web analytics

It’s not just me….

By Patrick Van Roy On February 10th, 2020

I have been called many things over this issue, a conspiracy theorist, a crazy person, a Trump Drone, and on and on. The last 3 years have been one attack after another on the President of the United States by the Press, every politician in the Democrat Party, and a good many Republican Politicians. The obsessed Democrats in NY have an ongoing investigation that holds a record now for having it’s subpoenas smacked down to fish through every record of his life and the lives of everyone associated with him in the desperate search for a crime.

Each and every concrete we’ve got him now has failed miserably. This however all began in one place and a storm is coming.

The Once and Future Scandal

Soon the worm may turn. The real scandal is back on the horizon, and at last, we may learn that no one is above the law—most certainly not a group of smug and mediocre apparatchiks who assumed they had the moral right to destroy a presidential candidate and later an elected president.

Victor Davis HansonFebruary 9th, 2020

Now that the four-and-a-half-month-long Ukraine impeachment bookend to the 22-month Mueller charade is over, it clearly accomplished nothing other than substantially raising the polls of both Donald Trump and the Republican Party. The public was reminded that Representative Gerald Nadler (D-N.Y.) and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) are every bit as childish, peevish, and absurd as Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.).

So, we are now back to the existential issue of the entire Trump phenomenon: to what degree did the Hillary Clinton campaign collude with high-ranking Obama officials, and the top echelons of the FBI, CIA, and the national intelligence apparatus, to surveil, defame, and hope to derail Donald Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign by unlawful means?

Who in the federal government then continued Clinton’s efforts after the 2016 election to disrupt and indeed attempt to destroy the Trump transition and presidency?

Eventually, someone will sort out whether that post-election effort on the part of federal officials to abort the Trump presidency, abetted by the media and #TheResistance, was a simple follow-up to the Clinton-DNC-Perkins Coe-Fusion GPS collusion against candidate Trump—or a sick preemptive attempt of the administrative state to smear Trump as a “Russian asset” because of their worries about the exposure of their own prior criminality and Trump’s iconoclastic agenda.

But for now, the following statements are irrefutable.

Donald Trump, in concrete ways, has been far harder on Russia than was the “reset” Obama presidency, and far more helpful to Ukraine than Team Obama ever was. Trump armed the Ukrainians. He upped sanctions against Russia. He ordered lethal retaliation against Russian mercenaries in Syria. He vastly increased U.S. oil and gas production to Russia’s detriment. He jawboned Germany about its fuel dependence on Moscow. He coerced NATO to spend more on defense. He got out of an asymmetrical missile treaty with Russia. He is rebuilding the U.S. military.

 

Unlike his predecessor, Trump did not dismantle U.S.-joint European missile defense in order to coax Putin into behaving during his reelection bid. He did not push a big plastic red reset button in Geneva to mark outreach to Putin, in rejection of prior Bush sanctions on Russians. He did not forbid the shipment of anti-tank missiles to an endangered Ukraine. He did not invite the Russians into Syria after a 40-year hiatus from the Middle East.

So the libel of Russian collusion was absurd from the get-go.

It originated in 2015-16 when the deep state was terrified over the then unlikely possibility of a President Donald Trump. The “collusion” ruse involved the chief players of federal law enforcement and national intelligence agencies. All, of course, had assumed Hillary Clinton would be president and their extralegal efforts to “insure” her victory would soon be commensurately rewarded, regardless of the illegality and unethical behavior required. And both crimes and amorality were most certainly involved.

See No Evil, Hear No Evil

The litany of these systematic abuses constitutes the greatest scandal in American history.

The FBI and the Justice Department deliberately misled Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court judges to spy on an American citizen as a way to monitor others in the Trump campaign. That crime is a charitable interpretation of Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz’s report, given that supposedly intelligent federal judges were told that the evidence for such state espionage was based on the “opposition research” of the 2016 campaign. And yet apparently in see-no-evil, hear-no-evil fashion, not one of the squishy judges ever asked the U.S. government, who exactly had paid for the Steele Dossier and why? After all, who was the “opposition” to Trump in late 2016?

Top Obama officials, such as Samantha Power and Susan Rice, in a panic over the Trump candidacy and then victory, requested the unmasking of scores of redacted names of those surveilled by intelligence agencies. Some of those names mysteriously, but certainly illegally, were leaked to the media with the intent of defaming them.

When Adam Schiff’s pernicious role in jump-starting the impeachment is finally fully known, he will likely be revealed as the prime schemer, along with minor Obama officials buried within the Trump National Security Council, dreaming up the entire Ukraine caper of the “whistleblower.”

Over the past three years during the Russian and Ukrainian farces, Schiff variously lied to the public about impending “bombshell” revelations of Trump “collusion.” His minority House Intelligence Committee memo outrageously alleged that the Steele dossier was accurate and truthful and yet was not the prime evidence for the granting of FISA warrants—two more lies exposed by Horowitz.

Schiff rigged the initial House impeachment hearings to exclude transparency and bipartisan access to witnesses. He read a false version of the Trump conversation with the Ukrainian president into the congressional record. He secretly data mined his own colleagues’ communications. And to the very last moments of the entire fraud, even in his dotage, he was still babbling in the Senate about the long-ago discredited “Russian collusion” and again stringing together absurd fantasies of Trump wishing to sell Alaska to the Russians.

Justice for the Wrongdoers?

Schiff was given a great gift with a quick Senate acquittal. If he had been called as a fact witness, he either would have had to lie under oath to refute his earlier myths, or continue them and compound his falsities.

The Mueller investigation—500 subpoenas, 22 months, $35 million—was one of the great travesties in American investigatory history. It was cooked up by fired, disgraced—and furious—former FBI Director James Comey. By his own admission, Comey conceded that he leaked confidential memos of private conversations he had with the president to create a large enough media and political storm to force the naming of a special prosecutor to investigate “Russian collusion.”

Comey is not yet in jail, in part, because his cronies at the FBI, including the disgraced Peter Strzok and Lisa Page, post facto, announced that the leaked Comey versions of his one-on-one talks with the president of the United States were merely confidential rather than top secret and thus their dissemination to the media was not quite felonious.

The rest is history. Comey’s leaking gambit paid off. It led to the appointment of his long-time friend and predecessor, former FBI Director Robert Mueller. Mueller then delighted the media by appointing mostly progressive activist lawyers, some with ties to Hillary Clinton and the Clinton Foundation, in what then giddy journalists called a “dream team,” of “all-stars” who in the fashion of a “hunter-killer” team would abort the Trump presidency. They would prove Trump was what former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper on television called a “Putin asset.”

In surreal fashion, the main players, under suspicion for seeding and peddling the fraudulent Steele dossier among the high echelons of the U.S. government and using such smears to cripple Trump—John Brennan, James Clapper, and Andrew McCabe—were hired by liberal CNN and MSNBC as paid analysts to fob off on others the very scandals that they themselves had created.

The proof of the pudding is in the eating, and the Mueller team finally had to concede that it was born out a conspiratorial hoax by finding after 88 weeks—punctuated by almost daily leaks to sympathetic progressive media—that there was no Trump-Russian collusion to warp the 2016 election. Nor did it find actionable obstruction of justice on the part of Trump to thwart the investigation of what was admittedly a non-crime.

Yet Mueller’s team was marred with problems from the outset. The amorous and textually promiscuous pair of Peter Strzok and Lisa Page were both fired for their rank partisanship, although Mueller and his team initially hid the reasons for their departures and staggered their firings to suggest a natural rotation. Mysteriously, hundreds of their incriminating texts have disappeared from FBI smart devices—a weirdness reminiscent of the FBI’s willingness not to examine Hillary Clinton’s computers that were hacked, as well as apparent unconcern that she destroyed thousands of subpoenaed emails.

Eric Clinesmith, another FBI lawyer, was fired by Mueller inter alia for his left-wing biases and tweeting out “Viva le [sic] Resistance”—as in long-live the World War II-like progressive resistance against the fascist and foreign occupier Trump. Clinesmith, according to the inspector general, altered an email presented as evidence before a FISA court to warp the request to surveil Carter Page. If there is any justice left in this sordid mess, he will end up in jail.

Four Years of Fakery

The end of the Mueller team was equally unceremonious. Mueller himself proved enfeebled in an embarrassing testimony before House committees, marked by the stunning admission he really had no idea what Fusion GPS was—the Glenn Simpson monstrosity that had hired the charlatan Christopher Steele, spawned the collusion myth and compromised top Justice Department officials such as Bruce Ohr, whose spouse worked for Simpson on the dossier.

When Mueller’s legal ramrod, progressive Andrew Weissman, finished up running the day-to-day operations of the “Mueller investigation,” in parody fashion he went to work—but of course—as a paid analyst for CNN where he no longer publicly had to suppress his loathing of the former target of his investigations.

The net effects of the Mueller and Horowitz investigations were variously to exonerate Trump, to expose a corrupt Justice Department, CIA, and FBI, to illustrate how the government hounded and ruined the lives of minor 2016 Trump campaign officials with largely process convictions and plea-bargained confessions, and to explain the peremptory resignations of more than a dozen top Washington officials of James Comey’s FBI—as well as the railroading General Michael Flynn.

Some of that skullduggery and more are currently the subjects of a criminal investigation by U.S. Attorney John Durham. The American public has been assaulted for four years by an array of fake scandals, fake bombshells, and fake televised analyses that camouflaged a systematic and terrible assault on our constitutional freedoms.

But soon the worm may turn. The real scandal is back on the horizon, and at last, we may learn that no one is above the law, and most certainly not a group of smug and mediocre apparatchiks who assumed they had the moral right to destroy a presidential candidate and later an elected president.

In sum, this real scandal, dormant for over four years, had been overshadowed by a series of progressive-government-media driven melodramas, aimed at both injuring the Trump presidency—and, in preemptive fashion, shielding a virtual coup to destroy an elected president.

103 Responses to “It’s not just me….”

  1. Here’s a scandal for ya’all. Today Trump whinged on Twitter about a possible nine year sentence for his old pal convicted crook Roger Stone. Within a few hours the Department of “Justice” had taken steps to undermine its own prosecutors and demand a lower sentence. So now it’s ok for the POTUS to openly interfere in the judicial process.

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/justice-dept-to-reduce-sentencing-recommendation-for-trump-associate-roger-stone-official-says-after-president-calls-it-unfair/2020/02/11/ad81fd36-4cf0-11ea-bf44-f5043eb3918a_story.html

  2. Stone was convicted of witness tampering.

    Trump believes in witness tampering. Trump supporters think that witness tampering is authorized by the founding fathers.

    And he knows esp after the fake Senate trial that the Senate and his cult will never hold him accountable for anything.

  3. Nine years is unfair, practically a death sentence, and the President is mulling over a pardon, which is within his purview.

  4. Stone was witness tampering ( as was the president, right on TV )

    What should the consequences be?

  5. Do you support no jail time at all for witness tampering?

  6. The Executive leans on the Judiciary to get a crooked crony off the hook. This is banana republic stuff.

  7. I would support jail time, but less than 9 years.

  8. “Nor do we know how swing voters will react to Trump’s anti-religious rant at what was previously an unfailingly civil, nonpartisan national prayer breakfast. This year, Trump used the occasion to mock the faiths of Nancy Pelosi and Mitt Romney, after dismissing the lessons of the Sermon on the Mount. What will swing voters think about his vituperative White House campaign rally and vengeful, banana-republic crusade to prosecute or otherwise retaliate against his critics and opponents? Will they ignore, excuse or applaud his division of Americans into one group of ‘good’ people, who unfailingly support, praise and even revere him, and another group of ‘terrible, evil’ people who criticise or oppose him? Who knows?

    Here’s what we do know: the 2020 election results will be suspect, tainted by voting-machine failures, manual-count disputes, and voter suppression in the form of onerous ID laws, reduced early-voting hours, or impossibly long lines on election day. Maybe insecure state-election systems will be hacked. Maybe reliable results will be placed in doubt by false claims of hacking or vote-tampering. Any or all of these problems, reflecting either incompetence or malevolence, will confirm and increase existing mistrust of our electoral system, some warranted, some the rancid fruit of propaganda campaigns…

    What else do we know? If results show that Trump has lost, he will challenge them and, perhaps, refuse to leave office, with the support of congressional Republicans, some of whom may follow suit and refuse to step down if results are against them. Democrats may challenge results that show Trump retaining office. In any case, we should be prepared for either a violent transfer or refusal to transfer power…”

    https://www.spiked-online.com/2020/02/11/state-of-disunion/

  9. Charles

    I’d be fine with that

    But Trump is openly interfering in the judicial system where a sentence has yet to be handed down!

    This is hugely disturbing to anyone who believes in the rule of law, in checks and balances of any kind

    Why not just appoint Trump as the head of all branches of government and let him do whatever he wishes

  10. But Trump is openly interfering in the judicial system where a sentence has yet to be handed down!

    Phantom, I see your point of view.

  11. Peter, the question is will the Democrats recognize Trump’s overwhelming victory in November without acting like brown shirts!

  12. What would be the normal sentence in a case of witness tampering?

  13. Patrick, you don know Trump is still president solely because of partisan politicians, right?

    You’ve definitely drank the coolaid on this one. Trump would walk all over a mere peon like you to get what he wants.

    The US forefathers thought politicians of whatever hue would do the honourable thing when it came to the highest office in the land – they were naive in that regard.

  14. Trump is acting like a brownshirt today, right now

  15. Seamus,

    Depending on the circumstances of your case, federal witness intimidation can be charged as a misdemeanor or a felony under U.S. Code 18 Section 1512. Federal witness intimidation is punishable by up to 20 years in federal prison and a fine of up to $250,000.Jul 11, 2014
    http://www.wklaw.com › tampering-with-witnesses-or-evidence

  16. So this is really a mid-range sentence?

  17. Not for a seventy-something year old man.

  18. Don’t do the crime if you can’t do the time

  19. I am broadly of the opinion that individual sentences should be set depending on the individual rehabilitation circumstances of the individual involved. However a slap on the wrist will likely not lead to Stone’s rehabilitation.

  20. Without punishment for premeditated crime, there is no possibility of justice.

  21. This is Trump’s tweet:

    “This is a horrible and very unfair situation. The real crimes were on the other side, as nothing happens to them. Cannot allow this miscarriage of justice!”

    https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1227122206783811585?s=20

  22. I feel for Stone. but it’s his personality that’s getting him what is essentially a life sentence, but after throwing the key away on him there are others who have done the same in this affair

    In April 2018 Department of Justice Inspector General Michael Horowitz officially referred fired Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe for criminal prosecution. According to a report published by the IG’s office, McCabe lied under oath multiple times to FBI and agents and IG investigators.

    He should be sentenced to at least an equal amount of time.

  23. Stone’s sentence is not the issue here.

    It’s Trump’s blatant interference in the judicial process that’s the issue.

  24. he hasn’t interfered in anything Peter.

    and actually the post is about the coming convictions of those that tried to frame him. Why don’t you actually read it and learn something.

  25. he hasn’t interfered in anything Peter.

    He blasted away on Twitter before the sentence was handed down. That’s interference in the process and maybe even attempted intimidation of the judge.

    It would help your credibility around here if you could bring yourself to admit the ****ing obvious when your man is in the wrong, instead of the endless whitewashing and whataboutery.

  26. Peter that’s not interference and if he is ever found committing a crime I’ll handout the pitchforks and torches, but so far all the left has done is proven Trump to be the cleanest man to ever hold the office.

    4 years of prosecutions and absolutely NOTHING….. oh how sad… orange man bad, but we just can’t find anything…..

    you can’t buy this kinda entertainment god I hope he wins!

  27. Where is my pitchfork

  28. lol

  29. So far all the left has done is proven Trump to be the cleanest man to ever hold the office

    I wouldn’t call anyone defrauding a charitable foundation clean by any stretch.

  30. compared to who ? Hillary

  31. Compared to ‘clean’

  32. this is interesting

    BLOODBATH! Third Prosecutor Adam Jed Withdraws from Roger Stone Following Excessive Sentencing Announcement

    https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/02/bloodbath-third-prosecutor-adam-jed-withdraws-from-roger-stone-following-excessive-sentencing-announcement/

  33. No interference in the judicial system, no sirree

    100% lawless

  34. but so far all the left has done is proven Trump to be the cleanest man to ever hold the office.

    Glad to see you haven’t lost your sense of humour.

  35. Peter,

    Four DOJ prosecutors have resigned in protest over their bosses lowering of Stone’s sentence to 14 to 21 months.

  36. Under direct political pressure from the president

  37. yes Trump made them do it……. it has nothing to do with the fact that they were giving a death sentence to an idiot old man and that there are federal agents about to be prosecuted for the same things and McCabe still hasn’t been charged even with an IGs recommendation for criminal prosecution.

