Pardons - Page 7

Squeegee Beckenheim · 23rd January 2021, 02:47 AM

Tuesday's Opening Arguments podcast will go over all the pardons. I don't imagine it will cover every pardon individually in detail, but host Andrew Torrez has read every single one in preperation.

Vixen · 23rd January 2021, 04:14 AM

Originally Posted by BobTheCoward

Yes. They should have all been prosecuted.

No, many draft dodgers had conscientious and reasonable objections to fighting in Vietnam. It spawned the 'flower power' movement. I read one account of MY LAY IN MAI LAI by a typical GI 'patriot', 'Heck man, we were all six feet tall, the gooks were only four foot six - not a fair fight'.

So, IMV a pardon for the Vietnam draft dodgers was an ethical and sound one.

erwinl · 23rd January 2021, 05:40 AM

Are these pardons generic ‘this person is pardoned for his crimes’, or more specific ‘this person is pardoned for crime x, y, z)?

Knowing Trump it would be too funny if something crucial was forgotten in the pardon and the end result would still be prison.

gypsyjackson · 23rd January 2021, 06:01 AM

Originally Posted by Susheel

Was surprised Ghislaine Maxwell wasn't on the list. Also, how was Joe Exotic so sure about his probable pardon? Were certain monetary considerations in play?

I imagine Trump calling him and saying ‘I’m sorry, Joe, I just ran out of time before the pile of pardons got down to X’.

BobTheCoward · 23rd January 2021, 06:42 AM

Originally Posted by Vixen

No, many draft dodgers had conscientious and reasonable objections to fighting in Vietnam. It spawned the 'flower power' movement. I read one account of MY LAY IN MAI LAI by a typical GI 'patriot', 'Heck man, we were all six feet tall, the gooks were only four foot six - not a fair fight'.

So, IMV a pardon for the Vietnam draft dodgers was an ethical and sound one.

What is the point of doing the right thing against an unjust law if you are just going to get out of the punishment?

The punishment is the point to the choice you made.

dirtywick · 23rd January 2021, 06:55 AM

Originally Posted by BobTheCoward

What is the point of doing the right thing against an unjust law if you are just going to get out of the punishment?

The punishment is the point to the choice you made.

that’s quite the hot take

Darat · 23rd January 2021, 06:59 AM

I think Trump’s pardoning was interrupted and knocked-off course by two events, one being told he couldn’t pardon himself and him losing the election and his betrayal by the criminals of the insurrection (by looking low class) and the fallout from that - apparently staff being warned about interacting with him.

Wouldn’t be surprised if the final pardons were all drawn up prior to those events so the paperwork had already been done.

Dave Rogers · 23rd January 2021, 08:42 AM

Originally Posted by BobTheCoward

What is the point of doing the right thing against an unjust law if you are just going to get out of the punishment?

The point is to have done the right thing. And if the prospect of punishing someone for doing the right thing is enough to convince the state to rescind both the unjust law and the punishment it mandates, then the moral victory is undiminished.

Dave

BobTheCoward · 23rd January 2021, 08:43 AM

Originally Posted by Dave Rogers

The point is to have done the right thing. And if the prospect of punishing someone for doing the right thing is enough to convince the state to rescind both the unjust law and the punishment it mandates, then the moral victory is undiminished.

Dave

That seems like a massive diminishment.

zooterkin · 23rd January 2021, 08:56 AM

Originally Posted by BobTheCoward

That seems like a massive diminishment.

No, it doesn't.

BobTheCoward · 23rd January 2021, 09:00 AM

Originally Posted by zooterkin

No, it doesn't.

Agree to disagree

Beelzebuddy · 23rd January 2021, 09:17 AM

Originally Posted by dirtywick

that’s quite the hot take

Read the recent Snowden thread and you'll see Bob's not alone in that sentiment.

Thor 2 · 23rd January 2021, 01:50 PM

Originally Posted by Vixen

No, many draft dodgers had conscientious and reasonable objections to fighting in Vietnam. It spawned the 'flower power' movement. I read one account of MY LAY IN MAI LAI by a typical GI 'patriot', 'Heck man, we were all six feet tall, the gooks were only four foot six - not a fair fight'.

So, IMV a pardon for the Vietnam draft dodgers was an ethical and sound one.

No argument with that although it shouldn't be at the discretion of a President, Governor, Prime Minister, or King. It should be something resulting from legal argument within the legal system.

Something highlighting the unfairness and stupidity of pardons, is that one person may be set free and another stay behind bars, when they have committed the same crime.

SteveAitch · 25th January 2021, 01:57 AM

I came across a reference to this on another board - I don't think it's been mentioned here - are such prosecutions likely?

Segnosaur · 25th January 2021, 07:04 AM

Originally Posted by Thor 2

Something highlighting the unfairness and stupidity of pardons, is that one person may be set free and another stay behind bars, when they have committed the same crime.

Let's assume for a second the president granting the pardons is acting with integrity when they pardon or commute sentences, and there are reasons to think a pardon is a good idea....

Yes even in that case you will get situations where one person goes to jail while another goes free... But if (for whatever reason) both people should have gone free, then keeping both in jail (because there is no ability to pardon anymore) seems kind of foolish.

Sent from my LM-X320 using Tapatalk

JoeMorgue · 25th January 2021, 07:23 AM

So the newest... I don't know whether to call it a conspiracy theory or not, floating around is the idea that Trump might have done... SECRET PARDONS! *Music sting*

The Don · 25th January 2021, 07:30 AM

Originally Posted by JoeMorgue

So the newest... I don't know whether to call it a conspiracy theory or not, floating around is the idea that Trump might have done... SECRET PARDONS! *Music sting*

The idea of secret pardons have already been mentioned upthread - secret pardons being those where neither the public nor congress have been informed (but presumably the justice department has).

Michael Cohen thinks he has:

Quote:

"I kind of think I figured it out," he said to MSNBC host Alex Witt. "I think Donald Trump actually has given himself the pardon. I think he also has pocket pardons for his children and for Rudy and it's already stashed somewhere that, if and when they do get indicted and that there's a criminal conviction, federal criminal conviction brought against him, that he already has the pardons in hand."

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...-b1792085.html

A Washington Post opinion piece thinks that secret pardons wouldn't work.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opini...dons-validity/

I wouldn't put it past him to do such a thing. I also wouldn't put it past him to do it so ineptly that it doesn't work.

Beelzebuddy · 25th January 2021, 07:57 AM

I don't think there's any secret pardons, not because I don't think they'd work, but because I don't think Trump is capable of keeping them secret. He would have blabbed.

Which doesn't mesh with my other thought, that there is no way in hell Trump would leave office without pardoning himself. It would have been the best and bigliest pardon anyone has ever received.

I can only conclude there was a minor mutiny of his office drones at the end, where they gave him the paperwork to do the pardons for himself and unsurprisingly it never got done.

Segnosaur · 25th January 2021, 08:31 AM

Originally Posted by SteveAitch

I came across a reference to this on another board - I don't think it's been mentioned here - are such prosecutions likely?

To anyone who hasn't read the referenced article...

Basically, it was suggesting that some of the people who received pardons from Trump at the last minute could still be prosecuted by the DoJ, because of the way the pardons were written.

For example, Manafort was pardoned specifically for crimes he was convicted of (instead of a blanket "all possible crimes".) However, some of the things he was initially charged with resulted in a hung jury... Because he was never convicted on several bank fraud charges, he could be retried on those. (And, because of elements of earlier plea agreements as well as the pardon, conviction might be easier this time around.) Another example is Bannon, who was pardoned for "Offences charged"... But there were other potential crimes that were overlooked (such as wire fraud), because prosecutors sometimes want to avoid "piling on" charges because it can overwhelm juries. Now that he's been pardoned on the main crimes, prosecutors can start looking into these other crimes.

I hope that the DOJ does start looking at these people that were pardoned to see if there are ways they can be convicted. However, I am skeptical that it will end up going anywhere... it depends on 1) the Biden administration taking a hard-line stance (which I am not convinced they will), 2) the charges actually being successful (there are enough MAGAchuds around that jury pools could be tainted.)

Thor 2 · 27th January 2021, 03:26 PM

Originally Posted by Segnosaur

Let's assume for a second the president granting the pardons is acting with integrity when they pardon or commute sentences, and there are reasons to think a pardon is a good idea....

Yes even in that case you will get situations where one person goes to jail while another goes free... But if (for whatever reason) both people should have gone free, then keeping both in jail (because there is no ability to pardon anymore) seems kind of foolish.

Sent from my LM-X320 using Tapatalk

Let's assume that a law is unjust and many folk are being punished for breaking said law.

I am suggesting that a bill should be generated to rescind that law. This passes through the U.S. Senate and the U.S. House of Representatives, and then stamped by the president.

In consequence all who have been convicted of breaking that law are pardoned by the courts. This is the way it should work in my opinion.

The Don · 29th January 2021, 04:02 AM

Originally Posted by Thor 2

Let's assume that a law is unjust and many folk are being punished for breaking said law.

I am suggesting that a bill should be generated to rescind that law. This passes through the U.S. Senate and the U.S. House of Representatives, and then stamped by the president.

In consequence all who have been convicted of breaking that law are pardoned by the courts. This is the way it should work in my opinion.

If you've got an obstructionist party in the Senate and/or House that bill may never see the light of day no matter how justified.

It may also take months or even years to get the bill passed even if it makes it onto the legislative agenda. Why force people to stay in prison while the bill meanders its way through the legislature ?

Suddenly · 29th January 2021, 08:41 AM

Originally Posted by The Don

If you've got an obstructionist party in the Senate and/or House that bill may never see the light of day no matter how justified.

It may also take months or even years to get the bill passed even if it makes it onto the legislative agenda. Why force people to stay in prison while the bill meanders its way through the legislature ?

Right.

In a carceral state removing one of the few avenues for redress of injustice is a bad move no matter how corruptly that power can be used.

In the US, actual innocence isn't always a grounds to have a settled conviction/sentence overturned. There is a patchwork of post conviction law the meanders so much that even when it works out it takes years. Things like pardons can be a valuable short circuit.

Legislatures, when they repeal crimes or reduce sentences usually do not make that retroactive to past convictions.

The last thing the US needs is to remove this. Bad pardons aren't worth making the system even harsher.

Dr. Keith · 29th January 2021, 11:52 AM

Originally Posted by Suddenly

The last thing the US needs is to remove this. Bad pardons aren't worth making the system even harsher.

I agree with you, but there is some value to everyone playing by the same rules. An overly harsh system is never corrected if the people who could correct it are instead allowed to sidestep it.

If a law is overly harsh and a rich person is impacted they have two means of redress: advocate for a change in the law or advocate for a pardon. One of those is quicker and cheaper and does nothing to make society as a whole better.

I'm reminded of proposed laws to make all recipients of welfare subject to random drug testing. A counter argument was that if we were worried about druggies getting government money then we should be drug testing all college students receiving financial aid. Make the harsh aspects of an unjust law apply to more people and their harshness becomes more evident and less tolerable.

And to repeat, I am only talking about theory. Practically, there have been too many good uses of the pardon to let a few bad ones spoil the idea.

Suddenly · 29th January 2021, 12:24 PM

Originally Posted by Dr. Keith

I agree with you, but there is some value to everyone playing by the same rules. An overly harsh system is never corrected if the people who could correct it are instead allowed to sidestep it.

If a law is overly harsh and a rich person is impacted they have two means of redress: advocate for a change in the law or advocate for a pardon. One of those is quicker and cheaper and does nothing to make society as a whole better.

I'm reminded of proposed laws to make all recipients of welfare subject to random drug testing. A counter argument was that if we were worried about druggies getting government money then we should be drug testing all college students receiving financial aid. Make the harsh aspects of an unjust law apply to more people and their harshness becomes more evident and less tolerable.

And to repeat, I am only talking about theory. Practically, there have been too many good uses of the pardon to let a few bad ones spoil the idea.

I'm not big on that theory because these people aren't in the same universe when it comes to the criminal justice system.

