Does Matt Bevin run for President in 2024?

[SnowLabrador]

He certainly seems ambitious enough to do it.

[Roll Roons]

Assuming he gets reelected (far from certain despite what IceSpear says), I think there's a decent chance he goes for it. Him and Cotton will try to out-Trump each other.

[Skunk]

The GOP base is certainly dumb enough to nominate him.

[Progressive Pessimist]

Probably.

[Libertas Vel Mors]

Probably not (at this point in time)

[Sir Mohamed]

Fore sure, dude can make the elactability argument by losing one of the reddest states as an incumbent. /s

[Politician]

No, but he might run for Senate in 2022.

[Xing]

He still might. Losing elections doesn't seem to deter Republicans from running for President.

[libertpaulian]

I could see him running for Senate in 2022 if Rand Paul keeps his two-term promise.  He'd likely have competition from Massie, though, who, IMO, has more statewide appeal.

[President Johnson]

I think he's done politically. If he chose to run in 2022, he would be irrelevant/yesterday news and not gain a lot of traction.

[DINGO Joe]

Looks like he's gearing up to run for Senate--in Alabama!

The governor of Kentucky just pardoned a man convicted of abusing his 6-year-old stepdaughter

[TrendsareUsuallyReal]

He barely won his primary for re-election against a no-name state Rep. there’s no way he’d win a Senate nomination with loser stench on him now

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

No, he is too polarizing

[SnowLabrador]

Okay, so it probably won't be Matt Bevin. Probably Tom Cotton or Josh Hawley.

[Fuzzy Says: "Abolish NPR!"]

Looks like he's gearing up to run for Senate--in Alabama!

The governor of Kentucky just pardoned a man convicted of abusing his 6-year-old stepdaughter

From the article:

The pardon hinges on the fact that in 2015, Hurt’s stepdaughter, whose name has not been made public, recanted her allegations. However, several judges declined to set aside Hurt’s conviction, the Louisville Courier-Journal reported, in part because of the role of Jefferson Circuit Judge Stephen Mershon in the recantation. Mershon presided over Hurt’s original conviction in 2001, but later began corresponding with Hurt and also contacted the stepdaughter.

In 2016, one judge said that Mershon had “altered” the stepdaughter’s memory and used “judicial coercion and intimidation” to get her to recant. After Hurt’s pardon, Mershon was the one to pick him up from prison.

In pardoning Hurt, Bevin wrote that, “In light of all that is known and all that will forever remain unknown, it does not seem possible that justice can be truly served in this instance.” But by granting the pardon, Bevin may have added his voice to the chorus of those telling survivors they should stay quiet, for fear of ruining perpetrators’ lives.

In this case, Bevin did the right thing.  The circumstances cited in the article would constitute reasonable doubt at any jury trial.  

This is not to say that the circumstances surrounding that particular affair aren't shaky all around.  But the need to alleviate the incarceration of the imprisoned for whom there is reasonable doubt of guilt takes precedence over keeping a person in prison when there is legitimate reasonable doubt as to their guilt because of some abstract concern about "believing victims".  The alleged victim in this defendant's case has certainly behaved in a way to where she should not be believed.  

Would you, the reader, be OK with being in prison for a heinous crime AFTER your accuser recanted, and you were not guilty?  Would you be OK with a loved one being in that position?

That whole matter stinks, to be sure.  But we set a far more dangerous precedent when we allow people in prison to remain there despite reasonable doubt about the verdict then when we cast skepticism over the allegations of alleged victims too quickly.  The latter is not desirable, but the former is a far greater wrong.  All folks here who are always complaining about authoritarianism ought to pause about a paradigm shift to where punishing the innocent is preferable to not punishing the guilty.

I'm not a Bevin fan.  I'm a fan of Governors and Presidents having broad powers to issue pardons and sentence commutations that are irreversible and not subject to further scrutiny.  It is important that vehicles exist to swiftly free the innocent.

[DINGO Joe]

Looks like he's gearing up to run for Senate--in Alabama!

The governor of Kentucky just pardoned a man convicted of abusing his 6-year-old stepdaughter

From the article:

The pardon hinges on the fact that in 2015, Hurt’s stepdaughter, whose name has not been made public, recanted her allegations. However, several judges declined to set aside Hurt’s conviction, the Louisville Courier-Journal reported, in part because of the role of Jefferson Circuit Judge Stephen Mershon in the recantation. Mershon presided over Hurt’s original conviction in 2001, but later began corresponding with Hurt and also contacted the stepdaughter.

In 2016, one judge said that Mershon had “altered” the stepdaughter’s memory and used “judicial coercion and intimidation” to get her to recant. After Hurt’s pardon, Mershon was the one to pick him up from prison.

In pardoning Hurt, Bevin wrote that, “In light of all that is known and all that will forever remain unknown, it does not seem possible that justice can be truly served in this instance.” But by granting the pardon, Bevin may have added his voice to the chorus of those telling survivors they should stay quiet, for fear of ruining perpetrators’ lives.

In this case, Bevin did the right thing.  The circumstances cited in the article would constitute reasonable doubt at any jury trial.  

