Tomorrow we will either see a bunch of

[Jtbny]

Just for the record, Trump has used his power to pardon significantly less than past presidents.


Using Clinton Bush and Obama as examples but recall they had double the term.

Clinton 396 pardons (218 in last year alone) 61 clemency
Bush 189 pardons 11 clemency
Obama 212 pardons (142 in his last year alone) 4071 clemency

Trump so far.... 28 pardons .

Great. Its not how many its who. If he pardons his kids , Rudy, himself, you cool with that?

[Farley1324]

Great. Its not how many its who. If he pardons his kids , Rudy, himself, you cool with that?

IF Biden pardons his kid? lol he's either going to use his influence to keep him entirely out of repercussions or pardon him, what is this "if"?







Can you guys imagine how much the MSM would be sucking off a dem potus if they did what Trump did with the economy - not starting wars - not pardoning everybody under the sun? My God

[Jtbny]

On topic just saw that 17 states are joining the SCOTUS lawsuit against some of the states where other election cases were dismissed in lower courts what the hell is going on. I’d think that states joining would be aware of evidence to be presented before agreeing to join? I can’t fathom red state governors completely disgracing themselves for an outgoing and highly controversial president. I mean it’s not going to make them a lock in their next elections, and might work against them from the Rs that dislike Trump. Hunter Biden stuff on CNN, anti China stuff on msn. Strange.

Its not the states its their AGs -Utah Gov for example came out against it even though their AG "signed on". Its lead by the same Texas AG being investigated by the FBI. https://www.texastribune.org/2020/11...en-paxton-fbi/

It was signed on by other states but that doesn't mean much. In fact I don't think any of those states are even sending reps to the court. The case is a joke all around and SCOTUS will likely hand Paxton a sticky note with their decision that reads "lol, no".

[Farley1324]

Its not the states its their AGs. Its lead by the same Texas AG being investigated by the FBI. https://www.texastribune.org/2020/11...en-paxton-fbi/

It was signed on by other states but that doesn't mean much. In fact I don't think any of those states are even sending reps to the court. The case is a joke all around and SCOTUS will likely hand Paxton a sticky note with their decision that reads "lol, no".

That mean states signing on certainly means something

[mtpockets]

[7Seconds]

Can you really imagine if every state had the right to sue every other state in the Supreme Court over changes to election law? And that could retroactively change the outcome of elections? No state would sign on to this, including Texas, if there was a snowball’s chance of the Court reaching the merits.

Why would it even stop at election laws? What would stop, say, Alabama from suing New York over their abortion laws? If this suit is legitimized you could start to see SCOTUS being viewed as a super-legislature where states can argue other states' laws.

[7Seconds]

I have not, I haven’t looked at anything presented. I live close enough to Chicago that I watch the skyline. I figured if there was a major development in Trumps favor, I would see the smoke from riot fires. Kinda like when a new pope is installed...


I haven’t been following any of this stuff closely. However, I’ve given depositions in law offices, hotels, etc. Each time, there has been a judge present, a court reporter, and I get sworn in before the deposition. There are certainly court like rules in these situations, because the judge will be barking procedural things I don’t understand at the attorneys. In fact, they tell you that it is exactly the same as being in a court as it relates to perjury. While I’m not well versed in legal proceedings, I have done a few of these. I’m pretty good at making the plaintiffs counsel mad, batting 1000 there, but that’s because their cases are usually weak and full of holes.

I wasn’t real clear but I was speaking specifically about Rudy’s public hearings. No real threat of perjury since no one was sworn in as they were just speaking in front of a few state reps and not a full legislative body or judge.

[Plateauplower]

Can you really imagine if every state had the right to sue every other state in the Supreme Court over changes to election law? And that could retroactively change the outcome of elections? No state would sign on to this, including Texas, if there was a snowball’s chance of the Court reaching the merits.

Why would it even stop at election laws? What would stop, say, Alabama from suing New York over their abortion laws? If this suit is legitimized you could start to see SCOTUS being viewed as a super-legislature where states can argue other states' laws.

You have a point there. Really, even if a state isn't following its own laws or constitution and that has a negative impact on the plaintiff states, it would be difficult in terms of state's rights. Big can O worms.

[induced_drag]

Great. Its not how many its who. If he pardons his kids , Rudy, himself, you cool with that?

Very quickly, several past presidents made questionable pardons certainly motivated by self dealings.

What is different in this case were trump to pardon his circle, is the degree to which they have been continually hunted, LOOKING for something to charge. NYS is a great example of insanity to get trump. They even altered their own constitution with the sole purpose of getting Trump. Correct that...they altered their constitution on the hopes once they got his tax returns, they could find a criminal charge.

