Pardons

[98valk]

obama:  1,927

Trump:  26

[Patrick]

It appears President Trump is doing the right thing.
I can only think of 2 right now. That woman from LA [?] and Blago. Blago is as talkative as ever and now a big Trump fan.

[Davemn]

obama:  1,927

Trump:  26

You do realize that Obama isn’t in office anymore. Why do you make this comparison? You could list all presidential pardons, still doesn’t matter.
You’re just a “baiter” to pump up your croanies to make you feel better about your clown in office.
One crook pardoning another.

[sandy]

Just to clarify; Pardon means you were never guilty. He commuted their sentence which means he's letting them out early. Still guilty.

[The emperor has no clothes]

Just to clarify; Pardon means you were never guilty. He commuted their sentence which means he's letting them out early. Still guilty.

I think he pardoned 7, and commuted 4

[Reb]

Commuted Bla-sonofab!tch

As a former resident of Illinois, Blasonofab!tch should stay in jail. Dude is a typical corrupt Chicago politician. It doesn't matter what party, Chicago = corrupt

[Newstart2k]

Elected to "drain the swamp' chooses instead to pardon the swamp.

[Jess from VA]

I have no opinion on these current pardons, commutations. (not interested enough to look)

He didn't let Jeffery Dahmer go or anything.   (well, he's dead but you get the idea)

But these may be a few middle-of-the-road pardons to make some future less popular ones harder to dispute by his critics. 

Of course taming mad dogs has never been an easy task.  I could be wrong (not about the mad dogs).     

[Moonshot_1]

obama:  1,927

Trump:  26

You do realize that Obama isn’t in office anymore. Why do you make this comparison? You could list all presidential pardons, still doesn’t matter.
You’re just a “baiter” to pump up your croanies to make you feel better about your clown in office.
One crook pardoning another.

The comparison would suggest there is more discretion with the current administration than previous ones relative to commutes and pardons. Your opinion that it doesn't matter is, however, correct as the simple comparison lacks context therefore it really doesn't matter. Each act of commutation and pardons would have to be compared on a case to case basis to have any value. 

As to Blaggo's commutation, it seems to me, and I'm not going to research it, but I seem to recall that I thought at the time the guy was being railroaded on a bunch of stuff. The prosecutors involved seem to have dubious reputations and do to this day. Is and was Blaggo corrupt? Pretty much all the politicians in Illinois have such a reputation to either a great degree or an astounding degree. An objective look into his case would seem the charges and prosecution were overblown from what should have been the norm.

[Alberta Patriot]

There are comments repeatedly coughed up about Trump, Barr etc...on this forum, either by intentionally inconsolable, or worse...deranged members here who are more than willing to allow themselves to be spoon fed the CNN type poison pablum on an hourly basis because of all the hatred that they and their bubble dwelling friends harbor. It is what they crave.
Re: Rod Blago', Manafort, Roger Stone, Flynn...I have no info on the their level of guilt or innocence. What I do know is there is a significant cabal of judges who use the sledge hammer not reasonable sentencing guidelines. Nine years for Roger Stone...FFS...at his age that could be a death penalty for what, lying to congress??
Trump is on the right track with sentencing reform with the "First Step Act", whether those here with dark unforgiving hearts like it or not.

[Rams]

While I do agree that Chicago has a reputation for corrupt elected officials, I wasn't on the jury, didn't see any of the evidence and only know he was convicted.   He's served some of his time and the President has the authority to do what he has done.  

Having said that, I'm not sure I agree but, I don't have much insight into each case.   What I do know is, all were convicted of "white collar" crimes and did serve some of their sentences.   Heck, some of their sentences were longer than violent crimes where people were raped, maimed and killed.  I've always thought there were some weighty issues when it comes to sentencing.

Child molesters should be put to death.
Rapist should never get out of jail.
Convicted murders on Death Row should only be allowed a limited amount of time.
Those serving jail sentences should be assigned to chain gangs while in prison.
Multiple offenders need not apply for any kind of parole (as in three strikes).
It's all about behavior modification and some will never comply.   

And yes, I do think those things should be applied to myself also if convicted of some heinous crime.

