So the official presidential Democrat position on the American legal system is “we fully and absolutely respect the due process of law and we always abide by the decisions of our independent judiciary, until they make a decision we don’t like then fuck all that lol”
Yes, that is how the American constitution is written.
To understand why, you need to think on what they were doing. To many of the Founding Fathers, they were building England 2.0
With lots of The Ancient Rights under Magna Carta stuff.
So, the President was the King, but elected. The Senate was the House of Lords, but nominated* by the States to represent their interests in Washington. The reason that all the minor local functionaries are elected is to try and avoid a Squirearchy. Etc etc…
The power of pardon is an ancient one. Part of the ultimate power of kings. The idea is that the mechanism of justice can sometimes produce injustice. So the Noble King saves the day, 5 minutes before the play ends.
*Originally not elected.
If you are saying that the US Constitution is not fit for purpose it would be impossible to disagree. The Electoral College system is a joke. The fact we still don't have the final figures for the House is absurd (as is the concept of an entire House being up for election every 2 years). The weighting of the Senate is ridiculous. The Supreme Court has far too much power for a democracy and not nearly enough oversight. Those founding fathers didn't know their arses from their elbows and pretending that their political fixes should be hallowed in some way shows the fantasy of the whole thing.
The basic idea worked fairly well. One big problem was the ending of the modernisation process - Amendments.
The other big one was the enshrining of Constitutional law as the ultimate power on the land. In the 90s, my American relatives (high flying lawyers among them) would tell me that progressive thought had Won - because the law controlled the system and the law was progressive.
They got quite upset when I pointed out that *which* way the Law progressed was up for grabs. And the complex and elegant bridge that was Roe vs Wade depended on that definition….
Even then, the cry on the Right was “Our Judges” - it wasn’t hard to work out. If the Supreme Court is the ultimate legislative body, win a majority there.
One thing that shouldn't be missed here, he didn't just pardon Hunter Biden for the gun charge and the tax dodging, he pardoned him against any Federal crime that he may committed over a 10 year period, that period where he was on the board of companies taking massive salaries for doing nothing.
That quite different from as a father, my son has been charged for something minor that was trumped up...its Stinky McStinky....
Yes exactly. There are loads of other suspicions and charges floating around Hunter Biden. Some of them worse than the charges made so far
Now he may be innocent or not. But the president has just made him immune from any prosecution for anything. What if it turns out one of the accusations is incontrovertibly true?
You mean like the accusations against Trump, many of which are undoubtedly true?
You mean
1) the accusations of which he has been convicted in court for? 2) the accusations that he has been charged with, with legal grade evidence presented? 3) the accusations which have just been stated?
With Trump and accusations of crime, there’s so many that you need to be specific…
This is embarrassing whataboutery from you. I would have expected it from other posters.
Apparently the Biden pardon is one of the most sweeping pardons in American history. He hasn’t pardoned his son of particular crimes (of which he is known to be guilty) he has exonerated him of anything he did since… 2014. Which is when Hunter Biden first got hooked up in Ukrainian politics and business
Also Biden is claiming his son is the victim of “law fare” (as Trump claims) but it was Biden’s own department of justice which pursued Hunter Biden because the crimes were so brazen they had to
How can it be lawfare when it’s admitted Hunter biden did all these things and it was Biden’s DOJ that took him to court?
The American presidential pardon is a strangely exotic thing, isn’t it? Essentially it means some well connected people are above the law. Which in turn surely encourages clan behaviour.
The $100m will have less influence than Twitter being used to peddle Farage and attack the "establishment" for the next four years. That will be pivotal.
Does anybody still use Twitter?
I do. But I can't see any of their advertising having much effect on me.
I'm genuinely interested in what their readership is.
I've never used it, although I used to click on links that others put up. (I generally regreted doing so.) Now I don't even do that because they insist on knowing my d.o.b. and I won't give them that.
It's not been any great loss.
Similar with Facebook, which I haven't visited for years. I have the impression that has degenerated into a wasteland for lonely losers.
Still a lot of scientists, subject specialists, and breaking news stuff on there, amid the general noise. It's perfectly possible to filter most of the latter out, even though it's probably 95% of the traffic.
There are a lot of very good legal specialists on there, excellent threads on photography, art and the classical world. Bluesky is dull and has some of the faults of old Twitter. It seems to have a lot of sanctimonious types on there. Neither are places to linger but both are useful as a starting point.
The American presidential pardon is a strangely exotic thing, isn’t it? Essentially it means some well connected people are above the law. Which in turn surely encourages clan behaviour.
At least the Clinton pardons came after the recipients had done some time, IIRC? And they didn’t say “you can’t be prosecuted for anything you did for a decade, yeah that decade when you were on crack and doing loads of crimes”
I’m guessing some of the more lurid allegations against Biden’s son have merit - and Biden knows it - but now he’s made his son immune
The $100m will have less influence than Twitter being used to peddle Farage and attack the "establishment" for the next four years. That will be pivotal.
Does anybody still use Twitter?
I do. But I can't see any of their advertising having much effect on me.
I'm genuinely interested in what their readership is.
I've never used it, although I used to click on links that others put up. (I generally regreted doing so.) Now I don't even do that because they insist on knowing my d.o.b. and I won't give them that.
It's not been any great loss.
Similar with Facebook, which I haven't visited for years. I have the impression that has degenerated into a wasteland for lonely losers.
Still a lot of scientists, subject specialists, and breaking news stuff on there, amid the general noise. It's perfectly possible to filter most of the latter out, even though it's probably 95% of the traffic.
There are a lot of very good legal specialists on there, excellent threads on photography, art and the classical world. Bluesky is dull and has some of the faults of old Twitter. It seems to have a lot of sanctimonious types on there. Neither are places to linger but both are useful as a starting point.
Bluesky has the advantage that you can put links in the initial post and the post isn’t automatically demoted to a black hole.
So the official presidential Democrat position on the American legal system is “we fully and absolutely respect the due process of law and we always abide by the decisions of our independent judiciary, until they make a decision we don’t like then fuck all that lol”
Yes, that is how the American constitution is written.
To understand why, you need to think on what they were doing. To many of the Founding Fathers, they were building England 2.0
With lots of The Ancient Rights under Magna Carta stuff.
So, the President was the King, but elected. The Senate was the House of Lords, but nominated* by the States to represent their interests in Washington. The reason that all the minor local functionaries are elected is to try and avoid a Squirearchy. Etc etc…
The power of pardon is an ancient one. Part of the ultimate power of kings. The idea is that the mechanism of justice can sometimes produce injustice. So the Noble King saves the day, 5 minutes before the play ends.
*Originally not elected.
If you are saying that the US Constitution is not fit for purpose it would be impossible to disagree. The Electoral College system is a joke. The fact we still don't have the final figures for the House is absurd (as is the concept of an entire House being up for election every 2 years). The weighting of the Senate is ridiculous. The Supreme Court has far too much power for a democracy and not nearly enough oversight. Those founding fathers didn't know their arses from their elbows and pretending that their political fixes should be hallowed in some way shows the fantasy of the whole thing.
It all went wrong after the US War of Independence then, say what you like about King George III but he obeyed the law himself and for his family and he was anointed by God not some Electoral College system
The utter blistering hypocrisy of Biden and the Democrats
They spend two years concocting often dubious law cases against Trump - basically trying anything to get him in jail. But that’s ok because the Democrats aren’t criminals and they don’t break the law like Trump so they are allowed to bend the law a bit ahem
And now Biden flat out pardons his convicted criminal son. There will be an awful lot of Americans feeling very vindicated in their vote for Trump
Why the Democratss were right to drop Biden: #28 in a series...
Hunter's legal travails may be substantial, like a felony conviction for a felon packing a sidearm, but they are mere trifles compared to Tango man's charge sheet.
The issue isn’t the pardon for the sidearm buying. The issue is the pardon covers *everything* from 2014 onwards. It’s utterly egregious.
The $100m will have less influence than Twitter being used to peddle Farage and attack the "establishment" for the next four years. That will be pivotal.
Does anybody still use Twitter?
I do. But I can't see any of their advertising having much effect on me.
I'm genuinely interested in what their readership is.
I've never used it, although I used to click on links that others put up. (I generally regreted doing so.) Now I don't even do that because they insist on knowing my d.o.b. and I won't give them that.
It's not been any great loss.
Similar with Facebook, which I haven't visited for years. I have the impression that has degenerated into a wasteland for lonely losers.
Still a lot of scientists, subject specialists, and breaking news stuff on there, amid the general noise. It's perfectly possible to filter most of the latter out, even though it's probably 95% of the traffic.
There are a lot of very good legal specialists on there, excellent threads on photography, art and the classical world. Bluesky is dull and has some of the faults of old Twitter. It seems to have a lot of sanctimonious types on there. Neither are places to linger but both are useful as a starting point.
Bluesky has the advantage that you can put links in the initial post and the post isn’t automatically demoted to a black hole.
That was one of musk’s dumbest moves out of many dumb moves in his handling of X
He should just accept that X will lose money but it’s worth it for the political power and global prestige (which it surely is). Allow links. Let X be the global talking shop - as he keeps insisting he wants
No, but Biden isn't running for anything now so why should he give any fucks about the party? Might as well make sure his family are sorted.
I’m pretty sure Biden now hates the Democrat party. They’re the ones that brusquely forced him out and humiliated him - to install his bimbo VP who then lost anyway
So the official presidential Democrat position on the American legal system is “we fully and absolutely respect the due process of law and we always abide by the decisions of our independent judiciary, until they make a decision we don’t like then fuck all that lol”
Yes, that is how the American constitution is written.
To understand why, you need to think on what they were doing. To many of the Founding Fathers, they were building England 2.0
With lots of The Ancient Rights under Magna Carta stuff.
So, the President was the King, but elected. The Senate was the House of Lords, but nominated* by the States to represent their interests in Washington. The reason that all the minor local functionaries are elected is to try and avoid a Squirearchy. Etc etc…
The power of pardon is an ancient one. Part of the ultimate power of kings. The idea is that the mechanism of justice can sometimes produce injustice. So the Noble King saves the day, 5 minutes before the play ends.
*Originally not elected.
If you are saying that the US Constitution is not fit for purpose it would be impossible to disagree. The Electoral College system is a joke. The fact we still don't have the final figures for the House is absurd (as is the concept of an entire House being up for election every 2 years). The weighting of the Senate is ridiculous. The Supreme Court has far too much power for a democracy and not nearly enough oversight. Those founding fathers didn't know their arses from their elbows and pretending that their political fixes should be hallowed in some way shows the fantasy of the whole thing.
The basic idea worked fairly well. One big problem was the ending of the modernisation process - Amendments.
The other big one was the enshrining of Constitutional law as the ultimate power on the land. In the 90s, my American relatives (high flying lawyers among them) would tell me that progressive thought had Won - because the law controlled the system and the law was progressive.
