530
Trump floats pardons to ‘protect’ Elon Musk and staffers from Democrat investigations
(www.independent.co.uk)
this post was submitted on 02 Nov 2026
530 points (98.9% liked)
politics
31714 readers
2479 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles. Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to US politics and contain quality and original content. Social Media adjacent hosts like Substack are allowed, but ONLY if they tie back to a company/subsidiary. No personal or friend group blogs and no self-promotion. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and re-hosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing other users of being bots or paid actors.
- No memes, trolling, misinformation, or low-effort posts/comments (including reposts). If you see posts like this that anger you, do not engage. Report, block, and live a happier life than they do. Any slap-fight is subject to comment removals. Fights full of rule violations will result in temporary bans to cool off.
- No manipulating votes via bots or alt accounts; this will result in permanent bans. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in an account ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be permanently banned.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules and use critical thinking when reading, posting, and commenting. Users that repeatedly have comments or posts removed, weaponize reports, or violate the code of conduct, will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users. The reason(s) behind moderator action(s) are publicly available through the Modlog.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Preemptive pardon should not even be a thing.
Accepting a pardon means you're guilty.
No, it doesn't.
It does, however, void your 5th Amendment rights to refuse to testify against yourself.
Accepting a pardon is generally seen as an admission of guilt.
And if it is, the executive should list explicitly what crimes, on what days, against which individuals, cannot be brought to trial.
This is the real crux of the issue. Blanket pardons shouldn’t be a thing. If you want to pardon someone, it should be specific. Which crimes? Where? When? Who was victimized? Who else was involved? What was the outcome of the crime?
The SCOTUS has already ruled in
Burdick v. USthat accepting a pardon requires admitting guilt of the crime you’re being pardoned of. The wording of the ruling was that a pardon carries “an imputation of guilt and acceptance of a confession of it.” The SCOTUS has consistently held that a pardon does not overturn a guilty conviction. Instead, it removes the punishment for the crime. You’re still unequivocally guilty after a pardon.It shouldn’t be some sort of “I pardon you for waves arms in air vaguely” power, because that turns the whole “needing to admit guilt” part into a sly wink wink elbow nudge situation. It puts the person’s crimes in a quantum Schrödinger state. The person accepting a vague pardon is inarguably guilty of something, because they admitted guilt when they accepted the pardon. But the court doesn’t know what they’ve admitted to until a prosecutor tries to indict them, and they go “oh no you can’t prosecute me, I was pardoned.”
It reminds me a little of popes selling indulgences. "Donate money and/or go on crusade, and I'll absolve you of any sins you've already commited or will commit in the future." That sort of thing eventually resulted in a rather significant schism.
Doesn't accepting a pardon, especially a blanket pardon, also mean that you lose your Fifth Amendment protection to not incriminate yourself? You can not be punished for what you did, that means you have nothing to fear and can be made to confess everything and incriminate accomplices. Wouldn't that be some way to have a go at Trump?
congress.gov
That's true, in that way it works like an immunity deal.
The problem is that, if the pardonee refuses to testify and is found in contempt, Trump (or some later asshole) can then pardon the contempt as well.
Maybe, but if you have a blanket pardon then what are they going to charge you if you just refuse to comply? You've already been pardoned for the hypothetical contempt.
At present pardons can be blanket, but they can’t be prospective. So it can be “I pardon you for all (federal) crimes ever up to now”, but it can’t be I pardon you for X you’re going to do tomorrow.
They aren't a thing. You can only pardon a crime that's already been commited, not for future crimes.
Also Trump violated his oath of office within 72 hours of this term beginning, so technically none of his pardons mean anything from this term and can just be reversed.
He wasn't legitimately serving in capacity of the president since he abdicated his office by violating his oath.
Oh I looked it up and you're right that future crimes can't be pardoned. It doesn't help that the media talks about preemptive pardons like they are for future crimes, when it really only means crimes that have been committed but no charges have been filed yet. https://northernkentuckylawreview.com/blog/preemptive-pardons-explained-understanding-president-bidens-family-pardons
And the only remedy for that is impeachment, followed by removal, which didn't happen.
Yes, but it can happen at anytime, then you retroactively invalidate his past actions
The crimes have already been committed, they just haven't been charged for it yet.
That would be interesting - if he could pardon the crimes but he'd first have to specifically detail them.
Exactly, and there's always like dozens of not hundreds of possible charges you could bring. If they pardon the few obvious big ones, they can still be charged on all the other ones, and have a judge sentence them to serve consecutively.
They also aren't immune to civil suits for monetary damages and other things
I don't think he would need to specifcy them?
I pardon Elon Musk and all DOGE staff for anything and everything they did while working for DOGE.
No, sadly he doesn't. But it would be good if it was somehow made to work that way.
It doesnt seem unreasonable to need to do that either, but at the same time it can be abused.
Like let's say Elon committed 20 crimes in DOGE, and they're all related in one way or another. The 20th one specifically is related to the 19th how he copied data, but its own obscure law, that everyone's forgot about, so they pardon the 19, and then get him on copying the data to a non authorized USB stick or something because it wasnt on an authorized seller list.
So I do kind of think it needs some ability to blanket things, but also, some specificity also seems important.
scRotus says anything dipshit does is just part of his doing the job and he can't be prosecuted for it at all.
'to the best of my ability' is also doing some heavy work here. he has no qualifications for office and he's dumb as bricks. he's doing the 'best' he can, doing the only thing he knows how to: lie, cheat, steal.
What I'm saying is the scrotus already set the path for executive overreach. The next president can use that to have them all killed if they wanted to Uber the same reasoning. Or just make up a pretext that isn't explicitly stated, like that they are sitting justices who will from here forward serve in a non judiciary capacity.
The could and they should but they won’t.
Pardon should only be possible under very narrow circumstances. For example if laws got loosened after conviction or when convoction WAS obviously politically motivated. But neither can logically handed out before a judge read the verdict.
What if trump pardons himself and friends for any sex crimes now, maybe even murder?
Why would any judge honor this? Ooo now i'm thinking dems kept heads low regarding epstein convictions to use that very argumentation and they can't pardon themselves anymore. A man can have hope right?
I strongly disagree. There has to be a check on judicial overreach and miscarriages of justice. Pardons make sense for that.
The problem with Trump isn't the use of pardons per se, it's that he's issuing them corruptly.