PDA

View Full Version : BREAKING!!! TRUMP PARDONS ARPAIO!!!




RonZeplin
08-25-2017, 08:15 PM
http://therightscoop.com/breaking-white-house-pardons-arpaio/

AND HE DID THIS TOO!!
SHEESH.
Busy night.
https://i2.wp.com/therightscoop.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/arpaio.jpg?resize=625%2C366 (https://i2.wp.com/therightscoop.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/arpaio.jpg)
So he’s angered the transgenders tonight and now the illegal aliens!!

He’s making lots of friends!!!

Good.

sparebulb
08-25-2017, 08:16 PM
Good.

There are many, many others that should also be pardoned.

kcchiefs6465
08-25-2017, 08:17 PM
Arpaio is a fascist.

pcosmar
08-25-2017, 08:18 PM
Good.

There are many, many others that should also be pardoned.

and no good reason in that case. :(

sparebulb
08-25-2017, 08:22 PM
Arpaio is a fascist.

Yes, I agree.

But what resistance to activist federal judges do we have other than defiance to their decrees?

surf
08-25-2017, 08:22 PM
Arpaio is a fascist.
what he said

kcchiefs6465
08-25-2017, 08:26 PM
Yes, I agree.

But what resistance to activist federal judges do we have other than defiance to their decrees?
A better defiance of their decrees would be to jail Arpaio longer than the judge decreed.

I wonder if the guy whose house was demolished by Arpaio and Seagal through use of their APC ever received compensation for his living room, his dog being murdered , and his slaughtered chickens?

KEEF
08-25-2017, 08:27 PM
Hey how about you pardon Edward Snowden.
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/webkit-fake-url://2423345e-2029-412b-ac48-4b918c27d37f/imagejpeg

phill4paul
08-25-2017, 08:30 PM
Will he pardon Todd Engle?

liveandletlive
08-25-2017, 09:14 PM
Good.

There are many, many others that should also be pardoned.

If Sheriff Joe was told not violate the 2nd Amendment.....you know, confiscate people's guns in an open carrying state, then violated the order, then PARDONED by Trump.

what would you say then?

Ender
08-25-2017, 09:18 PM
Arpaio is a fascist.

Yep-

Anti Federalist
08-25-2017, 09:19 PM
OK, so let's keep the ball rolling:

Ed Snowden.

All the Bundy people.

Ed and Elaine Brown.

Give me time, I'll come up with a comprehensive list.

Ender
08-25-2017, 09:20 PM
Hey how about you pardon Edward Snowden.
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/webkit-fake-url://2423345e-2029-412b-ac48-4b918c27d37f/imagejpeg

Can't pardon the REAL heroes, now can we? :rolleyes:

Snowden should definitely be pardoned.

jmdrake
08-25-2017, 09:38 PM
OK, so let's keep the ball rolling:

Ed Snowden.

All the Bundy people.

Ed and Elaine Brown.

Give me time, I'll come up with a comprehensive list.

Pardon tax protesters when Steve Bannon wants a 44 percent marginal tax?

http://sannyasnews.org/now/wp-content/uploads/733831.jpg

Seriously don't know why Trump hates Snowden so much though.

RonZeplin
08-25-2017, 11:11 PM
Seriously don't know why Trump hates Snowden so much though.

Because Statist Goon is a good fit with The Donald's New York Values?

pcosmar
08-25-2017, 11:17 PM
OK, so let's keep the ball rolling:

Ed Snowden.

All the Bundy people.

Ed and Elaine Brown.

Give me time, I'll come up with a comprehensive list.

I wouldn't mind one myself.

r3volution 3.0
08-25-2017, 11:36 PM
Arpaio is a fascist.

Drug Warrior, Snowball/O'Reilly GOPer.

...the sort of person who, in the good old days, would have no support at, of all places, Ron Paul Forums.

http://www.reactiongifs.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/shaking_head_breaking_bad.gif

Anti Federalist
08-25-2017, 11:38 PM
I wouldn't mind one myself.

Pardon Pete!!!

r3volution 3.0
08-25-2017, 11:44 PM
Pardon Pete!!!

Is your incessant posting about police abuse intended to be a joke of some kind?

If not, how is it that you're defending this cunt?

juleswin
08-25-2017, 11:46 PM
Drug Warrior, Snowball/O'Reilly GOPer.

...the sort of person who, in the good old days, would have no support at, of all places, Ron Paul Forums.

http://www.reactiongifs.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/shaking_head_breaking_bad.gif

But the liberals and SJW would get all butthurt and that somehow makes it OK. At this point, the best people have to to bring in the boogeyman liberals to try and scare people in going along with Trump.

Ender
08-25-2017, 11:48 PM
Is your incessant posting about police abuse intended to be a joke of some kind?

If not, how is it that you're defending this $#@!?

There's no way in hell or high water that AF is defending Trump pardoning Arpaio. He asking for pardons for people that SHOULD have one.

Swordsmyth
08-25-2017, 11:54 PM
Is your incessant posting about police abuse intended to be a joke of some kind?

If not, how is it that you're defending this $#@!?

He called for pardons of others, he never defended Arpaio.

Arpio vs. the liberals reminds me of an old saying of mine: When dragons fight the peasant's houses burn.

Neither side is right and I refuse to defend either one.

Not surprised Dump pardoned him though.

r3volution 3.0
08-25-2017, 11:55 PM
There's no way in hell or high water that AF is defending Trump pardoning Arpaio. He asking for pardons for people that SHOULD have one.

What does this mean?


OK, so let's keep the ball rolling:

Ed Snowden.

All the Bundy people.

Ed and Elaine Brown.

Give me time, I'll come up with a comprehensive list.

I'll be happy to have Anti-Federalist explain to me that he didn't mean what he appeared to mean.

juleswin
08-25-2017, 11:58 PM
What does this mean?



I'll be happy to have Anti-Federalist explain to me that he didn't mean what he appeared to mean.

That's how I understood it. He didn't seem to have any issues with the pardon, just wished Trump would pardon more people along with Arpaio which wouldn't happen :(

r3volution 3.0
08-26-2017, 12:01 AM
That's how I understood it. He didn't seem to have any issues with the pardon, just wished Trump would pardon more people along with Arpaio which wouldn't happen :(

Precisely

There really is no other explanation, other than that AF is an idiot, which he isn't.

Swordsmyth
08-26-2017, 12:02 AM
What does this mean?



I'll be happy to have Anti-Federalist explain to me that he didn't mean what he appeared to mean.


That's how I understood it. He didn't seem to have any issues with the pardon, just wished Trump would pardon more people along with Arpaio which wouldn't happen :(

He made no comment about the pardon of Arpio (probably because his opinion of the "law and order" cops is obvious from his posting history), but expressed the wish that while Dump was in a mood to issue pardons he should issue them for people he believes deserve them.

Ender
08-26-2017, 12:02 AM
What does this mean?



I'll be happy to have Anti-Federalist explain to me that he didn't mean what he appeared to mean.

"Keeping the ball rolling" is a bit of sarcasm leading to talk about those that actually deserve a pardon. Maybe Trump outta actually pardon those that the gov is trying to destroy.

anaconda
08-26-2017, 03:19 AM
Arpaio is a fascist.

His wiki page makes it pretty clear he was a complete dick.

anaconda
08-26-2017, 03:21 AM
OK, so let's keep the ball rolling:

Ed Snowden.

All the Bundy people.

Ed and Elaine Brown.

Give me time, I'll come up with a comprehensive list.

Reparations for Wesley Snipes.

TheTexan
08-26-2017, 03:28 AM
Seriously don't know why Trump hates Snowden so much though.

It's because Snowden hates America

Antischism
08-26-2017, 03:42 AM
Garbage human being pardoned by another garbage human being. No surprises.

Schifference
08-26-2017, 04:33 AM
AF must be some type of political figure. Now he has all sorts of people explaining what his statement meant.

jmdrake
08-26-2017, 05:40 AM
AF must be some type of political figure. Now he has all sorts of people explaining what his statement meant.

+rep! AF for presisdent!

jmdrake
08-26-2017, 05:57 AM
Precisely

There really is no other explanation, other than that AF is an idiot, which he isn't.

Well I'll speak for myself. I have issues with Sheriff Airpaio's "conviction" even though I don't like the man. He got "convicted" for contempt of court for doing in Latino communities what is common practice in black and other communities. His deputies would pull over Latinos for minor infractions (busted tail light, running a stop sign, whatever) and then ask "what is your immigration status." Where I live I've seen officers pull people over for supposedly having their windows tinted too dark, never issue a ticket for the windows being too dark, never even do a field test to show they were too dark, and then proceed to ask "Do you have drugs in the car?" By this time they've run the license and/or plates so if this person has prior drug convictions, all of a sudden that morphs to "probable cause" to search the car, or at least that's what the people being searched fear. Most people say "Sure search the car" or fess up to drugs if they have them. Those who say no are bullied by the "I can just hold you hear and go get a warrant" line, which is really a bluff, but most people don't know that. In one case the so called busted tail light was shown not to actually be busted upon investigation, but the judge still upheld the stop and search based on the theory that "Well maybe the taillight worked intermittently." Oh yeah, and it's black and white police officers doing this crap. So pardon me (no pun intended) for not begin outraged over Sheriff Arpaio simply doing what cops do because the left all of a sudden feels that illegal immigrants are the new victim supreme. Had Sheriff Arpaio been convicted for his drug warrior antics, then yeah, I'd be upset over him being pardoned.

That said, there are a lot of people that actually deserve a pardon. And AF gave a short list.

Ender
08-26-2017, 07:44 AM
+rep! AF for presisdent!

I'll take him any day. ;)

pcosmar
08-26-2017, 10:54 AM
Is your incessant posting about police abuse intended to be a joke of some kind?

If not, how is it that you're defending this $#@!?

Because as a Prohibited Person, I would like one.
And he knows that.

Zippyjuan
08-26-2017, 11:25 AM
Trump keeps another campaign promise- "Just knock the crap out of them. I will pay your fines. Don't worry about it!"

We need a bigger, more beautiful police state.

Swordsmyth
08-26-2017, 02:17 PM
+rep! AF for presisdent!
He would get my vote.

Swordsmyth
08-26-2017, 03:47 PM
Facts don't matter to either side of the Arpaio pardon debate
The conviction of former Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio for criminal contempt is being serially misrepresented. The misrepresentations are material to the question of whether President Donald Trump should have pardoned Arpaio (http://www.azcentral.com/story/news/politics/arizona/2017/08/25/former-maricopa-sheriff-joe-arpaio-my-political-career-isnt-over/604062001/).
Arpaio’s criminal conviction is routinely, in fact almost invariably, described in one of two ways. Either that he continued to engage in racial profiling despite a court order to stop. Or that he continued with immigration sweeps contrary to a court order to abandon them.
Both descriptions are inaccurate and misleading.
He was ordered not to enforce federal lawIn the underlying civil case, federal Judge G. Murray Snow did find that Arpaio had unconstitutionally used race in making traffic stops in an effort to find illegal immigrants. In fact, it was the central finding in the civil case.
Snow’s remedial orders, however, went far beyond simply forbidding the use of race in initial traffic stops (http://www.azcentral.com/story/opinion/op-ed/robertrobb/2017/08/11/joe-arpaio-immigration-clarify-what-happened/556914001/). He ordered Arpaio to get out of the immigration enforcement business altogether. Even with a legal stop, Arpaio was to either charge people with a state crime or let them go. No detaining them or turning them over to federal officials for immigration violations.
It was this edict to get out of the immigration business altogether that federal Judge Susan Bolton found Arpaio in criminal contempt for violating.

However, Bolton’s decision (http://www.azcentral.com/story/news/local/phoenix/2017/07/31/maricopa-county-sheriff-joe-arpaio-found-guilty-criminal-contempt-court/486278001/) does not include a finding that the sheriff’s office continued to illegally use race in initial stops, or any other legal problem with the initial stops. It was what the sheriff’s office did after the stop – turn people over to the feds for immigration violations without charging them with state crimes – that Bolton found in criminal contempt of Snow’s civil orders.


Federal law explicitly authorizes local law enforcement to communicate with federal officials about the immigration status of those they encounter. State law requires local law enforcement to follow up on reasonable suspicion of illegal presence when practical to do so.
So, arguably, Snow’s order prohibited Arpaio from doing what federal law allows and state law mandates. When Trump said in Phoenix that Arpaio was convicted for doing his job, there’s a basis for that point of view.
But Arpaio doesn't deserve a pardonNow, I don’t support a pardon for Arpaio. He was a lousy cop, a crummy administrator and a menace to the rule of law.
Singling out people based on their race for disproportionate law enforcement scrutiny, as Arpaio unquestionably did with his immigration sweeps, violates the fundamental founding principles of our country.
Before that, Arpaio trampled all over procedural rights and protocols in pursuit of his nutty conspiracy theory, hatched with former County Attorney Andrew Thomas, involving the Board of Supervisors, its staff, and some judges.
And even if Snow’s order was an overreach (http://www.azcentral.com/story/opinion/op-ed/robertrobb/2017/07/10/joe-arpaio-still-deserves-jury-trial/460585001/), Arpaio’s duty was to obey it while appealing it. Arpaio’s career ending with a criminal conviction is fitting.
None of these distinctions and nuances likely entered into Trump’s decision to pardon Arpaio (http://www.azcentral.com/story/news/local/phoenix/2017/08/25/donald-trump-pardons-sheriff-joe-arpaio/599835001/). Arpaio is an important ally and symbol on one of Trump’s signature issues, illegal immigration. The facts don’t matter to him.
By serially misrepresenting what Arpaio was found in criminal contempt for doing, opponents of a pardon have demonstrated that facts don’t matter to them either.

More at: http://www.azcentral.com/story/opinion/op-ed/robertrobb/2017/08/25/joe-arpaio-pardon-facts-dont-matter/603064001/

Swordsmyth
08-26-2017, 03:58 PM
+rep! AF for presisdent!

AF/Oyarde 2020

Slave Mentality
08-27-2017, 07:40 AM
AF/Oyarde 2020

"Make America Leave Me the Fuck Alone Again"

It's pretty catchy too.

Origanalist
08-27-2017, 07:59 AM
Facts don't matter to either side of the Arpaio pardon debate
The conviction of former Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio for criminal contempt is being serially misrepresented. The misrepresentations are material to the question of whether President Donald Trump should have pardoned Arpaio (http://www.azcentral.com/story/news/politics/arizona/2017/08/25/former-maricopa-sheriff-joe-arpaio-my-political-career-isnt-over/604062001/).
Arpaio’s criminal conviction is routinely, in fact almost invariably, described in one of two ways. Either that he continued to engage in racial profiling despite a court order to stop. Or that he continued with immigration sweeps contrary to a court order to abandon them.
Both descriptions are inaccurate and misleading.
He was ordered not to enforce federal lawIn the underlying civil case, federal Judge G. Murray Snow did find that Arpaio had unconstitutionally used race in making traffic stops in an effort to find illegal immigrants. In fact, it was the central finding in the civil case.
Snow’s remedial orders, however, went far beyond simply forbidding the use of race in initial traffic stops (http://www.azcentral.com/story/opinion/op-ed/robertrobb/2017/08/11/joe-arpaio-immigration-clarify-what-happened/556914001/). He ordered Arpaio to get out of the immigration enforcement business altogether. Even with a legal stop, Arpaio was to either charge people with a state crime or let them go. No detaining them or turning them over to federal officials for immigration violations.
It was this edict to get out of the immigration business altogether that federal Judge Susan Bolton found Arpaio in criminal contempt for violating.

However, Bolton’s decision (http://www.azcentral.com/story/news/local/phoenix/2017/07/31/maricopa-county-sheriff-joe-arpaio-found-guilty-criminal-contempt-court/486278001/) does not include a finding that the sheriff’s office continued to illegally use race in initial stops, or any other legal problem with the initial stops. It was what the sheriff’s office did after the stop – turn people over to the feds for immigration violations without charging them with state crimes – that Bolton found in criminal contempt of Snow’s civil orders.


Federal law explicitly authorizes local law enforcement to communicate with federal officials about the immigration status of those they encounter. State law requires local law enforcement to follow up on reasonable suspicion of illegal presence when practical to do so.
So, arguably, Snow’s order prohibited Arpaio from doing what federal law allows and state law mandates. When Trump said in Phoenix that Arpaio was convicted for doing his job, there’s a basis for that point of view.
But Arpaio doesn't deserve a pardonNow, I don’t support a pardon for Arpaio. He was a lousy cop, a crummy administrator and a menace to the rule of law.
Singling out people based on their race for disproportionate law enforcement scrutiny, as Arpaio unquestionably did with his immigration sweeps, violates the fundamental founding principles of our country.
Before that, Arpaio trampled all over procedural rights and protocols in pursuit of his nutty conspiracy theory, hatched with former County Attorney Andrew Thomas, involving the Board of Supervisors, its staff, and some judges.
And even if Snow’s order was an overreach (http://www.azcentral.com/story/opinion/op-ed/robertrobb/2017/07/10/joe-arpaio-still-deserves-jury-trial/460585001/), Arpaio’s duty was to obey it while appealing it. Arpaio’s career ending with a criminal conviction is fitting.
None of these distinctions and nuances likely entered into Trump’s decision to pardon Arpaio (http://www.azcentral.com/story/news/local/phoenix/2017/08/25/donald-trump-pardons-sheriff-joe-arpaio/599835001/). Arpaio is an important ally and symbol on one of Trump’s signature issues, illegal immigration. The facts don’t matter to him.
By serially misrepresenting what Arpaio was found in criminal contempt for doing, opponents of a pardon have demonstrated that facts don’t matter to them either.

More at: http://www.azcentral.com/story/opinion/op-ed/robertrobb/2017/08/25/joe-arpaio-pardon-facts-dont-matter/603064001/

This is the default condition of the current times. Groups form into two sides and they both get it wrong.

enhanced_deficit
08-27-2017, 08:06 AM
Back in 2016, JA also played a very controversial role in the movement that tried to deligit first mixed race POTUS in US history. Did President Trump know about this when he issued pardon order?

Sheriff Joe Arpaio renews birther claims about Obama's birth certificate
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation-now/...arpaio...obama.../95500958/
Dec 15, 2016 - Arpaio and his aides announced that a five-year investigation had "proved" that Obama's birth certificate from Hawaii in 1961 was a fake.

donnay
08-27-2017, 09:05 AM
This speaks volumes to me that this pissed off McCain and Ryan. I am sure Graham will chime in shortly.


Paul Ryan, John McCain break with Trump on Arpaio pardon
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/08/26/paul-ryan-john-mccain-break-with-trump-on-arpaio-pardon.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+foxnews%2Fpolitics+%28Interna l+-+Politics+-+Text%29

donnay
08-28-2017, 08:40 AM
Trump keeps another campaign promise- "Just knock the crap out of them. I will pay your fines. Don't worry about it!"

We need a bigger, more beautiful police state.

So you are advocating Kangaroo courts, then?

Ender
08-28-2017, 08:47 AM
So you are advocating Kangaroo courts, then?

Sarcasm, donnay, sarcasm. ;)

And I think we already have them.

donnay
08-28-2017, 08:55 AM
Sarcasm, donnay, sarcasm. ;)

And I think we already have them.

Yes and why we should continue to shine a light on them. Arpaio, like him or not, was tried in a Kangaroo court, and for nothing else, should have been pardon to send a message to the judicial system that people are watching them.

Zippyjuan
08-28-2017, 10:45 AM
Yes and why we should continue to shine a light on them. Arpaio, like him or not, was tried in a Kangaroo court, and for nothing else, should have been pardon to send a message to the judicial system that people are watching them.

