Bush finally (almost) pardons Ramos and Compean

Why should they have been pardoned? I support Bush here as the sentencing was far too severe, but they shot an unarmed fleeing suspect and then tried to cover it up... they deserve 100% of their felon status. Commuting their sentence was the right move.
 
Their story has been so exalted, retold, and misinterpreted by the right wing hate-brown-folks nutjobs that they'll happily and gleefully overlook the facts of this case.

You'll ignore that their testimony was contradicted by everyone other than themselves, they pled guilty to covering up the shooting, and they were found guilty on ALL charges (save one - attempted manslaughter?) by a jury, in a court of law. They are hardly the sympathetic heroes you and your Lou Dobbs worshipping colleagues want to suggest.

Now, they're pardoned, and that's that. I'm surprised that there have been so few controversial pardons/commutes. That said, what Ramos and Compean did was, in fact, criminal. If a policeman randomly decides to shoot someone, and that person happens to have warrants out for their arrest, do we exalt the police as heroes, or criticize their violation of procedural law?
 
The guy they shot, Osvaldo Aldrete Davila, is pure scum...

...just a few months after the pansy government let him go in exchange for his testimony, he went right back to smuggling drugs into the US. And it's not like they shot him unprovoked... they guy was trying to escape! They were protecting out border and the border is a dangerous place. What the hell are they supposed to do, just let a potentially dangerous criminal get away? Geez, they just shot him in the ass...
 
[quote name='BigT']And it's not like they shot him unprovoked... they guy was trying to escape![/quote]
Escaping is not a reason to use deadly force on a suspect.
They were protecting out border and the border is a dangerous place.
Click to expand...
Immaterial to the law and their upholding of it. If they are incapable of handling the job, they shouldn't be doing it. Period.
What the hell are they supposed to do, just let a potentially dangerous criminal get away? Geez, they just shot him in the ass...
Click to expand...
I'm not understanding what about this story is attracting the right wing authoritarians like this. As often as I listen to Hannity, Rush, Savage, etc. and see people on message boards defending them, I've never actually seen a reasonable defense demonstrated for these guys other than:

1. They shot a Messican.
2. Messicans don't count.

I mean, can you imagine the reaction from the right wing nuts if the ATF or FBI was using the same rules of engagement?

BigT, you have to know your supporting evidence is total shit. What first piqued your interest in this case and what about it garnered your continued support after you learned the facts?

Cause the facts are friggin awful. I don't get it.
 
[quote name='BigT']The guy they shot, Osvaldo Aldrete Davila, is pure scum...

...just a few months after the pansy government let him go in exchange for his testimony, he went right back to smuggling drugs into the US. And it's not like they shot him unprovoked... they guy was trying to escape! They were protecting out border and the border is a dangerous place. What the hell are they supposed to do, just let a potentially dangerous criminal get away? Geez, they just shot him in the ass...[/QUOTE]

Proper law enforcement procedure is not what you watch on "The Shield." You don't get to shoot "the bad guy" because he's "running away." If everything was above board, as you imply, they wouldn't have covered up the shooting, would they?
 
[quote name='BigT']The guy they shot, Osvaldo Aldrete Davila, is pure scum...

...just a few months after the pansy government let him go in exchange for his testimony, he went right back to smuggling drugs into the US. And it's not like they shot him unprovoked... they guy was trying to escape! They were protecting out border and the border is a dangerous place. What the hell are they supposed to do, just let a potentially dangerous criminal get away? Geez, they just shot him in the ass...[/QUOTE]

LOL..

It seems you have no respect for law, or even understand its purpose..

It was, rightfully, illegal to use deadly force in their situation; it was, rightfully , illegal to hide what they had done and attempt to deceive a court of law.
 
[quote name='JolietJake']So it's ok to break the law to catch a criminal? Doesn't that make them no better than the guy they're after?[/QUOTE]

Try telling that to Steven Segal.
 
[quote name='JolietJake']So it's ok to break the law to catch a criminal? [/quote]

No, but I have yet to see a perfect human being in this world.

