[flagged]

> But I think if the office of the President is selling pardons it's better they do that with money in the open than with backslapping behind closed doors.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_dilemma

What if we didn't let Presidents sell pardons?

	▲	renewiltord 3 days ago \| parent [-]
		This is, of course, the right thing. The pardon is no longer a relevant power. Scooter Libby's pardon was already too much and that's the one which scared me straight about them.

▲

mikeyouse 3 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Insanely unethical worldview. My actual ‘take’ is that people should pay for the crimes they commit and bribing officeholders to avoid repercussions for criminal behavior is very bad and extraordinarily corrosive to democratic rule.

It’s a common parlor trick to talk in the abstract about things like this to avoid the magnitude of the corruption.

But to be clear, the actual comparison here is a multimillion dollar bribe to save almost $200M in penalties from a convicted fraud - and someone who had served 13 years in Federal prison having the last 4 years of their imprisonment commuted, but having all of their other post-sentence restrictions and fines remain in place - with absolutely no benefit to the President who commuted that sentence.

So, no, I reject that these two are remotely comparable cases. Regardless the propriety of pardon power in general.

	▲	renewiltord 3 days ago \| parent [-]
		Doing a favor to a friend of the family is definitely worse than making it available to all. Far more corrosive to society for institutional nepotism to be considered better than payment. Nepotism is definitely more unethical.

▲

mindslight 3 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Edgelord as hard as you can. Pretending to be above it won't save you from societal destruction.