reSee.it - Related Video Feed

Trump and his lawyers seem to forget that they are not yet the president. If the Supreme Court grants the president complete immunity from prosecution, what would stop the actual president, Joe Biden, from launching a preemptive strike on Mar-a-Lago to engineer regime change? However, I don't believe Biden has the authority to attack his political rival, as it would violate Pazzi Conicatus and murder laws. If Biden were to do so, he would likely face prosecution. Trump and his supporters fail to understand that the powers he claims for himself would also apply to future presidents.

President Trump is reportedly considering preemptive pardons, raising concerns about the precedent it sets and the perception of the U.S. as a nation of laws. This approach to pardons and policy-making, particularly through social media, will not be part of our administration. We will adopt a fundamentally different approach to the justice system.

The most destabilizing act in recent years was Attorney General Garland's decision to criminally prosecute a former president based on questionable facts and untested legal theories. This unprecedented move occurred after the former president announced his candidacy against Garland's boss. Such actions could encourage ambitious prosecutors to target political opponents, potentially leading to charges against President Biden's associates. It's crucial to identify and remove those who misuse their power while promoting fairness and evidence-based actions. The focus should be on restoring legitimacy to the Department of Justice and resisting the temptation for retaliatory measures.

The Department of Justice may indict Donald Trump the day he leaves office. I strongly support indicting a president after they leave office. Threatening political opponents with jail time is unacceptable presidential behavior in a democracy.

It is essential for a prosecutor to begin with a crime rather than targeting an individual. The issue over the past four years has been the perceived targeting of Donald Trump, which began in 2016 with multiple investigations. If appointed attorney general, I will ensure the office remains non-political and will not pursue individuals based on their political affiliations. Justice will be administered fairly across the country. We need to unite and move forward to preserve our nation. Concerns about the potential politicization of the justice department during my tenure are valid, and I assure you that I will maintain independence and uphold the Constitution, even if it means disagreeing with the president.

Have you ever heard of someone innocent receiving a preemptive pardon? It seems unlikely, especially when it involves the president's family and associates. Seeking such pardons raises questions about guilt; if someone is innocent, why would they need one? Preemptive pardons suggest that crimes may have occurred, even if they are not publicly known. If the president were to issue these pardons, it might be framed as protecting his family from external threats. However, the underlying concern appears to be about his own and his family's legal troubles. The idea of a permanent pardon for individuals like Rudy Giuliani and the president's children is troubling, especially if they haven't been convicted of any crimes. Many would interpret these pardons as an admission of guilt.

The president appears focused on self-interest and grievances as his term nears its end. He is reportedly inquiring about the possibility of issuing preemptive pardons for himself, his family, and Rudy Giuliani. The clear answer is no; this would constitute a serious misuse of presidential pardon power.

Have you ever heard of someone innocent receiving a preemptive pardon? It seems unlikely, especially when it involves the president's family and associates. Seeking pardons suggests concern over potential wrongdoing. If someone is innocent, why would they need a pardon? Preemptive pardons imply that crimes may have occurred, even if not publicly known. If the president grants these pardons, it could be seen as protecting his family from external threats, but it raises questions about guilt. The idea of a permanent pardon for individuals like Giuliani or the president's children is troubling, especially if they haven't been convicted of any crime. If the president pardons anyone, many would interpret it as an admission of guilt. Recently, it was reported that President Biden will pardon his son, Hunter Biden.

If Trump wins, DOJ won't stop ongoing cases. Cases in Florida and DC could continue until January if Trump is reelected. Garland would still lead DOJ for a while after inauguration. Trump is using the Supreme Court decision on presidential immunity to delay his sentencing in New York until September. Uncertain how things will unfold in the coming months.

It's never acceptable to assault a police officer. Regarding DJ Rodriguez, who used a stun gun on an officer during the Capitol riot and later confessed, the question of his pardon arises. However, many murderers today go uncharged, particularly in cities like Philadelphia and LA. Those who have served time in harsh conditions deserve consideration. In places like Portland and Minneapolis, where violence occurred and no one was held accountable, the situation is troubling. I decided to grant pardons, similar to Joe Biden, who also pardoned numerous criminals. Questions should focus on his pardons, including those for his relatives and associates.

The weaponization of the justice department is concerning. Under Joe Biden, the department suggested that traditional Catholics could be considered domestic terrorists and indicated that individuals protesting school board policies might be investigated for terrorism. This politicization of the justice department is alarming, and we should not exacerbate the situation by allowing anyone appointed to the federal government to demand a pardon upfront. This could lead to a troubling precedent where appointments come with the expectation of immunity alongside a salary.

Have you ever heard of someone innocent receiving a preemptive pardon? It's unusual, especially when it's the president's family involved. Seeking preemptive pardons raises questions about guilt; if there's no wrongdoing, why ask for one? Such actions suggest that crimes may have occurred, even if not publicly known. If pardons are issued, they might be framed as protecting family reputations from external threats. The notion of a permanent pardon raises eyebrows, especially for individuals like Giuliani and the president's children, who haven't been convicted of crimes. If the president pardons them, many would interpret it as an admission of guilt. Meanwhile, there are still legal avenues to pursue accountability for any wrongdoing.

Joy, again, our investigation currently is civil in nature. It is not criminal. Our civil suit will continue, whether he's president or not. After January 20 at 12:00, the investigation will continue. There’s no way a potential pardon for Trump or his three eldest kids would shield them from ongoing inquiries. He cannot pardon himself; he could step down and allow the vice president, vice president Pence, to pardon him. It’s expected he would pardon family members, his son-in-law, and others in his administration, then step down and let the vice president do the pardoning again; he is pardoned from federal crimes but not from state crimes. Last year I introduced a bill in the state legislature to close the pardon loophole, now law in New York, ensuring President Trump cannot avoid justice there.

