Debunked: Chance a prisoner seeking a commutation for President Clinton/Bush/Obama

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
This seems like a prime example of lying with statistics. The suggestion is that Obama is being especially draconian in refusing commutations. Here's how the bunk appears:

http://harpers.org/archive/2013/03/harpers-index-348/
[bunk]Chance a prisoner seeking a commutation of sentence under President Clinton received one: 1 in 90
Under George W. Bush: 1 in 780
Under Barack Obama: 1 in 6,631[/bunk]

The source of these statistics is given rather loosely as "Office of the Pardon Attorney". I say loosely as it's quite easy to give a direct link to the actual figures, and it's almost like they don't want you to check.

http://www.justice.gov/pardon/statistics.htm

The reason that these figures are bunk is they only cover the first four years of Obama's presidency. The majority of commutations are given in the last four years, peaking very sharply in in the last year.

If you look just at the same time period, you'll see that the are basically the same number of commutations. Three for clinton, two for Bush, one for Obama. It's not a meaningful distinction.

 
Last edited:

Grieves

Senior Member
Dude. You've completely discounted the 'pardon' figures. They count.
from the other thread.
To date,the Obama administration has issued a total of 22 pardons and 1 commutation in five years, out of a total of 8337 petitions received for either/or.
The Bush administration, by its fifth year, had issued a total of 60 pardons/commutations, out of 5174 received petitions.
The Clinton administration by its fifth year had issued a total of 56 pardons/commutations, out of 3315 received petitions.
no statistical spin here, those are the figures taken directly from the page. Obama's current record of pardons/commutations is quite clearly and absolutely far less forgiving than those of the Bush or Clinton administration, even in their first five years, by a good 50+%. Take into account the number of petitions received, and the difference becomes far more stark. The numbers are the numbers.
You going to scratch out that 'debunked'?
it's almost like they don't want you to check.
Every issue of Harpers features an 'Index' at the start, citing interesting statistical figures which have come down the pipeline lately. Though these figures are sometimes tongue-in-cheek or even politically motivated where the intent of their being listed is concerned, they are usually accurate, and their sources are always cited toward the back of the publication. If they didn't want you to check, they wouldn't cite their sources. As far as I know nothing is obliging them too.Harper's, so far as I'm concerned, is one of the most respectable American publications still in print.
 

Cairenn

Senior Member.
Pres Obama, can't do anything without folks SCREAMING about it. If Michelle buys a 'designer' coat, to go over her J.Crew outfit, the right wingers will bitch and moan. He CAN'T do as many pardons.
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
I didn't discount the pardon figures. I'm debunking the quote, which specifically deals with commutations. So that quote is debunked.

If you look at the actual pattern, with several years of zero, then it's clear that it's not simply one guy being tougher than another, the figures are too randomly distributed to draw any inference. Like if you take just the first three years, Bush only had 7 pardons, Obama had 17.
For five years we have:

Clinton Pardons: 0,0,53, 0, 0
Bush Pardons: 0,0, 7,12,39
Obama Pardons: 0,0,17, 5, 0

What can you deduce from this pattern? Statistically nothing.
 

Grieves

Senior Member
The figures out of Haprer's are based on the totals thus-far. Clinton, out of 5,488 petitions total during his presidency for commutation, granted 61. That makes 1 in 90 an almost perfectly accurate figure where odds are concerned.
The Bush administration, receiving 8,576 applications for commutation, granted 11. That makes 1 in 780 an almost perfectly accurate figure where odds are concerned.
Obama, in his presidency thus-far, has recieved 6,986 applications for commutation, and has granted 1. That makes 1 in 6k+ an obviously accurate figure where odds are concerned.
And so, thus far at least, the figures are entirely accurate. That the odds may change as Obama's presidency progresses doesn't change the odds as they stand currently, and the quote directly relates to the odds, or 'chance', based on current figures. Still, even if we disregard those figures on the basis the Obama presidency isn't over yet, it's still quite accurate to say, based on a review of the first five years of all three presidents, that Obama, thus far, is by far the least likely to offer a pardon/commutation. Those are the numbers. Nothing's been debunked. Even if you claim those statistics shouldn't be considered significant given the Obama presidency is still ongoing and the figures COULD change, they're still the figures. You CANNOT call this quote debunked in honesty. The information is factual, even if you strongly disagree with what I suggest it implies.
 

Grieves

Senior Member
5 ways statistics are used to lie to you every day - this fits at #2 and also #1

Edit: It also fits the fallacy that something that is decided deliberately is a matter of chance - which isn't listed but I suspect should be.
I brought up these figures as being worthy of note while mentioning the less than liberal bent of the current administration. When entering a petition with a bureaucratic process of government there's a significant element of chance involved in how your individual case is handled.

The suggestion is that Obama is being especially draconian in refusing commutations.
My implied inference has no bearing on Harper's publishing of these figures. There wasn't a little article saying 'this is what we think about that', it's just those three bullet points. Disagreeing with what I believe is inferred doesn't 'debunk' the figures themselves. This thread opened suggesting, or at least seeming to suggest, the figures themselves were inaccurate spin to begin with.
 
J

Joe

Guest
Pres Obama, can't do anything without folks SCREAMING about it. If Michelle buys a 'designer' coat, to go over her J.Crew outfit, the right wingers will bitch and moan. He CAN'T do as many pardons.
If our economy wasn't in the toilet I'm sure Us Right wingers wouldn't care less . Why tell America we have to tighten our belts when the first family goes completely overboard with lavish perks and parties , Its called setting a example . So the left wingers never bitched and moaned over Bush ? Its America we have every right to complain about who we support with our tax money .
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
My implied inference has no bearing on Harper's publishing of these figures. There wasn't a little article saying 'this is what we think about that', it's just those three bullet points. Disagreeing with what I believe is inferred doesn't 'debunk' the figures themselves. This thread opened suggesting, or at least seeming to suggest, the figures themselves were inaccurate spin to begin with.

I was not saying the figures were inaccurate in themselves. I opened the tread suggesting it was "lying with statistics". That means using accurate figures to paint a misleading picture. Here it's misleading because they compared a period that has low and sporadic figures with a larger period that has higher figures. So it's a misleading comparison. They also pick commutations, because there's just one, so it makes the (already misleading) comparison even more misleading because the comparison with other presidents is ten times greater than if they had used pardons plus commutations.

So I stand by my posts. What is debunked is the suggestion that this is an accurate representation of the differences between the presidents. It very clearly is not. The figures DO seem to show some differences, but it's hard to see any statistical significance given the previous random timings of pardons and commutations.
 

Cairenn

Senior Member.
The trouble is, is that the Obamas PAY for their OWN clothes. Many of the things that circulate on FB about their lavish lifestyle are not true. Take the salary of the dog trainer. First, they pay that, second the amount that was being said he made, was his TOTAL salary and he works for many folks. If Romney had won, it would have been just as wrong for folks to complain about how much her horse trainer was paid.

Complaining about how much the President and his family spends is not new with the Obamas, it has been done for many years. I believe that there were editorials that complained about how much Mary Lincoln spent on clothes
 

walliswallis

New Member
I lost track of where this was going. Something about pardons and then it became about how we were all incorrectly mad about their Macy's bill so the pardon stats were wrong.
 
Thread starter Related Articles Forum Replies Date
P Debunked: 7 Alleged photos of aliens UFOs, Aliens, Monsters, and the Paranormal 1
Mick West Debunked: Biden signing "Blank" Executive Orders Election 2020 0
Mick West Debunked: Biden in "Fake" Oval Office Election 2020 7
P Debunked: UN hidden camera: the first UFO contact happened [Deep Fake] UFOs, Aliens, Monsters, and the Paranormal 2
Mick West Debunked: 94% of Fulton County Ballots Manually Adjudicated [It's a Process all Batches go Through] Election 2020 0
Mick West Debunked: "Missile Strike" caused Nashville Explosion General Discussion 3
Mick West Debunked: Nashville Explosion was "Across the Street" from the RV General Discussion 0
Mick West Debunked: "Error rate of 68.5% Allowable is .0008%" [Neither is True] Election 2020 4
Mick West Debunked: Claim that the Electoral College Count On Jan 6 will Change the Election Election 2020 136
Rory Debunked: Einstein wrote "blind belief in authority is the greatest enemy of truth" Quotes Debunked 12
Mick West Debunked: Navid Keshavarz-Nia's Claims of "A Sudden Rise in Slope" as Election Fraud Evidence Election 2020 5
Mick West Debunked: Trump's Claim of "1,126,940 votes created out of thin air" in PA Election 2020 8
Mick West Debunked: Crowder's "Fraud Week" Title Graphic (and Why it Matters) Election 2020 1
JFDee Debunked: Democratic senators complained about 'vote switching' by Dominion voting machines in 2019 Election 2020 2
Mendel Debunked: The Democrats are trying to take away freedom of religion Election 2020 6
H Debunked: Dr. Shiva's Scatterplot Analysis of Michigan Precincts Election 2020 43
Mick West Debunked: Suspicious "Biden Only" Ballots in Georgia Election 2020 3
Mick West Debunked: "Nancy Pelosi's long time Chief of Staff is a key executive at Dominion Voting" Election 2020 0
Mick West Debunked: Wisconsin Turnout 89% Impossible High [Actually 72%] Election 2020 1
Mick West Debunked: Video of Poll Worker "Filling In" Ballots. Election 2020 3
Mick West Debunked: Pentagon has Evidence of "Off-World Vehicles Not Made on this Earth" UFO Videos and Reports from the US Navy 14
derrick06 Debunked: United Nations creates a "NWO" website Conspiracy Theories 2
N Debunked: Google Mail icon shows linkage to Freemasons Conspiracy Theories 4
Mendel Debunked: The WHO did not take the Taiwan CDC seriously Coronavirus COVID-19 0
A Why 9/11 Truthers Are Wrong About The Facts | (Part 1 w/ Mick West) 9/11 1
Mendel Debunked: Radar Waves Affect Clouds General Discussion 0
Pumpernickel Need Debunking: Foucault's Pendulum debunked through Mach's principle (the Earth is a static object in the center of the Universe) Science and Pseudoscience 16
M Ufos arrive to the central zone of Chile. (Debunked). Skydentify - What is that Thing in the Sky? 0
Jesse3959 FE Debunked with water tube level - 187 foot building 21.2 miles away below eye level Flat Earth 0
H Debunked: Cadillac Mountain from 220 miles Flat Earth 7
Jesse3959 FE Claim Debunked: JTolan Epic Gravity Experiment - Flat earther disproves Perspective! (or his instruments.) Flat Earth 0
Mick West Debunked: DoD prepares for martial law in CONUS: Conspiracy Theories 0
Oystein Debunked: AE911T: CNBC Anchor Ron Insana claims Building 7 a Controlled Implosion 9/11 13
A Debunked: NASA tampered with the original television audio of the Apollo 11 moon landing Conspiracy Theories 1
Greylandra Debunked: media headline "Judea declares war on Germany" [boycott] Conspiracy Theories 20
Mick West Discovery Channel's "Contact: Declassified Breakthrough" was debunked 2.5 years ago UFOs, Aliens, Monsters, and the Paranormal 8
Joe Hill Debunked: "The North Face of Building 7 Was Pulled Inward" 9/11 66
A Debunked : Fake Set Moon Landing with TV Camera and Stairs Conspiracy Theories 3
Mick West Debunked: Photo with Sun Rays at Odd Angles Flat Earth 0
Staffan Debunked: Wikileaks releases unused footage of moon landing (Capricorn One movie scenes) Conspiracy Theories 2
Mick West Debunked: Neil deGrasse Tyson : "That Stuff is Flat" Flat Earth 10
Mendel Debunked: Air Map of the World 1945 is a flat Earth map Flat Earth 0
Trailblazer Debunked: Trees being cut down "because they block 5G" (tree replacement in Belgium) 5G and Other EMF Health Concerns 44
deirdre Debunked: Exemption from military service doc proves Jews had foreknowledge of WW2 (fake leaflet) General Discussion 0
Trailblazer Debunked: Obama called Michelle "Michael" in a speech. (Referring to Michael Mullen Jr) Quotes Debunked 0
Rory Debunked: 120-mile shot of San Jacinto proves flat earth Flat Earth 39
Rory Debunked: The Lunar Cycle affects birth rates Health and Quackery 26
Rory Debunked: Study shows link between menstrual cycle and the moon Health and Quackery 30
novatron Debunked: California Wildfires Match the Exactly Path of the Proposed Rail System Wildfires 3
Rory Debunked: "You must love yourself before you love another" - fake Buddha quote Quotes Debunked 7
Related Articles


















































Election 2020

Related Articles

Top