BREAKING!!! TRUMP PARDONS ARPAIO!!!

[Slave Mentality]

AF/Oyarde 2020

"Make America Leave Me the Fuck Alone Again"

It's pretty catchy too.

 

[Origanalist]

[h=1]Facts don't matter to either side of the Arpaio pardon debate[/h]
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.
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.
[h=2]He was ordered not to enforce federal law[/h]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. 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 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.
[h=2]But Arpaio doesn't deserve a pardon[/h]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, 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. 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/opin...oe-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]

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]

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/201...foxnews/politics+(Internal+-+Politics+-+Text)

 

[donnay]

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]

So you are advocating Kangaroo courts, then?

Sarcasm, donnay, sarcasm.

And I think we already have them.

 

[donnay]

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]

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]

Arpaio ran a kangaroo court system.

Arpaio was tried in a kangaroo court system.

 

[Ender]

Arpaio was tried in a kangaroo court system.

Karma.

 

[donnay]

Karma.

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

 

[Dangergirl]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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:

Originally Posted by Swordsmyth

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.
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. 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 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, 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. 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/

 

[Ender]

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]

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]

[h=1]Trump says he pardoned Joe Arpaio because charge made him lose re-election bid 'very unfairly'[/h]https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-says-pardoned-joe-arpaio-221704631.html

 

[r3volution 3.0]

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.