That is not the way the justice system is supposed to work. It is not, or should not be a 'witch hunt'. There are blue people in power who have basicly made threats that they will hunt any Trump supporters down and 'make them pay'. Even AOC encouraged people to start making 'lists'.

So no, I am not bothered by him pardoning them at all considering as of the past 3 1/2 years of continual investigation, they have not found criminal acts. If you did deep enough, you can probably find charges on anyone. Especially people running businesses with cash flows in the spectrum. Just like Trumps tax returns. I dont believe even he has seen them. Except to sign a few papers that his accountants told him to sign. He has no idea what is in them.

[Jtbny]

Very quickly, several past presidents made questionable pardons certainly motivated by self dealings.

What is different in this case were trump to pardon his circle, is the degree to which they have been continually hunted, LOOKING for something to charge. NYS is a great example of insanity to get trump. They even altered their own constitution with the sole purpose of getting Trump. Correct that...they altered their constitution on the hopes once they got his tax returns, they could find a criminal charge.

That is not the way the justice system is supposed to work. It is not, or should not be a 'witch hunt'. There are blue people in power who have basicly made threats that they will hunt any Trump supporters down and 'make them pay'. Even AOC encouraged people to start making 'lists'.

So no, I am not bothered by him pardoning them at all considering as of the past 3 1/2 years of continual investigation, they have not found criminal acts. If you did deep enough, you can probably find charges on anyone. Especially people running businesses with cash flows in the spectrum. Just like Trumps tax returns. I dont believe even he has seen them. Except to sign a few papers that his accountants told him to sign. He has no idea what is in them.

And this is why you're not objective and I can't take your arguments ITT seriously.

[Gabbar99]

test

[mtpockets]

tickle

[Plateauplower]

tickle

giggle

edit - Wont let me post in the cosmetic surgery thread anymore.

[induced_drag]

And this is why you're not objective and I can't take your arguments ITT seriously.

I am taking that to mean you do not believe that Trump or his associates were / are targeted in any way unfairly?

If the above is true, than we definitely disagree strongly. But I would never say I cant take you 'seriously'..... I would just say we could not disagree any greater on the issue.



I try a bunch to give people who seem 'real' the benefit of the doubt. I actually was not going to even respond to your post, but I figured it was a 'fair' question and 'deserved' an answer.

I should have realized a long time ago, that 'real world' rules dont apply here, and I am obviously not very good at this interface.

[Jtbny]

I am taking that to mean you do not believe that Trump or his associates were / are targeted in any way unfairly?

If the above is true, than we definitely disagree strongly. But I would never say I cant take you 'seriously'..... I would just say we could not disagree any greater on the issue.



I try a bunch to give people who seem 'real' the benefit of the doubt. I actually was not going to even respond to your post, but I figured it was a 'fair' question and 'deserved' an answer.

I should have realized a long time ago, that 'real world' rules dont apply here, and I am obviously not very good at this interface.

I've repeatedly said I don't think your objective on this topic so that shouldn't surprise you. Your response on the pardons was in line with that as you first went to "whataboutism" using past pardons and then saying you were just fine with pardoning his inner circle including his kids. You think you're being objective? Roger Stone? That cool?

FWIW we can revisit this when/if Biden does the same for his son and I'll feel the same way. It's an abuse of the power IMO and even though its perfectly within their rights we, the people, should take notice.

And with all due respect don't be so sensitive. We are just going back and forth here for the sake of conversation. It's not personal at all man.

[induced_drag]

I've repeatedly said I don't think your objective on this topic so that shouldn't surprise you. Your response on the pardons was in line with that as you first went to "whataboutism" using past pardons and then saying you were just fine with pardoning his inner circle including his kids. You think you're being objective? Roger Stone? That cool?

FWIW we can revisit this when/if Biden does the same for his son and I'll feel the same way. It's an abuse of the power IMO and even though its perfectly within their rights we, the people, should take notice.

And with all due respect don't be so sensitive. We are just going back and forth here for the sake of conversation. It's not personal at all man.

Understand your point in some regard.

But yours is a false equivalency. Hunter Biden actually did do things which are very apparent. It is not taking so much 'looking into' to find it. In fact, you could say the justice system has been protecting him by sitting on the laptop for almost a year.

Contrast that with Trumps kids, they have been searching for years and there are still no credible allegations of wrong doing. IF there were pics of Trump Jr smoking crack w/ Chinese prostitutes and doing all kinds of deals with foreign powers for which they have no real reason to be compensated other than their association with someone in US govt that can favor them, then yes investigate and charge him.


