President Biden commutes 1,500 sentences, grants pardons for 39 others | Fox News
By: Elizabeth Pritchett (Fox News)
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
closeV
Biden commutes nearly 1,500 sentences, pardons 39
Fox News' Brooke Singman provides details on President Biden's record-setting act of clemency.
President Biden has commuted jail sentences for nearly 1,500 people and granted 39 pardons, marking the largest single-day act of clemency in modern history, the White House announced Thursday morning.
Sentences were commuted for inmates placed on home confinement during the COVID-19 pandemic and who "have successfully reintegrated into their families and communities," according to the announcement. The 39 individuals pardoned were convicted of non-violent crimes, the White House said.
"The President has issued more sentence commutations at this point in his presidency than any of his recent predecessors at the same point in their first terms," White House officials said in a statement.
Biden hinted that he plans to make more pardons and clemencies before he leaves office.
WHO ELSE MIGHT BIDEN PARDON AFTER HE SPARED HUNTER FROM SENTENCING?
President Biden commuted 1,500 jail sentences and pardoned 39 others on Thursday in the largest single-day act of clemency in modern American history, according to the White House.(Samuel Corum/Sipa/Bloomberg via Getty Images)
"I will take more steps in the weeks ahead. My Administration will continue reviewing clemency petitions to advance equal justice under the law, promote public safety, support rehabilitation and reentry, and provide meaningful second chances," Biden said.
Thursday's pardons come as the president faces bipartisan criticism for pardoning his son, Hunter, of felony gun and tax charges.
Biden vowed multiple times across several months that he would not intervene on his son's behalf, only to go back on his word on Dec. 1. While public figures have criticized the move, it was also widely unpopular with the American people. A Wednesday poll from The Associated Press found just 2 in 10 Americans approved of the pardon.
Hunter Biden flashes a big smile as he leaves an Arby's in Santa Barbara, California, on Dec. 4. This was the first time that the son of President Biden had been photographed since he received a pardon.(The Image Direct for Fox News Digital)
The first son had been convicted in two separate federal cases earlier this year. He pleaded guilty to federal tax charges in September, and was convicted of three felony gun charges in June after lying on a mandatory gun purchase form by saying he was not illegally using or addicted to drugs.
The president argued in a statement that Hunter was "singled out only because he is my son" and that there was an effort to "break Hunter" in order to "break me."
President Biden and son Hunter Biden step out of a bookstore in Nantucket, Massachusetts, on Nov. 29. The president issued a pardon for his son just days later on Dec. 1.(Mandel Ngan/AFP via Getty Images)
Reporters grilled White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre a day after the pardon, asking whether President Biden and his surrogates lied to the American people. Jean-Pierre responded, "One thing the president believes is to always be truthful with the American people," and repeatedly pointed to Biden's own statement on the matter.
The judge in Hunter's case rebuked Biden for the pardon and for accusing investigators, prosecutors and himself of political bias.
Trolling, taunting, spamming, and off-topic comments may be removed at the discretion of group mods. NT members that vote up their own comments, repeat comments, respond to themselves, or continue to disrupt the conversation risk having all their comments deleted. Please remember to quote the person(s) you are replying to preserve the continuity of this seed. Posting debunked lies will be subject to deletion
No Fascism References, Source Dissing.
Tags
Who is online
177 visitors
No one is above the law HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA........
Will it be ok if Trump pardons himself?
This article isn't about trump it is about the piece of shit who mindly bleats..."nobody is above the law" he is a lying piece of shit. now stay on topic, only warning.
Need a conviction to get a pardon.
Nope, Nixon received a pardon from Ford,
You do not need a conviction. Biden pardoned his son for stuff he had been convicted of and stuff he hasn't even been charged with. From the pardon document:
John Fetterman had an interesting take on that. He defended the Hunter Biden pardon on the grounds that the case was politically motivate, and suggested a pardon for Trump's convictions would also be appropriate on the same grounds.
His point was that the political weaponizing of the justice system needs to stop.
e defended the Hunter Biden pardon on the grounds that the case was politically motivate
That's quite the indictment of Joe Biden's DOJ.
And quite the vindication of claiming Biden is partisan.
That investigation began in 2018 when Biden was not president, so it wasn’t really his DOJ.
I would prefer to see it proven that that is actually the situation - with specificity - before we set about stopping it.
It was his DOJ that decided to indict him decided its scope. It was his DOJ that tried to give him a sweetheart deal. It was his DOJ that took him trial and convicted him. It's his DOJ that singles out people and targets them for prosecution for political reasons, per Joe Biden.
What would that proof look like?
I mean, I'm not sure it gets more kangaroo court than the Trump fraud situation in NY. If we don't think that's a weaponization of the justice system, what would it take?
Correct. You do not need a conviction to receive and accept a pardon. But accepting the pardon does not signify innocence. Some will look at the acceptance of a pardon as an admission of guilt but that is not fact and is disputed.
A link from the DOJ on pardons.
The fact is almost everyone working at DOJ is a career attorney, and the particulars of who is president don’t really shape how they do their jobs. Blaming so much at Justice on politics is silly.
Odd that biden did then.
We should proceed just as we would with any conspiracy case. We need evidence of people coordinating to engage in fraudulent or corrupt activities. You can’t just look at a prosecution you don’t like and declare that a conspiracy exists. You’d want any defendant to have the benefits and protections of due process, and prosecutors deserve no less.
So, that was a state case (prosecuted by the DA in Manhattan) that didn’t have anything to do with DOJ. Still, I’m confident that what I said about the attorneys at DOJ holds true for most local prosecutors in most states. That investigation, by the way, was started under a different DA than the one they have now, and the new guy was criticized for not pushing it sooner and harder. You can’t please everybody.
Also, there are so many due process filters, it’s not fair to call it a kangaroo court. Trump mounted a vigorous defense at every stage, and was ultimately found guilty by a jury of regular people - a jury that Trump’s own lawyers helped select.
Evidence. Emails, memos, texts, official orders. If you’re looking at cases, you want prosecutions that proceed without probable cause, or convictions without evidence. The Trump case provided none of that. Same with Hunter Biden.
But again - and I feel like this needs to be repeated and stressed - corruption at DOJ isn’t enough. They would have to coordinate with judges, appeals courts, and juries. That’s a lot. That many different kinds of people are very unlikely to be so coordinated so as to justify characterizing the whole process as “weaponized.”
No, it’s not odd. It’s stupid. It’s stupid when Democrats do it and it’s stupid when Republicans do it. I’m not partisan about this, though I recognize that many around here are.
Politicians and media pay an extraordinary amount of attention to these cases because of the political people involved, but without real evidence supporting it, it’s kind of bullshit to suggest that prosecutors are motivated for those reasons.
I'm talking specifically about the case Leticia James pursued. (which I don't think is subject to pardon anyway, but demonstrates the weaponizing point pretty well)
We had a woman who ran for office on the promise she would use the power of that office to attack a specific political opponent. She then proceed with that, "defending" some of the largest financial institutions in the world, all of whom are more expert in finance than she and all of whom testified they had not been defrauded. We then had a judge (also an elected official of the opposing party) issue a summary judgement based on a highly debatable appraisal of a unique and iconic property.
Everything about that stank to high heaven and just looked so corrupt I half expected Jimmy Hoffa to make an appearance.
Yes, because Biden shits on the Constitution regularly. So why should his pardon of Hunter be any different?
DAs always run on a promise to prioritize a specific crime issue. Sometimes, it's related to stopping certain crimes; sometimes it's a sentencing policy; and yeah, sometimes they promise to go after a specific wrongdoer or group of wrongdoers.
What she's not going to be able to do is prosecute crimes with no evidence or basis in law. So, your objection here is not that Trump was innocent, but that she promised to bust him for his illegal behavior. That's not a great hill to die on.
Summary Judgment is how an awful lot of these things end. Trump is free to appeal, of course.
How exactly does his pardon shit on the Constitution?
The only explicit limits on the Pardon power are that it's confined to "offences against the United States," i.e. federal crimes; and it can be used to pardon impeachment. There's nothing there about whether or not charges have been filed, whether or not there is a conviction, whether or not anyone has been sentenced, etc.
