Obama Executive Order Frees 214 Prisoners

[SDBoiler1]

including 67 with life sentences.

"All told, Obama has commuted 562 sentences during his presidency — more than the past nine presidents combined, the White House said. Almost 200 of those who have benefited were serving life sentences."

Once again, Obama acts likes he's the King of the USA. It's not the President's job to override sentences he doesn't agree with like this. These people were sentenced under the laws of the states in which the crimes occurred.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/obama-shortens-terms-214-prisoners-67-had-life-175020256.html

 

[gr8indoorsman]

They were all Federal prisoners, charged under Federal (not State) laws.

Clemency initiative looks to reduce sentencing for:

• They are currently serving a federal sentence in prison and, by operation of law, likely would have received a substantially lower sentence if convicted of the same offense(s) today;

• They are non-violent, low-level offenders without significant ties to large scale criminal organizations, gangs or cartels;

• They have served at least 10 years of their prison sentence;

• They do not have a significant criminal history;

• They have demonstrated good conduct in prison; and

• They have no history of violence prior to or during their current term of imprisonment.

Don't think I have a significant problem with this. Saves money and opens Federal prison space for violent offenders.

 

[TopSecretBoiler]

including 67 with life sentences.

"All told, Obama has commuted 562 sentences during his presidency — more than the past nine presidents combined, the White House said. Almost 200 of those who have benefited were serving life sentences."

Once again, Obama acts likes he's the King of the USA. It's not the President's job to override sentences he doesn't agree with like this. These people were sentenced under the laws of the states in which the crimes occurred.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/obama-shortens-terms-214-prisoners-67-had-life-175020256.html

drugs are cool, but screw those whistle blowers!

 

[terminalg92]

They were all Federal prisoners, charged under Federal (not State) laws.

Clemency initiative looks to reduce sentencing for:

• They are currently serving a federal sentence in prison and, by operation of law, likely would have received a substantially lower sentence if convicted of the same offense(s) today;

• They are non-violent, low-level offenders without significant ties to large scale criminal organizations, gangs or cartels;

• They have served at least 10 years of their prison sentence;

• They do not have a significant criminal history;

• They have demonstrated good conduct in prison; and

• They have no history of violence prior to or during their current term of imprisonment.

Don't think I have a significant problem with this. Saves money and opens Federal prison space for violent offenders.

Given all of those bullet points, I have no problem with this at all. I'd go a step further and say this should be an ongoing process (if it's not already). Our incarceration rates are WAY too high relative to peer countries. It's not only immoral but it's expensive as hell.

Of course releasing a few prisoners here or there is just a drip. For any meaningful change, laws need to be adjusted.

 

[gr8indoorsman]

Given all of those bullet points, I have no problem with this at all. I'd go a step further and say this should be an ongoing process (if it's not already). Our incarceration rates are WAY too high relative to peer countries. It's not only immoral but it's expensive as hell.

Of course releasing a few prisoners here or there is just a drip. For any meaningful change, laws need to be adjusted.

https://www.justice.gov/pardon/clemency-initiative

 

[qazplm]

including 67 with life sentences.

"All told, Obama has commuted 562 sentences during his presidency — more than the past nine presidents combined, the White House said. Almost 200 of those who have benefited were serving life sentences."

Once again, Obama acts likes he's the King of the USA. It's not the President's job to override sentences he doesn't agree with like this. These people were sentenced under the laws of the states in which the crimes occurred.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/obama-shortens-terms-214-prisoners-67-had-life-175020256.html

Are you freaking kidding me? PARDON Power? He could pardon them if he wanted to, it's literally one of the few absolute powers a President has. He isn't even doing that, he's only commuting their sentences, and as Gr8 pointed out, it's a very narrow list of folks, and they are STILL going to be felons when they get out.

And most of the folks he is commuting are folks who were subjected to sentences that courts or Congress have decided were too severe and changed them...folks with no significant ties to organized crime/drugs, no violence, and a pattern of good behavior.

Is there nothing that Obama does that you won't find a way to criticize it?

 

[SDBoiler1]

Are you freaking kidding me? PARDON Power? He could pardon them if he wanted to, it's literally one of the few absolute powers a President has. He isn't even doing that, he's only commuting their sentences, and as Gr8 pointed out, it's a very narrow list of folks, and they are STILL going to be felons when they get out.

