2aHawaii
General Topics => Political Discussion => Topic started by: changemyoil66 on January 20, 2025, 08:33:53 AM
-
He preemptively pardoned: Fauci, Gen. Miley (ret), his family. Just to name a few.
-
He preemptively pardoned: Fauci, Gen. Miley (ret), his family. Just to name a few.
Protecting those who kissed his A$$.
Pardoned some members of his family for unspecified crimes. LOL.
If stupidity was a crime they all would be in jail for life.
-
Pardons should be for a specific crime that a person is convicted of. He set a dangerous precedent. I am glad that pupule lolo jackass is out of office.
-
These blanket pardons are going to backfire someday. Someones going to be a spy or serial killer and it'd be pardoned.
-
These blanket pardons are going to backfire someday. Someones going to be a spy or serial killer and it'd be pardoned.
Usually the pardons are for past crimes, not future, so at least he's not writing blank checks for future serial killers or embezzlers.
These pardons are an implicit admission that there were crimes committed under his watch, and he not only enabled them but protected the criminals all this time from prosecution.
There's also a great chance that the people he's pardoning (a) paid him off in some form or another, and/or (b) have something incriminating on him, his family or someone else he's protecting.
Nobody in DC, especially a Democrat, acts out of kindness or righteousness. There has to be something in it for his team.
-
Usually the pardons are for past crimes, not future, so at least he's not writing blank checks for future serial killers or embezzlers.
Meant in past tense, like Faucci has a freezer full of body parts.
-
I can understand it if he was the target of unjust political prosecution, but he isn't and never will be.
-
He didn't pardon Hillary. That's a rats next of evil ripe for the picking.
-
He didn't pardon Hillary. That's a rats next of evil ripe for the picking.
She didn't directly target Trump or try to undermine him when he was POTUS. She talked some shit, but she held no government position to do anything....legally anyways.
-
She didn't directly target Trump or try to undermine him when he was POTUS. She talked some shit, but she held no government position to do anything....legally anyways.
Yeah, claiming Russians hacked the DNC servers, refusing to allow the FBI to access those servers, and paying for the Steele dossier accusing Trump of all kinds of bad acts while colluding with the Russians to interfere in the election didn't undermine Trump at all for 3 years while he and his staff were investigated and spied on during both his campaign and administration.
Hillary didn't have to be in office to do all that. She was the official head of the party, and that gave her enough control to reach her slimy hand in anywhere she wanted.
-
Yeah, claiming Russians hacked the DNC servers, refusing to allow the FBI to access those servers, and paying for the Steele dossier accusing Trump of all kinds of bad acts while colluding with the Russians to interfere in the election didn't undermine Trump at all for 3 years while he and his staff were investigated and spied on during both his campaign and administration.
Hillary didn't have to be in office to do all that. She was the official head of the party, and that gave her enough control to reach her slimy hand in anywhere she wanted.
I blame the fake news more for carrying the story and spreading misinformation for years.
-
I blame the fake news more for carrying the story and spreading misinformation for years.
Without the fake dossier paid for by the Clinton campaign, there would have been no story for the MSM to pounce on.
-
Without the fake dossier paid for by the Clinton campaign, there would have been no story for the MSM to pounce on.
That is true. But I also assume that many like her pay for intel. I also assume that most don't get published or the attention the Steele got due to it not being verified. But in this circumstance, the fake news was looking at anything and even going to making stuff up to try to get Trump out.
We also know that the Russians offered Trumps people intel on Hillary, but they turned it down. For anyone who doesn't believe me, this was in the Mueller report.
-
Good discussion of all the damage Biden has done to the Justice system.
https://youtu.be/Q0KD2HD4OO0
-
Theres rumors that FL is going to go after Fauci and still can.
-
Theres rumors that FL is going to go after Fauci and still can.
Did Biden churn out preemptive pardons for all the people who worked for and with Fauci? I doubt it.
And as we all know, there are always advisors and managers who do more to drive the train than just the guy with the conductor hat.
i'd like to see all the guilty employees investigated, not just the guy regurgitating what those people fed him.
-
There’s no such thing as a preemptive pardon.
All he managed to accomplish was to make everyone on his list look guilty as hell.
Maybe that’s why he didn’t pardon himself? Throw everyone else to the wolves and hope we forget about him?
-
Maybe that’s why he didn’t pardon himself? Throw everyone else to the wolves and hope we forget about him?
He's protected. You don't be a yes man/rubber stamp man and not be protected later. Plus at his age and mental health state, he doesn't care.
-
There’s no such thing as a preemptive pardon.
All he managed to accomplish was to make everyone on his list look guilty as hell.
