Posted on 11/25/2008 12:50:24 AM PST by flattorney
Yes, it's a "good summary". More precisely, it's a good summary of the "formal" process which is customarily followed.
For myself, I'd prefer a President who acted morally and ethically to one who hides behind formal process. President Bush need look no further than the example set by his own father, President George H.W. Bush, who pardoned Casper Weinberger immediately upon his indictment by Lawrence Walsh without even waiting for a trial, much less a conviction, appeal process or any "formal" recommendation for a pardon.
It has been extremely disheartening to observe these past few years the number of "law and order" Freepers in these types of threads who clearly worship the "legal process" and revere the "Justice System", but either can't discern or don't care whether or not "justice" is actually done...
I believe these people, and President Bush as well, are exactly the sort Shakespeare had in mind and so aptly described, through the words of Mark Antony: "for Brutus is an honorable man... and so are they all honorable men..."
Well, you have to understand - - Bush doesn't want to upset the Democrats and their newsrooms.
Childish is posting a ridiculous question off topic, like ‘do you support pardon’s for drug dealers’.
I support commuting the sentence for these two. But thats it. They don’t deserver a pardon in my view.
I can appreciate the viewpoint you expressed here. We just disagree about this particular case.
Thanks for the civility.
Perhaps you missed the title and content of this thread:
Lou Dobbs: Outrageous, Bush pardons 14 people, including drug dealers, but not Ramos & Compean
Simple question... dodged once again.
Cite the statement you claim that Ramos and Compean made.
“Perhaps ‘lied’ was too strong.”
No, it just applies to you rather than Ramos and Compean. You’ve exposed your inability to back up your claim.
My claim?
My view is they both needed to be removed from any law enforcement capacity. They broke the faith.
Yep, your claim. You know, the one where you claimed that the agents lied. That claim.
You seem to ignore your previous posts or change your story when backed into a cormer.
I live right down here by the border....do you? Just yesterday the news came out that 14 headless bodies were found in a nearby border town. I would want both Ramos and Compean back on duty to protect me (and my head!)
You see, they understand the dangers of the drug running illegals. They are not innocent, peaceful gardners. Rather, they are ruthless and have taken on terrorist tactics.
Pardon Ramos and Compean!
sw
No pardon. Commutation of the sentence.
Sorry, they demonstrated by their own actions they shouldn’t be LEO’s.
On the border, or anywhere else.
It’s obvious you can’t back up the accusations you continue to make against Ramos and Compean. Otherwise you would produce the evidence.
It appears that Badlie is having trouble producing a quote from Ramos and Compean to back up his repeated claim that they lied to the court. tsk tsk.
I wonder why it’s so hard for him to come up with the evidence? The usual claque of Ramos and Compean bashers have assured us the evidence against them is so clear.
You should read the entire thread.
I don’t believe these two idiots deserver a ‘pardon’.
I’m all for a commutation of the excessive sentence.
You mean where you repeatedly claimed they lied, hence should not be LEOs but could not come up with a single fact to back up your claim, instead alleging that anyone who questioned you was not informed? Class act there! (NOT) Only when I badgered you did admit "perhaps 'lied' was too strong." Here's an enlightenment for ya: YOU lied, by repeatedly making untrue claims.
I don’t believe these two idiots deserver a ‘pardon’. I’m all for a commutation of the excessive sentence.
What do you think the criteria should be to "deserve" a pardon? So far, it appears that you do not object to pardons for drug dealers.
Actually, five or six days ago I noted ‘lied’ was probably too strong a word.
Ya’ll are ate up with the goofies on this topic.
bottom line is both were convicted.
As I stated, I think the sentence was too harsh, and it should be commuted. But no pardon.
‘So far, it appears that you do not object to pardons for drug dealers. ‘
btw, this was childish last week, and its still childish this week.
Childish is the inability to carry on an adult-like conversation by answering direct questions,
as you have so ably demonstrated.
Badlie, you’ve been exposed making accusations you can’t back up.
The last time I sat on a jury the judge’s instructions included the rule that we could throw out the testimony of a witness who gets caught lying. So using that rule I couldn’t care less what you think Ramos and Compean “deserve”.
No, childish is making up something, in this case ‘you support pardons for drug dealers’ which YOU can’t back up with anything I’ve ever posted, in reaction to my disagreeing with YOU about these two idiots that applied deadly force inappropriately.
One more time, I support commutation of sentence for them.
But no pardon. They get a pardon, they could carry a firearm with all that implies as a LEO. They’ve demonstrated they lack the professional judgement for such a serious responsibility to be returned to them.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.