Rich people rarely have laws enforced against them in the first place, and when they do it is because they beyond deserve it. Or they are getting rung up by the SEC or some other crime of the privileged.

The poor suffer mostly in terms of procedure rather than what is or is not criminal. At least as to offenses dire enough so that a pardon is relevant. Some rich guy who was so blatant as to stock manipulation to eat a conviction isn't going to react to not getting a pardon by wanting reform in the area of police interrogation or advocating for better funded indigent defense. Let 100 of those jokers go if it means rectifying one real injustice.

23rd January 2021, 02:47 AM	#241
Squeegee Beckenheim Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Dec 2010 Posts: 31,391	Tuesday's Opening Arguments podcast will go over all the pardons. I don't imagine it will cover every pardon individually in detail, but host Andrew Torrez has read every single one in preperation.
	__________________ I don't trust atoms. They make up everything.

23rd January 2021, 04:14 AM	#242
Vixen Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Apr 2015 Posts: 21,547	Originally Posted by BobTheCoward Yes. They should have all been prosecuted. No, many draft dodgers had conscientious and reasonable objections to fighting in Vietnam. It spawned the 'flower power' movement. I read one account of MY LAY IN MAI LAI by a typical GI 'patriot', 'Heck man, we were all six feet tall, the gooks were only four foot six - not a fair fight'. So, IMV a pardon for the Vietnam draft dodgers was an ethical and sound one.
	__________________ Blott en dag, ett ögonblick i sänder, vilken tröst, vad än som kommer på!

23rd January 2021, 05:40 AM	#243
erwinl Master Poster Join Date: Sep 2008 Posts: 2,773	Are these pardons generic ‘this person is pardoned for his crimes’, or more specific ‘this person is pardoned for crime x, y, z)? Knowing Trump it would be too funny if something crucial was forgotten in the pardon and the end result would still be prison.
erwinl Master Poster Join Date: Sep 2008 Posts: 2,773	__________________ Bow before your king Member of the "Zombie Misheard Lyrics Support Group"

23rd January 2021, 06:55 AM	#246
dirtywick Illuminator Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 3,312	Originally Posted by BobTheCoward What is the point of doing the right thing against an unjust law if you are just going to get out of the punishment? The punishment is the point to the choice you made. that’s quite the hot take
dirtywick Illuminator Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 3,312

23rd January 2021, 06:59 AM	#247
Darat Lackey Administrator Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: South East, UK Posts: 97,755	I think Trump’s pardoning was interrupted and knocked-off course by two events, one being told he couldn’t pardon himself and him losing the election and his betrayal by the criminals of the insurrection (by looking low class) and the fallout from that - apparently staff being warned about interacting with him. Wouldn’t be surprised if the final pardons were all drawn up prior to those events so the paperwork had already been done.
	__________________ I wish I knew how to quit you

23rd January 2021, 06:01 AM	#244
gypsyjackson Graduate Poster Join Date: Jan 2014 Location: Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia Posts: 1,123	Originally Posted by Susheel Was surprised Ghislaine Maxwell wasn't on the list. Also, how was Joe Exotic so sure about his probable pardon? Were certain monetary considerations in play? I imagine Trump calling him and saying ‘I’m sorry, Joe, I just ran out of time before the pile of pardons got down to X’.

23rd January 2021, 06:42 AM	#245
BobTheCoward Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Nov 2010 Posts: 20,425	Originally Posted by Vixen No, many draft dodgers had conscientious and reasonable objections to fighting in Vietnam. It spawned the 'flower power' movement. I read one account of MY LAY IN MAI LAI by a typical GI 'patriot', 'Heck man, we were all six feet tall, the gooks were only four foot six - not a fair fight'. So, IMV a pardon for the Vietnam draft dodgers was an ethical and sound one. What is the point of doing the right thing against an unjust law if you are just going to get out of the punishment? The punishment is the point to the choice you made.

23rd January 2021, 08:42 AM	#248
Dave Rogers Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD Posts: 32,415	Originally Posted by BobTheCoward What is the point of doing the right thing against an unjust law if you are just going to get out of the punishment? The point is to have done the right thing. And if the prospect of punishing someone for doing the right thing is enough to convince the state to rescind both the unjust law and the punishment it mandates, then the moral victory is undiminished. Dave
	__________________ There is truth and there are lies. - President Joseph R. Biden, January 20th, 2021

23rd January 2021, 08:43 AM	#249
BobTheCoward Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Nov 2010 Posts: 20,425	Originally Posted by Dave Rogers The point is to have done the right thing. And if the prospect of punishing someone for doing the right thing is enough to convince the state to rescind both the unjust law and the punishment it mandates, then the moral victory is undiminished. Dave That seems like a massive diminishment.

23rd January 2021, 08:56 AM	#250
zooterkin Nitpicking dilettante Administrator Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Berkshire, mostly Posts: 48,822	Originally Posted by BobTheCoward That seems like a massive diminishment. No, it doesn't.
	__________________ The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts.Bertrand Russell Zooterkin is correct Darat Nerd! Hokulele Join the JREF Folders ! Team 13232 Ezekiel 23:20

23rd January 2021, 09:00 AM	#251
BobTheCoward Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Nov 2010 Posts: 20,425	Originally Posted by zooterkin No, it doesn't. Agree to disagree

23rd January 2021, 09:17 AM	#252
Beelzebuddy Philosopher Join Date: Jun 2010 Posts: 8,097	Originally Posted by dirtywick that’s quite the hot take Read the recent Snowden thread and you'll see Bob's not alone in that sentiment.
Beelzebuddy Philosopher Join Date: Jun 2010 Posts: 8,097

23rd January 2021, 01:50 PM	#253
Thor 2 Philosopher Join Date: May 2016 Location: Brisbane, Aust. Posts: 6,684	Originally Posted by Vixen No, many draft dodgers had conscientious and reasonable objections to fighting in Vietnam. It spawned the 'flower power' movement. I read one account of MY LAY IN MAI LAI by a typical GI 'patriot', 'Heck man, we were all six feet tall, the gooks were only four foot six - not a fair fight'. So, IMV a pardon for the Vietnam draft dodgers was an ethical and sound one. No argument with that although it shouldn't be at the discretion of a President, Governor, Prime Minister, or King. It should be something resulting from legal argument within the legal system. Something highlighting the unfairness and stupidity of pardons, is that one person may be set free and another stay behind bars, when they have committed the same crime.
	__________________ Thinking is a faith hazard.

25th January 2021, 01:57 AM	#254
SteveAitch Thinker Join Date: Apr 2020 Location: St Aines Posts: 168	I came across a reference to this on another board - I don't think it's been mentioned here - are such prosecutions likely?
	__________________ If this board is too exciting for you, try my Flickr pages. Warning: may cause narcolepsy!

25th January 2021, 07:04 AM	#255
Segnosaur Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Canada, eh? Posts: 17,322	Originally Posted by Thor 2 Something highlighting the unfairness and stupidity of pardons, is that one person may be set free and another stay behind bars, when they have committed the same crime. Let's assume for a second the president granting the pardons is acting with integrity when they pardon or commute sentences, and there are reasons to think a pardon is a good idea.... Yes even in that case you will get situations where one person goes to jail while another goes free... But if (for whatever reason) both people should have gone free, then keeping both in jail (because there is no ability to pardon anymore) seems kind of foolish. Sent from my LM-X320 using Tapatalk
	__________________ Trust me, I know what I'm doing. - Sledgehammer I'm Mary Poppin's Y'all! - Yondu We are Groot - Groot

25th January 2021, 07:23 AM	#256
JoeMorgue Self Employed Remittance Man Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Florida Posts: 31,429	So the newest... I don't know whether to call it a conspiracy theory or not, floating around is the idea that Trump might have done... SECRET PARDONS! Music sting
	__________________ Yahtzee: "You're doing that thing again where when asked a question you just discuss the philosophy of the question instead of answering the bloody question." Gabriel: "Well yeah, you see..." Yahtzee: "No. When you are asked a Yes or No question the first word out of your mouth needs to be Yes or No. Only after that have you earned the right to elaborate."

25th January 2021, 07:30 AM	#257
The Don Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Sir Fynwy Posts: 31,593	Originally Posted by JoeMorgue So the newest... I don't know whether to call it a conspiracy theory or not, floating around is the idea that Trump might have done... SECRET PARDONS! Music sting The idea of secret pardons have already been mentioned upthread - secret pardons being those where neither the public nor congress have been informed (but presumably the justice department has). Michael Cohen thinks he has: Quote: "I kind of think I figured it out," he said to MSNBC host Alex Witt. "I think Donald Trump actually has given himself the pardon. I think he also has pocket pardons for his children and for Rudy and it's already stashed somewhere that, if and when they do get indicted and that there's a criminal conviction, federal criminal conviction brought against him, that he already has the pardons in hand." https://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...-b1792085.html A Washington Post opinion piece thinks that secret pardons wouldn't work. https://www.washingtonpost.com/opini...dons-validity/ I wouldn't put it past him to do such a thing. I also wouldn't put it past him to do it so ineptly that it doesn't work.

25th January 2021, 07:57 AM	#258
Beelzebuddy Philosopher Join Date: Jun 2010 Posts: 8,097	I don't think there's any secret pardons, not because I don't think they'd work, but because I don't think Trump is capable of keeping them secret. He would have blabbed. Which doesn't mesh with my other thought, that there is no way in hell Trump would leave office without pardoning himself. It would have been the best and bigliest pardon anyone has ever received. I can only conclude there was a minor mutiny of his office drones at the end, where they gave him the paperwork to do the pardons for himself and unsurprisingly it never got done.
Beelzebuddy Philosopher Join Date: Jun 2010 Posts: 8,097

25th January 2021, 08:31 AM	#259
Segnosaur Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Canada, eh? Posts: 17,322	Originally Posted by SteveAitch I came across a reference to this on another board - I don't think it's been mentioned here - are such prosecutions likely? To anyone who hasn't read the referenced article... Basically, it was suggesting that some of the people who received pardons from Trump at the last minute could still be prosecuted by the DoJ, because of the way the pardons were written. For example, Manafort was pardoned specifically for crimes he was convicted of (instead of a blanket "all possible crimes".) However, some of the things he was initially charged with resulted in a hung jury... Because he was never convicted on several bank fraud charges, he could be retried on those. (And, because of elements of earlier plea agreements as well as the pardon, conviction might be easier this time around.) Another example is Bannon, who was pardoned for "Offences charged"... But there were other potential crimes that were overlooked (such as wire fraud), because prosecutors sometimes want to avoid "piling on" charges because it can overwhelm juries. Now that he's been pardoned on the main crimes, prosecutors can start looking into these other crimes. I hope that the DOJ does start looking at these people that were pardoned to see if there are ways they can be convicted. However, I am skeptical that it will end up going anywhere... it depends on 1) the Biden administration taking a hard-line stance (which I am not convinced they will), 2) the charges actually being successful (there are enough MAGAchuds around that jury pools could be tainted.)
	__________________ Trust me, I know what I'm doing. - Sledgehammer I'm Mary Poppin's Y'all! - Yondu We are Groot - Groot

27th January 2021, 03:26 PM	#260
Thor 2 Philosopher Join Date: May 2016 Location: Brisbane, Aust. Posts: 6,684	Originally Posted by Segnosaur Let's assume for a second the president granting the pardons is acting with integrity when they pardon or commute sentences, and there are reasons to think a pardon is a good idea.... Yes even in that case you will get situations where one person goes to jail while another goes free... But if (for whatever reason) both people should have gone free, then keeping both in jail (because there is no ability to pardon anymore) seems kind of foolish. Sent from my LM-X320 using Tapatalk Let's assume that a law is unjust and many folk are being punished for breaking said law. I am suggesting that a bill should be generated to rescind that law. This passes through the U.S. Senate and the U.S. House of Representatives, and then stamped by the president. In consequence all who have been convicted of breaking that law are pardoned by the courts. This is the way it should work in my opinion.
	__________________ Thinking is a faith hazard.

29th January 2021, 04:02 AM	#261
The Don Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Sir Fynwy Posts: 31,593	Originally Posted by Thor 2 Let's assume that a law is unjust and many folk are being punished for breaking said law. I am suggesting that a bill should be generated to rescind that law. This passes through the U.S. Senate and the U.S. House of Representatives, and then stamped by the president. In consequence all who have been convicted of breaking that law are pardoned by the courts. This is the way it should work in my opinion. If you've got an obstructionist party in the Senate and/or House that bill may never see the light of day no matter how justified. It may also take months or even years to get the bill passed even if it makes it onto the legislative agenda. Why force people to stay in prison while the bill meanders its way through the legislature ?

29th January 2021, 08:41 AM	#262
Suddenly No Punting Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Not In Follansbee Posts: 4,118	Originally Posted by The Don If you've got an obstructionist party in the Senate and/or House that bill may never see the light of day no matter how justified. It may also take months or even years to get the bill passed even if it makes it onto the legislative agenda. Why force people to stay in prison while the bill meanders its way through the legislature ? Right. In a carceral state removing one of the few avenues for redress of injustice is a bad move no matter how corruptly that power can be used. In the US, actual innocence isn't always a grounds to have a settled conviction/sentence overturned. There is a patchwork of post conviction law the meanders so much that even when it works out it takes years. Things like pardons can be a valuable short circuit. Legislatures, when they repeal crimes or reduce sentences usually do not make that retroactive to past convictions. The last thing the US needs is to remove this. Bad pardons aren't worth making the system even harsher.

29th January 2021, 11:52 AM	#263
Dr. Keith Not a doctor. Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: Texas Posts: 22,894	Originally Posted by Suddenly The last thing the US needs is to remove this. Bad pardons aren't worth making the system even harsher. I agree with you, but there is some value to everyone playing by the same rules. An overly harsh system is never corrected if the people who could correct it are instead allowed to sidestep it. If a law is overly harsh and a rich person is impacted they have two means of redress: advocate for a change in the law or advocate for a pardon. One of those is quicker and cheaper and does nothing to make society as a whole better. I'm reminded of proposed laws to make all recipients of welfare subject to random drug testing. A counter argument was that if we were worried about druggies getting government money then we should be drug testing all college students receiving financial aid. Make the harsh aspects of an unjust law apply to more people and their harshness becomes more evident and less tolerable. And to repeat, I am only talking about theory. Practically, there have been too many good uses of the pardon to let a few bad ones spoil the idea.
	__________________ Suffering is not a punishment not a fruit of sin, it is a gift of God. He allows us to share in His suffering and to make up for the sins of the world. -Mother Teresa If I had a pet panda I would name it Snowflake.

29th January 2021, 12:24 PM	#264
Suddenly No Punting Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Not In Follansbee Posts: 4,118	Originally Posted by Dr. Keith I agree with you, but there is some value to everyone playing by the same rules. An overly harsh system is never corrected if the people who could correct it are instead allowed to sidestep it. If a law is overly harsh and a rich person is impacted they have two means of redress: advocate for a change in the law or advocate for a pardon. One of those is quicker and cheaper and does nothing to make society as a whole better. I'm reminded of proposed laws to make all recipients of welfare subject to random drug testing. A counter argument was that if we were worried about druggies getting government money then we should be drug testing all college students receiving financial aid. Make the harsh aspects of an unjust law apply to more people and their harshness becomes more evident and less tolerable. And to repeat, I am only talking about theory. Practically, there have been too many good uses of the pardon to let a few bad ones spoil the idea. I'm not big on that theory because these people aren't in the same universe when it comes to the criminal justice system. Rich people rarely have laws enforced against them in the first place, and when they do it is because they beyond deserve it. Or they are getting rung up by the SEC or some other crime of the privileged. The poor suffer mostly in terms of procedure rather than what is or is not criminal. At least as to offenses dire enough so that a pardon is relevant. Some rich guy who was so blatant as to stock manipulation to eat a conviction isn't going to react to not getting a pardon by wanting reform in the area of police interrogation or advocating for better funded indigent defense. Let 100 of those jokers go if it means rectifying one real injustice.