Hacker News Reader

Comment by noisy_boy | Hacker News Reader

There should be a limit on the number of pardons a president can do during their tenure so that they have to at least think a bit before using it. It is a very powerful tool that actually allows a last resort. But this kind of egregious abuse of it's power means it needs to be kept in check.

View on HN

It'd take a constitutional amendment. So all we can do is not elect someone who will trade pardons for money (on this scale).

Eh, or the next POTUS can just drone strike whoever has been pardoned by the previous one. Immune for official acts and all that.

I remember there being an article in The Onion or something similar "Supreme Court grants presidency complete immunity; dies in drone strike."

Lincoln pardoned basically the entire Confederacy. I'm not sure what the expert opinion is on that but it seems legit.

Well, after killing many of them.

Right, the ability to pardon is a diplomatic tool. Sad that it's being used as a get your buddies out of jail free card or a way to collect donations.

I think at this point whatever policy differences between us are probably secondary to just putting people in power, literally anyone, who aren't so corrupt it would be called too heavy handed in fiction.

Or just not have pardons at all.

This.

The Indian constitution too gives the President the power to pardon someone convicted. However, the Supreme Court has since clarified that this power is not absolute, and the court can subject it to a judicial review. ( https://compass.rauias.com/current-affairs/pardoning-powers-... ).

You're comparing our (flawed) democracy with a fake democracy.

Honest question- which one is fake?

At this point in time? Both

What about two years ago?

Is it a democracy if there are only two parties? Is it a democracy if people vote to chose electors, not for the actual candidate?

One can argue China is a democracy, they have elections as well.

> Is it a democracy if there are only two parties? Is it a democracy if people vote to chose electors, not for the actual candidate?

I don't see why not

Parent poster was considering ways on how to limit abuse of a certain political power, and I thought they may be interested on how other countries handle it. (Not though that I am not sure our indian approach is necessarily right - the Supreme Court of India is considering the Presidential powers of pardon only as a remedy to some judicial injustice / miscarriage. But sometimes there can be a political reason too, to pardon somebody. For example, someone cited the Lincoln example of pardoning the confederates. Legally, that may not be sound (ignoring crimes committed by them) but politically such things may be necessary to heal a society and create politically stability. And in such cases, the judiciary is not the right institution to make a judgement call on whether a political pardon was right or not.)

> You're comparing our (flawed) democracy

Sweet child. It was never a full democracy, I'd qualify it as a developing democracy, depending on how much damage this administration does, and when does USA enact the urgent reforms needed to transform into a full-fledged democracy.

Right now it's an oligarchy, capitalism as a political system. Money is a crucial component of campaigns, bribery is rampant, impunity becomes progressively less subtle. It had good PR after WW2 though, but reality hasn't matched the propaganda.

I say it from another eroding democracy, it seems like true democracies are incompatible with populous countries.

I think you've mixed up India and the US. For what it's worth, India still has options. The US is a sham democracy.

How would that help? They'll reserve the pardons only for corruption and leave the regular folks, eg with fake convictions , without justice. You're not checking any power without addressing the cause

> There should be a limit

There is, and the Constitution says the limit is impeachment and removal from office by Congress. That won't happen unless we fix how we talk about the ones responsible, to wit:

The Republican Party pardoned these criminals. The Republican Party is snatching Americans off the streets. The Republican Party is using the military to murder people on boats. The Republican Party is demolishing down the White House. The Republican Party is deporting people over free speech. The Republican Party has imposed the biggest tax increase in living memory with tariffs/import-taxes. The Republican Party is going pay itself your tax dollars in "lawsuit settlements".

There were 4 years of his first term and now 10 months of... all this. Today there is zero possibility of an oversight or mistake, any legislator who won't impeach and convict is choosing to support these things.

Nothing will improve while those legislators believe the blame will sail past them and stick solely to Trump.

I don’t think the majority of voting Americans have problems with any of those acts though. Think Joe you pass in Walmart cares about what happens to the White House ballroom?

The White House is a pretty significant symbol of this country, so yeah, I think they might care that a big chunk of it was just torn down.

Go to a Walmart in Ohio or Wisconsin and ask. Ask what % will change their next vote because of it

Please don't place the burden of proof on others with absurd tasks.

I think that's the wrong way to view the problem. Think about it this way: before Nixon resigned his approval rating was still 23%.

You can get a quarter of the country to say yes or not care for any given question no matter how obviously dangerous or stupid. But having a 25% approval rating would be very, very bad.

https://ohiocapitaljournal.com/2025/09/30/ohio-family-farmer...

https://upnorthnewswi.com/2025/10/20/wisconsin-soybean-farme...

What do they care about? Price of groceries? Health care maybe?

Red team win. Blue team crying amd punished, maybe bleeding.

I recall there being some… upset, when a previous resident planted a garden.

You think they're too dumb to understand the difference between "tearing down" and "renovating"?

I assure you, they are not.

> > a big chunk of it was just torn down

> You think they're too dumb to understand the difference between "tearing down" and "renovating"?

Are you? You think the East Wing is being "renovated"?

Renovation is renewal, repair, restoring function and safety.

What's happening instead? Knocking the safe and functional East Wing flat (walls, roof, both floors, 30+ internal rooms) and replacing it with a completely new structure with new foundations and a different purpose... and with a new footprint larger than the entire White House of 2024!

Nowhere even remotely close to the same thing. Might as well brag that you "repaired" your sedan by selling it and buying a new truck.

Yes, it is being renovated. Adding a new room is renovation.

They aren't demolishing the entire White House...

The East Wing isn't being renovated. It's gone, and being replaced with something else.

So the White House is being renovated then, right?

Bingo.

You keep using that word, but it doesn't mean what you want it to.

Renovation is as your interlocutor says, a restoration. Remodeling is what is happening there, tearing apart something and putting something new in its place. It's a more drastic and expensive work.

Fine, remodeling. The specific word is not finally the point. Incessant semantic pedantry doesn't change the fact that Trump is not destroying the White House.

Most people understand that any sort of "remodeling" or "renovation" often requires some demolition first.

And I get your point, but that is a crucial distinction when you're talking about historical buildings. If said ballroom was simply an extension, no one would complain about the placement.

> Incessant semantic pedantry doesn't change the fact that Trump is not destroying the White House.

Incessant semantic pedantry? You mean like stridently defending that Trump is not destroying the White House, in response to a comment that didn’t claim that Trump was destroying the White House?

A chunk that hasn’t been around that long - but most people aren’t being told that part.

Polling on it has been bad even amongst Republicans it isn’t great.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/articles/devastating-poll-reveals...

The ballroom is scheduled be ready in January 2029 assuming no delays. But by that time Trump will be at the end of his term. So is he doing this for future presidents (would be very much unlike him) or is he planning to stick around after Jan 2029?

He wants to stick around

The life expectancy tables are kinda against it though

His father Fred Trump died at 93. In Jan 2029 Trump will only be 82... and will have another 10 years to go if he lives as long as his father.

Most of the people in that sample-data are poor and have less access to doctors and medicine.

Life-expectancy tables for multimillionaires and national politicians are probably significantly different.

I'd say Joe Biden showed us a nice illustration of how there's limits to what doctors can do, even if you're the world's most powerful man and there's billions at stake keeping you alive and functional.

He's making his mark like a dog on a fire hydrant.

Steve Bannon is doing countless interviews and shamelessly saying he will be president again in 2028.

technically, he is currently scheduled to be president for the entirety of 2028 because the election is in November 2028 and the presidential term ends on January 20, 2029.

but that's probably not what he meant.

It is one thing for Bannon to say it. It is another thing for a prominent sitting senator to say it [1]. (That would be senator Lindsey Graham.) I wish John McCain was still around... he would have had the courage to stand up and talk sense into these people.

[1] https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/5519134-lindsey-graham-d...

> I wish John McCain was still around... he would have had the courage to stand up and talk sense into these people.

At one point I would have agreed, but then in 2017, McCain made his "We will regret what we are about to do" speech before the R's removed the filibuster requirement for the Gorsuch confirmation. And as an Arizona voter, I switched my registration from Independent to Democrat.

> “I fear that someday we will regret what we are about to do. In fact, I am confident we will,” said Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz. “It is imperative we have a functioning Senate where the rights of the minority are protected regardless of which party is in power at the time.” > > Nonetheless, McCain voted with McConnell on the rules change, saying he felt he had no choice.

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation/senate-gop-invokes-nucle...

The bro grifters are going to bro grift because it gets them views and merch sales. Trump won't live that long: age, appearance, bad health habits, and obesity... and talk about not getting into heaven and display of extra NGAF by pardoning real pieces of work in a fury like he's already on his way out of office. By July 2026, Dear Orange Leader will most likely be pushing up daisies. Poor health and impaired decision-making skills are what are signaled.

Or maybe he just actually wants to improve things and isn't the monster you think he is?

Why not paint the whole thing Green or like fix the bridges?

The fact they have to host large dignitary parties on tents on the lawn is a huge security issue in these days of fiber optic drones.

People are complaining because Trump is doing it. Nobody would care - hell, the media would probably excitedly talking about the plans - if it were anyone else.

> Nobody would care - hell, the media would probably excitedly talking about the plans - if it were anyone else.

Bull! People would complain for any President who:

1. Lied to everyone promising it "wouldn't interfere with the current building." [0]

2. Broke federal laws which have always governed changes to these public properties and landmarks.

3. Unconstitutionally spent funds Congress did not approve-of, which applies regardless of whether those funds came in as taxes or as donations.

Feel free to detail what other President did the same actions and nobody cared. Trump's bad reputation comes from his bad actions like these, not the other way around.

