[0]: https://www.sec.gov/litigation/litreleases/2018/lr24092.htm

[1]: https://www.pressherald.com/2016/11/30/sec-charges-ex-maine-...

[2]: https://www.pressherald.com/2018/04/02/liberty-in-sec-crossh...

There's also a difference between state and federal charges - even if they've been pardoned, they can still be charged for related crimes.

As you said, though it's not clear, it need to be a different (though potentially related) crime.

https://www.wklaw.com/double-jeopardy-federal/

Of course, there's still the limitation that the State would need to find it's own law that the accused violated - they have no jurisdiction over Federal law (and vice-versa).

Still... it doesn't sit quite right with me. If someone is acquitted by a jury in, let's say, Rhode Island for murder. It doesn't seem right that the Federal government could step in and hold an entirely new trial thereafter. Seems to fly in the face of what Double-Jeopardy is supposed to prevent.

...and that can happen regardless of criminal conviction.

I think a more interesting question is whether there's a specificity requirement. AFAIU, that hasn't been answered, either.

What gives you the impression pardons are limited to those that are "delivered" and/or "accepted". How would that even be legally demonstrated to a court.

The Supreme Court apparently ruled that way in a case a long time ago and that precedence has never been challenged (or come up again for that matter)

See https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c9IRZ9FzWEA

But realistically if they tried to revoke a pardon today it would certainly go to the Supreme Court again and they would almost certainly rule the other way.

Looking up Grants revocation of Johnson's pardons - it's hard to find details, but it does seem like a Federal judge took issue that they were not delivered prior to the new president revoking them.

Given that there's no such limitation in the Constitution, I wonder if it would hold up to SCOTUS. ...and maybe that's why they announce them publicly these days.

This is literally all it says...

> he shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offences against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.

p.s. - if you wonder why the Clintons are especially hated in some circles, and if you wonder why people are so quick to believe those Q conspiracy theories, the kernels of truth exist and originate in simple corruption like this

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Almon_Glenn_Braswell#Unsubstan...

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Susan_McDougal#Whitewater_affa...

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mel_Reynolds

[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roger_Clinton,_Jr.#Conviction_...

This pardon was... really pretty conventional. It's of a non-violent crime and a comparatively compartmentalized one that doesn't impact the nation as a whole. Incentivising industrial espionage isn't "not bad", but it's not that bad.

This is routine Washington stuff, really. The genuinely corrupt pardons, of his family and associates (and potentially himself) for crimes committed during the administration don't seem to have materialized[1]. The list from yesterday is very long, but really pretty unsurprising.

[1] But there is still an hour and a half left. A pardon can be scrawled on a napkin in 30 seconds and then shown to the media to deliver it. There's no formality requirement in the constitution. If he does it before noon then it counts.

I would say that it is uncommon for presidents to abuse the pardon power like this, it's just not completely unheard of. It's also worth noting that Trump multiplied the total number of corrupt presidential pardons in US history by something like 10 in his time in office. The scale is hard to fully grasp.

He granted clemency to 143 more last night which places him closer in line to Bush and G.W. Bush, but there's no way your data here would include that (and that still places him at a very low number), so I'm wondering where you're getting this data, and how you qualify "corrupt."

If we look at a handful of Bill Clinton's corrupt pardons on his last day in office alone as mentioned in the gp comment above:

(1) Susan McDougal who went to jail for contempt of court for him, (2) Braswell who paid Hillary $200k for the pardon, (3) his brother Roger Clinton Jr, (4) Democrat Mel Reynolds who was granted clemency after being found guilty of sexual abuse of a minor.

Thus, Trump must have had at least 40? Where is the source?

[1] https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2020/11/24/so-far-trum... [2] https://www.pewresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/FT_20...

So not "both siding" too little or too much, but both siding a just right amount?

The “sides” we ought to be considering are corrupt politicians and those of us who object to corrupt politicians.

Framing this as if there are two equivalent and corrupt sides effectively normalizes and excuses these corrupt pardons.

For me personally, it's frustrating to see comments about things like whataboutism when they're obviously just to deflect and distract.

At the very least, with caveats like saying "I don't support this, but..." there's some level of acknowledgement of, "yes, this might be veering into sketchy waters".

The other no name money laundering criminals are all related to either his gambling businesses or his place of living in Florida.

He's basically pardoning people he's been doing crimes with for a long time and then if course some big names.

I'm happy to see some rappers pardoned though tbh. Their music has influenced my life, they've done great deal of good outside of music and none of them were in the can for things like harming women or animals etc.

"I gotta bring the hood back after Katrina / Weezy F Baby now the F is for FEMA"

"The CAN-DO Foundation thanks President Trump for providing a second chance to numerous deserving individuals through the use of his Executive Clemency powers. Many defendants that receive draconian sentences are individuals who exercised their Sixth Amendment right to a trial and suffered the trial penalty phase by receiving harsh mandatory sentences many times greater than if they had taken a plea. These sentences were often based primarily on the testimony of other co-conspirators who received sentence reductions once they testified and were in many cases far more culpable. Executive clemency represented the last hope for many of these individuals to have a second chance at life since (with limited exceptions) there is no federal parole."

https://www.candoclemency.com/can-do-thanks-president-trump-...

It's not like they are all Trump's friends. But obviously conspiracy theories will prevail, sadly.

Most Trump's pardons bypassed DOJ.

https://www.lawfareblog.com/trumps-circumvention-justice-dep...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/most-clemency-...

And where he admits that he leaked info in order to counter the effect of Hillary's emails on the 2016 election. So, literal foreign interference in an election.

You may have also missed the declass that showed Fiona Hill perjured herself when she stated she had no idea who Christopher Steele was- yet actually met with him while he was compiling his dossier.

That's my kind of criminal, if so.

He did a few things right, but let’s not pretend the last year hasn’t been mostly political theatre rather than leadership and one man could have led with a different tone.