Trump to pardon the Hammonds (catalysts for the Bundy stand off)

[HomerThompson]

I support allowing natural fires to occur and also, for that matter, floods.

but

Hunters saw the Hammonds illegally slaughter a herd of deer. Two hours later Hammond coincidently told his nephew to “light the whole countryside on fire” to control invasive plants which had the suspicious side affect of running the hunters out and hiding the poaching evidence. Later, the Hammonds illegally set back fires during a natural fire that almost trapped BLM firefighters. Hammond threatened to frame the BLM firefighter for arson for if he didn’t drop the investigation. The back fires were set to protect winter feed areas so clearly,the Hammonds were not fans of natural range fires.

These people are dangerous thugs.

 

[RockstarChris]

My mom told be we are distant relatives with the Bundy gang. Guess that explains a lot about my views.....

 

[HomerThompson]

What evidence were they destroying?

They illegally poached a herd of deer. It's already been posted in this thread. And is common knowledge.

Stop being willfully ignorant all the time. It's a disastrously bad look.

 

[44nutman]

They illegally poached a herd of deer. It's already been posted in this thread. And is common knowledge.

Stop being willfully ignorant all the time. It's a disastrously bad look.

The, they were just poor farmers just trying to get by, when the mean ole government came in and arrested them for just trying to feed their family, is the biggest bullshit narrative floated out there, but as usual the Rubes have eaten it up and are asking for a second bowl..

 

[HomerThompson]

The, they were just poor farmers just trying to get by, when the mean ole government came in and arrested them for just trying to feed their family, is the biggest bullshit narrative floated out there, but as usual the Rubes have eaten it up and are asking for a second bowl..

The Trumpbots are applauding lawlessness like it's freedom. It's disgusting.

 

[Jorge Luis Borges]

They illegally poached a herd of deer. It's already been posted in this thread. And is common knowledge.

Stop being willfully ignorant all the time. It's a disastrously bad look.

Relax Homer. I haven't read about this case in years. A lot of things I would have known about it in 2015 or 2016 I've plumb forgotten. I asked a question, because I was ignorant. It was answered, and now I'm not ignorant. That's not how willful ignorance works.

 

[HomerThompson]

Relax Homer. I haven't read about this case in years. A lot of things I would have known about it in 2015 or 2016 I've plumb forgotten. I asked a question, because I was ignorant. It was answered, and now I'm not ignorant. That's not how willful ignorance works.

So are you against the pardon now?

 

[Execute]

The Trumpbots are applauding lawlessness like it's freedom. It's disgusting.

I'm sure they'll come into the illegal immigration thread all like "they're doing it to support their families, and the current path to citizenship is too difficult."

 

[Jorge Luis Borges]

So are you against the pardon now?

I'm not sure. If you read my comments through this thread, you'll see I had two issues: the conviction and the resentencing. I am ignorant of how often resentencing occurs after the original sentence has already been served, but it certainly seems unjust to me.

I'm not against the conviction. But sending them back to jail after they served their terms seems extraordinary. If someone could show me that this is a normal and reasonable part of our justice system, I'd change my mind about the pardon.

 

[HomerThompson]

I'm not sure. If you read my comments through this thread, you'll see I had two issues: the conviction and the resentencing. I am ignorant of how often resentencing occurs after the original sentence has already been served, but it certainly seems unjust to me.

I'm not against the conviction. But sending them back to jail after they served their terms seems extraordinary. If someone could show me that this is a normal and reasonable part of our justice system, I'd change my mind about the pardon.

More willful ignorance. They never served their sentences in the first place. That's why the government appealed, and got them put back in.

The original judge illegally shortened their sentences as he was retiring. The mandatory minimum was 5 years, and they hadn't even served close to that.

So, now, I assume that you are against the pardon. Or are you still "unsure" somehow?

 

[Seano]

Meh, seems unnecessary to me.

 

[Jorge Luis Borges]

More willful ignorance. They never served their sentences in the first place. That's why the government appealed, and got them put back in.

The original judge illegally shortened their sentences as he was retiring. The mandatory minimum was 5 years, and they hadn't even served close to that.

So, now, I assume that you are against the pardon. Or are you still "unsure" somehow?

False. They did serve their sentences. They went to court, were sentenced, and served those sentences. Later, someone decided the judge screwed up and they were resentenced. Can you think of another example of such a thing? I can't, which is why I asked whether anyone knew if this is a normal part of our justice system.

So, yeah, until you can accurately address my point accurately or answer my questions, then I have no strong problem with the pardon. I think these guys were rightly convicted and then paid their dues for that conviction. Seems like a variant of double jeopardy to sentence a person twice for one crime.

 

[My Spot]

PotUS pardoning someone?

 

[HomerThompson]

False. They did serve their sentences. They went to court, were sentenced, and served those sentences. Later, someone decided the judge screwed up and they were resentenced. Can you think of another example of such a thing? I can't, which is why I asked whether anyone knew if this is a normal part of our justice system.

So, yeah, until you can accurately address my point accurately or answer my questions, then I have no strong problem with the pardon. I think these guys were rightly convicted and then paid their dues for that conviction. Seems like a variant of double jeopardy to sentence a person twice for one crime.

So willful ignorance, and outright dishonesty it is.

Good luck with that.

 

[Jorge Luis Borges]

So willful ignorance, and outright dishonesty it is.

Good luck with that.

This isn't a good response. I asked several pertinent questions without which I can't render judgment. You can't answer those questions because you are equally ignorant.

I feel much the same about this pardon as I do with Trump's pardon of Alice Johnson. She also seems to have been rightly convicted, but the legally mandated sentencing seems unjust. So I'm somewhat for it. In the Hammond case, the legally mandated sentencing was overruled by a judge. Undoing that a year or so later seems unjust or at least abnormal to me, so I somewhat support the pardon. Pardons in general are a bit problematic for me, because they so often involve clemency toward criminals, which is a tricky thing.

As far as dishonesty, I haven't told any lies here. Why stoop to this kind of tactic when someone disagrees with you?

 

[Hog-train]

I'm not sure. If you read my comments through this thread, you'll see I had two issues: the conviction and the resentencing. I am ignorant of how often resentencing occurs after the original sentence has already been served, but it certainly seems unjust to me.

I'm not against the conviction. But sending them back to jail after they served their terms seems extraordinary. If someone could show me that this is a normal and reasonable part of our justice system, I'd change my mind about the pardon.

They were sentenced to only a few months in jail by a sympathetic retiring judge. However, the crime they were convicted of has a MANDATORY minimum sentence of 5 years in jail. So an appeals court obviously won that appeal and they had to serve the rest of their sentence.

It's really not that hard to understand and is not double jeopardy.

 

[Limbo Pete]

They were sentenced to only a few months in jail by a sympathetic retiring judge. However, the crime they were convicted of has a MANDATORY minimum sentence of 5 years in jail. So an appeals court obviously won that appeal and they had to serve the rest of their sentence.

It's really not that hard to understand and is not double jeopardy.

 

[Prutfis]

Appealing to the "banjo playing, applesauce through a straw eating, sister married, farm animal fucking" part of his base.

 

[D3thr0n3d K1ng]

The best way to display patriotism is to take over a bird sanctuary and poop all over the ground.

 

[7437]

What evidence were they destroying?

Poaching