Mike, it wasn't surprising that Joe Biden pardoned his family at the end of his term. The Hunter Biden pardon indicated that James Biden, who was involved in Hunter's business dealings, would also be pardoned. If Hunter's activities were criminal, the new Justice Department could have pursued investigations through James. The Biden family's involvement in these deals raises concerns about potential crimes, and the pardons aim to prevent any investigations. With a pre-pardon, there’s no basis for launching an investigation, as the Justice Department would lose the ability to seize evidence or documents related to the case.

On election day, imagine heading to the polls while Donald Trump, convicted of felonies, won't be able to vote. If we deny reality as a party, we'll end up with four more years of Joe Biden. When my colleagues supported Trump even if he was a felon, they confirmed his lies to the American people. Timidity in taking on Trump will be sensed by others like Xi, Putin, the Ayatollah, border cruisers, and criminals in our streets, who will take advantage of this failure of leadership. We need to embrace the old American idea that every person, including the president, is responsible for their own conduct. As president, I will work for the people, earning their trust and votes. Thank you, governor.

Speaker 1 explains the investigation is civil in nature and not criminal, and that "our civil suit will continue, whether he's president or not." After January 20 at 12:00, "our investigation will continue." Regarding pardons, "There’s no way a potential pardon for Trump or his three eldest kids would shield them from anything you're investigating." He adds, "He cannot pardon himself," but "he could step down and allow the vice president, vice president Pence, to pardon him," and "I suspect that he will pardon his family members, his children, his son-in-law, and individuals in his administration, as well as some of his close associates." Then "at some point in time, he will step down and allow the vice president to pardon him." He notes that "he is pardoned from federal crimes, but he is not pardoned from state crimes." He says, "Last year I introduced a bill in the state legislature, which would close the pardon loophole so that individuals such as the president of The United States would not evade justice. ... it is now the law in the state of New York. President Trump cannot avoid justice in the great state of New York."

I've put an end to the weaponization of government. A prime example of this was when a sitting president was allowed to viciously prosecute a political opponent, like myself. But how did that turn out? Not too good. Not too good at all.

Have you ever heard of someone innocent receiving a preemptive pardon? It's typically reserved for those close to the president, like family or associates. Seeking such pardons raises questions about guilt; if someone is innocent, why would they need one? Preemptive pardons suggest that crimes may have been committed, even if not publicly known. If the president issues these pardons, it may be framed as protecting his family from external threats. The obsession with pardons indicates concern over potential criminal culpability. The idea of a permanent pardon raises further questions about accountability. If figures like Rudy Giuliani receive pardons, many would interpret that as an admission of guilt, questioning the necessity of such actions if there were no wrongdoing.

The speaker emphasizes that the Department of Justice should not be politicized. This stance has been consistently expressed by the president during the campaign and throughout his time in the White House.

Speaker 1 notes that there are thousands of ongoing investigations and prosecutions in the country, and that some involve people and entities the president has previously criticized and believes should be investigated. He says this is not pressure and will not keep him up at night, except to ensure every case is investigated to the fullest extent of the law using all available resources. Regarding weaponization, he argues that it has become a contested word, but says it means nothing to him because it is “completely false.” He contends that for four years, some in the room witnessed weaponization of the department like never before, with a president indicted four times by the department, and with the department assisting two local district attorneys in going after the president. He also asserts the department stood idly by while states tried to keep President Trump off the ballot. He emphasizes that the past four years saw this pattern, and insists that today’s department is changing, not pursuing political enemies but pursuing justice as the president has repeatedly said he wants. He acknowledges the ongoing media narrative about weaponization but rejects it, stating it happens not to be true. He emphasizes that tens of thousands of prosecutors across the country are putting bad guys in jail, something that, in his view, did not happen as it should have in the past four years. He concludes by reiterating his commitment to continue this work, saying it will happen tomorrow and in the coming days.

I am announcing that my campaign has sent a letter to all the other candidates in this race, including Mike Pence, Nikki Haley, Larry Elder, RFK Junior, Marianne Williamson, Doug Bugram, Perry Johnson, Chris Christie, and Ron DeSantis. In this letter, I commit to pardoning Donald J. Trump if I am elected as the next US president on January 20, 2025. I have challenged every other candidate to either sign this commitment or explain why they won't. It may be difficult for them to sign because the donor class is pressuring Republican candidates to distance themselves from Trump. I believe we need to break free from the influence of the donor class and prioritize the interests of our country. I want to win this election by upholding the principles of our founding fathers, not by eliminating competition through arrests. I challenge the Biden administration and my fellow contenders to address this commitment.

I disagree with the ruling that the justice department's process for picking special counsels is illegal. We believe it is constitutional and have appealed the decision. This process has been used for decades, including in previous administrations, and has been upheld by every court that has reviewed it, including the Supreme Court.

A prosecutor should begin with a crime and then seek a name, not the other way around. The issue over the past four years has been the targeting of Donald Trump, starting from his 2016 campaign, leading to numerous investigations against him. As attorney general, I will not politicize the office or target individuals based on political affiliation. Justice will be applied fairly across the country. We need to unite and move forward; otherwise, we risk losing our country.

President Trump is reportedly considering preemptive pardons, raising concerns about the precedent it sets and how it affects perceptions of the U.S. as a nation of laws. This approach to pardons and policy-making via social media will not be part of our administration. We will adopt a fundamentally different approach to the justice system.

President Trump is reportedly considering a series of preemptive pardons. This raises concerns about the precedent it sets and how it affects the perception of the U.S. as a nation of laws. In our administration, we will not adopt this approach to pardons or make policy decisions through social media. Our focus will be on a fundamentally different approach to the justice system.