Crinkles
Posts: 253 +222
Man, I lived through this I know what was done. You, on the other hand, must try harder than baiting for comments against military troopers.
The courts have said GUILTY. End.
The courts first said Innocent. And that -- in a normal, non-political prosecution -- ends the matter.The courts have said GUILTY. End.
The courts first said Innocent. And that -- in a normal, non-political prosecution -- ends the matter.
Furthermore, under the US justice system, a guilty verdict is not your monosyllabic "end". There is the appeal process (still ongoing for the men in this case) as well as the pardon process itself -- intended for just these sorts of situations, as an executive check on judicial misconduct.
Still waiting for your response to the original questions. Do you believe four men simultaneously went berserk without reason? Are you not concerned that the investigator in charge of the case himself had ties to terror groups with a history of attacking Blackwater? And what explains the men radioing for help during the incident? And the AK-47-disabled Dept. of State vehicle?
How can they discuss evidence that was improperly withheld from them?A jury's duty is to gather, discuss evidence
How did they "shoot up" their State Dept. armored transport with an AK-47 that they didn't possess? This is reality we're talking about, not a video game. Weapons don't magically appear like they do in GTA.Blackwater communicated over radio prior to and during their attack, so they also shot up a government vehicle, in the land of GTA this is not entirely unexpected.
The fact they testified once does not mean they will not be called again. Not that quick on understanding, are you?Your tinfoil hat is on a bit too tight today. Stone and Manafort have already testified under oath, and neither took the Fifth.
Trying to explain "ethics" to these shills is like trying to explain to a rock the constitution of the US.The pardon is preposterous. You know it and I know you know, what we don't know is why anyone is hauling water for Blackwater criminals and trump.
The courts first said Innocent. And that -- in a normal, non-political prosecution -- ends the matter
Obama handed out 212 pardons and 1,700+ clemencies -- several times what Trump has. Obama also pardoned one traitor (Bradley Manning: over 750,000 classified documents given to our enemies), and one terrorist bomb-maker: FALN member Oscar Lopez. None of Trump's pardons involves traitors or terrorists.
Would you like to try again, this time with some facts?
Chelsea Manning as she was called by then is not a traitor in my book neither is Edward Snowden. The USA does some really shitty things to their citizens and others overseas having that in the open will make doing that less likely.Obama handed out 212 pardons and 1,700+ clemencies -- several times what Trump has. Obama also pardoned one traitor (Bradley Manning: over 750,000 classified documents given to our enemies), and one terrorist bomb-maker: FALN member Oscar Lopez. None of Trump's pardons involves traitors or terrorists.
Would you like to try again, this time with some facts?
The entire presidential pardon system is absolute horse manure!
What kind of country are you guys running over there, cancel that ridiculous corrupt system NOW.
Amend your outdated constitution and stop worshipping it as something that's perfectly written by God Himself.
It out of touch and out of date and it's being used to corrupt your entire democracy and laws.
You could write books about all the shitty secret **** the US has done, oh wait I think there are one or two (hundred)Yeah well, what good is our perfectly balanced system of checks and balances without one gigantic loophole....
Bradley Manning is the textbook definition of a traitor: someone who gives aid and comfort to a nation's enemies.Chelsea Manning as she was called by then is not a traitor in my book neither is Edward Snowden.
True. However, those books are far shorter and less numerous than the books about all the "shitty *****" most other nations have done.You could write books about all the shitty secret **** the US has done.
Bradley Manning is the textbook definition of a traitor: someone who gives aid and comfort to a nation's enemies.
Snowden at least had the partial justification of exposing that the Obama Administration was illegally spying on US citizens, and lying to Congress about it. Manning was simply attempting to drum up anti-US sentiment. Also, Snowden -- besides his beach being far smaller-- kept the most sensitive information out of Wikileaks hands, whereas Manning disseminated anything and everything. The two aren't even remotely comparable.
True. However, those books are far shorter and less numerous than the books about all the "shitty *****" most other nations have done.
Labelling a Snowden/Manning comparison as partisan is ludicrous: one was pardoned, one was not.So in your approximation one has at least "partial justification" for criminality and the other doesn't. Jesus. This sort of partisan straw grasping...
Whether or not snowden was pardoned is besides the point. You were defending his crime and rebuking another. Also, Trump has already pardoned criminals who have done just as bad and maybe worse...squabbling over the particulars is pointless though - especially when you hint political partisanship in your argument.Labelling a Snowden/Manning comparison as partisan is ludicrous: one was pardoned, one was not.
As for the salient of your gravamen, I can only assume you're unfamiliar with the last several centuries of human history, as since the dawn of the Enlightenment, motivation has been considered a component in determining a crime's severity. Killing in anger is less heinous than the same killing committed for financial gain, and an accidental killing less heinous than the same crime of passion. Furthermore, if you believe there's never a justification for revealing classified information, then the entirety of your vaunted media belongs behind bars, for the number of anti-Trump articles based on "anonymous sources" revealing classified information has been innumerable.
the USA isn't a country it is a corporate protection racketBradley Manning is the textbook definition of a traitor: someone who gives aid and comfort to a nation's enemies.
Snowden at least had the partial justification of exposing that the Obama Administration was illegally spying on US citizens, and lying to Congress about it. Manning was simply attempting to drum up anti-US sentiment. Also, Snowden -- besides his beach being far smaller-- kept the most sensitive information out of Wikileaks hands, whereas Manning disseminated anything and everything. The two aren't even remotely comparable.
True. However, those books are far shorter and less numerous than the books about all the "shitty *****" most other nations have done.
On the contrary, it is the entire point. When I brought up Obama releasing from jail the worst traitor of the last half-century, you immediately squawked "What about Snowden?" Well, what of him? He hasn't been pardoned, so it's obviously irrelevant. Logic. Try it, you might like it.Whether or not snowden was pardoned is besides the point.
Absolutely nothing, of course. The absolute low point of federal pardons was Clinton's pardoning of an FBI Top Ten Most Wanted fugitive, immediately after said fugitive's wife paid the Clintons a large sum. Since nothing in the last 20 years has sunk to that depth, the situation is improving. Clinton approved 10% of all pardons requested, Obama 6%, and Trump a mere 2%. The pardon process is an essential check on judicial misconduct and overreach. If and when you complain about some of Biden's pardons -- which will almost certainly include his brother and son -- then return here when you're not stinking of hypocrisy.As it stands, any federal crime either you or I can imagine can be LEGALLY pardoned. What should be done about that?
I wasn't the one who brought up Snowden. I merely referenced your own quote defending him...and I don't have to speculate about your partisan rationale. I'll let you explain:On the contrary, it is the entire point. When I brought up Obama releasing from jail the worst traitor of the last half-century, you immediately squawked "What about Snowden?" Well, what of him? He hasn't been pardoned, so it's obviously irrelevant. Logic. Try it, you might like it.
Furthermore, your "partisan" jibe is absurd.....
Endymio said:Snowden at least had the partial justification of exposing that the Obama Administration was illegally spying on US citizens, and lying to Congress about it.
"The U.S. Supreme Court has been totally incompetent and weak on the massive [FAKE] Election Fraud that took place in the 2020 Presidential Election, we have absolute PROOF, but they don't want to see it - No 'standing', they say. If we have corrupt elections, we have no country! " DjT
"My God. [Trump] trying to burn the place down on the way out because you can’t handle losing, No evidence, nothing but your temper tantrum and crazy conspiracies. [The] grift to raise money and gain followers by blaming everyone else, knowing full well they can’t do anything” - [to change the election] “It’s sad, and an utter scam.” Adam D. Kinzinger, Illinois
who's us? brain washed nitwits living in trump fantasy land? Clinton called the "us" factually when she said they are the "Basket of deplorables". The reality is these deplorables are bigly losers just like trump, so pathetic they turn to outlets like newsmax, breitbart, and one america news to lie to them.
Your "mere reference" was to claim a defense of Snowden was Right-wing partisanship. Yet the vast majority of Snowden's supporters come from the Left. Why not simply admit you were wrong, and move on?I wasn't the one who brought up Snowden. I merely referenced your own quote
You...took a final cheapshot at Joe Biden's son (and brother) by alluding to a need for a pardon of his own.
No rage, just factsYou are funny. SO much rage, so little time left, lol.