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:

  1. 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:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. 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.
  5. 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

• Register To Vote

• Citizenship Resource Center

• Congressional Awards Program

• Federal Government Agencies

• Library of Congress Legislative Resources

• The White House

• U.S. House of Representatives

• U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

• News

• World News

• Business News

• Political Discussion

• Ask Politics

• Military News

• Global Politics

• Moderate Politics

• Progressive Politics

• UK Politics

• Canadian Politics

• Australian Politics

• New Zealand Politics

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Trump said he would consider pre-emptive pardons to protect Elon Musk and other close aides should Democrats take control of Congress

Donald Trump said he would be willing to protect Elon Musk and his staff if Democrats take control of Congress after the midterm elections this week.

In an interview for the “Pod Force One” podcast published Monday, Trump said he would move to “protect” the billionaire SpaceX and Tesla CEO if Congressional investigators targeted him.

Trump also indicated that he was weighing pre-emptive pardons for his close aides and others around him should the Democrats pursue investigations, according to Axios. It is a notion that the president has floated before to keep his team from facing prosecution for actions during the first two years of his term.

(page 2) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Professorozone@lemmy.world 34 points 1 day ago (10 children)

I think we need an amendment to rescind the pardon. Reduce it to a stay of execution only. Why is it even a thing? Did they really think giving this power to a sitting president would ONLY be used to right injustices? It's a friggin unlimited commit crimes and get out of jail free card.

[–] HCSOThrowaway@lemmy.world 6 points 23 hours ago (3 children)

Yeah, pardons don't make sense unless you believe that executives can never do wrong.

Which is a very strange belief to have as people in the process of rebelling against a king because he made decisions they didn't like.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] bagsy@lemmy.world 4 points 22 hours ago

there should 100% be a check on pardons, like everything else. However, it wouldn't do much good in this situation seeing how congress and SC have already abdicated their duties.

load more comments (8 replies)
[–] grumpo_potamus@lemmy.world 13 points 21 hours ago

I'm at the point where fuck it... Play the game by their rules. Put them in prison even though they're pardoned. Oh it's illegal? You don't say...

[–] cranakis@reddthat.com 84 points 1 day ago (8 children)

Let's just take all of his money instead.

[–] adarza@lemmy.ca 19 points 1 day ago

he's used his money to commit crimes, he'll do it again. the fact he has so fucking much of it is too great a temptation.

civil forfeiture of all of it should definitely be on-the-table.

if a redneck sheriff can take a black guy's cash (it might have come from drugs) that he was takin' to pay ma's rent... muskrat's money.. hell, all those fukfaces' money.. should be fair game for the taking.

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] mercano@lemmy.world 30 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Great. Then they can’t plead the fifth when questioned by Congress.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Jaysyn@lemmy.world 26 points 1 day ago (2 children)

A pardon won't keep him from being de-naturalized & deported.

[–] phutatorius@lemmy.zip 1 points 12 hours ago

If the act for which the pardon was issued was the grounds for the denaturalization, it couldn't be used as the basis for a federal administrative sanction such as denaturalization. There's precedent for that.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] itsgroundhogdayagain@lemmy.ml 4 points 19 hours ago (2 children)

Pardons have to be for a specific crime which they have not been convicted of.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] xxce2AAb@feddit.dk 41 points 1 day ago (11 children)

In the near future American school children will respond to being told about Nixon with "wait, that's it?!"

Assuming they aren't too busy sheltering in place, of course.

[–] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 11 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Nixon was surpassed by Iran/Contra.

Ronnie Raygun had the largest number in history (138) for the number of people in an administration that were investigated, indicted or convicted. And the conservatives spent most of the 90s and beyond agitating to have stuff named after him, and to put that asshole on our money and on Mt. Rushmore...

They would have had the country built shrines to the guy if they had their way. They have zero shame.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scandals_of_the_Reagan_administration

load more comments (10 replies)
[–] neidu4@piefed.social 43 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (5 children)

"Trump floats" means nothing. Stop reporting on his idiocy as if it's news. It's been ten years of this doofus, and this is Lemmy, there's nobody here left to convince that he'll do anything but whatever he can, while his word means nothing.

Report on what he does, not what he says.

Let me know when he floats face down in the reflecting pool

[–] ccunning@lemmy.world 16 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Let me know when he floats face down in the reflecting pool

You’re gonna be really sad when you miss that headline…

[–] Mac@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 19 hours ago (1 children)

I assure you that they will neither be sad nor miss out. Everyone will know immediately.

[–] III@lemmy.world 3 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

His smell couldn't travel THAT far THAT quickly...

[–] Mac@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 12 hours ago

lol the internet would be a lot quieter if we had to wait for that. We all deal with his shit and can't even smell it from a distance (thank fucking god)

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] nerdo@lemmy.zip 8 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

The states can cut Musk into 50 pieces and imprison each

[–] III@lemmy.world 2 points 15 hours ago

That's ridiculous. No way all of the states convict him. Likely he will only be cut into 5 pieces.

[–] shirasho@feddit.online 15 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Pardons from criminal presidents should not be allowed.

[–] green_link@lemmy.world 7 points 22 hours ago

a 34-time convicted felon shouldn't be allowed to run for or be elected president. period.

[–] some_designer_dude@lemmy.world 26 points 1 day ago (6 children)

Democrats’ next move: round up the pardoned traitors and execute them. Then pardon the executioner. Problem solved?

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] Cruxifux@feddit.nl 17 points 1 day ago (2 children)

So he knows Elon and his staffers have committed crimes then. How is this legal??

[–] kent_eh@lemmy.ca 4 points 20 hours ago

How is this legal??

You aren't considering the "who is gonna stop us?" counter-arguement.

[–] JonEFive@piefed.social 7 points 1 day ago (1 children)

It isn't. That's the whole point of the pardon. It was just never imagined that pardons would be used the way they are today. Oh and SCOTUS' godawful ruling on executive immunity.

[–] phutatorius@lemmy.zip 1 points 12 hours ago

Some of the founders did imagine it, argued against it, but it was passed anyway.

[–] FatherPeanut@pawb.social 6 points 22 hours ago (2 children)

It sounds so very Trump to pardon preemptively, yet if a pardon is given, it'll be fair grounds for the pardoned to speak about their misdeeds without fear of prosecution, thus letting you spill the beans on everyone else. That's likely why pardons aren't given until people are already well beyond in the shitter.

[–] phutatorius@lemmy.zip 1 points 12 hours ago

For this reason, it serves Trump better to promise pardons, but never to deliver them.

[–] Buddahriffic@lemmy.world 9 points 22 hours ago

It goes a step further than that, once you have a pardon, there are no fifth amendment protections for questions about it anymore. Because with the pardon, you don't need protection.

[–] Bluedragon012@lemmy.world 3 points 19 hours ago

And we'll hunt your buddies. :D

[–] Sunflier@lemmy.world 3 points 20 hours ago

There's a logical perspective that, if the pardons are to advance his conspiracy, the pardons would be invalid.

load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›