    You want death for a crazy old man because he worked for trump while you say nothing about dirty fbi agents that worked for Obama….. to say your hypocrisy is showing would be a laugh.

    Besides they could give Stone 100 years and guess what if the President WANTS to really interfere he’ll pardon him an hour later….. no that how a president interferes in a case like this……

  38. It’s kind of like I was saying with the Ukraine thing. Trump didnt use the proper channels (the DOJ) to investigate Hunter Biden. Now he didn’t wait for actual sentencing of Stone to pardon him, which is his right. I don’t know if anything illegal was done, but as they say, a wink is as good as a nod to a blind man. He’s misbehaving!

  39. Maybe it has happened before, but I’ve certainly not heard of a president pardoning someone not yet sentenced.

    Especially when that person is a political crony.

    Can we have another speech about draining the swamp now, please?

  40. I misspoke. H hasn’t pardoned him yet, but he has somehow interjected himself into the process.

  41. if you read the post above by Hansen and have paid any attention to what i’ve been saying you would see how this not only makes sense but is more than justified.

    Anyone and everyone that has received any kind of sentences or penalties as a result of the Mueller Probe deserves an immediate pardon from the COURTS not the President.

    They are all fruit of the poison tree…… everything goes back to falsified evidence given FISA…. it all springs from the original warrant which was gotten with fake evidence and perjured testimony ALL CONVICTIONS should be tossed as a matter of Justice.

  42. General Flynn being another one.

  43. they were giving a death sentence to an idiot old man

    Stone is 67 and of sound mind. And the offences he was convicted of were serious. And of nine years was the top of the range. He would probably have got about six years and been out in three. Until Trump interjected himself into the process via Twitter. Yet again he shows his total contempt for the constitution.

  44. I expect we will hear soon that “Attorney General” Barr was involved in this in the past 24 hours but that he never discussed the case with Trump, nosiree.

  45. Courts don’t issue pardons.

  46. I’ve read that there was a media gag order imposed by the judge. I guess Twitter counts? Doesn’t look good.

  47. courts throw out cases and overturn cases every day….. everything is tainted.

  48. That isn’t a pardon.

  49. Charles

    Trump will accept no bounds or limits on what he can say or do. Since last week he has been like a crazy elephant lashing out all around him, even at the Prayer Breakfast. And it will get worse, be sure of that.

  50. excuse my misspeak

  51. I pardon you…

  52. “As he did after a jury speedily convicted Mr. Stone on seven felony charges in November, Mr. Trump attacked federal law enforcement officials, saying “the real crimes were on the other side.” “Cannot allow this miscarriage of justice!” Mr. Trump added.

    Late on Tuesday afternoon, prosecutors submitted a new filing that made no specific sentencing recommendation, saying only that the earlier guidance was excessive and “does not accurately reflect the Department of Justice’s position on what would be a reasonable sentence.” The government still believes “incarceration is warranted” for Mr. Stone, they wrote.
    https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/11/us/politics/roger-stone-sentencing.html?smtyp=cur&smid=tw-nytimes

    Here’s a likely scenario for the past 24 hours:

    1. Trump learns that prosecutors have asked for 7-9 year sentence, throws total wobbler.
    2. Trump calls AG Barr and instructs him to do something.
    3. Barr does as he’s told like the lapdog he is and instructs DOJ officials accordingly.
    4. DOJ officials undermine their own prosecutors by going back to court and withdrawing the sentencing request.
    5. Prosecutors resign.

  53. LMAO

    CHICAGO (Reuters) – Former “Empire” actor Jussie Smollett was charged on Tuesday in a six-count felony indictment with staging a phony hate crime, nearly a year after similar charges were abruptly dismissed by local prosecutors.

    https://www.reuters.com/article/us-people-jussie-smollett-idUSKBN2052SD

  54. “Mr. Stone, 67, was convicted in November of obstructing an investigation by the House Intelligence Committee into Russian meddling in the 2016 election, lying to investigators under oath and trying to block the testimony of a witness who would have exposed his lies. The jury deliberated for just seven hours.

    Adam B. Schiff, the California Democrat who chairs the House committee, said that if the president intervened in any way to reverse the decision of career prosecutors, it would be “a blatant abuse of power. Doing so would send an unmistakable message that President Trump will protect those who lie to Congress to cover up his own misconduct and that the attorney general will join him in that effort,” he said in a statement.”

    https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/11/us/politics/roger-stone-sentencing.html?action=click&module=Top%20Stories&pgtype=Homepage

  55. Peter……

    “Mr. Stone, 67, was convicted in November of obstructing an investigation by the House Intelligence Committee into Russian meddling in the 2016 election,

    Which was instigated by a falsified warrant…… it’s fruit of the poisonous tree

    and the NYTs was complicit

  56. Stone, Flynn, Papadopulos, heven forbid even Manafort and the indicted russians ALL should have their indictments overturned, charges dismissed and records expunged.

  57. What about your leading the pitchfork charge against the guilty?

  58. “Mr. Stone, 67, was convicted in November of obstructing an investigation by the House Intelligence Committee into Russian meddling in the 2016 election, lying to investigators under oath and trying to block the testimony of a witness who would have exposed his lies. The jury deliberated for just seven hours.” NYT

    Stone was convicted of serious crimes. The prosecutors know their job and should not be interfered with. Trump may want to use Stone’s ‘expertise’ in the upcoming election.

    Welcome to life in a dictatorship. The dictator’s wishes are more important than the rule of law, every government department, and anybody who gets in his way.

  59. If the evidence is tainted even if there was a body there’s no guilt.

    and even with that list of falsely crucified bodies that I list above….. they still got nothing on Trump.

    Face it Mahons the mans an ass, but he’s been proven to be an honest ass. God knows they’ve given him an anal exam for 4 years and got NOTHING…… if there were parking tickets they would reopen Alcatraz just for him.

  60. yes NYr we pick up our brownshirts and swastikas at the rally…….

  61. The withdrawals and resignations of the four prosecutors in the Stone case are a sign that there are still men and women of integrity in our government.

    William Barr is the most corrupt Attorney General in American history by an order of magnitude.

  62. Roger Stone Is an interesting guy to listen to

    As not everyone here may know, he worked on the Nixon and Reagan presidential campaigns and was known as a dirty trickster

    He has a tattoo of Richard Nixon on his back

    Here he is on the Bill Maher show

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dag6L7tnCEo

  63. The main benefit of controlling a modern bureaucratic state is not the power to persecute the innocent. It is the power to protect the guilty.

  64. you know where it gets even funnier…..

    The leader of the Democrat Party for President is a devout Socialist who Honeymooned in the Soviet Union in the middle of the Cold War…. that’s hysterical

  65. Patrick – and all these years later who is more pro Russian, Sanders or Trump?

  66. Sanders…..

    Trump has put tons of sanctions on Russia, got NATO off their ass to help pay to keep that force upto date, gave military arms to Ukraine, rebuilt our military and the icing on the cake boosted our production and has started exporting oil which wreaks havoc with russia’s economy.

    You refuse to see whats right before your eyes.

    You think Sanders would do any of that ?

  67. “As far as President Trump is concerned, banishing Lt. Col. Alexander S. Vindman from the White House and exiling him back to the Pentagon was not enough. If he had his way, the commander in chief made clear on Tuesday, the Defense Department would now take action against the colonel, too.” NYT

    Vindman was obeying his oath to the Constitution but the dictator will not tolerate anything he perceives as disloyalty so a good soldier it persecuted to keep everyone in line.

  68. Vindman is a good candidate for being charged with treason NYr.

  69. Everyone is guilty of treason

    Apart from “ Honest “ Donald Trump, that is.

    He will clean up the swamp. You betcha.

  70. “Vindman is a good candidate for being charged with treason NYr.” Please explain.

  71. He failed to worship and obey Trump, that’s the Treason !

  72. On a seperate point, regardless of the merit of any individual situation I am baffled as to how and why the power of Presidential pardon exists. It completely railroads the principle of an independent judicial and criminal system. It is completely wrong and shouldn’t be part of any society based on the rule of law.

  73. Colm- when used judiciously it is has value and compliments the rule of law ( Ford pardon of Nixon, Carter pardon of draft dodgers).

    But it can be abused (Clinton, Trump).

  74. “But Trump has now survived impeachment, and has a good sense of how consistently Senate Republicans have his back. Some have even argued that Trump has learned his lesson from the impeachment.

    The administration’s rush to aid Stone, especially set against the retributive firings, shows Trump newly willing to flex his muscles, and demonstrates how Pollyannaish the predictions of a chastened Trump were. The apology for firing Vindman goes this way: Vindman remains an officer, and Trump has a right to aides on the National Security Council whom he trusts. But Trump also said Tuesday that the military should consider disciplining Vindman, whose only offense seems to have been complying with a lawful subpoena from Congress.

    The intervention on behalf of Stone is particularly disturbing because he was convicted of lying to protect Trump. Thanks to Stone’s stonewalling, we still don’t really know what happened between Trump and Russia in 2016. Stone had Trump’s back, and now Trump has his. So much for the law-and-order president.”

    https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/02/what-unleashed-trump-looks-like/606421/

  75. Colm, it’s a hangover from the practice of Royal pardon that the Yanks inherited from the English. Have you really lost so much of your Irish background? Remember: when in doubt, blame the Brits.

    But I agree with Colm, such pardons go against the principle of separation of powers and are inevitably abused. Ford’s pardon of Nixon was a flagrant abuse of the power. It was from one guy for his friend and former boss, and was all discussed well in advance. It was a blanket protection and used to prevent criminal proceedings even commencing against someone who was obviously guilty.

    It should at the very least be restricted to beneficiaries who have no relation to the president. Pardoning your cronies or family members makes an even bigger farce of the whole thing.

    Let the president’s power to limited to reprieving those condemned to death and no more.

  76. There are occasions where a legal decision maybe morally unjust even if legally correct. It is those circumstances that the pardon should exist for.

    For example the use of mandatory minimum sentences (which is also an abuse of the separation of powers) means that cases that, because of the details of the case, deserve leniency are unable to have judges show that leniency. It creates an unjust but legally sound application of law, one where justice can only be found through the pardon system.

  77. Trump has never pardoned anyone, he’s trying to get a reduced sentence

    He knows he can pardon on federal charges, but not state level charges

  78. //There are occasions where a legal decision maybe morally unjust even if legally correct.//

    But morally unjust applications of law happen every day. If someone has recourse to some higher “moral” instance (just imagine Trump being in a position to make moral judgements), then all should have. There would have to be an instituion making such judgements to which all could appeal.

    If don’t see mandatory minimum sentences as being an abuse of the separation of powers. Legislators can specify what’s a crime in the first place and have a specify a range of penalties. As far as I know, specification of penalties has been part of legal codes since codes began.

  79. = have a right to specify

  80. A range of penalties is fine, and guidelines that crime A should have a broad range of sentencing options, while still giving a judge the discretion to go outside them when justified. But a Crime A must have a minimum of 15 years in prison, even when there are extreme mitigating circumstances is wrong, and far more of an abuse of the separation of power than commutations and pardons (which has always been a recognised executive power).

  81. “There would have to be an instituion making such judgements to which all could appeal.”

    There is such an institution. It is, in America, the Presidency (in federal cases and Governors for state cases). Anyone can appeal to them.

  82. So anyone who thinks he was morally right after being convicted can appeal to the president or the governor?

    And these guys still have time to play golf?

    In Nixon’s case btw, the “pardon” was IIRC before criminal proceedings even began.

  83. Pat
    Its illegal to meddle in trials, same with corrupt AG Barr its illegal to change sentencing recommendations. Both guys are literally tweeting their way into prison.
    Clean? They commit crimes every day, the House follows the law and so more impeachments coming is likely , starting with Barr ..
    you can’t get away with this shit mate .. no matter the whataboutery of you and rudy’s fake Ukraine indulgences , they don’t cancel each other out . Did you now know that ?

  84. In Nixon’s case it was to protect the Office of the Presidency. So in that case it wasn’t legally or morally right to interfere but still the prudent thing to do.

    “So anyone who thinks he was morally right after being convicted can appeal to the president or the governor?”

    Often there will be systems in place for it, so that it doesn’t become time consuming for the President or Governor. There has been a pardon attorney for the President since 1789. Most governors will also have support structures in place.

  85. Noel

    Of course that’s right, I forgot about Nixon

    Roger Stone was very bad here. He threatened witnesses with bodily injury. He’s very tight with Trump, has been for decades.. Hard to believe that Trump wasn’t aware of the threats. View any interventions by Trump in that light.