Maybe that’s why he didn’t pardon himself? Throw everyone else to the wolves and hope we forget about him?
That's the real damage. Many have been calling his clan The Biden Crime Family, based on his dealings for 50 years in government involving foreign money and family members -- Hunter in particular. These pardons help give the impression there must be more than smoke where the Right has been screaming, "Fire!"
I guess the precedence now is to pardon an entire WH staff and all Executive Agency directors when a president leaves office as a shield against any consequences for all their crimes committed in pursuit of the party's agenda. Might as well give qualified immunity to all government staffers for life.
-
I don't know through what avenue it would take but I would be very interested to see if this could be taken up to the supreme court. Not sure it would win on constitutional grounds but it would be nice to see some pushback. Who knows, maybe this will lead to discussions to remove the pardon power?
-
(https://i.imgur.com/FFMagRC.png)
-
I don't know through what avenue it would take but I would be very interested to see if this could be taken up to the supreme court. Not sure it would win on constitutional grounds but it would be nice to see some pushback. Who knows, maybe this will lead to discussions to remove the pardon power?
Do some research and get back to us on the justification the founders relied on to bestow the authority to pardon prisoners onto the President.
-
IMO, Biden is announcing that the justice system, at least at the federal level, is either broken, easily abused (politicized), or both. He obviously feels the people whose sentences he commuted were not tried or sentenced justly, and he's therefore stepping in to balance the law against just and fair treatment.
That, or Hunter gave him a list of drug dealers, suppliers and users he wanted to start partying with again.
The vast number of his orders are commutations. As for the preemptive pardons with no charges or verdicts to name for family and administration cohorts, the motivation is too obvious.
Pardons have a legitimate purpose. What Biden is doing exceeds those bounds by a lot. He's intentionally putting up walls around his chosen few to shield them from the consequences of their crimes. That's not the purpose of his Constitutional power of the pardon.
-
I wonder if HI's Nick Ocho (I don't remember his last name) was pardoned? He ran against Adrian Tam and lost. He was also called racist as he's a member of the Proud Boys. Even though he's having a child with a black woman. And the HI Proud Boys chapter were half Asian as I saw pics of their outings to bars and karaoke type events.
-
I wonder if HI's Nick Ocho (I don't remember his last name) was pardoned? He ran against Adrian Tam and lost. He was also called racist as he's a member of the Proud Boys. Even though he's having a child with a black woman. And the HI Proud Boys chapter were half Asian as I saw pics of their outings to bars and karaoke type events.
Ochs
Yes, and the libs at CB are crying about it
https://www.civilbeat.org/2025/01/hawai%CA%BBi-proud-boy-founder-us-army-soldier-get-jan-6-pardons-from-trump/
-
I wonder if HI's Nick Ocho (I don't remember his last name) was pardoned? He ran against Adrian Tam and lost. He was also called racist as he's a member of the Proud Boys. Even though he's having a child with a black woman. And the HI Proud Boys chapter were half Asian as I saw pics of their outings to bars and karaoke type events.
14 had their sentences commuted (no pardon, just released from prison with convictions intact).
For the rest:
...grant a full, complete and unconditional pardon to all other individuals convicted
of offenses related to events that occurred at or near the United States Capitol on
January 6, 2021;
https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/01/granting-pardons-and-commutation-of-sentences-for-certain-offenses-relating-to-the-events-at-or-near-the-united-states-capitol-on-january-6-2021/
If he is in the second group, then he gets a pardon, ... and she gets a pardon, .... everyone gets a pardon!! :geekdanc:
-
Ochs
Yes, and the libs at CB are crying about it
https://www.civilbeat.org/2025/01/hawai%CA%BBi-proud-boy-founder-us-army-soldier-get-jan-6-pardons-from-trump/
Wow, they even went after him again after SCOTUS said they overstepped.
-
Wow, they even went after him again after SCOTUS said they overstepped.
Why were comments for that article disabled?
Hmmmm.... :geekdanc: :rofl: :popcorn:
-
Why were comments for that article disabled?
Hmmmm.... :geekdanc: :rofl: :popcorn:
Over the past few years, CB has been disabling comments on things like the 2A too.
-
Do some research and get back to us on the justification the founders relied on to bestow the authority to pardon prisoners onto the President.
That is an interesting topic but doesn't really address what I raised. It would be part of the ultimate decision of course though
-
That is an interesting topic but doesn't really address what I raised. It would be part of the ultimate decision of course though
You get an "F" for the assignment.
Had you bothered, you would have answered your own question. But, I get that's not how lazy people operate. Keep doing those hit and run posts like this. It's what you enjoy.
-
I'm wondering why Biden didn't include himself and his wife in the crime family last-minute pardons.
