Breaking News....Joe Arpaio was never convicted of anything

[bripat9643]

Did a federal judge sign the order?

Then it's a legal court order.

Congress writes immigration law not some Obama appointed judge. I would have ignored the order too. The sheriff is the law in any county, he alone can tell the feds to go F themselves if he wants. At least that was the intent when law enforcement rules were established.
Obama ignored all of that to try and pry open our borders, he should be indicted for what he did. I don't care if he was president or king of the world he was in the wrong. If Trump ever acted like the dictator Obama the left would go nuts and rightly so.

A sheriff can tell the federal government to go F itself? Well, sure.....and then be held in contempt.

I'd like to see evidence that local sheriffs were intended to be able to ignore the federal government whenever they feel like it. I'm also curious how you can say that Arpaio was ordered to disobey federal law in one post, then say he can ignore the feds in another. There seems to be a disconnect there.

Look up "sanctuary city" and then get back to us.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Trump should appoint Sheriff Arpaio Chief of the INS just to enrage the racist Troglocrats who want to allow mass illegal immigration.

INS doesn't exist anymore.

And it's pretty safe to say that Arpaio would fail the background check, should Trump take your suggestion and appoint him to head ICE.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

That's not how it works.

Arpaio will have that conviction on his criminal record for the rest of his life.

In addition, by accepting the pardon, he is legally admitting guilt.

Both claims are wrong.

No, they're not wrong. In fact, they're both right.

I recognize that you're the type of person who believes the truth is whatever you want it to be, but that's just not how it works.

Wrong.

Are you under the impression that if you repeat yourself enough, it'll magically come true?

 

[Montrovant]

Did a federal judge sign the order?

Then it's a legal court order.

Congress writes immigration law not some Obama appointed judge. I would have ignored the order too. The sheriff is the law in any county, he alone can tell the feds to go F themselves if he wants. At least that was the intent when law enforcement rules were established.
Obama ignored all of that to try and pry open our borders, he should be indicted for what he did. I don't care if he was president or king of the world he was in the wrong. If Trump ever acted like the dictator Obama the left would go nuts and rightly so.

A sheriff can tell the federal government to go F itself? Well, sure.....and then be held in contempt.

I'd like to see evidence that local sheriffs were intended to be able to ignore the federal government whenever they feel like it. I'm also curious how you can say that Arpaio was ordered to disobey federal law in one post, then say he can ignore the feds in another. There seems to be a disconnect there.

Look up "sanctuary city" and then get back to us.

That doesn't actually address my post. Sanctuary cities don't show that local sheriffs were intended to be able to ignore the federal government when law enforcement rules were established, nor does it explain the seeming disconnect between saying Arpaio was ordered to disobey a federal law and then saying Arpaio could tell the feds to F off.

 

[Avatar4321]

It's a charge of contempt. Its not like its a serious charge people

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

That's not how it works.

Arpaio will have that conviction on his criminal record for the rest of his life.

In addition, by accepting the pardon, he is legally admitting guilt.

Frankly, I don't think he cares.

 

[Montrovant]

That's not how it works.

Arpaio will have that conviction on his criminal record for the rest of his life.

In addition, by accepting the pardon, he is legally admitting guilt.

Both claims are wrong.

For the first claim, the rest of his life is a bad phrase. It would be more accurate to say that the conviction remains on his record as it normally would, which allows for possible expunging.

For the second claim, it seems to be a matter of some contention. The USSC has talked about pardons carrying an implication of guilt, but there have also apparently been pardons written specifically to say that the person being pardoned is believed to be innocent.

That would make neither claim completely accurate.

Is accepting a pardon an admission of guilt? - An article discussing the topic.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

What did he do Doc?

He willfully and repeatedly violated a legal court order.

Actually Arpaio was found guilty of violating peoples 4th amendment rights. The court ordered him to cease violating peoples constitutional righs. Arpaio didn't stop, and the judge found him in criminal contempt.

No he wasn't. He was found guilty of misdemeanor contempt of court for violating an order the judge had no legal business issuing.

As I understand it, the Supreme Court has upheld racial profiling in at least three cases. Arpaio was with his authority.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

That's not how it works.

Arpaio will have that conviction on his criminal record for the rest of his life.

In addition, by accepting the pardon, he is legally admitting guilt.

Frankly, I don't think he cares.

Since he's right now filing motions like crazy trying to get the charges thrown out (rather than accept the pardon), I'd say he does.

 

[bripat9643]

That's not how it works.

Arpaio will have that conviction on his criminal record for the rest of his life.

In addition, by accepting the pardon, he is legally admitting guilt.

Frankly, I don't think he cares.

Since he's right now filing motions like crazy trying to get the charges thrown out (rather than accept the pardon), I'd say he does.

Those motions were file before he received the pardon.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

That's not how it works.

Arpaio will have that conviction on his criminal record for the rest of his life.

In addition, by accepting the pardon, he is legally admitting guilt.

Frankly, I don't think he cares.

Since he's right now filing motions like crazy trying to get the charges thrown out (rather than accept the pardon), I'd say he does.

He merely wants to make a point and rub the judge's nose in it when it IS thrown out.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

What did he do Doc?

He willfully and repeatedly violated a legal court order.

Actually Arpaio was found guilty of violating peoples 4th amendment rights. The court ordered him to cease violating peoples constitutional righs. Arpaio didn't stop, and the judge found him in criminal contempt.

No he wasn't. He was found guilty of misdemeanor contempt of court for violating an order the judge had no legal business issuing.

As I understand it, the Supreme Court has upheld racial profiling in at least three cases. Arpaio was with his authority.

That's not how our legal system works. You dont get to ignore court orders you don't like.

And since the SCOTUS rejected his appeal, it's pretty safe to say they're on the side of the lower court.

 

[Lewdog]

Common sense here...

How can you accept a pardon if your not guilty?

 

[theDoctorisIn]

That's not how it works.

Arpaio will have that conviction on his criminal record for the rest of his life.

In addition, by accepting the pardon, he is legally admitting guilt.

Frankly, I don't think he cares.

Since he's right now filing motions like crazy trying to get the charges thrown out (rather than accept the pardon), I'd say he does.

He merely wants to make a point and rub the judge's nose in it when it IS thrown out.

It's not going to be thrown out. That's a near certainty, at this point.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

That's not how it works.

Arpaio will have that conviction on his criminal record for the rest of his life.

In addition, by accepting the pardon, he is legally admitting guilt.

Frankly, I don't think he cares.

Since he's right now filing motions like crazy trying to get the charges thrown out (rather than accept the pardon), I'd say he does.

Those motions were file before he received the pardon.

No, he filed them on Monday.

You're really sticking with the whole ignoring reality thing, aren't you?

 

[TroglocratsRdumb]

People who are opposed to enforcing our immigration laws are racist.

People who refuse to accept that America is a sovereign country are racist

People who do not accept that America is an English speaking country are racist

People who oppose Voter ID are racist

Democrats are racist.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

What did he do Doc?

He willfully and repeatedly violated a legal court order.

Actually Arpaio was found guilty of violating peoples 4th amendment rights. The court ordered him to cease violating peoples constitutional righs. Arpaio didn't stop, and the judge found him in criminal contempt.

No he wasn't. He was found guilty of misdemeanor contempt of court for violating an order the judge had no legal business issuing.

As I understand it, the Supreme Court has upheld racial profiling in at least three cases. Arpaio was with his authority.

That's not how our legal system works. You dont get to ignore court orders you don't like.

And since the SCOTUS rejected his appeal, it's pretty safe to say they're on the side of the lower court.

Ignoring erroneous orders by lower courts is how we maintain our system. Of course, the system fights back when confronted. Most of that game is a waste of time and resources.

Research Supreme Court/racial profiling.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

Common sense here...

How can you accept a pardon if your not guilty?

Sometimes it keeps your ass out of a prison filled with people you put there.

 

[bripat9643]

What did he do Doc?

He willfully and repeatedly violated a legal court order.

Actually Arpaio was found guilty of violating peoples 4th amendment rights. The court ordered him to cease violating peoples constitutional righs. Arpaio didn't stop, and the judge found him in criminal contempt.

No he wasn't. He was found guilty of misdemeanor contempt of court for violating an order the judge had no legal business issuing.

As I understand it, the Supreme Court has upheld racial profiling in at least three cases. Arpaio was with his authority.

That's not how our legal system works. You dont get to ignore court orders you don't like.

And since the SCOTUS rejected his appeal, it's pretty safe to say they're on the side of the lower court.

I was getting emails from him about his appeal the day after the judge ruled him guilty

 

[theDoctorisIn]

What did he do Doc?

He willfully and repeatedly violated a legal court order.

Actually Arpaio was found guilty of violating peoples 4th amendment rights. The court ordered him to cease violating peoples constitutional righs. Arpaio didn't stop, and the judge found him in criminal contempt.

No he wasn't. He was found guilty of misdemeanor contempt of court for violating an order the judge had no legal business issuing.

As I understand it, the Supreme Court has upheld racial profiling in at least three cases. Arpaio was with his authority.

That's not how our legal system works. You dont get to ignore court orders you don't like.

And since the SCOTUS rejected his appeal, it's pretty safe to say they're on the side of the lower court.

Ignoring erroneous orders by lower courts is how we maintain our system. Of course, the system fights back when confronted. Most of that game is a waste of time and resources.

Research Supreme Court/racial profiling.

I love it when so-called conservatives completely abandon everything they supposedly stand for.

No, ignoring the law is not how our system works. In fact, it's the opposite of how our system works. We are a nation of laws, not a nation of ignoring the law.