121–130 of 310 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
not sure why you think it's intentional. But, created a github issue, and will work on that today/tonight.. yay GLM 5.1 :) https://github.com/vidluther/pardonned/issues/23
Stuff like this is very common. For example, at the start of Trump's second term, the whitehouse history page was changed to make democrat presidents look bad - https://www.whitehouse.gov/about-the-white-house/the-white-h...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Federal prosecutors have a ton of power. Conviction rates are 98-99%. This always gets thrown around, but the fact is they should be that high. Prosecutors shouldn't bring cases unless they have evidence of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, and DOJ prosectors don't (normally) screw around. When you see lower rates of conviction, as in the current ethically bankrupt administration, it's often malicious prosecution, a…
I would be fine if high conviction rates reflected prosecutor's only bringing good cases. It doesn't. It reflects the odds being stacked against you and it being so expensive and high risk to defend yourself. This high cost and power imbalance is used to force people into plea deals for crimes they didn't commit. Let me give you an example: 924C enhancements [1]. This is where certain drug or violent crimes being com…
There is a huge amount of hand-waving following this assertion without any evidence to back up the claim.
I'm not saying abuse of process doesn't happen, but this is just saying it can and then spelling out a big hypothetical without any proof that this practice is rampant.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There is no universe where any pardon is abolished unless there is a massive political shakeup. The entrenched political class is terrified of endangering their power and privilege even if individual players are ready to do it.
I've often wondered what would happen if a president explicitly offers to pardon anybody who murders members of Congress. Would they settle on reigning in the pardon power with an amendment? We're sort of already there. A lot of the Jan 6 rioters were openly trying to murder congressmen. The fact they weren't successful isn't super reassuring.
This single ruling will haunt the United States for the rest of its existence.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
not sure why you think it's intentional. But, created a github issue, and will work on that today/tonight.. yay GLM 5.1 :) https://github.com/vidluther/pardonned/issues/23
Stuff like this is very common. For example, at the start of Trump's second term, the whitehouse history page was changed to make democrat presidents look bad - https://www.whitehouse.gov/about-the-white-house/the-white-h...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've often wondered what would happen if a president explicitly offers to pardon anybody who murders members of Congress. Would they settle on reigning in the pardon power with an amendment? We're sort of already there. A lot of the Jan 6 rioters were openly trying to murder congressmen. The fact they weren't successful isn't super reassuring.
Nothing would happen, because SCOTUS decided to grant the president immunity for any crime committed in their official function, which would be the case here. It would literally be possible for the president to order congress killed, offer an automatic pardon to anyone carrying out this order, and establish a monarchy. This single ruling will haunt the United States for the rest of its existence.
That ruling is very broad and vague! I don't think killing Congress is part of POTUS's official job description.
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/trump-isnt-immune-from...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ford did real damage that day.
[flagged]
The US has many such instances unfortunately.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Nothing would happen, because SCOTUS decided to grant the president immunity for any crime committed in their official function, which would be the case here. It would literally be possible for the president to order congress killed, offer an automatic pardon to anyone carrying out this order, and establish a monarchy. This single ruling will haunt the United States for the rest of its existence.
>SCOTUS decided to grant the president immunity for any crime committed in their official function That ruling is very broad and vague! I don't think killing Congress is part of POTUS's official job description. https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/trump-isnt-immune-from...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>There's no reason to say that unless you know they're actively committing federal crimes in the present day. There are reasons. For example, you feel the justice system is going to be misused against them. Protection against future witch hunts basically. I don't think this is what's happening here, and trump is on record talking very explicitly about weaponising the state against his enemies himself, but it's probab…
That's what Biden did for Hunter right?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Like most political arguments, if you listen carefully; those who advocate for or against pardons, only want them to go one way. A pardon is only a protection against a 'vengeful administration' if that administration is not your party. Pardons are only a miscarriage of justice if those pardoned don't share your ideology.
That’s what ypu tell yourself to feel better. But it’s not true.
I certainly don't.