zlacker

>>Ozarki+(OP)
Someone might have already pointed it out but for me, the sentence of RA is not the main issue, the issue is allowing a single person to stamp through an entire legal system and undermine all of the time and money that is invested in it, even if that person is a president.

I suspect that the idea originally was to give some safety valve but if it is used more than a few times by a President, it makes a mockery of it and it should be removed as a power. How can a President ever decide that the entire legal process is flawed and their opinion is right? If the sentence was too long then change the sentencing guidelines.

>>lbrine+GT
Still something tells me you have zero problem with the thousands of pardons Biden issued, correct?

Don’t dress up your stance in fancy garb when it comes down to something baser.

>>keepam+731
This is not in any way related to Trump pardoning Ross or the fact that president can issue pardons at their discretion.

What you are doing here is a distraction from the topic - whataboutism.

>>varske+Ob1
Actually in matters of law (which this definitely is), "whataboutism" is just judicial or executive precedent.

This is like crying about whataboutism when a judge cites judicial precedent to justify a sentence. Good luck with that, it might work as a "nuh-uh" in online discussions but in real life, precedent does actually matter.

>>mardif+7D1
I understand what a precedent is in law and in life :) It seems like an illogical position to hold here.

Biden did bad pardons, now Trump has no other course (eg fix the system), but to do bad pardons as well? Except when Trump does it it is not bad because Biden did it first?

>>varske+u02
Misrepresentation. The point is none of that. It’s the moral inconsistency disguised as valid.