CreateDebate is a social debate community built around ideas, discussion and democracy.
If this is your first time checking out a debate, here are some quick tips to help get you started:
Arguments with the highest score are displayed first.
Argument replies (both in favor and in opposition) are displayed below the original argument.
To follow along, you may find it helpful to show and hide the replies displayed below each argument.
To vote for an argument, use these icons:
You have the power to cast exactly one vote (either up or down) for each argument.
Once you vote, the icon will become grayed out and the argument's score will change.
Yes, you can change your vote.
Debate scores, side scores and tag scores are automatically calculated by an algorithm that primarily takes argument scores into account.
All scores are updated in real-time.
To learn more about the CreateDebate scoring system, check out the FAQ.
When you are ready to voice your opinion, use the Add Argument button to create an argument.
If you would like to address an existing argument, use the Support and Dispute link within that argument to create a new reply.
In the United States, the pardon power for federal crimes is granted to the President of the United States under Article II, Section 2 of the United States Constitution which states that the President "shall have power to grant reprieves and pardons for offenses against the United States, except in cases of impeachment ...
I have no problem with Article 2 Section 2 is the "RIGHT" of the President. Leftist love "RIGHTS" don't they CON LMAO
People have done worse and not gotten impeached. Con is hellbound to prove Trump does bad things, and is possibly right, possibly wrong, but the kicker is... he only cares if TRUMP does bad things... If Obama does bad things, CNN tells him that it's okay, and he goes back to sleeping like a baby. If you lived through Obama, you will live through Trump.
I think most reasonable people will understand what that means, and it seems that such an action (especially pardoning himself) will be the type of action that will lead to impeachment.
Unfortunately, a significant proportion of his base, won't care. It doesn't seem to matter that he is doing nothing that he said he would; that he is undermining his own position and administration, nor that he is fundamentally undermining American interests at home and abroad; with each continuing angry tweet or diplomatic slight helping to create a vacuum of global leadership that is not going to be filled with someone looking out for American interests.
It doesn't even matter how over the last 6 months, and before; the amount of dishonesty, corruption and outrageous behavior dwarfs the type of behavior Trump and his supporters were so outraged at during the campaign.
Trump could reveal American secrets to the Russians using a private email server; and many people would be screaming "fake news".
It seems, if the Trump Supporters we see on forums like this, or on other discussion forum s are anything to go by; that the goal isn't anything inherently political, it isn't about being right, or having someone to fight their cause. It isn't about finding a messenger for their values, or someone to communicate their feelings or message:
It's about attacking and shouting down anyone who oppose them, at any cost.
Of course, until Trump has been and gone. And it will end up being like the Iraq War; a war that many of the right supported and continued to support right through the 2000's.
Now, it's surprising how few people you can find that would say they supported it; and even fewer that will admit they were part of the group shouting at the "un-americans" or "traitors" that didn't support it.
In the United States, the pardon power for federal crimes is granted to the President of the United States under Article II, Section 2 of the United States Constitution which states that the President "shall have power to grant reprieves and pardons for offenses against the United States, except in cases of impeachment ...
Now pay attention okay ! Nowhere in Article 2 Section 2 does it mention the president can pardon himself.
If you Leftist actually could find facts the "Safe Spaces" couldn't be built fast enough.
If you Leftist actually could find facts the "Safe Spaces" couldn't be built fast enough.
Oddly enough; you are being outright dishonest, and purposefully distorting information and facts in order to try and support your point:
"and he shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offenses against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment."
Nowhere does it mention the president can pardon himself.
But also, no where does it mention the president can pardon a past president, or someone before they are accused of a crime.
The wording is broad. It neither limits, or constrains, who, what, when and how someone can be pardoned, other than he cannot pardon someone unless they are being impeached.
It seems one of the number one strategies of people like you discussion forums, is to accuse the left of what you yourself are doing repeatedly; either before you're accused of it, or after.
