The Grassroot
Conservative
issue 7
June 11, 2025
Pahrump, NV
Checking the Conservative
Pulse in Southern Nevada
Join the Movement
visit us online at thenevadapatriot.com
The Grassroot Conservative ™
Content in this online publication cannot be recreated, reproduced, or copied
without the written consent of the author and publisher. Independent authors are
responsible for the content and all info herein is deemed by the publisher as
reliable and authentic. Publisher is a content aggregator of articles and is not
responsible for the individual authors’ consequences in exercising their free
speech.
Keep in mind the freedom of speech in need of the most protection is that which
we often times find disagreeable. If factual inaccuracies arise, you can contact
The Grassroot Conservative at 775-382-2516, so we can address your concern.
____________________________________________________________
ABOUT THE INDEPENDENT AUTHORS
Matt Sadler is a small business owner and proprietor of A Hope Bonds in Pahrump. He is a
recovering politician who reveres the 1st Amendment. He is a Christian, lucky husband of one,
and father of 3 terrific kids. He is also a reluctant owner of a sheepadoodle and
founder/chairman of Grassroots Conservatives of Nevada. He is also editor-in-chief at The
Grassroot Conservative™.
Colonel Patrick Nary (Ret.) is a mainstay of the Pahrump community (even while living in
Las Vegas) who is actively involved in any worthy cause you can ponder. He is a charitable,
no-nonsense man and The Grassroot Conservative is lucky to have his contributions.
Barry Lindemann holds an MBA, is a former United States Senate Candidate in Nevada, and
is a successful entrepreneur in Southern Nevada. He is a strong voice for common sense and
fiscal accountability.
Jerry Hashimura is a life-long conservative who spent 24 years as an active-duty Army
officer followed by 23 years as the head of a corporate legal department. He is happily married
for nearly 50 years.
China currently owns 383,934
acres of land in the United
States!
Think about that. The US has
allowed an “Enemy” of the state
to buy and own land.
Now granted they are not the
Largest foreign landowner in
the US, Canada owns that with
12 million acres mainly in the
Northeast, but China is the
most dangerous to the
freedoms we enjoy.
When you look at the map you
see majority of the land is in
states that have agriculture, but
they also have military bases in
those states. We know China
sends spies to the US to
infiltrate our businesses and our
government. A few examples:
2020 Two Chinese nationalist
illegally entering and
photographing defense
infrastructure in Key west
Florida.
2022 a Chinese nationalist
attending Illinois Institute of
Technology sentence to 8 years
for espionage.
2023 Five Chinese nationalist
attending University of Michigan
involved with illegally entering
Camp Gray while US was
training with Taiwanese military
and photographing.
Last, we have 2024 a Chinese
nationalist attending University
of Minnesota was arrested for
espionage while using a drone
to take photos of Naval bases
in Norfolk, Virginia.
In just a five-year period we see
the number of espionage cases
that were caught. How many
were not?
Just this week two Chinese
Scientists were caught trying to
smuggle a “dangerous
Biological Pathogen into the
US. This pathogen is labeled an
agroterrorism weapon. It would
cause a noxious fungus called
“head blight” which could/would
have devastated the wheat,
barley, maize and rice industry
for years, costing the US
Billions. Not only that but it
would cause liver damage and
reproductive defects in humans
and livestock.
If we know they are sending
spies, why would we let them
buy land close to military bases,
or any land for that matter?
China is not our friend and
would love to destroy the
United States and take on the
role of Leader in the world.
They continue to prove that with
each passing day and each spy
caught.
When we look at the land near
military bases some big names
pop out. Fort Lewis,
Washington, Fort Brag, NC,
Wright Patterson AFB, OH,
Madill AFB, FL, and Patrick
Space Force Base, FL. MacDill
AFB in Tampa is home of
Central Command and Special
Forces Command, both very
active in the Middle East and
around the world. Buying land
close to military bases lets them
follow the coming and goings of
what happens on the base. It
reminds me when they were
worried about spying happening
at Vandenberg Air Force base
now Space Force base. I was
talking with a member of the
base, and I looked at him and
told him “You have 4 hotels in
Lompoc and when you have
something going on at the base
everyone knows because the
hotels are filled up. Might want
to stop that.”