Rams

[Alberta Patriot]

+1 

[Wizzard]

If lying produces 8-9 years jail sentences then most of congress and the senate would be in jail. Trump is trying to say the sentence did not fit the crime.

[The emperor has no clothes]

If lying produces 8-9 years jail sentences then most of congress and the senate would be in jail. Trump is trying to say the sentence did not fit the crime.

It was a little more than just lying to Congress. 

"Mr. Stone deserves 7-9 years behind bars because he threatened the witness with bodily harm, interfered with a congressional investigation and then, after he was charged in a federal indictment, repeatedly flouted the orders of the judge overseeing his case, the prosecutors wrote in a sentencing memorandum.
In a multiyear scheme, the prosecutors said, Mr. Stone lied under oath, forged documents and engaged in “a relentless and elaborate campaign to silence” the witness because he could have exposed his lies to the House Intelligence Committee. When flattery failed, they said, he harassed the witness and even threatened his life and that of his dog. Even if the witness believed Mr. Stone would personally never injure him, he feared that he could inspire others to do so, they said."

[Wizzard]

If lying produces 8-9 years jail sentences then most of congress and the senate would be in jail. Trump is trying to say the sentence did not fit the crime.

It was a little more than just lying to Congress. 

"Mr. Stone deserves 7-9 years behind bars because he threatened the witness with bodily harm, interfered with a congressional investigation and then, after he was charged in a federal indictment, repeatedly flouted the orders of the judge overseeing his case, the prosecutors wrote in a sentencing memorandum.
In a multiyear scheme, the prosecutors said, Mr. Stone lied under oath, forged documents and engaged in “a relentless and elaborate campaign to silence” the witness because he could have exposed his lies to the House Intelligence Committee. When flattery failed, they said, he harassed the witness and even threatened his life and that of his dog. Even if the witness believed Mr. Stone would personally never injure him, he feared that he could inspire others to do so, they said."

That kind of crap has been going on for years. We have seen rapist and murderers get less time. I do not agree with any of it.

[98valk]

If lying produces 8-9 years jail sentences then most of congress and the senate would be in jail. Trump is trying to say the sentence did not fit the crime.

It was a little more than just lying to Congress. 

"Mr. Stone deserves 7-9 years behind bars because he threatened the witness with bodily harm, interfered with a congressional investigation and then, after he was charged in a federal indictment, repeatedly flouted the orders of the judge overseeing his case, the prosecutors wrote in a sentencing memorandum.
In a multiyear scheme, the prosecutors said, Mr. Stone lied under oath, forged documents and engaged in “a relentless and elaborate campaign to silence” the witness because he could have exposed his lies to the House Intelligence Committee. When flattery failed, they said, he harassed the witness and even threatened his life and that of his dog. Even if the witness believed Mr. Stone would personally never injure him, he feared that he could inspire others to do so, they said."

what is your source for that?

[Bighead]

And it all started on a bogus investigation.

[9Ball]

I’ve read several news articles the CNN had cameras in place for at least half an hour before the Roger Stone FBI raid and arrest.  Big time leak so that it could be recorded and sensationalized on CNN...

Coincidence?  Maybe.  Doubtful.  Here’s one for example.

https://dailycaller.com/2019/07/24/mueller-refuses-address-leaks-cnn/

[Alberta Patriot]

Well well, turns out the jury fore"person" Tomeka Hart exposed a deep resenting hatred of Trump and associates after outing herself to CNN. So she lied about her bias on the jury disclosure form that she signed.
Right out of the gate it sounds like the exposure of a Biased Jury is a slam dunk for a new trial. Stone's lawyers must push for a change of venue as he will never get a fair trial in the swamp.
Ya gotta thank CNN for being useful idiots in exposing this juror.
An excellent video on the matter:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CTjlZNCjyeE

[Oss]

so lying to congress is 7-9 years

Then what is destroying thousands of emails AFTER being served a subpoena ?

That is worse than a lie, it is destruction of evidence

Oh yeah.  what does it matter?

[Robert]

Hillary Clinton is not above the law, yet she has a record of contempt for the rule of law. Our leaders are bound by the rule of law, so Clinton must be held accountable. RETWEET if you agree & sign HERE

https://www.judicialwatch.org/petitions/stop-the-clinton-cover-up/?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=petition&source=46

#

To those who think there will never be justice, think again. @realDonaldTrump
 seemed pretty confident tonight. "I hope you're gonna be happy!" That implies that he has knowledge that something is coming.

https://twitter.com/i/status/1230364836946567169

#

January 10, 2020 | Judicial Watch

FBI “Finds” New Clinton Emails Include Classified Info and Official Business in Texts

Remember when Hillary Clinton repeatedly stated that the 55,000 pages she turned over to the State Department in December 2014 included all of her work-related emails?

In response to a court order in a Judicial Watch case, she declared under penalty of perjury that she had “directed that all my emails on clintonemail.com in my custody that were or are potentially federal records be provided to the Department of State, and on information and belief, this has been done.”

We’ve known for a while that this was not the case.

Now there’s more proof. We have released 37 pages of new Clinton emails recently “found” by the FBI that show the former secretary of state using her unsecure, non-government email to transmit classified information. The new emails also show Clinton used text messages for government business. The documents, which we received after a review by the State Department, include 13 new Clinton emails.

https://www.judicialwatch.org/tom-fittons-weekly-update/fbi-finds-new-clinton-emails/

[Jersey mike]

I don’t really care about Blagojevich, “he’s small potatoes” but I bet he’s got some good dirt on somebody.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=iUVNz4Rhwb0

[Wizzard]

So Blago never sold the senate seat. He simply thought about it.  Going by that you could be driving down the road and think about speeding but not speeding and still get a ticket

[The emperor has no clothes]

So Blago never sold the senate seat. He simply thought about it.  Going by that you could be driving down the road and think about speeding but not speeding and still get a ticket

not exactly. He attempted to sell it. If you attempt to rob the bank, but are stopped before you get the money, it’s still breaking the law.

[Wizzard]

So Blago never sold the senate seat. He simply thought about it.  Going by that you could be driving down the road and think about speeding but not speeding and still get a ticket

not exactly. He attempted to sell it. If you attempt to rob the bank, but are stopped before you get the money, it’s still breaking the law.

No he discussed it. If you discuss robbing the bank but don't rob it are you guilty? Where is the proof he attempted to sell it?
The only thing he was guilty of was lying. Just like all other politicians do.
I am not saying lying is ok, I am saying the sentence did not fit the crime.
Hillary destroyed evidence. Others have done worse with very little or no sentence.

Rob by your own words,, if you discussed giving away free merchandise to one of your customers but never delivered it are you guilty?

[The emperor has no clothes]

I’ll take your word for it Randy. I can’t remember that far back.

[Wizzard]

I’ll take your word for it Randy. I can’t remember that far back.

Well since I have the best entertainment on TV living close to Chicago, (IL politics) I cannot forget. 

[Jersey mike]

So Blago never sold the senate seat. He simply thought about it.  Going by that you could be driving down the road and think about speeding but not speeding and still get a ticket

not exactly. He attempted to sell it. If you attempt to rob the bank, but are stopped before you get the money, it’s still breaking the law.

No he discussed it. If you discuss robbing the bank but don't rob it are you guilty? Where is the proof he attempted to sell it?
The only thing he was guilty of was lying. Just like all other politicians do.
I am not saying lying is ok, I am saying the sentence did not fit the crime.
Hillary destroyed evidence. Others have done worse with very little or no sentence.

Rob by your own words,, if you discussed giving away free merchandise to one of your customers but never delivered it are you guilty?

Discussing it...would that be an overt act...conspiracy?

[MAD6Gun]

So Blago never sold the senate seat. He simply thought about it.  Going by that you could be driving down the road and think about speeding but not speeding and still get a ticket

not exactly. He attempted to sell it. If you attempt to rob the bank, but are stopped before you get the money, it’s still breaking the law.

 Evidently unless you live in New York City. They just released a bank robber not long ago with their new bail reform law.....

