He broke the law and should have done the time. Next time don't ignore a court order but I guess the law doesn't matter to Trump. Which isn't a surprise.
Pardoning someone does not violate any law. As for the pardon itself, be reasonable. How many 85 year olds who have committed no violent offenses get sent to jail?
In the case of Sheriffs that break the law and repeatedly and flagrantly do pretty much everything wrong that a Sheriff can do wrong, well, not enough.
Does a Canadian actually have to school an American on how your impeachment process works? I am being reasonable. I don't give a fuck if the cocksucker is 85. He was a law enforcement officer entrusted to protect his community and he abused that power and privilege... despite being repeatedly warned by the courts, Department of Justice and U.S. Attorney. He deserves to rot in jail. Fuck him sideways.
Not that we needed any additional proof, but Trump pardoning this piece of shit speaks volumes about his character. The man is entirely unfit to hold the highest office in your country. Shame on Congress if they don't stop this dickhead before he really does something every American will regret.
The one upside in all of this is that Sheriff Joe cannot use the 5th Amendment, and if subpoenaed, can be legally compelled to testify on the circumstances around his misconduct. Otherwise he could face jail time.
Arpaio said something to the effect of, "Of course I'll accept a pardon, because I'm innocent." According to the United States Supreme Court, acceptance of a pardon constitutes an admission of guilt.
Grants of immunity are widely used by DAs to get reluctant witnesses to testify against bigger fish. It's the same concept, in theory. Not sure if it's ever been tested.
This is an assault on an independent judiciary. It'd be gross and political if it was just for the allegations against him, but pardoning the contempt of court that he was actually in jail for seems to me to be far worse.
He was guilty alright. He showed contempt for a contemptible court. Let's not neglect to mention the order he refused to follow was your typical, liberal identity-politics and nothing shy of systematic racism: to discriminate criminal arrests based on skin color. That shit doesn't stand any more. Today justice is colorblind.
Oh, yeah. He's guilty of a whole host of things that would land most people in Federal Prison. They range from the mundane (Officer Safety issues) to overt harassment of the judiciary. Oh, that Officer Safety issue? Yeah. If you voiced a concern about something the administration was doing wrong, you were assigned to a division out in the middle of no where, at night, where the radios and cell phones didn't work. Good luck! How does that stand with the "backing the blue" crowd? This guy is the biggest douchebag in Law Enforcement. Now the biggest douchebag in the country has said everything he's done is just a-okay. USA! USA! USA!
Hmm, I thought the limit on evil for Republicans was "no fucking kids", as established by the sudden pariah-ing of Milo. But Trump just let go a guy who let go child rapists. Guess that didn't last long.
How many 85 year olds break the law period? That could be why you don't see many of them in your weekly Jail Report. Not a rowdy demographic would be my main bullet-point here I guess. But if the guy fucked up, he fucked up - throw the book at him!
IIRC you can no longer make the argument that you can't answer without incriminating yourself if you, due to your pardon, are no longer subject to criminal prosecution. I think it is kind of narrowly defined. You can't invoke the 5th Amendment if what you are being questioned about is unrelated to the crime you were pardoned for. Same as not being able to invoke the 5th Amendment if the state has granted you immunity from prosecution.
Between Trump's hateful racist campaign rhetoric, saying that there were some good Nazis a few weeks ago, and pardoning a man who literally set up a concentration camp, I think it's become increasingly clear what this presidency is about. I honestly don't see how any decent person can continue to support this presidency.
A "concentration camp"???? WTF!!! A tent encampment for inmates!!!! How is that a concentration camp? They lived in the same kinds of tents and ate the same kinds of meals that American soldiers had during Operation Desert Storm. And again, they were inmates.
You don't have to. "High crimes and misdemeanors" covers everything from abuse of authority to unbecoming conduct. Yes, President Trump had the constitutional power to pardon Joe Arpaio, but I'd strongly argue that his actions in this specific matter cover both "abuse of authority" and "unbecoming conduct". President Nixon was never charged or convicted of a crime, but had he not resigned, it's almost a certainty that Congress would have impeached him on "high crimes and misdemeanors". Lucky for him, President Ford granted him a pardon.
True. Impeachment and conviction in the case of a president or other constitutional officer is a political act. And it is beyond imagining that a president would be impeached or removed from office over pardoning someone. But I don't care. Impeachment would enrage the GOP and they would come flooding to the polls at the next election just as Democrats did in the 1998 midterms. Besides, remove President Trump from office and VP Pence becomes this nations 46th president. I can live with that all day long.
I think you're sadly mistaken. Every day that Trump sits in the Oval Office diminishes the GOP. The party stalwarts know this. They're just waiting for the right moment to dump Trump. Agreed, but just add this pardon to the long list of conduct unbecoming and you have yourself more than ample grounds for impeachment.
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/polit...s-biggest-scandals/ar-AAqJkQV?ocid=spartandhp Of the five major things they have against the sheriff, only the failure to properly investigate reported sex crimes sounds to me like getting worked up about. Having worked in a jail that was underground I would've immensely preferred living in a tent city. At least the encounters with Brown Recluse spiders would probably be reduced.
At some point, that becomes tautological. But there seem to be a few people running around that I had higher hopes for. I think @Paladin has gone from "overjoyed" on election night merely to "I don't support everything this guy does but I'm basically ok with him" rather than "this person is completely unacceptable in any position of power", but I really don't know.
Well, they have the majority in both houses, so it would have to be the GOP that dumps Trump. I don't see Trump supporters flocking to the polls to vote GOP once the GOP has deposed him. But perhaps they'll just lie again and somehow make it look as if the Democrats are in charge.
The tactic is to vote on the Democrats impeachment resolutions in the House. nearly all Democrats could be counted on to support it, while just enough Republicans secure in basically lifetime seats go along to push impeachment over the top. The Republicans then claim accurately and with a remarkably straight face that "a far larger percentage of Democrats voting to impeach President Trump than Republicans". Repeat in the Senate. But Democratic impeachment supporters don't realize is that impeachment proceedings are a trap for them as well. Having pledged "resistance" to President Trump they can't suddenly forego an opportunity to remove him from office without alienating their most die hard supporters.
