It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

Exclusive : Virginia Gov Pardons 60000 felons enough to swing election

page: 3
38
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 6 2016 @ 04:49 PM
link   
a reply to: dashen

Now to correct your misleading title?




posted on Nov, 6 2016 @ 04:58 PM
link   
a reply to: zosimov

its the title of the article



posted on Nov, 6 2016 @ 05:00 PM
link   
a reply to: dashen

Well that calls into question the valididty of the article, does it not?



posted on Nov, 6 2016 @ 05:02 PM
link   
a reply to: zosimov

nope, he pardoned them from being ineligible to vote, with an autopen, without reviewing the cases at all.

par·don
ˈpärdn/Submit
noun
1.
the action of forgiving or being forgiven for an error or offense.
"he obtained pardon for his sins"
synonyms: forgiveness, absolution, clemency, mercy, leniency, remission
"pardon for your sins"
verb
1.
forgive or excuse (a person, error, or offense).
"I know Catherine will pardon me"
synonyms: forgive, absolve, have mercy on; More



posted on Nov, 6 2016 @ 05:09 PM
link   
a reply to: dashen

Look, I understand that this is becoming a matter of semantics. But, when it comes to rhetoric vs truth, semantics is key. He did not attempt to "pardon" (grant clemency to) anyone. He attempted to change the state's disenfranchisement laws. This is not a new topic or action. There are many who disagree with these laws, particularly the class/race implications. In a given 4 year cycle, anyone attempting to question this particular status quo will be accused of the same.

But the word you are looking for is not "pardon," which has a specific meaning when we discuss law, as you will find in your post above.



posted on Nov, 6 2016 @ 05:13 PM
link   
a reply to: zosimov a pardon is not the same as a release, these pardoned felons will not have to do parole as a pardon means they are no longer felons at all and can vote immediately



posted on Nov, 6 2016 @ 05:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: zosimov
a reply to: dashen

Look, I understand that this is becoming a matter of semantics. But, when it comes to rhetoric vs truth, semantics is key. He did not attempt to "pardon" (grant clemency to) anyone. He attempted to change the state's disenfranchisement laws. This is not a new topic or action. There are many who disagree with these laws, particularly the class/race implications. In a given 4 year cycle, anyone attempting to question this particular status quo will be accused of the same.

But the word you are looking for is not "pardon," which has a specific meaning when we discuss law, as you will find in your post above.


his attempts to alter sate disenfranchisement laws is a separate incident separate topic to this event/thread.
this is about his pardoning that he DID do. get back on topic stop trying to create thread drift.



posted on Nov, 6 2016 @ 05:16 PM
link   
a reply to: NobodiesNormal

Exactly my point. He didn't pardon people, he attempted to change the pre-existing disenfranchisement laws, renewing the voting priveledge to those felons who have already served their time and completed parole. This is why semantics is so important.



posted on Nov, 6 2016 @ 05:19 PM
link   
a reply to: NobodiesNormal

Again, propaganda hard at work. If you look at the article provided, or any article about this matter at all, you will find that he did not pardon felons but tried to restore the voting rights to disenfranchised non-violent felons who have completed parole.

Which is why OP should change the misleading title so as not further confuse people.



posted on Nov, 6 2016 @ 05:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: zosimov
a reply to: NobodiesNormal

Again, propaganda hard at work. .


yea, you do seem to be working pretty hard...



posted on Nov, 6 2016 @ 05:27 PM
link   
a reply to: dashen

You know what? If you want to sell blatant misinformation as truth, and if people are willing to buy, who am I to stop you? You might as well work for MSM with your willingness to spin the story.



posted on Nov, 6 2016 @ 05:29 PM
link   
a reply to: zosimov

have you seen their pizza parties?



posted on Nov, 6 2016 @ 05:30 PM
link   
Is anyone watching Ted Nugent btw at Trumps rally?. on now.



posted on Nov, 6 2016 @ 05:31 PM
link   
a reply to: dashen

Still waiting for the evidence on that one.
If there are pizza parties, members both Dems and Repubs are invited and accept that invite.
For now, my vote goes to Stein.



posted on Nov, 6 2016 @ 05:32 PM
link   
a reply to: zosimov

if i were to vote i think Vermin Supreme is the only sane choice



posted on Nov, 6 2016 @ 05:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: John_Rodger_Cornman
a reply to: dashen

Why shouldn't felons be allowed to vote?

Republicans, don't want felons to vote



posted on Nov, 6 2016 @ 05:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: dashen
a reply to: zosimov

if i were to vote i think Vermin Supreme is the only sane choice


lol, now here's where we can agree!

(But I still think Stein has my vote)



posted on Nov, 6 2016 @ 05:37 PM
link   
Sounds shady, but felons should be allowed to vote. They are still US Citizens



posted on Nov, 6 2016 @ 05:48 PM
link   
As a felon myself you sure sound like one of those paranoid *insert insult here* types that think all felons are murderers,rapists, and thugs.

Why would you care about felons being able to vote? Do you expect them to write in Lil' Wayne?

Hillary was accused of a felon, yet half of America is going to vote for her.



posted on Nov, 6 2016 @ 06:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: WilburnRoach

originally posted by: John_Rodger_Cornman
a reply to: dashen

Why shouldn't felons be allowed to vote?

Republicans, don't want felons to vote

Actually it's the state law.

Virginia is one of four states that permanently strip felons of voting rights unless the governor lifts the prohibition, which Virginia governors had done sparingly.

www.nytimes.com...

The court told him he could not simply restore everyone at once. He had to actually review the case and sign off on it.

Using an auto pen to "sign" without any review seems like it's against the law in Virginia, at the very least the spirit of it.

If Virginia wants Felons voting they can change the law, rather than have a governor skirt the law.




top topics



 
38
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join