Trump pardons Sheriff Arpaio

'A middle finger to America': What people are saying about Trump's first presidential

http://www.businessinsider.com/trum...spect-of-rule-of-law-with-the-arpaio-pardon-1
giphy.gif
 
If liberals have a problem with it they can always file a case questioning the constitutionality of the pardon. Im sure you can get the ninth circuit to agree with you.
 
BucklyTARD said:
It is fitting that Trump's first padon was a racist...
It's significance is not lost on America.
Click to expand...

There you go again with the stupid strawman and innuendo. You leftTards are quite full of them.

I would ask how Joe A is a racist, but it is obvious you're too stupid to comprehend the meaning of words.
 
christiefan915 said:
Arpaio was the most corrupt, abusive sheriff in America and he cost his county millions to defend him in numerous lawsuits. He's a racial profiler and a bigot. He's responsible for deaths in his custody. He's detained legal citizens without warrant or without charging them. He kept a woman in a cage in the sun and she died from heat exposure. He flouted laws for decades. He's filth.

If Arpaio accepts the pardon that's a tacit admission of guilt. Saying he's just an 85-year old man with a lifetime of service is like saying Al Capone was just a tax cheat.
Click to expand...

So if Trump pardons Hillary and she accepts it, it's an admission of guilt.
 
christiefan915 said:
All that tells me is that the Attorney's office is just as corrupt as Arpaio and his henchmen.

The woman was mentally ill and working as a prostitute. She wasn't in there for a felony, it was a Class 1 misdemeanor.

This is the money quote: "It means they've gotten away with the most colossal example of brutality I have seen against a female prisoner in the history of the Arizona Department of Corrections," remarked Hamm, adding, "And they got off scot-free."
Click to expand...

Then why did they sentence her to 27 months?
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
Then why did they sentence her to 27 months?
Click to expand...

Class 1 Misdemeanor Penalties in Arizona
The maximum punishments for misdemeanors are outlined by A.R.S. § 13-707. According to the statutes, the maximum penalties for a class 1 misdemeanor include up to six months in jail.
Fines often accompany a misdemeanor conviction, and can vary depending on the nature of the crime and if it’s a first offense. For class 1 misdemeanors, the fines can be no more than $2,500.
The statutes state that adults who have been previously convicted of misdemeanors or even petty offenses can be sentenced for the next higher level of misdemeanor, so these penalties can apply to someone who is charged with a class 2 misdemeanor and who has previous convictions.
The final subsection of the statute says that the court may require that a person charged with a misdemeanor may not be released until the sentence has been served in full.

Sounds more like she was convicted of a felony:
Class 1 Felonies are at the top of the chart and are the most severe in Arizona. This kind of felony can hold as much as life in prison or as little as twenty-five years in a state penitentiary. The death penalty is also a possibility for those who have committed crimes classified under Class 1 Felonies. This is usually for first degree murder cases.

Class 2 Felonies are the next category of felonies and can have as few as three and a half years in prison or as much as five years. These sentences are normally served in a state prison.

A Class 3 Felony can have as much as three and a half years in a prison

while a Class 4 Felony can have up to two and a half years of incarceration.

A Class 5 Felony is punishable by up to one and a half years,

and a Class 6 Felony -- the last of Arizona's felony classifications -- can have up to one year in a state facility.
 
I was one of Joe Arpaio’s victims. He doesn’t deserve a pardon.

On Dec. 4, 2009, my wife, Eva, and I were driving in our truck in Phoenix when a Maricopa County sheriff’s deputy drove up alongside us in a police cruiser. The deputy stared at us both, then switched his lights on and pulled us over. We hadn’t been doing anything wrong, and at first, when he turned his lights on, we thought he was speeding off to respond to a call.

After a few minutes, he still hadn’t come over to our truck, so we both stepped out to see what was happening. The deputy got out of his car and yelled at us, furious. He demanded my driver’s license and Eva’s, even though she wasn’t driving. And he refused to answer my questions about why he’d pulled me over.

I had my suspicions, though. I was born in Chihuahua, Mexico, though I’ve been living legally in the United States since 1958 and have been a citizen since 1967. When we were stopped, the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office, led by Joe Arpaio, routinely engaged in racial profiling of Latinos in Phoenix and the surrounding area. After Arpaio refused to end discriminatory treatment of Latinos despite a federal court order that I and other victims had won, he was convicted of criminal contempt of court — which is what President Trump pardoned him for Friday night.

What happened to me and Eva that night eight years ago was all too typical: We were driving a pickup truck with landscaping tools, and we were Hispanic, so we got pulled over by an overzealous deputy working for a sheriff who never made any attempt to hide his contempt for immigrants.

“What’s going on?” I said.
“I’m going to search you,” he answered.
I asked him what he was searching me for.
“Drugs and weapons,” he told me.

