The federal possession forgiveness was a red herring. It only applies to people in federal prison who aren’t also in for “violent” offenses, which all the aggravated and intent charges count as.
And yes federal because that’s what he has jurisdiction over. And yes violent offences are a big and completely different step up. It was intended to be possession and that what it was, not other things. You’re doing a weird deflection on what was a good call. And plenty of advisors probably pointed out that many times some decently bad incidents get argued down to possession for plea deal.
Almost no one is in federal prison for “just” possession. Almost no one serves time in federal prison for possession when their case is plead down. Part of an attractive plea deal is avoiding federal prison. Lots of weird shit counts as violent crime even though we wouldn’t think it was. Felony murder is a thing.
A red herring, especially in a narrative, is some piece of information meant to be misleading.
Biden pardoning of people with possession charges amounted to very few actual pardons, didn’t account for the Byzantine legal system and didn’t have any effect for precursor crimes. The intent was to get some publicity and seem like he’s doing something while actually not doing anything. Purposely misleading information. A red herring.
Yeah it’s not many people because most convictions are from the states, which he does not have jurisdiction over. Ok? Got it? The president can not do anything about state convictions or sentences. So he did what he could with federal charges, because federal charges is what he has jurisdiction over.
Part of an attractive deal is pleading down more serious stuff down to simple possession.
Red herring:
Something that draws attention away from the matter being discussed or dealt with.
It’s not a red herring. What you are trying to do is closer (still not quite) to a red herring because you are trying to draw attention away from what he could do and trying to minimize it with the repeated “not many”. The number doesn’t matter, he did what he had jurisdiction over, You are the one much closer to a red herring. Ciao.
Oh the pwesident doesn’t have any juwustiction owver the states… nothing he could do!
If I was a politician with more than 50 years under my belt running on tough on crime platforms and spearheading racist laws that ramp up the convictions of millions of black Americans for minor drug offenses with the knock on effect of providing police the chance to go hunting for more evidence, detain and steal the property of those people, would you call it a red herring when I grant clemency to the absolute barest minimum possible?
I obviously would, because I did, but language is mutable and it’s possible that there’s a better phrase when you’re responsible for the current juiced up run wild carceral slavery system holding millions and decide that a handful of people actually shouldn’t be in there but only the ones that you can very quietly grant clemency to without causing a stir and only the ones serving time on the most narrow range of charges which just happens to be nearly tangential to each other!
If you want to keep arguing about language, the word tangent should be your next target, I just described what most people would visualize as two shapes as being tangent to each other but only unbounded shapes like planes or lines can be tangential! Quick, start looking up definitions!
Biden created the laws and supported the growth of a system that put these people in prison for his entire career. He now occupies the highest seat of power in the nation and releases a tiny fraction of the people he’s responsible for the imprisonment of. If you won’t accept that it’s a red herring then I’m forced to call it bullshit.
Oh the pwesident doesn’t have any juwustiction owver the states… nothing he could do!
Lol you turn to mocking the president about ??? the things he can and can’t do??? Yeah that about sums it up, you showed who you are. You have no idea how things work so sorry to say you’re acting like a child (with those spellings). Why am I even bothering, ciao.
He’s just a smol bean sitting on the big chair! He literally can’t do anything more than the token gesture he made! No, don’t look at all the billions in federal funding and aid for state prisons! Don’t look at the huge standing army, don’t look at the billions in aid to foreign wars!
The federal possession forgiveness was a red herring. It only applies to people in federal prison who aren’t also in for “violent” offenses, which all the aggravated and intent charges count as.
So it ended up applying to like five dudes.
That’s not what a red herring is.
And yes federal because that’s what he has jurisdiction over. And yes violent offences are a big and completely different step up. It was intended to be possession and that what it was, not other things. You’re doing a weird deflection on what was a good call. And plenty of advisors probably pointed out that many times some decently bad incidents get argued down to possession for plea deal.
Almost no one is in federal prison for “just” possession. Almost no one serves time in federal prison for possession when their case is plead down. Part of an attractive plea deal is avoiding federal prison. Lots of weird shit counts as violent crime even though we wouldn’t think it was. Felony murder is a thing.
A red herring, especially in a narrative, is some piece of information meant to be misleading.
Biden pardoning of people with possession charges amounted to very few actual pardons, didn’t account for the Byzantine legal system and didn’t have any effect for precursor crimes. The intent was to get some publicity and seem like he’s doing something while actually not doing anything. Purposely misleading information. A red herring.
Yeah it’s not many people because most convictions are from the states, which he does not have jurisdiction over. Ok? Got it? The president can not do anything about state convictions or sentences. So he did what he could with federal charges, because federal charges is what he has jurisdiction over.
Part of an attractive deal is pleading down more serious stuff down to simple possession.
Red herring:
It’s not a red herring. What you are trying to do is closer (still not quite) to a red herring because you are trying to draw attention away from what he could do and trying to minimize it with the repeated “not many”. The number doesn’t matter, he did what he had jurisdiction over, You are the one much closer to a red herring. Ciao.
Oh the pwesident doesn’t have any juwustiction owver the states… nothing he could do!
If I was a politician with more than 50 years under my belt running on tough on crime platforms and spearheading racist laws that ramp up the convictions of millions of black Americans for minor drug offenses with the knock on effect of providing police the chance to go hunting for more evidence, detain and steal the property of those people, would you call it a red herring when I grant clemency to the absolute barest minimum possible?
I obviously would, because I did, but language is mutable and it’s possible that there’s a better phrase when you’re responsible for the current juiced up run wild carceral slavery system holding millions and decide that a handful of people actually shouldn’t be in there but only the ones that you can very quietly grant clemency to without causing a stir and only the ones serving time on the most narrow range of charges which just happens to be nearly tangential to each other!
If you want to keep arguing about language, the word tangent should be your next target, I just described what most people would visualize as two shapes as being tangent to each other but only unbounded shapes like planes or lines can be tangential! Quick, start looking up definitions!
Biden created the laws and supported the growth of a system that put these people in prison for his entire career. He now occupies the highest seat of power in the nation and releases a tiny fraction of the people he’s responsible for the imprisonment of. If you won’t accept that it’s a red herring then I’m forced to call it bullshit.
Lol you turn to mocking the president about ??? the things he can and can’t do??? Yeah that about sums it up, you showed who you are. You have no idea how things work so sorry to say you’re acting like a child (with those spellings). Why am I even bothering, ciao.
You said goodbye last time but you’re still here!
He’s just a smol bean sitting on the big chair! He literally can’t do anything more than the token gesture he made! No, don’t look at all the billions in federal funding and aid for state prisons! Don’t look at the huge standing army, don’t look at the billions in aid to foreign wars!
He can’t do anything else! It’s not possible!
Are you also scared of project 2025?