Trump to pardon the Hammonds (catalysts for the Bundy stand off)

[44nutman]

You should look into how nature works, it's not only necessary, it's a vital part in the wheel of life

I have no problem with actual controlled burns. I have problem with setting fires to destroy evidence.

 

[gatchaman]

I have no problem with actual controlled burns. I have problem with setting fires to destroy evidence.

Excuse my interjection, but would you link me to the part of the official decision (either from the original trial or from the overturning of the original sentence) that describes the destruction of evidence?

 

[BrotherClaudio]

I have no problem with actual controlled burns. I have problem with setting fires to destroy evidence.

What?

Destroying evidence? Please do tell

 

[44nutman]

What?

Destroying evidence? Please do tell

Excuse my interjection, but would you link me to the part of the official decision (either from the original trial or from the overturning of the original sentence) that describes the destruction of evidence?

What?

Destroying evidence? Please do tell

I have posted it in this very thread. I quoted court testimony before you start your fake news bullshit.
They broke the law but since your team likes them you throw accountability out the window.
I was taught a man is responsible for his actions. Now the narrative is Fox News says their cool so who gives a fuck about responsibility.
You two are the inbred version of BLM. Picking the wrong law breaking assholes to defend.

 

[BrotherClaudio]

I have posted it in this very thread. I quoted court testimony before you start your fake news bullshit.
They broke the law but since your team likes them you throw accountability out the window.
I was taught a man is responsible for his actions. Now the narrative is Fox News says their cool so who gives a fuck about responsibility.
You two are the inbred version of BLM. Picking the wrong law breaking assholes to defend.

I asked for proof

You gave your opinion

Much like the left does when reporting "news"

 

[Hog-train]

I asked for proof

You gave your opinion

Much like the left does when reporting "news"

This is the official court document - Steve Hammond instructed his teenage nephew, Dustin Hammond, to "light the whole country on fire." He testified against them and the Hammonds were burying evidence of their poaching.

That's not "liberal news" - that's the court document and what they were convicted of.

https://popehat.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/HammondGovBrief.pdf

 

[HomerThompson]

According to the Molyneux video posted earlier by @Farmer Br0wn (starting at 24:12 below)

the judge cited the following precedents to support upholding the 5-year minimum sentence for the Hammonds.

Spoiler

The Supreme Court has upheld far tougher sentences for less serious or, at the very least, comparable offenses.

See Lockyer v. Andrade (upholding a sentence of fifty years to life under California’s three-strikes law for stealing nine videotapes); Ewing v. California (upholding a sentence of twenty-five years to life under California’s three-strikes law for the theft of three golf clubs);

Hutto v. Davis (upholding a forty-year sentence for possession of nine ounces of marijuana with the intent to distribute); Rummel v. Estelle (upholding a life sentence for under Texas’s recidivist statute for obtaining $120.75 by false pretenses).

My understanding of the argument is that, in these precedents, it was correctly decided that the punishments were not cruel and unusual enough to evoke 8th amendment protection against the imposed mandatory minimum and so it should be for the Hammonds.

For those of you willing to come forth and be outraged that a mere three (or four) years is deemed enough (Only a full five years behind bars will do for the Hammonds!), please tell me the sentence you would like for Leandro Andrade for stealing five children's videotapes from a K-Mart store in Ontario, California. He is sentenced to a mandatory minimum of fifty years.

But what about another derail vol. 5!!!

 

[Fawlty]

I'm sure Molyneux's latest e-jaculation is deeply relevant to the federal crime of arson to cover up poaching that was unconscionably pardoned by this jackoff administration.

 

[44nutman]

I asked for proof

You gave your opinion

Much like the left does when reporting "news"

Wrong dude. I posted the court transcripts in this thread. Scroll back a couple pages. I am sorry you are too lazy to look. Don’t play dumb. They set a fire to hide evidence of illegal poaching. Typical right winger, facts mean nothing to your narrative.

 

[BrotherClaudio]

Wrong dude. I posted the court transcripts in this thread. Scroll back a couple pages. I am sorry you are too lazy to look. Don’t play dumb. They set a fire to hide evidence of illegal poaching. Typical right winger, facts mean nothing to your narrative.

