Board 8 > Politics Containment Topic 252: Voiding Our Special Relationship

(+) Yeah! (+)

xp1337 posted...

well technically he can't be primaried at all anymore since he left the party. but he was facing an immediate primary challenge before he did that and polling wasn't looking great for him. like down 10-16 points bad.

That's surprising to me I'll admit. I do think a campaign would help, where he could refresh the voters' memory about everything else he's done so he's not just remembered as the Republican who voted for impeachment.

---

https://twitter.com/susan_hennessey/status/1205567953976135680?s=21

lmao

---

Matt Bevin pardons man who killed a woman and stuffed her body in a toxic waste barrel.

https://www.thetimestribune.com/news/bevin-pardons-man-convicted-of-gruesome-murder-of-betty-carnes/article_a3dc8e8c-1d10-11ea-8612-873a642d85ca.html

His reasoning seems to be that "They didn't test this DNA!" I mean you'd think he'd wait until DNA evidence actually exonerated him rather than being like "Here's a pardon!" But that's Matt Bevin for you.

---

Yikes

---

He pardoned a bunch of murderers and a child rapist (and the brother of one of the pardoned murderers super coincidentally held a fundraiser for him like a year ago!)

---

LordoftheMorons posted...

He pardoned a bunch of murderers and a child rapist (and the brother of one of the pardoned murderers super coincidentally held a fundraiser for him like a year ago!)

and funnily enough, the co-conspirator of that murderer who didn't actually kill anybody wasn't pardoned. how unusual

---

LordoftheMorons posted...

He pardoned a bunch of murderers and a child rapist (and the brother of one of the pardoned murderers super coincidentally held a fundraiser for him like a year ago!)

Can I get a big yikes from the crowd?

Party of law and order

---

Other charges that Patrick Baker (pardoned guy who's brother did a significant Bevin Fundraiser) was found guilty of include robbery, tampering with evidence and impersonating a police officer (which he used to force his way into the victim's home to shoot and rob them)

He's also the pardoned guy who's co-conspirators were not pardoned.

Bevin is emblematic of what the Republican party has become. Corruption Incarnate.

---

Corrik already kind of called us hypocrites on this based on what we were arguing earlier about the guy being federally executed, but theres a difference between arguing for a criminals life and arguing for their freedom.
---

Jakyl25 posted...

Corrik already kind of called us hypocrites on this based on what we were arguing earlier about the guy being federally executed, but theres a difference between arguing for a criminals life and arguing for their freedom.

If he is rehabilitated why not according to yinz? That said, this is an example of why pardons just undermine the legal process by nature of even existing.

---

Corrik7 posted...

If he is rehabilitated why not according to yinz? That said, this is an example of why pardons just undermine the legal process by nature of even existing.

We dont know if he is rehabilitated or not. All we had in that other story is one nun saying hes changed for the better and no history of violence while incarcerated. It would take more than that for me to say a murderer should be free.

If he is, then yes, free him.
---

Jakyl25 posted...

If he is, then yes, free him.

That's crazy.

---

I know you think a lot of my ideals are crazy so thats okay with me that you think that.

I do find it interesting that you can grasp that there is an issue with the power of pardons, and wish they didnt exist, but decry other people when they take issue with other Constitutional decrees that they think make a mockery of things
---

To be clear by opposing the death penalty I'm not advocating for the freedom of pedophiles and murderers. I just don't think we should kill them.

Rehabilitated or not they can live their life out behind bars.

---

I think I am pretty close to coming around to categorically opposing the sentence of life in prison without parole. Or any sentence of years in excess of a human lifespan without parole.

Then make the right to a jury trial nonwaivable, so that there can't be a plea bargain. And seal all criminal records.

---

Corrik7 posted...

That's crazy.

if you somehow knew for sure that he was rehabilitated, why not? What would keeping him in prison accomplish?
---

I would also like to be clear that any prisoner who was freed early due to rehabilitation should still owe community service in exchange. I dont know exactly what that exchange rate would be, but they would be required to still give back to the community they harmed.
---

MoogleKupo141 posted...

if you somehow knew for sure that he was rehabilitated, why not? What would keeping him in prison accomplish?

The not breaking down of your societal system and rules of law. Just because you think someone may be rehabilitated does not mean they are.

If a guy molests and rapes 34 young children under the age of 7, are you going to let him out of jail if he appears rehabilitated? How the fuck can you even determine that and quantify that in a way that could go across the spectrum fairly?

A lot of crimes should err more to rehabilitation than retention. A lot. Especially non violent crimes. But, an arbitrary if you were sentenced to death/life without parole but you appear to be rehabilitated you get out? What? Some crimes have repercussions that extend past what you may have learned from them. You aren't gonna let Hitler live peacefully in your town if he appeared rehabilitated for the Holocaust. Hell, they are still taking down members of the German Army just for carrying out orders from their superiors regarding it here and there to this day.

---

But! We need to crack down hard on really serious crimes, like deleting emails.

Then it's time to massively increase the budget of our immigration courts, so that they can hear deportation proceedings quickly - and maybe set up a preliminary hearing procedure that allows someone to be quickly determined to be legally in the country and released, and if not, then they can be held in detention pending a full hearing with all the due process bells and whistles. Or they can voluntarily leave the country.

---

Corrik7 posted...

Just because you think someone may be rehabilitated does not mean they are.

There are professionals that can help determine this. There are steps between full incarceration and freedom.
---

And if the professionals say they CANT accurately determine it, then I retract my idea
---

Yeah, rehabilitation as a condition of release has some serious problems, like giving too much power to whoever it is determining whether someone has been rehabilitated. It can result in an actually innocent person staying in prison for his full sentence because he refuses to confess and so is deemed not to be rehabilitated, while a good liar is able to convince the authorities that he has repented and changed. And what is the lesson for people thinking about whether to commit crimes - they will be released as soon as they can convince others they have been rehabilitated? That significantly reduces the deterrent.

---

Jakyl25 posted...

And if the professionals say they CANT accurately determine it, then I retract my idea

Realistically in a lot (most?) cases they are not going to be all that accurate, even if they have the best intentions.


---

Also, I oppose community service as a punishment. We should have a 28th Amendment that says that slavery is illegal in all circumstances, even as a punishment for crime.

---

No one is advocating for Arkham Asylum style "rehabilitation" where Harley Quinn falls in love with The Joker and deems him sane and Two-Face keeps tricking the doctors. Come on.

The entire point of advocating rehabilitation is to make the process better, and that's also why violent criminals are lowest priority compared to rehab for non-violent offenses and improving prison conditions in general. If you don't or can't make a fair assessment, or it's impossible to rehab someone, then don't let them out.

---

HeroDelTiempo17 posted...

No one is advocating for Arkham Asylum style "rehabilitation" where Harley Quinn falls in love with The Joker and deems him sane and Two-Face keeps tricking the doctors. Come on.

The entire point of advocating rehabilitation is to make the process better, and that's also why violent criminals are lowest priority compared to rehab for non-violent offenses and improving prison conditions in general. If you don't or can't make a fair assessment, or it's impossible to rehab someone, then don't let them out.

But the problem is that if you take the position that if you can't determine if someone is rehabilitated they stay in prison, the result is that they stay in prison for longer. Longer than they would have if there was no rehab -> release provision, because the starting sentence will be longer in a world in which people can be released early. Either that, or the deterrent effect of the sentence will be less because the average served sentence will be less.

So people end up in prison not because of what they did, as determined a jury, but based on what a team of doctors think about them. That's really troubling to me.

---

Jakyl25 posted...

There are professionals that can help determine this. There are steps between full incarceration and freedom.

There are laws and justice that can determine if someone should not have parole or retain their life also.

---

Corrik7 posted...

There are laws and justice that can determine if someone should not have parole or retain their life also.

laws can change

do you think our current justice system is 100% perfect?
---

MoogleKupo141 posted...

laws can change

do you think our current justice system is 100% perfect?

No but any changes and evolution need to happen via the proper channels by legislation and decree. They are likely not less perfect than any supposed professionals are.

---

also justice doesnt determine anything, we determine justice. Its a goal, not a tool.
---

Corrik7 posted...

No but any changes and evolution need to happen via the proper channels by legislation and decree. They are likely not less perfect than any supposed professionals are.

I think in this hypothetical situation were discussing the law would change through proper channels to incorporate the professionals were discussing.
---

red sox 777 posted...

But the problem is that if you take the position that if you can't determine if someone is rehabilitated they stay in prison, the result is that they stay in prison for longer. Longer than they would have if there was no rehab -> release provision, because the starting sentence will be longer in a world in which people can be released early. Either that, or the deterrent effect of the sentence will be less because the average served sentence will be less.

So people end up in prison not because of what they did, as determined a jury, but based on what a team of doctors think about them. That's really troubling to me.

I was talking about in the example of life sentences/death penalty alternatives. For nonviolent crimes you can do both early release and post-release rehab programs. Sentencing also needs reforms but also it shouldn't be used to just jail most people indefinitely. That's obviously defeating the point.

It's a very messy system that could stand many improvements.

---

MoogleKupo141 posted...

I think in this hypothetical situation were discussing the law would change through proper channels to incorporate the professionals were discussing.

Your hypothetical from any crime to possibly free based on a professional opinion will never happen.

---

Corrik7 posted...

Your hypothetical from any crime to possibly free based on a professional opinion will never happen.

ok i didnt think it would
---

Looks like KY Republicans are at least smart enough to distance themselves from Bevin (Mitch also denounced):
https://twitter.com/StevenTDennis/status/1205612216432640000

---

Ratio incoming:

https://twitter.com/MattBevin/status/1205611949041573901

---

When is DJT pardoning himself for all crimes he or may not have committed?

---

Graham criticizes Graham seems like almost as much of a thing as Trump criticizes Trump!
https://twitter.com/BillKristol/status/1205634545640448001

---

SCOTUS decided to take up the Trump subpoenas case (both Congress and NY.) Arguments expected in March.

what a joke ruling against congress would kill checks and balances. SCOTUS could have just declined and let the lower rulings stand.

Guessing this is a stall tactic by the conservatives on the court (only need 4 for cert) and I am bracing myself for the eventual Roberts "No, the Administration is wrong on the merits (so we can subpoena future democratic presidents) but you can't get Trump's records because (arcane technical reason)" 5-4 decision in June or whatever.

Not sure if the House can request SCOTUS expedite this because it'd be kinda important and relevant atm but I'm not holding my breath and with arguments in March even if they somehow handed down a ruling in a day by then the Senate trial has surely ended.

---

xp1337 posted...

SCOTUS decided to take up the Trump subpoenas case (both Congress and NY.) Arguments expected in March.

what a joke ruling against congress would kill checks and balances. SCOTUS could have just declined and let the lower rulings stand.

Guessing this is a stall tactic by the conservatives on the court (only need 4 for cert) and I am bracing myself for the eventual Roberts "No, the Administration is wrong on the merits (so we can subpoena future democratic presidents) but you can't get Trump's records because (arcane technical reason)" 5-4 decision in June or whatever.

Not sure if the House can request SCOTUS expedite this because it'd be kinda important and relevant atm but I'm not holding my breath and with arguments in March even if they somehow handed down a ruling in a day by then the Senate trial has surely ended.

Well, they've expedited things before. They decided Bush v. Gore in 3 days. And I think checks and balances requires the executive to have immunity from this kind of thing. Otherwise the President would be below Congress. It would be like the House issuing a subpoena to the Senate.

---

Also, SCOTUS should be keenly aware of what happened when it ruled against Andrew Jackson - he made that famous quip, "[The chief justice] has made his ruling, now let him enforce it." And the President proceeded to ignore the decision of the Supreme Court with no consequences, because there wasn't support in Congress to impeach him.

SCOTUS has been building its power in the nearly 200 years since that episode by being careful never to make orders it didn't think would be followed.

---

Whoops misread as still talking about Trumps taxes

If SCOTUS rules that anybody has to testify they can be held in contempt. I guess Trump could pardon them, but that would likely trigger another impeachment.

---

We could end up with a 2-tier justice system here, as was the case in Britain until the 30s or 40s. Regular people get tried in the regular courts. The President and his allies are tried in the United States Senate.

---

LordoftheMorons posted...

Whoops misread as still talking about Trumps taxes

If SCOTUS rules that anybody has to testify they can be held in contempt. I guess Trump could pardon them, but that would likely trigger another impeachment.

I think you need 51 votes to call witnesses so honestly, it's seems unlikely the Senate successfully calls anyone that the Trump admin doesn't want to testify.

---

Hopefully we'll get Hunter Biden and Hillary Clinton testifying.

---

red sox 777 posted...

Hopefully we'll get Hunter Biden and Hillary Clinton testifying.

Republicans have already threatened to do this so you might get your wish

---

https://twitter.com/joesonka/status/1205682259203969026?s=21

Fuck Bevin

---

Can't they federally try some of the pardoned.

---