My main point is the left has made direst threats to Trump and anyone associated with them. AOC is telling people to 'make lists' and we will 'make them pay'.

A pardon at this point is not really dismissing ANY charges since there are none. It is to stop the future harassment which is already promised.


Now if, if they find later on that Trump's kids were selling nuclear secrets for hookers and crack, you bet your a$$ I would be pissed. But I see the pardon as letting them move on with their lives. I mean the left has gotten crazy and has a history of weaponizing govt. Think the IRS under obama. This kind of stuff can happen on both sides, the with Trump, it has been taken to a new, and very scary level.


That is my thought on pardons and why I have no issues with it.

[x-trainer ben]

And think the IRS under President Cheney.^^

[Jtbny]

Understand your point in some regard.

But yours is a false equivalency. Hunter Biden actually did do things which are very apparent. It is not taking so much 'looking into' to find it. In fact, you could say the justice system has been protecting him by sitting on the laptop for almost a year.

What happened to innocent until proven guilty?

Contrast that with Trumps kids, they have been searching for years and there are still no credible allegations of wrong doing. IF there were pics of Trump Jr smoking crack w/ Chinese prostitutes and doing all kinds of deals with foreign powers for which they have no real reason to be compensated other than their association with someone in US govt that can favor them, then yes investigate and charge him.

The Trump kids - https://ag.ny.gov/press-release/2019...ump-foundation

And since we are applying guilt before the cases are settled -
https://www.cnn.com/2020/05/19/polit...any/index.html

My main point is the left has made direst threats to Trump and anyone associated with them. AOC is telling people to 'make lists' and we will 'make them pay'.

Not a good look for sure. But I see her point. If you're supporting the open attempt to overturn an election you should be held accountable. But I don't mean accountable like attempting to kidnap a sitting official I mean w/holding public office.

https://abc7chicago.com/michigan-gov...litia/8079861/

A pardon at this point is not really dismissing ANY charges since there are none. It is to stop the future harassment which is already promised.

Then you don't understand the power of the pardon.

Now if, if they find later on that Trump's kids were selling nuclear secrets for hookers and crack, you bet your a$$ I would be pissed. But I see the pardon as letting them move on with their lives. I mean the left has gotten crazy and has a history of weaponizing govt. Think the IRS under obama. This kind of stuff can happen on both sides, the with Trump, it has been taken to a new, and very scary level.


That is my thought on pardons and why I have no issues with it.

Thats the bar? Selling nuclear secrets?

Weaponizing govt isn't a right/left thing, ID. You know this. This is where I call out your bias.

[induced_drag]

Thats the bar? Selling nuclear secrets?

Weaponizing govt isn't a right/left thing, ID. You know this. This is where I call out your bias.

Dont have super amount of time. I have been playing too much hooky lately

The nuclear secrets was hyperbole. But you and I probably agree that anybody in politics deserves to be prosecuted for 'real' violations of law.

The financial crimes get a little tougher since I believe if you look hard enough you can find something. Getting into the levels they are operating on, it is no longer 1040ez Without some giant coordinated conspiracy, I dont see most 'financial' crimes in the same light as others. That is just me. Manfort for example, was convicted in Muller probe in part for obtaining loans 12 years ago (or so) using improper financial statements. Those loans were long paid off in full and no one was de-frauded. To me, going after that as a "win" from the Muller probe is the kind of things I think are a waste.

Again. Respect. Be good over a beer someday.

[Jtbny]

Dont have super amount of time. I have been playing too much hooky lately

The nuclear secrets was hyperbole. But you and I probably agree that anybody in politics deserves to be prosecuted for 'real' violations of law.

The financial crimes get a little tougher since I believe if you look hard enough you can find something. Getting into the levels they are operating on, it is no longer 1040ez Without some giant coordinated conspiracy, I dont see most 'financial' crimes in the same light as others. That is just me. Manfort for example, was convicted in Muller probe in part for obtaining loans 12 years ago (or so) using improper financial statements. Those loans were long paid off in full and no one was de-frauded. To me, going after that as a "win" from the Muller probe is the kind of things I think are a waste.

Again. Respect. Be good over a beer someday.

Wouldn't argue this.

I'm home schooling both kids right now so as I sit here I have time to respond in between helping them with assignments. I should go be more productive though

[Farley1324]

Can you really imagine if every state had the right to sue every other state in the Supreme Court over changes to election law?

If it was illegally changed, maybe we wouldn't have states breaking the rules so much? Seems like that would be an okay thing?

