8 ms·
Trump pardons former Google self-driving car engineer Levandowski
- jcstryker 6y agoSo pardons are for sale to the wealthy or well-connected. Maybe this has always been the case, but to see it so blatant... The power of pardon simply further reduces the trust and legitimacy of the executive branch. At least for humans it should be revoked, I think we can still trust the presidency with the power to pardon turkeys.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- oji0hub 6y agoBuying your freedom is as old as prisons. E.g. I just saw someone post this book although the post disappeared (?): Pardongate: How Bill & Hillary Clinton and Their Brothers Profited from Pardons
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- smt88 6y agoDo you have a source on Reagan and Carter pardoning people who gave them money? The issue isn't Trump issuing a lot of pardons. It's the corrupt (though legal) influence market that is essentially rewarding him financially for doing it. It's really frustrating that criminal consequences are moot if you find a way to get this president's attention or loyalty.
- a_bonobo 6y agoI don't know, that book looks a bit dodgy - released 6-ish months ago, OK publisher, 6 reviews on Amazon, the co-author seems to be a long-time Clinton enemy (https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/bensmith/man-who-saw-trump-coming https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/bensmith/man-who-saw-tr...) The Wikipedia article is probably a better overview: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Clinton_pardon_controversy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Clinton_pardon_controvers...
- matthewdgreen 6y agoMy understanding is that there was a criminal investigation of Clinton's Marc Rich pardon that concluded without finding any evidence of criminality. I'm not raising this as a defense of his making that pardon, but rather, to point out that a President selling pardons is and has long been considered a serious crime. The Clinton precedent is a clear illustration. Saying "hey, some book alleges Clinton got paid for a pardon, therefore it's common practice" sounds nice, but ignores the fact that suspicion around Clinton's Marc Rich pardon triggered an extensive criminal investigation that concluded he did not, in fact, get paid for it.
- 0goel0 6y agoMeanwhile https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/17/us/politics/trump-pardons.html https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/17/us/politics/trump-pardons... "The brisk market for pardons reflects the access peddling that has defined Mr. Trump’s presidency as well as his unorthodox approach to exercising unchecked presidential clemency powers. Pardons and commutations are intended to show mercy to deserving recipients, but Mr. Trump has used many of them to reward personal or political allies."
- TameAntelope 6y agoThat's about buying access to Trump so people can make their case for a pardon, which is substantively different.
- oji0hub 6y agoPerson gives person B money. Person B gives person A a pardon. We can say that A paid for access, made a voluntary contribution, lightened their walled, lent out money that didn't have to be repaid, etc. In practice, these are just ways of phrasing "bribe" differently.
- TameAntelope 6y agoThat's not what the NYT is reporting, the NYT is reporting that Person A gives person B money, person B provides access for Person A to talk to Person C about giving Person A a pardon. The pardoner, Person C, does not get any money. That is an important distinction. I'm not saying Trump isn't accepting payments for pardons, I'm saying the NYT article linked above isn't reporting that. They're reporting on lobbying efforts, which don't appear to be illegal. People pay for the President's time quite frequently. What's interesting about this story is that the folks with access are trying directly to solicit from convicts. I think that's fairly new or at least newsworthy.
- daniel-s 6y agoThe reason why it exists is important for a democracy. It protects the outgoing administration from political persecution after they leave, promoting peaceful transitions of power and is a safety valve for when the state becomes powerful and goes after people that it shouldn't, which happens all the time. Unfortunately it is also used by all presidents to pardon their buddies.
- mcrae 6y ago> It protects the outgoing administration from political persecution Aren’t pardons generally given post-conviction? How can it be a tool to protect against an incoming administration if the victim has been convicted under the current one? Unless you mean that in the future, when the outgoing’s party is back in power they can issue pardons. That doesn’t seem to be consistent with the trend that many pardons are issued on a President’s last day in office (and not his first).
- StavrosK 6y agoMaybe it would be enough to change the law so a president can only issue pardons in his first year or two each term.
- mc32 6y agoGovernors too, I imagine.
- maxerickson 6y agoFamously, Ford pardoned Nixon prior to any charges, never mind conviction.
- koolba 6y ago> The reason why it exists is important for a democracy. It protects the outgoing administration from political persecution after they leave, promoting peaceful transitions of power and is a safety valve for when the state becomes powerful and goes after people that it shouldn't, which happens all the time. That's not why it exists. Pardon power exists so the President has a way to declare peace on behalf of the government with an individual. It has nothing to do with transfer of power. It's to ensure that the President has an out to call off the wolves of the rest of the government and put a matter behind us. > Unfortunately it is also used by all presidents to pardon their buddies. Which is still less corrupt than pardoning your cocaine trafficking, drunk driving brother: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roger_Clinton_Jr.#Conviction_and_pardon https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roger_Clinton_Jr.#Conviction_a...
- gadders 6y agoHe's pardoned fewer people than all recent presidents except HW Bush: https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/976/cpsprodpb/C330/production/_116586994_optimised-pres_pardons-nc.png https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/976/cpsprodpb/C330/production/...
- croon 6y agoMaybe the targets are more relevant than the number. 3000 minor drug offenses or 5 mob cronies.
- mythrwy 6y agoLook at his pardon list from last night. It includes a large number of oversentenced drug offenders including a number of people serving life sentences for marijuana trafficking.
- gadders 6y agoGo here and search for "drug" or "amphetamines". Quite a few non-violent drug offenders with stupid sentences getting pardoned: https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/statement-press-secretary-regarding-executive-grants-clemency-012021/ https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/statement-pr... EG: Corvain Cooper – President Trump commuted the sentence of Mr. Corvain Cooper. Mr. Cooper is a 41 year-old father of two girls who has served more than 7 years of a life sentence for his non-violent participation in a conspiracy to distribute marijuana.
- pc86 6y agoWhether an individual pardon is good or bad certainly depends on how you feel about the crime committed by the pardoned, and whether we want to admit it or not, at least a little bit on the party of the President who pardons them. Even if you could objectively measure the damage done by any individual pardon (you can't), the good in aggregate outweighs the bad, especially of any one case that we disagree with but 10,000 equally reasonable and intelligent people may think is great.
- mc32 6y agoTrump has been among the stingiest pardoners. I also have no idea behind the refusal to pardon Assange other than politics. DoJ must have made it clear not to pardon Assange for whatever reason.
- CydeWeys 6y agoHe's been the stingiest in terms of giving them out for people who deserve them on account of being ill-served by the criminal justice system, but he's been the most liberal in terms of bailing out his co-conspirators and politically connected elite.
- mc32 6y agoDo we have a list of the “quality” of all presidential pardons? It may be that proportionally some presidents show certain “favoritism” while others less. But given some pardon in the thousands it’s hard to say without further study that in absolute numbers one self serves more than another except by using biased heuristics.
- Chris2048 6y agoDo you feel Michael Flynn was well served by the criminal justice system?
- shadowgovt 6y agoTrump was never Assange's friend, and Assange was foolish to assume the enemy of his enemy would be his friend. Given the way Trump operates in general, there's nothing in the long term that benefits him about having a whistleblower running around free, even if that whistleblower did significant political damage to his opponent one time.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- gnusty_gnurc 6y ago> The power of pardon simply further reduces the trust and legitimacy of the executive branch. The presidency is a mythologized and over-important role. It should be trusted less.
- throwaway0a5e 6y agoHere's the list. https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/statement-press-secretary-regarding-executive-grants-clemency-012021/ https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/statement-pr... Just browsing the names and convictions it looks like a pretty decent mix of people genuinely deserving and people who have very powerful people advocating for them. Looks like most of the crimes in the list are drug or fraud related. I haven't gone down the whole thing but the guy who got LWOP for weed (presumably huge quantities of it) caught my eye.
- Chris2048 6y agoDid Levandowski pay Trump?
- DougN7 6y agoIs there any proof this pardon was purchased, or is it just assumed? Honest question.
- neartheplain 6y agodupe: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25843040 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25843040
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- Emma_Goldman 6y agoThere is a long tradition of thought about mercy. Law has to be rendered at a sufficiently general level in order than it can encompass every relevant case. This, the argument goes, means written law cannot properly deal with context. Many of us realise that, sometimes, the context in which a crime is committed bears upon how just or unjust it is, even if that fact is not accommodated in law. Anyway, one enduring argument for mercy is that can be exercised on those rare occasions where there is some overwhelming contextual argument for why the general law should be overridden, e.g., the Greek play Antigone is effectively built around just such a case. Not that this argument has anything to do with Trump's unashamed cronyism and self-aggrandisement. But my point is that mercy isn't just an excuse for base corruption.
- schwartzworld 6y agoIt's just amazing how that mercy is only extended to corrupt wealthy people. Antigone is a fitting example, as she was the regent's daughter.
- Emma_Goldman 6y agoNote the emphasis when I wrote that mercy isn't just an excuse for corruption, i.e. it is mostly, but not entirely. Recall that at the end of the last administration, Obama pardoned Chelsea Manning. Or that Harding commuted Eugene Deb's conviction for sedition during WW1 in 1921. Neither are, as far as I can see, instances of corruption.
- darkerside 6y agoThis particular case seems almost like the opposite. Cases where you bring prior knowledge from one place to another are typically nigh unprovable. Most people do bring their priors with them, are rewarded for it, and benefit of the doubt is granted that there wasn't a "theft", simply a person moving jobs. In the rare case where somebody was actually proven in a criminal court to have stolen trade secrets and taken then directly to a competitor, a pardon is issued by a president who has felt antagonized by the former employer. It seems less like mercy and more like vindictiveness.
- throwaway0a5e 6y agoThis is just him giving the bird to tech while doing some key influential people a favor. Frankly I think he should pardon Snowden and Assange (if he's gonna give people the bird why not extend it to the establishment) and Joe Exotic (because the lulz of doing that would be on brand for him) while he's at it. Unlike Levandowsky, Snowden and (to a lesser extent) Assange are deserving of pardons in much of the public's eyes.
- Dirlewanger 6y agoWas really hoping for Snowden. Would have been the perfect FU to Obama/Biden.
- mjburgess 6y agoI would say leakers of this kind maybe shouldn't be actively pursued by the justice department outside of the USA. But either (1) pardoning; or (2) failing to pursue within USA; is a tall order. It licences the principle that intelligence can be leaked without legal consequence "by the conscience" of the leaker. Is that really how intelligence should be conducted? Most people are idiots; and do not know the ramifications of what they do. It is perfectly reasonable for something to be both moral and illegal, and remain punishable. Ie., it is Good that these leaks occured, but nevertheless, we require the leakers to pay some cost for it. If that cost is "in practice" merely exile from the country, that seems a reasonable compromise.
- Bodell 6y agoIf our justice system does not represent some bid for moral rightness (as flawed as it may be) then what is the point of justice at all? The leakers crimes is in these two cases were mostly pointing out others much weightier violations of the law. Those others have received no punishment, no cost for their crimes. Also, putting the word “merely” before ‘exiled indefinitely from your home’ is personally baffling to me. Especially since one of these people does not live in the US and “in practice” both their lives either were or still are in jeopardy. Edit: I do think I understand your overall point though. Actually leaking information should be a very serious decision, and should not be taken lightly.
- xpe 6y agoThiel went against the grain and supported Trump. Perhaps this was some payback? > The pardon was backed by several leaders in the technology industry who have supported Trump, including investors Peter Thiel and Blake Masters and entrepreneur Palmer Luckey, according to the White House.
- antattack 6y agoI have yet to see one good historical example or even a hypothetical argument given for presidential pardon to exist. Also, if there really is a separation of power than President should not meddle in Judicial branch affairs.
- Skunkleton 6y agoHypothetically, a law can be broken in a way where it is moral or necessary to do so, a punishment can be overly severe, or the law itself can be deemed as amoral. For example, should minor drug offenders sit in prison with COVID threatening their lives?
- tdy_err 6y agoNo but we do not need pardoning in lieu of legal reform
- Skunkleton 6y agoThe legal system isn't perfect.
- antattack 6y agoWhat is moral is in the eye of the beholder. If we are nation of law we follow the law and update it when necessary through Legislative branch. As to your example, Obama pardoned few minor drug offenders but it was a drop in a bucket, one time deal. People who voted for decriminalization of of Marijuana had much larger impact. Presidential pardon is a power given to POTUS that is not needed for functioning of a democratic society. It's a power royalty used to have and should be just used for pardoning the turkeys.
- Skunkleton 6y agoAre you saying that those minor drug offenders Obama pardoned should have waited in prison for some law to maybe pass? Even more important, what about Governor's pardoning powers? Those have been used to positive effect many times, should those go away too? Its an imperfect system, just following the script that law provides will lead to injustices. Having an escape hatch is a good thing, even if it is occasionally abused. I would support federal/state congresses overturning pardons though.
- breck 6y agoI probably support this one. Just like I support pardons for non-violent drug offenders. Copyright and patent laws are stupid in the first place.
- tdy_err 6y agoIt’s hard to imagine that Donald Trump, a greedy mogul, pardoned Levandowski because he believes patent law was unjustly enforced
- sjg007 6y agoInteresting. What's more interesting is how the market has moved on. There are a bunch of self driving trucking startups with some way further along now.