A Chinese Billionaire Sun
Guangxin spent $110 million
buying land next to Laughlin
AFB, TX where military pilot
training happens routinely.
Senator Ted Cruz raised the
alarm that the CCP is willing to
invest billions to expand their
espionage in the US. Is anyone
listening?
With the Drone explosion
around the world, it would take
nothing for a “Farmer” to use a
drone and fly it close to military
base and take photos, or worse
attack the installation.
We just witnessed Ukraine
taking out 40 nuclear planes in
Russia. We don’t need that
here.
It’s time the President and
Congress take action to stop
foreign governments or their
proxies from buying US land.
I’m all about “Keep your friends
close, but your enemies closer.”
This is not a wise move and we
need action now, not before it is
to late.
Patrick Nary
LTC (R) United States Army
* all articles in this publication are
authored by independent writers
and do not necessarily reflect the
opinions of the publisher or other
independent writers herein.
ADVERTISEMENT: A Hope
Bail Bonds is a proud Sponsor
of The Grassroot Conservative
publication.
Stolen Valor: Why? Why?
Why?
I think we have all seen TV
news reports, articles, or
YouTube videos calling out
people for stolen valor claims.
For those unfamiliar with this
term, let me provide my brief
but very personal definition.
“Stolen Valor” is when some
scumbag, dirtbag, a$$hole,
jerkwad (I could go on further
but I think you get the idea)
claims military service or
military awards they did not
earn. The law defining stolen
valor is, to me, unfortunately
too restrictive and confined to
specific combat-related medals
in order to somehow protect
these scumbags’ First
Amendment rights. While I am
a strong supporter of the right
to free speech, telling lies is
not, to me, free speech in any
way, shape, or form…it doesn’t
even come close and should
not be protected. I don’t think
anyone was raised by parents
who believed you could lie
because it’s your right to free
speech…no, it was wrong and
you were punished for telling a
lie. Before they may be
prosecuted for stolen valor
claims, the statute also requires
these jerkwads try to obtain
money, property, or other
benefits through their lies.
Again, we don’t want to hurt
these liars’ feelings and need to
protect their First Amendment
right to say whatever the heck
they want. Arggghhhhh!!!
Since I dedicated my entire
professional life to the legal
business, I am always
interested in the legal
underpinnings for certain
issues. You may not be but, if
you are, here is how the
statutes evolved relative to
stolen valor. If you’re not
interested, skip down a couple
of paragraphs or now might be
the time for some Tylenol. In
2006, the Stolen Valor Act of
2005 was signed into law,
making it a federal
misdemeanor to falsely
represent oneself as having
received certain U.S. military
decorations or medals. In
2012, in the case of the United
States v. Alvarez, the Supreme
Court deemed this Act
unconstitutional because the
Act’s prohibition on falsely
claiming military awards was
too broad and could suppress
harmless or trivial lies, thereby
chilling free expression (read
that as a violation of the First
Amendment’s right to free
speech). Personally, I don’t find
it harmless or trivial if someone
lies about serving or receiving
military awards of any kind for
any reason – but hey, that’s just
me (and I hope you, too).
Xavier Alvarez, of the U.S. v.
Alvarez case, was an elected
member of a water district
board in California who
identified himself at a public
meeting by stating, “I’m a
retired Marine of 25 years. I
retired in the year 2001. Back
in 1987, I was awarded the
Congressional Medal of Honor.
I got wounded many times by
the same guy.” Alvarez was
never wounded in combat, did
not receive the Medal of Honor,
and, in fact, never served in any
branch of the military. He truly
fits my description above of a
“scumbag, dirtbag, a$$hole,
jerkwad” and it doesn’t seem to
me his First Amendment right to
free speech could possibly be
violated when he tells these
lies. As a comical side note, if it
weren’t so pathetic, he also
previously claimed to have
played hockey for the Detroit
Red Wings and that he once
married a starlet from Mexico –
all untrue. How sad is your real
life that you must make such
claims publicly?
