'jkol;asdfg[SZUOPDnkml./AWEanml;'sd{
JOP'ZKL:SJdfg['oalknmfasz ,./dmfawer,.faaw'SE NIKML

The Green brothers are fucking awesome.

Exactly, maybe because protecting a racist bigot like himself is far far more important.

The President is a 71 year-old racist who, during a hurricane, pardoned an 85 year-old racist sheriff who'd been convicted of being racist.

— Ken Tremendous (@KenTremendous) August 26, 2017

Brownshirtie, you're doing a heck of a job.

Prove that you aren't racist. Protip: you can't.

On the other hand, when someone says "I think the guy is lazy. And it’s probably not his fault because laziness is a trait in blacks. It really is, I believe that. It’s not anything they can control," I think things have gone beyond a reasonable doubt.

Which is hearsay, I'll admit, but the whole Gonzalo Curiel thing was well documented straight from his own mouth.

His history seems to be pretty dark— Phoenix New Times coverage of Arpaio over the years

I'm sorry, but the inference within your fish picture is devaluing the hobby of keeping goldfish. Comparing a beautiful peaceful creature with no sense of what racism is with a certain "hobby president" is certainly not called for.

Violating people's fifth amendment rights? Bah, no biggie.

Not people, Brucseki, Latinos.

American citizens. The lawsuit that lead to the court's demands was filed by American citizens who were detained by Sheriff Arpaio and the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office until proof of their citizenship could be produced in violation of their Fourth Amendment rights.

The Constitution applies to everyone except where it specifically says otherwise (like the right to vote).

So...i read through the majority of his pardons...what exactly am I to gain from this...what am I "educating myself" about. Didn't seem anything inappropriate at face level in that link.

My point precisely.

He exercised his Constitutional prerogative, as did Trump.

Educate yourself on the rule of law, and the consequences of elections. I believe your guy said "I have a pen and a phone". Right?

why dont you just tell us your view on his pardons?

He's Constitutionally entitled to pardon whomever he pleases.

As is Trump.

To suggest that your guy's pardons are somehow better or more worthy is utterly laughable.

TDS, full force. Get help.

your above statements do not indicate that you agree with with the pardons issued by Obama, and in fact find fault with them. hence you directing people to look them up themselves.

if you had no issue with them, this would/should have been stated.
and note, your response to me didn't actually give your view on his pardons, just your view on the constitutionality of the pardon system
so yet again, put up or shut up cuck bitch

I said Trump and Obama's pardons were Constitutional. I didn't say I agreed with Obama's; in fact I don't.

And I believe the phrase for what I'm doing is 'living in your head, rent free'.

So yet again, get help.

There now, was that so hard?

So, Trump's pardon of Arpaio?

I personally feel it's more evidence of "one hand washing the other".

Arpaio?

If you're concerned about the rule of law, tell me where you stand on Lois Lerner and Fast and Furious.

I feel the same way about it as i do the oliver north incident and cia-rick ross-coke connection.

Government is too powerful and operates without any form of true regulation, and thus need to be stopped by any means.

Because there is no "-1 Stupid". Do you understand why these people requested a pardon? Did you look at the conviction dates versus the term of their sentences?

American justice system deems once a criminal, always a criminal. You have a record and this limits your civilian life even after you have paid your dues to society. So, the Pardon is requested to erase their record, so that they can return to "normal" life after paying their dues, and do things like "vote" or "purchase a gun" or "get hired in a job that deals with money", you know, little things where having a criminal record can be problematic.

These people apply for a Pardon, they are mostly first time offenders for low impact crimes who all served their sentences, and the Justice Department has reviewed them prior to giving to the President for recommendation. It's not like Obama hand picked a group of people based on their mug shots.

See my comment, directly above.

I guess we get to find out how much of this was bullshit now.

Key Trump staffer was on the brink of resigning after Charlottesville response

The stock market started to fall on rumors this guy was going to quit and they worried they wouldn't get their tax cuts...anybody taking bets?

And while we are on the topic...


Controversial Trump Adviser Sebastian Gorka Reportedly Resigns
He has long faced questions about his ties to Nazi sympathizers and far-right Hungarian political groups.

Just in case you thought this shit was over....


St. Louis man charged with driving into protesters, leaving scene

Are "long faced questions" answered with bald-faced lies?

Pretty sure Arpaio has countless civil suits against him. Lets see how deep are his pockets.

Yes, remember that presidential pardons only cover Federal offences. On everything else, Arpaio is still fair game.

I don't know case law on pardons, but I do recall reading once that accepting a pardon carries an admission of culpability. If that is the case, it may actually be a boon for those bringing civil suits against him.

I think this is a test run of the pardon process. He wants to have the kinks worked out before he starts pardoning his family, and staff, and himself.

Yes it is if you accept a pardon it is an admission of guilt. That is why Ford carried a copy of the Nixon pardon...to remind people he was the one who got him to confess.

A lot depends on how the pardon was worded. It can be so broad and vague as to be an admission to noting in particular.

So what are the options for bringing him to justice now? Can a higher court overrule this, or do people have to take in into their own hands?

Civil suits, as opposed to criminal.

He was supposed to spend six months in jail, and was in the process of appeal. Now he's admitted guilt, which in theory makes him easier to pin with the civil suits, but i doubt it, because the pardon invalidates the record as well.

They can still be criminal, just not Federal.

I can't see Mauricio County bringing charges. The Arizona AG is this guy Mark Brnovich

"Brnovich has worked as the Director of the Center for Constitutional Government at the Goldwater Institute, briefly for the Corrections Corporation of America, served as Assistant U.S. Attorney for the District of Arizona, a prosecutor with the Maricopa County Attorney's Office, and Assistant Attorney General of Arizona"

So not likely there either.

meanwhile, Kelly pushes Gorka out to drift...

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/aug/25/donald-trump-sebastian-gorka-out-white-house-breitbart