Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Genuine question: Of all the people to pardon, why him?


because it was a promise he made to the libertarian camp

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X8ofi6U0eWE


He upgraded from commutation to pardon, I wonder about what happened there.


[flagged]


it would be visible on-chain, so if you notice something weird you can take a look and point it out to us.


It might be visible. Just not a large amount from one account to another. Thats not how laundering works and definitely not how trades work that are supposed to go unnoticed.


Trump promised to do this at the Libertarian Party convention. This case is very important to the libertarian crowd. He is a martyr for many of their ideals. After Trump was so well received at the convention the LP, recently taken over by the right faction of the party, put forth a candidate specifically chosen to not get votes so that members would vote for Trump. Trump seems to be a man of his word.


Voters wanted a better economy first, not pardons for drug traffickers and violent offenders.

This could have waited until after the midterms.


> This could have waited until after the midterms.

On the contrary, he can just bury it in the first 48 hours. This will fade into the background soon enough but that group is kept happy.


It was one signature? Doesn't seem like a big time sink. Many of these early actions were prepared prior to inauguration.


In war, you point your biggest gun at the enemy. You don't shoot yourself in the foot.


It seems like the voters that were being referred to value restoring rights. How can something immediately achievable be balanced with "the economy", a thing so broad and deeply systemic?


The people in Pennsylvania who elected him, didn't want this.


It isn't clear from your original statement that those voters aren't from Pennsylvania. I interpret your statement as discounting the weight of their vote on actions they care about. There are many perspectives, and the values of those who did vote in that direction are being addressed in some way.


A lot of republicans want a "shining city upon the hill". Drug free, sin free, tough penalties on crime.

A lot of republicans want a working economy. High paying jobs, low taxes.

A lot of republicans believe in a free market economy. Freedom to innovate, freedom to hire and fire.

And then we have this.


> sin free

wow, not even god could eliminate sin but apparently the republicans can?

how do you envision that being enforced? death penalty for any sin? You've never made a sin yourself? If so how could you live in sin-free city? sounds sick and dystopian.

anyway, the point i wanted to make was that when you vote for somebody, you are the one giving that person the authority to take actions on your behalf. if you voted for T, you shouldn't complain about anything he does, because he can only do so because of your vote. learn to be wary of politicians, they treat you right during the dates (election) but after the wedding the true person comes out.


We're talking about Libertarians and not Republicans, atleast that is what the parent comment was referring to. I don't know what Republicans what or believe vs what they say. The action to pardon directly addresses the Libertarian ideals.


I guess if Trump really wanted to run Libertarian, he could have run under the Libertarian ticket.


He attended the convention. Is is for all intents and purposes representing them.


The people in Pennsylvania knew they were voting for an out-of-control, unpredictable, felonious septuagenarian with fascist tendencies. Complaining now that he is all of those things before he is someone who may or may not do other good things, is just silly. Either they knew, or they've been had.



>This could have waited until after the midterms.

He promised to pardon the rioters during the election and it didn't hurt him. I think he decided it wouldn't hurt him (and Trump cares bout that first) and if he thought about the midterms ... maybe won't hurt then either.

Congress isn't directly involved in any of this anyway.


Congress is involved. They have to prove they can govern. It's hard to be the party of "law and order" if you need only to kiss the ring for your release.


GOP house could hardly operate last round and … they won more seats.


I think this is funny.

People hate congress. Yet each person can vote to only change one congressman at a time.

https://news.gallup.com/poll/1600/congress-public.aspx

October of 2001 they were up to 80% approval. Left to their own devices by Aug 2002 they were below 50%.

There's an argument to be made that congress doesn't really represent the people at large. Some people go on to make the argument that through gerrymandering politicians choose who's elected, and not the people.


2 parties and 2 choices certainly is a recipe for sending the wrong message.

I'd like to see some ranked choice voting.


The GOP doesn't exist anymore, it's simply Trump Party. They live or die on his performance, and kiss his ring to exist.


The leopards will be feasting the next 4 years.


Eh, lowering the price of eggs is not as easy so



The LP candidate was nominated due to some fluke/shenanigans/dealings between candidates. Based on the right-leaning demographics you would not expect him to win. It just happened to work out perfectly to get the people who would never vote for him anyway to vote for Trump. (Meanwhile the chairwoman encouraged Biden supporters to vote for the LP candidate).