And most of the folks he is commuting are folks who were subjected to sentences that courts or Congress have decided were too severe and changed them...folks with no significant ties to organized crime/drugs, no violence, and a pattern of good behavior.

Is there nothing that Obama does that you won't find a way to criticize it?

How do you justify freeing more prisoners during this administration than the previous 9 Presidents combined? Obama obviously doesn't believe in the separation of powers and he's trying to backdoor legislate and act in a quasi-judicial manner increasingly. Even though he's a lawyer, he seems to not have much regard for the law.

It seems that ever since the Reagan years, Presidents have acted with increasing disdain toward the separation of powers doctrine (system of checks and balances). We do not live in a monarchy or a dictatorship. This erosion of the rule of law and increased disregard for the separation of powers doctrine should be concerning for all of us. Some politicians, including George W. Bush, have eroded the civil rights of Americans in order to "keep us safe".

 

[gr8indoorsman]

You need to take a look at the DOJ webpage about the Pardon Attorney and understand the process involved when levying these criticisms. You're pretty clearly ignorant on the process, and not just because you disagree with Obama's determination. This office has existed since 1893, has legal processes in place for applying for clemency, including representation requirements and options, as well as well-documented legality granting broad authority to the office as well as the office of the President in approving the clemency requests.

I mean, your very first post indicated that you thought the President was overturning State court sentencing, which was just patently false.

You're really reaching here, man.

 

[qazplm]

How do you justify freeing more prisoners during this administration than the previous 9 Presidents combined? Obama obviously doesn't believe in the separation of powers and he's trying to backdoor legislate and act in a quasi-judicial manner increasingly. Even though he's a lawyer, he seems to not have much regard for the law.

It seems that ever since the Reagan years, Presidents have acted with increasing disdain toward the separation of powers doctrine (system of checks and balances). We do not live in a monarchy or a dictatorship. This erosion of the rule of law and increased disregard for the separation of powers doctrine should be concerning for all of us. Some politicians, including George W. Bush, have eroded the civil rights of Americans in order to "keep us safe".

WTF are you talking about? There IS no congressional clemency power, not in any practical sense.

This is not REMOTELY a separation of powers issue nor is it a "quasi-judicial" issue nor is it a disregard for law.

Article II, Section 2 of the Constitution establishes it as a nearly unrestricted power of the Executive Branch. "...he shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offenses against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment" This is LITERALLY what he is doing, granting a "reprieve."

"In Biddle v. Perovich 274 U.S. 480 (1927), the Supreme Court reversed the doctrine, ruling that "[a] pardon in our days is not a private act of grace from an individual happening to possess power. It is a part of the Constitutional scheme. When granted it is the determination of the ultimate authority that the public welfare will be better served by inflicting less than what the judgment fixed."

You don't even know what the cases are, you don't know the circumstances, you just know Obama did it, and it's more than before so it MUST be bad.

How can anyone take you seriously when you don't remotely know what the Constitution says about this.

 

[terminalg92]

How do you justify freeing more prisoners during this administration than the previous 9 Presidents combined?

I would not only justify it, I would applaud it.

Answering a question with a question, how would YOU justify keeping people incarcerated for outdated laws, poorly applied sentences for non-violent offenses???

Check out the stats (courtesy of the ACLU website) copied at the bottom of this post. Again this is not only immoral but it's super-expensive, not only to house/feed prisoners but also just in societal cost as they are separated from their families, have difficulty integrating back into society, etc.

I don't believe I've heard either major party candidate take on this topic, which is unfortunate. I get why it's politically a touchy subject ("oh he/she's soft on crime!!"), but nonetheless leadership requires taking tough stances regardless of political risk.

THE NUMBERS:

• With only 5% of the world’s population, the U.S. has more than 20% of the world’s prison population – that makes us the world’s largest jailer.
• From 1978 to 2014, our prison population has risen 408%.
• One in 110 adults are incarcerated in a prison or local jail in the U.S. This marks the highest rate of imprisonment in American history.
• One in 35 adults are under some form of correctional control, counting prison, jail, parole and probation populations.