Arpaio ran a kangaroo court system.

donnay
08-28-2017, 11:14 AM
Arpaio ran a kangaroo court system.

Arpaio was tried in a kangaroo court system.

Ender
08-28-2017, 12:55 PM
Arpaio was tried in a kangaroo court system.

Karma.

donnay
08-28-2017, 12:59 PM
Karma.

So that makes it better to say it is Karma. What do we tell the Bundy's?

Dangergirl
08-28-2017, 01:09 PM
I'm pretty surprised by some of the comments here though at this point I shouldn't be.

This isn't about the characters involved, it's about the principle. Arpaio wasn't convicted of any "crimes" except trying to uphold Federal Law. You may think he's a prick or a wife-beater or whatever you imagine he's done to offend you, but that's not the case here. Get a grip on your emotions, you're losing more then you're winning.

H. E. Panqui
08-28-2017, 02:58 PM
I'm pretty surprised by some of the comments here though at this point I shouldn't be.

This isn't about the characters involved, it's about the principle. Arpaio wasn't convicted of any "crimes" except trying to uphold Federal Law. You may think he's a prick or a wife-beater or whatever you imagine he's done to offend you, but that's not the case here. Get a grip on your emotions, you're losing more then you're winning.

...anyone not a brainwashed ignoramus understands that 'the federal war on drugs' is unconstitutional, abominable, etc..your stinking republican-radio hero, arpaio, enthusiastically facilitated this/?your rotten goddamned fool drug war...

...i HEARTILY second the 'karma' comment...

Ender
08-28-2017, 03:13 PM
So that makes it better to say it is Karma. What do we tell the Bundy's?

Arpaio has broken the constitution he promised to uphold many times. Did the Bundy's? NO.

Maybe if a few of the better-than-thous get stung by the unconstitutional laws they uphold, they might just wake up.

Ender
08-28-2017, 03:15 PM
I'm pretty surprised by some of the comments here though at this point I shouldn't be.

This isn't about the characters involved, it's about the principle. Arpaio wasn't convicted of any "crimes" except trying to uphold Federal Law. You may think he's a prick or a wife-beater or whatever you imagine he's done to offend you, but that's not the case here. Get a grip on your emotions, you're losing more then you're winning.

Federal Law should never precede State Law. And his "crime" was not doing as he was told by the judge instead of simply appealing.

Swordsmyth
08-28-2017, 03:19 PM
Federal Law should never precede State Law. And his "crime" was not doing as he was told by the judge instead of simply appealing.

I don't like JA but the law he continued to enforce was not in contradiction with state law.

I almost totally agree with the article I posted in this thread:


http://www.ronpaulforums.com/images/misc/quote_icon.png Originally Posted by Swordsmyth http://www.ronpaulforums.com/images/buttons/viewpost-right.png (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?p=6518031#post6518031)

Facts don't matter to either side of the Arpaio pardon debate

The conviction of former Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio for criminal contempt is being serially misrepresented. The misrepresentations are material to the question of whether President Donald Trump should have pardoned Arpaio (http://www.azcentral.com/story/news/politics/arizona/2017/08/25/former-maricopa-sheriff-joe-arpaio-my-political-career-isnt-over/604062001/).
Arpaio’s criminal conviction is routinely, in fact almost invariably, described in one of two ways. Either that he continued to engage in racial profiling despite a court order to stop. Or that he continued with immigration sweeps contrary to a court order to abandon them.
Both descriptions are inaccurate and misleading.
He was ordered not to enforce federal law

In the underlying civil case, federal Judge G. Murray Snow did find that Arpaio had unconstitutionally used race in making traffic stops in an effort to find illegal immigrants. In fact, it was the central finding in the civil case.
Snow’s remedial orders, however, went far beyond simply forbidding the use of race in initial traffic stops (http://www.azcentral.com/story/opinion/op-ed/robertrobb/2017/08/11/joe-arpaio-immigration-clarify-what-happened/556914001/). He ordered Arpaio to get out of the immigration enforcement business altogether. Even with a legal stop, Arpaio was to either charge people with a state crime or let them go. No detaining them or turning them over to federal officials for immigration violations.
It was this edict to get out of the immigration business altogether that federal Judge Susan Bolton found Arpaio in criminal contempt for violating.