They got quite upset when I pointed out that *which* way the Law progressed was up for grabs. And the complex and elegant bridge that was Roe vs Wade depended on that definition….
Even then, the cry on the Right was “Our Judges” - it wasn’t hard to work out. If the Supreme Court is the ultimate legislative body, win a majority there.
The US constitution is what you would expect a group of classically-educated, slave-owning, aristocrats and professional people to devise, in 1776.
The model they sought to reproduce was the Roman Republic.
Essentially it was an aristocratic Republic, with some input from the masses.
I agree a direct lie doesn't look particularly good, but Clinton's pardons were worse by a long way, both optically and practically.
At least Hunter Biden is accused of relative trivialities for the most part which aren't even usually prosecuted and everybody can understand a father wanting to help his surviving son but there was no excuse at all for Marc Rich, whose wife had just happened to make large donations to Hilary's Senate campaign.
I'm pretty sure the press secretary believed it at the time - as did an awful lot of Democrats. One difference between then and the GOP is that a fair percentage of the party seem quite pissed off with the decision.
No, but Biden isn't running for anything now so why should he give any fucks about the party? Might as well make sure his family are sorted.
I’m pretty sure Biden now hates the Democrat party. They’re the ones that brusquely forced him out and humiliated him - to install his bimbo VP who then lost anyway
Some of his actions during the campaign suggested he voted for Trump, at least.
No, but Biden isn't running for anything now so why should he give any fucks about the party? Might as well make sure his family are sorted.
I’m pretty sure Biden now hates the Democrat party. They’re the ones that brusquely forced him out and humiliated him - to install his bimbo VP who then lost anyway
Some of his actions during the campaign suggested he voted for Trump, at least.
The American presidential pardon is a strangely exotic thing, isn’t it? Essentially it means some well connected people are above the law. Which in turn surely encourages clan behaviour.
It reflects a number of "unfinished business" aspects of the system. The fact that the President can't be prosecuted for ANYTHING is remarkable too.
12 seats left to declare, and a recount in Cork North Central, but looks like the final seat tally will be: FF 48 (including the Ceann Comhairle, aka Speaker) SF 39 FG 38 Independents 17 Lab 11 SDP 11 Independent Ireland 4 PBP-S 3 Aontú 2 100% Redress 1
Independent Ireland have perhaps not done well enough to sell themselves to FF and FG. My sense is that the SDP haven't done well enough to insist on all five of their red line demands, and so will not go into coalition. Labour probably will be willing to compromise more and get what they can, and the coalition negotiations to come will be a dance for them to try and leverage as much as possible - with FF/FG making eyes at the Independents to reduce the price they have to pay for Labour support.
FG are fighting a hard rearguard action to retain a rotating Taoiseach, with lots of talk of "parity of esteem", but the seat gap looks fairly large. If FF want to keep Taoiseach to themselves they may have a chat with SF about a coalition to put the frighteners on FG.
On the Bidens, it's not hugely surprising. The problem is more that presidents have this power without veto from anyone else.
I don't know the ins and outs of H Biden's case to judge whether he's been targeted as the President's son or whether he was getting what was coming to him. If he's been targeted, that sucks and is likely due to the partisan nature of prosecutions in the US. But the president shouldn't have the power to unilaterally pardon. It stinks.
The answer to the headline question may well be: Both. Very large amounts of money obviously make stuff possible, and affect the political weather, but actually election results rest in respect of direct causation 100% of people making crosses on bits of paper, a process which cannot be bought since the introduction of the secret ballot.
The UK public have resolutely elected a social democrat government in every election since 1945. And I think they will carry on doing so.
No £trillions would ever make George Galloway prime minister; Farage becoming PM would rest ultimately on enough voters believing that his version of social democracy - a fairly old fashioned sort and even less well costed than the others - is the least worst available. Musk can't make Farage PM, but Kemi and Starmer might.
Yes - Reform etc are dependent on the system continuing to seize up in a meandering mess of process. Which protects the guilty and punishes the innocent.
In some ways the Post Office farce is the perfect example of this. On one side you have the studious protection of the rights of the senior managers, who lied to the courts and parliament. On the other you have dogged resistance to exoneration and compensation to the innocent. Decades of “Brazil” style procedural farce.
Only ended by a parliamentary fiat - the SPMs were declared innocent. Because the legal system could not.
The American presidential pardon is a strangely exotic thing, isn’t it? Essentially it means some well connected people are above the law. Which in turn surely encourages clan behaviour.
It reflects a number of "unfinished business" aspects of the system. The fact that the President can't be prosecuted for ANYTHING is remarkable too.
That's new law created pretty well out of thin air by the current Supreme Court. Constitutionally absurd, IMO, but barring a constitutional amendment, it's quite hard to see how it gets fixed for a generation, now that Trump gets to appoint the replacements for the oldest justices.
The pardon power, though increasingly abused, is actually there in the original text.
One thing that shouldn't be missed here, he didn't just pardon Hunter Biden for the gun charge and the tax dodging, he pardoned him against any Federal crime that he may committed over a 10 year period, that period where he was on the board of companies taking massive salaries for doing nothing.
That quite different from as a father, my son has been charged for something minor that was trumped up...its Stinky McStinky....
Yes exactly. There are loads of other suspicions and charges floating around Hunter Biden. Some of them worse than the charges made so far
Now he may be innocent or not. But the president has just made him immune from any prosecution for anything. What if it turns out one of the accusations is incontrovertibly true?
You mean like the accusations against Trump, many of which are undoubtedly true?
You mean
1) the accusations of which he has been convicted in court for? 2) the accusations that he has been charged with, with legal grade evidence presented? 3) the accusations which have just been stated?
With Trump and accusations of crime, there’s so many that you need to be specific…
This is embarrassing whataboutery from you. I would have expected it from other posters.
We were discussing the accusations against Trump. I was just asking which ones were in scope for the discussion.
Like Hunter Biden, he’s been convicted in court of a bunch of stuff.
On the Bidens, it's not hugely surprising. The problem is more that presidents have this power without veto from anyone else.
I don't know the ins and outs of H Biden's case to judge whether he's been targeted as the President's son or whether he was getting what was coming to him. If he's been targeted, that sucks and is likely due to the partisan nature of prosecutions in the US. But the president shouldn't have the power to unilaterally pardon. It stinks.
He wasn’t targeted FFS. The prosecutions were brought by Biden’s own Dept of Justice and Hunter Biden pleaded guilty
So the official presidential Democrat position on the American legal system is “we fully and absolutely respect the due process of law and we always abide by the decisions of our independent judiciary, until they make a decision we don’t like then fuck all that lol”
Yes, that is how the American constitution is written.
To understand why, you need to think on what they were doing. To many of the Founding Fathers, they were building England 2.0
With lots of The Ancient Rights under Magna Carta stuff.
So, the President was the King, but elected. The Senate was the House of Lords, but nominated* by the States to represent their interests in Washington. The reason that all the minor local functionaries are elected is to try and avoid a Squirearchy. Etc etc…
The power of pardon is an ancient one. Part of the ultimate power of kings. The idea is that the mechanism of justice can sometimes produce injustice. So the Noble King saves the day, 5 minutes before the play ends.
*Originally not elected.
If you are saying that the US Constitution is not fit for purpose it would be impossible to disagree. The Electoral College system is a joke. The fact we still don't have the final figures for the House is absurd (as is the concept of an entire House being up for election every 2 years). The weighting of the Senate is ridiculous. The Supreme Court has far too much power for a democracy and not nearly enough oversight. Those founding fathers didn't know their arses from their elbows and pretending that their political fixes should be hallowed in some way shows the fantasy of the whole thing.
It all went wrong after the US War of Independence then, say what you like about King George III but he obeyed the law himself and for his family and he was anointed by God not some Electoral College system
Although spent half his reign talking to trees.
And the rest of his reign talking to vegetables. (He did like farming.)
Apparently the Biden pardon is one of the most sweeping pardons in American history.
In all seriousness...is any of that true? The former would require knowledge of Biden's motives and health over and above what is known to the public, and the latter would require a ranked list of all pardons and the criteria used to rank them.
So the official presidential Democrat position on the American legal system is “we fully and absolutely respect the due process of law and we always abide by the decisions of our independent judiciary, until they make a decision we don’t like then fuck all that lol”
Yes, that is how the American constitution is written.
To understand why, you need to think on what they were doing. To many of the Founding Fathers, they were building England 2.0
With lots of The Ancient Rights under Magna Carta stuff.
So, the President was the King, but elected. The Senate was the House of Lords, but nominated* by the States to represent their interests in Washington. The reason that all the minor local functionaries are elected is to try and avoid a Squirearchy. Etc etc…
The power of pardon is an ancient one. Part of the ultimate power of kings. The idea is that the mechanism of justice can sometimes produce injustice. So the Noble King saves the day, 5 minutes before the play ends.
*Originally not elected.
If you are saying that the US Constitution is not fit for purpose it would be impossible to disagree. The Electoral College system is a joke. The fact we still don't have the final figures for the House is absurd (as is the concept of an entire House being up for election every 2 years). The weighting of the Senate is ridiculous. The Supreme Court has far too much power for a democracy and not nearly enough oversight. Those founding fathers didn't know their arses from their elbows and pretending that their political fixes should be hallowed in some way shows the fantasy of the whole thing.
The basic idea worked fairly well. One big problem was the ending of the modernisation process - Amendments.
The other big one was the enshrining of Constitutional law as the ultimate power on the land. In the 90s, my American relatives (high flying lawyers among them) would tell me that progressive thought had Won - because the law controlled the system and the law was progressive.
They got quite upset when I pointed out that *which* way the Law progressed was up for grabs. And the complex and elegant bridge that was Roe vs Wade depended on that definition….
Even then, the cry on the Right was “Our Judges” - it wasn’t hard to work out. If the Supreme Court is the ultimate legislative body, win a majority there.
The US constitution is what you would expect a group of classically-educated, slave-owning, aristocrats and professional people to devise, in 1776.
The model they sought to reproduce was the Roman Republic.
Essentially it was an aristocratic Republic, with some input from the masses.
Er, no.
The was some inspiration from the belief that the Old Roman Republic was democratic (which it wasn’t) - but many of the founders were as much inspired by the French Revolution (*not* the later Terror etc) as anything else
You can read their very extensive ruminations on this - a mega ton of documents available.
An aristocracy in the sense of the Roman Senate was what they were trying to *avoid*. Explicitly.
On the Bidens, it's not hugely surprising. The problem is more that presidents have this power without veto from anyone else.
I don't know the ins and outs of H Biden's case to judge whether he's been targeted as the President's son or whether he was getting what was coming to him. If he's been targeted, that sucks and is likely due to the partisan nature of prosecutions in the US. But the president shouldn't have the power to unilaterally pardon. It stinks.
He wasn’t targeted FFS. The prosecutions were brought by Biden’s own Dept of Justice and Hunter Biden pleaded guilty
“Hunter Biden makes last-minute guilty plea in tax case”
"I don't know the ins and outs of H Biden's case to judge whether he's been targeted"
Well, now - pending any opposite suggestions from others - I do!
(There's a legitimate question, in general in the US, I think as to whether famous people/those related to powerful people get special treatment either lenient or harsh. Maybe here, too. People wanting to be seen as tough/not giving special treatment so they pursue things that might otherwise not have been a priority? People not pursuing things as they don't want to piss off the powerful/famous person or are leant on. Some suggest Trump has been unfairly targeted.)
Apparently the Biden pardon is one of the most sweeping pardons in American history.
In all seriousness...is any of that true? The former would require knowledge of Biden's motives and health over and above what is known to the public, and the latter would require a ranked list of all pardons and the criteria used to rank them.
The “most sweeping pardon” claim is from Politico the website. Not exactly trumpite
That’s afaik and remember. I’m jet lagged and drinking wine at 5am in the Andes
So the official presidential Democrat position on the American legal system is “we fully and absolutely respect the due process of law and we always abide by the decisions of our independent judiciary, until they make a decision we don’t like then fuck all that lol”
Yes, that is how the American constitution is written.
To understand why, you need to think on what they were doing. To many of the Founding Fathers, they were building England 2.0
With lots of The Ancient Rights under Magna Carta stuff.
So, the President was the King, but elected. The Senate was the House of Lords, but nominated* by the States to represent their interests in Washington. The reason that all the minor local functionaries are elected is to try and avoid a Squirearchy. Etc etc…
The power of pardon is an ancient one. Part of the ultimate power of kings. The idea is that the mechanism of justice can sometimes produce injustice. So the Noble King saves the day, 5 minutes before the play ends.
*Originally not elected.
If you are saying that the US Constitution is not fit for purpose it would be impossible to disagree. The Electoral College system is a joke. The fact we still don't have the final figures for the House is absurd (as is the concept of an entire House being up for election every 2 years). The weighting of the Senate is ridiculous. The Supreme Court has far too much power for a democracy and not nearly enough oversight. Those founding fathers didn't know their arses from their elbows and pretending that their political fixes should be hallowed in some way shows the fantasy of the whole thing.
The basic idea worked fairly well. One big problem was the ending of the modernisation process - Amendments.
The other big one was the enshrining of Constitutional law as the ultimate power on the land. In the 90s, my American relatives (high flying lawyers among them) would tell me that progressive thought had Won - because the law controlled the system and the law was progressive.
They got quite upset when I pointed out that *which* way the Law progressed was up for grabs. And the complex and elegant bridge that was Roe vs Wade depended on that definition….
Even then, the cry on the Right was “Our Judges” - it wasn’t hard to work out. If the Supreme Court is the ultimate legislative body, win a majority there.
The US constitution is what you would expect a group of classically-educated, slave-owning, aristocrats and professional people to devise, in 1776.
The model they sought to reproduce was the Roman Republic.
Essentially it was an aristocratic Republic, with some input from the masses.
Er, no.
The was some inspiration from the belief that the Old Roman Republic was democratic (which it wasn’t) - but many of the founders were as much inspired by the French Revolution (*not* the later Terror etc) as anything else
You can read their very extensive ruminations on this - a mega ton of documents available.
An aristocracy in the sense of the Roman Senate was what they were trying to *avoid*. Explicitly.
The French Revolution was in 1789. Britain admitted defeat in the American War of Independence in 1783.
The Americans drew a lot of inspiration from the English Civil War.
On the Bidens, it's not hugely surprising. The problem is more that presidents have this power without veto from anyone else.
I don't know the ins and outs of H Biden's case to judge whether he's been targeted as the President's son or whether he was getting what was coming to him. If he's been targeted, that sucks and is likely due to the partisan nature of prosecutions in the US. But the president shouldn't have the power to unilaterally pardon. It stinks.
He wasn’t targeted FFS. The prosecutions were brought by Biden’s own Dept of Justice and Hunter Biden pleaded guilty
“Hunter Biden makes last-minute guilty plea in tax case”
"I don't know the ins and outs of H Biden's case to judge whether he's been targeted"
Well, now - pending any opposite suggestions from others - I do!
(There's a legitimate question, in general in the US, I think as to whether famous people/those related to powerful people get special treatment either lenient or harsh. Maybe here, too. People wanting to be seen as tough/not giving special treatment so they pursue things that might otherwise not have been a priority? People not pursuing things as they don't want to piss off the powerful/famous person or are leant on. Some suggest Trump has been unfairly targeted.)
Trump HAS in part been unfairly targeted - the New York case was well dodgy - as PB’s resident legal eagle, @DavidL, has eloquently explained
However - to my legally amateur mind - some of the other cases against Trump seemed perfectly legitimate
Just been given the heads up by my American relatives - apparently the MAGA types in state politics are already talking about state level prosecution of Hunter Biden. To get round the federal pardon.
*Apparently* there were US air strikes against Iranian-backed militia in eastern Syria last night.
Not seeing this reported anywhere sane, but it was on Twix.
Yes, I saw that, but hesitated to post it without confirmation. The source was a pretty regular Syrian conflict reporter, FWIW.
If true, that means Russia and the USA are on the same side?!?
No. Both Russia and Iran back Assad (though I would not be surprised if Iran was sponsoring other groups as well.)
Thankyou. It’s so incredibly complex
I’ve seen some hideous evidence that these rebels - or some of them - are easily as bad as isis. Islamist maniacs who will impose brutal sharia law a la Taliban
Which leaves me in the impossibly horrible position of maybe hoping Assad prevails
On the Bidens, it's not hugely surprising. The problem is more that presidents have this power without veto from anyone else.
I don't know the ins and outs of H Biden's case to judge whether he's been targeted as the President's son or whether he was getting what was coming to him. If he's been targeted, that sucks and is likely due to the partisan nature of prosecutions in the US. But the president shouldn't have the power to unilaterally pardon. It stinks.
He wasn’t targeted FFS. The prosecutions were brought by Biden’s own Dept of Justice and Hunter Biden pleaded guilty
On the Bidens, it's not hugely surprising. The problem is more that presidents have this power without veto from anyone else.
I don't know the ins and outs of H Biden's case to judge whether he's been targeted as the President's son or whether he was getting what was coming to him. If he's been targeted, that sucks and is likely due to the partisan nature of prosecutions in the US. But the president shouldn't have the power to unilaterally pardon. It stinks.
He wasn’t targeted FFS. The prosecutions were brought by Biden’s own Dept of Justice and Hunter Biden pleaded guilty
The utter blistering hypocrisy of Biden and the Democrats
They spend two years concocting often dubious law cases against Trump - basically trying anything to get him in jail. But that’s ok because the Democrats aren’t criminals and they don’t break the law like Trump so they are allowed to bend the law a bit ahem
And now Biden flat out pardons his convicted criminal son. There will be an awful lot of Americans feeling very vindicated in their vote for Trump
And the republicans did all they could to keep Trump out of jail, and will continue to do so now. I don't see any righteous anger from you about that.
The presidential pardon system is a cancerous ulcer in America's body politic. Politically, Biden should not have done this. But from a human point of view, I see why he did.
“From a human point of view”
Listen to yourself
Even the NYT is expressing shame and shock
“Mr. Biden’s decision to use the extraordinary power of executive clemency to wipe out his son’s convictions on gun and tax charges came despite repeated statements by him and his aides that he would not do so. Just this past summer, after his son was convicted at trial, the president rejected the idea of a pardon and said that “I will accept the outcome of this case and will continue to respect the judicial process.” The statement he issued on Sunday night made clear he did not accept the outcome or respect the process”
Americans re elected Trump despite his criminal conviction and the other charges against the President elect have largely been dropped after the SC ruling on presidential immunity. So Biden I suspect felt he may as well use the same presidential immunity and pardon powers to let his son off especially as he is never running for election again when he leaves the White House and now doesn't give a toss what voters think of him and his family
Yep. A no-brainer for Joe. It's the wrong thing to do (obviously) but he was right to do it. There's no reward for virtue in American politics. Indeed it's the opposite. Fortune favours ultra partisanship and crookery. Nov 5th demonstrated and cemented this. If you care more about the price of a Big Mac than your democracy and constitution, don't be surprised if your politics tumbles into the gutter.
So the official presidential Democrat position on the American legal system is “we fully and absolutely respect the due process of law and we always abide by the decisions of our independent judiciary, until they make a decision we don’t like then fuck all that lol”
Yes, that is how the American constitution is written.
To understand why, you need to think on what they were doing. To many of the Founding Fathers, they were building England 2.0
With lots of The Ancient Rights under Magna Carta stuff.
So, the President was the King, but elected. The Senate was the House of Lords, but nominated* by the States to represent their interests in Washington. The reason that all the minor local functionaries are elected is to try and avoid a Squirearchy. Etc etc…
The power of pardon is an ancient one. Part of the ultimate power of kings. The idea is that the mechanism of justice can sometimes produce injustice. So the Noble King saves the day, 5 minutes before the play ends.
*Originally not elected.
If you are saying that the US Constitution is not fit for purpose it would be impossible to disagree. The Electoral College system is a joke. The fact we still don't have the final figures for the House is absurd (as is the concept of an entire House being up for election every 2 years). The weighting of the Senate is ridiculous. The Supreme Court has far too much power for a democracy and not nearly enough oversight. Those founding fathers didn't know their arses from their elbows and pretending that their political fixes should be hallowed in some way shows the fantasy of the whole thing.
The basic idea worked fairly well. One big problem was the ending of the modernisation process - Amendments.
The other big one was the enshrining of Constitutional law as the ultimate power on the land. In the 90s, my American relatives (high flying lawyers among them) would tell me that progressive thought had Won - because the law controlled the system and the law was progressive.
They got quite upset when I pointed out that *which* way the Law progressed was up for grabs. And the complex and elegant bridge that was Roe vs Wade depended on that definition….
Even then, the cry on the Right was “Our Judges” - it wasn’t hard to work out. If the Supreme Court is the ultimate legislative body, win a majority there.
The US constitution is what you would expect a group of classically-educated, slave-owning, aristocrats and professional people to devise, in 1776.
The model they sought to reproduce was the Roman Republic.
Essentially it was an aristocratic Republic, with some input from the masses.
Er, no.
The was some inspiration from the belief that the Old Roman Republic was democratic (which it wasn’t) - but many of the founders were as much inspired by the French Revolution (*not* the later Terror etc) as anything else
You can read their very extensive ruminations on this - a mega ton of documents available.
An aristocracy in the sense of the Roman Senate was what they were trying to *avoid*. Explicitly.
The French Revolution was in 1789. Britain admitted defeat in the American War of Independence in 1783.
The Americans drew a lot of inspiration from the English Civil War.
I wonder if the New Englanders took inspiration from the English Civil War while the Virginian plantation owners took inspiration from the Glorious Revolution.
Leading to the split between New England Federalists and the Virginian Democrat-Republicans from 1796 onwards.
I just asked Copilot and Perplexity.ai the following question:
"Good morning. Most people are aware of the saying "this is the way the world will end, not with a bang but with a whimper". But there is another variant, which has the phrase" with laughter from all the witty heads, who think it such a joke". Can you tell me about that variant please?"
*Apparently* there were US air strikes against Iranian-backed militia in eastern Syria last night.
Not seeing this reported anywhere sane, but it was on Twix.
Yes, I saw that, but hesitated to post it without confirmation. The source was a pretty regular Syrian conflict reporter, FWIW.
If true, that means Russia and the USA are on the same side?!?
No. Both Russia and Iran back Assad (though I would not be surprised if Iran was sponsoring other groups as well.)
Thankyou. It’s so incredibly complex
I’ve seen some hideous evidence that these rebels - or some of them - are easily as bad as isis. Islamist maniacs who will impose brutal sharia law a la Taliban
Which leaves me in the impossibly horrible position of maybe hoping Assad prevails
Initial reports on the ground from Aleppo suggest not. But then again, similar claims of reasonableness were actually made for ISIS in the very early days.
The utter blistering hypocrisy of Biden and the Democrats
They spend two years concocting often dubious law cases against Trump - basically trying anything to get him in jail. But that’s ok because the Democrats aren’t criminals and they don’t break the law like Trump so they are allowed to bend the law a bit ahem
And now Biden flat out pardons his convicted criminal son. There will be an awful lot of Americans feeling very vindicated in their vote for Trump
And the republicans did all they could to keep Trump out of jail, and will continue to do so now. I don't see any righteous anger from you about that.
The presidential pardon system is a cancerous ulcer in America's body politic. Politically, Biden should not have done this. But from a human point of view, I see why he did.
“From a human point of view”
Listen to yourself
Even the NYT is expressing shame and shock
“Mr. Biden’s decision to use the extraordinary power of executive clemency to wipe out his son’s convictions on gun and tax charges came despite repeated statements by him and his aides that he would not do so. Just this past summer, after his son was convicted at trial, the president rejected the idea of a pardon and said that “I will accept the outcome of this case and will continue to respect the judicial process.” The statement he issued on Sunday night made clear he did not accept the outcome or respect the process”
Americans re elected Trump despite his criminal conviction and the other charges against the President elect have largely been dropped after the SC ruling on presidential immunity. So Biden I suspect felt he may as well use the same presidential immunity and pardon powers to let his son off especially as he is never running for election again when he leaves the White House and now doesn't give a toss what voters think of him and his family
Yep. A no-brainer for Joe. It's the wrong thing to do (obviously) but he was right to do it. There's no reward for virtue in American politics. Indeed it's the opposite. Fortune favours ultra partisanship and crookery. Nov 5th demonstrated and cemented this. If you care more about the price of a Big Mac than your democracy and constitution, don't be surprised if your politics tumbles into the gutter.
So the official presidential Democrat position on the American legal system is “we fully and absolutely respect the due process of law and we always abide by the decisions of our independent judiciary, until they make a decision we don’t like then fuck all that lol”
Yes, that is how the American constitution is written.
To understand why, you need to think on what they were doing. To many of the Founding Fathers, they were building England 2.0
With lots of The Ancient Rights under Magna Carta stuff.
So, the President was the King, but elected. The Senate was the House of Lords, but nominated* by the States to represent their interests in Washington. The reason that all the minor local functionaries are elected is to try and avoid a Squirearchy. Etc etc…
The power of pardon is an ancient one. Part of the ultimate power of kings. The idea is that the mechanism of justice can sometimes produce injustice. So the Noble King saves the day, 5 minutes before the play ends.
*Originally not elected.
If you are saying that the US Constitution is not fit for purpose it would be impossible to disagree. The Electoral College system is a joke. The fact we still don't have the final figures for the House is absurd (as is the concept of an entire House being up for election every 2 years). The weighting of the Senate is ridiculous. The Supreme Court has far too much power for a democracy and not nearly enough oversight. Those founding fathers didn't know their arses from their elbows and pretending that their political fixes should be hallowed in some way shows the fantasy of the whole thing.
The basic idea worked fairly well. One big problem was the ending of the modernisation process - Amendments.
The other big one was the enshrining of Constitutional law as the ultimate power on the land. In the 90s, my American relatives (high flying lawyers among them) would tell me that progressive thought had Won - because the law controlled the system and the law was progressive.
They got quite upset when I pointed out that *which* way the Law progressed was up for grabs. And the complex and elegant bridge that was Roe vs Wade depended on that definition….
Even then, the cry on the Right was “Our Judges” - it wasn’t hard to work out. If the Supreme Court is the ultimate legislative body, win a majority there.
The US constitution is what you would expect a group of classically-educated, slave-owning, aristocrats and professional people to devise, in 1776.
The model they sought to reproduce was the Roman Republic.
Essentially it was an aristocratic Republic, with some input from the masses.
Er, no.
The was some inspiration from the belief that the Old Roman Republic was democratic (which it wasn’t) - but many of the founders were as much inspired by the French Revolution (*not* the later Terror etc) as anything else
You can read their very extensive ruminations on this - a mega ton of documents available.
An aristocracy in the sense of the Roman Senate was what they were trying to *avoid*. Explicitly.
The French Revolution was in 1789. Britain admitted defeat in the American War of Independence in 1783.
The Americans drew a lot of inspiration from the English Civil War.
Yes they did.
They were also inspired by the run up to the French Revolution. Which didn’t spring out of nowhere in 1789. The intellectual and philosophical roots were there - and many of the Founders personally knew the leading players.
The original Revolution (not the later guillotine free for all tyranny that ended up with Napoleon) was part of an Enlightenment inspired movement that was sweeping through the European intellectual scene. See also 1798 in Ireland.
*Apparently* there were US air strikes against Iranian-backed militia in eastern Syria last night.
Not seeing this reported anywhere sane, but it was on Twix.
Yes, I saw that, but hesitated to post it without confirmation. The source was a pretty regular Syrian conflict reporter, FWIW.
If true, that means Russia and the USA are on the same side?!?
No. Both Russia and Iran back Assad (though I would not be surprised if Iran was sponsoring other groups as well.)
Thankyou. It’s so incredibly complex
I’ve seen some hideous evidence that these rebels - or some of them - are easily as bad as isis. Islamist maniacs who will impose brutal sharia law a la Taliban
Which leaves me in the impossibly horrible position of maybe hoping Assad prevails
The SDF are the best hope. Unfortunately, their strong Kurdish component makes them anathema to Turkey.
*Apparently* there were US air strikes against Iranian-backed militia in eastern Syria last night.
Not seeing this reported anywhere sane, but it was on Twix.
Yes, I saw that, but hesitated to post it without confirmation. The source was a pretty regular Syrian conflict reporter, FWIW.
If true, that means Russia and the USA are on the same side?!?
No. Both Russia and Iran back Assad (though I would not be surprised if Iran was sponsoring other groups as well.)
Thankyou. It’s so incredibly complex
I’ve seen some hideous evidence that these rebels - or some of them - are easily as bad as isis. Islamist maniacs who will impose brutal sharia law a la Taliban
Which leaves me in the impossibly horrible position of maybe hoping Assad prevails
The rebel groups, except perhaps the Kurds, are a rather fractious combination of smaller groups, sometimes with little in common except geography. Earlier on in the conflict, some of these groups would fight together against Assad, then a few months later be fighting each other, then fighting (say) the Kurds, then Assad. It would have been hilarious if it was not so damned tragic.
We really fucked up in not supporting the initial incarnation of the FSA (*) back in 2013. IMV it also aided Putin's decision to go after Crimea and eastern Ukraine the next year, as he (rightly, at the time) saw the west as impotent.
(*) The current FSA has little in common with the original one, which was pretty much destroyed by Assad, Russia and ISIS.
*Apparently* there were US air strikes against Iranian-backed militia in eastern Syria last night.
Not seeing this reported anywhere sane, but it was on Twix.
Yes, I saw that, but hesitated to post it without confirmation. The source was a pretty regular Syrian conflict reporter, FWIW.
If true, that means Russia and the USA are on the same side?!?
No. Both Russia and Iran back Assad (though I would not be surprised if Iran was sponsoring other groups as well.)
Thankyou. It’s so incredibly complex
I’ve seen some hideous evidence that these rebels - or some of them - are easily as bad as isis. Islamist maniacs who will impose brutal sharia law a la Taliban
Which leaves me in the impossibly horrible position of maybe hoping Assad prevails
Initial reports on the ground from Aleppo suggest not. But then again, similar claims of reasonableness were actually made for ISIS in the very early days.
There are, I am afraid, grotesque videos. I don’t think they are fake
This is probably ISIS 2.0 and I reckon anyone hoping for the rebels to be good guys are like those who hoped the new Taliban would be more reasonable. That’s the Taliban who have just made it illegal for women to speak
Just been given the heads up by my American relatives - apparently the MAGA types in state politics are already talking about state level prosecution of Hunter Biden. To get round the federal pardon.
Hunter would have had to engage in criminal activity within those states for that to work.
Trump was vulnerable because of his actions in New York and Georgia - I doubt many Red states have a claim on Hunter.
On the Bidens, it's not hugely surprising. The problem is more that presidents have this power without veto from anyone else.
I don't know the ins and outs of H Biden's case to judge whether he's been targeted as the President's son or whether he was getting what was coming to him. If he's been targeted, that sucks and is likely due to the partisan nature of prosecutions in the US. But the president shouldn't have the power to unilaterally pardon. It stinks.
He wasn’t targeted FFS. The prosecutions were brought by Biden’s own Dept of Justice and Hunter Biden pleaded guilty
“Hunter Biden makes last-minute guilty plea in tax case”
They originated under the previous Trump administration.
He pleaded guilty. He admits guilt in his post pardon statement
He did. He also had a plea deal rescinded (for what seem fairly dodgy reasons).
The unfair targeting claim is not that he's some innocent paragon, but that most others in his position would likely have been allowed to settle (which is true). It's a tough one to judge; prosecutors in the US can also push to impose absurdly long sentences on quite ordinary people on occasion.
One the other hand, the GOP has spent quite absurd amounts of Congressional time, and millions in public funding, pursuing him for the last five or six years.
The utter blistering hypocrisy of Biden and the Democrats
They spend two years concocting often dubious law cases against Trump - basically trying anything to get him in jail. But that’s ok because the Democrats aren’t criminals and they don’t break the law like Trump so they are allowed to bend the law a bit ahem
And now Biden flat out pardons his convicted criminal son. There will be an awful lot of Americans feeling very vindicated in their vote for Trump
And the republicans did all they could to keep Trump out of jail, and will continue to do so now. I don't see any righteous anger from you about that.
The presidential pardon system is a cancerous ulcer in America's body politic. Politically, Biden should not have done this. But from a human point of view, I see why he did.
“From a human point of view”
Listen to yourself
Even the NYT is expressing shame and shock
“Mr. Biden’s decision to use the extraordinary power of executive clemency to wipe out his son’s convictions on gun and tax charges came despite repeated statements by him and his aides that he would not do so. Just this past summer, after his son was convicted at trial, the president rejected the idea of a pardon and said that “I will accept the outcome of this case and will continue to respect the judicial process.” The statement he issued on Sunday night made clear he did not accept the outcome or respect the process”
Americans re elected Trump despite his criminal conviction and the other charges against the President elect have largely been dropped after the SC ruling on presidential immunity. So Biden I suspect felt he may as well use the same presidential immunity and pardon powers to let his son off especially as he is never running for election again when he leaves the White House and now doesn't give a toss what voters think of him and his family
Yep. A no-brainer for Joe. It's the wrong thing to do (obviously) but he was right to do it. There's no reward for virtue in American politics. Indeed it's the opposite. Fortune favours ultra partisanship and crookery. Nov 5th demonstrated and cemented this. If you care more about the price of a Big Mac than your democracy and constitution, don't be surprised if your politics tumbles into the gutter.
*Apparently* there were US air strikes against Iranian-backed militia in eastern Syria last night.
Not seeing this reported anywhere sane, but it was on Twix.
Yes, I saw that, but hesitated to post it without confirmation. The source was a pretty regular Syrian conflict reporter, FWIW.
If true, that means Russia and the USA are on the same side?!?
No. Both Russia and Iran back Assad (though I would not be surprised if Iran was sponsoring other groups as well.)
Thankyou. It’s so incredibly complex
I’ve seen some hideous evidence that these rebels - or some of them - are easily as bad as isis. Islamist maniacs who will impose brutal sharia law a la Taliban
Which leaves me in the impossibly horrible position of maybe hoping Assad prevails
The rebel groups, except perhaps the Kurds, are a rather fractious combination of smaller groups, sometimes with little in common except geography. Earlier on in the conflict, some of these groups would fight together against Assad, then a few months later be fighting each other, then fighting (say) the Kurds, then Assad. It would have been hilarious if it was not so damned tragic.
We really fucked up in not supporting the initial incarnation of the FSA (*) back in 2013. IMV it also aided Putin's decision to go after Crimea and eastern Ukraine the next year, as he (rightly, at the time) saw the west as impotent.
(*) The current FSA has little in common with the original one, which was pretty much destroyed by Assad, Russia and ISIS.
I remember there were stories of US-trained and equipped groups crossing over the border into Syria and promptly being relieved of their equipment by Islamist groups. I don't think there ever was a strong enough FSA to support.
*Apparently* there were US air strikes against Iranian-backed militia in eastern Syria last night.
Not seeing this reported anywhere sane, but it was on Twix.
Yes, I saw that, but hesitated to post it without confirmation. The source was a pretty regular Syrian conflict reporter, FWIW.
If true, that means Russia and the USA are on the same side?!?
No. Both Russia and Iran back Assad (though I would not be surprised if Iran was sponsoring other groups as well.)
Thankyou. It’s so incredibly complex
I’ve seen some hideous evidence that these rebels - or some of them - are easily as bad as isis. Islamist maniacs who will impose brutal sharia law a la Taliban
Which leaves me in the impossibly horrible position of maybe hoping Assad prevails
Initial reports on the ground from Aleppo suggest not. But then again, similar claims of reasonableness were actually made for ISIS in the very early days.
There are, I am afraid, grotesque videos. I don’t think they are fake
This is probably ISIS 2.0 and I reckon anyone hoping for the rebels to be good guys are like those who hoped the new Taliban would be more reasonable. That’s the Taliban who have just made it illegal for women to speak
Bad guys of different types killing each other is no bad thing.
It is now. If a bunch of your colleagues are offended by what you thought of a banter and they thought of as harassment, the thing to do is apologise profusely, claim ignorance and promise to change your behaviour in the future. Then you might get to keep your job. What you don't do is double down, insult them, and accuse them of taking needless offence. Bye bye, Greg.
Just been given the heads up by my American relatives - apparently the MAGA types in state politics are already talking about state level prosecution of Hunter Biden. To get round the federal pardon.
Hunter would have had to engage in criminal activity within those states for that to work.
Trump was vulnerable because of his actions in New York and Georgia - I doubt many Red states have a claim on Hunter.
Well, it’s MAGA. So logic and law are a bit out of context.
I wouldn’t be surprised if there wasn’t a hint for something he’d done in a suitable state. For example, IIRC, he was carrying a firearm. If he just travelled through the “wrong” state, they might try that.
I will bet money that there will be an attempt in this direction. And it will be linked to the state cases against Trump…
*Apparently* there were US air strikes against Iranian-backed militia in eastern Syria last night.
Not seeing this reported anywhere sane, but it was on Twix.
Yes, I saw that, but hesitated to post it without confirmation. The source was a pretty regular Syrian conflict reporter, FWIW.
If true, that means Russia and the USA are on the same side?!?
No. Both Russia and Iran back Assad (though I would not be surprised if Iran was sponsoring other groups as well.)
Thankyou. It’s so incredibly complex
I’ve seen some hideous evidence that these rebels - or some of them - are easily as bad as isis. Islamist maniacs who will impose brutal sharia law a la Taliban
Which leaves me in the impossibly horrible position of maybe hoping Assad prevails
The SDF are the best hope. Unfortunately, their strong Kurdish component makes them anathema to Turkey.
The SDF are interesting. AIUI, for the first few years they had no unified command; the Kurdish fighters from Iraq, Syria, Turkey et al were all separate groups: because although they were all Kurdish, there were many language and cultural barriers to having them as one fighting group. But they spent the first few years trying to remove those barriers, and became a pretty unified fighting force for AANES (*), even if they are still separate militias
Despite what @HYUFD says, the SDF have done much of the work in removing ISIS/ISIL as a coherent force from Syria. Syrian regime and Russian forces have mainly concentrated on hammering non-ISIS rebels.
*Apparently* there were US air strikes against Iranian-backed militia in eastern Syria last night.
Not seeing this reported anywhere sane, but it was on Twix.
Yes, I saw that, but hesitated to post it without confirmation. The source was a pretty regular Syrian conflict reporter, FWIW.
If true, that means Russia and the USA are on the same side?!?
No. Both Russia and Iran back Assad (though I would not be surprised if Iran was sponsoring other groups as well.)
Thankyou. It’s so incredibly complex
I’ve seen some hideous evidence that these rebels - or some of them - are easily as bad as isis. Islamist maniacs who will impose brutal sharia law a la Taliban
Which leaves me in the impossibly horrible position of maybe hoping Assad prevails
Initial reports on the ground from Aleppo suggest not. But then again, similar claims of reasonableness were actually made for ISIS in the very early days.
There are, I am afraid, grotesque videos. I don’t think they are fake
This is probably ISIS 2.0 and I reckon anyone hoping for the rebels to be good guys are like those who hoped the new Taliban would be more reasonable. That’s the Taliban who have just made it illegal for women to speak
I'm not expecting good guys. Just hoping for something slightly better than Assad. We'll see.
How can anyone justify that? What if Biden committed a murder or a rape or child abuse or god knows. I can’t get my head around it
I am NOT saying Hunter Biden did any of these things, I am saying that if he did then - as per my reading of these words - he is now immune from prosecution
That actually goes far beyond the concept of “pardon”
So the official presidential Democrat position on the American legal system is “we fully and absolutely respect the due process of law and we always abide by the decisions of our independent judiciary, until they make a decision we don’t like then fuck all that lol”
Yes, that is how the American constitution is written.
To understand why, you need to think on what they were doing. To many of the Founding Fathers, they were building England 2.0
With lots of The Ancient Rights under Magna Carta stuff.
So, the President was the King, but elected. The Senate was the House of Lords, but nominated* by the States to represent their interests in Washington. The reason that all the minor local functionaries are elected is to try and avoid a Squirearchy. Etc etc…
The power of pardon is an ancient one. Part of the ultimate power of kings. The idea is that the mechanism of justice can sometimes produce injustice. So the Noble King saves the day, 5 minutes before the play ends.
*Originally not elected.
If you are saying that the US Constitution is not fit for purpose it would be impossible to disagree. The Electoral College system is a joke. The fact we still don't have the final figures for the House is absurd (as is the concept of an entire House being up for election every 2 years). The weighting of the Senate is ridiculous. The Supreme Court has far too much power for a democracy and not nearly enough oversight. Those founding fathers didn't know their arses from their elbows and pretending that their political fixes should be hallowed in some way shows the fantasy of the whole thing.
It all went wrong after the US War of Independence then, say what you like about King George III but he obeyed the law himself and for his family and he was anointed by God not some Electoral College system
You say that like you think being anointed by God is a good thing.
*Apparently* there were US air strikes against Iranian-backed militia in eastern Syria last night.
Not seeing this reported anywhere sane, but it was on Twix.
Yes, I saw that, but hesitated to post it without confirmation. The source was a pretty regular Syrian conflict reporter, FWIW.
If true, that means Russia and the USA are on the same side?!?
No. Both Russia and Iran back Assad (though I would not be surprised if Iran was sponsoring other groups as well.)
Thankyou. It’s so incredibly complex
I’ve seen some hideous evidence that these rebels - or some of them - are easily as bad as isis. Islamist maniacs who will impose brutal sharia law a la Taliban
Which leaves me in the impossibly horrible position of maybe hoping Assad prevails
The rebel groups, except perhaps the Kurds, are a rather fractious combination of smaller groups, sometimes with little in common except geography. Earlier on in the conflict, some of these groups would fight together against Assad, then a few months later be fighting each other, then fighting (say) the Kurds, then Assad. It would have been hilarious if it was not so damned tragic.
We really fucked up in not supporting the initial incarnation of the FSA (*) back in 2013. IMV it also aided Putin's decision to go after Crimea and eastern Ukraine the next year, as he (rightly, at the time) saw the west as impotent.
(*) The current FSA has little in common with the original one, which was pretty much destroyed by Assad, Russia and ISIS.
I remember there were stories of US-trained and equipped groups crossing over the border into Syria and promptly being relieved of their equipment by Islamist groups. I don't think there ever was a strong enough FSA to support.
There was a strong FSA pre-early 2014. Unfortunately, the west's reticence to do the right thing allowed Russia to fill the void. That worked out well, didn't it?
The utter blistering hypocrisy of Biden and the Democrats
They spend two years concocting often dubious law cases against Trump - basically trying anything to get him in jail. But that’s ok because the Democrats aren’t criminals and they don’t break the law like Trump so they are allowed to bend the law a bit ahem
And now Biden flat out pardons his convicted criminal son. There will be an awful lot of Americans feeling very vindicated in their vote for Trump
And the republicans did all they could to keep Trump out of jail, and will continue to do so now. I don't see any righteous anger from you about that.
The presidential pardon system is a cancerous ulcer in America's body politic. Politically, Biden should not have done this. But from a human point of view, I see why he did.
“From a human point of view”
Listen to yourself
Even the NYT is expressing shame and shock
“Mr. Biden’s decision to use the extraordinary power of executive clemency to wipe out his son’s convictions on gun and tax charges came despite repeated statements by him and his aides that he would not do so. Just this past summer, after his son was convicted at trial, the president rejected the idea of a pardon and said that “I will accept the outcome of this case and will continue to respect the judicial process.” The statement he issued on Sunday night made clear he did not accept the outcome or respect the process”
Americans re elected Trump despite his criminal conviction and the other charges against the President elect have largely been dropped after the SC ruling on presidential immunity. So Biden I suspect felt he may as well use the same presidential immunity and pardon powers to let his son off especially as he is never running for election again when he leaves the White House and now doesn't give a toss what voters think of him and his family
Yep. A no-brainer for Joe. It's the wrong thing to do (obviously) but he was right to do it. There's no reward for virtue in American politics. Indeed it's the opposite. Fortune favours ultra partisanship and crookery. Nov 5th demonstrated and cemented this. If you care more about the price of a Big Mac than your democracy and constitution, don't be surprised if your politics tumbles into the gutter.
How can anyone justify that? What if Biden committed a murder or a rape or child abuse or god knows. I can’t get my head around it
I am NOT saying Hunter Biden did any of these things, I am saying that if he did then - as per my reading of these words - he is now immune from prosecution
That actually goes far beyond the concept of “pardon”
Yes it is appalling, but not a peep out of you when Trump did similar and worse stuff.
How can anyone justify that? What if Biden committed a murder or a rape or child abuse or god knows. I can’t get my head around it
I am NOT saying Hunter Biden did any of these things, I am saying that if he did then - as per my reading of these words - he is now immune from prosecution
That actually goes far beyond the concept of “pardon”
The whole pardon system is wrong. His decision is wrong. But if I was in his position, had that power and same situation with his child, I would do the same and suspect the vast majority would too.
How can anyone justify that? What if Biden committed a murder or a rape or child abuse or god knows. I can’t get my head around it
I am NOT saying Hunter Biden did any of these things, I am saying that if he did then - as per my reading of these words - he is now immune from prosecution
That actually goes far beyond the concept of “pardon”
Most of those are state crimes, so he’d be in the nick.
*Apparently* there were US air strikes against Iranian-backed militia in eastern Syria last night.
Not seeing this reported anywhere sane, but it was on Twix.
Yes, I saw that, but hesitated to post it without confirmation. The source was a pretty regular Syrian conflict reporter, FWIW.
If true, that means Russia and the USA are on the same side?!?
No. Both Russia and Iran back Assad (though I would not be surprised if Iran was sponsoring other groups as well.)
Thankyou. It’s so incredibly complex
I’ve seen some hideous evidence that these rebels - or some of them - are easily as bad as isis. Islamist maniacs who will impose brutal sharia law a la Taliban
Which leaves me in the impossibly horrible position of maybe hoping Assad prevails
Initial reports on the ground from Aleppo suggest not. But then again, similar claims of reasonableness were actually made for ISIS in the very early days.
There are, I am afraid, grotesque videos. I don’t think they are fake
This is probably ISIS 2.0 and I reckon anyone hoping for the rebels to be good guys are like those who hoped the new Taliban would be more reasonable. That’s the Taliban who have just made it illegal for women to speak
Bad guys of different types killing each other is no bad thing.
It is if you’ve been to Syria and met Syrians and had a wonderful time back in 1998 and held out a lot of hope that this country - quite secular, pluralistic, a safe place for minorities like Christians, despite the horrors of the regime - might actually evolve into an exemplar. Maybe even one day a democracy
What has happened since is unutterably bad. There is no upside. At all
How can anyone justify that? What if Biden committed a murder or a rape or child abuse or god knows. I can’t get my head around it
I am NOT saying Hunter Biden did any of these things, I am saying that if he did then - as per my reading of these words - he is now immune from prosecution
That actually goes far beyond the concept of “pardon”
Read upon the pardon Ford gave Nixon then get back to me.
*Apparently* there were US air strikes against Iranian-backed militia in eastern Syria last night.
Not seeing this reported anywhere sane, but it was on Twix.
Yes, I saw that, but hesitated to post it without confirmation. The source was a pretty regular Syrian conflict reporter, FWIW.
If true, that means Russia and the USA are on the same side?!?
No. Both Russia and Iran back Assad (though I would not be surprised if Iran was sponsoring other groups as well.)
Thankyou. It’s so incredibly complex
I’ve seen some hideous evidence that these rebels - or some of them - are easily as bad as isis. Islamist maniacs who will impose brutal sharia law a la Taliban
Which leaves me in the impossibly horrible position of maybe hoping Assad prevails
Initial reports on the ground from Aleppo suggest not. But then again, similar claims of reasonableness were actually made for ISIS in the very early days.
There are, I am afraid, grotesque videos. I don’t think they are fake
This is probably ISIS 2.0 and I reckon anyone hoping for the rebels to be good guys are like those who hoped the new Taliban would be more reasonable. That’s the Taliban who have just made it illegal for women to speak
Ukrainian intelligence seem to have quite a bit to say about recent events in Syria. I would not be surprised to find out that they saw this group as useful and willing allies for an operation that would capture and destroy Russian equipment and soldiers at little cost to Ukraine.
I'm willing on the collapse of the Assad regime on that basis.
I reckon Turkey are playing with fire to be backing this group of Islamists as a counterweight to the Kurds, though. A big risk that they'll suffer terrorist blowback as a result.
I honestly don't think I can get exercised about conflicts in the middle east, especially civil wars. Usually it's the side that shouts "allahu akhbar" loudest that wins. I'd take a stable, somewhat secular dictator over a "democratic" Islamist and whenever we see islamic countries do "democracy" they very quickly descent into Iranian style opposition voter repression tactics to ensure that the "democrats" always win and we end up with an implacable enemy rather than a mildly bitter tyrant we can pay off to not bomb our allies.
There's not a single person that can honestly say Libya has benefited from our freedom bombing campaign and the Arab spring has had overly negative consequences for the whole region as it became an Islamist uprising. I don't see how Syria would have been any different and I don't see how the Syrian rebels will be any better or worse than what is there now. They would, in power, do exactly what Assad has done to maintain it.
How can anyone justify that? What if Biden committed a murder or a rape or child abuse or god knows. I can’t get my head around it
I am NOT saying Hunter Biden did any of these things, I am saying that if he did then - as per my reading of these words - he is now immune from prosecution
That actually goes far beyond the concept of “pardon”
There is precedent.
Bad precedent, of course. ..Experts on pardons said they could think of only one other person who has received a presidential pardon so sweeping in generations: Nixon, who was given a blanket pardon by Gerald Ford in 1974...
The American presidential pardon is a strangely exotic thing, isn’t it? Essentially it means some well connected people are above the law. Which in turn surely encourages clan behaviour.
It reflects a number of "unfinished business" aspects of the system. The fact that the President can't be prosecuted for ANYTHING is remarkable too.
In fairness, that travesty is a very recent development. The courts didn’t believe that for the first 240 years.
How can anyone justify that? What if Biden committed a murder or a rape or child abuse or god knows. I can’t get my head around it
I am NOT saying Hunter Biden did any of these things, I am saying that if he did then - as per my reading of these words - he is now immune from prosecution
That actually goes far beyond the concept of “pardon”
Yes it is appalling, but not a peep out of you when Trump did similar and worse stuff.
The American system of democracy is broken
What are you talking about? I’m the one who compared Trump to a hungry polar bear on the ice floe. Trump was a direct menace to democracy and the sane vote was for Harris (and I loathe the woke democrats - I just saw a greater and more immediate evil in Trump)
Biden’s actions today make me think maybe US voters made the right choice
How can anyone justify that? What if Biden committed a murder or a rape or child abuse or god knows. I can’t get my head around it
I am NOT saying Hunter Biden did any of these things, I am saying that if he did then - as per my reading of these words - he is now immune from prosecution
That actually goes far beyond the concept of “pardon”
The whole pardon system is wrong. His decision is wrong. But if I was in his position, had that power and same situation with his child, I would do the same and suspect the vast majority would too.
I'm afraid that I expected better of Biden. I actually thought he would keep his word.
Just been given the heads up by my American relatives - apparently the MAGA types in state politics are already talking about state level prosecution of Hunter Biden. To get round the federal pardon.
Hunter would have had to engage in criminal activity within those states for that to work.
Trump was vulnerable because of his actions in New York and Georgia - I doubt many Red states have a claim on Hunter.
*Apparently* there were US air strikes against Iranian-backed militia in eastern Syria last night.
Not seeing this reported anywhere sane, but it was on Twix.
Yes, I saw that, but hesitated to post it without confirmation. The source was a pretty regular Syrian conflict reporter, FWIW.
If true, that means Russia and the USA are on the same side?!?
No. Both Russia and Iran back Assad (though I would not be surprised if Iran was sponsoring other groups as well.)
Thankyou. It’s so incredibly complex
I’ve seen some hideous evidence that these rebels - or some of them - are easily as bad as isis. Islamist maniacs who will impose brutal sharia law a la Taliban
Which leaves me in the impossibly horrible position of maybe hoping Assad prevails
Initial reports on the ground from Aleppo suggest not. But then again, similar claims of reasonableness were actually made for ISIS in the very early days.
There are, I am afraid, grotesque videos. I don’t think they are fake
This is probably ISIS 2.0 and I reckon anyone hoping for the rebels to be good guys are like those who hoped the new Taliban would be more reasonable. That’s the Taliban who have just made it illegal for women to speak
Bad guys of different types killing each other is no bad thing.
It is if you’ve been to Syria and met Syrians and had a wonderful time back in 1998 and held out a lot of hope that this country - quite secular, pluralistic, a safe place for minorities like Christians, despite the horrors of the regime - might actually evolve into an exemplar. Maybe even one day a democracy
What has happened since is unutterably bad. There is no upside. At all
On Topic - A £100m is not to be sneezed at and very useful, but it isn't election winning. Scraping by on limited financial resources has made the LD campaigning machine what it is, particularly during election time when limits apply. If Reform can turn it's new membership into street activists (which I doubt) they will become formidable.
How can anyone justify that? What if Biden committed a murder or a rape or child abuse or god knows. I can’t get my head around it
I am NOT saying Hunter Biden did any of these things, I am saying that if he did then - as per my reading of these words - he is now immune from prosecution
That actually goes far beyond the concept of “pardon”
Yes it is appalling, but not a peep out of you when Trump did similar and worse stuff.
The American system of democracy is broken
What are you talking about? I’m the one who compared Trump to a hungry polar bear on the ice floe. Trump was a direct menace to democracy and the sane vote was for Harris (and I loathe the woke democrats - I just saw a greater and more immediate evil in Trump)
Biden’s actions today make me think maybe US voters made the right choice
Not sure you're much of an authority on voters making the right choice.
How can anyone justify that? What if Biden committed a murder or a rape or child abuse or god knows. I can’t get my head around it
I am NOT saying Hunter Biden did any of these things, I am saying that if he did then - as per my reading of these words - he is now immune from prosecution
That actually goes far beyond the concept of “pardon”
The whole pardon system is wrong. His decision is wrong. But if I was in his position, had that power and same situation with his child, I would do the same and suspect the vast majority would too.
I'm afraid that I expected better of Biden. I actually thought he would keep his word.
Also, let’s play out a counterfactual
Imagine if Biden had NOT pardoned his own son. And let him go to prison, albeit with great sorrow. That would have been noble and inspiring. And an example to America and a huge moral boost for democrats
That wouid have enabled them to walk tall and say “yes actually we are better than Trump. We DO respect the law. Joe Biden will go down in history as a man willing to put country before family”
What an honourable thing that would have been. It would have fired up everyone on the American left to take on Trump
Instead we have this squalid blanket pardon for a crack addict who might have done even worse things than we know about, completely betraying everything the democrats have said for the last year
How can anyone justify that? What if Biden committed a murder or a rape or child abuse or god knows. I can’t get my head around it
I am NOT saying Hunter Biden did any of these things, I am saying that if he did then - as per my reading of these words - he is now immune from prosecution
That actually goes far beyond the concept of “pardon”
The whole pardon system is wrong. His decision is wrong. But if I was in his position, had that power and same situation with his child, I would do the same and suspect the vast majority would too.
I'm afraid that I expected better of Biden. I actually thought he would keep his word.
It’s not so much a crossing of the Rubicon ( which has been done before by both sides) as building a new bridge over it with a three lane highway.
When we are heading into 4 years of chaos with an untrammelled President Trump running rampant with a corrupt SC urging him on it is an unhelpful abuse of Presidential power.
How can anyone justify that? What if Biden committed a murder or a rape or child abuse or god knows. I can’t get my head around it
I am NOT saying Hunter Biden did any of these things, I am saying that if he did then - as per my reading of these words - he is now immune from prosecution
That actually goes far beyond the concept of “pardon”
Yes it is appalling, but not a peep out of you when Trump did similar and worse stuff.
The American system of democracy is broken
What are you talking about? I’m the one who compared Trump to a hungry polar bear on the ice floe. Trump was a direct menace to democracy and the sane vote was for Harris (and I loathe the woke democrats - I just saw a greater and more immediate evil in Trump)
Biden’s actions today make me think maybe US voters made the right choice
And there you go. Justifying Trump. As if Jan 6th was in the same league, or all the other stuff he did. 2 wrongs don't make a right, but there are degrees of wrong and this wrong has in one blow flipped you over to supporting Trump. Totally transparent. You even say so in your last sentence.
*Apparently* there were US air strikes against Iranian-backed militia in eastern Syria last night.
Not seeing this reported anywhere sane, but it was on Twix.
Yes, I saw that, but hesitated to post it without confirmation. The source was a pretty regular Syrian conflict reporter, FWIW.
If true, that means Russia and the USA are on the same side?!?
No. Both Russia and Iran back Assad (though I would not be surprised if Iran was sponsoring other groups as well.)
Thankyou. It’s so incredibly complex
I’ve seen some hideous evidence that these rebels - or some of them - are easily as bad as isis. Islamist maniacs who will impose brutal sharia law a la Taliban
Which leaves me in the impossibly horrible position of maybe hoping Assad prevails
Initial reports on the ground from Aleppo suggest not. But then again, similar claims of reasonableness were actually made for ISIS in the very early days.
There are, I am afraid, grotesque videos. I don’t think they are fake
This is probably ISIS 2.0 and I reckon anyone hoping for the rebels to be good guys are like those who hoped the new Taliban would be more reasonable. That’s the Taliban who have just made it illegal for women to speak
Bad guys of different types killing each other is no bad thing.
It is if you’ve been to Syria and met Syrians and had a wonderful time back in 1998 and held out a lot of hope that this country - quite secular, pluralistic, a safe place for minorities like Christians, despite the horrors of the regime - might actually evolve into an exemplar. Maybe even one day a democracy
What has happened since is unutterably bad. There is no upside. At all
More backwash of the Iraq invasion.
Possibly the greatest unforced error by western powers EVER
Britain’s decision to enter WW1 was worse if you’re a Briton
How can anyone justify that? What if Biden committed a murder or a rape or child abuse or god knows. I can’t get my head around it
I am NOT saying Hunter Biden did any of these things, I am saying that if he did then - as per my reading of these words - he is now immune from prosecution
That actually goes far beyond the concept of “pardon”
The whole pardon system is wrong. His decision is wrong. But if I was in his position, had that power and same situation with his child, I would do the same and suspect the vast majority would too.
I'm afraid that I expected better of Biden. I actually thought he would keep his word.
Terrible dilemma though. There was a huge risk that the vengeful Trump would persecute his son literally to his grave. Difficult to weigh that against abstract constitutional niceties.
How can anyone justify that? What if Biden committed a murder or a rape or child abuse or god knows. I can’t get my head around it
I am NOT saying Hunter Biden did any of these things, I am saying that if he did then - as per my reading of these words - he is now immune from prosecution
That actually goes far beyond the concept of “pardon”
Yes it is appalling, but not a peep out of you when Trump did similar and worse stuff.
The American system of democracy is broken
What are you talking about? I’m the one who compared Trump to a hungry polar bear on the ice floe. Trump was a direct menace to democracy and the sane vote was for Harris (and I loathe the woke democrats - I just saw a greater and more immediate evil in Trump)
Biden’s actions today make me think maybe US voters made the right choice
And there you go. Justifying Trump. As if Jan 6th was in the same league, or all the other stuff he did. 2 wrongs don't make a right, but there are degrees of wrong and this wrong has in one blow flipped you over to supporting Trump. Totally transparent. You even say so in your last sentence.
Just said Trump is a greater evil. What more do you want
*Apparently* there were US air strikes against Iranian-backed militia in eastern Syria last night.
Not seeing this reported anywhere sane, but it was on Twix.
Yes, I saw that, but hesitated to post it without confirmation. The source was a pretty regular Syrian conflict reporter, FWIW.
If true, that means Russia and the USA are on the same side?!?
No. Both Russia and Iran back Assad (though I would not be surprised if Iran was sponsoring other groups as well.)
Thankyou. It’s so incredibly complex
I’ve seen some hideous evidence that these rebels - or some of them - are easily as bad as isis. Islamist maniacs who will impose brutal sharia law a la Taliban
Which leaves me in the impossibly horrible position of maybe hoping Assad prevails
Initial reports on the ground from Aleppo suggest not. But then again, similar claims of reasonableness were actually made for ISIS in the very early days.
There are, I am afraid, grotesque videos. I don’t think they are fake
This is probably ISIS 2.0 and I reckon anyone hoping for the rebels to be good guys are like those who hoped the new Taliban would be more reasonable. That’s the Taliban who have just made it illegal for women to speak
Bad guys of different types killing each other is no bad thing.
It is if you’ve been to Syria and met Syrians and had a wonderful time back in 1998 and held out a lot of hope that this country - quite secular, pluralistic, a safe place for minorities like Christians, despite the horrors of the regime - might actually evolve into an exemplar. Maybe even one day a democracy
What has happened since is unutterably bad. There is no upside. At all
More backwash of the Iraq invasion.
Possibly the greatest unforced error by western powers EVER
Britain’s decision to enter WW1 was worse if you’re a Briton
How can anyone justify that? What if Biden committed a murder or a rape or child abuse or god knows. I can’t get my head around it
I am NOT saying Hunter Biden did any of these things, I am saying that if he did then - as per my reading of these words - he is now immune from prosecution
That actually goes far beyond the concept of “pardon”
The whole pardon system is wrong. His decision is wrong. But if I was in his position, had that power and same situation with his child, I would do the same and suspect the vast majority would too.
I'm afraid that I expected better of Biden. I actually thought he would keep his word.
I wouldn't have been surprised either way. He probably meant it at the time. It's a rubbish system that actively encourages abuse and people, even politicians, are human.
How can anyone justify that? What if Biden committed a murder or a rape or child abuse or god knows. I can’t get my head around it
I am NOT saying Hunter Biden did any of these things, I am saying that if he did then - as per my reading of these words - he is now immune from prosecution
That actually goes far beyond the concept of “pardon”
The whole pardon system is wrong. His decision is wrong. But if I was in his position, had that power and same situation with his child, I would do the same and suspect the vast majority would too.
I'm afraid that I expected better of Biden. I actually thought he would keep his word.
I'm guessing if Kamala had won Biden wouldn't have taken this step. One thing to let justice take its course when there's a national government at least willing to pay lip service to even handed legality, but when it's a bunch of crooks loudly boasting about persecuting their enemies as soon as they get the chance...
Still wish Biden had done the courageous and difficult thing.
The Joe Biden pardoning Hunter Biden one is a strange one. Looking at comments on the Meidastouch video reporting it, it is uniformly congratulating President Biden for "doing the just fair, right to do" action. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PGp5P8WQQ_I
We all know what Trump is, but that reaction to me has a feel that they also think they are in the wild west, wearing the White Hat (Trump: Black Hat), and their side also needs to act like a freelance enforcer - rather than mending, or seeking to reform, a broken system. I agree it's a really tough decision, given the US system is fairly patchy (read: random) and like a bureaucratic Black Hole of Calcutta, but Biden doing a reverse ferret over his many promises not to intervene will not help.
I dropped this comment on the MT thread (with 8000 comments) for the video reporting the pardon last night. I wonder if anyone will react:
As a Brit this seems a strange decision. In my circles the mere existence of the unfettered Presidential Pardon is seen as one of the more corrupting elements of a fragile, capricious system. And that applies whether it's Clinton pardoning Marc Rich or his own family members, Trump pardoning Roger Stone, Ford pardoning Nixon, or any of the others over the years.
Politically, Trump will take it as a justification for the far more corrupt way he will seek to abuse the system in his personal interest. For him, this is a gift, and it is a political problem for his opponents.
For President Biden, he has repeatedly stated he would not use his Presidential power in this case. That creates one hell of a problem.
The original case was arguably politically-driven, but two wrongs do not make a right.
Comments
The other big one was the enshrining of Constitutional law as the ultimate power on the land. In the 90s, my American relatives (high flying lawyers among them) would tell me that progressive thought had Won - because the law controlled the system and the law was progressive.
They got quite upset when I pointed out that *which* way the Law progressed was up for grabs. And the complex and elegant bridge that was Roe vs Wade depended on that definition….
Even then, the cry on the Right was “Our Judges” - it wasn’t hard to work out. If the Supreme Court is the ultimate legislative body, win a majority there.
Also Biden is claiming his son is the victim of “law fare” (as Trump claims) but it was Biden’s own department of justice which pursued Hunter Biden because the crimes were so brazen they had to
How can it be lawfare when it’s admitted Hunter biden did all these things and it was Biden’s DOJ that took him to court?
As @Peter_the_Punter says: a shitshow
It will reverberate for a long time
I notice the middle class women of a certain age on Sky News are leading the charge.
The revenge of the tricoteuse!!
I’m guessing some of the more lurid allegations against Biden’s son have merit - and Biden knows it - but now he’s made his son immune
Quite extraordinary
He should just accept that X will lose money but it’s worth it for the political power and global prestige (which it surely is). Allow links. Let X be the global talking shop - as he keeps insisting he wants
The model they sought to reproduce was the Roman Republic.
Essentially it was an aristocratic Republic, with some input from the masses.
One difference between then and the GOP is that a fair percentage of the party seem quite pissed off with the decision.
Not seeing this reported anywhere sane, but it was on Twix.
And Hunter Biden will be available now.
The source was a pretty regular Syrian conflict reporter, FWIW.
A senile President Biden might well have done exactly what Hunter told him to.
12 seats left to declare, and a recount in Cork North Central, but looks like the final seat tally will be:
FF 48 (including the Ceann Comhairle, aka Speaker)
SF 39
FG 38
Independents 17
Lab 11
SDP 11
Independent Ireland 4
PBP-S 3
Aontú 2
100% Redress 1
Independent Ireland have perhaps not done well enough to sell themselves to FF and FG. My sense is that the SDP haven't done well enough to insist on all five of their red line demands, and so will not go into coalition. Labour probably will be willing to compromise more and get what they can, and the coalition negotiations to come will be a dance for them to try and leverage as much as possible - with FF/FG making eyes at the Independents to reduce the price they have to pay for Labour support.
FG are fighting a hard rearguard action to retain a rotating Taoiseach, with lots of talk of "parity of esteem", but the seat gap looks fairly large. If FF want to keep Taoiseach to themselves they may have a chat with SF about a coalition to put the frighteners on FG.
I don't know the ins and outs of H Biden's case to judge whether he's been targeted as the President's son or whether he was getting what was coming to him. If he's been targeted, that sucks and is likely due to the partisan nature of prosecutions in the US. But the president shouldn't have the power to unilaterally pardon. It stinks.
... but not above your close family felons in the USA
In some ways the Post Office farce is the perfect example of this. On one side you have the studious protection of the rights of the senior managers, who lied to the courts and parliament. On the other you have dogged resistance to exoneration and compensation to the innocent. Decades of “Brazil” style procedural farce.
Only ended by a parliamentary fiat - the SPMs were declared innocent. Because the legal system could not.
To me, that is a dire warning for the future.
Constitutionally absurd, IMO, but barring a constitutional amendment, it's quite hard to see how it gets fixed for a generation, now that Trump gets to appoint the replacements for the oldest justices.
The pardon power, though increasingly abused, is actually there in the original text.
Like Hunter Biden, he’s been convicted in court of a bunch of stuff.
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cr5n926n6n0o
“Hunter Biden makes last-minute guilty plea in tax case”
The was some inspiration from the belief that the Old Roman Republic was democratic (which it wasn’t) - but many of the founders were as much inspired by the French Revolution (*not* the later Terror etc) as anything else
You can read their very extensive ruminations on this - a mega ton of documents available.
An aristocracy in the sense of the Roman Senate was what they were trying to *avoid*. Explicitly.
Well, now - pending any opposite suggestions from others - I do!
(There's a legitimate question, in general in the US, I think as to whether famous people/those related to powerful people get special treatment either lenient or harsh. Maybe here, too. People wanting to be seen as tough/not giving special treatment so they pursue things that might otherwise not have been a priority? People not pursuing things as they don't want to piss off the powerful/famous person or are leant on. Some suggest Trump has been unfairly targeted.)
That’s afaik and remember. I’m jet lagged and drinking wine at 5am in the Andes
It would be entirely unsurprising for the same side to attack itself, for factional reasons.
One of the reasons for Israel’s success and survival has been mastering the art of playing off the factions in opponents.
The Americans drew a lot of inspiration from the English Civil War.
However - to my legally amateur mind - some of the other cases against Trump seemed perfectly legitimate
I’ve seen some hideous evidence that these rebels - or some of them - are easily as bad as isis. Islamist maniacs who will impose brutal sharia law a la Taliban
Which leaves me in the impossibly horrible position of maybe hoping Assad prevails
But yes, the Syria conflict is a bizarre mess.
Leading to the split between New England Federalists and the Virginian Democrat-Republicans from 1796 onwards.
"Good morning. Most people are aware of the saying "this is the way the world will end, not with a bang but with a whimper". But there is another variant, which has the phrase" with laughter from all the witty heads, who think it such a joke". Can you tell me about that variant please?"
Both came up blank. Any ideas?
But then again, similar claims of reasonableness were actually made for ISIS in the very early days.
They were also inspired by the run up to the French Revolution. Which didn’t spring out of nowhere in 1789. The intellectual and philosophical roots were there - and many of the Founders personally knew the leading players.
The original Revolution (not the later guillotine free for all tyranny that ended up with Napoleon) was part of an Enlightenment inspired movement that was sweeping through the European intellectual scene. See also 1798 in Ireland.
We really fucked up in not supporting the initial incarnation of the FSA (*) back in 2013. IMV it also aided Putin's decision to go after Crimea and eastern Ukraine the next year, as he (rightly, at the time) saw the west as impotent.
(*) The current FSA has little in common with the original one, which was pretty much destroyed by Assad, Russia and ISIS.
This is probably ISIS 2.0 and I reckon anyone hoping for the rebels to be good guys are like those who hoped the new Taliban would be more reasonable. That’s the Taliban who have just made it illegal for women to speak
Trump was vulnerable because of his actions in New York and Georgia - I doubt many Red states have a claim on Hunter.
He also had a plea deal rescinded (for what seem fairly dodgy reasons).
The unfair targeting claim is not that he's some innocent paragon, but that most others in his position would likely have been allowed to settle (which is true).
It's a tough one to judge; prosecutors in the US can also push to impose absurdly long sentences on quite ordinary people on occasion.
One the other hand, the GOP has spent quite absurd amounts of Congressional time, and millions in public funding, pursuing him for the last five or six years.
I wouldn’t be surprised if there wasn’t a hint for something he’d done in a suitable state. For example, IIRC, he was carrying a firearm. If he just travelled through the “wrong” state, they might try that.
I will bet money that there will be an attempt in this direction. And it will be linked to the state cases against Trump…
Despite what @HYUFD says, the SDF have done much of the work in removing ISIS/ISIL as a coherent force from Syria. Syrian regime and Russian forces have mainly concentrated on hammering non-ISIS rebels.
(*) The 'state' they control in northern Syria.
Just hoping for something slightly better than Assad. We'll see.
“The pardon is very broad, covering offenses “which he has committed or may have committed or taken part in” dating back to the beginning of 2014”
https://x.com/afneil/status/1863527669939216732?s=46
How can anyone justify that? What if Biden committed a murder or a rape or child abuse or god knows. I can’t get my head around it
I am NOT saying Hunter Biden did any of these things, I am saying that if he did then - as per my reading of these words - he is now immune from prosecution
That actually goes far beyond the concept of “pardon”
The American system of democracy is broken
https://www.formula1.com/en/latest/article/breaking-alpine-confirm-doohan-to-race-in-abu-dhabi-as-ocon-is-released.5rrOqcBxVZooeD6B38GWi0
What has happened since is unutterably bad. There is no upside. At all
I'm willing on the collapse of the Assad regime on that basis.
I reckon Turkey are playing with fire to be backing this group of Islamists as a counterweight to the Kurds, though. A big risk that they'll suffer terrorist blowback as a result.
There's not a single person that can honestly say Libya has benefited from our freedom bombing campaign and the Arab spring has had overly negative consequences for the whole region as it became an Islamist uprising. I don't see how Syria would have been any different and I don't see how the Syrian rebels will be any better or worse than what is there now. They would, in power, do exactly what Assad has done to maintain it.
Bad precedent, of course.
..Experts on pardons said they could think of only one other person who has received a presidential pardon so sweeping in generations: Nixon, who was given a blanket pardon by Gerald Ford in 1974...
Biden’s actions today make me think maybe US voters made the right choice
I actually thought he would keep his word.
Imagine if Biden had NOT pardoned his own son. And let him go to prison, albeit with great sorrow. That would have been noble and inspiring. And an example to America and a huge moral boost for democrats
That wouid have enabled them to walk tall and say “yes actually we are better than Trump. We DO respect the law. Joe Biden will go down in history as a man willing to put country before family”
What an honourable thing that would have been. It would have fired up everyone on the American left to take on Trump
Instead we have this squalid blanket pardon for a crack addict who might have done even worse things than we know about, completely betraying everything the democrats have said for the last year
When we are heading into 4 years of chaos with an untrammelled President Trump running rampant with a corrupt SC urging him on it is an unhelpful abuse of Presidential power.
Britain’s decision to enter WW1 was worse if you’re a Briton
Whatever. I’m having some nuts with my wine
Still wish Biden had done the courageous and difficult thing.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PGp5P8WQQ_I
We all know what Trump is, but that reaction to me has a feel that they also think they are in the wild west, wearing the White Hat (Trump: Black Hat), and their side also needs to act like a freelance enforcer - rather than mending, or seeking to reform, a broken system. I agree it's a really tough decision, given the US system is fairly patchy (read: random) and like a bureaucratic Black Hole of Calcutta, but Biden doing a reverse ferret over his many promises not to intervene will not help.
I dropped this comment on the MT thread (with 8000 comments) for the video reporting the pardon last night. I wonder if anyone will react:
As a Brit this seems a strange decision. In my circles the mere existence of the unfettered Presidential Pardon is seen as one of the more corrupting elements of a fragile, capricious system. And that applies whether it's Clinton pardoning Marc Rich or his own family members, Trump pardoning Roger Stone, Ford pardoning Nixon, or any of the others over the years.
Politically, Trump will take it as a justification for the far more corrupt way he will seek to abuse the system in his personal interest. For him, this is a gift, and it is a political problem for his opponents.
For President Biden, he has repeatedly stated he would not use his Presidential power in this case. That creates one hell of a problem.
The original case was arguably politically-driven, but two wrongs do not make a right.