 

[qazplm]

How do you justify freeing more prisoners during this administration than the previous 9 Presidents combined? Obama obviously doesn't believe in the separation of powers and he's trying to backdoor legislate and act in a quasi-judicial manner increasingly. Even though he's a lawyer, he seems to not have much regard for the law.

It seems that ever since the Reagan years, Presidents have acted with increasing disdain toward the separation of powers doctrine (system of checks and balances). We do not live in a monarchy or a dictatorship. This erosion of the rule of law and increased disregard for the separation of powers doctrine should be concerning for all of us. Some politicians, including George W. Bush, have eroded the civil rights of Americans in order to "keep us safe".

what is even more ridiculous about your post is that while he has granted more commutations he is granted far FEWER actual pardons going all the way back to McKinley.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...mas-push-to-commute-lots-of-prison-sentences/

"Obama has been issuing commutations at a rapid pace in his last few years in office. But he's only issued 70 pardons so far, according to the Justice Department. That's fewer pardons than any president going all the way back to William McKinley, the earliest president for which the Justice Department tracks clemency statistics."

"At an average of seven pardons or commutations per month, Obama is now issuing clemency actions at a faster pace than any president since Jimmy Carter. But those numbers are still well under historic norms for most of the 20th century. Woodrow Wilson granted pardons and commutations at a rate of nearly 30 per month. Herbert Hoover issued an average of 25 per month."

So he's actually doing the CONSERVATIVE thing and only granting commutations vice pardons, but even that gets twisted by Obama haters. Even when he does conservative things, it DOES NOT MATTER.

 

[SDBoiler1]

You need to take a look at the DOJ webpage about the Pardon Attorney and understand the process involved when levying these criticisms. You're pretty clearly ignorant on the process, and not just because you disagree with Obama's determination. This office has existed since 1893, has legal processes in place for applying for clemency, including representation requirements and options, as well as well-documented legality granting broad authority to the office as well as the office of the President in approving the clemency requests.

I mean, your very first post indicated that you thought the President was overturning State court sentencing, which was just patently false.

You're really reaching here, man.

Just because President Obama can use "the Pardon Attorney" this much doesn't mean he should. And yes, I messed up on state laws vs. federal laws.

Basically, what you and qaz are saying is that the "war on drugs" was an abject failure? We should just override legal decisions based on......conjecture? Public opinion of weed smokers? What?

 

[TOKenBoiler]

Just because President Obama can use "the Pardon Attorney" this much doesn't mean he should. And yes, I messed up on state laws vs. federal laws.

Basically, what you and qaz are saying is that the "war on drugs" was an abject failure? We should just override legal decisions based on......conjecture? Public opinion of weed smokers? What?

Conjecture? I wonder if you're smoking weed. There were criteria, almost all objective, used to make these commutation decisions. And these folks, as pointed out already, are still convicted felons.

 

[qazplm]

Just because President Obama can use "the Pardon Attorney" this much doesn't mean he should. And yes, I messed up on state laws vs. federal laws.

Basically, what you and qaz are saying is that the "war on drugs" was an abject failure? We should just override legal decisions based on......conjecture? Public opinion of weed smokers? What?

 

[gr8indoorsman]

Just because President Obama can use "the Pardon Attorney" this much doesn't mean he should. And yes, I messed up on state laws vs. federal laws.

Basically, what you and qaz are saying is that the "war on drugs" was an abject failure? We should just override legal decisions based on......conjecture? Public opinion of weed smokers? What?

Or I am saying at there are objective criteria used to determine who should receive clemency, that those criteria are both legal and reasonable, and that the president is using this legal and common executive power both responsibly and in line with what makes sense.

But since you asked, I think pretty clearly the war on drugs has been an abject failure.

 

[terminalg92]

Basically, what you and qaz are saying is that the "war on drugs" was an abject failure?

Exactly, IMO the war on drugs has been an abject failure. If anyone disagrees I'd be interested to know the bases for disagreement.

 

[SDBoiler1]

Exactly, IMO the war on drugs has been an abject failure. If anyone disagrees I'd be interested to know the bases for disagreement.

