08-08-2021, 12:25 PM
(08-08-2021, 03:20 AM)Dill Wrote: Er, one doesn't "refute" statements like this:
Hahaha, I wonder if you knew what an ass you look like with this smarmy routine.
They are not really "points" and certainly not arguments.
Indeed, and yet the vast majority of the content of my posts, which you have still not addressed, are nothing like that.
Quote:And let's NOT "flip the script" if that means treating a case in which no one served jail time and or showed repentance for the crime
to which he/she pled guilty as one which rises to the level of pardon application.
I'm not treating the circumstances as equal, and never have. You're arguing against a point I never made.
Quote:I've already explained why I don't agree with burning a pardon on a misdemeanor case, which didn't require a pardon,
while ignoring so many more deserving cases which do require one. (And the pardon is "burned" because the time and effort spent on it could have been spent on serious cases involving decades of lost freedom for innocents.)
There was minimal "time and effort" expended as the governor had previously stated he would pardon them if convicted. So, another Dill point shot down.
Quote:If you think a pardon should be spent on a misdemeanor case already amenable to other legal resolution, instead of the many more serious applications already on the governor's desk, then you should explain why.
And here's where you enter peak inanity. I have done so, explicitly, numerous times in this thread. This is becoming extremely boring.
Quote:Whether the prosecutors of misdemeanor violations should have been prosecuted is not pertinent to the question of whether the
misdemeanor violations of unrepentant perps should rise to the level of pardon.
It absolutely does and why is easily explainable. DA's tend to overcharge so they can pull back the serious charges in a plea bargain. It makes it look like they're giving you a break when, in fact, they're only giving back what shouldn't have been charged in the first place. This is done to facilitate plea bargaining and free up time on the court docket. When the DA fabricates evidence to facilitate this you've irrevocably tainted the entire case. Yes, the McClosky's could have appealed, but that takes time and money, both of which they should not have to spend. As to why the governor knows about the case, well, that's easy. It was made a national news story and the corrupt DA used the case to raise funds for her re-election campaign, another huge corrupt no no. You want to argue why other cases are more deserving of a pardon, fine. But you've yet to even attempt to explain why a pardon was unwarranted in the McClosky case. All you've done is use it to paint me as a 2A zealot (which is laughable as Bel is actually more extreme on that subject than I am, yet you never say anything to him. I wonder why?). You've made zero attempt to refute any point made as to why the pardon was warranted.
Quote:So far it does not look like you are interested in the implications of the McCloskey case for the institution of the pardon; you just
want to go over the prosecutorial misconduct in a case involving 2A issues.
A gross fabrication on your part. You've literally become what you purport to despise. I guess you stared too long into the abyss.