  86. //In Nixon’s case it was to protect the Office of the Presidency. //

    What does that mean? Nixon wasn’t president when it was issued.

    And what’s all this about “the office” of this and that? It’s in effect saying that people are immune from prosecution for breaking the law just because they hold down a certain job.

  87. The Nixon pardon by Ford, was controversial at the time.

    But it has since been widely praised.

  88. Ford’s pardon probably cost him the election. It was a brave act and given to also heal a divide in the nation. Time has proven it to have been the right thing to do. Nixon was undeserving but uniting a reeling nation was more important. Ford was an honorable man, unlike Nixon, and didn’t issue the pardon out of “friendship” or illicit conspiracy with his “boss”.

  89. Spot on

  90. Because an indictment, trial, conviction, appeal, sentence, release etc… of a former President for actions committed as President would have kept the matter going for years, even decades. And each revelation, each step in the process would have heaped more and more negative attention on the Presidency itself.

    The pardon of Nixon ended the matter. The US moved on, unencombered by Watergate, with the reputation and prestige of the Presidency intact.

  91. Ford was just a place holder and did the right thing. Whoever won the democrat nomination was bound to win to the detriment of the country it was Carter.

  92. Carter portrayed himself as a clean candidate, and he really was that, more than any president in our lifetime.

  93. he was and is a nice man

  94. https://www.onlineathens.com/opinion/20200124/gerson-jimmy-carter—hero-who-gets-up-and-moves-on

  95. //Ford was an honorable man, unlike Nixon, and didn’t issue the pardon out of “friendship”//

    Actually, it seems he did. Towards the end of his life he told Bob Woodward in an interview

    “I had no hesitancy about granting the pardon, because I felt that we had this relationship and that I didn’t want to see my real friend have the stigma.”

    //And each revelation, each step in the process would have heaped more and more negative attention on the Presidency//

    Why on the presidency? Did all the stupidity of the Bush years that came out later harm the presidency when Obama was in the WH? I’d say it harmed more the former president, and rightly so.

    The old line about justice being seen to be done. As it was, everyone saw that you could get off scot free if you (Nixon) just had the right connections.
    That would seem to me to be more damaging to a society than any imagined harm to “the presidency”.

  96. Obama did the most damage to the office of the President. PERIOD…..

    and the full damage has yet to be rolled out, but it’s coming.

  97. Bob Woodward claims that, but it is contrary to talks Woodward has given previously (after that interview) in which he described Ford as gutsy and having done the right thing. The quote doesn’t even sound like Ford.

  98. Obama did the most damage to the office of the President

    More than Nixon? Did Obama do a Watergate and lie about it and cover up and subvert the constitution? I musta missed that.

    And Trump is worse than Nixon by a country mile. He subverts the constitution every week and lies every hour that he’s awake. He refuses to accept any limits whatsoever on what he can say and do. Dershovitz gave him carte blanche and he intends to use it.

  99. One of the charges against Nixon was that he THREATENED to use the IRS as a weapon, Obama actually used the IRS as a weapon. He also used the FBI/DOJ/CIA/NSA to persecute and frame his political enemies.

    You really have no clue do you….? FBI agents are about to go to jail over it. Nixon was an angel.

  100. Pat even you must be getting tired of being so wrong so often

  101. No, there’s zero evidence that Obama did any of those things.

  102. Obama did everyone of those things and slowly but surely people are going to go to jail. Lois Lerner should have gone to jail but Obama’s justice department refused to prosecute. Everyone involved in crossfire hurricane was at the direction of Obama framing a man that was running for president.

    It involved the DOJ, the NSA, and the CIA all being funneled through the FBI and right now there is a United States Attorney General with an open CRIMINAL investigation and a grand jury pouring over every thread of it since last February.

    The shit storm is coming the only question is when.

    This will be worth waiting for, I want to see that smug face of Comey as he does a perp walk.

  103. The shit storm is coming the only question is when.

    Trump has been in power for three years, so what’s keeping him? We know from the Stone shenanigans this week that he owns the Justice Department. Or will he have to sack lapdog Barr as well, maybe he should appoint Junior Don to the AG post to get some action? There’s still eight months to the election, surely plenty of time to bring charges.