Images | Commentary | Digital Scrapbook
“…certain aspects of the presidential pardoning power are so well-established that it is unlikely that any Court, conservative or liberal, will revisit them. For starters the power is extremely broad; it is vested by the Constitution in the president, and there is little that Congress can do to constrain it short of impeaching the president if they believe its exercise improper.
Although the Constitution speaks of “reprieves” and “pardons,” these words encompass more than what they might seem to entail. “Pardons,” for example, encompass amnesties and can be accorded people whose identities the president does not know and may be unable to determine. The first such pardon was issued in 1795 by George Washington to people who participated in the Pennsylvania Whiskey Rebellion, with Jimmy Carter’s pardon of Vietnam-era draft evaders being a more recent example. Pardons may also be conditioned on a person accepting certain restrictions on future behavior, including submitting to punishments not otherwise provided by law. Pardons need not follow convictions but can be issued before or during a criminal prosecution. The rationale for so-called “pre-emptive” pardons is that there is no point in requiring a person to live in fear of conviction or to go through a trial if the offense of which he is or might be accused would ultimately be pardoned. Pre-emptive pardons do, not, however apply to offenses not yet committed. The president can tell a thief not to worry about being convicted for the crime he has committed yesterday because he has pardoned him. But a pardon today cannot forgive a crime the thief commits tomorrow…”
“…Testimony and video from the day showed Babbitt being pushed through a door window into the House Speaker’s Lobby behind the House floor when, without warning, she was shot by Byrd. The shooting was investigated, but no charges were leveled, and Byrd was promoted. In addition to the promotion from lieutenant, Just the News reported this week that House Democratic leaders pressured the Capitol Police to give Byrd a $37,000 retention bonus, help with $160,000 in private fundraising, and housing. Meanwhile, the 115-pound Babbitt, who was 36 when shot, has been savaged in the liberal media…”
Biden better get started on preemptive pardons. It looks like that is going to be a big job.
Related. Change can’t come too soon. We’re heading down to the wire:
They laugh at the suckers in garbage media and the fools that vote for Democrats no matter what. They laugh at them because they hate them for naivete and for their stupidity and because it makes them feel better about themselves.
Biden is not a good man. He used his son Hunter. He set Hunter up to take the fall. He lied to the world about his corruption. He is an ugly, abusive, manipulative personality.
This is terrible.
I suppose it could have been worse.
He should have been acquitted of all charges.
A small and quiet voice tells me Democrats are on the jury and are hopelessly confused.
Just when you thought liberal Supreme Court justices could not have dumber arguments than K.B. Jackson, Sotomayor steps up to the plate and says hold my beer.
“…I’m sorry, Counselor,” she said, interrupting him. “Every medical treatment has a risk, even taking aspirin, there is always going to be a percentage of the population under any medical treatment that’s going to suffer a harm…”
Cutting off the healthy breasts and genitals of minors is just like taking aspirin, same minimal risk.
Personally, I don’t think Democrats choose the best and brightest. They choose people based on identity, skin color, sexual preference, gender, and willingness to stick to lefty policies no matter how outrageous or embarrassing for themselves or others.
Pure stupidity.
How in the world can Sotomayor influence the conservative justices on the court with an argument like that?
Democrats shoot themselves in the foot again.
Walter Russell Mead:
“…How Reagan-Bush Republicans awakened the Balrogs of economic, immigration, and identity politics that Donald Trump used to crush them…”
Willful political incompetence
“…Party ID — Democrats’ proportion of the electorate significantly drops to a historic low, making Democrats de facto the third party in this election.
Issues — The economy, not abortion.
Key voters — Who moved.
Conclusion
Republicans won the political trifecta — the Presidency and majorities in the Senate and House of Representatives. Additionally, Trump won the popular vote, only the second time for a Republican over the last nine presidential elections. He was helped in this by a presidential Republican party ID advantage of +4, the largest 1984 forward.
But the big question that emerges from this election is what happened to the Democratic Party? In the last 10 Presidential elections, the Democrats made up the largest portion of the electorate in terms of party identification (being even at 37% with Republicans for first in 2004). In this election, not only was that streak broken, but Democrats fell behind independents as well – into third place.
The clear question from this election is — where did those Democrats go? There are two possibilities. First, they just didn’t show up to vote while independent turnout increased significantly. This theory would contradict the public survey data done prior to the election that said Democrats were very motivated to vote, while independents were not. The other is that many Democrats changed their party identification to independent. Either way, it shows an electorate that moved away from Democrats as a result of Biden policies and voted for change. Democrats will need to think through how to bring voters back, which is very different than forming the next version of opposition.
The election was a positive outcome for Trump and the GOP, but the presidential race was still close. Over the last 14 presidential races, only one had a closer popular vote margin than this: Bush in 2000. This election was a rejection of the last four years and a strong willingness to listen to new policy approaches. That is a significant opportunity and positive starting point for the incoming Trump administration and Republicans as they focus on the issues that matter to the electorate, but they must deliver on the economy…”
“inconsistency” with one’s “characteristics.”
There is no comparison between Interracial marriage bans, which were based on racial discrimination, and bans on irreversible gender transmogrification for minors, which are intended to protect children from medical techniques when they lack the maturity to make permanent life-altering decisions.
Personally, I don’t think Democrats choose the best and brightest. They choose people based on skin color, sexual preference, gender, and willingness to stick to lefty policies no matter how outrageous or embarrassing for themselves or others.
@orums542 Its not enough, few good negus and you knownits not enough #democrats #narcissist #macro
Who signed Hunter’s pardon?
