Discussion»Questions»Legal» Words can be tricksters. "I am the law and order president". Sez he. Then he PARDONS someone who broke the law. RACISTS are above the law?
I'm confused by your (weak) premise (again). The very nature of a US presidential pardon is that it's used when a person has been convicted of breaking the law. Do you assume that all other presidential pardoning occurred when no law had been broken, so a new wheel was invented with Trump? The caveat is that some people can and have been pardoned largely becauseof their innocence, or perceived innocence. That being said, a larger percentage of presidential pardons for guilty persons than for innocent ones.
I hear that the sheriff was defying a judge who ignored the Constitution. That judge should be held responsible for failing to do his duty to the nation. There are all too many such judges. Civil disobedience is a valid protest against such travesties. Bill Clinton pardoned a swindler who took millions and donated much to Clinton's campaign. I say Clinton and the swindler should both be in prison, and the judge who ignored the Constitution should be there with them. I think the sheriff and Trump are correct. The liberal media tries to manufacture faults for Trump and excuse Obama. All too many people are puppets of the media deceivers, so they blindly believe many absurdities, e.g. that Rolex is the costliest and best watch brand when it is a mass-produced low level luxury brand, Glock is a great pistol but I would not take one if you gave it to me free, Bruce Lee was the greatest martial artist of all time when he was not even near the best of his own time, everything Trump does is wrong, everything Hillary and Obama do is right, etc. Few people can think critically and objectively. Tung lei, to anata, und sie, et vous?
The only law he broke was contemp of court. President Obama pardoned/commutated over 1800 drug offenders and 2 murders, and several who commited fraud of some kind. Where was the outrage then? Hundreds after the election of Trump....but the media was too busy lying about President Trump and Russia to report on it.
You are correct not all pardons are equal....Trump pardon 1 person with one conviction of "Contempt of Court" and Obama pardoned/commuted nearly 2000, mostly drug offenders "posswith intent to distribute" and many of those also had firearms and other convictions as well. And hundreds of fraud offenders. There were was one murder.
No, I don't consider these the same type of pardons/commutations at all.
the tendency to search for, interpret, favor, and recall information in a way that confirms one's preexisting beliefs or hypotheses---What's the name for that again.
When President Donald Trump granted his very first pardon to Arizonan former sheriff Joe Arpaio, he bucked process and precedent by circumventing the Department of Justice's unit dedicated to making recommendations on such requests.
Most pardons are granted following a recommendation and rigorous scrutiny from a special office in the Department of Justice. They are typically granted at least five years after conviction -- and are based on post-conviction character, the seriousness of the crime and demonstrations of remorse and responsibility, according to DOJ guidelines.
Sessions recommended Trump not pardon former sheriff Joe Arpaio.
Meanwhile, Arizona Federal Judge Susan Bolton on Tuesday stopped short of throwing out the conviction based solely on Arpaio's request. Instead she ordered Arpaio and the U.S. Department of Justice, which is prosecuting the case, to file briefs on why she should or shouldn't grant Arpaio's request.
Thank you for your thoughtful and informative reply tom. You do know that you're preaching to the choir, right ? Those who will reject this fine answer are drowning in a miasma of lies/deception/denial. Forever lost it seems to me. Happy Saturday to thee! :)
They have one another with whom to commiserate. They jointly berate those who disagree with them as being blind to what is going on. They believe that so fervently they will never be capable of disbelieving it. So that's life I guess. They can't help it tom. It is their DNA that determines everything about them including intellect, logic and reason. We cannot blame them. We don't agree with then. It is what it is. They are whom they are and they are very happy with it. We are whom we are and we are very happy with it. Two happy and contradictory camps. That's life! Thank you for your reply and Happy Sunday! :)
I'm sorry. He was really only doing his job. Illegal immigration is huge in Arizona and the border states and no small potato to ignore. Fact is the only way to target such an issue is to do a little profiling and work the statistics. If they can do road blocks to see if random people been drinking, wearing seat belts, licensed, or registered, etc,etc... Then this is really not much different and in truth more justfied.
I totally disagree with thee Glis. So what, right? Who cares? What difference does it make? Thank you for your reply and Happy Sunday! :) Never thought I'd see the day when bigotry and racism was normalized. What comes next? I don't know but it will be worse and worse and worse and worse. You will disagree of course. You and others who think as you do will see it as getting better and better and better. SIGH.
This post was edited by RosieG at September 3, 2017 4:20 AM MDT
Point is that profiling isn't illegal. That illegal immigration is a serious issue, maybe not in there being a problem with people comming to work on a farm but an uninforced policy can lead to bigger problems. Whether I agree or not with current policies and laws is moot, what is the issue though is that the policies and laws need to be concrete and fully applied by a government and law agencies that are responsible for them and not cherry picked and bended against their wordings when a comsequence we or others don't like springs up. Then the law needs to be changed to reflect the new conditions and situations.
It's also worth mentioning that playing the statistics isn't being racist at its face. We are all profiled. Black, white, brown, yellow, and red. If we don't agree with that situation then the law needs to tackle it the proper way. Outlaw the practice. Also as stated before it isn't much different that stopping and roadbocking driver for no reason other than to check belts, drinking, and registration with no probable cause other than drunk drivers, unregistered drivers, and people who don't wear belts tend to be in cars so check every driver.
There is a serious issue here but lets adress it the proper way according to the protocols, not target anyone commiting acts we don't like but aren't actually against the law. We can't safely and rightly start a culture of retroactively punishing people for breaking a percieved infraction of a law or policy that doesn't yet exist. That's knee-jerk reacting that sends all of us down a dark road.
Point is that profiling isn't illegal. That illegal immigration is a serious issue, maybe not in there being a problem with people comming to work on a farm but an uninforced policy can lead to bigger problems. Whether I agree or not with current policies and laws is moot, what is the issue though is that the policies and laws need to be concrete and fully applied by a government and law agencies that are responsible for them and not cherry picked and bended against their wordings when a comsequence we or others don't like springs up. Then the law needs to be changed to reflect the new conditions and situations.
It's also worth mentioning that playing the statistics isn't being racist at its face. We are all profiled. Black, white, brown, yellow, and red. If we don't agree with that situation then the law needs to tackle it the proper way. Outlaw the practice. Also as stated before it isn't much different that stopping and roadbocking driver for no reason other than to check belts, drinking, and registration with no probable cause other than drunk drivers, unregistered drivers, and people who don't wear belts tend to be in cars so check every driver.
There is a serious issue here but lets adress it the proper way according to the protocols, not target anyone commiting acts we don't like but aren't actually against the law. We can't safely and rightly start a culture of retroactively punishing people for breaking a percieved infraction of a law or policy that doesn't yet exist. That's knee-jerk reacting that sends all of us down a dark road.
BTW: you were born and grew up in a time when bigotry was comletely normalized, so how can you say you never thought you would see the day when you come from a generation when it was at it's zenith in the USA? This isn't excusing the remaining remnants but lets give some credit to those who have stuck there neck out to fight it and lessen it. The Klan and Nazi's still exist, but in smaller numbers and on the fringes, not as the largest " charitable" (cough) organizations in the country with numerous members in office. Let's keep it up instead of complaining. Let's fix the system with the system as we have been doing and historically with the greatest return on the effort.
Benedict Arnold 