However, Bolton’s decision (http://www.azcentral.com/story/news/local/phoenix/2017/07/31/maricopa-county-sheriff-joe-arpaio-found-guilty-criminal-contempt-court/486278001/) does not include a finding that the sheriff’s office continued to illegally use race in initial stops, or any other legal problem with the initial stops. It was what the sheriff’s office did after the stop – turn people over to the feds for immigration violations without charging them with state crimes – that Bolton found in criminal contempt of Snow’s civil orders.


Federal law explicitly authorizes local law enforcement to communicate with federal officials about the immigration status of those they encounter. State law requires local law enforcement to follow up on reasonable suspicion of illegal presence when practical to do so.
So, arguably, Snow’s order prohibited Arpaio from doing what federal law allows and state law mandates. When Trump said in Phoenix that Arpaio was convicted for doing his job, there’s a basis for that point of view.
But Arpaio doesn't deserve a pardon

Now, I don’t support a pardon for Arpaio. He was a lousy cop, a crummy administrator and a menace to the rule of law.
Singling out people based on their race for disproportionate law enforcement scrutiny, as Arpaio unquestionably did with his immigration sweeps, violates the fundamental founding principles of our country.
Before that, Arpaio trampled all over procedural rights and protocols in pursuit of his nutty conspiracy theory, hatched with former County Attorney Andrew Thomas, involving the Board of Supervisors, its staff, and some judges.
And even if Snow’s order was an overreach (http://www.azcentral.com/story/opinion/op-ed/robertrobb/2017/07/10/joe-arpaio-still-deserves-jury-trial/460585001/), Arpaio’s duty was to obey it while appealing it. Arpaio’s career ending with a criminal conviction is fitting.
None of these distinctions and nuances likely entered into Trump’s decision to pardon Arpaio (http://www.azcentral.com/story/news/local/phoenix/2017/08/25/donald-trump-pardons-sheriff-joe-arpaio/599835001/). Arpaio is an important ally and symbol on one of Trump’s signature issues, illegal immigration. The facts don’t matter to him.
By serially misrepresenting what Arpaio was found in criminal contempt for doing, opponents of a pardon have demonstrated that facts don’t matter to them either.

More at: http://www.azcentral.com/story/opini...ter/603064001/ (http://www.azcentral.com/story/opinion/op-ed/robertrobb/2017/08/25/joe-arpaio-pardon-facts-dont-matter/603064001/)

Ender
08-28-2017, 03:21 PM
I don't like JA but the law he continued to enforce was not in contradiction with state law.

I almost totally agree with the article I posted in this thread:

I agree with the article and am just pointing out this part:


And even if Snow’s order was an overreach, Arpaio’s duty was to obey it while appealing it.

Swordsmyth
08-28-2017, 03:26 PM
I agree with the article and am just pointing out this part:

I agree but you mentioned state law, and that was not involved.

Swordsmyth
08-28-2017, 07:33 PM
Trump says he pardoned Joe Arpaio because charge made him lose re-election bid 'very unfairly'https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-says-pardoned-joe-arpaio-221704631.html

r3volution 3.0
08-28-2017, 07:39 PM
Facts don't matter to either side of the Arpaio pardon debate

The only fact which interests me is that he enthusiastically imprisoned people for "crimes" which harmed no person nor any property.

That is, he committed multiple kidnappings.

Swordsmyth
08-28-2017, 07:42 PM
The only fact which interests me is that he enthusiastically imprisoned people for "crimes" which harmed no person nor any property.

That is, he committed multiple kidnappings.

All facts always matter, including but not limited to those you mentioned.

nikcers
08-28-2017, 07:43 PM
The only fact which interests me is that he enthusiastically imprisoned people for "crimes" which harmed no person nor any property.

That is, he committed multiple kidnappings.
Yeah- a lot of people cheered as people were locked up in inhumane conditions because they are criminals- some hadn't been charged with a crime and were awaiting trial. This is purely a partisan debate though where facts don't matter to the partisans debating his morality which is disgusting.

r3volution 3.0
08-28-2017, 08:12 PM
Yeah- a lot of people cheered as people were locked up in inhumane conditions because they are criminals- some hadn't been charged with a crime and were awaiting trial. This is purely a partisan debate though where facts don't matter to the partisans debating his morality which is disgusting.

I agree that this is almost entirely a pure partisan debate; GOPers don't know what Dems claim he did.

None of that interests me...

As I said, my interest is that this fellow committed multiple kidnappings.

Swordsmyth
08-28-2017, 11:54 PM
Joe Arpaio Wants His Conviction Tossed Out Now That He's Been Pardoned
A presidential pardon does not automatically undo a criminal conviction. A pardoned person's criminal record continues to note their conviction, as well as the pardon, unless a judge expunges it from their record, according to (https://www.justice.gov/pardon/frequently-asked-questions-concerning-executive-clemency#18) the Justice Department.
Arpaio's lawyers filed court papers (https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/3982383/8-28-17-Arpaio-Motion-to-Vacate.pdf) on Monday arguing that because Trump issued the pardon before Arpaio was sentenced and a final judgment was entered — and, as a result, before Arpaio could appeal his conviction and before the US Supreme Court ruled on an earlier challenge that Arpaio filed related to his trial — the court is "obligated" to vacate his conviction.
A Justice Department spokesperson said they are "reviewing the motion."

More at: https://www.buzzfeed.com/zoetillman/joe-arpaio-wants-his-conviction-tossed-out-now-that-hes?utm_term=.duAxKB27z#.idaxeQgoL

Swordsmyth
08-30-2017, 08:16 PM
Judge won't vacate Arpaio's contempt conviction without oral argumentsU.S. District Court Judge Susan Bolton canceled former Sheriff Joe Arpaio's upcoming sentencing hearing for his criminal contempt-of-court conviction, telling attorneys not to file replies to motions that were pending before Arpaio’s recent presidential pardon.However, Bolton on Tuesday stopped short of throwing out the conviction (http://http://azc.cc/2xLjei2) based solely on Arpaio's request. Instead she ordered Arpaio and the U.S. Department of Justice, which is prosecuting the case, to file briefs on why she should or shouldn't grant Arpaio's request.
Arpaio's attorneys asked Bolton on Monday to vacate Arpaio's conviction in light of President Trump's Friday pardon.
Bolton has scheduled oral arguments on the matter for Oct. 4, the day before Arpaio was supposed to be sentenced.

More at: https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation-now/2017/08/29/judge-wont-vacate-arpaios-contempt-conviction-without-oral-arguments/615146001/

Created4
09-11-2017, 08:51 PM
Remember when Joe Arpaio’s men allegedly threatened to have a reporter’s children taken away? (http://www.nccprblog.org/2017/08/remember-when-joe-arpaios-men-allegedly.html)


Sheriff Joe Arpaio, let’s not forget the time two of his top deputies allegedly threatened to have a reporter’s children taken from her.

According to a report from another county sheriff’s office, it happened several times. According to the Phoenix alternative weekly New Times, “’[The reporter] was always threatened that her child would end up in the hands of CPS, which was very upsetting to her,’ the report states.”

It allegedly happened in 2009, but didn’t come to light until two years later. I wrote about it at the time, and that post is reprinted below.

Full article (http://www.nccprblog.org/2017/08/remember-when-joe-arpaios-men-allegedly.html).

kcchiefs6465
09-12-2017, 03:18 PM
Remember when Joe Arpaio’s men allegedly threatened to have a reporter’s children taken away? (http://www.nccprblog.org/2017/08/remember-when-joe-arpaios-men-allegedly.html)



Full article (http://www.nccprblog.org/2017/08/remember-when-joe-arpaios-men-allegedly.html).
Let us not forget the time he dropped the ball on hundreds of child abuse cases to hut hut around like a fascist with Steven Segal, murdering chickens and waging political witch hunts as years went by.