If someone breaks the law to catch a criminal they should be punished fairly like any other criminal. Frankly, it isn't the shooting that bothered me as much as the coverup and lying about it. It makes you wonder what else they may have lied about.
 
You guys are trying to make it into a democrat vs. republican issue...

But look at the facts: it was George Bush and his right hand man Karl Rove, who persuaded their crony lawyer Johnny Sutton to carry out the prosecution with trumped up charges (mandatory 10 years because of using a gun during the crime - duh, border patrol agents carry guns as part of their jobs)...

Senator Feinstein did a great job in helping push Bush to reduce their sentences: http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=56727
Many other democrats signed the a petition to Bush to commute the sentence (including Rahm Emanuel)

What they did (not reporting that they fired their guns) warrants perhaps a 1-2 week suspension and not an 11-12 year felony conviction!

It was a retarded and fruitless attempt by Bush and Rove to try to get more latino support for the Republican party. They tried to throw a couple of people under the bus in the process, and that's just wrong!

What pissed me off about this whole case is that the drug smuggler got immunity, free medical care, tired to sue the US for $5 million, and got a free visa (that he used to smuggle drugs again!)... he went free while the guys on our side got 11-12 years sentences! That's completely insane.
 
You're the only person here treating the legal issue as a political one... if I'm not mistaken speed usually leans to the right, I doubt his post was critical of republicans.

You're still not offering any valid defense for these felons, who shot a fleeing unarmed suspect and then attempted to deceive our legal system...
 
[quote name='speedracer']Escaping is not a reason to use deadly force on a suspect.

Immaterial to the law and their upholding of it. If they are incapable of handling the job, they shouldn't be doing it. Period.

I'm not understanding what about this story is attracting the right wing authoritarians like this. As often as I listen to Hannity, Rush, Savage, etc. and see people on message boards defending them, I've never actually seen a reasonable defense demonstrated for these guys other than:

1. They shot a Messican.
2. Messicans don't count.

I mean, can you imagine the reaction from the right wing nuts if the ATF or FBI was using the same rules of engagement?

BigT, you have to know your supporting evidence is total shit. What first piqued your interest in this case and what about it garnered your continued support after you learned the facts?

Cause the facts are friggin awful. I don't get it.[/quote]

How do you know the facts? The feds lied (and later admitted to lying) to congress about the facts of the case... they made up stuff!
http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=54132
http://hecubus.wordpress.com/2007/02/07/government-lied-about-ramos-compean-what-else-is-new/

Two other border patrol agents lied in their testimony and were subsequently fired for changing their stories.
http://www.dailybulletin.com/news/ci_5200281

The jurors were misled in their instructions
http://www.dailybulletin.com/news/ci_4508579

As for how I got interested: It's been a recurring theme on the John and Ken show on KFI 640... the original case was reported by Sara A. Carter, who broke the story.


But come on, in the heat of the moment, when you are fighting with a drug smuggler... are you going to think twice before shooting? How many drug smugglers (with a van load of drugs) are not armed? And for all we know, the guy may have been armed (he ran back to Mexico and was not caught on the spot).

I hope Johnny Sutton: 1.) Loses his job and 2.) Has a nice place in hell reserved for him!
 
That first article is from Jerome Corsi, who himself has never met a fact he wasn't able to completely make up. If you're going to go all WND on us, I don't see why I should bother. Let me go dig up a counterpoint from "HuffPo" if you're going to be that lazy.

Moreso, what we now have is, if you're a *fool*, an argumentative stalemate.

Here's a FACT: The two convicts covered up the shooting.
Here's another: The shooting was a legal violation of law enforcement procedure (necessitating the coverup)

Here's what is up for contention: Either Ramos and Compean lied about their involvement, the incident itself, and the coverup of their *unarguably* illegal act. Or EVERYONE ELSE LIED while only Ramos and Compean told the truth.

That's the new ideological war brought on us by the right. Play the kindergarten 'telephone' game, turn the world on its head, and argue incorrect points loud and often such that they are misinterpreted as fact.

