Trump says he will "consider" pardoning 1/6 perpetrators

Page 1 of 3 [ 41 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next

kraftiekortie
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 4 Feb 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 87,510
Location: Queens, NYC

31 Jan 2022, 2:07 pm

I feel like this would be a miscarriage of justice. It would set an extremely bad precedent for this country.



cyberdad
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Feb 2011
Age: 58
Gender: Male
Posts: 36,036

31 Jan 2022, 5:29 pm

perpatrators of what Kraftie?



Fnord
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 May 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 60,950
Location:      

31 Jan 2022, 5:37 pm

Mr. Trump says he may pardon anyone convicted of taking part in his coup attempt on January 6, 2020.


_________________
The mere fact that science may not yet adequately explain an object, event, or experience does not mean the immediate explanation should automatically default to a conspiratorial, extraterrestrial, paranormal, or supernatural cause.


cyberdad
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Feb 2011
Age: 58
Gender: Male
Posts: 36,036

31 Jan 2022, 5:55 pm

Gosh! what a bottom feeder he is.



Fnord
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 May 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 60,950
Location:      

31 Jan 2022, 6:03 pm

cyberdad wrote:
Gosh! what a bottom feeder he is.
That is an insult to bottom-feeders everywhere.

:wink:



kraftiekortie
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 4 Feb 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 87,510
Location: Queens, NYC

31 Jan 2022, 6:21 pm

It would be like the loser in a coup attempt promising to "pardon" those who participated in the losing effort....once the "loser," somehow, regains power.

Pure Banana Republic stuff.

I am amazed at what Trump could get away with! Nobody else would get away with Trump's stunts.

Actually, I can't believe this potential for Trump pardoning the perpetrators of the Insurrection isn't attracting more attention.



Dox47
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Jan 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,670
Location: Seattle-ish

31 Jan 2022, 9:35 pm

Pardoning the non-violent ones would have been the right thing for him to do before he left office, as he was a major cause of the rabbit hole those people fell down. That would have required a level of maturity I doubt he's capable of though, where now it feels more like political pandering.


_________________
Your boos mean nothing, I've seen what makes you cheer.

- Rick Sanchez


cyberdad
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Feb 2011
Age: 58
Gender: Male
Posts: 36,036

31 Jan 2022, 9:42 pm

A former aide of Richard Nixon has compared Trump on twitter to authoritarian dictators the US government has tried to topple or overthrow in the past

Again Trump is the symptom, whoever is giving him a free pass is the ones who need their heads checked



DW_a_mom
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 22 Feb 2008
Gender: Female
Posts: 13,689
Location: Northern California

31 Jan 2022, 10:18 pm

I feel like he's incentivizing further "aggressive" protests, trying to offset the harm to his "causes" the prosecutions have generated. His speech was an open invitation to overthrow the rule of law ... but only when the rule of law is against Trump.

I still don't believe he sees his own followers as anything more than cannon fodder for his own agenda. But that is just my opinion.

One opinion on the speech from a political history professor, Heather Cox Richardson (I don't necessarily agree with all of it, but do feel it is appropriate to this discussion):

Quote:
Last night, at a rally in Conroe, Texas, former president Trump told supporters that if he runs for president and wins in 2024, he will pardon the January 6 insurrectionists. Observers note that this promise might encourage the bigger fish ensnared by the investigation to keep quiet; Will Bunch of the Philadelphia Inquirer noted that “Trump…is committing a form of obstruction of justice in full public view.” Others note that the promise of pardoning the insurrectionists might well become a litmus test for any Republican candidate in 2024.

That promise of pardons might also be for crimes not yet committed. Trump called for "the biggest protest we have ever had" in New York City, Washington, and Atlanta if the prosecutors "do anything wrong or illegal." The specificity of the cities he mentioned suggests that the cases against him in New York City, Georgia, and Washington are weighing on his mind. "These prosecutors are vicious, horrible people. They're racists and they're very sick—they're mentally sick," he said. "They're going after me without any protection of my rights from the Supreme Court or most other courts. In reality, they're not after me, they're after you."

Observers saw his comments as a call for violence if the various legal cases against him lead to indictments. Crucially, these statements were clearly part of a plan: he did not say them off the cuff but appeared to read them from a teleprompter. It seems likely that as investigators get closer, he is turning to the threat of street violence to try to get them to back off.

It is not clear that will work, since more than 750 people who took to the streets for him in January 2021 are now facing criminal prosecution. Many have blamed him for where they are. It might be hard to rally more people with that history, and it seems that the promise of future pardons might be designed to address that wavering faith.

But Bunch noted that, overlooked by those not attuned to the siren songs of the right, Trump’s use of the word “racist” is a call to white supremacists. Three of the main prosecutors investigating the former president—Fulton County, Georgia, district attorney Fani Willis; New York State attorney general Letitia James; and Manhattan prosecutor Alvin Bragg (who recently took over from Cyrus Vance, Jr.)—are Black. So is Representative Bennie Thompson (D-MS), who chairs the House Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the U.S. Capitol.
“[I]t’s both alarming and yet utterly predictable that Trump would toss the gasoline of racial allegations onto his flaming pile of grievances, knowing how that will play with the Confederate flag aficionados within the ex-president’s cult,” Bunch wrote. Trump, he said, “is seeking to start a race war.”

But, as a sign of just how tied the Republican Party is to the former president now, on ABC News’s This Week, today, Senator Susan Collins (R-ME) refused to rule out supporting Trump in 2024 despite last night’s incendiary speech.
Collins’s reluctance to offend the former president didn’t do her much good: tonight, in an astounding statement, he referred to her as “Wacky Susan Collins.”

The statement was astounding not because he was insulting a Republican senator.

Referring to bipartisan congressional discussions about clarifying the law to guarantee that no one ever again will argue that the vice president can overturn the results of an election (this is where Collins came up), Trump claimed those discussions themselves proved the plan his team came up with was, in fact, legal. (It is not.) He went on to say: “Mike Pence did have the right to change the outcome and they now want to take that right away. Unfortunately, he didn’t exercise that power, he could have overturned the Election!”

After more than a year of insisting he just wanted to address the problem of voter fraud, which he falsely claimed had stolen the election from him, Trump just came right out and said he wanted to overturn the results of the 2020 election. Former U.S. attorney and legal commentator Joyce White Vance wrote: “This is what prosecutors call guilty knowledge. And also, intent.” CNN’s Jim Acosta was more succinct: he tweeted, “Coup coup for Cocoa Puffs.”
It is unlikely Trump’s admission was a slip. He tends to put out in public potential criminal activity, like the phone call to Ukraine president Volodymyr Zelensky, which he—not a whistleblower—first told reporters about. Apparently, declaring it openly makes it harder for people to see it as a crime. That he chose to put this out on a Sunday night suggests that he expects bad news this week.

At the very least, it is impossible to imagine that his promise to pardon the January 6 insurrectionists, his call for protests if he is indicted, and his admission that he wanted to overturn the results of the 2020 election will not stir up politics this week.

What will the Republican leaders who have tied themselves to Trump say now that he has openly admitted he was trying to destroy our democracy?


_________________
Mom to an amazing young adult AS son, plus an also amazing non-AS daughter. Most likely part of the "Broader Autism Phenotype" (some traits).


kraftiekortie
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 4 Feb 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 87,510
Location: Queens, NYC

31 Jan 2022, 11:25 pm

The fact that he stated that he “loved” the insurrectionists, and then told them to “go home” in a tweet which came out towards the end of the violence, makes it plainly obvious that he didn’t take the storming of the Capitol Building very seriously.

If anybody else had pulled this, they would be in jail now.



Dox47
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Jan 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,670
Location: Seattle-ish

31 Jan 2022, 11:58 pm

kraftiekortie wrote:
If anybody else had pulled this, they would be in jail now.


