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.
Accepting a pardon is admittance of guilt which can be used to force testimony without the 5th amendment protection.
Accepting a pardon is admittance of guilt
That’s based on the incorrect belief that a bit of dicta in Garland is actually precedential. It’s not. And, due to the possibility of general pardons (upheld in the precedential part of the Garland ruling) it’s a logical impossibility anyway. If you’re pardoned for “any or all crimes committed” during a period of time, what would you be pleading guuilty to? And anyway, there is no step in the pardon process where you are required to admit guilt.
That part is true, but not for the reason you cited. They can’t plead the fifth for the same reason that people granted immunity can’t: because they’re not in jeopardy of prosecution for anything they’ve been pardoned for. But note that they can still plead the fifth to avoid charges for other crimes outside the scope of the pardon.
That’s very obviously not true based on what we saw with Fauci. He had a presidential pardon and plead the 5th for his entire questioning.
You can be compelled to testify legally. In practice it’s much more difficult and a more arduous process, which doesn’t play well for tv and all fauci was subpoenaed for was to try to create compelling clips on social media and cable news for Trump and his sycophants. Fauci definitely could have been compelled but it would have been pointless and potentially could have created more sympathy for him or exposed things republicans wouldn’t have wanted. That’s why he wasn’t compelled, not because you can’t.
He couldn’t be compelled. If he was at risk of being charged with anything outside the scope of his pardon, he could still plead the fifth (which he did).
As he should have, because it was a witch hunt being performed on a, to my knowledge, innocent man, and they were fishing for anything they could use without having any evidence of wrongdoing. He said in his diary he disliked the president and their behavior. That’s not a crime. And yes, on the matters he received a blanket pardon from actions performed “January 1, 2014, through January 19, 2025, arising from Fauci’s service as NIAID Director, Chief Medical Advisor, or member of the White House coronavirus task forces”. If he refused to testify on specifics they can use their congressional powers to compel through their constitutional powers via imprisonment, fines, or both. (Brown v. Walker)
Burdick v. United States Allows fauci to refuse his pardon or pardons and then employ his fifth amendment right. Also if someone being compelled has performed crimes or suspects they have or will be charged for state crimes they may invoke their fifth to protect themselves against that while also accepting a pardon, but they are still protected against federal charges.
If congress had actually been interested in some truth or testimony from fauci to get to the bottom of some events, they could have used under 18 U.S.C. § 6005 via a U.S. District Court order a grant of immunity that would have allowed him to testify while protecting against malicious or resulting state prosecutions, but they offered no such deal, while also having no claims of evidence of impropriety, showing it was a fishing expedition and an attempt to get viral clips for political gain. Which they got by him invoking his fifth, causing morons across the Internet to then claim that proves guilt.
That’s more because they were obviously fishing for something new or different to catch him on. There was no reason to bring him back before congress at this point. It was pure theater.
If he purjures himself, intentionally or not, by saying anything that conflicts with previous statements, they’d try to charge him. There was zero benefit to Fauci to testify in that hearing, only legal peril.
I feel like you just explained why even with a pardon you should plead the 5th. Obviously they’re hoping he would trip on something.
That is exactly what I was explaining. Maybe I missed your point and we were saying the same thing.
Maybe we’re agreeing and not realizing it because this form of communication isn’t the best.