Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

Prev Next
Re: The pardons that shouldn't [spot] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
spot wrote:
gofigure wrote:
spot wrote:
Guffaw wrote:
Eddie Gallagher is a POS deserving of war crimes court date and likely a noose. Its a poor reflection on the US Military that he 'got away' with a single charge of murder on a POW. It would be a terrible reflection on the USA if he was pardoned. Even many of his Navy SEALs think he is a POS. https://www.navytimes.com/...out-eddie-gallagher/

With the lack of accountability for the evil acts, the narrative that the US is the 'good guy' in global affairs is harder and harder to spin throughout most of the world.


Did you actually read the entire article that you linked? Because while he may well be a POS and should be behind bars, there is not a whole lot of evidence against him, other than mostly second and third hand testimony. There is (or was) apparently some question whether or not he killed anybody. Not to mention the fact that there is evidence that some of those witnesses wanted to get together to "make sure their story jibed" before testifying to the NCIS.

This is not to say he should be pardoned; I think the trial should continue and let justice take its course. But it seems to me you are jumping to some conclusions that the facts may not support.


Navy prosecutors argue that Gallagher's accusers showed "the courage and integrity to come forward and report". So if a pardon pre-conviction is offered and taken, then the they sayers ought be believed.


I don't understand how that logically follows. If Gallagher gets pardoned, then that means the accusers should then be believed? How does a pardon have anything to do with their veracity?

Again, for the record, I'm not for a pardon here. I think a courts martial should determine the veracity of his accusers. But your statement doesn't make any sense to me.

My thinking here, and I might be wrong, but acceptance of a pardon before conviction is a passive admission of guilt and hence his boys were not ginning up some BS just to get back at him and were to be believed.
Quote Reply
Re: The pardons that shouldn't [gofigure] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Let’s assume he didn’t do any of these things.

Given the option of going to trial and possibly jail for a long time or “admitting” to something you didn’t do then getting your record cleared...

Yeah real tough choice.

How does Danny Hart sit down with balls that big?
Last edited by: BLeP: May 21, 19 17:37
Quote Reply
Re: The pardons that shouldn't [gofigure] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Quote:
And, Trump still has the option to pardon himself.

I used to think he was fundamentally unfit for office. The more I think about it, it's actually perfect for him.

All the power, media attention, and money generating potential one can imagine, with absolutely no accountability whatsoever.

"Americans can always be counted on to do the right thing, after they have exhausted all other possibilities."
Quote Reply
Re: The pardons that shouldn't [sphere] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
//All the power...//

I think Trump highlights all of the reasons we should not give so much power to the office of the POTUS. I hope, but highly doubt, we will learn this lesson and make some changes.

We can complain all we want about ‘bad’ pardons, but he has the absolute power. Period.
Quote Reply
Re: The pardons that shouldn't [gofigure] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Well Mr. Trump has some sketchy pardons starting with Sheriff Joe, but has actually been a bit stingy with his pardons compared to the 1,500 pardons/clemency that Mr. Obama granted. (the most since Truman). There must have been a bunch of meth dealers wrongfully convicted during the Obama administration reading the convictions lists. But what the hell that is a crazy part of Executive Power given to the president. Time will tell if soldiers pissing on dead people, whacking a POW, bank fraud, drug dealing, murder or just being Sheriff Joe is more distasteful. I am sure there are more than a couple of folks more pissed at Enron or Bernie Madoff for ruining the lives of people than some other guys that got a Presidential pardon.
Quote Reply
Re: The pardons that shouldn't [sphere] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
sphere wrote:
His pardons appear unprecedented in two distinct ways: the overt political-personal focus, and the absence of a formal DOJ review process.

In other words, he just pardons whomever he wants to, for his own personal reasons. That's not abuse of power at all, I guess. The ball washers here are locked into their circular logic that as long as it's legal, there's nothing to see here, and because he's POTUS, nothing is illegal, so it's his right, and therefore totally fine...

The Black pardon, in particular, really tests the limits of what is appropriate. But as with many other norms, Trump is happy to bulldoze it.

