Posted on 08/30/2017 11:55:43 AM PDT by Seizethecarp
After President Trump’s pardon of ex-sheriff Joe Arpaio, who had been convicted of criminal contempt for violating a court order designed to stop the violation of the constitutional rights of suspected illegal immigrants, conventional wisdom — and certainly the Trump administration — would have us believe that Trump’s pardon powers are unlimited. However, never before has someone stretched the pardon power so beyond its original intent. Trump has now drawn scrutiny not simply from critics of his racist rhetoric but from the court itself.
The Arizona Republic Reports:
U.S. District Court Judge Susan Bolton canceled former Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s upcoming sentencing hearing for his criminal contempt-of-court conviction, telling attorneys not to file replies to motions that were pending before his recent presidential pardon.
However, 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.
In other words, this is no slam dunk.
Lurking in the background is the potential for Trump to pardon associates involved in the probe of possible collusion between the Trump campaign and Russian officials and the possible obstruction of justice that followed. The Arpaio pardon may well have been an attempt to signal to those officials and ex-officials that they can resist inquiries with the assurance that Trump will pardon them.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
BTW, this is the "most read" opinion piece as of this posting...
Ford pardoned Nixon before any indictment.
F***ing lunacy. The executive branch needs to assert itself over the judicial branch. The judicial branch is not superior. The court has no authority anymore over Joe.
If Bolton were to follow Joe around, she might can get him on jaywalking.
Ping to delusional libs trying to litigate Trumps pardon of Sheriff Arpaio...and linking the pardon to “Russia collusion”!
She needs to be arrested.
“...from critics of his racist rhetoric...”
Stopped reading right there.
And it will apply worldwide. Because she said so....
The Constitutional Pardon Power is absolute. There is no “review.”
[Lurking in the background is the potential for Trump to pardon associates involved in the probe of possible collusion between the Trump campaign and Russian officials and the possible obstruction of justice that followed. The Arpaio pardon may well have been an attempt to signal to those officials and ex-officials that they can resist inquiries with the assurance that Trump will pardon them.]
And the pressholes pull another one out of their a**es.
“never before has someone stretched the pardon power so beyond its original intent. “
How so?
Waste of time.
“...from critics of his racist rhetoric...”
This is nothing but fake news as a vehicle to bash Trump some more. Surprised they didn’t work in Ivanka’s shoes.
Pardoning someone is NOT denying them life, liberty, or property ... so due process does not enter into it.
Meanwhile, the left is all too happy to deny due process in matters of asset forfeiture.
Jennifer Rubin is the house “conservative” at the execrable Washington Post. I have never seen her write a thing that is conservative, unless you consider advocacy for endless foreign interventions in wars where we don’t belong “conservative”.
The only thing that makes this case unusual is that the pardon was issued before the defendant (Arpaio) was even sentenced. So there's still an active case on the court docket, and the judge is telling the prosecution in the case (the U.S. Justice Dept.) how it wants to proceed. Despite Arpaio's pardon, his legal team's motion to dismiss the conviction is still before the court.
Politicized Federal Judiciary again shows its out of control. They will twist themselves in knots to try and deny Trump a clear Constitutional prerogative of his position.
It’s time to have impeachment on this judge.
If we had an aggressive DOJ that supported the President, they would be looking at options to remove judges who have stopped enforcing the law and are engaged in personnel vendettas or making up the law.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.