An abject failure based on what criteria? Crime rates are down big since the 1990s overall. You don't think locking up criminals for drug offenses has helped to reduce the crime rate?

 

[qazplm]

An abject failure based on what criteria? Crime rates are down big since the 1990s overall. You don't think locking up criminals for drug offenses has helped to reduce the crime rate?

1. A distraction from just how wrong you've been in this thread.

2. But sure, let's talk crime rates. Nope, the war on drugs has not driven down crime rates in any substantial way.

The number 1A reason why the crime rate has dropped is that the economy overall was/is better from the 90s through today than it was in the 70s and early to mid 80s, particularly for the poor.

The number 1B reason why the crime rate has dropped is that the raw numbers of people within the age cohort most likely to commit crime fell as the baby boomers grew out of that cohort.

Other reasons range from the rise of community policing (which is probably the number one way to reduce crime), the improvement in high school graduation levels among minorities, the rise of the AA middle class (since poverty and crime strongly correlate).

All the "war on drugs" does is CREATE crime. Marijuana is no worse than alcohol, yet we arbitrarily declare one a crime, and the other legal. At a low level, we legalize amphetamines in some cases (many weight loss drugs are amphetamine related) and we criminalize it at the other end.

Furthermore, 40% of crimes are ALCOHOL-related according to the DOJ. Less than half of that percentage was directly tied to crime to support a drug habit.

Even furthermore, the number of total arrests has dropped from 1995 to today by a significant percentage (15 million v. 11.2 million in 2014) while the number of arrests for drug use are almost exactly the same (1.47 million in 95 v. 1.56 million in 2014).

So the war on drugs:

a. hasn't actually resulted in fewer arrests (aka a decrease in drug use)
b. so it cannot be responsible for the drop in crime

If you REALLY wanted to drop crime rates you'd consider banning alcohol but of course we tried that once already.

So to recap:

the basis you used to start this thread is 100% wrong
the side issue you pivoted to is 100% wrong.

 

[SDBoiler1]

1. A distraction from just how wrong you've been in this thread.

2. But sure, let's talk crime rates. Nope, the war on drugs has not driven down crime rates in any substantial way.

The number 1A reason why the crime rate has dropped is that the economy overall was/is better from the 90s through today than it was in the 70s and early to mid 80s, particularly for the poor.

The number 1B reason why the crime rate has dropped is that the raw numbers of people within the age cohort most likely to commit crime fell as the baby boomers grew out of that cohort.

Other reasons range from the rise of community policing (which is probably the number one way to reduce crime), the improvement in high school graduation levels among minorities, the rise of the AA middle class (since poverty and crime strongly correlate).

All the "war on drugs" does is CREATE crime. Marijuana is no worse than alcohol, yet we arbitrarily declare one a crime, and the other legal. At a low level, we legalize amphetamines in some cases (many weight loss drugs are amphetamine related) and we criminalize it at the other end.

Furthermore, 40% of crimes are ALCOHOL-related according to the DOJ. Less than half of that percentage was directly tied to crime to support a drug habit.

Even furthermore, the number of total arrests has dropped from 1995 to today by a significant percentage (15 million v. 11.2 million in 2014) while the number of arrests for drug use are almost exactly the same (1.47 million in 95 v. 1.56 million in 2014).

So the war on drugs:

a. hasn't actually resulted in fewer arrests (aka a decrease in drug use)
b. so it cannot be responsible for the drop in crime

If you REALLY wanted to drop crime rates you'd consider banning alcohol but of course we tried that once already.

So to recap:

the basis you used to start this thread is 100% wrong
the side issue you pivoted to is 100% wrong.

1A seems hard to fathom, considering the hell the country went through related to the mortgage meltdown and the Tech Bubble bursting in the late 90s. There is no doubt the country suffered greatly under Jimmy Carter in the mid to late 70s, but was that time worse than 2008 and 2009?

The mid to late 70s were the end of the Golden Age of the Union Movement. So the economy kept improving as the Union Movement collapsed? Are you asserting that Lyndon Johnson's Great Society construct actually worked in the end?

So blame it on the pothead Boomers for 1B?

 

[IlluminatiEXPOSETHEMNOW1]

including 67 with life sentences.