In this case, you've misrepresented the facts; then accuse me of it.
Even more ironic; is that you appear DESPERATE to try and find some reason to attack the other position: It's as if you have been triggered and are using these baseless dishonest attacks to try and make yourself feel better: Indeed, you are the one that appears to need the safe space.
In the United States, the pardon power for federal crimes is granted to the President of the United States under Article II, Section 2 of the United States Constitution which states that the President "shall have power to grant reprieves and pardons for offenses against the United States, except in cases of impeachment ...
Now pay attention okay ! Nowhere in Article 2 Section 2 does it mention the president can pardon himself.
You have to learn to read. President can pardon his family and whomever he wants if you don't like that then do your best to change Article 2 Section 2.
In the United States, the pardon power for federal crimes is granted to the President of the United States under Article II, Section 2 of the United States Constitution which states that the President "shall have power to grant reprieves and pardons for offenses against the United States, except in cases of impeachment ...
Leftist you can't deal with the facts. Barack Obama used Article 2 Section 2 to pardon prisoners who committed federal crimes but that was okay right ?
Again, you appear to be a troll; you don't want to have a discussion.
If you want to talk like a grown up, rather than a triggered snowflake who simply wants to repeat the same angry post (even though it's pretty much refuted in it's entirety by my first reply) so that he can pretend that he has a point; I'll be here.
In the mean time, please, continue your poop flinging.
In the United States, the pardon power for federal crimes is granted to the President of the United States under Article II, Section 2 of the United States Constitution which states that the President "shall have power to grant reprieves and pardons for offenses against the United States, except in cases of impeachment ...
Leftist you can't deal with the facts. Barack Obama used Article 2 Section 2 to pardon prisoners who committed federal crimes but that was okay right ?
As Article 2 Section 2 reads if Don Jr , Kushner , Flynn , Manafort and Ivanka are accused and jailed for committing a federal crime they can be pardoned. President has that power just as ever president before Donald Trump.
Again, feel free to act like a triggered snowflake. It's somewhat funny to watch you melt down.
Unfortunately, while you're patting yourself on the back; you're forgetting that no one is making the argument that Trump doesn't have the ability to Pardon people.
President Obama commuted prison sentences for 46 drug offenders on Monday, noting that their long sentences (lifelong in 14 cases) didn't fit their crimes. The commutations reflect a trend at federal, state, and local levels of relaxing harsh minimum sentences for non-violent drug offenses.
These commutations also reflect Mr. Obama's view of America, which he called "a nation of second chances." As The New York Times pointed out, this brings the President's commutation total to 89, the most by any president since Lyndon Johnson, and more than the last four presidents combined.
OOPS the Leftist Presidents rank 1 and 2 in pardons
In my first post, I pointed out that Trump would definitely be impeached the second he tried to Pardon himself, (and the chances are the Pardons he issued would likely be over turned by the supreme court as the notion that the President or the Administration is above prosecution by law runs country to everything in the constitution; but that's not an argument I was making).
The reason he'd be impeached is because only the desperate right wingers like yourself (who don't care about truth or reality, just want to be winners) argue that the President has absolute power; or that the intent of the constitution as written is not important compared to the words it contains.
So, given that he'd be impeached; my point was that people like you would continue to think it's okay, and defend it.
Which you have illustrated most beautifully in your replies; which prove that everything I said is pretty much correct.
That the president doesn't "technically" have the power: is unrelated nonsense.
That other presidents have issued pardons to people before: is unrelated nonsense.
That the president couldn't technically pardon those 5 people: is unrelated nonsense.
The key point expressed by Excon and myself; is that such an action would indicate to everyone that the President is a corrupt and malevolent force looking out for himself, rather than the country that should not be allowed to retain his presidency legally or ethically.
Now, you can either try and defend your position; or show how I'm wrong.
