She may have been MAGA, but I admire her for having principles and being able to admit to being wrong.
this post was submitted on 22 Jan 2025
263 points (99.3% liked)
News
23980 readers
5735 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 right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
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.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
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 or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. 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.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
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
Finally, a republican with some fucking integrity!
I agree, but:
Pamela Hemphill, who pleaded guilty and was sentenced to 60 days in prison,
If her sentence was 10 years I wonder if she'd still be taking the moral stand.
Out of all the hairs to split here, I personally think this is one I’d let slide. Gotta take the little flashes of hope for the next two years, at least.
If her sentence was 10 years I wonder if she'd still be taking the moral stand.
I would recommend that instead of conditionally forgiving her (based on something we’ll never know), we should give her the benefit of the doubt and assume that yes she would.
Why are they called "rioters" now?
They're insurrectionists
Because they're only insurrectionists if they fail...
They're part of Trump's private army, the Seditious Shitheads, or "SS" for short.
Because these people are cash cows for the media so they want to treat them with kid gloves.
They're insurrectionists, traitors, fascists
Terrorists.
No no, they were peaceful protestors! It was a day of love! Trump said so.
While also being antifa crisis actors.
Yeah, shouldn't Republicans be terrified of Trump letting all of those Antifa people stirring up trouble on January 6th out of prison?
I'm pretty sure he called them hostages on Monday.
He's been doing that for months.
I learned recently that Americans do in fact have the right to refuse a pardon.
Same. Imagine being her lawyer now, having to argue on her behalf in court that she is guilty and is entitled to prison time. That she has a right to that prison time and to a permanent criminal record.
~~I might be wrong here, but wouldn't it basically require you to confess the crime?~~
It is not an admission of guilt.
I believe that's true, but that's not why she did it.
"Accepting a pardon would only insult the Capitol police officers, rule of law and, of course, our nation," she said.
"I pleaded guilty because I was guilty, and accepting a pardon also would serve to contribute to their gaslighting and false narrative."
There must always be a path to redemption, and it appears she has chosen to take it.
That's honourable of her and I respect it.
I always give consideration to those who admit they were wrong.
I recall a reporter arguing with Joe Arpaio after he was pardoned by Trump. Joe kept saying "I never admitted got" and the reporter repeated "by accepting a pardon, you admit guilt". It went nowhere
Not necessarily. You can plead guilty while still asserting innocence, for example the Alford plea. It means the defendant accepts the sentence, but remains adamant that what they did was okay according to their conscience.
In this case tho, the only alternative is to go free despite your wrongdoing, so it might be more of a "Fuck your pardon, orange twat" reaction.
But US SCOTUS ruled that accepting a pardon is an admission of guilt in 1915
Although the Supreme Court's opinion stated that a pardon carries "an imputation of guilt and acceptance of a confession of it," this was part of the Court's dictum for the case. Whether the acceptance of a pardon constitutes an admission of guilt by the recipient is disputed. In Lorance v. Commandant, USDB (2021) the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that "there is no confession and Lorance does not otherwise lose his right to petition for habeas corpus relief for his court-martial conviction and sentence.
That's from the Wikipedia article about the case you're referring to. Note that a dictum from the Supreme Court is influential but not binding as a precedent.
However, that case has to do with a preemptive pardon for a crime that the recipient had not yet been accused of. Pardons for a crime that the recipient is currently being punished for may be different. (If the government wants to remove you from prison, can you refuse to leave?) So may pardons for a crime for which the recipient has already completed his punishment.
Hahaha, you think precedent actually means anything to SCROTUS.
I know that in New York, you can simply plead “no contest” or “nolo contendre”
Accepting a pardon is not an admission of guilt so I don't think refusing one is either. The rest of what she said was a confession, though.
Seems that is true since a couple of years back, at least!
I respect her choice. She seems cool about it.
That's so wild that the people who tried to overthrow the election results are even capable of this much change so quickly.
Not really. One can look at other cults where people finally snap out of their trance once they've been separated from their leaders for a while. Not everyone does but many do.
It’s pretty inspiring, really. If there’s one thing the orange assface is right about, it’s that our prison system is horrendous. Now, I’m sure he doesn’t actually care since he’s above the law and will never see the inside of a cell, but I’m willing to bet at least of few of the insurrectionists (many of whom had relatively privileged backgrounds) took their guilty verdict and prison sentence very seriously. It’s probably the first time many of them were ever properly held responsible for their actions, which makes the pardons that much more egregious.
Not that it’s the same thing, but murderers have some of the lowest recidivism rates amongst convicted criminals, because people are first and foremost human, and when given the time most people are capable of understanding the impacts of their actions.
Our justice system does a pretty terrible job in general, but the Jan 6 cases were a rare example of the system working properly.
Idk, a lot of the Jan6 sentences were very lenient in general.
For sure, I agree. Many of the sentences could probably have been longer. But clearly some were enough to make a difference for people like this woman. People can change and understand the wrongs they’ve committed if they’re given the opportunity and empathy to do so.
To be clear I’m not making excuses for any insurrectionists. But everybody, even them, deserves a genuine chance to understand the harm they caused with their crimes. If even a few of them can do that, then maybe this whole ordeal wasn’t a complete quagmire.