Trump Pardons Racist Felon, and, Nazis Run as Republicans … What's Up with that?
Trump tweets he will give full pardon to Dinesh D'Souza
By Kaitlan Collins, Maegan Vazquez and Laura Jarrett, CNN
Updated 11:03 AM ET, Thu May 31, 2018
The 57-year-old was sentenced to five years of probation, including eight months living under supervision in a halfway house and a $30,000 fine.
President Trump keeps pardoning his political friends
D'Souza is a contentious figure who once accused then-President Barack Obama of adopting "the cause of anti-colonialism" from his Kenyan father in a 2010 Forbes magazine cover story when Obama was in office. In the piece, he referred to Obama's father as a "philandering, inebriated African socialist, who raged against the world for denying him the realization of his anticolonial ambitions." He also once argued that Adolf Hitler was not "anti-gay."
A Justice Department spokesperson confirmed Thursday that Trump's pardon of D'Souza did not go through the department's Office of Pardon Attorney.
https://www.cnn.com/2018/05/31/politics/trump-dinesh-dsouza-pardon/index.html
Counter-Semitic candidate runs as Republican in California Senate race
William Cummings, USA TODAY Published 10:38 p.m. ET May 3, 2018
A Holocaust denier who praises Adolf Hitler and aims to "remove the Jews from power" is running as a Republican for a U.S. Senate seat out of California — and a recent poll found him in second place trailing only incumbent Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein.
Patrick Little got more support than any other Republican candidate in an April 27 SurveyUSA poll. Little polled at 18%, compared with Feinstein's 39%. The next highest-performing GOP candidate came in at 8%.
Neo-Nazi Arthur Jones wins Republican nomination for Illinois congressional seat
Neo-Nazi and Holocaust denier Arthur Jones won the Republican nomination for the 3rd Congressional District in Illinois.
Jones will seek to unseat Rep. Dan Lipinski, who won a narrow victory over Marie Newman in Tuesday's Democratic primary.
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/03/21/neo-nazi-wins-republican-nomination-for-illinois-congressional-seat-.html
Article is LOCKED by author/seeder
Who is online
105 visitors
STAY ON TOPIC … STAY AWAY FROM AD HOMINEM
His controversial views, some of which I agree with, are not the subject of the pardon. Something about a campaign donation violation, I believe it was. I distinctly remember a previous president pardoning a convicted felon or two.
I remember a convicted traitor, also.Maybe, just my imagination!
The similarities end with the pardoning …
THE RACISM AND ANTI-SEMITISM are the connecting elements of the article … noted that you failed to address that.
Mark Rich was international felon. And there is also a list of his other pardons.
https://www.justice.gov/pardon/clinton-pardons
Yeah...but....they have nothing to do with the pardon, and the guy has every freedom to believe and say what he wants. It's up the readers or listeners to make their personal judgements.
You do realize that D'Souza is an INDIAN-AMERICAN? Aren't minorities supposedly inherently non-racist? Oh, wait, I forgot, he is a CONSERVATIVE Indian-American; therefore, he is automatically racist regardless of his minority status...
Where do you get that idea?
link
I had to look up what he was convicted for.
I saw an episode of "Law and Order: SVU" last night that had Garza (the prosecuting attorney) asking what happened to this country ever since trumpy was elected. It's funny that I had said the same thing just this week.
Most of these fringe candidates are probably running in otherwise uncontested seats. No party can force someone to not be a member.
D'Souza as far as I know is not a bigot and those quotes don't prove anything. As far as Trumps other pardons go there are no signs of bigotry at all:
Some conservative publications criticized D'Souza's allegations. In "Obama, Anticolonial Hegemonist?", Daniel Larison of The American Conservative states, "Dinesh D'Souza has authored what may possibly be the most ridiculous piece of Obama analysis yet written... All in all, D'Souza's article reads like a bad conspiracy theory." [82] Larison criticizes D'Souza's suggestion that Obama is anti-business, citing a lack of evidence.
Andrew Ferguson of The Weekly Standard wrote, "D'Souza always sees absence of evidence as evidence of something or other ... There is, indeed, a name for the beliefs that motivate President Obama, but it's not anticolonialism; it's not even socialism. It's liberalism!" [83] The magazine published D'Souza's letter, in which he expressed surprise "at the petty, vindictive tone of Andrew Ferguson's review". [84]
Video: Unhinged Extremist, Bigot and Felon Dinesh D’Souza Addresses VA 6th CD GOP Dinner
They can publicly remove support for someone however. Also seems interesting that all these racists that are running, gravitate to the Republican side. It's almost like they can sense the lack of support and votes from the Democratic side.
Years ago I read one of Dinesh D'Souzas early books "Racism" , which I found interesting and even informative in some aspects. But that was before D'Souza went anti-Obama as a career path. Most of what he did in the past 10 years has been cartoonishly offensive , mainly his "documentaries" that are filled with false and misleading "information".
I would guess there are a million convicted criminals more worthy of a pardon than Dinesh D'Souza.
He was caught and plead guilty. Purely partisan political reasons for this.
I guess that is his loyalty pledge.
Yep, it always seems to be for partisan reasons.
Didn't agree with a lot of his either.
Trump has become cozy with Nazis and other anti-semites and racists, panders to such hatred …
… and that's the phenomenon about which this article addresses.
Does anyone who equivocates or avoids that elephant-in-the-room thus far, care to stand up and denounce that specifically … or do we look the other way?
Trump has become cozy with Nazis and other anti-semites and racists, panders to such hatred …and that's the phenomenon about which this article addresses.
I disagree with this assessment of Trump. I view it as a not fully formed or accurate opinion, and somewhat biased. Everyone is entitled to their own opinions even if the are wrong, as is the case here.
Does the phrase "some very fine people" ring a bell?
Of course you don't specifically explain on what basis you find the view being "not fully formed and somewhat bias;" that way you can evade stating how you feel about self-described Nazis running as Republicans.
Tell me exactly where I am wrong … dismissive pronouncements not only don't cut it, they make one appear to be either evasive, or, sympathetic to reprehensibles!
Where do you stand on Nazis in the Republican party?
I have to laugh at people who suggest that critics or opponents are "biased" against Trump. How do you become "biased" against an asshole? He says or does something insane virtually every day.
There are no Nazis supported by the Republican Party. This is a boogeyman which you fell for.
Less than two weeks after the 2016 election, a prominent alt-right leader addressed more than 200 people gathered at the Ronald Reagan Building in Washington, D.C. Millions of people would come to know what happened next.
“Hail Trump, hail our people, hail victory!” said the leader, Richard B. Spencer.
Attendees in the room replied with shouts, applause, and Nazi salutes. The speech closed the annual conference of the National Policy Institute, which describes itself as “dedicated to the heritage, identity, and future of people of European descent in the United States and around the world.”
The moment was captured on video by Daniel Lombroso, a journalist at The Atlantic. In the days after the speech, Lombroso’s footage of Spencer’s declaration—and the Nazi salutes that followed—would be viewed nearly 50 million times on Facebook and YouTube. It was also broadcast on dozens of television networks.
Yet for all its notoriety, YouTube recently curtailed the video’s spread on its platform and categorized it as borderline hate speech—a decision that illustrates the problems faced by the company as it tries to address the use of its platform to spread hate speech, conspiracy theories, and violent extremism.
So why do all the Nazis today vote for Trump?
Well I don't know. What Nazi's are endorsed and supported by the Republican Party?
All The White Supremacists Running For Office In 2018
Arthur Jones
Paul Nehlen
David Duke
Sean Donahue
John Abarr
Augustus Invictus
Tom Tancredo
Joe Arpaio
Steve King
Corey Stewart
Matt Gaetz
Dana Rohrabacher
Lou Barletta
Maybe because even they were not stupid enough to vote for Hillary.
I don't personally know of any, so I don't cast aspersions on people I don't know that may call themselves Nazi's. Same would go for people who call themselves Nationalists. Where do Democrats stand on violent leftists and commies in the Democrat party. Sure seem to be some that want to start a revolution because of a lost election.
At any rate, there is no factual evidence of these kind of people taking over or even influencing the Republican party except at a very minor and local level, or that Trump approves of it. The article seems to imply otherwise.
I disagree. Trump hasn't cozied up to those two candidates. But the people of California and Illinois did by electing them.
It's a moot point anyway. Neither has a hope in hell of getting elected.
And on the executive privilege pardons i agree. I've never liked what Presidents do with that at times but be careful. Obama set a modern day Presidential record with the number of commutations/pardons to felons he doled out. And some for crimes a lot worse than campaign donation violations. Crimes like sedition and unlawful disclosure of classified information.
All Presidents do it and not all of their pardons/commutations are as righteous as the next.
On this we agree.
I will agree with that as well. IMO it should only be used for things like wrongful imprisonment. Ie. people found to be innocent after the fact.
Most presidents follow the DOJ recommendations, but not Trump.
Trump has consistently cozied up to racists whether they were candidates or not. He also sends them zingers of support. Watch his constant rallies, he is always ringing those racist bells (nice people) while he goes after blacks and minorities (Colin Kapernick is worse for kneeling than the overt racist things he lets slide, like those REPUBLICAN Nazi's running for a party seat, or Roseannes multiple racist comments). Its no mystery why all republicans are at risk to be slimed by the racist label, and if one doesn't like it, better speak out specifically against it. Which nobody does, they go into defense mode, whataboutism, deflection, denial. Anything but face the truth about Trump's use of racism to his base. Very rarely do republicans deal with the real reasons they are labeled racists.
Can you publish the DOJ recommendations given to Trump?
Now why would it even matter since he doesn't read anything not having to do with him personally? Why even bring it up if he doesn't care and doesn't read them himself?
Anyone who didn't rely on Fox and Breitbart for their news would be aware of this but here's the latest:
I think we have more serious problems than D'Souza.
Yeah! Like Nazis infiltrating the Republican Party!
Your comment is dismissive. There many priorities we could post about … this post is about Nazis and assorted haters becoming the voice of the Republican Party.
You mean... in addition to the Russians?
It's not really happening, and I certainly do not waste my time even considering it.
Well of course, it is a non-issue.
And you need to do a bit more research before posting -
"Painting" too Much ?
Just like you do.
"Pray to MY God!"
"Vote for MY president!"
More deflection and a cartoon.
The level of discourse declines.
Did I hit a nerve?
And he's not MY president. You can't make me say it or believe it no matter how many times you say IT or tell me to shove something up my ass.
NOT. MY. PRESIDENT.
That seems to escape some. If you are a citizen, he is your president. Like it or not.
No he isn't and you can't make me accept it.
NEENER! NEENER! NEENER!
Yes he is.....it is the law.
Too bad, so sad.
THE HEAD OF THE PARTY IS THE POTUS, Donald Trump; until such time, if ever, he unequivocally states that "there is no place in the Republican party for Nazis," …
… he is giving tacit approval and pandering to the haters in his base!
Unlike yourself, I always back my position with specifics … that, rather than post ad hominem, innuendo deflections again-and-again.
Why not DEBATE instead of BERATE?
Trump is not responsible for every political race in the US. No more than any other President has been. You can't hold him to a higher standard because you don't like him. He has not endorsed any of these candidates and doesn't need to make a blanket statement.
As the HEAD OF HIS PARTY, it is Trump's ethical responsibility to denounce Nazis in the Republican Party! Failing to do so is tacit approval.
HIS PARTY DID NOT ENDORSE OR SUPPORT EITHER CANDIDATE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
YOU ARE ARGUING FOR SOMETHING THAT DOESN'T EVEN EXIST!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
READ THE LINKS I PROVIDED!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
That does not change that fact, that, as the head of his party, Trump must denounce any and all self-described haters who align themselves with, identify themselves as, and/or run as Republicans!
AND NOW … WHICH OF YOU WHO SUPPORT TRUMP AND THE REPUBLICAN PARTY …
… will be the first in this discussion to simply and unequivocally state, that "NAZIS, WHITE SUPREMACISTS, the ALT-RIGHT and any/all MANNER OF HATERS … are un-welcomed by you, in the your Republican Party?"
That's a DIRECT QUESTION.
Trump doesn't have to do anything of the sorts. And if he did he still wouldn't be believed by you. If you feel that strongly about it, I suggest you send an email to the Whitehouse.
"Some of those Nazis are very fine people."
The whole premise is faulty and not logically thought out. Vivid imagination seems to be in play here.
Hello! THAT is why republicans are called racists so often! They vote for racists, which reflects their values and beliefs. So why is everybody so shocked when people believe it?
It starts to decline when someone has to resort to fonts of many sizes and colors because their argument(s) are so weak and stupid.
Here's what David Duke himself said about the election of Donald Trump:
A former Ku Klux Klan leader – or 'grand wizard' – has suggested fascists had helped Donald Trump win the US presidential election.
David Duke, who once led the neo-Nazi, white-supermacist organisation, tweeted the claim on election night.
“This is one of the most exciting nights of my life,” Mr Duke wrote.
“Make no mistake about it, our people have played a huge role in electing Trump!”
So what. Trump and all Republicans and Conservatives have repeatedly denounced David Duke who is a despicable person.
since 1988 the Communist party stopped running candidates for President and instead has endorsed the Democrat nominee. I’ve yet to ever hear Democrats renounce that endorsement
So why was did Duke only win election when he ran as a Republican? And why is the GOP so blindingly white?
Did President Obama denounce every person that had communist/socialist leanings? As head of the Democratic Party, while he was Presdient, it would have been his responsibility along these lines of thought.
You might recall, during the election, even the elected Republicans, many of them, did not stand with President Trump. Where does it say that he 'must' do this or that? Or is that just an opinion?
Who are their people? How many of them? MOre of just this guy's wet dream that his organization tipped the scales to elect the President.
Just because someone says something that fits your argument, doesn't make it true.
Benghazi? Oh, wait, Mueller hasn't even gotten close to that benchmark.
If we have more pressing problems, why don't you expect that to be at the top of Trumps agenda or twitter feed?
I see you didn't mention Paul Nehlen
Nazis?
You mean like this guy?
.
Or this one?
Or Maybe this one?
Sean,
Tell me how you boys can condemn Obama's CHRISTIAN MINISTER … while simultaneously calling him "A MUSLIM."
And Farrakhan has recently become a Trump supporter … and I see that by innuendo, because Obama appears with a Muslim-American member of Congress, that you use it as a dog whistle to the Trumpians.
When have I called him a Muslim?
Is that how you defend Rev Wright's virulent antisemitism, by making straw man arguments? I guess facing up to the fact that you support a man who willingly honored and followed a racist anti- Semite must be causing you some cognitive dissonance. Or at least it should be, if you are not an anti-Semite and are honest with yourself.
So now he's a problem for you? His antisemitism was acceptable enough with Democrats when he supported Obama.
No, it's because he's anti-Semite who continues to follow Farrakhan.
Why are Democrats so comfortable electing and associating with such vicious anti-Semites, do you think? There's also Obama's adviser Al Sharpton, there's Trayon White in D.C. etc.etc..
That's actually very telling.
Why are Democrats so comfortable electing and associating with such vicious anti-Semites, do you think
It's an epidemic, perhaps by calling others Nazis, they hope no one notices their tendencies to anti-semitic conspiracies. About a month ago.
White, a Democrat , posted a video early on March 16 in which he accused “the Rothschilds” of controlling the climate to make money — an anti-Semitic conspiracy theory that has gained traction on the web. He later removed the video and issued an apology.
City Councilman David Greenfield is asking the Manhattan Democratic Party to boot a City Council candidate running on his opposition to "greedy Jewish landlords" off the party rolls.
Thomas Lopez-Pierre, who is challenging Councilman Mark Levine for a West Harlem seat, has drawn attention for a series of anti-Semitic comments and racial slurs.
Greenfield (D-Brooklyn) said election law allows Democratic officials to remove a member for "disloyalty" to the party, and the uptown candidate's rhetoric should qualify.
"There's no question that Lopez-Pierre's campaign is based on good, old-fashioned, virulent anti-Semitism, " he said. "It is incumbent on our party leadership to oust him immediately and to make clear to all New Yorkers that Lopez-Pierre's values are not Democratic values. Quite frankly, if Lopez-Pierre wants to run for City Council he should do so by petitioning his way onto the Ku Klux Klan party. His views are very much in line with David Duke's."
Democratic Candidate Who Criticized Israel Faces Charges of Anti-Semitism
Leslie Cockburn, the Democrat running for an open House seat in Virginia, faces G.O.P. charges of anti-Semitism
Democrat who blamed Jews threw ‘tantrum’ during caucus
Assembly Democrats who witnessed Richardson’s outburst at Speaker Carl Heastie over funding one of her pet projects said they were stunned and outraged, calling it the most abusive and rude behavior they ever encountered at a caucus meeting.
“She had a meltdown. She was really out of control,” said one Assembly veteran.
“Everyone in the room was appalled at her behavior. She basically accused the speaker and his staff of lying to her. It was a personal attack. I’ve never seen anything like that in conference.”
Another Assembly Democratic insider who witnessed Richardson’s rant called it “the most abusive behavior in memory.”
Sources said three Assembly members — Inez Dinkins of Harlem and Erik Dilan Jr. and Walter Mosley of Brooklyn — went over to Richardson to calm her down.
“She was nasty and disrespectful. It was kind of kooky. It was like a three-year-old having a tantrum. She certainly diminished herself in the eyes of her colleagues,” one witness said.
The new revelations come after The Post reported that Richardson was accused of making anti-Jewish comments at a community board meeting on Monday.
Then there is the Brits labor antisemitism problem. There are, of course, antisemites in all parties, but it does seem especially acute on the "left" side of the aisle
And the "missing" Rashid Khalidi, Obama, video. Who can forget that kerfuffle?
Obama, Ayers, and PLO supporters toast Edward Said's successor, but the press doesn't think it's quite as newsworthy as Sarah Palin's wardrobe.
L et’s try a thought experiment. Say John McCain attended a party at which known racists and terror mongers were in attendance. Say testimonials were given, including a glowing one by McCain for the benefit of the guest of honor … who happened to be a top apologist for terrorists. Say McCain not only gave a speech but stood by, in tacit approval and solidarity, while other racists and terror mongers gave speeches that reeked of hatred for an American ally and rationalizations of terror attacks.
Now let’s say the Los Angeles Times obtained a videotape of the party.
Question: Is there any chance — any chance – the Times would not release the tape and publish front-page story after story about the gory details, with the usual accompanying chorus of sanctimony from the oped commentariat?
Let's remember, Bernie Sanders campaign was based on socialism and nationalism. Never a healthy combo. Really shocking for a Jewish man.
How about the women's march? Does anyone remember that? I have sources (LOL)
And then he walked it back!
On Saturday, a Nazi sympathizer at a white supremacy rally in Charlottesville — whose mother identified as a Trump supporter — rammed his car into a crowd of anti-racism counter protesters, killing one and injuring more than a dozen. In the immediate aftermath, Trump refused to condemn white supremacy specifically, prompting angry calls from Republican lawmakers and voters.
By Monday, Trump had answered his party’s demands, condemned racist hate groups by name, and announced a Department of Justice investigation into the act of domestic terrorism. But it didn’t take long for him to walk back his stronger condemnation once again.
Here are five telling quotes that reveal what Trump really thought about the events in Charlottesville:
“Not all of those people were white supremacists by any stretch”
Trump made a concerted effort to normalize the participants of the white supremacy rally.
“Not all of those people were neo-Nazis, believe me,” he said. “Not all of those people were white supremacists by any stretch.”
Instead, he argued that at both the Friday night tiki torch rally on the University of Virginia’s campus and the white supremacy rally in downtown Charlottesville on Saturday, there were people there simply protesting taking down Confederate statues:
While the protests were nominally about the statues, at both events, crowds were chanting, “Sieg Heil,” and, “Blood and Soil” — strong neo-Nazi rallying cries.
“You are changing history and culture”
In justifying these rally-goers, Trump also attempted to make the case for the Robert E. Lee statue in Charlottesville — and Confederate statues around the nation.
“This week, it is Robert E. Lee and this week, Stonewall Jackson. Is it George Washington next? You have to ask yourself, where does it stop?” Trump said, as reporters asked him what he thought of Confederate memorializations.
Trump’s case was simple. “You are changing history and culture,” he said:
Hardly....it had to be pointed out to him THEN he decided to call out the Nazis
G et the whole picture, Sean; unlike Trump, Obama AS HEAD OF HIS PARTY, DENOUNCED A HATER!
Whoops!
Did he denounce Sharpton? Did he denounce Farrakhan's minion, Ellison?
comfortable is that? One such democrat is one too many … but Trump and his minions, as I have posted, are well ahead in the alt-right/white supremacist "welcome aboard" tally.
The difference is fringe racists claim to support Trump, while elected democratic politicians actively embrace and kiss the the ring of racists.
If your KKK conection is meaningfull in some way, then so are these two. If however, it is meaningless, so is yours.
A California Ku Klux Klan leader on Monday endorsed Hillary Clinton, saying he believes she would do the exact opposite of what she promises.
Not only is it a stupid position, but an expert on hate groups said the Klan leader cannot be trusted.
Will Quigg, grand dragon of a Klan chapter in California who last month participated in a KKK rally in Anaheim, California, that ended in violence , told The Telegraph he’s switching his support from Republican front-runner Donald Trump to Democrat Hillary Clinton.
“We want Hillary Clinton to win,” Quigg told the newspaper .
KENTUCKY - USA - Imperial Wizard, Ronald Edwards has stated that, "anything is better than Hillary Clinton." White Christian Supremacist group the Ku Klux Klan has endorsed Barack Obama to be the next President of the United States of America. Speaking from his Kentucky office in Dawson Springs, the Imperial Wizard exclaimed that anything or anyone is better than having that "crazy ass bitch" as President. This is the first time in Klan history that any member of the KKK has ever publicly supported an African American candidate for the presidency. KKK lodges all over America have been gathering and holding rallies supporting the black presidential candidate. KKK members in Tennessee rally against Hillary Clinton and support Barack Obama Grand Turk Cletus Monroe has also been very vocal about the election and has donated thousands of dollars to Obama's election fund
The Ballot Brawl of 1924.
Democratic convention
Just to make things more interesting, a lot of McAdoo's rooters were members of the Ku Klux Klan, which was then at the height of its power. The Klan hated Catholics and Smith was a Catholic. (Needless to say, there were exactly zero black delegates.)
It wasn't going to be easy uniting these factions, but the party bosses tried. They managed to finesse the Prohibition issue with a compromise that called for the enforcement of all laws but avoided mentioning the hated law against hooch. They tried to finesse the Klan issue in the same way, writing a platform that denounced violent secret societies but neglected to actually mention the Klan.
Well, as Reagan would say, the leftist started the violence.
Obama has denounced Farrakhan throughout his career
And …
"It’s also unclear if the photo proves that Obama’s relationship with Farrakhan was cozier than previously acknowledged. Farrakhan may have gravitated to the emerging political star to say hello, Muhammad was in the right place and time, a snapshot ensues."
As a one-time newspaper editor and photo-journalist, it's sometimes possible that people and things become part of a photo that was recorded in 1/60th of a second.
If Obama had never made a statement one way or the other regarding Farrakhan, the photo would possibly imply a camaraderie for sure; but …
Obama decried Farrakhan's racism
By Angie Drobnic Holan on Wednesday, January 23rd, 2008 at 12:00 a.m.
We checked out the award claim and found it to be Mostly True. A magazine closely related to the church gave Farrakhan an award for lifetime achievement. For more on this, see the statement here .
But Barack Obama definitely did not remain silent about it. The award received widespread attention after Washington Post columnist Richard Cohen wrote about it on Jan. 15, 2008.
Later that day, the campaign released a statement in which Obama himself said:
"I decry racism and anti-Semitism in every form and strongly condemn the anti-Semitic statements made by Minister Farrakhan. I assume that Trumpet Magazine made its own decision to honor Farrakhan based on his efforts to rehabilitate ex-offenders, but it is not a decision with which I agree."
Cohen said in his column that he had asked the campaign about the award and received a response from a spokesperson saying Obama did not agree with the award. The blog "Talking Points Memo" said it too asked Obama about Farrakhan and received the statement from Obama rejecting the award. After the statement was released, it was reported in other news outlets as well. For these reasons, we find the e-mail's claims about Obama's response to the award to be False.
UPDATE: Barack Obama resigned from Trinity United Church of Christ on May 31, 2008, after church pastor Jeremiah A. Wright Jr. made controversial remarks about U.S. foreign policy and other matters. Obama said he intends to join another church after the election.
Of course … ALL SITUATIONS ARE THE SAME, right?
The particulars should be totally ignored because … why compare facts when one can just paint with the broad brush?
I never prepared ahead of time when representing individuals in grievance and arbitration proceedings … I just cited cases that appeared similar in any way imaginable … and rested my case.
And that's SARCASM.
Old and stale news. Got anything new, true, and exciting?
Tell it to the person who broached the subject.
Discuss the subject/comment at hand rather than go to ad hominem … and become third-man-in.
Got anything at all related to the topic?
I wonder if our Glorious Leader is pardoning D'Souza because he's a fellow adulterer, a fellow crook, or because he likes D'Souza's nutty conspiracy theories?
He pardoned him because Trump is a racist.
I definitely agree that the King of the Birthers is a racist.
Based on what evidence. Be specific now!
All three?
WE ARE GETTING AWAY FROM THE TOPIC …
Trump Pardons Racist Felon, And, Nazis Run As Republicans … What's Up With That?
Stay on it.
NOTES:
1. I asked that we stay on topic … and, although I try to give the courtesy of a response to most comments … even those off-topic … I STILL WANT COMMENTS TO ADDRESS THE TOPIC … IF IN DOUBT, read the HEADLINE.
2. I will be on the road tomorrow and may LOCK THE DISCUSSION LATER TONIGHT, so, anyone who wishes to comment STILL HAS HOURS TO DO SO.
I thought someone might have, by now, broken the code on TRUMP'S PARDONS …
Scooter Libby … Washington (CNN) President Donald Trump granted a pardon on Friday to Scooter Libby , the chief of staff to then-Vice President Dick Cheney who was convicted of perjury in 2007.
Dinesh D'Souza … Washington (CNN) President Donald Trump announced unexpectedly Thursday that he is granting a full pardon to Dinesh D'Souza , the conservative author and filmmaker who pleaded guilty to violating federal campaign finance laws in 2014 after he was indicted earlier that year on charges that he illegally used straw donors to contribute to Republican Senate candidate Wendy Long in New York in 2012.
Full List … as you read the list, note the CRIMES pardoned by Trump … AND THINK ABOUT WHICH ONES MIGHT ARISE FOR TRUMP HIMSELF, MICHAEL COHEN, et al Trump-connected people.
DANGLING PARDONS CAN LEAD TO CHARGES OF "Witness Tampering" which is a form of Obstruction of Justice.
Leave the quips, deflections and ad hominem comments out of the discussion; there is plenty here to address specifically.
If the seeder is away, the forum denizens will play dodge ball and tiddlywinks.
If the discussion is locked, the denizens will have to play elsewhere … I will have given almost 4 hours notice so that there's more than enough time to comment … ON THE TOPIC.
I find these threads very depressing.
The actions of this President are so hurtful to the country as a whole. But honestly what I find more hurtful is the blind devotion from his supporters. They are too full of hate and anger to care what is happening to the country or to see the truth.
They're definitely blind to Trump's cronyism.
I do wonder though about his strategy with these pardons. Is he just pandering to his deplorable base or is he trying to send a message to people like Cohen that if they don't talk to the feds about him then he'll pardon them? If it's the latter that's a very risky thing to do since using the pardon (or promise of a pardon) to shield oneself would be an impeachable offense.
I honestly think it's a combination of the reasons you mentioned but I would add vendictiveness. He knows what he's doing is wrong. That's why he does it. He likes hurting people. He also knows he's sending a signal.
Good article here about why Trump's refusal to follow long-established conventions on pardons is so problematic:
I kept the discussion open overnight instead of locking it last midnight as originally planned; l will lock it at 9:00 AM EDST this morning.
Thanks to all who participated.
It's 9:06 A.M........just sayin'.
Yup, missed it by 12 minutes … so now … it's more than time.
Bye all.