So where is the Constitutional violation?
I find that problematic when the person in question is targeted for their political affiliations.
My objection is that she specifically targeted a political opponent.
So you concede that he committed crime, but prosecutors should ignore it because of politics?
Was a Republican prosecutor going to investigate him?
How does Biden pardoning his son violate the US Constitution?
My understanding was that it was a civil case.
Considering the "victims" in question have expansive legal departments of their own and have said all along that there was no fraud, no, I don't suspect they would.
But I think you hint at a good litmus test... i.e. "would you think this action acceptable if the politics were reversed?"
Imagine Ken Paxton campaigning on the promise to "get Wendy Davis", then using the power of his office to investigate her for something nobody complained about. He then brings a fraud case against her for a discrepancy over the stated value of her house when she applied for a business loan, despite the bank stating publicly that no fraud occurred.
The case goes before a conservative judge who knows he's up for reelection in a year, so he declares her guilty without a jury.
As you say, she can then appeal. The staunchly conservative Texas Supreme Court unsurprisingly upholds their buddy's decision on the woman known as "Abortion Barbie".
The liberal outrage would be immeasurable.
And justified.
If we wouldn't accept political railroading in one direction, we should not accept it in the other.
Pardons and commutations are legal.
Specifically which ones are you opposed to and why? Specifically.......
This just in......
Biden Pardons Three Chinese Spies
I can’t wait for usual nut jobs here to try and defend this one. And Trump is the threat to democracy?
This a clear case of treason. Providing aid and comfort to an enemy.
Amazing!
It’s not “just in.” It’s a prisoner exchange between the US and China that was reported three weeks ago , and seeded by Perrie.
3 Americans Detained In China Are Released In Prisoner Swap, Official Says
No surprise Chinese spies get gifts from Biden,
And Russian spies get gifts from Trump? But I assume that's okay with you.
Which Russian spies did Trump pardon?
Paul Manafort admits he passed Trump campaign data to a suspected Russian asset
U.S. has new intel that Manafort friend Kilimnik gave Trump campaign data to Russia
Let’s Recall What Exactly Paul Manafort and Rudy Giuliani Were Doing in Ukraine
Before signing up with Donald Trump, former campaign manager Paul Manafort secretly worked for a Russian billionaire with a plan to “greatly benefit the Putin Government
So none then.
Do you not know what a spy is?
Manafort was convicted of tax fraud.
So now you are claiming that you can only be a spy after you are convicted of it?
Spying is, in fact, illegal. Unless you have information proving otherwise(and why did you keep it secret I wonder), Manafort was not a russian spy.
Despite the fact that he admitted that he provided sensitive information to Russian agents?
So again, you are claiming that you are not a spy unless convicted of it?
Presidents and Governors have the power to pardon and commute sentences. Every time they exercise this perfectly legal power, somebody bitches.
It would be nice if they did it out of a sense of justice every time. I do think that happens much of the time. Other times, these things are personal or political. That's when many of us have a more icky reaction.
Did you ever consider it might be the "Victims" !
Sure, but that's not what I'm talking about. I don't think "victims" includes anyone here, or anyone in media or politics, who are usually the loudest and most numerous voices doing the bitching. And in this case,
So there may not even be any victims of the people receiving pardons.
The people who had their sentences commuted were already
So - assuming this statement is true - it's not like they are dangerous people who got let out of prison.
If you rip someone off for 100K that's a non-violent crime, if you steal someone's identity the same, if you sell drugs the same. You have no idea how much pain or financial loss these people have caused.
Therefore, what? Is there a point? Do you oppose all pardons and commutations?
This started with you bring up "somebody bitches", all I did was point out they may have a good reason.
And I clarified that I was talking about commenters here, people in media and political voices. Again, "victims" are not the ones doing the bitching. But you keep going, anyway.
This isn’t a partisan issue. It’s just something the constitution got wrong. That much is clear by how much it has been abused.
I'm waiting for Jan. 19, 2025 for the paper work to be produced giving ALL Illegal aliens AMENESTY.