In 2013, the Stolen Valor Act of
2013 was enacted to amend
the 2005 Act to address the
Supreme Court’s earlier ruling,
stating, in part: “Whoever, with
intent to obtain money, property,
or other tangible benefit,
fraudulently holds oneself out to
be a recipient of a decoration or
medal described in subsection
(c)(2) or (d) shall be fined under
this title, imprisoned not more
than one year, or both.” The
medals listed in the statute
include the three highest
awards for bravery, i.e., the
Congressional Medal of Honor,
Distinguished Service Cross,
and Silver Star, as well as other
combat-related awards, such as
the Purple Heart, Combat
Infantryman’s Badge, Combat
Action Badge, Combat Medical
Badge, Combat Action Ribbon,
or Combat Action Medal. In my
opinion, the statute should,
frankly, include any medal or
award from any branch of
service. While I’m pleased the
statute calls out the awards that
brave service members may
have lost their lives earning or
been catastrophically injured,
it’s offensive to me to see
anyone claim any military
medal they did not earn or
military service that is just a flat
lie, and the statute’s listing of
awards should have been
broad enough to include any
military award or military
service – but, of course, the
Supreme Court would have
likely found it unconstitutional
again as I’m sure people
smarter than me crafted the
2013 Act. Stolen valor claims
are essentially a huge lie but no
matter how big the lie, it is not
illegal to lie about military
service. If someone simply
claims to have served in the
military, it is just a lie and not a
criminal act. It becomes a lie
when the liar uses the lie to
receive something tangible,
such as VA benefits or money.
So, lie, lie, lie, all you want;
you’re protected by the First
Amendment; but to me it’s
wrong, wrong, wrong and
should be criminally punishable.
I guess if I was in charge, we’d
have to build more jails or
prisons but I’m okay with that
(you know, supporting the local
economy with more building) –
there’s plenty of desert where I
live that could accommodate
lots of stolen valor criminals.
I’m a retired Army officer with
24 years of continuous active-
duty service. I’m proud of my
service and served alongside
real heroes who exemplified
duty, honor, courage, and
commitment…they earned the
combat awards listed in the
Stolen Valor Act through
bravery, sacrifice, and blood. I
would never embellish my
career, make false claims about
my awards or deployments, or
allow others to do so without
correcting the record. I cannot
understand what motivates
people to do so. Is your real life
or your accomplishments so
pathetic that you must make
false claims regarding military
service or awards to impress
people? In my opinion, making
such claims is a slap in the face
to those of us who actually
served and especially those
who died or were injured while
serving. When these
scumbags publicly make these
false claims to enhance their
own reputation or life
accomplishments, it tarnishes
the reputations of our real
combat heroes and everyone
who put on a uniform and
served this great country. I’ve
seen Youtube videos of young
men and women falsely
claiming they served. Aside
from throwing up in my mouth a
little bit, when I see these
videos, most looked able
enough to actually join the
military and serve – why didn’t
they or why won’t they put on a
uniform and put themselves in
harm’s way? Maybe that’s it,
they don’t want to put
themselves in harm’s way and
fear they won’t or can’t
measure up. Frankly, if they
are the type of person to wear a
military uniform and claim
awards and/or service they did
not earn, it’s probably best they
never did put on a uniform and
put their fellow service
members at risk.
Aside from Alvarez, here are a
few examples of more
scumbags dirtbags individuals
making stolen valor claims (and
there are, sadly, so many
more):
Sarah Cavanaugh was a
decorated Marine veteran of
Iraq and Afghanistan. She
received a Bronze Star for
pulling fellow Marines from a
burning Humvee, even after
the door crushed her hip.
When she left the military,
she struggled to get VA
benefits, her painful leg was
a constant issue, she
needed hearing aids for
both ears, and eventually
developed lung cancer she
alleged from burn pit
exposure while on active
duty. Despite all of these
problems, she volunteered
for veterans’ retreats, joined
a gym, and became the
commander of her local
VFW. The only problem
with Cavanaugh is that she
never served in the military.
All lies.
Cavanaugh not only
falsified her military
service and claimed
medals she did not earn,
she collected more than
$250,000 in cash and
benefits intended to be
charitable contributions
for a wounded and
disabled veteran.
Thankfully, she was
sentenced to 70 months
in prison under the
Stolen Valor Act of 2013.
William Clark claimed to be
a Green Beret captain. In
2002, he showed up at a
gun show in Alaska,
claiming to be an active-duty
Green Beret captain and
tried to buy all-terrain
vehicles for “his guys.” He
caught the attention of a real
Army Sergeant, SGT Louis
Brandwein, stationed at a
nearby military base in
Alaska. Brandwein recalls
Clark as a “ridiculously
obese” guy in fatigues
claiming to be an active-duty
Green Beret captain.
Brandwein found glaring
problems with Clark’s
uniform and also wondered
why an active-duty Green
Beret stationed at Fort
Carson, Colorado, would be
in Alaska trying to buy ATVs
for his guys. Brandwein
reported it to his chain of
command and eventually
the FBI started looking into
Clark. They discovered
Clark had outstanding
warrants for check fraud
across the country,
stretching from Iowa to
Alaska. I could not find an
article reporting on the
sentencing of Clark for
stolen valor but maybe it’s a
case of it not being real
news at that point. When a
tugboat crashed into a
bridge in Missouri in 2002,
killing 14 people and
sending more into the water,
people rushed to the river,
desperately trying to save
the victims of the crash.
Clark rolled up and not only
told emergency responders
that he was in charge,
disrupting the professionals
who included the FBI,
National Transportation
Safety Board, and Army
Corps of Engineers, he went
through the victims’ personal
effects and commandeered
a truck from a nearby
dealership on the “National
Guard’s orders.” Sadly, a
real Army officer died in the
accident and Clark took it
upon himself to break the
news to the man’s widow. A
real class act. Clark was
sentenced to 6 years in
prison and 3 years’
probation in 2003 by a
Missouri judge.
I’ll close with the much-
reported stolen valor claims
surrounding Tim Walz,
former congressman,
current Governor of
Minnesota, and Kamala
Harris’s vice-presidential
running mate. There are
many people both for and
against Walz making stolen
valor claims. In the end, it
seems to me that an
argument can be made for
both sides – either he’s just
an idiot who misspeaks or
fails to speak to correct the
record; or, he’s an idiot but a
clever idiot who made
claims knowingly and
intentionally to get elected
as a Congressman,
Governor, and hoped to get
elected as the Vice
President.
In too many places to
count, Walz stated he
retired from the
Minnesota National
Guard as a Command
Sergeant Major (E-9),
the highest enlisted rank
in the Army. He also
made these claims while
running for Congress.
He was elected but
there’s no way to tell
how or if that swayed
any voters.
In fact, he applied for
promotion to
Command Sergeant
Major (things must be
different in the
National Guard since
active duty soldiers
don’t “apply” for
promotion, their
records are reviewed
by a promotion board
and only the best
qualified are selected
for promotion). He
started the work
required to achieve
the promotion but, for
some reason,
changed his mind
and retired (some say
before his National
Guard unit deployed
to Afghanistan). His
retirement records
erroneously reported
he retired as a
command sergeant
major; but four
months after he
retired from the
National Guard, his
records were
corrected to reflect he
retired as a Master
Sergeant (E-8).
Despite knowing he
retired as a Master
Sergeant, he
continued to state he
retired as a
Command Sergeant
Major. I don’t care
what the Walz
supporters said then
or say now, this is an
intentional and
knowing false claim
designed to enhance
his own reputation. I
retired from the
military and there
was no question in
my mind what rank I
had achieved at
retirement.
Connected to this
false claim of being a
Command Sergeant
Major, a C-SPAN
interview video and
later newspaper
article reported a
quote from him that
identified him as
someone “who
served in Afghanistan
as an Army command
sergeant major
before joining
Congress in 1987.”
He never served in
Afghanistan. Walz
did not correct this
erroneous reporting.
As someone who has
served honorably, I
would not and could
not let an error like
this go uncorrected.
It is my responsibility
to set the record
straight since I clearly
would know it’s
wrong. Apparently,
Walz doesn’t think
that way and, likely,
believed it enhanced
his reputation if the
public thought he
served in a hostile
fire zone and helped
him get elected to
office. He was
repeatedly referred to
as a “combat
veteran” but, again,
he never corrected
the record. At some
point, he was being
questioned by
President Bush’s
staffers and this set
of answers came
from Walz: Do you
support the
president? Walz
refused to answer.
Do you oppose the
president? Walz
replied it was no
one’s business but
his own. When he
learned from his wife
that the Secret
Service might arrest
him, he thought for a
moment and asked
the Bush staffers if
they really wanted to
arrest a command
sergeant major who’d
just returned from
fighting the war on
terrorism. In truth, he
had returned from a
short, minor support
role in Italy, not
Afghanistan. He
should have been
proud of his service,
not lie to make it
sound like he put his
life at risk in
Afghanistan. He
served and that
should have been
enough for him but,
clearly, he wanted to
sway potential voters.
Shameful.
Lastly, at a campaign
stop while Harris’s VP
nominee and asked
about his policy on
guns, he stated he
“carried weapons in
war.” This is likely
another instance of
his being an idiot who
cannot speak clearly.
Or, again, it was a
knowing and
intentional false
statement made by
an idiot to give the
misleading
impression he served
in a theater of war. A
more accurate – but
clearly weaker –
statement would be
he “carried weapons
in wartime” since he
did carry a weapon
while the U.S. was
involved in war but he
did not serve in any
actual war. I
personally believe
this was intentional.
Again, as someone
who served a long
time, I would never
make such a claim to
give the misleading
impression I served
in a hostile fire zone
like Iraq or
Afghanistan. My
carrying my military-
issued pistol while
serving in Germany
and Korea while
soldiers were serving
in Afghanistan and
Iraq does not mean I
carried a weapon in
war. Come on, Walz,
just tell the truth.
If you see or suspect someone
is engaging in stolen valor, and
especially if they are trying to
obtain money or benefits from
these lies, there are websites to
report these incidents so that
they may be more fully
investigated and, hopefully,
prosecuted if substantiated. If
you believe any instance of
falsely claiming military service
or medals not listed in the
Stolen Valor Act of 2013 should
be criminalized, make your
voices heard by your elected
officials.
Jerry Hashimura
Pahrump, NV
* all articles in this publication are
authored by independent writers
and do not necessarily reflect the
opinions of the publisher or other
independent writers herein.
ADVERTISEMENT: Grassroots
Conservatives of Nevada—
Pahrump normally meets the 4th
Monday of each month at 41 N.
Highway 160. Pahrump
Nevada. G-CON is a
conservative, non-partisan
group dedicated to government
accountabilty, promoting
conservative ideals, defeating
progressive ideas in the court
of public opinion, and affecting
policy changes through
elections and grassroots
efforts. Website is
grassrootsconservativesofnevada.com
ADVERTISEMENT: The
Nevada Patriot Podcast with
Matt Sadler is a conservative
talk show featuring content and
guests speaking into what
matters to us. All episodes are
at thenevadapatriot.co
m
Presidential Pardons and
Clemency: What do you
think?
It seems like every news cycle
contains a report of President
Trump granting another pardon
and a convicted felon is being
released from prison or his/her
sentence has been commuted.
The mainstream news media,
never Trump’s friend going all
the way back to his first term,
paints these pardons in the
worst possible light imaginable.
It’s often hard to separate the
wheat from the chaff and fully
appreciate what is going on. I’d
like to present my take on
pardons, provide some context
to President Trump’s pardons in
his second term, and let you
decide.
I’ll say up front that I am not a
fan of pardoning convicted
felons. My professional lifetime
in the legal biz has made me a
law-and-order kind of guy and a
firm believer in the old cliché,
“Don’t do the crime if you can’t
do the time.” That being said, if
the prosecution of a particular
crime was politically motivated,
like the oft used term “political
lawfare” to describe Biden’s use
of the Department of Justice to
manipulate and misuse the
legal system to achieve political
objectives, I could possibly
sorta maybe support reducing a
convicted felon’s sentence to a
more reasonable sentence
absent this political lawfare –
after all, a jury did find they
committed a crime and I believe
if they did the crime, they do the
time – but I can’t get behind a
pardon to erase the felony
conviction and eliminate the
sentence imposed. In my
opinion, the presidential pardon
should only be used to correct
an error that occurred, e.g., a
person convicted because of
their skin color when reliable
exculpatory evidence was
presented or DNA-evidence
has now come forth due to the
advances in modern science
but a clearly innocent person is
not released. History, however,
has shown the use of the
presidential pardon is more
often than not politically
motivated – sad, to say the
least.
To be perfectly transparent to
my friends on the left (and, yes,
I do have some left-leaning
friends that I am constantly
trying to pull to the right side –
pun intended), Trump has
granted pardons to many
convicted felons that I find
downright offensive. But I
would add that Trump has
pardoned people after almost
all of them had undergone
arrest, trial, conviction, and
punishment for their crimes.
And, President Trump told the
American people what he was
going to do and let them
decide, i.e., on the campaign
trail, he said one of his first acts
would be to pardon the people
convicted for the January 6th
storming of the capitol and he
won the presidency in an
overwhelming mandate. Unlike
Biden, who preemptively
pardoned people who had not
only not been charged but
pardoned them for unknown
crimes they may or may not
have committed and did not tell
anyone what he was going to
do until it was a done deal
(without explanation, by the
way)…but more on that below.
As I stated above, I do not
support pardoning anyone
convicted in a court of law and
when I read of another felon
being granted a pardon, it really
chaps my a$$. President
Trump has, I believe, lost some
supporters by his pardoning
reality TV stars and a convicted
gang leader because of their
perceived connections and
support of Trump. I also think
he is losing more supporters by
continuing to pardon individuals
who should be serving their full
sentences. The Fraternal
Order of Police, the largest
police union in the U.S.,
endorsed Trump in 2016, 2020,
and 2024, but recently issued a
statement with the International
Association of Police Chiefs
saying they are “deeply
discouraged by the recent
pardons and commutations
granted by both the Biden and
Trump Administrations to
individuals convicted of killing
or assaulting law enforcement
officers.” I believe Trump’s
pardoning of people involved in
the January 6th, 2021, incident
is what is being referred to as
more than 600 faced charges of
assaulting, resisting, or
impeding law enforcement and,
at last count, 69 had pleaded
guilty to assaulting law
enforcement with a dangerous
or deadly weapon.
As much as I despise President
Trump granting pardons or
clemency, there’s not a thing I
or anyone can do as it is a
Constitutional right granted to
presidents with few exceptions.
But let’s take a moment and
look at Biden’s record of
granting pardons or clemency.
A couple of different sources
reported that Biden granted
more than 8,000 pardons or
acts of clemency – more than
any other president in history.
While most people focus on his
granting his son, Hunter Biden,
clemency after he stated
repeatedly, he would not ever
do that, there are, in my
opinion, much worse examples.
Before I get to that, let’s not
forget that just 15 minutes
before Trump was inaugurated,
Biden also issued pardons to
members of his family, most
notably his brothers, sister, and
in-laws; so, with his pardoning
these family members and
Hunter Biden for the crimes he
was awaiting sentencing on as
well as any other crimes he
“committed or may have
committed or taken part in
during the period from January
1, 2014 through December 1,
2024” – ten freakin’ years –
what crimes is he trying to
hide? With these pardons, no
family member is likely to talk
about any information that
would directly implicate Joe
Biden in the family’s alleged
“pay to play, 10% to the Big
Guy” schemes. Biden hid this
from the public and refused to
answer any questions about
them. Let’s also not forget that
he “preemptively” pardoned
members of his administration,
like Dr. Anthony Fauci and
General Mark Milley, though
none of them were being
investigated or charged at the
time (but, admittedly, Trump’s
Administration probably would
have started investigating
them).
Because there are too many
instances of pardons being
granted with sketchy
circumstances to discuss here,
I’ll only focus on a few.
Not only did Biden commute the
sentence of a corrupt judge
who sent hundreds of children
to jail for bribes (yes, he
accepted bribes to imprison
children, one of whom killed
himself) but he released 11
Yemeni terrorists from
Guantanamo Bay and struck a
plea deal so that Khalid Sheikh
Mohammed and two other
architects of the 9/11 attacks
will avoid the death penalty.
This plea deal is a slap in the
face of the brave men and
women who left their safe lives
to join the military and fight to
protect this country and the
thousands who died on 9/11.
Biden commuted to life in
prison without parole the
sentences of a selected 37 of
40 murderers on federal death
row because of his stated
opposition to the death penalty.
If Biden were truly standing on
his principled opposition to the
death penalty, he would have
commuted the sentences of all
40 federal death row inmates –
and I could, reluctantly,
understand his reasoning.
However, he left 3 inmates
facing the death penalty only
because commuting their
sentences would have hurt the
Democratic Party. The 3 left
facing the death penalty are the
Mother of Imanuel Church
shooter (an anti-black mass
shooting killing 9 and wounding
1), the Tree of Life Synagogue
shooter (killing 11 and
wounding 6), and the Boston
Marathon bomber (killing 3 and
wounding more than 500).
Biden certainly would not want
the Democratic Party to lose
the support of black and Jewish
voters – it would be devastating
for many Democratic
candidates across the United
States. Now, let’s look briefly at
a couple of the 37 he did save
from the death penalty:
Anthony Battle: he broke
into his ex-wife’s home and
raped her and stabbed her
to death with a butcher
knife. It doesn’t make the
crime worse, but she was a
United States Marine.
Battle wasn’t on death row
for her murder but for
beating to death a
corrections officer with a
hammer.
Marvin Gabrion: another
rapist and serial killer saved
by Biden. While facing trial
for raping a 19-year-old
woman, he kidnapped her,
bound her body with duct
tape, chained her to a
concrete block, and threw
her into a lake while she
was still alive. Additionally,
he killed her 11-month-old
baby because, according to
him, he “killed the baby
because there was nowhere
else to put it.”
Edward Leon Fields:
sentenced to death for the
fatal shootings of two
campers on federal land.
Ricardo Sanchez:
sentenced to death in 2009
for the drug-related killing of
a family, including two
children.
These are the men, along with
33 more convicted killers, that
Biden decided deserved
clemency two days before
Christmas. He made the
decision that the victims of
these 37 depraved killers and
their families did not deserve
justice. Biden made, to me,
both stupid and insensitive
remarks (no surprise here) to
justify his actions, saying he
grieved with the families of the
victims. Hogwash! There are
crimes that are so heinous and
so evil that the perpetrators
deserve to die. They don’t
deserve clemency and they
don’t deserve to live while the
families of their victims will
never see their loved ones
again, will never enjoy their
company, and the children of
the victims will never have the
benefit of the love and care that
has been denied them. Joe
Biden, “Don’t hide behind your
“grieving” with the victims’
families or a purported
opposition to the death penalty
– both are belied by your
actions.”
I will continue to bite my tongue
when I read of another pardon
or clemency by President
Trump; it’s the only thing I can
do (and I’m positive I’ll see
future presidents from both
parties continue to grant
clemency). I will, however, post
to blogs, write articles, and
send emails and texts to the
White House relative to my
continued opposition to
presidential pardons absent
some egregious miscarriage of
justice. If you agree, I hope you
do the same.
Jerry Hashimura
Pahrump, NV
* all articles in this publication are
authored by independent writers
and do not necessarily reflect the
opinions of the publisher or other
independent writers herein.