Trump issued some pardons today

  • Thread starter Thread starter F_Marturana
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
vz71 said:
Why?
The unwarranted assumptions wouldn’t cease either way.

At least this way he controls the narrative.
Click to expand...
No, he doesn’t control the narrative at all. It’s just out there that he pardoned the Blackwater murdrers. Blackwater is owned by Eric Prince, Betsy DeVOs’ brother. Big contributors.

Owning the narrative would be releasing a reason, such as he didn’t think justice was served or the sentences were overly harsh. He hasn’t said anything, has he?
 
Years before my mother passed, my wife and I would have to stop by the house frequently.

I always made it a point to wear a shirt that was wrinkled.

My wife finally asked since all it did was make her complain. And I told her…I control what the complaint will be.

You see, she was going to fuss about something.
And unfortunately she would also hurt people as she complained.
This way, I knew the complaint was innocuous and didn’t have much spillover to hurt others.

I submit to you that if an explanation for Trump’s pardon would really have stopped the complaint, and he has not done so, then he probably wants the focus there.
 
First degree murder. Pardoned.

Yet lesser crimes like felony murder executed.

Justice by mood swing.
 
vz71 said:
Why?
The unwarranted assumptions wouldn’t cease either way.
Click to expand...
Of course not.
And the same people criticizing Trump here have supported Obama and Biden.
The 542 drone strikes that Obama authorized killed an estimated 3,797 people, including 324 civilians. As he reportedly told senior aides in 2011: “Turns out I’m really good at killing people. Didn’t know that was gonna be a strong suit of mine.”
Click to expand...

Four years of double standards and hypocrisy from the left.
 
vz71 said:
You are squarely in the realm of opinion based calumny.
Where is the evidence?
Click to expand...
You misuse the term ‘calumny’. Your repeated call for evidence on which my opinions are based is just an avoidance of probability and a quibbling about facts which have been stated. No other president has issued pardons in the manner of Trump and I can recall controversial pardons for the last 50 years. Trump has gone outside the DOJ’s pardon commission and its recommendations in order to make political points by excusing his cronies.

If you believe these statements to be in error, explain where I have gone wrong.
billsherman said:
Conflict of interest, like the lives of people conceived in rape and incest, are meaningless to him.
Click to expand...
Remember high officials (such as Rockefeller) putting their holdings in a blind trust? Trump blithely ignored concerns about his business conflicts.
Victoria33 said:
It is my understanding that Obama pardoned a domestic terrorist, maybe more, one has to go through and search down that information.
Click to expand...
That’s inaccurate and even if true would only be a very thin excuse.
 
Last edited:
Nepperhan said:
Trump has gone outside the DOJ’s pardon commission and its recommendations in order to make political points by excusing his cronies.
Click to expand...
That is an opinion.
And one that needs to be backed with evidence.
My repeated calls for evidence are perfectly reasonable.

You are the one making the claim, you need to be the one to back it.
 
vz71 said:
That is an opinion.
Click to expand...
Nope, that’s a fact. Do you think the pardon attorney favored clemency for Roger Stone and Manafort?

From the standards used by the department:
“In general, a pardon is granted on the basis of the petitioner’s demonstrated good conduct for a substantial period of time after conviction and service of sentence. The Department’s regulations require a petitioner to wait a period of at least five years after conviction or release from confinement (whichever is later) before filing a pardon application (28 CFR Section 1.2).”

“The extent to which a petitioner has accepted responsibility for his or her criminal conduct and made restitution to its victims are important considerations. A petitioner should be genuinely desirous of forgiveness rather than vindication. … Persons seeking a pardon on grounds of innocence or miscarriage of justice bear a formidable burden of persuasion.”

News report: “Trump has moved even more slowly than his predecessors, who acted on hundreds or thousands of petitions by the end of four years in office. And rather than consult with the Justice Department’s pardon attorney for recommendations, Trump has routinely subverted the process and largely favored political allies and those who are well-connected for clemency.”


Now, what conclusion should a thinking, rational person draw from all that? By the way, a pardon won’t save Manafort: attorney ethics folks deal with what a lawyer did, not convictions. He remains disbarred.
 
Last edited:
Nepperhan said:
Nope, that’s a fact.
Click to expand...
I understand you have difficulty with the difference between fact and opinion.
I am sorry, but there is no further that it can be explained.
Facts can be backed up by logic, history, science.
Opinions cannot.
In your case, you have decided what motivation may be and have proclaimed it to be fact.
It is not…unless you have something to back it with.
Nepperhan said:
Do you think the pardon attorney favored clemency for Roger Stone and Manafort?
Click to expand...
It doesn’t matter what I think.
It would be conjecture. As it is when you claim to know his motivation.
Nepperhan said:
Now, what conclusion should a thinking, rational person draw from all that?
Click to expand...
None. We have facts and then we have conjecture. Anything you claim beyond what is known is just conjecture, not fact.
 
Now getting back to my original point…
I would be interested to see this same study for Clinton, Bush, Obama, Bush Sr., and Reagan.

I have a feeling it would look much the same.

Think about it. To get the pardon, the president must be familiar with the names at least…which means someone had to mention it…which means it is likely someone with a tie somewhere.
 
vz71 said:
I understand you have difficulty with the difference between fact and opinion.
Click to expand...
Trump went outside the Justice Department procedures to pardon people, many of whom were his cronies. That is a fact.

Trump made political points in pardoning people like Roger Stone. That is a fact, too.

Manafort was Trump’s campaign manager! ““As a result of blatant prosecutorial overreach, Mr. Manafort has endured years of unfair treatment and is one of the most prominent victims of what has been revealed to be perhaps the greatest witch hunt in American history,” the White House press secretary said in a statement announcing the pardon.”
https://kansaspublicradio.org/npr-news/trump-pardons-roger-stone-paul-manafort-and-charles-kushner

Arriving at an opinion after reviewing facts is not conjecture. For someone to ignore the obvious is intellectual dishonesty.
vz71 said:
Think about it. To get the pardon, the president must be familiar with the names at least…which means someone had to mention it…which means it is likely someone with a tie somewhere.
Click to expand...
Please review the stated procedures for clemency of the Department of Justice. Presidential familiarity and political ties are no where mentioned.
 
Last edited:
Nepperhan said:
Trump went outside the Justice Department procedures to pardon people, many of whom were his cronies. That is a fact.
Click to expand...
I disagree with the term cronies.
Such a charged statement smacks of heavy bias and opinion.
Nepperhan said:
Trump made political points in pardoning people like Roger Stone. That is a fact, too.
Click to expand...
No, this is opinion.
There are a variety of things that must be present to make this a political point. None of which can be known without some statement from Trump explaining the specific point he was trying to make.
Nepperhan said:
Manafort was Trump’s campaign manager!
Click to expand...
So what?
That still doesn’t make your opinion fact.
Nepperhan said:
Arriving at an opinion after reviewing facts is not conjecture.
Click to expand...
So you admit it is opinion.
Very good.
I agree.
Nepperhan said:
Presidential familiarity and political ties are no where mentioned.
Click to expand...
Nor are they excluded.
But it still doesn’t make fact out of opinion.
 
Last edited:
F_Marturana said:
The Blackwater pardons killed a group of civilians.

Arbitrary and capricious.
Click to expand...
seems there is more to the story but that has got lost in translation

the charges were originally all dropped before politics got involved

it wasn’t an Mỹ Lai type massacre as some are saying

what would you have done if you were being targeted in a war zone?
 
No no no no.

There was a first degree murder conviction.

Trump pardoned that conviction.

The murder victims were civilian men women and children.

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

This little boy was shot in the head. His brain fell on the floor at his father’s feet.

Trump pardoned his killer.

The killer was convicted of first degree murder, and was sentenced to life in prison without parole.
 
If the verdict was incorrect there is an appeals process one goes through.

There wasn’t even any judicial review for this.

Inconsistent mood swing justice.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top