There's probably no precedent of a president pardoning himself preemptively. If he tried that, maybe it won't hold up?
The big question I have is, did he pardon the people who have evidence against him, including Hunter? If so, those get out of jail free cards have a flip side. Anyone who can be a witness against Biden can no longer use the 5th Amendment to stay silent. If there's no fear of self incrimination, then they would be required to testify truthfully or else they would risk criminal charges.
i'd be happy if the pardons he issued wind up being what finally sinks him.
-
I'm wondering why Biden didn't include himself and his wife in the crime family last-minute pardons.
There's probably no precedent of a president pardoning himself preemptively. If he tried that, maybe it won't hold up?
The big question I have is, did he pardon the people who have evidence against him, including Hunter? If so, those get out of jail free cards have a flip side. Anyone who can be a witness against Biden can no longer use the 5th Amendment to stay silent. If there's no fear of self incrimination, then they would be required to testify truthfully or else they would risk criminal charges.
i'd be happy if the pardons he issued wind up being what finally sinks him.
At his age and mental state, he wouldn't notice being in jail or would get a home arrest type sentence. As for Jill, she's just as guilty for knowing his state and protecting him, knowing it's screwing our nation. Loyalty toward your husband is 1 thing, but not while it screws millions world wide.
-
At his age and mental state, he wouldn't notice being in jail or would get a home arrest type sentence. As for Jill, she's just as guilty for knowing his state and protecting him, knowing it's screwing our nation. Loyalty toward your husband is 1 thing, but not while it screws millions world wide.
I don't want Biden to go to jail as much as I want the entire crime family exposed. After that, people can sue for reparations against them which would hurt way more than jail time. Take away the money they illegally accumulated. Make them all poor.
Leftists and Democrats refuse to accept their party leaders and top officials are corrupt. Exposing that and proving they were vile, greedy people breaking laws needs to happen so a few million noses can be rubbed in it.
-
You get an "F" for the assignment.
Had you bothered, you would have answered your own question. But, I get that's not how lazy people operate. Keep doing those hit and run posts like this. It's what you enjoy.
I did do reading before I made the comment. I checked for past SCOTUS cases on overturning presidential pardons but didn't find any. Feel free to post it if you found one.
-
I did do reading before I made the comment. I checked for past SCOTUS cases on overturning presidential pardons but didn't find any. Feel free to post it if you found one.
"F minus"
-
"F minus"
As I said, feel free to post the SCOTUS case if I missed it, otherwise your reply is empty.
-
As I said, feel free to post the SCOTUS case if I missed it, otherwise your reply is empty.
"F minus minus"
-
"F minus minus"
Is that your new catch phrase?
-
Is that your new catch phrase?
Do you have anything intelligent to post? Or do you only want to argue and nag?
If you can't find the information, that's fine. But you didn't say what you did find -- which tells me you never tried.
One-way information flow is getting so, so old.
-
Do you have anything intelligent to post? Or do you only want to argue and nag?
If you can't find the information, that's fine. But you didn't say what you did find -- which tells me you never tried.
One-way information flow is getting so, so old.
I didn't start an argument you did, your response to my question was not only irrelevant, it did nothing but pick another pointless argument, like you usually do.
I searched for SCOTUS cases on reversing pardons and found none, what do you want me to post, something else that has nothing to do with SCOTUS?
Congress could impeach to stop the pardon but that wasn't my question was it.
-
No Joke!
(https://www.gannett-cdn.com/presto/2020/03/18/USAT/38928b0a-784e-42c7-a026-84ee2c8cd485-Biden_1.JPG?crop=4499,2531,x0,y0&width=3200&height=1801&format=pjpg&auto=webp)
-
I didn't start an argument you did, your response to my question was not only irrelevant, it did nothing but pick another pointless argument, like you usually do.
I searched for SCOTUS cases on reversing pardons and found none, what do you want me to post, something else that has nothing to do with SCOTUS?
Congress could impeach to stop the pardon but that wasn't my question was it.
No wonder you couldn't find anything. Your reading comprehension sucks. You earned an "F" for that, too.
Show me where i said to find a case in which the SCOTUS reversed a pardon.
Your comment about Congress is getting warmer, but that deals with a specific argument against giving the president broad, unilateral pardon powers.
Keep looking. And let me refresh your memory on what I actually did ask:
Do some research and get back to us on the justification the founders relied on to bestow the authority to pardon prisoners onto the President.
Nowhere did i use the words SCOTUS, Supreme Court or reversal in any form.
-
No wonder you couldn't find anything. Your reading comprehension sucks. You earned an "F" for that, too.
Show me where i said to find a case in which the SCOTUS reversed a pardon.