"All told, Obama has commuted 562 sentences during his presidency — more than the past nine presidents combined, the White House said. Almost 200 of those who have benefited were serving life sentences."

Once again, Obama acts likes he's the King of the USA. It's not the President's job to override sentences he doesn't agree with like this. These people were sentenced under the laws of the states in which the crimes occurred.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/obama-shortens-terms-214-prisoners-67-had-life-175020256.html

That is the plan. He's got to make room for the patriots in America. The democrats are going to finalize the Trotsky purge of the country. This is the strategy Stanley Kubrick tried to expose in his films. It is a true plan. And Obama carries out his marching orders from his European Trotsky commanders with ABSOLUTE PRECISION. First it is a few hundred. Then a few thousand. Then it is more. Then they stage a false flag terror attack and then it is rounding up patriots into prisons and disappearing people. Then it's Nazi Germany. Obama aligns himself with Iran, with socialism, with European Oligarchs, with for the most part total enemies to the United States, ISIS, Muslim extremists, and will call US patriots extremists, but NOT Muslims. He is for disarming the US making the country weaker and susceptible to total annihilation in all things. It is who he is. Obama is an absolute traitor the country. With pure unaltered intent unabated.

 

[qazplm]

1A seems hard to fathom, considering the hell the country went through related to the mortgage meltdown and the Tech Bubble bursting in the late 90s. There is no doubt the country suffered greatly under Jimmy Carter in the mid to late 70s, but was that time worse than 2008 and 2009?

The mid to late 70s were the end of the Golden Age of the Union Movement. So the economy kept improving as the Union Movement collapsed? Are you asserting that Lyndon Johnson's Great Society construct actually worked in the end?

So blame it on the pothead Boomers for 1B?

1. I know everything is in a liberals suck glass for you, but the 70s and early 80s were a horrible time for poor people and minorities economically. Not just Carter, before Carter, and after Carter too. Education rates, income, minority middle class were all depressed compared to yes even the crash of 07-10.

2. Unions were strong through the 80s into the 90s, it's only in the 21st Century that they've really declined. I have no idea why you mentioned them except to scream "unions suck." I have no idea why people who tout the concept of free market capitalism decry the workers banding together to increase their leverage which is exactly what the free market would expect.

3. The "tech bubble" bursting didn't affect the poor who weren't invested in the tech bubble to begin with. But yet again you attempt to carve out some sort of Democrats suck argument where it doesn't remotely belong.

I'm also going to add basic criminal justice theory to the list of things you think you know a lot about but do not.

 

[SDBoiler1]

1. I know everything is in a liberals suck glass for you, but the 70s and early 80s were a horrible time for poor people and minorities economically. Not just Carter, before Carter, and after Carter too. Education rates, income, minority middle class were all depressed compared to yes even the crash of 07-10.

2. Unions were strong through the 80s into the 90s, it's only in the 21st Century that they've really declined. I have no idea why you mentioned them except to scream "unions suck." I have no idea why people who tout the concept of free market capitalism decry the workers banding together to increase their leverage which is exactly what the free market would expect.

3. The "tech bubble" bursting didn't affect the poor who weren't invested in the tech bubble to begin with. But yet again you attempt to carve out some sort of Democrats suck argument where it doesn't remotely belong.

I'm also going to add basic criminal justice theory to the list of things you think you know a lot about but do not.

You seem to think you know everything about everything.

 

[qazplm]

You seem to think you know everything about everything.

lol as do you, the difference is, I know more than you about a few things, and the things I don't I try to seek out experts and those who've done the hard work of looking at it and come up with the answers.

but yes since criminal justice was my undergrad degree, since I've written a paper on the death penalty and studied the causes of crime, and since I've been an attorney with a focus on criminal law for awhile now...yeah I just might know a wee bit more than you in this area.

 

[SDBoiler1]

lol as do you, the difference is, I know more than you about a few things, and the things I don't I try to seek out experts and those who've done the hard work of looking at it and come up with the answers.

but yes since criminal justice was my undergrad degree, since I've written a paper on the death penalty and studied the causes of crime, and since I've been an attorney with a focus on criminal law for awhile now...yeah I just might know a wee bit more than you in this area.