[Alberta Patriot]

Canada under Globalist/Marxist Trudeau is, at an accelerating rate, becoming a political, legal and moral dystopian failed state.
There should be a lesson in many of my posts to those here, about why you need to drop kick the democrats with a big Red Neck Red Wing Steel Toed Boot in the November. The message is not for those of you who I know understand the consequences of electing such people into power...it is for those who refuse to see your future if the Bernie Sanders types get hold of power.
You can elect your way into socialist(marxist) statehood, but you may have to shoot your way out!!...just ask the citizens of Venezuela. Another example...Virginia...removing guns from the citizens is the first step...step #2...we all know how that goes don't we!!

[Wizzard]

Canada under Globalist/Marxist Trudeau is, at an accelerating rate, becoming a political, legal and moral dystopian failed state.
There should be a lesson in many of my posts to those here, about why you need to drop kick the democrats with a big Red Neck Red Wing Steel Toed Boot in the November. The message is not for those of you who I know understand the consequences of electing such people into power...it is for those who refuse to see your future if the Bernie Sanders types get hold of power.
You can elect your way into socialist(marxist) statehood, but you may have to shoot your way out!!...just ask the citizens of Venezuela. Another example...Virginia...removing guns from the citizens is the first step...step #2...we all know how that goes don't we!!

yep just ask the Indians

[Alberta Patriot]

Trudeau gave us a clear message of who he is...the ship of fools here either ignored it or liked his idea of a basic dictatorship!!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tVusYrv2jIU

[Jess from VA]

Conspiracy generally consists of an agreement between two or more people to commit an illegal act, along with an intent to achieve the agreement's goal.  Most U.S. jurisdictions also require an overt act toward furthering the agreement.  An overt act is a statutory requirement, not a constitutional one. See Whitfield v. United States, 453 U.S. 209 (2005). The illegal act is the conspiracy's "target offense."

Mere discussion would usually be the agreement (among two or more), but the overt act could be additional communications of some sort in furtherance of the conspiracy.  If he acted alone, it cannot be a conspiracy. 

Another inchoate crime that can be committed by one is "attempts."  Which also takes an act or acts in furtherance of the attempt.

[Robert]

  I wonder why they tapped Jackson for the judge in Stone case, when there would have been other judges just as qualified and not immersed in the Mueller investigation.

  In October 2017, Jackson was assigned to preside over the criminal case that Special Counsel Robert Mueller brought against Paul Manafort and Rick Gates as part of his investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election cycle

Last month, Jackson agreed with the Office of the Special Counsel that Manafort “intentionally made false statements to the FBI, the OSC, and the grand jury." As a result, Manafort’s plea agreement with the government was nullified, opening him up to a stiff sentence.

She should have been disqualified and her personal statement,"He was not prosecuted, as some have claimed, for standing up for the president. He was prosecuted for covering up for the president". only makes things less clear and seemingly biased.

Her history also makes you wonder about her bias as in the case of Hillary Clinton.

The judge presiding in the U.S. District Court Judge Amy Berman Jackson, appointed by former President Obama in 2010, concluded that Clinton used her email in the course of her official duties and dismissed the wrongful death portion of the suit on technical grounds.

https://ecf.dcd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/show_public_doc?2016cv1606-37

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amy_Berman_Jackson

While nothing to do with this case she also ruled against the Roman Catholic Diocese of Washington in its challenge to the contraceptive mandate under the Affordable Care Act as applied to its employees.

Also the pardon of Dinesh D'Souza was a good thing to do and his case reflects of the political hit job and dirty politics that are always present.

[Jersey mike]

Conspiracy generally consists of an agreement between two or more people to commit an illegal act, along with an intent to achieve the agreement's goal.  Most U.S. jurisdictions also require an overt act toward furthering the agreement.  An overt act is a statutory requirement, not a constitutional one. See Whitfield v. United States, 453 U.S. 209 (2005). The illegal act is the conspiracy's "target offense."

Mere discussion would usually be the agreement (among two or more), but the overt act could be additional communications of some sort in furtherance of the conspiracy.  If he acted alone, it cannot be a conspiracy. 

Another inchoate crime that can be committed by one is "attempts."  Which also takes an act or acts in furtherance of the attempt.

Ok, thanks for the information, I appreciate you taking the time to explain that.