81–90 of 797 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's actually explicitly in the Constitution: "The President...shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offences against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment." Article II, Section 2
So it's only possible if it was something that was done against the US?
Seven years is still a long time for whistle blowing. I'm glad to see she is still getting released though. It's important to note commuting the sentence is not a pardon. Chelsea will still have this conviction for the rest of her life. I know there is a lot of controversy with Manning compared to Wikileaks et. al. as far as not redacting documents or using a discriminating news source to filter them. Still, I oppose…
How do you know what Obama's motive is? Were you at the meetings? Did you read the memos? Do you have a brain-to-brain interface or have you hacked his Blackberry?
Should he do nothing good or positive, so that you don't suspect him of manipulating people?
Now pardon Snowden
And admit you're the cause of the Assange investigation which has kept him locked up in an embassy for years as well.
Why can the US president meddle with the sentence of a convict? Isn't that against the separation of powers? Not that I have anything against this guy Manning in particular, just asking why is this "tolerable" in a democracy. Isn't it a risk, that the president can pardon whoever he wants?
The president is granted the power to pardon by the same document that establishes the separation of powers. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_Two_of_the_United_Stat... It's not a super long document. http://constitutionus.com/
Good. I wish that he would just pardon her, though. I don't want the next administration to somehow undo this.
She can't be tried again though, so how would they undo it?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's actually explicitly in the Constitution: "The President...shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offences against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment." Article II, Section 2
So it's only possible if it was something that was done against the US?
Why can the US president meddle with the sentence of a convict? Isn't that against the separation of powers? Not that I have anything against this guy Manning in particular, just asking why is this "tolerable" in a democracy. Isn't it a risk, that the president can pardon whoever he wants?
The President in in charge of federal law enforcement; the risk of non-enforcement is already greater than the risk of random pardons.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, it seems very cowardly and very much passing the buck and doesn't acknowledge that what she did was justified at all, just that mercy was granted.
Isn't that exactly what Obama was trying for? I've never read any statements from the Obama administration that makes it seem like they find anything about this case justified or acceptable.
A criminal that's being granted a shorter sentence, not the "support" for someones actions a pardon would be.
Now pardon Snowden
I sort of wonder if it would matter. Whether they should or not, I really doubt the parts of the government he pissed off will forgive him just because they are told to.