[When I read the title I was not sure whether to agree or disagree, but the rationale and arguments in the text are very valid imo.]
People need to stop asking Democrats to play by different rules than Republicans, and they need to stop asking Biden to be a worse father than any of us would be in his place.
[…]
Biden’s detractors argue that his use of the pardon for Hunter somehow cedes the mythical “high ground” to Trump and clears the way for him to pardon the January 6 terrorists.
Fundamentally, these pundits are committing the same mistake that has plagued American media for at least a decade: demanding that Democrats play by a set of rules that Republicans have long rejected. And I am tired of it.
[…]
Trump will have all the power soon, and we don’t have to guess how he’ll use the pardon power, because he’s already used it for his own, corrupt ends. You know what’s “worse” and more corrupt than pardoning your family members? Pardoning your criminal coconspirators. That’s what Trump did […] the list of Trump’s pardons from his first term […]includes his former national security adviser Michael Flynn, who lied for Trump to the FBI; former foreign policy adviser George Papadopoulos, who lied for Trump to the Robert Mueller investigation; lawyer Alex Van Der Zwaan, who lied to Mueller; dirty trickster Roger Stone, who literally tampered with witnesses; and Trump’s former campaign manager Paul Manafort, who was engaged in an international conspiracy to obstruct justice and commit tax fraud.
[The article goes on with some more ‘Trump pardons’.]
The problem I’m supposed to care about is that Democrats have abandoned some ephemeral high ground that would have allowed them to object to Trump’s pardons of terrorists. Who are these people who think that bitching from a slightly elevated position is more effective at restraining raw political and military power? Do they also think there are magical bears out there who shit rainbows and that we can overcome authoritarian regimes with the power of friendship?
If institutionalists would really like to have an institutional solution to the problem, I have one: The pardon power is anachronistic bullshit and should be stricken from the Constitution.
[…]
Presidents (and governors) should not have the power to overturn convictions based on their feelings. If the justice system gets it wrong (as it does all the time), there should be a process freely and equally available to all to reverse convictions, without needing to have special access to the thought bubbles of the most powerful political figure in the land.
[…]
People need to stop asking Democrats to play by different rules than Republicans, and they for sure need to stop asking Biden to be a worse father than any of us would be in his situation.
This is a good pardon. Trump’s pardons were bad and will be again. If you can’t spot the difference between pardoning your son who was persecuted because of your job versus pardoning your criminal coconspirators or pardoning terrorists who attacked the Capitol at your request, you should take your head out of your ass.
That’s fair. Not a lot of people read Playboy for the articles.
I was more referring to this sort of coverage moving over to The Nation. When it hits The Economist, things will be set right, but even they will have to reconsider neoliberalism. What struck me is that I have written this sort of piece before … I want to have a beer with this guy, as he speaks with my voice. Throat-clearing and all. The cadence is uncanny.
I want to have a beer with this guy, as he speaks with my voice. Throat-clearing and all. The cadence is uncanny.
How do you think people like George Bush or Trump got elected?
The smarter and more-educated journalists out there need to figure out how not to always turn on their aloofness and find better ways to just relate to their audience.
Again, HST figured this out 50 years ago.
