A Special Prosecutor Should Challenge Joe Arpaio's Special Pardon... (Page 10): Your and retwardlow have those race cards locked up. But thinking of a DemoCrap isn't far behind. As far...

Checkmate Loc: Southern California

thom w wrote:

You and checkers all the way. I'm sorry but you either are a racist or you play one in the attic.

Your and retwardlow have those race cards locked up. But thinking of a DemoCrap isn't far behind. As far as Joe Arpaio is concerned, he has more balls than
all the leftists combined and should be given the Congressional Medal Of Honor.

Szalajj Loc: Salem, NH

Wrangler wrote:

Apparently, the president wins. That is how the former president overruled the courts who gave prison sentences to 1,927 criminals. Do you argue that the president does not have the right to pardon people? Why can one president pardon or commute a person and the next president cannot?

The whole problem with trump's pardon of the sheriff, is the timing of when he issued the pardon.

Because he failed to wait for the sentencing phase to be completed, he overstepped the Judicial branch of the government.

If trump had just waited a little while longer to issue his pardon, there wouldn't have been a legal problem with the pardon.

But trump was trying to out shine his predecessors by issuing a pardon without the necessary research into the case being done. And anything that pushed his "Stronger Border" initiative, and that was going to "help" his image, was going to be exploited.

That's just what trump did, he exploited that sheriff.

Twardlow Loc: Arkansas

Szalajj wrote:

Your arguments are WAY off base.

You seem to have forgotten that the actions of the sheriff threw out the US Constitution and the laws of our country when he swept up his prisoners in racial profiling arrests.

Absolutely-friggin'-lutely!

Twardlow Loc: Arkansas

Checkmate wrote:

Your and retwardlow have those race cards locked up. But thinking of a DemoCrap isn't far behind. As far as Joe Arpaio is concerned, he has more balls than
all the leftists combined and should be given the Congressional Medal Of Honor.

Race cards--whatever those are--have nothing to do with this issue except to give you the opportunity to cease thinking.

Then you prove your ignorance in your final statement.

Godspeed with your denial, and work hard to protect your ignorance; it will save you the effort of thought.

Blurryeyed Loc: NC Mountains.

Szalajj wrote:

Every person stepping foot on US soil is protected... (show quote)

Yes, there are things that president Trump could have and or should have done to make his actions more palatable, but the fact remains is that there will be no successful challenge to the pardon, it was legal, just as there was much talk about an Obama pardon for Hillary prior to his leaving office so that there could be no further threat to her freedom arising from the email scandal. Trump could have waited and commuted the sentence, I have seen prominent conservatives who have written that this would have been the preferred action as it would have not questioned the court actions that lead up to the sentencing. Disliking the president's action in no way makes in invalid except in the current frenzied chaotic state of the liberal mind.

WNYShooter Loc: WNY

Szalajj wrote:

The whole problem with trump's pardon of the sheri... (show quote)

You don't know what you're talking about. HE WAS ALREADY CONVICTED!!! Trump pardoned the conviction! The only thing that was left in the trial was sentencing. Since the conviction was pardoned, there is nothing to sentence for.

It would have been the same outcome if Trump had pardoned him before the trial started, or before he was even charged criminally for contempt of court.

Let's say it did go to sentencing though. The pardon would still have the same result.....but cost the Fed more, that's it, the only difference.

papakatz45 Loc: South Florida-West Palm Beach

Szalajj wrote:

Every person stepping foot on US soil is protected... (show quote)

You are wrong. The Constitution states:

Article II section 2:

Presidential pardons can be granted anytime after an offense has been committed including before, during, or after a conviction for the offense. If granted before a conviction is given, it prevents any penalties from attaching to the person. If granted after a conviction, it removes the penalties, and restores the person to all his or her civil rights. However, a pardon can never be granted before an offense has been committed – because the president does not have the power to waive the laws.

papakatz45 Loc: South Florida-West Palm Beach

Szalajj wrote:

There could be an obstruction of justice charge against trump.

You are wrong. The Constitution states:

Article II section 2:

Presidential pardons can be granted anytime after an offense has been committed including before, during, or after a conviction for the offense. If granted before a conviction is given, it prevents any penalties from attaching to the person. If granted after a conviction, it removes the penalties, and restores the person to all his or her civil rights. However, a pardon can never be granted before an offense has been committed – because the president does not have the power to waive the laws.

papakatz45 Loc: South Florida-West Palm Beach

Szalajj wrote:

The whole problem with trump's pardon of the sheri... (show quote)

You are wrong. The Constitution states:

Article II section 2:

Presidential pardons can be granted anytime after an offense has been committed including before, during, or after a conviction for the offense. If granted before a conviction is given, it prevents any penalties from attaching to the person. If granted after a conviction, it removes the penalties, and restores the person to all his or her civil rights. However, a pardon can never be granted before an offense has been committed – because the president does not have the power to waive the laws.

green Loc: 22.1749611,-159.646704,20

alright, you don't have to rub it in!

papakatz45 Loc: South Florida-West Palm Beach

green wrote:

alright, you don't have to rub it in!

Well, if people would just read then they would not make these dumb-ass comments.

Wrangler Loc: North Texas

There is one thing that everyone seems to forget. Federal law says deport illegals. Judge says don't look for illegals. No matter what Arpaio does, he breaks a law.

Checkmate Loc: Southern California

Twardlow wrote:

Race cards--whatever those are--have nothing to do with this issue except to give you the opportunity to cease thinking.

Then you prove your ignorance in your final statement.

Godspeed with your denial, and work hard to protect your ignorance; it will save you the effort of thought.

Still making a clown out of yourself. We are just waiting for you to pull out your Race Card and say that the policeman that shot another black trash in St. Louis was
guilty and we need to bring in a special prosecutor to railroad him. Remember Michael Brown and you making a total foolish ass out of yourself that time? We do!

Twardlow Loc: Arkansas

Wrangler wrote:

There is one thing that everyone seems to forget. Federal law says deport illegals. Judge says don't look for illegals. No matter what Arpaio does, he breaks a law.

Not so at all. He merely has to conform to the US Constitution, strange as that sounds.

Thousands and thousands of police do it.

Every day.

What you can't do is arrest in mass numbers--including US Citizens--in the hope that some of them may have done something illegal.

You can't withhold due process of law to anyone.

And you can't prescribe cruel and unusual punishment--especially those what innocent as all are before a trial.

In some circles, a person is innocent until proven guilty.

Joe should join those circles, and you should stop making wild and undocumented and uninformed generalizations in the hope that wild exaggeration will win your point for you.

Wrangler Loc: North Texas

So Joe doesn't have to pay attention to a local judge. He just has to enforce federal laws. So, he shouldn't have been convicted of a misdemeanor. I see now.