Also, Trump actually got a mixed reception at the convention at best.


> Trump seems to be a man of his word.

when there's political gain, sure


You may not like Trump but I remember he fulfilled or attempted to fulfill a lot of his campaign promises back in 2016 as well. Biden, the career politician, talked a lot about many things before election and then forgot about them after he was elected. For example, universal health care. Obama promised to enshrine a woman's right to abortion as law, and then when he had the House and Senate after he was elected, he said "it's not a priority for me." Then we lost Roe V Wade.


>or attempted

That's a really low bar with that bit added. "I didn't say it would be easy" was his line about his token tariffs the first term ... then he never tried again for the rest of that term.


He also lies all the time about many things. People are are sometimes honest are called 'liars'.

> when he had the House and Senate after he was elected, he said "it's not a priority for me."

How could he get it through the Senate without a filibuster-proof majority?


Trump did just about what every president does - makes promises and then does some of them, tries to some others (successful unless thwarted by Congress), and ignores others.

Obama didn't have the votes in the Senate (to overcome the filibuster, also not as many Dems congressmen supported it as you might think). Neither did Clinton (people thought it would happen then)


I'm privately predicting the senate will remove the filibuster this term.


When did Biden talk about universal healthcare?

Let's go through Trump's campaign promises: Infrastructure, Border wall, increased US manufacturing, repealing ACA, "drain the swamp". He achieved zero of those.

Biden in contrast followed up on his campaign promises: Infrastructure, increased US manufacturing, expanding ACA plus lowering costs. Among others.


> universal health care

that was Obama - Biden never promised that

Biden delivered on the IRA and climate change bill.

Trump promised to "drain the swamp" and filled it instead. I can't think of any major campaign promise that he fulfilled - he didn't even build the wall (probably his main promise).


that was Obama - Biden never promised that

https://jacobin.com/2022/08/joe-biden-public-option-health-c...

I can't think of any major campaign promise that he fulfilled

Renegotiate NAFTA

Lower Taxes

Move the US Embassy to Jerusalem

Nominate to the Supreme Court from the list he shared

Kill TPP

No Social Security Cuts

Take No Salary

Where he failed, it generally wasn't for trying, but because he was getting blocked by Congress, the courts, and the general bureaucracy. You only have to look at the last 48 hours to see a better prepared Trump committed to his promises.


I'm not sure "No Social Security Cuts" should count, because (1) he did try to cut it in his proposed 2020 budget, (2) he did nothing to try to address the shortfall that is expected in the social security trust fund around 2033, and (3) he said that if he was reelected in 2020 he would get rid of the payroll tax, which would have moved the depletion of the trust fund up to around 2026.


He took 3/4 of his salary


>Trump seems to be a man of his word.

One of the big reasons I voted for him. He actually keeps the promises he made as far reality will allow.

What's really stupid is that keeping promises made isn't the norm for politicians, of all kinds.


This is 100% true. I am posting from an anon account (obviously), but I was heavily involved in this. I worked with members of the party to push part of their strategy - mainly the coalition with trump and an effort to get vivek and elon involved. We spoke about this in 2023. I didn't care about Ross, had my own motivations, but I wrote some of their playback with AI and it worked. I didn't know about certain things (like the losing candidate for example). I wrote strategy that seems to have made its way all the way to Trump's team.


Without proof this is just a bedtime story.


So, when Trump said that some of the same FBI agents involved in busting DPR also worked on Trump’s cases, how precise was that?


It's because of his mother Lyn.

She was a tireless advocate for his release from the start, and it became a part of the libertarian cause to see him released.

It worked. Trump courted the libertarian vote, and this was his most popular promise to them.

She's an inspiring woman. I'm so glad she lived to see this.


Someone with that dedication can now move on to remedying the damage done by a free-for-all gun marketplace.


Yay the drug trafficker and hitman hirer is free! What a happy ending! /s


Don't forget all the zombie drones who attacked the capitol on his behalf


Trump explains it eloquently:

"The scum that worked to convict him were some of the same lunatics who were involved in the modern day weaponization of government against me," Trump said in his post online on Tuesday evening. "He was given two life sentences, plus 40 years. Ridiculous!"


According to Trump, he is doing this to get libertarian support.


