Omg... fuck Trump yall.
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
29-08-2017, 06:42 AM
RE: Omg... fuck Trump yall.
Odd..

We didn't see this outrage when President Obama pardoned a person convicted of treason.


Seems to me that contempt of court over an arguably political legal maneuvering is a "slightly" lesser charge.

.......................................

The difference between prayer and masturbation - is when a guy is through masturbating - he has something to show for his efforts.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-08-2017, 06:48 AM
RE: Omg... fuck Trump yall.
(29-08-2017 06:42 AM)onlinebiker Wrote:  Odd..

We didn't see this outrage when President Obama pardoned a person convicted of treason.


Seems to me that contempt of court over an arguably political legal maneuvering is a "slightly" lesser charge.

[Semi irony mode]
Yeah but that guy wasn't an agent of the government.
I support pardons for Anarchists, revolutionaries, etc etc.
But not government officials. As a conflict of interest sort of thing.
[/Semi irony mode]

[Image: anigif_enhanced-26851-1450298712-2.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-08-2017, 07:00 AM
RE: Omg... fuck Trump yall.
(29-08-2017 06:42 AM)onlinebiker Wrote:  Odd..

We didn't see this outrage when President Obama pardoned a person convicted of treason.


Seems to me that contempt of court over an arguably political legal maneuvering is a "slightly" lesser charge.

Who did he pardon that had a conviction for treason?

One big difference is that President Obama used the system that was in place, letting the actual prosecuters and defense lawyers make a legal case for why a particular person, already convicted and sentenced, deserved to have a sentence shortened, commuted, or a pardon granted. Then he weighed their arguments before deciding on an action.

The outrage in this case is not that a pardon was given, but that it was given while bypassing all of the legal arguments and even before a sentence was decided on by the judge. That's an action that fits squarely under the "high crimes and misdemeaners" in the Constitution.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Rockblossom's post
29-08-2017, 07:02 AM
RE: Omg... fuck Trump yall.
Trump wants a police state. I keep saying that. He wants brutal police. Remember when he said "don't be too nice" regarding hitting the heads of suspects on the car door...

And the Trumpians who are being targeted by the Russian investigation are listening. There are pardons in their future.

He can't pardon himself though...

[Image: dobie.png]Science is the process we've designed to be responsible for generating our best guess as to what the fuck is going on. Girly Man
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Dom's post
29-08-2017, 07:04 AM
RE: Omg... fuck Trump yall.
(29-08-2017 07:02 AM)Dom Wrote:  Trump wants a police state. I keep saying that.

And the Trumpians who are being targeted by the Russian investigation are listening. There are pardons in their future.

He can't pardon himself though...

Tricky Dick showed him the answer to that nasty problem...

Dodgy

.......................................

The difference between prayer and masturbation - is when a guy is through masturbating - he has something to show for his efforts.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-08-2017, 07:04 AM
RE: Omg... fuck Trump yall.
(29-08-2017 04:18 AM)Thoreauvian Wrote:  
(29-08-2017 02:12 AM)Deesse23 Wrote:  He is trying to bypass the constututional separation of powers, not for the first time, but now pretty blatantly, and is announcing it proudly.

That is the real problem the US faces.

Just add this to Trump's list of impeachable offenses. His supporters may not see it, but many other people who understand the law do.

How is issuing a pardon considered to fall under "high crimes and misdemeanors?" I don't like the guy very much either, but I'm trying to understand how the POTUS exercising the powers granted to the office in Article II Section 2 of the Constitution is considered a crime. The only restrictions are the pardons cannot impact an impeachment process, and the crimes must be against the US (not state or civil). Seems like the pardon meets those requirements. So how does this reach the level of an impeachable offense? Additionally, if it were unlawful, wouldn't he have a hard time enacting the pardon? I'm sure he didn't say it and it was done. There were lawyers, judges and paperwork involved. I'm sure even the pardon process has checks and balances to ensure validity (I don't KNOW this to be the case, just proposing that the POTUS doesn't have dictator powers at this point in time). If he tried to pardon someone convicted in a State case, I'm sure that wouldn't have been enforceable, correct?

It pays to keep an open mind, but not so open your brains fall out.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-08-2017, 07:07 AM
RE: Omg... fuck Trump yall.
(29-08-2017 07:00 AM)Rockblossom Wrote:  Who did he pardon that had a conviction for treason?

One big difference is that President Obama used the system that was in place, letting the actual prosecuters and defense lawyers make a legal case for why a particular person, already convicted and sentenced, deserved to have a sentence shortened, commuted, or a pardon granted. Then he weighed their arguments before deciding on an action.

