Trump has pardoned Joe Arpaio

[VRAMdemon]

Will Donnie Boy offer support for those caught in the hurricane during his morning tweets, or will it throw jabs at a certain Arizona senator?

Washington, D.C. – U.S. Senator John McCain (R-AZ) released the following statement today on President Trump’s pardon of former Sheriff Joe Arpaio:

“No one is above the law and the individuals entrusted with the privilege of being sworn law officers should always seek to be beyond reproach in their commitment to fairly enforcing the laws they swore to uphold. Mr. Arpaio was found guilty of criminal contempt for continuing to illegally profile Latinos living in Arizona based on their perceived immigration status in violation of a judge’s orders. The President has the authority to make this pardon, but doing so at this time undermines his claim for the respect of rule of law as Mr. Arpaio has shown no remorse for his actions.”

Will anyone try to challenge this in court? Civil lawsuits?...From what I understand, People were killed in his jails, under very suspicious conditions. Scott Norberg for one.

 

[sandorski]

It's because of the scale of what he did, the viciousness of it, and the motivations behind the pardon.

Arpaio wreaked havoc across a huge swath of a state, in a fundamentally racist, anti-democratic fashion. And Trump is pardoning him not out of mercy, but because of bogus claims that it was a "witch hunt."

Basically: murder is horrible, but do you know what's also horrible? Widescale abuses of power that not only inflict suffering on thousands upon thousands of innocent people, but get the official approval of the President (who, naturally, is abusing power himself).

Not only all that, but he was given the opportunity to cease and desist without consequence and he still gave the Court a "Fuck you" in response.

 

[1sikbITCH]

President Windbag is cool with Sheriff Joe because he was picking on the right group of people. Apparently, violating people's constitutional rights for years on end is okay in some people's books.

Especially if you are white and oppressing minorities. Good guy, that Joe.

 

[emperus]

The "Law and Order" President. lol..

 

[tommo123]

The "Law and Order" President. lol..

just means he watches law and order. probably with an imaginary teddy bear while getting high

 

[imported_tajmahal]

Far worse and more controversial have been pardoned and we survived.

Except Nixon was never found guilty of anything.

 

[pmv]

Except Nixon was never found guilty of anything.

Apart from disgracing and degrading the presidency of the United States, fleeing the Whitehouse like a diseased cur, and breaking the heart of the American Dream.

 

[brycejones]

Will Donnie Boy offer support for those caught in the hurricane during his morning tweets, or will it throw jabs at a certain Arizona senator?

Washington, D.C. – U.S. Senator John McCain (R-AZ) released the following statement today on President Trump’s pardon of former Sheriff Joe Arpaio:

“No one is above the law and the individuals entrusted with the privilege of being sworn law officers should always seek to be beyond reproach in their commitment to fairly enforcing the laws they swore to uphold. Mr. Arpaio was found guilty of criminal contempt for continuing to illegally profile Latinos living in Arizona based on their perceived immigration status in violation of a judge’s orders. The President has the authority to make this pardon, but doing so at this time undermines his claim for the respect of rule of law as Mr. Arpaio has shown no remorse for his actions.”

Will anyone try to challenge this in court? Civil lawsuits?...From what I understand, People were killed in his jails, under very suspicious conditions. Scott Norberg for one.

No challenge is possible in court in this case.

 

[Puffnstuff]

I suspect a pair of Sheriff Joe Underoos will be in the mail shortly.

Nah I expect for them to go on sale immediate in the official republican party store along side other items in their line up. I can't wait for the golden statues of Trump to show up for the party faithful to place upon their mantles and worship.

 

[fskimospy]

Except Nixon was never found guilty of anything.

Because he was pardoned before that could happen.

 

[Sheik Yerbouti]

Except Nixon was never found guilty of anything.

carry that water, bitch! carry it!

 

[imported_tajmahal]

Apart from disgracing and degrading the presidency of the United States, fleeing the Whitehouse like a diseased cur, and breaking the heart of the American Dream.

lmao hyperbole much?
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/hyperbole

Definition of hyperbole

1. 
   : extravagant exaggeration (such as “mile-high ice-cream cones”)
   

 

[imported_tajmahal]

Because he was pardoned before that could happen.

Which means he wasn't guilty. Innocent until proven guilty.......well in your mind unless it's a conservative or a Republican which means they're guilty without a trial by jury.

 

[imported_tajmahal]

"
To be sure, the pardon of Arpaio is, at least in part, a political act by a president who campaigned on a tough-as-nails immigration policy and who received Arpaio’s backing. But there’s a pretty good argument that the prosecution of Arpaio was also political.

It was the highly politicized, left-wing Obama Justice Department that chose to prosecute Arpaio in connection with the hot button political issue of enforcing immigration laws. The judge whose order Arpaio defied apparently was satisfied with civil contempt. Team Obama went criminal on the octogenarian sheriff. And it did so, according to Arpaio’s lawyers, just two weeks before he stood for reelection.

The pardon thus can be said to represent a political end to a political case.

Some may defend the pardon by comparing it to egregious pardons of the past, like President Clinton’s pardon of wealthy fugitive Marc Rich and President Obama’s pardon of a Puerto Rican terrorist. Arguing form these outliers strikes me as misguided. Their pardons were so flagrantly unjust that the same argument could be used to defend a great many indefensible pardons.

No such argument is required to defend Trump’s pardon of Arpaio. It was a reasonable exercise of the pardon power."

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2017/08/trump-pardons-joe-arpaio.php

 

[Jhhnn]

Which means he wasn't guilty. Innocent until proven guilty.......well in your mind unless it's a conservative or a Republican which means they're guilty without a trial by jury.

That doesn't apply to Arpaio.

Nice attempt at duh-version, anyway.

 

[imported_tajmahal]

That doesn't apply to Arpaio.

Nice attempt at duh-version, anyway.

He wasn't found guilty in a jury trial.

 

[JSt0rm]

He wasn't found guilty in a jury trial.

and that means...

 

[Uhtrinity]

Which means he wasn't guilty. Innocent until proven guilty.......well in your mind unless it's a conservative or a Republican which means they're guilty without a trial by jury.

To accept a pardon you also accept the guilt.

https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/236/79/case.html

 

[imported_tajmahal]

and that means...

That he wasn't found guilty in a jury trial.

To accept a pardon you also accept the guilt.

https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/236/79/case.html

Yes, he was guilty of pissing off the Obama justice department.

 

[feralkid]

and that means...

Dick?

 

[Jhhnn]

"
To be sure, the pardon of Arpaio is, at least in part, a political act by a president who campaigned on a tough-as-nails immigration policy and who received Arpaio’s backing. But there’s a pretty good argument that the prosecution of Arpaio was also political.

It was the highly politicized, left-wing Obama Justice Department that chose to prosecute Arpaio in connection with the hot button political issue of enforcing immigration laws. The judge whose order Arpaio defied apparently was satisfied with civil contempt. Team Obama went criminal on the octogenarian sheriff. And it did so, according to Arpaio’s lawyers, just two weeks before he stood for reelection.

The pardon thus can be said to represent a political end to a political case.

Some may defend the pardon by comparing it to egregious pardons of the past, like President Clinton’s pardon of wealthy fugitive Marc Rich and President Obama’s pardon of a Puerto Rican terrorist. Arguing form these outliers strikes me as misguided. Their pardons were so flagrantly unjust that the same argument could be used to defend a great many indefensible pardons.

No such argument is required to defend Trump’s pardon of Arpaio. It was a reasonable exercise of the pardon power."

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2017/08/trump-pardons-joe-arpaio.php

Fantastic spin, based on this central lie-

But in a real sense, Arpaio’s crime consists of being overzealous in combating illegal immigration.

Arpaio's crime was refusal to obey a federal court order. His so-called reasons are utterly immaterial. Law enforcement acts as agents of the Judiciary. That's fundamental to our system of govt under the Constitution. Otherwise, they're just making up their own law, which is exactly what Arpaio did. He willfully became an outlaw with a badge.

 

[JujuFish]

You have to question the sanity of someone who, during a time with heightened criticism over his seemingly racist tendencies, decides to double down and pardon a racist.

 

[Jhhnn]

That he wasn't found guilty in a jury trial.

Yes, he was guilty of pissing off the Obama justice department.

False. Arpaio was found guilty of arrogantly defying the federal judiciary.

 

[imported_tajmahal]

False. Arpaio was found guilty of arrogantly defying the federal judiciary.

And Holder was found guilty of Contempt of Congress. Whoop de do.

 

[Jhhnn]

And Holder was found guilty of Contempt of Congress. Whoop de do.

Also false-

http://www.politico.com/blogs/under...ge-declines-to-hold-holder-in-contempt-196650