First, I apologize for drastically editing your exhaustive and compelling case. I do agree completely and this is the reason why I am torn about these potential military justice intercession pardons. Although our TDS is strong, there has to be something more to our concern than that animus. Of the cases before Trump now the only one that I am in favor of a pardon is those USMC snipers who urinated on the dead bodies of Taliban fighters. I empathize with these young enlisted men a bit more than the others. If for a personal, politically overt or self serving reason, Trump pardons these boys, then I am fine with that. As to the others, those reasons don't carry the same weight.
Quote Reply
Re: The pardons that shouldn't [BLeP] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
No argument with your point. Which then should go into the argument that Trump, and his want to pardon, ought to at least let military justice run it's course before acting.
Quote Reply
Re: The pardons that shouldn't [burnthesheep] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
burnthesheep wrote:
Why?

He has a big fan base of voters who have adopted the personas or have sick fascinations with the whole "Punisher" thing and glorification of violence subset of society.
And why I am torn because....

These same people seem to have weird sick personal fascinations with the very real, very difficult profession of snipers.

...some of us have an appropriately healthy and patriotic appreciation of the very difficult profession of these snipers.

It's a fascination with the personification of reaching out and punishing a group of people they perceive to have wronged America or some how disenfranchised the "persecuted white male Christian" through the lens of a sniper scope.

There is a sickness there that those snipers might not want association with.

Nothing wrong at all with respecting and praying for our soldiers. Entirely different to hold sick personal fantasies and fan club like mentalities about killing people.

Yes, entirely different.

No joke......I've seen bumper stickers locally supporting that marine guy he wants to pardon. It's out there.


And the owners of those bumpers vote.
Quote Reply
Re: The pardons that shouldn't [HandHeartCrown] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
HandHeartCrown wrote:
Goosedog wrote:
gofigure wrote:
Wapo has editorialized:

"Mr Trump would undermine the military by pardoning those who violated laws of war......
Pardons in these cases would undermine discipline in the ranks, impede cooperation with citizens and fighters of other nations, and insult millions of service members who have behaved honorably.....show weakness, corroding the professionalism and humanity of the armed forces."


Nah, MAGA.


If that wasn't intended to be in pink font, can to please elaborate?

I tread insecurely into deep waters whenever the give and take of pink intent, or not, is raised. Since goosedog has not elaborated, then surely it was intended pink and he is chuckling mightily over our denseness. Or, he is one of the ballwashers and really has no meaningful counterpoint.
Quote Reply
Re: The pardons that shouldn't [G-man] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
G-man wrote:
Well Mr. Trump has some sketchy pardons starting with Sheriff Joe, but has actually been a bit stingy with his pardons compared to the 1,500 pardons/clemency that Mr. Obama granted. (the most since Truman). There must have been a bunch of meth dealers wrongfully convicted during the Obama administration reading the convictions lists. But what the hell that is a crazy part of Executive Power given to the president. Time will tell if soldiers pissing on dead people, whacking a POW, bank fraud, drug dealing, murder or just being Sheriff Joe is more distasteful. I am sure there are more than a couple of folks more pissed at Enron or Bernie Madoff for ruining the lives of people than some other guys that got a Presidential pardon.

So it goes," with great power comes great responsibility." Spiderman or Voltaire?
Quote Reply
Re: The pardons that shouldn't [gofigure] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
gofigure wrote:
burnthesheep wrote:
Why?

He has a big fan base of voters who have adopted the personas or have sick fascinations with the whole "Punisher" thing and glorification of violence subset of society.
And why I am torn because....

These same people seem to have weird sick personal fascinations with the very real, very difficult profession of snipers.

...some of us have an appropriately healthy and patriotic appreciation of the very difficult profession of these snipers.

It's a fascination with the personification of reaching out and punishing a group of people they perceive to have wronged America or some how disenfranchised the "persecuted white male Christian" through the lens of a sniper scope.

There is a sickness there that those snipers might not want association with.

Nothing wrong at all with respecting and praying for our soldiers. Entirely different to hold sick personal fantasies and fan club like mentalities about killing people.

Yes, entirely different.

No joke......I've seen bumper stickers locally supporting that marine guy he wants to pardon. It's out there.


And the owners of those bumpers vote.

Can't disagree with any of that.
Quote Reply

Prev Next