politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
Trump: Filling his cabinet with conflicted individuals and loyalists, many of whom have had legal troubles and been pardoned by him.
Biden: Pardons a family member who has never held government office for a drug-related offence.
And which story dominates the news cycle? The media is more than complicit in the resurgence of fascism in this country.
Maybe I'm being inflammatory, but I think this move might have saved his son's life. I wouldn't be surprised if the next administration was planning to make an example of Hunter to show off their newly radicalized DOJ
Agree, due to the politization of the case, its no longer about legality or justice. Its a safety issue now, I dont feel like this is an ethical pardon, but the country voted against ethics, so im not going to be mad at this.
If Harris had won then it would have been a very different matter, but the upcoming DOJ apointees will likely be 47s attack dogs and the biden family cant afford have any lingering cases for them to exploit.
Could have gotten epstiened I guess.
100%. Allowing Hunter Biden to be in the custody of Trump's doj would be a national security risk.
Must be because people are so unfair to that troubled youth who just needed help, Hunter Biden. Has nothing to do with Joe Biden promising to use presidential powers to pardon the indigent, disproportionately-black group of people who went to jail for possessing weed and instead using the powers specifically for his 54 year old millionaire son.
Wow, this reads with so much hatred that it took me a few times to recognize the sarcasm. It's not even nuanced, it's just so angry-sounding and seemingly hate-filled that my emotions were louder than the actual words.
Biden already pardoned everyone convicted of possessing weed. The only "non-violent" cannabis offenders in federal prison are dealers.
Just this year there have been 200,000 weed related arrests, and thousands more imprisoned because simple possession is still illegal in lots of the US.
Federal or state/local?
You could simply google it instead of asking and waiting for me to google it for you yknow.
No you made the claim now it is your burden to source and prove it. Generally and federally not much is happening with weed even on the arrest side as we wait to try to decriminalize it. You can't pardon state crimes.
This isn't a court of law and they weren't the person who I made the claim to. They can google it.
And how many of those are federal arrests not state arrests?
https://www.forbes.com/sites/ajherrington/2024/11/26/nonprofit-group-calls-on-biden-to-pardon-cannabis-prisoners/
LOL, like any of these papers give a fuck about pardoning weed prisoners. You're right that he should be pardoning more people, but the "debate" and "controversy" is entirely separate from that.
These papers care about him promising not to do it then doing it anyways - that's also part of the controversy.
A promise about an irrelevant thing is similarly irrelevant. This isn't pushing the bounds for presidential pardons or going to influence the future of politics or law enforcement at all. The media is deeply concerned about a trivial act that's both 100x less serious than the lies and pardons of his predecessor, those of past Democratic presidents, and his own prior deceptions and actions. It's centrist media clutching pearls for the precious "norms" and "optics" while everyone knows Trump has and will do worse in this very same department and that Biden himself has grave failures they're completely uninterested in. They want to pretend they're hard-nosed watchdogs of Both Sides without actually engaging in any truth-seeking that might upset people who will still hold power past January.
YUP.