buffalo_bill Posted February 20, 2020 Report Share Posted February 20, 2020 6 hours ago, cavanami said: Bubi Check the link as all the crimes are listed. Mr Cav , point was that Trump selects pardonable people after what they or related people might have done for him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cavanami Posted February 21, 2020 Report Share Posted February 21, 2020 5 hours ago, buffalo_bill said: Mr Cav , point was that Trump selects pardonable people after what they or related people might have done for him. Bubi...wake up call...ALL PRESIDENTS have done this...do you understand ALL PRESIDENTS? That said, it is NOT necessary the right thing to do but it is COMMONLY DONE. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Posted February 21, 2020 Report Share Posted February 21, 2020 Trump is reminiscent of Hitler in the bunker. Surrounding himself with people who will bend over and let him cuck them. That's it. No experience needed. The position specifically says the person should have, national security experience, intel or military experience. The only experience this guy Grennel has is having his head in Trump's lap This guy has ZERO experience. Its a vital position. This guy has zero idea about the intel that comes across. Trump has literally put the nation at risk. https://www.cnn.com/2020/02/20/politics/republican-reaction-richard-grenell-pick/index.html 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flashermac Posted February 21, 2020 Report Share Posted February 21, 2020 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flashermac Posted February 21, 2020 Report Share Posted February 21, 2020 8 hours ago, buffalo_bill said: Mr Cav , point was that Trump selects pardonable people after what they or related people might have done for him. "Don't forget that Bill Clinton pardoned his brother and a convicted Wall Street felon whose ex-wife contributed to Clinton's presidential library and Hillary Clinton's 2000 Senate campaign. In doing so, Clinton set a modern-day precedent for presidents who want to use the pardon power in ways that some may see as, well, unpardonable." Buffalo News 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cavanami Posted February 21, 2020 Report Share Posted February 21, 2020 12 hours ago, buffalo_bill said: Mr Cav , point was that Trump selects pardonable people after what they or related people might have done for him. I'll make it easy for you Bubi... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pom Michael Posted February 21, 2020 Report Share Posted February 21, 2020 Pardons are an ugly part of our government. But normally - most are at the end of their presidency - not all - but a majority wait until the end. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flashermac Posted February 21, 2020 Report Share Posted February 21, 2020 But then they can't vote for your reelection. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Posted February 21, 2020 Report Share Posted February 21, 2020 4 hours ago, cavanami said: I'll make it easy for you Bubi... The argument isn't the number, its whom and why. Lets not obfuscate who for amount. Obama pardoned hundreds who were in federal offense for stuff like pot. The elder Bush pardoned some characters involved in Iran Contra for Reagan. I was very upset about that at the time. Many were. Pardoning for money is bribery and impeachable. Trump has done that. To excuse things with 'someone else has done it too' and that someone else didn't on this level either. Call balls and strikes. That's it. Trying to excuse some thing because its somewhat relatable to a prior administration is wrong. Did Republicans call out Clinton PS: Clinton pardoned his brother several years AFTER he served his sentence and had been paroled. It was wrong but its vastly different than influencing sentencing and there has been nothing on the level and scope of Trump. Lots of apples and oranges comparisons. How does one claim he's draining the swamp on one hand and excusing swamp behavior by saying the swamp has been doing it? Hypocritical argument. I don't expect a legitimate answer. The question is rhetorical. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Posted February 21, 2020 Report Share Posted February 21, 2020 I used to think Rand Paul and Bernie Sanders) were the two who had the integrity to act according to their beliefs. Both polar opposites politically but acting on their honest view of the constitution with ethics. Paul's support for acquittal and other things that were clearly improper by Trump have made me see him for who he really is. Integrity applied in a narrow tunnel. Bernie Sanders, no matter what I think of his politics is at least honest in his beliefs and applies it honestly. You know what you are getting has been . The rest don't. Ron Paul wishy washy as well. I lost a lot of respect for him. Paul has been accused of having nationalist leanings and the election of Trump has exposed a lot of people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now