Tim Campbell

[Tim Campbell @Timcamp1955]

would pardons for individuals from POTUS be valid if after POTUS has left office that the pardons were issue to keep POTUS from being impeached remain valid.
The validity of presidential pardons issued to prevent the president's own impeachment or legal consequences after leaving office is a complex legal question that hinges on several constitutional and statutory interpretations. Here are some key points to consider:

Constitutional Basis for Pardons: Under Article II, Section 2 of the U.S. Constitution, the President has the power to "grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offenses against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment." This clause clearly limits the pardon power in relation to impeachment but does not directly address the scenario where a president might issue pardons to shield themselves from future legal action after leaving office.
Intent and Self-Pardons: While the Constitution does not explicitly prohibit self-pardons, the conventional legal interpretation has been that such an act would conflict with the principle of checks and balances. No president has ever attempted to self-pardon, so there's no direct legal precedent. However, issuing pardons to others with the intent to protect oneself indirectly could still be seen as an abuse of power, potentially leading to legal challenges.
Judicial Review: The Supreme Court has the authority to review presidential pardons, particularly if there's an argument that they were issued corruptly or beyond the president's constitutional powers. In Burton v. United States (1906), the Supreme Court affirmed that the President's pardon power is quite broad, but this does not preclude the possibility that a court might find certain uses of the pardon power to be invalid if they are clearly outside the scope intended by the Constitution.
Post-Tenure Legal Actions: If a president issues pardons to prevent their own legal accountability after leaving office, those pardons might be scrutinized by the courts. One argument against their validity could be that they were issued with corrupt intent, to obstruct justice or to avoid accountability for actions while in office.
Congressional and Public Reaction: Even if legally upheld, such actions might provoke significant backlash from Congress or the public, possibly leading to new legislation to address perceived abuses of the pardon power or even constitutional amendments.
Historical Precedents: While no exact precedent matches this scenario, the closest might be the controversy around President Nixon's potential self-pardon during the Watergate scandal, which was averted by President Ford's pardon of Nixon. This historical event underscores the political and legal complexities involved.

Given these considerations, while a president might issue such pardons, their validity would likely be contested in court. The courts could potentially rule them invalid if they were seen as an overreach or misuse of presidential power, particularly if the intent was clearly to shield the president from legal repercussions after leaving office.

Therefore, while the pardons might initially stand, they would be subject to judicial review, and their ultimate validity would depend on legal interpretations of the Constitution's pardon clause, the intent behind the pardons, and the specific circumstances surrounding their issuance.

[Tim Campbell @Timcamp1955]

@ksorbs I understand: can you suggest an alternative to pay for fire departments, police force and public schools.

[Tim Campbell @Timcamp1955]

@RedEagleUpdates 👍

[Catturd ™ @catturd2]

Over 80% want it, and the Republican Senate and John Thune refuses to pass it.

And it’s infuriating.

[Tim Campbell @Timcamp1955]

@LeaderJohnThune FU, pass SAVE America act

[Tim Campbell @Timcamp1955]

@Luna_Jones79 Yes

[Tim Campbell @Timcamp1955]

@DanBig9953 Yes

[Tim Campbell @Timcamp1955]

@aroog1278 Yes

[Tim Campbell @Timcamp1955]

@Trustintrump47 Yes

[Tim Campbell @Timcamp1955]

@FloraLuzz_ Yes

[Tim Campbell @Timcamp1955]

@FloraLuzz_ No

[Tim Campbell @Timcamp1955]

@Ericrising44 A) YES

[Tim Campbell @Timcamp1955]

@WHLeavitt @elonmusk . Yes

[Trumps Nephew @ForgiatoBlow47]

DO YOU THINK SUSAN COLLINS SHOULD BE PRIMARIED FOR VOTING AGAINST THE SAVE ACT & VOTING TO IMPEACH PRESIDENT TRUMP?

[Nick Leo🇺🇲 @i_saim1]

DO YOU SUPPORT BANNING ILLEGAL ALIENS FROM RECEIVING DRIVERS' LICENSES????

A. Yes

B. No

[Tim Campbell @Timcamp1955]

@GlobalMAGA_ Who will introduce the 28th Amendment to the Constitution for the same reason as the 22 the amendment? competency test at least.

[RRMJR51124 @rrmjr51124]

@ElissaSlotkin You’re trained to lie.

[Tim Pool @Timcast]

Thank fucking god

[Donald Reed @r05236831]

@RepHaleyStevens President Trump has worked to bring jobs, companies, & manufacturing back to the U.S. after years of Democrats chasing jobs & companies to China. Trump has relaxed CAFE requirements, disincentivized EV’s over gasoline- auto’s, & worked to increase manufacturing.
Stevens LIES !

[TRUTH THE NEWS 🇺🇲 @Truth86007News]

@RepHaleyStevens Haley, President Trump 45 did away with NAFTA to support the automakers 8 years ago. 47 is moving on. Take note in the video the Dow is at 26,000 today it's 50,000. 🇺🇲
https://t.co/pxYnXXdMZo

[JohnWellet @JohnWellet]

@RepHaleyStevens The governor has gone on trips totaling over $2 million and has brought back nothing. Why would she be taken on a trip where she’s done nothing for the citizens of Michigan you’re @IfindRetards