I suspect, however, that you will simply return to the same childish repetition, non-sequitors, red-herrings and other poop flinging behavior you have demonstrated in most of your replies thus far, as you are unable or unwilling to face down any criticism:
I'm not surprised; you appear to be holding beliefs that are clearly indefensible; and I suspect it's much better for your psyche to simply troll anyone who challenges you rather than to admit to yourself that you cannot back up anything you say: The ultimate psychological "safe-space".
Again, as I pointed out in my previous post; your desperate trolling attempt to change the subject and try and hide yourself from criticism is completely transparent.
Now, as you have proven my point for me: that people like you will say pretty much anything (no matter how dishonest or irrelevant) to excuse behavior that would be technically allowed, but a brazen breach of the intent of the law.
There's not much left to say. You're not defending your own position, nor are you saying anything relevant to mine.
So please; continue to fling your poop. Unless you say something relevant to my previous post which I pretty much completely refute every one of the dozen or so redundant and irrelevant positions you have taken thus far, I will not be replying further.
I never changed the subject about pardons but CON brought it up so i addressed pardons now you may not like the power the president has but not much you can do about it.
You seem to be the only one mentioning Hillary Clinton. It's likely the only thing of note that you can really point to that Trump has achieved.
Indeed, it's really changing the subject, like you were before.
The subject heading is a generally speculative statement implying that the respondents should fill in the blanks with what would happen next, and whether they would be cool with it or not.
I did so; providing an explanation of what I thought would happen, and that pretty much no one but trumps supporters would be cool with it.
So, with that in mind:
- Arguing that Trump is legally able to Pardon people is utterly unrelated to anything that was discussed in any way shape or form: and raising this repeatedly is changing the subject by definition.
- Arguing that there is nothing the Left could do to prevent it is utterly unrelated to anything that was discussed in any way shape or form: and raising this repeatedly is changing the subject by definition.
- Arguing as if I am saying that impeachment is looming; which I am not is unrelated to anything that was discussed in any way shape or form: and raising this repeatedly is changing the subject by definition.
In fact, I'm pretty sure you're deliberately not trying to talk about the subject in any way; and I can say this with near certainty as you have been deliberately going out of your way to repeatedly ignore everything that has been raised.
Given the repetition of error and sheer level of stupidity of what you've been saying and implying means that you likely wouldn't have the intellectual fortitude to string a coherent sentence together; it is unlikely that your repeated contextual errors are due to ignorance or "misunderstanding"; meaning that you're doing it because you're a troll.
As a result, this conversation is largely meaningless; as this boils down to, effectively, you flinging poop at people.
Now, given that I have come up with a detailed explanation of why you're wrong, how you're wrong, and how I can accurately say you're a dishonest troll. Together with an explanation of why a grown man would come to a discussion forum and troll people for an entire year: the only explanation that makes sense, is that you need to validate yourself, but are intellectually unable to do so: Hence you are creating your own intellectual safe-space by trolling to give you a false sense of superiority.
Given that after I explained this; you launched into multiple ranting posts here, and in one of my other posts, it appears relatively clear that this analysis has hit a nerve.
Just so you're aware; this sort of emotional and lash-out response is typically what the right wing refer to as "triggering": and is specifically used to refer to the actions and reactions of "snowflakes": (those who view themselves and their opinions as somehow special) when confronted with some uncomfortable or opposing point of view.
Perhaps next time, before I outline in detail the entirety of how and why you're wrong; I will start with a special trigger warning just for you; to avoid such future melt-downs.
Let me help you out. He has the power to pardon anybody, even himself in my opinion. But that's not the problem. Obstruction of justice is the problem. If he carries out those pardons, it's obstruction of justice pure and simple.
LMMFAO now we are off pardons and onto Obstruction of Justice. CON you Leftist are so spun out that your entertainment value rises everyday. Pardons are an obstruction of justice pure and simple. But CON Article 2 Section 2 does not backup your insanity.