They seem to be pandering to the more libertarian tech community. This guy appeals to that and to the more radical maga types who want a revolution. I’m sure we’ll see more.

The Biden DOJs bungling of the insurrection, turning a jail into a martyrs club, slow rolling prosecutions, etc is ultimately worse than the insurrection for democracy.


> The Biden DOJs bungling of the insurrection, turning a jail into a martyrs club, slow rolling prosecutions, etc is ultimately worse than the insurrection for democracy.

I'd argue promoting that narrative was ultimately worse than the insurrection for democracy.


What narrative?


That the Federal government has no obligation to prosecute an armed mob breaking into Congress.


Agreed!


Presumably musk pushed for it. Not sure who else in/near the administration would even have him on their radar


Whether or not he was the sole or even primary reason, he knew about it beforehand as seen by his tweet last night saying it was coming soon. Love him or hate him, it's a bit concerning that he has that level of access IMO.

The tweet:

https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1881524296386031892


It’s been a campaign of Mike Cernovich’s for a long time.


And Trump cares what Mike Cernovich thinks because.... ?


Take your best guess, I believe in you


Musk is definitely a fan recreationally chemistry


The clips of him rolling his eyes and head around in boredom at the inauguration definitely looked like he was suffering from some kind of withdrawal symptoms.


Trump promised it when he attended the libertarian convention


[flagged]


Why now, and not 4 years from now when Trump is about to leave office?

How do republicans in Idaho (who don't even have medical marijuana on the books), defend Trump pardoning someone convicted of drug trafficking?


That argument isn't contrary to the GP comment: It's very possible Trump is offered a benefit now that he wasn't offered in 2020.

You could ask the same of any deal: Why not instead of years ago? Because the deal wasn't available years ago.


> The Trump admin was already selling pardons at the end of their last term, why wouldn't they continue doing so?

Substantiating my obliterated sibling comment:

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/giuliani-accu...


He promised the Libertarians he would and he's holding true to his word. Say what you will but at least he's fulfilling his campaign promises.


What about his campaign promise for law and order?


Trump's Law, not you know, the people's law.


He promised international canvassers that we'd have peace in Ukraine on his first day in office. Whatever he arranged with druggie libertarians is chopped liver from a policy perspective. On the international stage it's the dictionary definition of a nothingburger.


as somebody with family members who are "republicans in idaho" they mostly won’t care. many if not most republican idahoans think you should be able to own machine guns and do whatever you want without hurting others.

the mormon ones would be the most likely that would object, but even plenty of the republican/libertarian mormons i know are happy to have the massive government overreach corrected.


Why not now?

Trump isn't up for re-election. It's his act alone.

He promised in the election to pardon other criminals and it didn't hurt him.


[flagged]


Well even if he bet on going that route he wouldn't have to be "elected", and my last line applies none the less, it didn't hurt him during an actual election.


Yes. Except, "neutralize?" I don't know why the federal government would bother with the pretense of a 22nd Amendment when they demonstrably do not care in the slightest about the 14th or most of the Bill of Rights.


You believe there are "selfless politicians" operating in America right now?


I believe there's a wide range of choices and behaviors and any poor choice is not equivalent to all poor choices.


I honestly kinda think that first degree murder is similar to other first degree murders. But that's just me.


Ah, so when challenged, you immediately acknowledge there is a spectrum and not a black and white picture. That makes for a poor thread.


I don't know what you mean.


Yes. I think many of them are. The harassment and constant criticism isn't worth it unless you really care about the people you serve in most cases.

It's pretty obvious which ones are doing it for themselves.


What do you mean? Trump just pardoned or commuted pretty much all of the J6 crowd. One guy convicted of crimes that don't require proving violence beyond a reasonable doubt is pretty tame in comparison. He is one of thousands.


Trump know the Jan 6 rioters and supported them. Pardoning is important to justify his claim that nobody did anything wrong as that the election was "stolen by the Dems".

I can't imagine he would have known Ross Ulbricht's case.


What? All crimes were proved beyond a reasonable doubt according to a jury of our peers. (Or they plead guilty).


The violent element was not proven for Ross. The judge decided on preponderance of evidence he hired the hit man, and sentenced him as if he did.


Ulbricht was convicted of crimes by a jury of his peers though.

There are no mandatory maximums in sentencing guidelines. Just mandatory minimums.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: