11-26-2020, 02:22 AM
On the low standard of proof used by Trump and his cronies when it comes to their own conspiracy theories (it feels like something’s going on & critics have to disprove them), there’s no doubt Trump pardoning Flynn and others after dangling pardons at a time they might testify against him was corrupt. But proving that in a court of law would be next to impossible. Ironically, he would then demand that type of conspiracy be proved beyond reasonable doubt by introducing cogent and admissible evidence. Hypocritical much?
Some suspected that Nixon did a deal with Ford that Ford would pardon him if he resigned. Ford rejected that accusation vehemently. He relied on a telephone call he made to Nixon in the presence of 2 witnesses in which he told Nixon he wouldn’t guarantee a pardon. Unless Trump and his lawyers are complete idiots (and that’s possible), Trump will have made sure he has plausible deniability.
Some suspected that Nixon did a deal with Ford that Ford would pardon him if he resigned. Ford rejected that accusation vehemently. He relied on a telephone call he made to Nixon in the presence of 2 witnesses in which he told Nixon he wouldn’t guarantee a pardon. Unless Trump and his lawyers are complete idiots (and that’s possible), Trump will have made sure he has plausible deniability.