So maybe we pray for just that…that the scales of their eyes be removed.
1 Like
There are two kinds of Americans:
- pre-pardoned Americans; and,
- Losers.
“Hey, mister, you can’t rape people and shoot dogs like that.”
“Shut up, kid, I got a pre-pardon from the presden hisself says I can.”
WTF “legal system” even is this?!
1 Like
lol
I spend too much time wading through the PP forums as it is , add X to it ,and I’ll never get anything done.
H
6 Likes
‘just to be clear, invoking the 5th is not an admission of guilt..’
No but accepting a pardon IS an admission of guilt … the US Supremes tested that long ago.
3 Likes
The great lesson of history: the group which controls the secret police is the ultimate power in any state.
Dont overlook control of the media…
2 Likes
tell that to all the obedient dutch jews who ticked that box on their census forms before the ‘new managment’ came over the border from the east…
I think you have answered your own question…
1 Like
It seems to me that being pardoned for a crime you have not been tried for removes your right to a fair trial and due process under the law.
If thats your position, you decline the pardon and have your day in court… that was the basis of the Supreme Court decision which ruled accepting a pardon equates to an admission of guilt.
3 Likes
Common Knowledge.
Reporter: “What’s the plan at safety?”
Eagles Defensive Coordinator Vic Fangio: “I’m gonna be like Fauci and just take the Fifth Amendment on all questions."
Anthony Fauci pleading the Fifth well over 100 times during a Senate Homeland Security Committee hearing is starting to go mainstream after the accountability dodging that many Americans witnessed yesterday. The former NIAID head who just a couple of years ago said he would be eager to answer any questions from Congress and had nothing to hide now has accepted a presidential blanket pardon and pleaded the Fifth now that his government diaries have revealed the truth.
2 Likes
Wonderfully stated by Joe Kent.
https://x.com/joekent16jan19/status/2082992303216443527?s=61&t=Mwt6vB5qMDygkHDLxH9PhQ
Full Tweet:
Being angry at Fauci or being angry at Israel isn’t productive anymore. The anger is justified, but without real accountability it’s just wasted energy—unless it’s directed effectively into a pursuit for positive change.
Trump won in 2024 because most Americans understood that wars in the Middle East are bad for the U.S. & that COVID was a crime against humanity. He built a historic coalition that promised, with conviction, that voting for Trump meant we’d get accountability, no more foolish wars, & an administration that would actually put America first.
Instead, we have a new war in the Middle East and Trump announcing he’ll honor Fauci’s pardon.
This is all infuriating, but don’t let it demoralize you—because it’s also clarifying.
We can declassify documents, stage hearings, and post talking points on the internet all day. But none of it matters when we have a justice system that refuses to deliver genuine, bipartisan accountability, impartial to political influence from any direction.
Right now, Trump has the ultimate power to pursue that accountability, and he’s choosing not to. That tells you everything you need to know.
We know who will hide behind performative outrage about Fauci, Iran, or the Deep State while taking no real action in efforts to shield their political careers—and we know who will actually stand up, fight, & tell the truth, no matter how uncomfortable the consequences may be.
The problem isn’t the War Machine, foreign interests trying to push us into war, or the Deep State & their pathetic apparatchiks like Fauci seeking to control us.
The problem is putting our faith in leaders, again and again, who lack the courage to fight them.
6 Likes
7 Likes
I suppose that means accepting a blanket pardon is confessing to all manner of crimes.
1 Like
Is there a legal process where someone has to accept a pardon with some form of acknowledgment?
1 Like
Not that I know of, other than the practicalities of it. By that I mean this. Suppose Fauci was indicted for some crime. His attorney then files a written application to the court to dismiss the indictment based upon the pardon. At that point, Fauci - as a matter of law - would have accepted the pardon by virtue of the fact he performed a positive act relying upon the pardon to accomplish a definite legal goal.
Interestingly, if I were a prosecutor seeking to prosecute him, I would take the position that he has already rejected the pardon by virtue of his taking the fifth amendment. If he relied upon the pardon, the fifth amendment plea is unnecessary. I would argue that by relying on fifth amendment he has essentially rejected the pardon. There is a doctrine called judicial estoppel which states that you can’t take one position in one tribunal and then take the opposition position in another tribunal. I would argue that taking the fifth amendment (i.e. rejecting the benefits of the pardon) before Congress would be inconsistent with accepting the pardon before a court.
5 Likes