Biden commutes all but 3 federal death sentences

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Is this the thread where “conservative Christians” pretend to be Pro Life?

You need to get used to the GOP taking a much more aggressive posture than in the past. Everytime I read one of these "well that's not very nice!" comments from libs, I get a little thrill. You're not nice, and now we aren't nice, and that's how it's going to be for 4 years.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Can Trump un-commute them, or is that not allowed?

No.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is this the thread where “conservative Christians” pretend to be Pro Life?

Is this the comment where the poster equilibrates the life of an unborn child and a ruthless, convicted terrorist?

"All lives matter"

Which is why I support the death penalty. Someone who murders should have the ultimate penalty.

Sure, as long as you can ensure 100% of the time that the decision was made accurately and without a trace of bias.

PP and I agree. And I wouldn’t have had an issue with Biden’s use of a pardon if he had had particular concerns with one of the cases. But I have a major problem with him commuting cases categorically because he is a catholic who doesn’t believe in the death penalty. He said he would uphold the laws and he isn’t.

Which laws are he not upholding. The law actually allows him to commute death sentences, so he is not violating any laws. He is actually following the laws granted to him by congress.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I love that he didn’t commute the sentences of Dylan Roof or Robert Bowers - two murders widely celebrated by a portion of Trump’s nationalist rightwing base.

I’ll wager 10 bucks that Trump doesn’t have the fortitude to execute those two.

This move all but guarantees that Trump will make a big celebratory show of executing Tsarnaeov. Maybe even live stream it on Truth Social. It will be grotesque.

Pay per view?

Make them compete for commutation in a reality show. We can call it running man.

Make death more profitable and watch executions rise.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is this the thread where “conservative Christians” pretend to be Pro Life?

Is this the comment where the poster equilibrates the life of an unborn child and a ruthless, convicted terrorist?

"All lives matter"

Which is why I support the death penalty. Someone who murders should have the ultimate penalty.

Sure, as long as you can ensure 100% of the time that the decision was made accurately and without a trace of bias.

PP and I agree. And I wouldn’t have had an issue with Biden’s use of a pardon if he had had particular concerns with one of the cases. But I have a major problem with him commuting cases categorically because he is a catholic who doesn’t believe in the death penalty. He said he would uphold the laws and he isn’t.

Commuting sentences is not not upholding the law, and the power of the executive to do so was enshrined in the Constitution for a reason--to extend mercy at the executive's decision.

It literally is not upholding the law. The law is that the funding of the court should stand. Pardons are not for presidents who don’t agree with the law. It’s for extending mercy in cases like a reformed convict, or for example concerns about jury bias or lawyer malfeasance - not commuting an entire category of cases.

That ship sailed in 1972, with the pardoning of Richard Nixon from Gerald Ford.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am a conservative who WAS against the death penalty until I represented the families of murder victims. I still get uncomfortable with States taking lives. With that, Biden should have a day where all these victim families get to line up and tell them about their suffering. He will forget it the next day, but will be catharsis for the victims.

I worked with crimes victims for years. Doing so doesn’t make the death penalty any less wrong. Biden meets people all the time who suffered and faced trauma. Sounds like you just want to push him for correcting a bad policy.

I worked with criminals and the death penalty has a deterrent effect if it is consistently and reliably enforced.
So, we should short circuit the appeals process, especially for 3 time violent offenders guilty of capital crimes and televise the execution on pay per view.
Use the proceeds to prosecute more capital crimes and eventually the message will get through or we will remove their impact on the gene pool produce fewer of them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is this the thread where “conservative Christians” pretend to be Pro Life?

Is this the comment where the poster equilibrates the life of an unborn child and a ruthless, convicted terrorist?

Kill em all, let god sort em out.

We have due process but a three time violent offender should have a very abbreviated appeals process.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Biden probably just saved about $1 billion in legal expenses for the federal government.

When will DOGE send a congratulatory tweet?

He could have just executed them and saved the money - now we have to pay for their care and medical treatment for life.

So no.

Life sentences are cheaper than death penalty cases which cost a ton of money for prosecutors and federal public defenders.
https://www.amnestyusa.org/issues/death-penalty/death-penalty-facts/death-penalty-cost/#:~:text=Recent%20Cost%20Studies&text=In%20Tennessee%2C%20death%20penalty%20trials,which%20prosecutors%20seek%20life%20imprisonment.&text=In%20Maryland%20death%20penalty%20cases,million%20for%20a%20single%20case.

But those costs are self inflicted. Texas seems to be rather efficient in executions.

Texas doesn't give a flying heap of manure if you're innocent or not. But yes, the state of Texas is very efficient in committing state sanction murder.
https://www.houstonchronicle.com/politics/texas/article/texas-executions-melissa-lucio-innocent-17120233.php

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I agree with the move. I feel like life in prison without parole is a better deterrent than the death penalty. And from a practical standpoint it costs the government more to sentence somebody to death (due to legal fees for the appeals process) than it does to house them in prison indefinitely.

Then get rid of the lengthy appeals process for the worst offenders

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is this the thread where “conservative Christians” pretend to be Pro Life?

Is this the comment where the poster equilibrates the life of an unborn child and a ruthless, convicted terrorist?

Until you can show a government that is perfect, maybe it shouldn’t be involved in taking lives? Sounds like Big Government to me.

We wage war and kill millions of innocent civilians. Killing a few actual murderers should be a breeze.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And yet the Biden Administration is pursuing the death penalty against the kid who shot the health insurance CEO.

It's interesting how establishment Democrats think mass murder is forgivable. But touch an oligarch, and it's still the death penalty. Out of all the crimes, a crime against the rich is evidently the very worst. The Biden Administration will put you to death for it.

Nothing in your post is reality-based. The AG stands alone in deciding to pursue the death penalty….at least with the current Administration. I’m sure Trump will directly tell his AG Bondi when to pursue death.

And, frankly, I don’t think a terror charge is going to stick once Luigi gets to court. Laughably flimsy federal case

Luigi will be found not guilty by reason of insanity, if it even goes to trial.

The terrorism is a stupid charge but assassination almost never qualifies for insanity.
There may be jury nullification but only if there is someone who has dealt with health insurance companies on the jury.

We may have to go to canada to find a jury.

[Anonymous]

Again , I have no prob with ridding death sentence IF as a concept it is applicable as a law for all criminals. What I find infuriating, unforgivable, hypercritical and downright ridiculous is that Biden played God to decide who gets mercy and who doesn't. That is unethical, unlawful per current statutes and totally shameful.

This is what's wrong with the entire administration and why they lost the a presidency, Senate and House. They are totally illogical, ridiculous and just dumb assets in general.

[Anonymous]

Asses^

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Trump probably wants to pull the switch himself for the remaining three, on pay-per-view.

I wonder how much it would cost and how they could add value to the event. Maybe get taylor swift to perform?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Disgusting but typical of Biden. He agreed to enforce the laws when he made his oath. It’s one thing to issue a pardon out of mercy and another because you don’t agree with the law.

Aren’t Republicans the party of life?

They are also the party of accountability.

And let's face it, their pro0life position is based at least in part on an accountability argument.