Tell someone, go murder this political opponent of mine, dont worry, ill pardon you afterwards, that would presumably bring about some reevaluati reevaluation of the pardon power. That proxy is which most of us have just spent the last several years not paying attention to the degree to which executives like to control this power and then we wonder when congress cant achieve its goals of exercising control and power where it went to, well, these are the kinds of moments that we have to keep watching for. Thats right. Were living we are living through the most extreme circumstances that should have only ever be cited as hypotheticals for what the extent of executive power should be. Thats right. Now we get to live them in real time. I think that will change the way we think about these things forever. Rachel, thank you, and we will see you tomorrow unless you have decided that two days of shows today was enough because that was a lot of tv. You have a great night, friend. Do not tempt m
Pardons are in the constitution. They are there for a reason. They serve a real purpose and historically, they have. What we saw tonight was not that purpose. Thats exactly right, and it will raise questions whether its in congress or in the courts, it will raise questions as to whether or not the admittedly plenary power of the pardons needs to somehow be circumscribed so it cant be used for plainly corrupt purpospurpose s. If this president is going to tell someone, go murder this political pardon of mine, dont worry, ill pardon you afterwards, th as he gets cl and closer to that kind of extremism, that kind of line, i think the question about what happens to the pardon power in his wake gets more and more live g. That proxy is which most of us have just spent the last several years not paying attention to the degree to which executives like to control this power and then we wonder when congress cant achieve its goals of exercising control and power where it went to, well, these are
Within hours of the Supreme Court s decision last week to hear Trump v. United States, the former president s immunity appeal, prominent commentators began spreading the narrative that the Supreme Court
Today s D Brief: Deadly drone confusion; China s IOT hacks; Arms exports set record; Inside a UK tanker over Nevada; And a bit more defenseone.com - get the latest breaking news, showbiz & celebrity photos, sport news & rumours, viral videos and top stories from defenseone.com Daily Mail and Mail on Sunday newspapers.
Last week, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., falsely labeled Attorney General William Barr a “liar.” Our colleague and former Supreme Court litigator Paul Larkin debunked that baseless epithet, as did Harvard Law School Professor Jack Goldsmith and Kim Strassel of the Wall Street Journal.