Here's the list Trump pardoned...no saints here :rolleyes:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...%20the%20cases.
Printable View
Here's the list Trump pardoned...no saints here :rolleyes:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...%20the%20cases.
I'm against pardons.
Should only be used for death row.
Re-trail yes but not pardons.
Me too! I find it bizarre that a President holds this power and it's wide open to corruption.Quote:
I'm against pardons.
Edit> For clarity, I'm not against pardons as such. I just don't understand why the President holds this power arbitrarily. I'm not 100% sure it needs a full blown retrial, depending on the case in question, but it should certainly rest with the Judicial branch not the Executive.
Edit2> Except for turkeys. I'm fine with pardoning them.
The broad concept of governmental authority to provide relief from criminal punishment has deep historical roots. The power vested in the President by the Constitution traces its origins to authority held by the English Crown, leading the Supreme Court to look to legal principles underlying the latter in interpreting the scope of the former. A prerogative of mercy held by the King appeared during the reign of King Ine of Wessex (688–725 A.D.)6 and by 1535 had been declared by Parliament, during the reign of King Henry VIII (1509–1547 A.D.), as a right exclusive to the Crown. Though broad in application, the power as it existed through the colonial period did have legal limits, which grew in number in response to perceived abuses of the King’s authority. For instance, a pardon could not impair certain rights of third parties9 and, by act of Parliament in 1701, pardons could not be pleaded to bar impeachment (though a pardon following sentence was still available).
https://constitution.congress.gov/br...ALDE_00013317/
In the 18th century, George Washington granted the first high-profile federal pardon to leaders of the Whiskey Rebellion on his final day in office.
Trump often bypassed the OPA, and, unlike previous presidents, made the majority of his grants to executive clemency to "well-connected offenders who had not filed petitions with the pardon office or did not meet its requirements." Ultimately, of the 237 grants of clemency by Trump, only 25 came through the Office of ...
That reminded me of a scene on Erik the Viking, if anyone has seen the film when he says to only cut of his hand and the victim is graceful :D
By the way, the pardon is not the point. The point is the Democrats lied as usual.
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/zXToNz33myE
He has the right. Trump demonstrated that.
Here is a list of Trumps most egregious lies. He averaged around ten lies a day while in office.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...-in-one-place/
I was wondering if US president is allowed to pass any last month laws?
Is this customary a no?
In Greece the departed government usually pass all the traitorial legislations at the very last day of an open parliament so any opposition cannot be raised the next day.
Even if it could be raised after the elections, the other traitorial government that comes in, "ignores" what he was yelling about and go along.
Sorry, I'm not paying to read leftist propaganda. You got one that's not behind a paywall?Quote:
Originally Posted by TysonLPrice
first off I was wave reading. I thought, why we talk about pardon , I did not realize that Sleepy pardoned his son. Or I'm missing something?
Also
"Through April 29, his 100th day, Biden has made 78 false or misleading statements"
https://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...cker-100-days/
That is completely useless as it's game over but just for the heck of it.
How many of those did Trump repeatedly state he would not pardon?Quote:
Originally Posted by TysonLPrice
Pardoned for any actions from January 1st 2014 through December 31st, 2024. Purge month for Hunter Biden!
I'd say the point is it's selective outrage(not that you've been acting outraged). Politicians from both sides of the isle lying or changing their opinion isn't rare, it's barely news.Quote:
Originally Posted by OptionBase1
But since it's the Presidents son it will be given importance by the news for a few days.
So your saying we can blame this on the British. Cool!!Quote:
Originally Posted by TysonLPrice
This was conveniently left out of the post #537 link that was pointing out:
"Also "Through April 29, his 100th day, Biden has made 78 false or misleading statements"
Biden 78, Trump 511:
Tho poster 537 don't give a rats banuka as said, it was for the heck of it as it's over.
And now I got a case of the dil's so in everyone's good health.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5fih...el=ClintonJaws
Just because the Whiskey Rebellion was mentioned, that's no excuse to post drunk.Quote:
Originally Posted by sapator
It hurts huh? :p
I'll allow it from you but I don't drink from Nov till May as I don't like to drink at cold weather. You must accidentally mistaken me for Kamala.
Anyhooo. You are fifth https://worldpopulationreview.com/co...ism-by-country , we are nowhere near you given the fact the we Ouzo the hell out (I don't like it, prefer beer but...) , so, I'm rubber you're glue ;)
I'm not sure telling someone you're going to rob their house excuses robbing their house. Or that telling someone you wouldn't makes the robbery worse. The point is the robbery.Quote:
How many of those did Trump repeatedly state he would not pardon?
I don't drink at all, nor did I really think you posted that drunk, but it sure was a confusing mash-up of thoughts and words, and I'm not above making a drug reference whether it is warranted or not.Quote:
Originally Posted by sapator
Interesting link, though. I guess I'm kind of surprised at how high the US ranks on that list.
But if you read the link the "5" is misleading. The US is actually 35th.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaggy Hiker
From the link:
The rate of alcoholism varies significantly among nations. While it might stand to reason that rates of alcoholism would correlate closely to overall alcohol consumption per country or possibly with drinking age by country, these correlations are not always present. For example, although consumption varies by state, Americans on average consume 9.9 liters of pure alcohol per capita annually (WHO, 2020), the equivalent of imbibing 33.0 handles (1,716.8 fluid ounces/50.75 liters) of vodka per person per year. This means that the U.S., despite being 5th on the list of countries with the highest rates of alcoholism, was only 35th on the list of countries with the highest alcohol consumption per capita in 2019 (CIA). The most recent data regarding alcoholism rates in each country was compiled by the World Health Organization, which recorded the percentage of males and females 15 years and above with alcohol use disorders in
I'm not sure whether that counts as misleading or not. It certainly does change the interpretation, as we aren't the fifth most drunken country, but I'm still surprised at that 5th for alcoholism. I suppose that, taken together, it could mean we are high on the list of hypochondria, diagnosis of alcoholism, or treatment for alcoholism.
