BS: Bush pardons Border Patrol agents

Subject: BS: Bush pardons Border Patrol agents
From: Wesley S
Date: 19 Jan 09 - 04:32 PM

As I recall this story has stirred up some interest before.

CNN Story

Subject: RE: BS: Bush pardons Border Patrol agents
From: Bill D
Date: 19 Jan 09 - 04:54 PM

Not sure why he had to wait till the last day...but it's about time.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush pardons Border Patrol agents
From: pdq
Date: 19 Jan 09 - 05:07 PM

This was very important to many true Conservatives. These border agents were lynched for doing their jobs and risking their lives. About time.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush pardons Border Patrol agents
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 19 Jan 09 - 05:13 PM

Why should the President have the power of pardon in his own dicretion? Is the concept of the rule of law no longer relevant in US jurisprudence? Or does the President have a modern variation of the divine right of kings?

Subject: RE: BS: Bush pardons Border Patrol agents
From: Ebbie
Date: 19 Jan 09 - 05:14 PM

Hmmmmm. If the news account is correct, I don't think that the border agents were simply "doing their jobs". At the least it appears they over-reacted.

That said, I agree that tensions of such a job may easily cause one to over-react.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush pardons Border Patrol agents
From: Uncle_DaveO
Date: 19 Jan 09 - 05:54 PM

Richard Bridge asked,

Why should the President have the power of pardon in his own dicretion? Is the concept of the rule of law no longer relevant in US jurisprudence? Or does the President have a modern variation of the divine right of kings?

The power to commute sentences (which is what is involved here, not pardon) which the Executive sees as excessive is very solid in US law. At the moment I can't tell you whether it's constitutionally based or legislatively based, but it's been around from the birth of the Republic. And I believe we got it from English law, and that the King/Queen has such power. And the same with the power to pardon.

I am confident that the governor of every state has such power with relation to his/her state, also.

It just may be helpful to remember that, in the US system, the President is not only the head of government (like the UK prime minister) but also the head of State, (like the Queen).

Now, as to "why", it's part of our culture. It has been part of our history for centuries, and is seen as being right.

Dave Oesterreich

Subject: RE: BS: Bush pardons Border Patrol agents
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 19 Jan 09 - 05:58 PM

Or does the President have a modern variation of the divine right of kings?    

Well, he is a monarch though a temporary and elected one, with the same kind of powers and status as kings had in the 18th century.
......................................

"...doing their job..." - these border agents must have an interesting job description if that is the case.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush pardons Border Patrol agents
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 19 Jan 09 - 06:18 PM

So, is it now legal to shoot a government witness to your crimes?

That is what the pardons imply.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush pardons Border Patrol agents
From: artbrooks
Date: 19 Jan 09 - 07:07 PM

Commuted to time already served - in other words, a reduction of the sentence - rather than pardoned. The issue of guilt or innocence was determined at their trial, and this decision by almost-former President Bush doesn't change that one bit.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush pardons Border Patrol agents
From: Riginslinger
Date: 19 Jan 09 - 09:01 PM

In any event, I don't think they'll have any trouble finding another job.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush pardons Border Patrol agents
From: Amos
Date: 19 Jan 09 - 09:09 PM

pdq;

It was no part of their job description to shoot an unarmed, fleeing criminal in the back.

Their job was to apprehend illegal immigrants; they failed to do that, having shot huim dead instead.

I have no ax to grind for the "victim" who put himself in that situation completely by trying to smuggle pot across the border.

But don't give me that "just doing their jobs" bull.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Bush pardons Border Patrol agents
From: Peace
Date: 19 Jan 09 - 09:12 PM

Can a president pardon himself? (Serious question.)

Subject: RE: BS: Bush pardons Border Patrol agents
From: pdq
Date: 19 Jan 09 - 10:40 PM

...from a man who actually knows what he's is talking about:

        
on October 21, 2006 at 2:27 am Luis Delgado

I went to school with Ignacio Ramos, who we all called Nacho. I have always known him to be a good guy, in a city that one can easily decide to go the other way. I am very saddened by this news and to see him and his family suffer. But it's the border, and the traffickers of people and drugs have all the power.

Sure we see the arrests of the so-called smugglers on television. But what we don't see enough of, is what we, that come from that area know, are the true criminals being held accountable. Those that hide their criminal activity behind titles, positions, and influence. So when their activity is threatened or exposed, the common man, mule, or in this case law abiding government employee, becomes the scapegoat. Someone sends a message.

So what's the message they are sending with this witch trial? To those that have and continue to dedicate their lives defending, supporting, and trusting in their government, it has to be that we must always follow procedure without fail. To those that dedicate their lives to crime, it must be that whenever you get caught, just make sure you either have the right connections and/or simply know that our government will grant you immunity from anything, if you can help them with their agenda. But most importantly, to those that live a more relaxed existence, not having to defend their lives, family, or country on a daily basis.

The message is that their is no real war on drugs. It's all made up. Because in a war, soldiers protect each other. The generals we praise in our history books, are legends. They were men that at times fought side by side with their men. They protected them with honor. They respected the sacrifice. So if there is a war on drugs, where is the general? Where is he during this fight? Since when does errors in procedure not only cost a soldier his career, reputation, and freedom, but also, have his own general grant the enemy immunity for helping to prosecute his own soldier?

This isn't a war, it's a business. A business that is so deeply stitched into our history, our culture, and our level of acceptance, that we can't even imagine how to change it. Who is the guilty party? It's so well organized and complicated that sometimes the guilty parties don't even know they are guilty. They simply accept the benefits of the business. Why shouldn't they, there is always a scapegoat.

What we do know are the victims. The users, dealers, transporters, government agents, the families of each, and even the traffickers. The ultimate pawns. One king sends it across and the other king counters with a badge. And at the end of each battle, the two shake hands and play again, leaving behind a trail of victims. And in this case, Nacho, Compean, and their families are the obvious victims. Regardless of failed procedure.

Stories involving border patrol agents being prosecuted and drug traffickers being the victim, usually include theft of drugs and money. So if these men are bad, and do not deserve to protect our border, then why did they not secure the van and keep the drugs? Why didn't they just ask for some money to look the other way? If they would have, they would still have their jobs, still have their reputations intact, still have insurance for their families, still be able to afford their mortgages, and still be home with the family for Christmas. So what's the real message being sent by the kings to the pawns?

Good luck Nacho and congrats. You just became immortal. Because we will not let this end without a fight. We will not forget your bravery. We will not forget your sacrifice. You have proven to be more man than most. I am honored to know you and hope to see and speak to you again soon. And to all of those brave men and women working our borders, you have a voice. Use it. Because, this battle must be won to protect you when you have to react to a potentially deadly situation. The confidence of support and trust in instinct must remain intact. After all, they didn't issue you a gun because the other side plays fair and uses a policies and procedures manual. They issued you a gun so that you can make it home. It may take 10 years, but Nacho and Compean will make it home again.

Respectfully,

Lui…..
Proud ex-classmate of a hero

Subject: RE: BS: Bush pardons Border Patrol agents
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 19 Jan 09 - 11:48 PM

What has this to do with his lawful conviction for a crime?
He remains a convicted criminal. He and his partner will never serve in law enforcement again.

Artbrooks, thanks for the correction. Some of us are sloppy in our language, or only hear the inaccurate reports on CNN.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush pardons Border Patrol agents
From: Riginslinger
Date: 20 Jan 09 - 06:46 AM

Blackwater will be happy to hire them!

Subject: RE: BS: Bush pardons Border Patrol agents
From: Riginslinger
Date: 20 Jan 09 - 06:49 AM

"Can a president pardon himself? (Serious question.)"


                   I don't think so. If he were actually accused of something, I think he would have to face the music. I don't see how he could pardon himself speculatively either, since there would be nothing to pardon himself for.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush pardons Border Patrol agents
From: Uncle_DaveO
Date: 20 Jan 09 - 08:42 AM

Pardons are occasionally granted preemptively, before any actual charge is made.

But I shouldn't think that a president would be able to pardon himself.   Don't ask for legal citations, because I don't have any, but that's my off-the-cuff feeling on the thing.

Dave Oesterreich

Subject: RE: BS: Bush pardons Border Patrol agents
From: artbrooks
Date: 20 Jan 09 - 09:15 AM

U.S. Constitution, Article II, Section 2: "The President {irrelevant material omitted} shall have power to grant reprieves and pardons for offenses against the United States, except in cases of impeachment." Anything that would limit his power to pardon himself, before or after an offense or a charge, would require a Constitutional amendment...unless, as I read it, the charge is brought under Congress's impeachment powers. A bill was brought before Congress back in the 1930s that would require a conviction before a pardon could be granted, but it died.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush pardons Border Patrol agents
From: kendall
Date: 20 Jan 09 - 09:50 AM

First, I am a retired federal law enforcement agent. One of the first things I learned in the Treasury School of law enforcement and criminal investigation was, NEVER shoot a fleeing felon. If you want to be a gun slinger, get into movies.

Second, In Maine we have a truth in sentencing law that requires you to do the time you were given when convicted. An acquaintance of mine was convicted of murder. His lawyer was a clod. After he served about 15 years, I asked the governor, another almost friend of mine about a pardon and he told me that he had no power to pardon the man because of truth in sentencing. When he developed Alzhiemers, the review board let him out anyway.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush pardons Border Patrol agents
From: Greg F.
Date: 20 Jan 09 - 10:13 AM

Kinda reminds me of that other Great American Patriot and Hero : Oliver North.

He was just doing his job, too- unfortunately, that job was an illegal one.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush pardons Border Patrol agents
From: Riginslinger
Date: 20 Jan 09 - 10:18 AM

It's a little different, Greg. The job the border agents were doing was legal. The illegal alien drug dealer just happen to stick his ass out in the path of a speeding bullet.

                Oliver North was illegal out of the gate, though he's being paid well for it now.

Subject: RE: Bush commutes sentences on Border Patrol
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 20 Jan 09 - 07:56 PM

Surely it would have been that the governor had no power to commute that sentence, kendall. As pointed out by someone earlier, a pardon involves a decision that someone is innocent, and that therefore any sentence handed down ceases to apply.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush pardons Border Patrol agents
From: John on the Sunset Coast
Date: 20 Jan 09 - 08:31 PM

"Their job was to apprehend illegal immigrants; they failed to do that, having shot huim(sic) dead instead."

Factually untrue. They shot him, a drug smuggler, while he was fleeing. He was wounded and captured. The agents were not found guilty of shooting him, but of covering up the facts of the shooting in their report. The drug runner was given immunity from prosecution for his alleged crime to testify against the agents.

The final irony: after testifying against Ramos and Campeon, the freakin' perp was later arrested doing it all over again.

Anyhow, Pres. Bush commuted the sentences to time served, about two years. He did not pardon them, which would have made the whole thing go away for them.

I think justice has been served in this case,

Subject: RE: BS: Bush pardons Border Patrol agents
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 20 Jan 09 - 08:46 PM

""The illegal alien drug dealer just happen to stick his ass out in the path of a speeding bullet.""


Oh, I see! It was his own fault, the border guard fired a warning shot, and he stepped in front of it. Stupid bugger.


I'm not TOO surprised THAT one didn't persuade the jury to acquit.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush pardons Border Patrol agents
From: Charley Noble
Date: 20 Jan 09 - 09:08 PM

pdq-

It must be nice to have such faith in the judgment of border guards, when confronted with a fleeing person. Shooting him down really must make your day.

Bush's pardon actually does make sense to me but your reasoning I find appalling.

Charley Noble

Subject: RE: BS: Bush pardons Border Patrol agents
From: pdq
Date: 20 Jan 09 - 09:22 PM

The real problem here is with you, Ignoble one: you don't know your ass from a hole in the ground about this subject and are obviousy not interested in changing that.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush pardons Border Patrol agents
From: robomatic
Date: 20 Jan 09 - 09:44 PM

I heard that Lisa Murkowski requested that Ted Stevens be put on the pardon list. I haven't found if Uncle Ted got pardoned.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush pardons Border Patrol agents
From: Riginslinger
Date: 20 Jan 09 - 09:47 PM

"Oh, I see! It was his own fault, the border guard fired a warning shot, and he stepped in front of it. Stupid bugger."


       No, no, no; he didn't step out in front of it, he stuck his ass out in front of it. There's a big difference.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush pardons Border Patrol agents
From: pdq
Date: 20 Jan 09 - 09:49 PM

No, Ted Stevens and "Scooter" Libby were both passed over by the great pardon-giver. Such a dangerous pair they are.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush pardons Border Patrol agents
From: Ebbie
Date: 20 Jan 09 - 11:48 PM

Being 'dangerous' is not the only rationale for prosecution.

In Ted Stevens' case he misused, he abused his public service position, his oath of office, evidently from a sense of entitlement. Libby is not 'dangerous' either- but you'd better not lie to the Feds.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush pardons Border Patrol agents
From: robomatic
Date: 21 Jan 09 - 05:51 AM

Yeah, just heard on the local news that Uncle Ted did not get a pardon. I believe he's still gonna fight it in court. Interestingly enough, among my many 'laskan friends and acquaintances the feelings about him are split about 50-50.

I'd feel better about him if he hadn't of gone and named the Anchorage International Airport after himself.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush pardons Border Patrol agents
From: GUEST,Janice now in Western NY State
Date: 21 Jan 09 - 10:48 AM

A friend of mine served nearly three years in Danbury Federal Prison for refusing to serve in the Vietnam War. He was pardoned by Jimmy Carter, and although he will never get those three years back, he feels vindicated in his resistance to an unjust war. Those Border Patrol agents were not pardoned. They still stand convicted of federal felonies and will forever suffer both the indignaties and disabilities that come with being a felon in this country. What they did get back were years of their lives.

Who got the better deal? I don't know, but personally I would have chosen the freedom of not being in jail. My draft resistor friend, however, felt differently. He could have left the country or could have avoided the draft by truthfully claiming that he was gay. Instead he chose to take a moral stand.

It's all so confusing and complicated, but despite all the baggage, I am glad the US President has the power to grant reprieves, commutations, and pardons.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush pardons Border Patrol agents
From: pdq
Date: 21 Jan 09 - 11:08 AM

"Border Patrol agents were not pardoned. They still stand convicted of federal felonies and will forever suffer both the indignaties and disabilities that come with being a felon in this country..."

Quite correct. They will not vote in the next federal election while millions of illegal aliens will.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush pardons Border Patrol agents
From: Wesley S
Date: 21 Jan 09 - 11:12 AM

"while millions of illegal aliens will".

Any proof of that or is it just wild speculation picked up from AM radio talk show hosts? The one I heard last night said there will never be another election ever. Yeah..... Right......

Subject: RE: BS: Bush pardons Border Patrol agents
From: Riginslinger
Date: 21 Jan 09 - 11:29 AM

We all know it happens, Wesley, but it's very difficult to prove. Just like the first Lorreta Sanchez election, they were able to prove some illegals voted, but they weren't able to prove enough illegals voted to overturn the outcome of the election. Most people who've looked at that election think there were more illegal votes, but still couldn't prove it.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush pardons Border Patrol agents
From: pdq
Date: 21 Jan 09 - 11:45 AM

If people want to learn something about the border problem with Mexico...

                         read here

If not, so be it.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush pardons Border Patrol agents
From: Wesley S
Date: 21 Jan 09 - 02:02 PM

PDQ - Did you notice this disclaimer on the site referenced? :

This site is maintained by supporters of the United States Border Patrol and is not an official government site. The contents of this site are privately managed and not subject to the direction of the United States Border Patrol.

Still waiting for proof that MILLIONS of illegals voted in the last election.......

Subject: RE: BS: Bush pardons Border Patrol agents
From: pdq
Date: 21 Jan 09 - 02:08 PM

two points:

Truth is what it is regardless of the source

you are unlikely to find facts by "waiting"; try "looking"

Subject: RE: BS: Bush pardons Border Patrol agents
From: Amos
Date: 21 Jan 09 - 02:21 PM

My apologies for the false statement.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Bush pardons Border Patrol agents
From: Riginslinger
Date: 21 Jan 09 - 02:24 PM

So now we are no longer looking for illegals voting, but we're looking of MILLIONS of illegals voting.

             It was the same way when we were trying to make the point that illegals were a significant component of the mortgage crisis. Everyone wanted to see the printed documentation. Now that it's finally out, they refuse to believe it.

                     Believe it!

Subject: RE: BS: Bush pardons Border Patrol agents
From: Uncle_DaveO
Date: 21 Jan 09 - 02:27 PM

PDQ said there were two points:

Truth is what it is regardless of the source

and

you are unlikely to find facts by "waiting"; try "looking"

And I say, "two points":

The source is one of the legitimate things that one looks to in order to decide what "the truth" is. Is the source in an actual position to truly know "the truth"? Does the source have a vested interest in the question? Does the source have a prejudged position? If the source is indeed in a position to know the facts, it should be easy for him/her to back up the assertion.

and

If someone asserts a fact (here, the "millions"), and wants it accepted, the burden of proof is on the asserter of that "fact". It is quite legitimate for Wesley (and the rest of us) to "wait" for that proof to be put forward by the asserter, or for the proof to emerge independently from elsewhere. But there is no burden on a person who doubts or is at least unconvinced of an asserted fact to do the fact-sponsor's investigation for him.

Dave Oesterreich

Subject: RE: BS: Bush pardons Border Patrol agents
From: pdq
Date: 21 Jan 09 - 02:44 PM

Uncle DaveO... sorry that I once confused you with a lawyer. You aren't one.

As to "burden of proof", an average citizen is assumed to be correct and telling the trutrh. In law, the "burden of proof" is on the people who wish to impeach the person making the statement.

{BTW, go read what in on that website...you may learn something}

Subject: RE: BS: Bush pardons Border Patrol agents
From: Wesley S
Date: 21 Jan 09 - 03:57 PM

So we're supposed to assume you are correct because you are an average citizen? I'm an average citizen and the moon is made of green cheese. This is the internet. When someone makes a statement like millions of unregisted alians voted in the last election you can expect to be asked to back that up with facts. If you had claimed that the sun will rise in the east tomorrow morning I would have cut you some slack.

And yes I'm still waiting for you to prove your claim. I don't think you can.Prove me wrong.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush pardons Border Patrol agents
From: Uncle_DaveO
Date: 21 Jan 09 - 04:05 PM

PDQ, the burden of proof is not only a legal concept, it is a basic concept of persuasion in logic and in rhetoric.   

Dave Oesterreich

Subject: RE: BS: Bush pardons Border Patrol agents
From: GUEST,Janice now in Western NY State
Date: 21 Jan 09 - 04:06 PM

Whether convicted felons can vote is up to each state. All states have some process for restoring the right to vote. In New York State it happens automatically once a convicted felon's entire sentence has expired and she or he is no longer on parole, probation, or conditional release. In New Jersey, a period of time must pass (I believe 5 years, but I'm not sure) after the expiration of the sentence, unless the person successfully applies for an earlier restoration of her or his right. In Florida, the right to vote is never automatically restored. One has to apply to the state and prove that she or he has shown remorse, made restitution, and has led a productive and law abiding life. Even then, more than two-thirds of the applications are denied.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush pardons Border Patrol agents
From: Riginslinger
Date: 21 Jan 09 - 05:55 PM

I don't think folks get too upset about felons voting as much as people who are not citizens and are not even legally in the country.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush pardons Border Patrol agents
From: artbrooks
Date: 21 Jan 09 - 06:08 PM

No illegal residents voted in the last election.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush pardons Border Patrol agents
From: Riginslinger
Date: 21 Jan 09 - 06:13 PM

That's laughable!

Subject: RE: BS: Bush pardons Border Patrol agents
From: pdq
Date: 21 Jan 09 - 06:18 PM

artbrooks,

I know you are a blind raging partisan Democrat, but I didn't realize you were completely blind.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush pardons Border Patrol agents
From: artbrooks
Date: 21 Jan 09 - 06:37 PM

Prove I'm wrong.