Comments by "리주민" (@user-nf9xc7ww7m) on "Can the President Pardon Himself? His Family? Co-Conspirators?" video.

  1. "And no one will ever discover i was the mastermind behind it all! Ha ha!" - Barron Trump 😋
    7
  2. Only if I can pardon myself after committing a crime. I could go steal some video games and computers and resell them. Anybody accused me, id have my lackeys call them names and liars, and I would call fake news and conspiracy by those that don't like me. And since Q is taken (not just by John de Lancie [oh, jean-luc]), I'll pick another letter. X is cool. Disclaimer: I do not intend to commit any crimes. Meant to show analogy.
    4
  3. @Fred Freddy Exactly. Many Americans also wanted the natives out of the way, against the british govt. Funnily americans will harp on the confederacy (the second one 1861, not the first one which was 1783-1788) about slavery was the reason for secession from United States, but they are eerily silent on wished ethnic cleansing being one of their reasons for secession from Great Britain. Well, america did get its Lebensraum/manifest destiny...
    3
  4.  @mechanomics2649  https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=swcJzacZkWU 2:22 on "What if Obama had said it"
    2
  5. Can a pardon after the fact work too? For example, could Bob be pardoned for all or a single type of crime in the future committed, let's say stealing. Could Bob continue stealing or even do it just once after the pardon granted?
    1
  6. Could a future pardon, if allowed, be for the entire population, let's say because the president wants to effectively nullify a law, such as pardoning anyone who has or will grow and traffic cannabis and cocaine, for example? Asking for a friend 😏 Disclaimer: meant as a joke. I do not have, nor have used or grown that.
    1
  7.  @jonathanfaber3291  Maybe if the next president or two doesn't speak any English, maybe they can get a prime minister that won't have this power. 😋
    1
  8. Made me double check....yep, I subscribed. Thank you 😁👍
    1
  9. History: We also have to remember that the US did not jump into its federal system. It started off respecting the wishes of not wanting king-like powers to one person (indeed, Switzerland still honoured this with its 7-member coequa multipartyl executive that cannot fire each other). From 1783 to 1789, the us was under the articles of confederation. The original confederate states of America, if you would. Because of some protest/rebellion, some got together to create a stronger central govt with a unitary executive, despite anti-federalist papers warning. Imagine if a single rebellion/protest created a unitary state. Yeah... Years later, the central govt and more particularly the president became more powerful through legislative acts and judicial interpretations of laws (commerce and defence).
    1
  10. Could you do a video on supreme court case Ramos v Louisiana (2019), please? I have oyez and was listening to this (yes, I'm a legal nerd), but am puzzled that nobody brought up that the supreme court decisions dont require unanimity. This case was over if juries decisions were required to be unanimous or if a majority could work. As appeals courts all the way up to supreme courts (state and federal) do not use juries, but rather plural judges, should the judge panel be unanimous too, just as juries would have to be? iirc The ruling was that a 10-2 conviction by the jury was not sufficient--only unanimity (all 12). Funnily enough, the supreme court decision that ruled this was split 6-3 and not unanimous. 😋
    1
  11. While the pardon power may not be able to be used against state crimes, the supreme court can overturn state law. Could they not overturn, not just convictions, but charges against the president? And since federal law trumps 😏 state law (supremacy clause of the constitution), would not federal order (executive order) trump state order (governors executive order) and state laws?
    1