Trump pardons US congressman who spent $1,500 of campaign funds on Steam games

Endymio

Posts: 1,334   +1,216
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?
 

Crinkles

Posts: 116   +112
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.

A jury's duty is to gather, discuss evidence, and once a necessary consensus is reached, render a verdict of guilty or not guilty.

Some may form a plausible theory to extend that to other, infinite alternatives, but most of us probably apply the monosyllabic term "end" for the occasion - when jurors depart.

LooK when hunters put fowl inside an oven the goose is _ _ _ _ _ _

geddit?

werds....

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?

What on earth, who made a claim they went berserk?
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.

...
 

Endymio

Posts: 1,334   +1,216
A jury's duty is to gather, discuss evidence
How can they discuss evidence that was improperly withheld from them?

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.
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.
 

wiyosaya

Posts: 5,906   +4,142
Your tinfoil hat is on a bit too tight today. Stone and Manafort have already testified under oath, and neither took the Fifth.
:rolleyes: The fact they testified once does not mean they will not be called again. Not that quick on understanding, are you?

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.
Trying to explain "ethics" to these shills is like trying to explain to a rock the constitution of the US.
 

Arbie

Posts: 259   +486
The courts first said Innocent. And that -- in a normal, non-political prosecution -- ends the matter

The courts first said No evidence of fraud. And that - in a normal, non-political prosecution - ends the matter.

[Let me help you with an alt-logic response: Actually, one court in ~60 found a few votes had been mishandled, or whatever, which was corrected. (All the other cases were laughed out of court, often with extreme scorn from Republican judges.) But that case may have been fraud. And where there's any fraud, there's more fraud! We'll never know how much! It could have been more than the couple dozen so far found anywhere. It could have been any number!! So the 80+ million blue state votes are all in doubt! SoTrump should never concede, and those states should be redone! ]

I hope I got that right - it's hard to think so inanely.
 
Last edited:

SixTymes

Posts: 134   +91
1500 bucks, OH MY GOD THE SKY IS FALLING. but it's ok for obama to send 6 Million of US tax payer money, tanks, guns and even jet fighters to Iran. and just this year pelosi blocked relief funds, not once, not twice but three times. but you dont report that?! Save the political bs hypocrisy from this site please. stop spreading Hypocritical hate you jerks.
 

Nobina

Posts: 3,043   +2,839
Both Trump and the congressman understand how difficult it is not to spend money on Steam sales. They both get a plus from me.
 

bexwhitt

Posts: 534   +218
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?
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.
 

penn919

Posts: 316   +223
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.

Yeah well, what good is our perfectly balanced system of checks and balances without one gigantic loophole....
 

bexwhitt

Posts: 534   +218
Yeah well, what good is our perfectly balanced system of checks and balances without one gigantic loophole....
You could write books about all the shitty secret **** the US has done, oh wait I think there are one or two (hundred)
 

Endymio

Posts: 1,334   +1,216
Chelsea Manning as she was called by then is not a traitor in my book neither is Edward Snowden.
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.

You could write books about all the shitty secret **** the US has done.
True. However, those books are far shorter and less numerous than the books about all the "shitty *****" most other nations have done.
 

penn919

Posts: 316   +223
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.

So in your approximation one has at least "partial justification" for criminality and the other doesn't. Jesus. This sort of partisan straw grasping dressed up as profound delineation between this side or that side is delusional.

We all get the idea of Presidential Pardons, but pretending unrestrained application is okay for one side but wrong for the other is dishonest. If you are okay with the rules as written then there's no place for complaint. Period.

If you believe pardons should have qualified restrictions, then what's the point of arguing? The problem is obvious. We all know we can't just expect people to do the right thing. What's our system of law and order for?
 

Endymio

Posts: 1,334   +1,216
So in your approximation one has at least "partial justification" for criminality and the other doesn't. Jesus. This sort of partisan straw grasping...
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.
 

penn919

Posts: 316   +223
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.
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.
As it stands, any federal crime either you or I can imagine can be LEGALLY pardoned. What should be done about that?
 

bexwhitt

Posts: 534   +218
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.
the USA isn't a country it is a corporate protection racket
 

Endymio

Posts: 1,334   +1,216
Whether or not snowden was pardoned is besides the point.
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. Those on the Left support Snowden's acts even more than the Right. Leftist Hollywood filmmaker Oliver Stone even made a movie glorifying Stone's crime. So how can I be making it a "partisan issue" by pointing out his acts were partially justified?

As it stands, any federal crime either you or I can imagine can be LEGALLY pardoned. What should be done about that?
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.
 

penn919

Posts: 316   +223
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.....
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:

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.

So in summary, you...

1. Defend Trump Allies and all his pardons

2. Take issue only with Presidential pardons by Democrats (even going as far as saying Obama " released from jail the worst traitor in the last half century")

3. Claim that characterizing yourself as partisan is "absurd"

4. Say there is nothing wrong with pardons (?)

5. Took a final cheapshot at Joe Biden's son (and brother) by alluding to a need for a pardon of his own.

All that aside, if you're okay with how Presidential Pardons are allowed to be used, it has been duly noted and nothing more needs to be said here.
 

Crinkles

Posts: 116   +112
"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
😂 I like Adam​
 

paul1122

Posts: 101   +63
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.

You are funny. SO much rage, so little time left, lol.
 

Endymio

Posts: 1,334   +1,216
I wasn't the one who brought up Snowden. I merely referenced your own quote
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?

You...took a final cheapshot at Joe Biden's son (and brother) by alluding to a need for a pardon of his own.

Facts are not cheap shots. Biden's brother and son are both under federal criminal investigation, which makes a pardon is a definite possibility. Much has been written about Hunter Biden's emails confessing that he acted as a conduit, transferring payments from Russia and China to his father. The media has focused less on Joe Biden's brother, James:

"The president of HillStone International was Kevin Justice...On Nov. 4, 2010, Mr. Justice visited the White House [in] the Office of the Vice President. Less than three weeks later, HillStone announced that James Biden would be joining the firm as an executive vice president. James appeared to have little or no background in [Hillstone's business of] housing construction. [This was] just as the firm was starting negotiations to win a massive contract in war-torn Iraq... A group of minority partners, including James Biden, stood to split about $735 million...."

Hillstone was given that contract: the largest, most lucrative ever for the company, despite its lack of experience in handling foreign construction projects, and indeed within three years, Hillstone's mishandling of the contract forced it to be terminated early.
 

Endymio

Posts: 1,334   +1,216
Another of Trump's Pardons:

"Stephanie Mohr, a Maryland police officer was sentenced to 10 years in prison after her K-9 police dog bit an illegal immigrant while responding to a burglary. Officer Mohr had already served the maximum 10-year sentence for a civil rights violation when President Trump granted her a pardon yesterday. ... She was just a 24-year old rookie at the time of the incident..."