Those stats are interesting.
The US isn't in the top 10 for men but is number 1 for women. Now we know who the trouble makers are. lol
I think there's a good chance this is affecting the numbers.Quote:
it could mean we are high on the list of hypochondria, diagnosis of alcoholism, or treatment for alcoholism.
I was surprised the South Korea was so high on the list. Not that I know much about South Korea, just not the perception I had.
Buh you clearly insulted me as usual so I will not talk to you for one post. Unless the post is something magnificent.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaggy Hiker
A question here. We see a lot of data on US been a "fat" country. And that is nothing to be laughed about. Is that correct?
By my visit...I don't remember :D
My latest example was at the airport here, we had an office eating Friday and we ordered from the nearby airport (hopefully we will get the heck out of this distant area soon) fast fooderianrty.
I can't recall what it was, possible burger king as we only got one in Athens and it's an "American" shop, meaning high portions double refreshment for an xtra buck and so on.
Point is the meal was so much I could not finish half of it. It's like pushing you to buy "garbage" at a cheap price to get fat and addicted. Now once every 2 weeks or so, I don't mind to be a garbageer but as I'm thin due to my metabolism, I don't really crave food that much but others may get caught in that eating garbage marathon. I have a few example in my circle.
....And now we all know what comes next:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...y_obesity_rate
You are 13 there but is that accurate, give or take by your whereabouts? Greece been 38, hmm, maybe maybe not , probably down the list since we got that depression and people limit the extra food for other needs such electricity and water. Also I don't really trust WHO, that bunch of idiot fakevid arsmolkks.
Unfortunately, so many countries are catching, or passing, us in that regard that I'm not sure we count, anymore.Quote:
Originally Posted by sapator
I don't think the reason is to make people get fat, exactly. I think the reason is to make money. Still, you're essentially right. It has often been pointed out in the US, that cheap food is fattening, and rightly could be called "garbage". Good food is available, but often not in poor areas, and it costs more. Eating isn't expensive, but eating well can be.Quote:
Point is the meal was so much I could not finish half of it. It's like pushing you to buy "garbage" at a cheap price to get fat and addicted.
I never know about those lists, but that one is probably about right. We shouldn't be #1 on that list, because we have lots of rich, fatty, foods, but we also have a whole lot of exercise culture, which should push us down the list a bit. So...#15 seems reasonable, especially with other countries passing us, as they do.
On the other hand, Trump lies about his weight, too, so perhaps we'll suddenly get thinner by following his example.
Drugs like Ozempic will change a lot of that but can be expensive...Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaggy Hiker
https://www.economist.com/leaders/20...ange-the-world
I'll have to chew on that before I agree.
https://www.vbforums.com/images/ieimages/2024/12/4.png
Context: In the wake of Donald Trump's victory a lot of very prominent leftists promoted BlueSky as a Twitter alternative, as in their view Twitter has become a right wing hellhole since Elon Musks's takeover. BlueSky is basically the left's version of Truth Social, a haven for the the far left.
Took me less than 10 seconds to debunk
Nobody on the left (or the right for that matter) is accepting of paedophiles. Except for actual paedophiles that is.
Your next play: cite Reddit's Left Wing Bias.
Takei is pedophile??!
No, and I linked to a debunk.Quote:
Originally Posted by sapator
But he is gay and to a certain subset of Alt Right people these are morally the same. They're not the same, but that doesn't stop some people.
He further has some background as he was sexually abused as a child himself. Which really only highlights just how sick that post was. (The linked post, not Niya's. Niya's was merely naively credulous)
Edit> Sorry, I accidentally edited Sappy's post instead of creating my own so this might have looked odd for a bit. My mistake and I've now restored it as was.
I dunnno...I smell a cover up....Quote:
Originally Posted by FunkyDexter
Yea sure. Thing is, I've seen this kind of disturbing thing on the left too often to the point I don't even care anymore if some are false flags. I see something like that, I'm running with it.Quote:
Originally Posted by FunkyDexter
I see it on the right, too. I still don't run with it.
It's like scissors: It cuts both ways, and don't run with it.
I remember in a post in a galaxy far far away I've said I'm pro freedom of speech in everything , except pedophiles, that should be hanged of course.
And possibly animal lovers but that is a WOKE thing so I'm not sure, I might be insulting some psycho.
So would you also share and run with it if it was falsely claiming someone from the right was a paedophile?Quote:
Originally Posted by Niya
Let's not go to this.
Also stop trying again and again to label people "sideways", it ain't working.
I mean, Niya was trying to label the left as paedophiles but, again, you didn't feel like that was worth calling out.Quote:
Also stop trying again and again to label people "sideways", it ain't working.
Or to put it another way, you don't want reality to get in the way of your fantasy.Quote:
Yea sure. Thing is, I've seen this kind of disturbing thing on the left too often to the point I don't even care anymore if some are false flags. I see something like that, I'm running with it.
No. Just the left.Quote:
Originally Posted by PlausiblyDamp
How come it is only an issue when someone is accused of being on the "right", you never seem to have an issue if someone, including yourself, accuses someone of being "left"?Quote:
Originally Posted by sapator