BTW, judges or executives illegally changing what the legislature set is exactly the opposite of changing the law. They aren't allowed to change the legislature's laws, that's kid of the whole point here isn't it?

[7Seconds]

I'm home schooling both kids right now so as I sit here I have time to respond in between helping them with assignments. I should go be more productive though

I have 4 middle school boys who are in virtual academy this semester (and most likely next); I am pretty much no help for anything other than Social Studies and making sure they are actually in a class and not just watching you tube videos.

Forgot how much I hated algebra.

[7Seconds]

If it was illegally changed, maybe we wouldn't have states breaking the rules so much? Seems like that would be an okay thing?

BTW, judges or executives illegally changing what the legislature set is exactly the opposite of changing the law. They aren't allowed to change the legislature's laws, that's kid of the whole point here isn't it?

The same laws that TX also violated when their Governor extended the early voting window through executive order? TX Constitution has similar wording to PA. The same wording that TX is trying to claim makes PA's changes unconstitutional. This is a pot calling the kettle black. They're also opening themselves up to lawsuits from other states should this succeed.

[Farley1324]

The same laws that TX also violated when their Governor extended the early voting window through executive order? TX Constitution has similar wording to PA. The same wording that TX is trying to claim makes PA's changes unconstitutional. This is a pot calling the kettle black. They're also opening themselves up to lawsuits from other states should this succeed.

Good, then maybe we can get everybody to follow the god damn law?

[Jtbny]

I have 4 middle school boys who are in virtual academy this semester (and most likely next); I am pretty much no help for anything other than Social Studies and making sure they are actually in a class and not just watching you tube videos.

Forgot how much I hated algebra.

Ha right? I'm pretty good in math but have to be careful on how I explain it with common core. I only have two in hybrid (2 days in 3 days home). Can't imagine doubling that.

[7Seconds]

Good, then maybe we can get everybody to follow the god damn law?

The Texas Governor expanded early voting without Legislative permission. The State Supreme Court okayed it, but Texas' entire argument is literally the same we've seen in every swing state: "If the election rule wasn't passed by the Legislature, it's invalid and spoils only the Presidential election".

So, there should be no delegating rule making authority to the Governor or Secretary of State, or to counties or election boards, no State Constitutional requirements, whether Court imposed or not?

[Farley1324]

The Texas Governor expanded early voting without Legislative permission. The State Supreme Court okayed it, but Texas' entire argument is literally the same we've seen in every swing state: "If the election rule wasn't passed by the Legislature, it's invalid and spoils only the Presidential election".

So, there should be no delegating rule making authority to the Governor or Secretary of State, or to counties or election boards, no State Constitutional requirements, whether Court imposed or not?

Nope. And it goes beyond election boards.

Laws are to be written by the legislature and signed by the executive (unless veto override super majority in legislature).

Enough with legislating from the bench or using executive orders to do what The People don't want and won't support at the elected representative/legislature level

And let's make sure we stop with the BS of alphabet agencies writing or changing their regulations with the weight of law

[Plateauplower]

Nope. And it goes beyond election boards.

Laws are to be written by the legislature and signed by the executive (unless veto override super majority in legislature).

Enough with legislating from the bench or using executive orders to do what The People don't want and won't support at the elected representative/legislature level

And let's make sure we stop with the BS of alphabet agencies writing or changing their regulations with the weight of law

On board for that. How many times can the ATF flip flop on pistol braces. Does a previous written interpretation provide protection from a new interpretation of a "law" under ex post facto status?

[7Seconds]

Nope. And it goes beyond election boards.

Laws are to be written by the legislature and signed by the executive (unless veto override super majority in legislature).

Enough with legislating from the bench or using executive orders to do what The People don't want and won't support at the elected representative/legislature level

And let's make sure we stop with the BS of alphabet agencies writing or changing their regulations with the weight of law

I think we are talking past each other at this point because I don’t necessarily disagree with your general point. But doesn’t the state legislature not delegate the authority to decide to the state supreme court in their constitution/laws? Wouldn’t this be the argument for Penn on why the PA Supreme Court has authority to make its decision?

[ElrondHubbard]

IF Biden pardons his kid? lol he's either going to use his influence to keep him entirely out of repercussions or pardon him, what is this "if"?







Can you guys imagine how much the MSM would be sucking off a dem potus if they did what Trump did with the economy - not starting wars - not pardoning everybody under the sun? My God

People keep crowing about what Trump did with the economy, when in reality he did nothing with it. All he did was ride on Obama's coattails, and then somehow convince the gullible that HE did it. That's the biggest fraud of all. That and the fact that seemingly intelligent people are naive enough to fall for it.