Reposted by Jake Tapper 🦅
The statement raises concerns about the authenticity of presidential pardons due to the use of an autopen for signatures. It questions the integrity of the process and suggests potential oversight or misconduct.
- The statement does not directly harm but implies potential misconduct, which could indirectly cause reputational harm. [-1]Principle 1:I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
- It respects privacy but questions the integrity of public officials, which is a legitimate area of public concern.Principle 2:I will respect the privacy and dignity of others and will not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech.
- The statement seeks to promote understanding by questioning the validity of the pardons, encouraging scrutiny and transparency. [+1]Principle 3:I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
- It engages in constructive criticism by questioning the process rather than attacking individuals personally. [+1]Principle 4:I will engage in constructive criticism and dialogue with those in disagreement and will not engage in personal attacks or ad hominem arguments.