ADVERTISEMENT

Biden Commutes Sentences Of 37 Death Row Inmates Says ‘We Must Stop’ Using Death Penalty At Federal Level

All very good points.
Sadly, I think this virtually guarantees/broadens some sort of mass J6 pardon.

That said, not to take us too far down a weird rabbit hole, but as I took a quick glance at the history of mass pardons, one might argue that a mass J6 pardon might have a longer historical pedigree than some of the more recent "policy" ones (which started perhaps with Truman's selective service or Kennedy's narcotics ones, though arguably perhaps earlier with the mormon polygamy ones but that was in response to a disavowal of the position). Surprisingly (to me at least), some of the biggest ones go way back to the very beginning, and have involved 'insurrections" - Washington's Whiskey Rebellion, Adams' Frie's rebellion, Buchanan's Mormon War pardons, and Johnson and Grant's civil war pardons.
 
Last edited:
If it meant so much to Joe Biden to pardon these people he should have when he first became president. He's just being obtuse to do it now.
The most dangerous times in any administration are when they are entering and when they are leaving. In both cases (and perhaps especially here as to the latter), the core risk is the same - party activists among WH staff running with their pet issues, often using extraordinary/nonroutine processes and authority.
 
Joe is posturing for his upcoming Vatican visit,.. and ultimately his meet the maker trip.
I'd certainly be ok with that. But if that's the case, I'd suggest he might have just one more reeeally big act of contrition he may have to undertake before late January if he's shooting for doctrinal consistency....
 
Interesting seeing all the anti-abortion numpties being ok with murder by the state. How do you reconcile that?
While consistency is ultimately the 'right' answer, i would note that there are very plausible moral and other distinctions. One involves killing the innocent, the other not so much. Further, one involves the act of an individual, the other the act of the state (whose existence, while ideally aligned with the moral imperative, sometimes exists apart from it).
 
  • Like
Reactions: DogBoyRy
Interesting seeing all the anti-abortion numpties being ok with murder by the state. How do you reconcile that?


I'm pro-choice (within reason) btw. This piece of shit doesn't deserve to breathe. The left would rather abort a thousand babies than see him put down though, which is wild.
 
  • Angry
Reactions: HIWILLE
While consistency is ultimately the 'right' answer, i would note that there are very plausible moral and other distinctions. One involves killing the innocent, the other not so much. Further, one involves the act of an individual, the other the act of the state (whose existence, while ideally aligned with the moral imperative, sometimes exists apart from it).
The state has killed a lot of innocent people via execution. But, you probably knew that.
 
The state has killed a lot of innocent people via execution. But, you probably knew that.
absolutely. though i'm pretty sure they didn't typically execute people who actually went through a judicial process. which counts for something important.

The argument about whether our process is good enough is a very good one (and it's probably not), but it is a very different issue than the comparative morality of the death penalty and abortion.
 
Sadly, I think this virtually guarantees/broadens some sort of mass J6 pardon.

That said, not to take us too far down a weird rabbit hole, but as I took a quick glance at the history of mass pardons, one might argue that a mass J6 pardon might have a longer historical pedigree than some of the more recent "policy" ones (which started perhaps with Truman's selective service or Kennedy's narcotics ones, though arguably perhaps earlier with the mormon polygamy ones but that was in response to a disavowal of the position). Surprisingly (to me at least), some of the biggest ones go way back to the very beginning, and have involved 'insurrections" - Washington's Whiskey Rebellion, Adams' Frie's rebellion, Buchanan's Mormon War pardons, and Johnson and Grant's civil war pardons.
Trump doesn't need any legal justification or precedent to issue mass pardons. He'll do it because he wants to because deep down he knows he committed crimes, and he did nothing for 3 hours while his goons ransacked the Capitol. Pardoning all of those cop beaters lets Trump create a construct that 1/6 was a peaceful protest. Don't overthink it and ponder how Buchanan's Mormon War pardons might impact Trump's thinking.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Moral
absolutely. though i'm pretty sure they didn't typically execute people who actually went through a judicial process. which counts for something important.

The argument about whether our process is good enough is a very good one (and it's probably not), but it is a very different issue than the comparative morality of the death penalty and abortion.
I have seen studies many years ago providing credible arguments and evidence that up to 10 percent of all people executed were innocent of the crime they were convicted of. The Feds might be better at it, but the death penalty process in this country is riddled with flaws and biases.
 
I have seen studies many years ago providing credible arguments and evidence that up to 10 percent of all people executed were innocent of the crime they were convicted of. The Feds might be better at it, but the death penalty process in this country is riddled with flaws and biases.
i agree.
 
This was a dumb move. If for no other reason than it is going to create serious issues wrt federalism.

South Carolina relied on the federal sentence when they allowed Roof to plea and avoid a state death penalty verdict.
 
Trump doesn't need any legal justification or precedent to issue mass pardons. He'll do it because he wants to because deep down he knows he committed crimes, and he did nothing for 3 hours while his goons ransacked the Capitol. Pardoning all of those cop beaters lets Trump create a construct that 1/6 was a peaceful protest. Don't overthink it and ponder how Buchanan's Mormon War pardons might impact Trump's thinking.
no president needs any legal justification for mass or other pardons. it's an absolute power. But this sort of thing, as well as the preemptive stuff that might be coming down the pike, just makes it politically easier. (As I learned in my constitutional politics seminar those many years ago, at the very least, the branches of government always tend to at least act as though they're acting in a manner consistent with the constitution and constitutional tradition.) My point was simply one of surprise at how far back the practice of "insurrection pardons" actually reached. I suppose if there's a 'good insurrection v bad insurrection pardon' distinction to be found, it may relate to the need of the G to put things behind us for teh good of the country at a given point in time. i don't put j6 in the good side of that bucket.
 
This was a dumb move. If for no other reason than it is going to create serious issues wrt federalism.

South Carolina relied on the federal sentence when they allowed Roof to plea and avoid a state death penalty verdict.
interesting point. worse yet, to lucas' point, "execution" (no pun intended) of death-eligible cases at the state level is worse than it is at the federal level, so this could actually reinforce the problems we have properly processing these types of cases.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mnole03
Why don’t you let us hear about them if there are a lot of cases.
You know google would solve this for you in about 2 seconds right? And no, I’m not going to do it for you.

They’re absolutely a tragic thing that innocent people have been executed for crimes they didn’t commit. This isn’t something in dispute.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Moral
Florida brought us Ted Bundy. There are other notable examples as well. Yes, my bar is extremely high, but not impossible to achieve.
So what is an objective method of determining this standard? Take DNA. It can be planted. Do you think there isn’t a single corrupt police officer out there? Officers have been convicted of planting evidence everywhere.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ree4 and Moral
Too bad, don't like it, suck it up buttercup. Elections have consequences, and Biden can do whatever he wants. Remember 2020 he landslided Bonespurs and became president. You can babble back and forth about whether he should have done it or not, the fact is he had the right to do it and he did. Enough said.
 
  • Sad
Reactions: HIWILLE
So what is an objective method of determining this standard? Take DNA. It can be planted. Do you think there isn’t a single corrupt police officer out there? Officers have been convicted of planting evidence everywhere.
To do what he’s asking for, you have to envision the perfect case. That sort of standard where the bad guy is caught red handed, with all the evidence and witnesses accurate beyond any shadow of a doubt, with no funny games played by prosecutors/cops is all but impossible to meet practically.
 
Too bad, don't like it, suck it up buttercup. Elections have consequences, and Biden can do whatever he wants. Remember 2020 he landslided Bonespurs and became president. You can babble back and forth about whether he should have done it or not, the fact is he had the right to do it and he did. Enough said.
Fair enough. So no complaining about Trump, right? Election have consequences. He’ll have the right to make the choices me makes. 😉
 
Fair enough. So no complaining about Trump, right? Election have consequences. He’ll have the right to make the choices me makes. 😉
Sure, Bonespurs was elected president. No making up hokey stories about stolen votes and dumped ballots and dead voters, real men stand up and acknowledge when they got beat. Which is why Bonespurs didn't do it. He's too weak in the ego to admit he got beat in 2020. That's sad. He won the 2024 election and he can make any move/choice he wants. And I can remark about how I believe many of his moves are stupid, incompetent, and just plain bad. : See Gaetz as AG as example #1. That was horrible. With more obviously to come.
 
Last edited:
Really? Tell that to Obama who killed a US citizen without any due (judicial) process.

For the record, I believe the death penalty should only be used in cases where there's proof beyond any doubt. There are people who don't deserve to live, just as a rabid dog has to be put down. I recognize there are many people wrongly convicted because of misconduct, incompetence, and mistakes.

Mr. Obama. I don't think you should kill people.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ree4 and gohawks50
  • Like
Reactions: gohawks50
Sadly, Joe doesn't even know that he communicated their sentences.

Since election day, Waldo has had more public appearances than Joe.
Joe doesn't know he 'communicated' any of their sentences because he didn't 'communicate' any of their sentences.
 
  • Like
Reactions: gohawks50
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT