Spiridon Louis wrote:
BLeP wrote:
slowguy wrote:
Who got a better deal is irrelevant.
It's not irrelevant. You're forgetting that this is the But but but Obama! game.
See, Obama gave Manning a better deal. Thus Obama is worse than the new Hitler.
That's not the comparison at all. The question is: are you freaking out over the Trump pardon? And if you are, what was your take on Manning's deal? It's about "you" (the people reacting), not about them. If your reaction is worse to Trump's pardon, which is far less a big deal IMO, then your reaction is more about Trump than the action he took. <I'm not talking specifically about you when I say "you" here> That's my angle anyway. I don't care about the deal with the sheriff, and wouldn't have if Obama had done it either. Manning should still be in jail, and I'd say the same no matter who let her out.
Why has nobody mentioned the appearance of a quid pro quo?
Arpaio was an early and huge supporter of Trump's campaign. Trump got elected and then helped his friend out. That looks kind of sleazy to me. Especially as the pardon is so early in his term.
On the other hand, whether or not you like the idea of commuting Manning's sentence it seems pretty clear that Obama did not receive a benefit from doing so.
Kevin
http://kevinmetcalfe.dreamhosters.com My Strava