Did what?


_________________
Your boos mean nothing, I've seen what makes you cheer.

- Rick Sanchez


cyberdad
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Feb 2011
Age: 58
Gender: Male
Posts: 36,036

01 Feb 2022, 12:00 am

Dox47 wrote:
kraftiekortie wrote:
If anybody else had pulled this, they would be in jail now.


Did what?


Directly instigating an insurrection. If Joe citizen tried to instigate a attack on the capitol he'd be sitting in Guantanimo bay.



Dox47
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Jan 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,670
Location: Seattle-ish

01 Feb 2022, 12:10 am

cyberdad wrote:
Directly instigating an insurrection. If Joe citizen tried to instigate a attack on the capitol he'd be sitting in Guantanimo bay.


Yeah, no. Our laws concerning incitement are quite narrow, and though you can argue that Trump whipped the crowd up, he didn't actually say "go down to the Capitol Building and storm it!" or other words to that effect necessary to draw an incitement charge. A private citizen could have given the same speech and not faced charges, let alone ended up in our legal grey zone prison used for holding prisoners of indeterminate status.


_________________
Your boos mean nothing, I've seen what makes you cheer.

- Rick Sanchez


cyberdad
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Feb 2011
Age: 58
Gender: Male
Posts: 36,036

01 Feb 2022, 12:29 am

Dox47 wrote:
cyberdad wrote:
Directly instigating an insurrection. If Joe citizen tried to instigate a attack on the capitol he'd be sitting in Guantanimo bay.


Yeah, no. Our laws concerning incitement are quite narrow, and though you can argue that Trump whipped the crowd up, he didn't actually say "go down to the Capitol Building and storm it!" or other words to that effect necessary to draw an incitement charge. A private citizen could have given the same speech and not faced charges, let alone ended up in our legal grey zone prison used for holding prisoners of indeterminate status.


According to the first amendment it's not a crime unless it meets certain conditions

According to a consitutional lawyer I read, Trump's speech met the above criteria of First of intended to cause violence (and you infer that intent from the circumstances). It also has to be likely to cause violence.

Referring to himself and his supporters collectively, Mr Trump said there would be no concession.
He went on: "You don't concede when there's theft involved. Our country has had enough. We will not take it anymore."

Mr Trump said the Biden presidency had to be challenged.
"You will have an illegitimate president. That is what you will have, and we can't let that happen."

"if you don't fight like hell you're not going to have a country anymore".

He said "We will stop the steal' We will never give up. We will never concede. It doesn't happen' there would be no concession.
He went on: "You don't concede when there's theft involved. Our country has had enough. We will not take it anymore."

Immediately after that he said "We're going to walk down to the Capitol and we're going to cheer on our brave senators and congressmen and women, and we're probably not going to be cheering so much for some of them."

The lawyer I was reading argued "He (Trump) clearly knew there were people in that crowd who were ready to and intended to be violent, and he certainly did nothing to discourage that. He not only did nothing to discourage it, he strongly hinted it should happen.When you take this in totality I think he has breached the first constitution right to free speech and crossed into instigating a riot.



kraftiekortie
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 4 Feb 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 87,510
Location: Queens, NYC

01 Feb 2022, 12:30 am

It’s more Trump’s actions/inaction DURING the insurrection…..than even his alleged “incitement.”

In reference to the phone call to the Georgia election official: who, other than Trump, would have been investigated for, and perhaps already arrested for, what he said during the phone call?



cyberdad
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Feb 2011
Age: 58
Gender: Male
Posts: 36,036

01 Feb 2022, 12:55 am

kraftiekortie wrote:
It’s more Trump’s actions/inaction DURING the insurrection…..than even his alleged “incitement.”

In reference to the phone call to the Georgia election official: who, other than Trump, would have been investigated for, and perhaps already arrested for, what he said during the phone call?


Transcript?