[0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ru9kvsvf5Ao

Let's give the benefit of the doubt to the person who blatantly lies, and repeatedly has shown contempt for the law. We gotta be fair even if he and their cohorts aren't, right?

They were fed "waste fraud and abuse" in the beginning of the year. and suddenly it happens in broad daylight and people shrug?

At this point it's just brainwashing. Some people's principals are clearly less about their own conviction and treating all this like a sports team. Whoever team "wins", even if the stadium burns down around them.

It's privately funded so it doesn't fit under "waste, fraud, and abuse" in the same vein as things that use taxpayer money.

Conflict of interest by attempting to curry favor for his vanity project by making donations? That's a fair criticism.

It is allegedly privately funded.

Remember that Mexico allegedly would pay for the wall.

The ironic part is, we became the wall. Many immigrants stayed in Mexico because they couldn't cross to USA. Trump invited our wimpy president to a secret meeting, afterwards Mexico silently made the change of attitude from country of passage to destination.

Aren’t private donations supposed to go to the treasury where they are then allocated by congress?

Yeah: If someone donates money to the government for any purpose, that becomes government funds, and the Constitution says Congress and only Congress has the authority to decide where those go. Not the President.

So either Trump is doing this officially as a President, but with funding that is illegal/unconstitutional...

... Or the funding is legal, but Trump is doing it as a private citizen, which is a federal crime. [0]

[0] https://www.justice.gov/archives/jm/criminal-resource-manual...

The Supreme Court will jiggle the constitution and some forgotten legal precedent from the magna carta will fall out and 5-4 this is actually not a problem at all if you think about it.

Everything Trump does, is, by definition, a minor question.

There’s no chance that it’s actually privately funded, right?

> It's privately funded so it doesn't fit under "waste, fraud, and abuse" in the same vein as things that use taxpayer money.

Does Trump paying himself $230 million in taxpayer dollars in compensation for his various criminal prosecutions fit under "waste, fraud, and abuse"?

Doesn't matter if a trillion dollars was shat by God himself out of a plane into the Treasury. They failed to get historic district planning permission, they failed to save historic materials and objects, and lied about the plan. The now revealed plan is an gaudy, boorish, tasteless, and tacky abomination because that is the essence Trump.

”Libs hate this one weird trick - bribes isn’t waste, fraud and abuse!

Learn more at TrumpIsKing.gov”

> Some people's principals

Another (more charitable?) explanation is they just never make the connection:

> It’s easy to find authoritarians endorsing inconsistent ideas. Just present slogans and appeals to homey values, and then present slogans and bromides that invoke opposite values. The yea-saying authoritarian follower is likely to agree with all of them. Thus I asked both students and their parents to respond to, “When it comes to love, men and women with opposite points of view are attracted to each other.” Soon afterwards, in the same booklet, I pitched “Birds of a feather flock together when it comes to love.” High [Right-Wing Authoritarian scorers] typically agreed with both statements, even though they responded to the two items within a minute of each other.

-- https://theauthoritarians.org/ (2006 ebook)

I think they will care if their life gets worse, they just don't realize that these things are the cause.

> Think Joe you pass in Walmart cares about what happens to the White House ballroom?

Joe in Walmart thinks what Facebook memes and Fox News tell him to think. The same subversive forces that support the administration's lawlessness control the media diet of a plurality of Americans.

If you want Americans to care about wants going on, you have to inform them about it first.

> the Constitution says the limit is impeachment and removal from office by Congress

Why do you think most US presidents wait until the end of their term to pardon people?

I get it but it is imperative that this never happen. The reason is that a pardon is the only recourse the people have against the supreme court

Pardons by American presidents:

  - Bill Clinton: 459
  - George W. Bush: 200
  - Barack Obama: 1,927
  - Donald Trump (first term): 237
  - Joe Biden: 4,245
  - Donald Trump (second term): 1,600

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_people_pardoned_or_gra...

Off the top of my head regarding Biden's numbers: https://apnews.com/article/biden-commutes-2500-nonviolent-dr...

"he is seeking to undo “disproportionately long sentences compared to the sentences they would receive today under current law, policy, and practice.”

Numbers matter less than reasons. We should be asking why, not how many.

Would you be saying the same if the numbers were different?

Yes? Our boy in the big top hat pardoned the entire Confederacy—he's Pardons—Georg. Nobody would be dumb enough to use number of pardons to argue Lincoln was corrupt or abusing power.

4000 of Biden's pardons were mass pardons. 1500 of Trump's second term pardons are also a mass pardon of Jan 6, a decision I completely agree with. I would have pardoned them too because people were losing their minds over it to the point of not being able to be productive anymore. Honestly I feel the same way about the stupid laptop thing, you all clearly can't be normal about it so I'm ending it.

Yes. Smart people are educated to look at statistics with a critical eye, and we should be educating everyone we can do to the same.

Should just do away with the system entirely.

Add this to the list of abuses this admin has done. This is just one of the legal ones.

As opposed to the previous President? Pardon abuse is not something Trump invented.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com