder is this... if she is somehow elected.... what would the military do? How do military brass enforce any kind of regulations concerning classified information if she walks from this?

There is a lot more to this than meets the proverbial eye.

At every security interview for a clearance, do they inform people that they can be punished and imprisoned for mishandling of classified information, unless your name is Hillary Clinton?

Do they pardon Clinton and leave all the little fish to fend for themselves?




edit on R572016-05-14T18:57:04-05:00k575Vpm by RickinVa because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 14 2016 @ 06:55 PM
link   
a reply to: queenofswords

From what I have read the senior leadership at the FBI has intimated that if there is cause to charge Clinton and politics get involved they would resign in protest and dump the files to the media.

Normally I would take it with a grain of salt however Director Comey (FBI) has made this sort of stand before while G. W. Bush was president. That dealt with illegal surveillance and he won over Bush in the end.



posted on May, 14 2016 @ 07:03 PM
link   
a reply to: RickinVa

I know man, its insane but most people aren't capable of imagining the ramifications of this should she skate. Maybe the corruption investigation centered around the Clinton Foundation can take them down even if Obama gives her a hall pass for the espionage violations.

@X, what effect do you think this (FBI floods media with info & quits) would have if it went that far?

I mean, if she's willing to play chicken and does not flinch, what kind of train wreck are we looking at here?

What kind of clout would she have to have to bring it to that?
edit on 14-5-2016 by jadedANDcynical because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 14 2016 @ 07:11 PM
link   
a reply to: jadedANDcynical

I have hope that when this comes down, as far as Hillary goes, it may be a shock and awe campaign from the FBI.

I truly would not be surprised to see her hit with so many indictment recommedations, that she is literally forced out of the campaign shortly there after. Hillerites would scream bloody murder...smear campaign.. FBI bought off etc. of course.

If they only hit her with 1 or 2 charges, She could drag that out past election and still win while awaiting a court date..

Crazy times in which we live.


edit on R162016-05-14T19:16:36-05:00k165Vpm by RickinVa because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 14 2016 @ 07:27 PM
link   
a reply to: RickinVa

You know, I'd love to see her (and all her lackies, Bill, and anyone else tied in with the Foundation found to be complicit) buried beneath and avalanche of charges so overwhelming that history is made.

The Clintons would supplant Nixon as the icon of American politIcal corruption.

I'm afraid I'm a bit too jaded and cynical to actually entertain that hope more than dimly.

I'd dearly love to be wrong about the feeling I've had about this forever that she would just slide past this slicker than # through a goose, really, I would.



posted on May, 14 2016 @ 07:34 PM
link   
a reply to: jadedANDcynical

If the FBI were to do that I think the political fallout would be detrimental.. To Hilary, this administration, and any politician (regardless of party) who does not speak out against politics trumping law.

It's ok to go after Manning? Snowden? Petraus? etc but its ok to let Clinton off the hook?

I would go far as to suggest an increase in the number of states passing the request for a constitutional convention and I think that would spell the end of the politics as usual, untouchable politician era.

I would expect to see impeachment proceedings against members of this administration and most likely Congress voting for special prosecutors.

In laymens terms it would be "the straw that breaks the camel's back". I think politicians are severely underestimating the anger of the American people.
edit on 14-5-2016 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 14 2016 @ 07:45 PM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra

I am all for making a 51st state... PR, Virgin Islands..etc..

Each state gets 1 electoral vote... who ever gets the first 26 is the winner.

That would totally destroy the process we have today, but it doesn't seem to me like the one we have now works very good, at this point, what does i t matter anyways,,, change it.

edit on R482016-05-14T19:48:04-05:00k485Vpm by RickinVa because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 14 2016 @ 07:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: RickinVa
a reply to: jadedANDcynical

What I wonder is this... if she is somehow elected.... what would the military do? How do military brass enforce any kind of regulations concerning classified information if she walks from this?

There is a lot more to this than meets the proverbial eye.

At every security interview for a clearance, do they inform people that they can be punished and imprisoned for mishandling of classified information, unless your name is Hillary Clinton?

Do they pardon Clinton and leave all the little fish to fend for themselves?





It seems to me Comey is the current crux of this predicament for Crooked Hillary...and he is currently most at risk.



posted on May, 14 2016 @ 08:02 PM
link   
a reply to: IAMTAT

I wonder if he has a special security detail?

I imagine he got lots of heat directed his way.




top topics



 
55
<< 9  10  11    13 >>

log in

join