The outrage in this case is not that a pardon was given, but that it was given while bypassing all of the legal arguments and even before a sentence was decided on by the judge. That's an action that fits squarely under the "high crimes and misdemeaners" in the Constitution.

Explain that further if you would. Where in the Constitution does it say the issuing of pardons has to go through the process of "letting the actual prosecuters and defense lawyers make a legal case for why a particular person, already convicted and sentenced, deserved to have a sentence shortened, commuted, or a pardon granted."

It pays to keep an open mind, but not so open your brains fall out.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-08-2017, 07:18 AM
RE: Omg... fuck Trump yall.
(28-08-2017 11:36 PM)earmuffs Wrote:  He granted a full pardon to Arpaio...

What the fuck..?

Yea we know, is it horrible? Yes. Is it shocking? No. 45 has been shitting on the concept of western pluralism for 5 years.

Poetry by Brian37(poems by an atheist) Also on Facebook as BrianJames Rational Poet and Twitter Brianrrs37
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-08-2017, 07:20 AM
RE: Omg... fuck Trump yall.
(29-08-2017 07:07 AM)reeveseb Wrote:  
(29-08-2017 07:00 AM)Rockblossom Wrote:  Who did he pardon that had a conviction for treason?

One big difference is that President Obama used the system that was in place, letting the actual prosecuters and defense lawyers make a legal case for why a particular person, already convicted and sentenced, deserved to have a sentence shortened, commuted, or a pardon granted. Then he weighed their arguments before deciding on an action.

The outrage in this case is not that a pardon was given, but that it was given while bypassing all of the legal arguments and even before a sentence was decided on by the judge. That's an action that fits squarely under the "high crimes and misdemeaners" in the Constitution.

Explain that further if you would. Where in the Constitution does it say the issuing of pardons has to go through the process of "letting the actual prosecuters and defense lawyers make a legal case for why a particular person, already convicted and sentenced, deserved to have a sentence shortened, commuted, or a pardon granted."

I'm not a lawyer, so I'll have to explain my understanding as a layman. Any actual lawyers, feel free to correct me.

It has to do with the definition of "high crimes and misdemeaners" as it is used in the Constitution. It's a single term, as "high-crimes-and-misdemeaners" not as "he murdered seven poeple, then he jaywalked!" HC&M refers to misuse of power that can only be done from high office.

Quote:The charge of high crimes and misdemeanors covers allegations of misconduct peculiar to officials, such as perjury of oath, abuse of authority, bribery, intimidation, misuse of assets, failure to supervise, dereliction of duty, unbecoming conduct, and refusal to obey a lawful order. Offenses by officials also include ordinary crimes, but perhaps with different standards of proof and punishment than for nonofficials, on the grounds that more is expected of officials by their oaths of office.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_crime...sdemeanors

This particular pardon might be seen (or not, depending on who is making the call) as an abuse of power to pardon someone for personal reasons ( bypassing the judicial process) or as a personal favor to a friend/supporter.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Rockblossom's post
29-08-2017, 07:25 AM
RE: Omg... fuck Trump yall.
(29-08-2017 07:07 AM)reeveseb Wrote:  
(29-08-2017 07:00 AM)Rockblossom Wrote:  Who did he pardon that had a conviction for treason?

One big difference is that President Obama used the system that was in place, letting the actual prosecuters and defense lawyers make a legal case for why a particular person, already convicted and sentenced, deserved to have a sentence shortened, commuted, or a pardon granted. Then he weighed their arguments before deciding on an action.

The outrage in this case is not that a pardon was given, but that it was given while bypassing all of the legal arguments and even before a sentence was decided on by the judge. That's an action that fits squarely under the "high crimes and misdemeaners" in the Constitution.

Explain that further if you would. Where in the Constitution does it say the issuing of pardons has to go through the process of "letting the actual prosecuters and defense lawyers make a legal case for why a particular person, already convicted and sentenced, deserved to have a sentence shortened, commuted, or a pardon granted."

It obviously doesn't say these things, otherwise the pardon would not be a fait accompli. As it stands though, it's transparently obvious that this is not a pardon with any solid reasoning behind it (other than benefits to Trump's own interests), regardless that it's perfectly a legal pardon. It's kind of amazing that your president has such wide powers. Also kind of amazing that though everyone knows he's not fit to make such a decision he's STILL able to launch nuclear missiles more or less on a whim - unless someone disobeys him.

We'll love you just the way you are
If you're perfect -- Alanis Morissette
(06-02-2014 03:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  And I'm giving myself a conclusion again from all the facepalming.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: