4 ms·

> and he shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offenses against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment. And why is he not rubberstampi

> and he shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offenses against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment. And why is he not rubberstamping such when the prison situation in US is cruel, sadly not unusual and definitely unjust.

nknighthb 12y ago
The offenses were not against the United States. This man is in a Colorado prison for crimes under Colorado law. The President has no authority in this case.
- venomsnake 12y ago
  There are enough federal inmates with good reasons for pardon. And mass pardons of federal prison could hint the governors about their power too.
  - nknighthb 12y ago
    1) The governors have powers that vary from zilch to equal to the President's. This is determined state-by-state. 2) You are mistaken if you believe all or even a substantial minority of the governors would ever agree with your views in this matter.
    - jessaustin 12y ago
      The Colorado governor may pardon any Colorado conviction other than those for treason or impeachment. The entire point of this thread is that the governors are culpable for the injustice of the system. Their opinions don't absolve them of that.
      - nknighthb 12y ago
        The comment I responded to said "And mass pardons of federal prison could hint the governors about their power too.". This suggests two mistaken beliefs: 1) That governors as a whole have these powers. 2) That "hints about their power" would prompt them to act in the manner he wishes. The governors don't need hints about their power in this area, they are well aware of it. They don't fail to exercise it as he wants them to because they need a "hint", they fail to exercise it as he wants them to because they do not agree with him. I'm not addressing the thread as a whole. I'm addressing this little corner of it. I'm under no obligation to address the thread as a whole in every comment I make, and doing so would be both pointless and tiring.
jessaustin 12y ago
Actually they could just start with all the drug incarcerations. Not only do those crimes have no plausible victims, but the eventual verdict of posterity on the entire practice of drug prohibition is pretty clear even now. Why wouldn't any politician want to get on the right side of that?

nknighthb 12y ago

The offenses were not against the United States. This man is in a Colorado prison for crimes under Colorado law. The President has no authority in this case.

venomsnake 12y ago
There are enough federal inmates with good reasons for pardon. And mass pardons of federal prison could hint the governors about their power too.
- nknighthb 12y ago
  1) The governors have powers that vary from zilch to equal to the President's. This is determined state-by-state. 2) You are mistaken if you believe all or even a substantial minority of the governors would ever agree with your views in this matter.
  - jessaustin 12y ago
    The Colorado governor may pardon any Colorado conviction other than those for treason or impeachment. The entire point of this thread is that the governors are culpable for the injustice of the system. Their opinions don't absolve them of that.
    - nknighthb 12y ago
      The comment I responded to said "And mass pardons of federal prison could hint the governors about their power too.". This suggests two mistaken beliefs: 1) That governors as a whole have these powers. 2) That "hints about their power" would prompt them to act in the manner he wishes. The governors don't need hints about their power in this area, they are well aware of it. They don't fail to exercise it as he wants them to because they need a "hint", they fail to exercise it as he wants them to because they do not agree with him. I'm not addressing the thread as a whole. I'm addressing this little corner of it. I'm under no obligation to address the thread as a whole in every comment I make, and doing so would be both pointless and tiring.

jessaustin 12y ago

Actually they could just start with all the drug incarcerations. Not only do those crimes have no plausible victims, but the eventual verdict of posterity on the entire practice of drug prohibition is pretty clear even now. Why wouldn't any politician want to get on the right side of that?