cross-posted from: https://lemm.ee/post/60270545
This is some serious unprecedented bullshit. Especially when their charge was money laundering. Basically he is making money laundering legal. Go ahead and break the law. Trump will pardon you…
They wanted to be republic they said. Yet each day they look more and more like a monarchy or an authoritarian regime.
I have to assume all these crypto pardons are his team of lawyers trying to limit any precedent for inevitible lawsuits brought by people who lost money through TRUMP coin, once they’ve become disillusioned with the man. That, or he’s buying favors from people willing to do crimes.
He is buying favors more than anything.
Trump is a conman. He views his own supporters as rabble to be used and thrown away. Even dictators like Mao and Stalin actually did try to better their countries (the USSR was a major backwater before Stalin’s industrialization, but he industrialized it and made it a nuclear power).
I just don’t know why that seems to include someone like Hawk Tuah girl.
I think Trump is eventually going to make the same argument she does, “I didn’t know the the people I was working with were professional crypto grifters. I don’t know anything about crypto, I’m one of the victims here (who happened to also make out like a bandit). They just said it would be good for the ecosystem, and we would make some profit from the value we created.”
Can executive pardons get you out of a civil case, though? I thought it only excused you from criminal prosecution.
IANAL, but I assume lawyers are always looking for any precedent.
If someone claims someone else scammed them (in a civil or criminal case), they’re going to appeal to past similar cases. The civil case might even depend on the outcome of a criminal case against the same person. If they’re actually found not-guilty in a criminal case, then a civil case probably isn’t going to go anywhere. So if trump can convince a civil class action lawsuit to settle because it looks like they won’t win, then he can just pocket the difference.
All of this is my own conjecture as I see it, not to be considered factual.
Counter example: OJ Simpson wasn’t convicted in criminal court, but he lost the civil case brought by the victims’ families. If I recall from Trump’s various cases, there’s actually a lower burden of proof on civil cases. For a criminal case, you need to be found guilty beyond the shadow of a doubt. In a civil case, it’s just a preponderance of the evidence. (More likely than not.)
Good example. Hard to say if any of this rational will ever apply, though. I just expect him to either ignore anything a court says, or push it to the supreme court where the president is above the law.
Article that doesn’t require an email address:
https://thehill.com/opinion/criminal-justice/5224229-trump-makes-history-by-pardoning-a-corporation/
By the way, guess which company is involved with Melania Coin.