They set fires to re vitalize grazing lands. Were there actions acceptable? That's debatable, should a real conversation take place on the use of land, yes

 

[Happy Man]

This is the official court document - Steve Hammond instructed his teenage nephew, Dustin Hammond, to "light the whole country on fire." He testified against them and the Hammonds were burying evidence of their poaching.

That's not "liberal news" - that's the court document and what they were convicted of.

https://popehat.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/HammondGovBrief.pdf

That document doesn't say that they were poaching. Where does it say that? It also says the fire was lit on their property and it spread to the federal land.

 

[gatchaman]

But what about another derail vol. 5!!!

Would you please tell me how citing that actual decision to uphold the sentence constitutes a derail?

What part of the following is a derail?:

The judge cited the following precedents to support upholding the 5-year minimum sentence for the Hammonds.

The Supreme Court has upheld far tougher sentences for less serious or, at the very least, comparable offenses.

See Lockyer v. Andrade (upholding a sentence of fifty years to life under California’s three-strikes law for stealing nine videotapes); Ewing v. California (upholding a sentence of twenty-five years to life under California’s three-strikes law for the theft of three golf clubs);

Hutto v. Davis (upholding a forty-year sentence for possession of nine ounces of marijuana with the intent to distribute); Rummel v. Estelle (upholding a life sentence for under Texas’s recidivist statute for obtaining $120.75 by false pretenses).

 

[Hog-train]

That document doesn't say that they were poaching. Where does it say that? It also says the fire was lit on their property and it spread to the federal land.

You're so freaking disingenuous and simply being lazy because you don't want to look at the facts objectively.

You already have it in your head that the Hammonds are innocent and are being railroaded so any facts that contradict that - you completely ignore. Typical douche behaviour.

The fires was to cover up the illegal slaughter of the deer which was witnessed by the hunting guide, the guide’s two hunters, and was affirmed by Dusty Hammond.

That's their official testimony.

And the motive doesn't even matter ANYWAY. They set five fires on federal land- Hardie-Hammond, Fir Creek, Lower Bridge Creek, Krumbo Butte, and Granddad. That's illegal.

Stop making bullshit excuses.

 

[Happy Man]

You're so freaking disingenuous and simply being lazy because you don't want to look at the facts objectively.

You already have it in your head that the Hammonds are innocent and are being railroaded so any facts that contradict that - you completely ignore. Typical douche behaviour.

The fires was to cover up the illegal slaughter of the deer which was witnessed by the hunting guide, the guide’s two hunters, and was affirmed by Dusty Hammond.

That's their official testimony.

And the motive doesn't even matter ANYWAY. They set five fires on federal land- Hardie-Hammond, Fir Creek, Lower Bridge Creek, Krumbo Butte, and Granddad. That's illegal.

Stop making bullshit excuses.

So I mention the source doesn't have this story, and you claim the story still and don't provide a new source.

That's not the way to make a point. You have to back up a claim.

And again the court docket stated that the fire was set on private land then grew out of control and spread to federal land. It wasn't started on federal land as you claim.

 

[44nutman]

So I mention the source doesn't have this story, and you claim the story still and don't provide a new source.

That's not the way to make a point. You have to back up a claim.

And again the court docket stated that the fire was set on private land then grew out of control and spread to federal land. It wasn't started on federal land as you claim.

So 4 peoples sworn testimony is not enough. Hell one of 4 was a Hammond. They set a fire to hide evidence. There is no disputing this.
So you are either a dummy or a troll.

 

[Rod1]

Nothing matters but liberal tears.

 

[Judge]

This will encourage good behavior from these crazies...

https://apnews.com/7060f760f76f4608a72359f2ddcc98be

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump has pardoned two ranchers whose case sparked the armed occupation of a national wildlife refuge in Oregon.

Dwight and Steven Hammond were convicted in 2012 of intentionally and maliciously setting fires on public lands. The arson crime carried a minimum prison sentence of five years, but a sympathetic federal judge, on his last day before retirement, decided the penalty was too stiff and gave the father and son much lighter prison terms.

Prosecutors won an appeal and the Hammonds were resentenced in October 2015 to serve the mandatory minimum.

The decision sparked a protest from Ammon Bundy and dozens of others, who occupied the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge near the Hammond ranch in southeastern Oregon from Jan. 2 to Feb. 11, 2016, complaining the Hammonds were victims of federal overreach.

The armed occupiers changed the refuge’s name to the Harney County Resource Center, reflecting their belief that the federal government has only a very limited right to own property within a state’s borders.

Bundy was arrested during a Jan. 26 traffic stop, effectively ending the protest. Another key occupier, Robert “LaVoy” Finicum, was fatally shot that day by Oregon State Police.

In a statement Tuesday, White House press secretary Sarah Sanders called that decision to resentence the Hammonds “unjust.”

“The Hammonds are devoted family men, respected contributors to their local community, and have widespread support from their neighbors, local law enforcement, and farmers and ranchers across the West,” she said. “Justice is overdue for Dwight and Steven Hammond, both of whom are entirely deserving of these Grants of Executive Clemency.”

The pardons are the latest in a growing list of clemency actions by Trump, who has been using his pardon power with increasingly frequency in recent months.

Trump has been especially pleased with news coverage of his actions, which included commuting the sentence of Alice Johnson, a woman serving a life sentence for drug offenses whose case had been championed by reality television star Kim Kardashian West.

He has repeatedly referenced emotional video of Johnson being freed from prison and running into her family members’ arms, and has said he’s considering thousands more cases — both famous and not.

But critics say the president could be ignoring valid claims for clemency as he works outside the typical pardon process, focusing on cases brought to his attention by friends, famous people and conservative media pundits.

Aides say that Trump has been especially drawn to cases in which he believes the prosecution may have been politically motivated — a situation that may remind him of his own position at the center of the ongoing special counsel investigation into Russian election meddling.

Many have also seen the president as sending a signal with his pardons to former aides and associates caught up in the probe, or lashing out at enemies like former FBI Director James Comey, who oversaw the prosecution of lifestyle guru Martha Stewart, whom Trump has said he is thinking of pardoning.

I think this is more favorable than OBAMA

n one more end-of-presidency act of clemency aimed at prisoners serving long sentences for drug-related offenses, President Obama announcedThursday that he is commuting the sentences of 330 prisoners. He has granted clemency to more people than any president since Harry S. Truman,Not including the mass pardons Gerald Ford and Jimmy Carter granted to Vietnam War-era draft dodgers, which were not individual acts of clemency administered through the Department of Justice.and Thursday’s announcement was typical of how Obama’s approach to clemency has differed from that of his predecessors: Obama’s clemency is almost always given by freeing people from prison with commuted sentences, not pardoning people after their release.

On Tuesday, with less than a week left in office, Obama granted clemency to 273 federal inmates, including Chelsea Manning, the army intelligence analyst who was convicted in 2013 of disclosing sensitive information to WikiLeaks. Manning’s commutation was one of 209 that Obama made Tuesday; with the 330 from Thursday, his total number of commutations is now 1,715, more than any other president in history, according to the White House. Obama also issued 64 pardons this week.
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/obama-granted-clemency-unlike-any-other-president-in-history/

 

[Judge]

Would it be ok for people in the inner city to burn down their neighborhoods when they are booted by imminent domain?

As long as they don't burn any businesses with "BLACK OWNED" signs....not sure why people would do that ....

 

[Darkballs]

And again the court docket stated that the fire was set on private land then grew out of control and spread to federal land. It wasn't started on federal land as you claim.

Really? Well I guess we don't need to concern ourselves with the actual testimony then. Do you have any comments from a guy down the street from the courthouse?

 

[Hog-train]

That document doesn't say that they were poaching. Where does it say that? It also says the fire was lit on their property and it spread to the federal land.

You didn't even look. Completely disingenuous you are.

"In 2001, Dwight and Steven Hammond were seen by a hunting guide, a hunter and his father. They saw Steven Hammond and others illegally shooting deer on BLM property. Shortly thereafter, fires ignited by the Hammonds forced the witnesses to leave the area and destroyed evidence of their crime..."

https://popehat.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/HammondGovBrief.pdf