Biden's Pardons

If any of you think there is ANY chance that the "Justice System" is not seriously corrupted or think somehow you can one day setup your own "justice system" that will not quickly become corrupt, you are dreaming.

Spend some time with Civil rights groups that work on innocence projects and dealing with bad LE and bad judges and such, and you'll quickly want the government to have as little power as possible.

I'm completely opposed to the death penalty because the "justice system" top to bottom cannot be trusted.
Especially after that stupid state supreme court ruled that essentially "being proven innocent is no reason to overturn a sentence" B.S. and the SC ruling that well tough luck if you are innocent if we don't want to let you have more appeals, that's just too bad for you.

And then there is the issue with the Uniform Hangers and their evil.
And that you know if you are dark skinned you can do all the crime you want to light skinned folks and god forbid any of them should try to stop you.


Now if you are in the middle of doing some crime or doing something horrible to somebody and you get killed, well that's kind of on you.
If you do something horrible to somebody's kin or friends and they go a bit crazy and deal some old testament style justice, well you know... maybe you should have turned yourself in for safety and been nice and protected in the jail...

Grisham’s “The Innocent Man” modified my view. Not opposed to the death penalty, but I do believe evidence should be so concrete no person of reasonable intelligence could deny.
 
Grisham’s “The Innocent Man” modified my view. Not opposed to the death penalty, but I do believe evidence should be so concrete no person of reasonable intelligence could deny.
There are some cases out there that should make everyone question any decision by the justice system. If you start down the wrongful conviction rabbit hole, it doesn't take long to realize that nobody is safe from the jack boots and their DA's with that gavel in their eyes. There is nothing some of them aren't willing to do to see a conviction. Their careers are based on conviction rates, and you're just the 50th person they've seen this month. To some of them, you're just a nail and they are the hammer. Oh, and if they get caught, nothing happens. They can't punish them, because then they could potentially get a retrial for every conviction they've achieved in their careers. This little snag is how kamala Harris avoided (I think it was 5 seperate convictions for felony jury interference, evidence tampering etc.). They found her guilty 5 times but wouldn't convict her because it would open thousands of her previous cases to an automatic retrial. Can't have that.
 
Last edited:
Yes, a "collateral" deterrent. I just don't believe TPTB should "promote" or "market" it as a deterrent (i.e. "We should have the death penalty because it will deter crime").

Pretty effective deterrent. I believe it was Roy Bean that said, “I’m not hanging you because you stole a horse. I’m hanging you so you don’t steal another.

Want to get really pissed off? Google Pee Wee Gaskins. Read about his victims and why he was finally executed.
 
Pretty effective deterrent. I believe it was Roy Bean that said, “I’m not hanging you because you stole a horse. I’m hanging you so you don’t steal another.

Want to get really pissed off? Google Pee Wee Gaskins. Read about his victims and why he was finally executed.

I don't deny that it definitely deters that one individual from committing more crimes. But, again, that's a "collateral benefit." I guess I'll have to agree to disagree with Roy Bean. One should not execute people "so they don't commit" future crimes. They should execute only "because of the crime they've already committed."
 
  • Like
Reactions: kmckinnon
I don't deny that it definitely deters that one individual from committing more crimes. But, again, that's a "collateral benefit." I guess I'll have to agree to disagree with Roy Bean. One should not execute people "so they don't commit" future crimes. They should execute only "because of the crime they've already committed."

Two birds, one stone?
 
If I wereTrump, I’d have Pam Bondi as Attorney General challenge every one of the pardons, as it’s clearly unlikely Biden granted them. Someone else did it in his name. Only the president can grant a pardon.

FJB still has to sign them. So. technically, he's responsible, even though others prep the letters and shove them in front of him for his signature.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SONIC SAAMI
"Among those who will no longer face the death penalty is a monster who raped two little girls before stabbing them to death.

Jorge Avila-Torrez: In 2005, Avila-Torrez sexually assaulted two little girls, Laura Hobbs, 8, and Krystal Tobias, 9 before stabbing them both to death. Avila-Torrez also strangled naval officer Amanda Snell, 20, to death inside her barracks in Virginia."
 
  • Angry
Reactions: NoDopes
Per Newsmax's "Wake Up America" show, this morning, FJB has commuted 37 more Federal Death Sentences, but with 3 exceptions.

He did *not* commute Tsarnaev, Roof, and Bowers. So these three still face the Death Penalty.

Proving that his commutations were 100% political and he has zero valid or virtuous reasons behind them. A woketard placating the other woketards.

I am against the death penalty, will argue against it, but unless there was a good reason to commute or pardon the people convicted and sentenced I wouldn't do it even if it was within my power. It's the law, and people wrung their hands over these decisions for a very long time, as well as considering the impacts on the victims, which Biden did not do... When you look at Trump's pardons and commutations, as far as I've seen, there was always a reason, like it was an egregiously long sentence for a first offense, or there is evidence that wasn't allowed by a judge at the trial.

At least Biden wasn't paid like Clinton was for Marc Rich.
 
Make Gallows Great Again........
1735057318687.png
 
Proving that his commutations were 100% political and he has zero valid or virtuous reasons behind them. A woketard placating the other woketards.

I am against the death penalty, will argue against it, but unless there was a good reason to commute or pardon the people convicted and sentenced I wouldn't do it even if it was within my power. It's the law, and people wrung their hands over these decisions for a very long time, as well as considering the impacts on the victims, which Biden did not do... When you look at Trump's pardons and commutations, as far as I've seen, there was always a reason, like it was an egregiously long sentence for a first offense, or there is evidence that wasn't allowed by a judge at the trial.

At least Biden wasn't paid like Clinton was for Marc Rich.

I hope that will be part of the reasoning behind Trump's pardoning of most of the J6'ers.
 
Proving that his commutations were 100% political and he has zero valid or virtuous reasons behind them. A woketard placating the other woketards.

I am against the death penalty, will argue against it, but unless there was a good reason to commute or pardon the people convicted and sentenced I wouldn't do it even if it was within my power. It's the law, and people wrung their hands over these decisions for a very long time, as well as considering the impacts on the victims, which Biden did not do... When you look at Trump's pardons and commutations, as far as I've seen, there was always a reason, like it was an egregiously long sentence for a first offense, or there is evidence that wasn't allowed by a judge at the trial.

At least Biden wasn't paid like Clinton was for Marc Rich.
i am pro death penalty, but i don't think of it as the state killing people.
convicted murderers choose their own crimes and the associated penalties.
we have no say in what they choose. i am not killing anyone.

that said, i would prefer lifetime incarceration if not for the ability of most humans to adapt reasonably well to confinement.
/and we don't allow torture unless they are j6ers.
 

  • Judge Roy Bean: [talking to Maria Elena] Maybe you can explain to these people here that I mean them no harm. Tell 'em it's going to be a new place. It's going to be a nice place to live. I'm the new judge. There will be law. There is going to be order, progress, civilization, peace... Above all, peace. And I don't care who I have to kill to get it. Now go on, you tell 'em that.
 
i am pro death penalty, but i don't think of it as the state killing people.
convicted murderers choose their own crimes and the associated penalties.
we have no say in what they choose. i am not killing anyone.

I'd be much more comfortable with this if eligibility for the death penalty were a bit more "automated" than it is now (ie. if the prosecutor was no longer involved in "seeking' it). I know, that's what caused the initial problems and led to prosecutor's seeking it, but I don't mind the pendulum swinging the other way a little. Maybe we have specific Capital crimes that are death penalty eligible and then let the jury decide if is warranted in this particular case. Of course, the prosecutor gets to decide with what to charge the defendant, so there is that. But perhaps, those capital crimes can have extra requirements to prove that the jury can evaluate.

that said, i would prefer lifetime incarceration if not for the ability of most humans to adapt reasonably well to confinement.
/and we don't allow torture unless they are j6ers.

Yes, if it is only a crime for which life or life without parole is warranted but no greater. If the crime/circumstances so warrant the "forfeiture of life," then it should be carried out.
 
Last edited:
one of the "justice" problems in the capital punishment debate is the very real cost to society at large of maintaining prisoners in the extravagant way they are treated and coddled; ,recreation,med care,diet quality,freedom of movement. if our prisons were like those in china,cuba,mid east,then recidivism would be a lesser issue. people i knew that had been in castro's prisons said they would do anything to not go back. why should taxpayers spend any money to do anything but keep them locked up? have heard cost per prisoner is 100K/yr. don't know #s but that sounds close.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NoDopes
I'd be much more comfortable with this if eligibility for the death penalty were a bit more "automated" than it is now (ie. if the prosecutor was no longer involved in "seeking' it). I know, that's what caused the initial problems and led to prosecutor's seeking it, but I don't mind the pendulum swinging the other way a little. Maybe we have specific Capital crimes that are death penalty eligible and then let the jury decide if is warranted in this particular case. Of course, the prosecutor gets to decide with what to charge the defendant, so there is that. But perhaps, those capital crimes can have extra requirements to prove that the jury can evaluate.
yes and of course we must assume the person is actually guilty and not railroaded.
Yes, if it is only a crime for which life or life without parole is warranted but no greater. If the crime/circumstances so warrant the "forfeiture of life," then it should be carried out.

noticed many of the ones on death row were convicted of killing prisoners, so incarceration is not a safe option for anyone else.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Fx51LP308
one of the "justice" problems in the capital punishment debate is the very real cost to society at large of maintaining prisoners in the extravagant way they are treated and coddled; ,recreation,med care,diet quality,freedom of movement. if our prisons were like those in china,cuba,mid east,then recidivism would be a lesser issue. people i knew that had been in castro's prisons said they would do anything to not go back. why should taxpayers spend any money to do anything but keep them locked up? have heard cost per prisoner is 100K/yr. don't know #s but that sounds close.

Yeah, I'm told it's often more costly to seek a death sentence than it is to incarcerate someone for life (without parole).
 
  • Like
Reactions: EddieNFL
Yeah, I'm told it's often more costly to seek a death sentence than it is to incarcerate someone for life (without parole).
that's part of the problem. decades of litigation.
the actual answer depends on how long they live at the $40-130k per year cost to incarcerate them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: UKDslayer
could be true. but the games played in the courts by lawyers and politics likely the cost of that. took fl 10 years to execute ted bundy. shows the biggest problem in our system. it is how the word games are played. the guilt or innocence of the defendant is only a minor consideration. IMHO the only thing should be convincing 13 of real "peers" that he/she did it or didn't beyond reasonable doubt. modern tech does make that more reliable seems to me but that's why jury trials exist.
brings up the jury issue.
 
could be true. but the games played in the courts by lawyers and politics likely the cost of that. took fl 10 years to execute ted bundy. shows the biggest problem in our system. it is how the word games are played. the guilt or innocence of the defendant is only a minor consideration. IMHO the only thing should be convincing 13 of real "peers" that he/she did it or didn't beyond reasonable doubt. modern tech does make that more reliable seems to me but that's why jury trials exist.
brings up the jury issue.

It’s about winning or losing, not justice.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mosin46
Well this didn't take very long!:

Convicted South Carolina bank killer asks for 'compassionate release' days after Biden commuted death sentence​


arguing that he deserved a "compassionate release" because he had been subjected to "severe, unnecessary, and unjustifiable psychological harm" that "can only be accurately construed and assimilated as an act of torture,"
 
Well this didn't take very long!:

Convicted South Carolina bank killer asks for 'compassionate release' days after Biden commuted death sentence​


arguing that he deserved a "compassionate release" because he had been subjected to "severe, unnecessary, and unjustifiable psychological harm" that "can only be accurately construed and assimilated as an act of torture,"

Well, there's no harm in "asking."

I gather his argument is that since he suffered the extra stress of being under a death sentence, a sentence which was just commuted, that he's entitled to some sort of compensation for undergoing that extra stress, only to have it cancelled later on. Dude... your compensation is very simple... you get to keep your life... It may not be in the way you want it, but you do get to keep it.

That's all ya get!
 
  • Like
Reactions: deltawiskey
Well this didn't take very long!:

Convicted South Carolina bank killer asks for 'compassionate release' days after Biden commuted death sentence​


arguing that he deserved a "compassionate release" because he had been subjected to "severe, unnecessary, and unjustifiable psychological harm" that "can only be accurately construed and assimilated as an act of torture,"

Should put his sentence back on the fast track to old Sparky…

IMG_6414.jpeg