This is not to say that the circumstances surrounding that particular affair aren't shaky all around.  But the need to alleviate the incarceration of the imprisoned for whom there is reasonable doubt of guilt takes precedence over keeping a person in prison when there is legitimate reasonable doubt as to their guilt because of some abstract concern about "believing victims".  The alleged victim in this defendant's case has certainly behaved in a way to where she should not be believed.  

Would you, the reader, be OK with being in prison for a heinous crime AFTER your accuser recanted, and you were not guilty?  Would you be OK with a loved one being in that position?

That whole matter stinks, to be sure.  But we set a far more dangerous precedent when we allow people in prison to remain there despite reasonable doubt about the verdict then when we cast skepticism over the allegations of alleged victims too quickly.  The latter is not desirable, but the former is a far greater wrong.  All folks here who are always complaining about authoritarianism ought to pause about a paradigm shift to where punishing the innocent is preferable to not punishing the guilty.

I'm not a Bevin fan.  I'm a fan of Governors and Presidents having broad powers to issue pardons and sentence commutations that are irreversible and not subject to further scrutiny.  It is important that vehicles exist to swiftly free the innocent.

Yeah, I read the article and I disagree.  While neither you or I are privy to details of the case, there are red flags all over the place with this and there's no reason to think Bevin has the wisdom of Solomon to resolve this.

[Fuzzy Says: "Abolish NPR!"]

Looks like he's gearing up to run for Senate--in Alabama!

The governor of Kentucky just pardoned a man convicted of abusing his 6-year-old stepdaughter

From the article:

The pardon hinges on the fact that in 2015, Hurt’s stepdaughter, whose name has not been made public, recanted her allegations. However, several judges declined to set aside Hurt’s conviction, the Louisville Courier-Journal reported, in part because of the role of Jefferson Circuit Judge Stephen Mershon in the recantation. Mershon presided over Hurt’s original conviction in 2001, but later began corresponding with Hurt and also contacted the stepdaughter.

In 2016, one judge said that Mershon had “altered” the stepdaughter’s memory and used “judicial coercion and intimidation” to get her to recant. After Hurt’s pardon, Mershon was the one to pick him up from prison.

In pardoning Hurt, Bevin wrote that, “In light of all that is known and all that will forever remain unknown, it does not seem possible that justice can be truly served in this instance.” But by granting the pardon, Bevin may have added his voice to the chorus of those telling survivors they should stay quiet, for fear of ruining perpetrators’ lives.

In this case, Bevin did the right thing.  The circumstances cited in the article would constitute reasonable doubt at any jury trial.  

This is not to say that the circumstances surrounding that particular affair aren't shaky all around.  But the need to alleviate the incarceration of the imprisoned for whom there is reasonable doubt of guilt takes precedence over keeping a person in prison when there is legitimate reasonable doubt as to their guilt because of some abstract concern about "believing victims".  The alleged victim in this defendant's case has certainly behaved in a way to where she should not be believed.  

Would you, the reader, be OK with being in prison for a heinous crime AFTER your accuser recanted, and you were not guilty?  Would you be OK with a loved one being in that position?

That whole matter stinks, to be sure.  But we set a far more dangerous precedent when we allow people in prison to remain there despite reasonable doubt about the verdict then when we cast skepticism over the allegations of alleged victims too quickly.  The latter is not desirable, but the former is a far greater wrong.  All folks here who are always complaining about authoritarianism ought to pause about a paradigm shift to where punishing the innocent is preferable to not punishing the guilty.

I'm not a Bevin fan.  I'm a fan of Governors and Presidents having broad powers to issue pardons and sentence commutations that are irreversible and not subject to further scrutiny.  It is important that vehicles exist to swiftly free the innocent.

Yeah, I read the article and I disagree.  While neither you or I are privy to details of the case, there are red flags all over the place with this and there's no reason to think Bevin has the wisdom of Solomon to resolve this.

We may not be privy to inside details, but based on what was presented, I would have, at a minimum, commuted the man's sentence in such a way as to allow for a full appeal, or vacated the verdict, if not pardoned him (assuming a Governor could actually do that).

We're not privy to all the details, but a victim recanting an allegation is a big thing.  Huge.  That, in and of itself creates reasonable doubt.  Just based on the statements in the article, there is no way that, if I were Governor, I would allow that man to serve another day in prison (although I may not have vacated his sentence or issued a pardon).

There are red flags?  Of course there are red flags.  Is not the recanting of an allegation a red flag?  Or do red flags only apply when they support the #MeToo argument?  If this were a black defendant and a white robbery victim were recanting, you'd be screaming as to why this man was still in prison.  You'd be clamoring for the Governor of THAT state to do what Bevin did, and consider each passing second a second overdue.  Most of Atlas would.  And very rightly so; innocent people shouldn't be in jail for a second.  People for whom the burden of guilty beyond a reasonable doubt is not established should not be in jail for a second.  And this principle should not be tossed just because we find some classes of the accused more unsavory and some classes of victims more sympathetic.

The principle that it is better that the guilty go free than the innocent be punished is one of the principles I have always adhered to.  It is beyond liberal and conservative.  It is a principle of basic justice.  Justice is denied when an innocent man is punished in ways that does not happen when a guilty man escapes punishment.

[LiberalDem19]

It would make for some great comedy when Kentucky has its primary

[DINGO Joe]

Yeah, Bevin will never get elected to anything again.