With parental advisories, of course.
Posted on 09/17/2026 8:07:28 AM PDT by simpson96
When TMZ DC asked Rep. Nancy Mace (R-S.C.) about Lindsay Clancy's murder case this week, she was blunt. In fact, I think she said exactly what a lot of people have been thinking but are generally too polite to say out loud.(snip)
When TMZ DC’s Jacob Wasserman mentioned Reddington’s pardon request to Mace, she vented her uninhibited opinion. "Which is how retarded it is," she said. "He knows, as an attorney in the state of Massachusetts, you can't ask for a federal pardon for a state case. I mean, it doesn't take a lawyer — I’m not even a lawyer, I didn't go to law school — it doesn't take a lawyer to figure that out. It was just a publicity stunt. I think it's nasty; it's ugly."
Mace had more to say on the subject. "Her children are dead. She should be dead, too," she averred. "She should get the death penalty. It should be public. It should be a public execution."
I don't think Wasserman could wrap his head around what she was saying, and he pushed to spell out exactly what she meant: "So when you say public execution, spell that out for me."
If he expected her to walk it back, he was very wrong.
Mace laid it out. "It could be by a firearm, it could be electric chair — I don't really care. Not an injection," she said, adding that it should stand as "a warning to women everywhere. You don't kill your kids." When Wasserman suggested that might be "a little out of bounds," Mace rejected his premise outright and doubled down. "Absolutely not," she said. "Child rapists, too — add them to the list of public executions. If people can get away with murdering children, what else can they do?"
(Excerpt) Read more at pjmedia.com ...
Thank you for sharing.
In many States, slaughtering your children isn't "murder"; slaughtering your children is legal. It's a right, protected by black letter law passed by the legislature or by referendum.
Bloodthirst isn’t justice, either.
Thank you.
“but a public execution is too barbaric for us.”
In America, public executions, usually hangings, LITERALLY were “a day at the park”.
AI: “Why People Attended:
ENTERTAINMENT: Towns on the frontier had very few forms of amusement, so a high-profile execution functioned as a major social gathering.
FESTIVAL ATMOSPHERE: Crowds sometimes brought blankets, picnic baskets, AND CHILDREN, while local vendors sold food, souvenirs, or photographs.”
With parental advisories, of course.
Gallows. When the knees buckle while going up the steps, that is when you know the brain engaged the heart.
People who kill their kids have volunteered to give up all future claim on oxygen.
It would be a shame to refuse their gift.
Yes. A public execution would be the ultimate cautionary tale.
Where do you get the notion that oxygen on Earth is ‘limited’?
You must have gotten your science degree in Underwater Basket Weaving...
That’s not my question.
To whom WAS is addressed? Neither thee person who displays nor anyone seeing it can do a damned thing about it.
If she is not severely punished, our entire criminal justice system will revolve around feeeeelings and subjective states of mind instead of facts and objective reality. Those children will have died for nothing, if not to correct this terrible injustice of political activism in the jury room. Seeking justice for the dead children and bereaved father and grandparents is not bloodthirst.
Are you a teenager? Because there is no excuse for an adult not understanding why it is posted.
Did you watch all of the testimony of the 80+ witnesses?
Doing what’s moral is always right. And doing right ain’t got no end.
Prove me wrong
“On Friday, Dr. Avram Mack, a forensic psychiatrist, testified that he found no evidence of mania or hypomania to support a bipolar diagnosis — or of psychosis — leading up to the killings. He said Clancy was experiencing severe mental illness when she killed her children but that it was a continuation of the depression she had experienced for months in which she was able to control impulses and distinguish right from wrong.”
“In the months before killing her children, Clancy had sought treatment for mental health problems from multiple providers and admitted herself to a psychiatric hospital.”
In mid-December, Jollotta had a call with the couple and was told Clancy had her “worst day” and was “having persistent, intrusive thoughts of suicide.” Jollotta suggested she consider a higher level of care such as that offered by Massachusetts General Hospital. She settled on the Women and Infants Hospital postpartum program in Rhode Island but was soon discharged — with advice to stop taking one of her antipsychotic medication.
The article right above this is a good one to show she had been treated in patient and out at a few mental hospitals and was continually taking a number of drugs to control her mental state and actions. In some cases the perscribing indivual was askinbg her to cut back because she was taking so many.
You folks can say what you want, but the evidence is there for reasonable doubt.
wy69
“Clancy had her ‘worst day’ and was ‘having persistent, intrusive thoughts of suicide.’ Jollotta suggested she consider a higher level of care”
Jollotta should’ve suggested that she consider jumping from a window at least THREE STORIES high, and leave her kids alone.
“You folks can say what you want, but the evidence is there for reasonable doubt.”
There are still three murdered children, via a well-thought-out and carefully executed plan.
True crime never did much for me.
I appreciate how horrible humans can be without following barbarous crimes. Saying “I’m in favor for justice for dead victims” does nothing to revive those poor souls or to bring the perpetrators to justice.
The only time lawmakers need to speak out on crimes is when they are making laws.
The thing that is not in doubt is that three individual human beings are dead by her hand. She had a responsibility as a parent and a healthcare professional to put the brakes on her own problems before the children got hurt by her. There are so many other things she could have done; there were four grandparents who would have helped with the kids so she could take a leave and rest; there were priests available for personal support and counsel; and doubtless they could have put her in touch with nuns such as the Medical Mission Sisters to help her and the kids; but she was deep into her determination to hurt her husband.
That is my conclusion. She felt unworthy because of her exhaustion, her pride, her depression or her lack of confidence in the God who made her; she extrapolated that to a morbid fear of the possibility that her husband could tire of her crap, divorce her (whether he actually wanted to or not), remarry, and have HER kids raised by another woman—and she wasn’t having that.
That’s why, supposedly suicidal, she took out the kids instead of herself, and did a crap job on killing herself, which she had known very well from hospital exposure how to do, being a nurse. She knew which veins to cut, which direction to cut and where her carotid artery and femoral arteries are. But did she just take herself out and spare her children? No. Because she wanted to destroy them so he couldn’t have them without her. Many spouses do this horrible act, both males and females.
She is criminally insane at best. At worst, she is a psychopathic manipulator—apparently her attorney’s volley of psychobabble has you fooled. She has no place in society ever again. The fact that she has admitted her deed but has the gall to ask to be declared not guilty is proof enough that she is either one or the other of the above two choices. But she most certainly is not innocent. She is a drug abuser and a liar.
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.