When the search was finished, I asked the deputy for the third time why he’d pulled us over. He said it was because he hadn’t been able to see the license plate on my truck. And then, finally, he let us go, with this warning: “Don’t think for a minute that this has anything to do with racial profiling.”

Not long after we were stopped, I contacted the Arizona chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union, and I joined their lawsuit against Arpaio — a lawsuit they had filed the year before we were pulled over. Three years later, in 2012, I finally had my chance to testify against Arpaio. Eva and I both worried that we were in danger from the sheriff, his men or his supporters in Arizona, though I never let her know I was almost as scared as she was. When we won the case in 2013, I was elated. Arpaio never stopped his racist practices, though, which is why he was finally convicted of contempt.

Arpaio built a culture in his department of discrimination and racism. By pardoning him, Trump is saying to the nation that it’s okay to insult another race or another culture. Instead of making America great, he’s making America a lot more divided, just as Arpaio did here in Phoenix.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/amph...e-arpaios-victims-he-doesnt-deserve-a-pardon/
 
christiefan915 said:
I was one of Joe Arpaio’s victims. He doesn’t deserve a pardon.

On Dec. 4, 2009, my wife, Eva, and I were driving in our truck in Phoenix when a Maricopa County sheriff’s deputy drove up alongside us in a police cruiser. The deputy stared at us both, then switched his lights on and pulled us over. We hadn’t been doing anything wrong, and at first, when he turned his lights on, we thought he was speeding off to respond to a call.

After a few minutes, he still hadn’t come over to our truck, so we both stepped out to see what was happening. The deputy got out of his car and yelled at us, furious. He demanded my driver’s license and Eva’s, even though she wasn’t driving. And he refused to answer my questions about why he’d pulled me over.

I had my suspicions, though. I was born in Chihuahua, Mexico, though I’ve been living legally in the United States since 1958 and have been a citizen since 1967. When we were stopped, the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office, led by Joe Arpaio, routinely engaged in racial profiling of Latinos in Phoenix and the surrounding area. After Arpaio refused to end discriminatory treatment of Latinos despite a federal court order that I and other victims had won, he was convicted of criminal contempt of court — which is what President Trump pardoned him for Friday night.

What happened to me and Eva that night eight years ago was all too typical: We were driving a pickup truck with landscaping tools, and we were Hispanic, so we got pulled over by an overzealous deputy working for a sheriff who never made any attempt to hide his contempt for immigrants.

“What’s going on?” I said.
“I’m going to search you,” he answered.
I asked him what he was searching me for.
“Drugs and weapons,” he told me.

When the search was finished, I asked the deputy for the third time why he’d pulled us over. He said it was because he hadn’t been able to see the license plate on my truck. And then, finally, he let us go, with this warning: “Don’t think for a minute that this has anything to do with racial profiling.”

Not long after we were stopped, I contacted the Arizona chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union, and I joined their lawsuit against Arpaio — a lawsuit they had filed the year before we were pulled over. Three years later, in 2012, I finally had my chance to testify against Arpaio. Eva and I both worried that we were in danger from the sheriff, his men or his supporters in Arizona, though I never let her know I was almost as scared as she was. When we won the case in 2013, I was elated. Arpaio never stopped his racist practices, though, which is why he was finally convicted of contempt.

Arpaio built a culture in his department of discrimination and racism. By pardoning him, Trump is saying to the nation that it’s okay to insult another race or another culture. Instead of making America great, he’s making America a lot more divided, just as Arpaio did here in Phoenix.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/amph...e-arpaios-victims-he-doesnt-deserve-a-pardon/
Click to expand...

Well boo boo boo. Hwurt feewings again.

37403-02_kft_ignite_ml_80ct_ctn_eileen_1.png
 
christiefan915 said:
Pardons her for what, you stupid shit? Losing the election?
Click to expand...

lulz

i posted a daily kos article earlier that wuz a trial balloon 4 obummer pardoning crooked hillary back when he was stinking up the oval office

u know perfectly well what she would have needed a pardon 4

trouble iz, her ship haz sailed

on the up side tho, i hear shez been sick

real sick

and shez old
 
i have reviewed it

perhapz u can point out the elementz of the courts majority opinion which upholdz ur contention that acceptance of the pardon establishes guilt

i did notice this in my research

After Gerald Ford left the White House in 1977, intimates said that the former President privately justified his pardon of Richard Nixon by carrying in his wallet a portion of the text of the Burdick decision that suggested (empahsis mine) that a pardon carries an imputation of guilt and that acceptance carries a confession of guilt. Legal scholars have questioned whether that portion of Burdick is meaningful or merely dicta.

President Ford made reference to the Burdick decision in his post-pardon written statement furnished to the Judiciary Committee of the United States House of Representatives on October 17, 1974. However, said reference related only to the portion of Burdick that supported the proposition that the Constitution does not limit the pardon power to cases of convicted offenders or even indicted offenders..


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burdick_v._United_States
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top