Your comment about Congress is getting warmer, but that deals with a specific argument against giving the president broad, unilateral pardon powers.
Keep looking. And let me refresh your memory on what I actually did ask:
Do some research and get back to us on the justification the founders relied on to bestow the authority to pardon prisoners onto the President.
Nowhere did i use the words SCOTUS, Supreme Court or reversal in any form.
My question was about how a case would do if it went up through the SCOTUS which is why your series of snarky posts are irrelevant. I know you wanted to ride your high horse and sound superior for your historical knowledge but you obviously failed at reading comprehension since you didn't even understand what I was asking.
-
My question was about how a case would do if it went up through the SCOTUS which is why your series of snarky posts are irrelevant. I know you wanted to ride your high horse and sound superior for your historical knowledge but you obviously failed at reading comprehension since you didn't even understand what I was asking.
Oh, so your question is what you can't answer, but mine you just ignored but started a pissing match about it anyway?
Got it.
-
No wonder you couldn't find anything. Your reading comprehension sucks. You earned an "F" for that, too.
Show me where i said to find a case in which the SCOTUS reversed a pardon.
Your comment about Congress is getting warmer, but that deals with a specific argument against giving the president broad, unilateral pardon powers.
Keep looking. And let me refresh your memory on what I actually did ask:
Do some research and get back to us on the justification the founders relied on to bestow the authority to pardon prisoners onto the President.
Nowhere did i use the words SCOTUS, Supreme Court or reversal in any form.
Sounds like hes imagining things so he can think hes right about something. This is another tactic he uses.
Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk
-
Sounds like hes imagining things so he can think hes right about something. This is another tactic he uses.
Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk
Yeah. Strange how he quoted and replied to my post with my question. However, he now pretends he was answering his own question ... somehow. Why quote my post while responding to yourself?
:crazy:
-
Yeah. Strange how he quoted and replied to my post with my question. However, he now pretends he was answering his own question ... somehow. Why quote my post while responding to yourself?
:crazy:
(https://www.the-sun.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/6/2022/04/NINTCHDBPICT000726262064.jpg)
-
Oh, so your question is what you can't answer, but mine you just ignored but started a pissing match about it anyway?
Got it.
You didn't ask a question, you told me to go research something unrelated to my question.
Don't want a pissing match? Don't start them then. My first post didn't quote you but you felt the need to respond with an irrelevant suggestion then got pissy when I pointed out your suggestion was irrelevant
-
You didn't ask a question, you told me to go research something unrelated to my question.
Don't want a pissing match? Don't start them then. My first post didn't quote you but you felt the need to respond with an irrelevant suggestion then got pissy when I pointed out your suggestion was irrelevant
Who's nit picking now? I gave you a specific question to research. Not all questions need a question mark, or did you miss the day in English class they covered interrogative sentence structures?
"Do some research and get back to us on the justification the founders relied on to bestow the authority to pardon prisoners onto the President."
Maybe you need every question structured as a 6th grader would?
"What was the justification the founders relied on to bestow the authority to pardon prisoners onto the President?"
No difference between the two QUESTIONS, but you argue one is a question and one isn't. Irrelevant since you ignored it completely. Now you want to argue whether or not it was a question? Are you that stupid, or just practicing your trolling techniques?
Since you obviously can't answer the question in either form, there's no use continuing trying. I give up trying to teach you anything.
:closed: :stopjack:
-
Who's nit picking now? I gave you a specific question to research. Not all questions need a question mark, or did you miss the day in English class they covered interrogative sentence structures?
"Do some research and get back to us on the justification the founders relied on to bestow the authority to pardon prisoners onto the President."
Maybe you need every question structured as a 6th grader would?
"What was the justification the founders relied on to bestow the authority to pardon prisoners onto the President?"
No difference between the two QUESTIONS, but you argue one is a question and one isn't. Irrelevant since you ignored it completely. Now you want to argue whether or not it was a question? Are you that stupid, or just practicing your trolling techniques?
Since you obviously can't answer the question in either form, there's no use continuing trying. I give up trying to teach you anything.
:closed: :stopjack:
If I said I was interested in how bicycles are made and you told me to research the origins of trains then don't go getting offended that I "failed" your research assignment. I don't go researching irrelevant topics because you tell me to. You clearly didn't have any insight into the question I posed so your response was clearly just to start another argument, as you frequently do.
-
If I said I was interested in how bicycles are made and you told me to research the origins of trains then don't go getting offended that I "failed" your research assignment. I don't go researching irrelevant topics because you tell me to. You clearly didn't have any insight into the question I posed so your response was clearly just to start another argument, as you frequently do.
:closed: :stopjack: :geekdanc: