Board 8 > Politics Containment Topic 360: The Red Ringleaders of Death

(+) Yeah! (+)

I have no problem with Bill Clinton pardoning his brother for a drug charge that he served his full sentence for.

I do have a problem with him pardoning Marc Rich after Rich's wife donated money to Hillary's campaign.

---

kevwaffles posted...

Did you skip over the posts that the pardon was done after he had served his full sentence?

Ok? Im sure lots of people would love to answer No to questions about if they had committed a felony before and dont have a brother thats a president.

Unless Clinton pardoned every single person who already served their sentence its nepotism

---

masterplum posted...

Ok? Im sure lots of people would love to answer No to questions about if they had committed a felony before and dont have a brother thats a president.

Unless Clinton pardoned every single person who already served their sentence its nepotism

It was slammed for nepotism, yeah. It also would be the precedent pointed to for Trump if he pardons across his family. There also was a lot of smoke on whether his brother and brother in law were accepting payments to lobby for pardons of others as well.

Then of course there was also pardons for people who refused to testify against the Clinton's and such also during the whitewater scandal I believe as well.

Pardons are just bad.

---

I mean I agree that he shouldnt have done it

I think its a pretty damn weak reason not to vote for his wife (not even Bill himself) against literally Donald Trump, though (and also as it originally arose in this discussion is a very weak both-sidesing of Trumps horrific record on pardons).

---

LordoftheMorons posted...

I mean I agree that he shouldnt have done it

I think its a pretty damn weak reason not to vote for his wife (not even Bill himself) against literally Donald Trump, though (and also as it originally arose in this discussion is a very weak both-sidesing of Trumps horrific record on pardons).

I mean, I didnt know about it until today. I didnt vote for Hillary because I thought she was corrupt in general, this just being an example of that. The way the democrats undemocratically handed her the nomination (Which is completely allowed but having the guise of a fair primary is totally hypocritical) was a much bigger factor.

None of which means that I wanted to vote for Trump. I just thought they both sucked. Having known what I know now I probably would have voted for her as the rise of white nationalism is pretty bad, but in 2016 there was still a thought maybe once he was elected he would stop acting Trumpy

---

I disagree both that Hillary was corrupt or that the 2016 Dem primary was at all rigged but dont have the energy to argue either here again

---

LordoftheMorons posted...

I disagree both that Hillary was corrupt or that the 2016 Dem primary was at all rigged but dont have the energy to argue either here again

Oh sweet child.

---

The negative press Hillary Clinton got was FAR more warranted than what Biden gets. And it wasn't warranted to begin with.

Trump and his base are just getting crazier by the minute.

---

masterplum posted...

None of which means that I wanted to vote for Trump. I just thought they both sucked. Having known what I know now I probably would have voted for her as the rise of white nationalism is pretty bad,

trump's handling of covid has also been pretty bad!

---

MoogleKupo141 posted...

is Clinton pardoning his brother even corrupt, really?

whats the point of giving the president pardon power if they cant use it to help out their brother a little

i mean it's his brother so yes, though what benefit he had exactly isn't particularly clear. presumably something the felony had prevented or limited him in some way. it's definitely unclear as to what exactly the reason was but it's not like anybody could do anything so it faded relatively quickly. was a noted moment though since the 140 or so pardons did happen on his last day as president with his brother as the highlighted one. even has a nickname of pardongate, so let it be known even in 2001 the answer was "throw -gate at the end."

can't say i really get the "oh but he served his sentence!" bit since uh, it's a pardon. a pardon says you shouldn't have served it at all, that it shouldn't have been a crime, etc.

---

Wanglicious posted...

i mean it's his brother so yes, though what benefit he had exactly isn't particularly clear. presumably something the felony had prevented or limited him in some way. it's definitely unclear as to what exactly the reason was but it's not like anybody could do anything so it faded relatively quickly. was a noted moment though since the 140 or so pardons did happen on his last day as president with his brother as the highlighted one. even has a nickname of pardongate, so let it be known even in 2001 the answer was "throw -gate at the end."

can't say i really get the "oh but he served his sentence!" bit since uh, it's a pardon. a pardon says you shouldn't have served it at all, that it shouldn't have been a crime, etc.

---

Dude, it doesnt matter what the outcome is, at the end of the day his brother wanted a pardon and Bill gave it to him, and millions of people in the same situation with completed sentences didnt get one.

Is it detrimentally corrupt? No. Is it corrupt? Yes. It can be both bad and not as bad as a hundred things Trump has done at the same time.

---

There is a difference between that and planning to pardon a bunch of your ACTIVE co-conspirators in your corruption, as well as pardoning those who purchased a pardon from you.

---

https://twitter.com/hugolowell/status/1351210400805773317?s=21

Well see how this one holds up

---

masterplum posted...

Dude, it doesnt matter what the outcome is, at the end of the day his brother wanted a pardon and Bill gave it to him, and millions of people in the same situation with completed sentences didnt get one.

Is it detrimentally corrupt? No. Is it corrupt? Yes. It can be both bad and not as bad as a hundred things Trump has done at the same time.

I mean yeah, this is true.

Arguably the best pardon (and maybe the most radical action he took?) was when Obama pardoned Chelsea Manning.

Shame the government pulled that shit to get her back into lockup for awhile afterwards, but yeah, shes free now.

---

now that's just bullshit.
...and was added onto the wikipedia article for the first time on... August 19th, 2020.

sounds like wikipedia alright.


---

UshiromiyaEva posted...

There is a difference between that and planning to pardon a bunch of your ACTIVE co-conspirators in your corruption, as well as pardoning those who purchased a pardon from you.

Can literally be applied to Clinton. Pardongate after all refers to the fact that his brother and half brother were possibly selling access to the President for pardons. That Clinton wouldn't have even seen these people's names in pardons if not for this.

Also, they also pardoned people in the whitewater scandal, including some who refused to testify against them.

People really need to learn their history in here.

---

i obviously saw the source considering it got added before the current listing.
still is bullshit. but glad you believe everything the government says now Mr. Ad Hominem.


---

Wanglicious posted...

i obviously saw the source considering it got added before the current listing.
still is bullshit. but glad you believe everything the government says now Mr. Ad Hominem.

My argument wasn't "you're wrong, and my evidence is that you're an idiot". My argument was "you're wrong, and you're an idiot"
---

so your argument is just that you don't have one and just want to lash out.


---

Wanglicious posted...

so your argument is just that you don't have one and just want to lash out.

My argument is that this is the government's position, not lolwikipedia nonsense fiat... which all you enunciated of your "point"
---

Wang, your entire argument seems to be

Wanglicious posted...

but glad you believe everything the government says now Mr. Ad Hominem.

I dont BELIEVE the government when they say pardons dont mean innocence.

Its just...such a weird semantic position, and the one objectively without basis.

---

and i'll again iterate that's bullshit. DOJ saying that now doesn't mean that's actually the case or is believed to be the case, made most clear by how cheeky in how it's trying to act like a presidential pardon and a governor's pardon are any different on this. but i'll also laugh at wikipedia being used as a source for anything regarding politics since this literally wasn't there even half a year ago, which is par for the course for wikipedia and political issues. lol wikipedia is always valid on that front.

i mean look if you're saying tony should've used government propaganda instead of wikipedia i guess that's true, though it'd still be a laugh.

---

Wang what the fuck are you even alleging the government is lying about here? They control the pardons. The government is the foremost expert on how they work. You're basically complaining that you think pardons should only be used one way, or that the government only uses them one way, when they specifically are telling you otherwise and historically have used it in other ways.

---

Are you guys arguing over the word ordinarily? It just means in past uses this has been how it has been used a lot. There have been a lot of cases this wouldn't apply to. Again... See Bill Clinton and Marc Rich for a good example. Never believed he did anything wrong, fled the country to avoid prosecution, etc.

A pardon is forgiveness for a crime. It doesn't matter your remorse, your crime, where in the investigation or sentence is. It is a forgiveness and clean wipe of it.

---

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

I dont BELIEVE the government when they say pardons dont mean innocence.

never said that, no. never said the word innocent because pardons haven't necessarily or traditionally meant that, though that's changed over the past couple decades most notably.

---

Wanglicious posted...

now that's just bullshit.
...and was added onto the wikipedia article for the first time on... August 19th, 2020.

sounds like wikipedia alright.

...a "wikipedia sux" post? what is this, 2006?

---

Wow, that might be the most "durr wikipedia" "Look at the source, bitch" own I've ever seen.

---

Wanglicious posted...

but i'll also laugh at wikipedia being used as a source for anything regarding politics since this literally wasn't there even half a year ago,

uh yeah, that's how wikipedia works. articles constantly change because its users add information and fix errors. that's a good thing, not something that's deserving of laughter and mockery.

---

Infuriating thread

https://twitter.com/btshapir/status/1351218053766410240?s=21

---

HeroDelTiempo17 posted...

Wang what the fuck are you even alleging the government is lying about here? They control the pardons. The government is the foremost expert on how they work. You're basically complaining that you think pardons should only be used one way, or that the government only uses them one way, when they specifically are telling you otherwise and historically have used it in other ways.

mostly the phrasing and the stuff in bold. so basically the first sentence that goes on for a couple lines. this part:

A pardon is an expression of the Presidents forgiveness and ordinarily is granted in recognition of the applicants acceptance of responsibility for the crime and established good conduct for a significant period of time after conviction or completion of sentence.

i mean some of this isn't exactly lying but spun - president's pardon being any different than a governor's, it not solely being a function derived from being head of executive, this element of benevolence, that 'acceptance of responsibility' crap where it's basically saying "pardons are for good boys in jail."

but no, pardons can be used in plenty of different ways, it's the perk of an absolute power. gave two examples, lack of serving a sentence, that something you're convicted of shouldn't have been a crime. those two are distinctly different from each other but there's other ones to use too. sentence reduction is common if they feel a crime is overly harsh too - this was the bulk of obama's last day. technically that might count as what the DOJ is saying there but there's a pretty notable gap between "pardons are ordinarily used to cut down a sentence" and that bit they wrote, which i just roll my eyes to since it acts like both parties are such good beings.

---

Wang literally claiming the government isn't a good source for how the government works..

Maybe he is a Q.

---

I mean, Wang isn't wrong.

---

Wanglicious posted...

that something you're convicted of shouldn't have been a crime

I'm not sure this one specifically makes sense, since it's very often argued that accepting a pardon is an admission of guilt.

The whole "forgiveness" thing falls more in line, since it could basically be like saying "Well what you did was technically a crime but it's a dumb/minor/whatever crime and you're clearly not that bad so I forgive you/you're pardoned."

---

man, i didn't know LtM was so trusting of the government now. you know police are part of the government too, right? so i guess you now trust police when they tell you how it works.


---

Wang, this "Oh NOW you trust the government instead of Wanglicious of Board 8" argument might be the most dumbass thing I've ever read and you should probably back away from it before you lose any remaining credibility you have.

If you want to argue your logic, argue your logic. But that line is hilariously bullshit.

---

Here is the whole of what the Constitution says about the Presidential Pardon:

The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States; he may require the Opinion, in writing, of the principal Officer in each of the executive Departments, upon any Subject relating to the Duties of their respective Offices, and he shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offenses against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.

Here's (all) the definition(s) of "Pardon":

Definition of pardon (Entry 1 of 2)
1
: INDULGENCE sense 4
2
: the excusing of an offense without exacting a penalty
offered a pardon to the draft evader
3
a
: a release from the legal penalties of an offense
b
: an official warrant of remission of penalty
a royal pardon later released him from a death sentence
American Guide Series: Maryland
4
: excuse or forgiveness for a fault, offense, or discourtesy
I beg your pardon
She asked my pardon for taking up so much of my time.

Definition of pardon (Entry 2 of 2)
transitive verb
1
a
: to absolve from the consequences of a fault or crime
b
: to allow (an offense) to pass without punishment : FORGIVE
c
: to relieve of a penalty improperly assessed

Here's what Wang said:

Wanglicious posted...

can't say i really get the "oh but he served his sentence!" bit since uh, it's a pardon. a pardon says you shouldn't have served it at all, that it shouldn't have been a crime, etc.

Wang is wrong.

The end.

---

Tony you're believing the UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION and DICTIONARIES?!?! lmao xfd rofl

---

Wanglicious posted...

man, i didn't know LtM was so trusting of the government now. you know police are part of the government too, right? so i guess you now trust police when they tell you how it works.

I trust them more then I trust you.

---

Pardons can literally be rejected by the person receiving them on the basis they insist on claiming their innocence even after conviction. Accepting them also removes 5th amendment protections for any crimes you're being pardoned for because you are both admitting guilt and not incriminating yourself anymore.

So no, pardons do not mean you're innocent and taking that position is beyond stupid.
---

HashtagSEP posted...

I'm not sure this one specifically makes sense, since it's very often argued that accepting a pardon is an admission of guilt.

The whole "forgiveness" thing falls more in line, since it could basically be like saying "Well what you did was technically a crime but it's a dumb/minor/whatever crime and you're clearly not that bad so I forgive you/you're pardoned."

traditionally it meant guilt yes, only recently has it been accepted as not necessarily meaning guilt. clearest example of these would be everything related to the innocence project since they're literally not guilty of anything.

though for what i said there, you're still guilty of a crime. i was thinking more whistleblowers or civil rights activists, things where yeah, you committed a crime, but it shouldn't have been one that had any punishment to it. didn't say that last bit but i think that clears it up as a separate position than the cases where you're saying you've committed no crime.

---

HashtagSEP posted...

If you want to argue your logic, argue your logic. But that line is hilariously bullshit.

why on earth are you acting like i'm gonna do more than shitpost against someone trolling me.

---

Wanglicious posted...

traditionally it meant guilt yes, only recently has it been accepted as not necessarily meaning guilt. clearest example of these would be everything related to the innocence project since they're literally not guilty of anything.

though for what i said there, you're still guilty of a crime. i was thinking more whistleblowers or civil rights activists, things where yeah, you committed a crime, but it shouldn't have been one that had any punishment to it. didn't say that last bit but i think that clears it up as a separate position than the cases where you're saying you've committed no crime.

Arguably the biggest amount of pardons if ever tallied would be for the draft dodger blanket pardon. Most weren't even charged nor would have been charged ultimately, but this pardon, I think (I should probably look it up), was under the guise that it shouldn't have been a crime to dodge the draft because that war shouldn't have been there to dodge.

---

forgot draft dodgers when i said that, somehow. even though that's definitely the biggest example, politically and numerically, especially for the type of pardon i was talking about there. you'd have to go back to Reconstruction era to find a bigger example if talking numbers considering it was pretty much a blanket pardon with very few exceptions. i'm not sure what the exact wording was, just remember that the purpose was to put Vietnam behind the nation and that was the easiest and firmest way to pull it off.

---

Wanglicious posted...

forgot draft dodgers when i said that, somehow. even though that's definitely the biggest example, politically and numerically, especially for the type of pardon i was talking about there. you'd have to go back to Reconstruction era to find a bigger example if talking numbers considering it was pretty much a blanket pardon with very few exceptions. i'm not sure what the exact wording was, just remember that the purpose was to put Vietnam behind the nation and that was the easiest and firmest way to pull it off.

Well, Carter was staunchly against the Vietnam War and that side politically view the war as criminal and immoral. So, I feel like it was probably that he felt like it shouldn't have been a crime to dodge that war, but I could be wrong.

---

Corrik7 posted...

Well, Carter was staunchly against the Vietnam War and that side politically view the war as criminal and immoral.

I feel like most of the other side do too these days!
---

https://twitter.com/jon_christian/status/1350821265062453248?s=21

Love you Yang but fucking hell
---

i'm fine with him doing some not drunk Socratic side questing.
it's WAY more than what we get from other candidates. only question is whether yang offered to buy him a slice too or not.


---

Can he get on with the main quest?

https://twitter.com/AdamSculthorpe/status/1350872780355596289?s=19

Parler wasn't content with providing only the US government with identifiable information about its users, now it also wants Russia to have that same access!

---