Author Topic: Presidential Pardons  (Read 684 times)

Offline Flanders

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 8
  • Gender: Male
Presidential Pardons
« on: April 30, 2018, 06:26:44 AM »
1. The Whole Thing Was Nonsense
   
   If you ask an average American why Stewart went to jail, they’d probably tell you “insider trading.” In fact, that is not what brought her down. She was never charged with insider trading over the 2001 sale of ImClone stock that started the whole affair. She was charged with conspiring to lie about the crime with which she was never charged.
   
   Seven Reasons Donald Trump Should Pardon Martha Stewart
   By Mary Katharine Ham   
   April 26, 2018
   
   http://thefederalist.com/2018/04/26/seven-reasons-donald-trump-should-pardon-martha-stewart/


Michael New is the forbidden pardon. I doubt if he could buy a pardon for any price.

   Feb. 6, 1996 note: Michael New has been dishonorably discharged in a trial that lasted about 15 minutes. An appeal is planned.

   Michael New: A Patriot Court Martialed for Obeying His Oath of Duty
         
   http://www.jefflindsay.com/MichaelNew.shtml
[/url]
I only have only one objection to pardoning Ms. Stewart. Nobody should be pardoned until Michael New is pardoned. New’s court-martial and conviction remains the biggest miscarriage of justice in this country’s history; on par with France’s Alfred Dreyfus.

Asking the questions is the tragedy:

   
   So what master do U.S. servicemen serve: the U.S. Constitution or the United Nations Charter?

         Phyllis Schlafly
         What Master Do U.S. Servicemen Serve?
         Nov. 2, 1995
         
         http://eagleforum.org/column/1995/nov95/col-11-2.html

And this:

   What if New was right all along, and the order to don the U.N. emblems was unlawful, as he argued throughout his dispute with his commanding officers at his court-martial and throughout the appeals process?
   
   It would mean that prosecutors in the Clinton administration withheld exculpatory evidence, deceived a judge in the case and misled defense counsel to stamp out what could have been a rebellion against illegal orders to serve under the banner of the international political group.   


         U.S. soldiers forced to wear U.N. logo?
         Appeal explains Clinton's secret executive order
         Published: 05/20/2012 at 6:57 PM
         by BOB UNRUH
         
         http://www.wnd.com/2012/05/u-s-soliders-forced-to-wear-u-n-logo/?cat_orig=us



Bosnia was a NATO operation, but President Clinton used the U.S. military as United Nations peacekeepers punishing anyone refusing to serve.  Michael New refused.   

I have a suggestion that I offered from time to time:

Change the Universal Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) so that no American can be ordered to fight for the U.N.

It is my understanding that the commander in chief can make that change without consulting Congress. Do not hold your breath until the change is made.

In the unlikely event a president loyal to this country ever does make the change it should be so ironclad that military personnel so inclined will have every Right to refuse to serve the United Nations without fear of being punished.

Michael New was court-martialed for refusing to serve the U.N. He was loyal to the United States and was punished by the Clintons. Neither Bush the Younger nor the Chicago sewer rat considered giving New a  pardon.
   
In 2007 the U.S. Supreme Court refused to hear Michael New’s  appeal. President Bush could have overturned his conviction and awarded Michael New an honorable discharge. If ever anybody deserved a pardon it was Michael New. A Bush pardon would have sent a message of hope to the American people; at least to those Americans who would defend this country against the United Nations. Even today, you never hear a media mouth compare Michael New to pardoning Marc Rich, Gitmo terrorists, and drug dealers.

In all of the years since 1995 -1996 Michael New received very little coverage for his courageous stand. (I cannot recall one report on television then or since.)  Mainstream media has been in full cover-up mode for more than 20 years.  The press can always find a way to make the worst criminal a cause célèbre, while electronic media always treated New like he never existed.

And I will wager that no military recruiting officer will ever tell a prospective enlistee that he or she might be ordered to serve the United Nations. If recruiters are asked about disobeying an unlawful order, I am certain they will fudge their answer one way or another. Once you are in the military it will not matter what you were led to believe before you signed up. Refuse a direct order and your ass is mud —— unless you are a Muslim refusing to fight against Muslim brothers. 

My advice to young Americans thinking about a career in the military is for them to get a legal document, signed by the president, stating that they will not be punished if they refuse to serve the United Nations  Sadly, the only way giving this issue the importance it deserves is for conscription to be considered again.

A simpler way to make the United Nations problem disappear is to withdraw from the U.N. and let those countries so full of hatred for the U.S. stew in their own juices. You can bet they will think twice before attacking the U.S. after the U.N. goes belly up.

Lay my UCMJ suggestion on Democrats and you will hear so much caterwauling you will need earplugs to drown it out. They oppose the war against terrorism when it means the U.S. defending itself unilaterally, while they all favor Americans dying for the U.N. 

Not one of the Democrats who opposed the war in Iraq while seeking their party’s nomination for president in 2004 ever included military U.N. peacekeeping missions in their anti-war pronouncements. John Kerry’s comments were so cleverly worded he fooled himself into thinking he had scored brownie points with voters.  I remember he said: “America should never go to war because it wants to, but only when it has to.” 

Most voters understood  “. . . only when it has to.” would have been decided by the U.N. had Kerry won the election. Neither Kerry nor any other Democrat ever said otherwise.

Presidents can sign U.N. treaties, senators can ratify them, New World Order judges can interpret them for the U.N.’s benefit, and the press can make it all sound wonderful. None of those things will con the majority of Americans into fighting for the U.N.     

In any event, Americans should only fight to defend their country against clearly-defined menaces like Islamic fundamentalism (think 9/11) and Communist expansion by force (think worldwide Communist domination) rather than being manipulated into fighting against a philosophical threat determined by liberals. When Americans do go to war, they should fight a total war and to hell with the U.N.’s feelings.

Bottom line: Fight the war against Islam, but do not do it for the United Nations.

Lets not forget Marine Lt. Col. William Richard Higgins:


   In light of his sensitive position, Higgins' assignment to Lebanon was "a case of gross mismanagement," former national security adviser Robert C. McFarlane said in an interview shortly after Higgins' capture in February 1988. Another high-placed Defense Department official who had dealt extensively with Higgins, called his late-1987 assignment to a U.N. peacekeeping force in Southern Lebanon "a huge security lapse . . . absolutely, colossally stupid."

         He Knew Too Much, Say His Colleagues
         By Frank Greve, Inquirer Washington Bureau Inquirer staff writer Marc Duvoisin contributed to this article
         Posted: August 01, 1989
         
         http://articles.philly.com/1989-08-01/news/26146569_1_huge-security-lapse-peacekeeping-force-william-richard-higgins

Col. Higgins was captured and hanged. Col. Higgins is unique in that he was in the U.S. Marines and in a United Nations peacekeeping force. His duel loyalty was "a case of gross mismanagement," because he knew a lot about sensitive information. To the New World Order crowd there is nothing wrong with the average soldier dying for the United Nations while wearing an American military uniform.

From what I understand about Col. Higgins, he had no conflict serving the U.N. as well as serving the country in the U.S. Marines. Here is the rub.  Higgins did it voluntarily. That is why the UCMJ should be amended as I suggested above.

United Nations traitors championed Higgins in an attempt to sucker Americans into believing that serving the U.N. is the same as serving the country. It is a big mistake to integrate the two beliefs.

In addition, any American who wants to serve the United Nations is free to do so, but they should not embroil the U.S. military in their political beliefs. Choose one or the other —— not both.

Once our government gets into a United Nations-POW situation the Left jumps on the opportunity to play the patriotism card, knowing that most Americans will not tolerate anyone murdering our military people. The U.N. then benefits from American anger as Americans are moved closer to believing that serving the U.S. and serving the U.N. are one and the same.

I expect U.N.-lovers are outraged knowing that most Americans do not care whenever the United Nations is attacked. The same indifference from the American people happened in Iraq in 2003 when 17 people, including top U.N. envoy Sergio Vieira de Mello, were killed after a truck bomb exploded outside U.N. headquarters in Baghdad.

U.N. Special Representative in Iraq, Sérgio Vieira de Mello, was killed along with 20 other U.N. employees. At the time the headlines screamed U.N. HQ Attacked in Baghdad, and variations on that theme.
   
U.N.-loving media liberals jumped on the bombing like bedbugs jump on a boarding house mattress. The press instinctively knew how to writeup the incident without any guidelines from the U.N.’s public relations office.  At the time, I wondered how the press knew the truck bomb was aimed at U.N. personnel since a lot of journalists were known to hang around the hotel?
   
The sickest reporting were clips of the U.N. flag flying (“fluttering” according to one report) over the smoking ruins?  Talking heads made the Canal Hotel sound like Fort McHenry. Give me a break on that one.  The media did a lot of sorry things in recent decades, but that one was as sick as it gets. They truly expected the rest of us to place our hands over our hearts and sing the Star Spangled Banner to the U.N. house flag?
      
The United Nations is so protected by media it is impossible to nail those filthy bums for anything, but it is possible to make every U.N.-loving elected official accountable. Democrats unanimously support every piece of garbage the United Nations dumps on this country, everything from United Nations law, to open-borders, to environmental horse manure.  Happily, voters still have a chance to find out how Republican wannabes running for Congress stand on the United Nations.

The last hope generally means no hope.

President Trump is Michael New’s last and only hope for a pardon after all of these years, while you can be sure the next Democrat president will pardon Beau Bergdahl.
   
NOTE: Presidential pardons granted by Democrats should be a big issue in the 2020 election. Rest assured, the Democrat nominee is going to pardon every traitor in sight should Hillary Clinton & Company ever be tried and convicted for their crimes.

Sad to say, President Trump will have to rent a spine long enough to pardon Michael New who refused to serve the United Nations.

Parenthetically:


   WASHINGTON – For decades, the Justice Department has refused to even look at pardon applications for people no longer living, saying its scarce resources are better spent investigating cases from people "who can truly benefit from a grant of clemency."
   
   That would seem to be bad news for champions of Jack Johnson, the former heavyweight boxing champion convicted of kidnapping in 1913 in a racially charged prosecution. He died in 1946.
   
   President Trump could pardon him anyway.

   A Trump pardon for boxer Jack Johnson would be just the third posthumous pardon in history
   Gregory Korte, USA TODAY Published 3:12 p.m. ET April 25, 2018 | Updated 11:01 a.m. ET April 26, 2018
   
   https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2018/04/25/trump-pardon-boxer-jack-johnson-would-just-third-posthumous-pardon-history/539030002/

My greatest fear is that a Democrat will pardon all of those dead traitors like Alger Hiss and the Rosenbergs. Frankly, I would not put it past the next Democrat traitor in the White House like Obama clearing Benedict Arnold’s name.
 
The basic test of freedom is perhaps less in what we are free to do than in what we are free not to do. It is the freedom to refrain, withdraw and abstain which makes a totalitarian regime impossible. Eric Hoffer

Offline Solar

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 60537
  • Gender: Male
Re: Presidential Pardons
« Reply #1 on: April 30, 2018, 07:18:10 AM »
Just a couple of tips. One, don't use [url to highlight (Ever) us bold, otherwise it becomes a clickable dead link, leaving the reader to believe you are hiding a link behind it.
Bold is used to draw the readers attention to a single point, so stop bolding your entire post!
Two, too damn long, your posts are too involved for our casual reader and too many links distract from your overall point, so post the links as reference at the bottom only, and get to the point sooner, most, simply haven't the time to try and figure out what you're going for and move on after the first few sentences.
Bottom line, your intro is boring and you lose your potential audience in the first paragraph, so get to the point immediately, (Summarize) then go about doing whatever it is you were doing. Truth is, I quit reading almost immediately when I clicked your dead link, trying to figure out what you were talking about.
Why in the world would I want to click a link that takes me away from your point in the middle of a read?

Koolaid is for kids, TEA is for adults

Offline Flanders

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 8
  • Gender: Male
Re: Presidential Pardons
« Reply #2 on: April 30, 2018, 01:42:31 PM »
To Solar: Go and fuck yourself.

Quote
Just a couple of tips. One, don't use [url to highlight (Ever) us bold, otherwise it becomes a clickable dead link, leaving the reader to believe you are hiding a link behind it.
Bold is used to draw the readers attention to a single point, so stop bolding your entire post!
Two, too damn long, your posts are too involved for our casual reader and too many links distract from your overall point, so post the links as reference at the bottom only, and get to the point sooner, most, simply haven't the time to try and figure out what you're going for and move on after the first few sentences.
Bottom line, your intro is boring and you lose your potential audience in the first paragraph, so get to the point immediately, (Summarize) then go about doing whatever it is you were doing. Truth is, I quit reading almost immediately when I clicked your dead link, trying to figure out what you were talking about.
Why in the world would I want to click a link that takes me away from your point in the middle of a read?
The basic test of freedom is perhaps less in what we are free to do than in what we are free not to do. It is the freedom to refrain, withdraw and abstain which makes a totalitarian regime impossible. Eric Hoffer

Offline Solar

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 60537
  • Gender: Male
Re: Presidential Pardons
« Reply #3 on: April 30, 2018, 01:47:41 PM »
To Solar: Go and fuck yourself.
To Flanders. Bye.
Koolaid is for kids, TEA is for adults

Online Sick Of Silence

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 375
  • Militant Libertarian
Re: Presidential Pardons
« Reply #4 on: April 30, 2018, 01:49:37 PM »
To Solar: Go and fuck yourself.

Now. Now. It's good friendly advice. Don't attack him.

(but you can call him out on things).
Here is your first lesson about Free Speech...

...shut up about it!

Online Sick Of Silence

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 375
  • Militant Libertarian
Re: Presidential Pardons
« Reply #5 on: April 30, 2018, 01:53:22 PM »
To Flanders. Bye.

Now. Now. We have been all hot-headed when we joined a new forum. Let's be friends.

Here is your first lesson about Free Speech...

...shut up about it!

Offline Solar

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 60537
  • Gender: Male
Re: Presidential Pardons
« Reply #6 on: April 30, 2018, 02:06:39 PM »
Now. Now. We have been all hot-headed when we joined a new forum. Let's be friends.


I have a feeling he's played this rodeo many times. People like him think their message is more important than the etiquette of the forum and tend to write their own rules.
Just another hothead, better off without their worthless lives pissing off the other members.
Koolaid is for kids, TEA is for adults

Offline LegalAmerican

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 83
  • I love Conservative Political Forum!
Re: Presidential Pardons
« Reply #7 on: June 08, 2018, 02:45:27 PM »
I support Mike New.  Maybe someone could write president TRUMP?  My president, did not wear the GLOBAL PIN, & instead, used the American flag pin.

President TRUMP would, certainly understand . 



Offline Rotwang

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 628
Re: Presidential Pardons
« Reply #8 on: June 08, 2018, 08:32:29 PM »
To Flanders. Bye.


Thanks.


Eight miserable posts.

Offline Rotwang

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 628
Re: Presidential Pardons
« Reply #9 on: June 08, 2018, 08:36:04 PM »
To Flanders. Bye.


As far as the Pardons go, I agree with every last one so far.


I do not understand what a Muhammad Ali pardon would accomplish, as the SCOTUS vacated his conviction in 1971.


I do understand a Black Man was convicted of Draft Dodging, while a White Woman was a stone-cold TRAITOR and never saw any charges.







Online Sick Of Silence

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 375
  • Militant Libertarian
Re: Presidential Pardons
« Reply #10 on: June 08, 2018, 10:25:11 PM »

As far as the Pardons go, I agree with every last one so far.


I do not understand what a Muhammad Ali pardon would accomplish, as the SCOTUS vacated his conviction in 1971.


I do understand a Black Man was convicted of Draft Dodging, while a White Woman was a stone-cold TRAITOR and never saw any charges.





Forget calling her the bad name. Shouldn't she be tried as an American traitor?
Here is your first lesson about Free Speech...

...shut up about it!

 

Powered by EzPortal