this post was submitted on 02 Dec 2024
706 points (97.8% liked)

News

35774 readers
2616 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.


Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.


7. No duplicate posts.


If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.


All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Summary

President Joe Biden pardoned his son Hunter Biden, reversing his prior stance against using executive clemency.

The pardon covers Hunter’s federal gun conviction and tax evasion guilty plea, sparking political controversy.

Biden cited political attacks and a “miscarriage of justice” as reasons for his decision, emphasizing his son’s recovery from addiction and the targeting of his family.

Critics argue the move undermines the judicial process, while supporters view it as within Biden’s constitutional powers.

This decision shields Hunter from potential prison time as Biden nears the end of his presidency.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world -4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I'm not a lawyer, but I thought the way it worked was that the prosecutor offers the plea bargain and the accused accepts but it's still up to the judge's discretion whether that accepted plea bargain goes through, meaning that the system was working as it always works and it wasn't some sort of special persecution deal.

[–] chiliedogg@lemmy.world 29 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

The judge almost never throws out a plea bargain - and it's almost unheard of for one to throw it out for not being harsh enough.

They're more often rejected for thing like a plea bargain where the case should be dismissed entirely or the defendant has a very good chance of winning or securing a lesser conviction at trial. Judges are supposed to err on the side of leniency.

Rejecting a plea bargain because a charge that is almost never prosecuted is being dismissed is judicial malpractice.

The gun crime he was convicted for is one that anyone who has ever smoked pot is guilty of if they ever touched a gun before quitting pot entirely.

If a resident of Colorado eats a gummy legally and has a gun in the safe at home, they've committed the same crime.

[–] Corkyskog@sh.itjust.works 11 points 1 year ago

If Conservatives cared about this law, all they would have to do is pull dispensary ID logs and probably a tenth or more of all gun applicants could be arrested. But they don't do that because people don't care, and they just want another law they can apply selectively.