So we are to believe that either (1) the two people who committed the shooting and covered up said shooting lied, or (2) everyone else lied except for the two people who did the shooting.

Those are out choices according to you? That's a reasonable discussion to have? If EVERYONE lied except for Ramos and Compean, the one thing you can't explain is why the shooting was covered up by the two of them, then. You and your can't script a coherent story, so you assemble this sympathetic hero story of law enforcement agents trying to do their job properly and heroically (which it is not proper in a legal sense, nor is it heroic to shoot as someone flees).

This isn't a debate worth having; whether or not they deserve 11/12 years for violating to uphold the law is a debate we can have. That's a discussion of ideas, of philosophies. Great. Let's do that.

But this "everyone lied except for those who were convicted" is so juvenile, so pitiful, that it's like Ann Coulter: shocking enough to warrant airtime in a "car-crash news tv" kind of way, but not at all suitable for a reasoned, intellectual discussion. Which makes it, of course, absolutely and amazingly unsurprising that world renowned bullshit artist Jerome Corsi is behind it.

Corsi would take a look at your anatomy, tell you you're a woman, and you'd unquestioningly believe him, wouldn't you?
 
Mykevermin, the master of lazy ad hominem attacks strikes again: just because you don't like Corsi, you attack him and not the content of his writing... he's no different than the mirror image of Krugman, who you love to cite, but is essentially a very biased spokesperson for the left (but since you agree with his political stance, you don't seem to mind his biases)...
 
Yes. Because Corsi was correct about John Kerry and Barack Obama, and Krugman was dead wrong about predicting the housing bubble and its effects.

:roll:

Get real. Corsi is not worth addressing. You don't seem to understand that. Having a political opinion doesn't immediately mean one is deserving of entree into intellectual political discourse.

And, speaking of not addressing, you really honed in on that ad hominem and ignored the flagrant logical fallacy of the "everybody lied by the two convicts" side of the story. Bravo. But not very slick, mind.
 
So taking a step back and boiling all this down, what did the border patrol, in general, learn (get taught) from all this?

When you fire your gun, make sure they are dead.

I trust they all watched this case and have learned this lesson.
 
Firstly if all they did was shoot this guy in the ass and he's a drug smuggler boo fucking hoo for him. What I mean is that he then has no fucking right to sue the government. If he's coming from Mexico chances are I doubt that it's Pot he's smuggling.
For all we know these guys covered it up because they were exactly afraid they'd have the book thrown at them considering the guy crossing the border was Mexican. I mean I suspect both of the guys who shot him were White. You do the math.
 
He didn't sue the government. The federal government prosecuted the border agents on their own. You don't go to prison for a civil case, Sarang.

No one is disputing that the guy was fucking dirt but the government can't have guys running around shooting unarmed civilians. Ask the city of Oakland how that works out.
 
[quote name='depascal22']He didn't sue the government. The federal government prosecuted the border agents on their own. You don't go to prison for a civil case, Sarang.

No one is disputing that the guy was fucking dirt but the government can't have guys running around shooting unarmed civilians. Ask the city of Oakland how that works out.[/quote]

Two separate issues, the drug smuggler, Davila, also sued the government for violating his civil rights ($5 million dollars)... insanity!
 
Reminds me of that case earlier last year, where that guy shot the two fleeing burglars who were robbing his neighbors. I still can't believe he got off free.

In my mind, to shoot someone who isn't even attacking you is wrong. If someone is fleeing, they're no longer a threat to you. I don't care that they only shot him in the ass, they could have just as easily shot him in the head.
 
[quote name='Sarang01']For all we know these guys covered it up because they were exactly afraid they'd have the book thrown at them considering the guy crossing the border was Mexican. I mean I suspect both of the guys who shot him were White. You do the math.[/QUOTE]
You're absolutely right. I mean really, what kind of a world do we live in when federal employees don't have the ability to cover up shooting people and then giving their side of the story the benefit of the doubt when they get caught?

Love the race angle too. Cherry on top of the brutal fail that is your argument.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top