Trump pardons Sheriff Joe

[d.kaufman]

Didn't see this anywhere. Glad he pardoned him!
https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/08/...f-arizona.html?referer=http://www.google.com/

 

[Expat]

I am glad but I flipped over to MSNBC and the guy was melting down. He looked like he might cry...
but the Gorka thing was being announced too***

 

[Twangbanger]

Well...having a photo op. for a pardon seems a bit ballsy, especially for this early in an administration...but hey...

 

[confused89]

This put a smile on my face.

 

[SwikLS]

This is what happens when a president doesnt let the border patrol and ICE do their jobs.

 

[d.kaufman]

Well...having a photo op. for a pardon seems a bit ballsy, especially for this early in an administration...but hey...

Maybe, but at least it isnt the drug dealers and other scum that Obummer pardoned. This man was doing his job!

 

[Trigger Time]

This put a smile on my face.

Me too. As soon as I saw it online I started laughing. It's awesome. What's democrats gonna say about it? Their guy pardoned traitors.

The libs are gonna flip their lids and that just makes it so much sweeter

 

[churchmouse]

Me too. As soon as I saw it online I started laughing. It's awesome. What's democrats gonna say about it? Their guy pardoned traitors.

The libs are gonna flip their lids and that just makes it so much sweeter

Bravo DJT......Bravo.

Now, can he go get those real douche bags that "O" pardoned and put them back.

 

[Trigger Time]

Bravo DJT......Bravo.

Now, can he go get those real douche bags that "O" pardoned and put them back.

One can only hope. They're getting one of them on other charges

 

[2A_Tom]

I am glad to see Mr. Trump begin to release Political Prisoners. Keep it up Mr. President!

 

[Sylvain]

Bravo DJT......Bravo.

Now, can he go get those real douche bags that "O" pardoned and put them back.

Can it be done?
I don't think you can put someone on trial if they have been pardoned, that's the whole point.
They would have to get a pardoned person for a different crime I assume.

 

[Kutnupe14]

Just a few questions, given the support there seems to be for this action:
-do you believe that Arpaio wasn't profiling people to make illegal immigration arrests?
-if you don't, nothing further... if you do believe he profiled, was the court correct in telling him to stop?
-After the court told him to stop, do you believe he stopped, or did he still allow his department to profile?
-If you believe he continued to allow his department to profile, should he have been punished?

 

[fineguitarman]

It was great news, and the libs are freaking out.

 

[Sylvain]

Just a few questions, given the support there seems to be for this action:
-do you believe that Arpaio wasn't profiling people to make illegal immigration arrests?
-if you don't, nothing further... if you do believe he profiled, was the court correct in telling him to stop?
-After the court told him to stop, do you believe he stopped, or did he still allow his department to profile?
-If you believe he continued to allow his department to profile, should he have been punished?

I don't know enough about the case to answer your questions but aren't all (or most) immigration arrests based on profiling?
Especially if the arrests are not made at the border but at checkpoints inside the country.

 

[Kutnupe14]

I don't know enough about the case to answer your questions but aren't all (or most) immigration arrests based on profiling?
Especially if the arrests are not made at the border but at checkpoints inside the country.

How do you legally profile an illegal immigrant, justifying detaining them, and that doesn't infringe upon the protections 4th Amendment?

 

[BehindBlueI's]

Maybe, but at least it isnt the drug dealers and other scum that Obummer pardoned. This man was doing his job!

This. I dislike the whole executive pardon thing, period. Too much like the feudal system, IMO, where the "lord" gets to override a jury of one's peers. That said, this is a significantly better use of the pardon, someone who is 84 and zero threat to public safety, than people serving life sentences for narcotics. I know a guy who's up to three lifers he put away who are back on the streets, and the idea they were "nonviolent" is a joke.

 

[Kutnupe14]

This. I dislike the whole executive pardon thing, period. Too much like the feudal system, IMO, where the "lord" gets to override a jury of one's peers. That said, this is a significantly better use of the pardon, someone who is 84 and zero threat to public safety, than people serving life sentences for narcotics. I know a guy who's up to three lifers he put away who are back on the streets, and the idea they were "nonviolent" is a joke.

Is it? I mean (assuming you think he was guilty of what he was convicted) Arpaio was the leader of a large LE, and intentionally encouraged violating the Constitution. He then gets a pass from the president, because his while his means were undesirable, the results were acceptable. Why shouldn't other govt officials also violate the Constitution, if the president will give a "ends justify the means" pardon? We're not talking about the bad behavior of individuals, here, but institutions.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

Is it? I mean (assuming you think he was guilty of what he was convicted) Arpaio was the leader of a large LE, and intentionally encouraged violating the Constitution. He then gets a pass from the president, because his while his means were undesirable, the results were acceptable. Why shouldn't other govt officials also violate the Constitution, if the president will give a "ends justify the means" pardon? We're not talking about the bad behavior of individuals, here, but institutions.

What he was convicted of was contempt of court, which isn't the same as intentionally violating the Constitution. He was also denied a jury trial.

And he's no longer sheriff. And he's in his mid-80s. (I said 84, earlier, but he's actually 85). And he's not a threat to public safety.

So, yes. It is.

 

[Trigger Time]

Just a few questions, given the support there seems to be for this action:
-do you believe that Arpaio wasn't profiling people to make illegal immigration arrests?
-if you don't, nothing further... if you do believe he profiled, was the court correct in telling him to stop?
-After the court told him to stop, do you believe he stopped, or did he still allow his department to profile?
-If you believe he continued to allow his department to profile, should he have been punished?

No I don't think he profiled but law enforcement should and this court was wrong.
If he would have profiled I'd still support him.
I hope this emboldened law enforcement down there and they start rounding these donkeys up.
The courts are out of control and need reined in. Time to put some judges in prison

 

[Kutnupe14]

What he was convicted of was contempt of court, which isn't the same as intentionally violating the Constitution. He was also denied a jury trial.

And he's no longer sheriff. And he's in his mid-80s. (I said 84, earlier, but he's actually 85). And he's not a threat to public safety.

So, yes. It is.

Hs contempt was based on his department's continued use of profiling, which he said that he would continue to do. I view that as intentionally violating the 4th Amendment. And while he is old, that's not a defense to avoid punishment.