Judge May Keep Sheriff Joe Conviction Despite Trump Pardon

[IsailedawayfromFR]

The Executive Branch's (Dept of Justice) own guidelines define the pardon as a forgiveness of the punishment, not the crime.  (But of course, Trump ignored his own branch's guidelines and issued the pardon despite breaking several of the points of guidance.)

In any case, a pardon is an "expression of forgiveness," but does not remove the actual conviction.  That's a separate issue, known as expungement.  Others who have been pardoned still have the convictions on their record.

But of course, Joe Arpaio isn't supposed to be held to the law of everyone else, I know.

1.  that does not answer the Constitutional nature of the right of the Executive to issue pardons.
2. POTUS is the Executive, not the DOJ.  Do you think the Constitution gave power otherwise?

The entire point of all of this is the obvious punitive nature of a federal judge when it comes to a Constitutionally-granted pardon by the President.  This judge refuses to allow the case to be dropped from her court in spite of the pardon.

How many of the hundreds and thousands of pardons handed down by previous Presidents did a runaway federal judge do the same thing when a Presidential pardon was made?

[Cyber Liberty]

1.  that does not answer the Constitutional nature of the right of the Executive to issue pardons.
2. POTUS is the Executive, not the DOJ.  Do you think the Constitution gave power otherwise?

The entire point of all of this is the obvious punitive nature of a federal judge when it comes to a Constitutionally-granted pardon by the President.  This judge refuses to allow the case to be dropped from her court in spite of the pardon.

How many of the hundreds and thousands of pardons handed down by previous Presidents did a runaway federal judge do the same thing when a Presidential pardon was made?

None of that matters.  Under the newly formed DoK (Department of Karma) Law Enforcement people are not eligible for any kind of pardon because, at least once in their careers, they arrested somebody who didn't get a Pardon, and therefore deserve what's coming to them. 

This is what I learned from this thread.

[IsailedawayfromFR]

None of that matters.  Under the newly formed DoK (Department of Karma) Law Enforcement people are not eligible for any kind of pardon because, at least once in their careers, they arrested somebody who didn't get a Pardon, and therefore deserve what's coming to them. 

This is what I learned from this thread.

what I learned from thread is that some supposedly smart people actually believe that some unelected black robes rule this country, not the people or those elected by the people.

That is chilling.

[Cyber Liberty]

what I learned from thread is that some supposedly smart people actually believe that some unelected black robes rule this country, not the people or those elected by the people.

That is chilling.

Frankly it scares me to death, because it's a fact that tyrants in black robes effectively DO rule this country.  Try arguing with a Judge some time, or refuse to look down when they're yelling at you, you're either be out a bunch of money or thrown in the slammer.  Then, because they think you're rude, will find against you in whatever you were there for anyway, regardless of what the law states.

"Judges" are the most arrogant people on the planet, and proud of it, too.

[Suppressed]

1.  that does not answer the Constitutional nature of the right of the Executive to issue pardons.
2. POTUS is the Executive, not the DOJ.  Do you think the Constitution gave power otherwise?

@IsailedawayfromFR

Nobody is denying the right of the POTUS to issue pardons.

This judge refuses to allow the case to be dropped from her court in spite of the pardon.

Yes, because convictions stand regardless of pardons. 

And the DOJ is part of the Executive Branch.  The head of the Executive Branch is ignoring the guidelines of his own Administration.

How many of the hundreds and thousands of pardons handed down by previous Presidents did a runaway federal judge do the same thing when a Presidential pardon was made?

I don't know what you mean about runaway judge -- the judge is following the usual procedure, and it's Trump who has changed things (e.g., not waiting for the judicial wheels before issuing his pardon, not waiting 5 years after conviction, pardon for misdemeanor, etc.).

But maybe this will answer your question about how it is for most peons, not St. Joe and God Don:

FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS CONCERNING EXECUTIVE CLEMENCY
https://www.justice.gov/pardon/frequently-asked-questions-concerning-executive-clemency

Does a presidential pardon expunge or erase the conviction for which the pardon was granted?

No.  Expungement is a judicial remedy that is rarely granted by the court and cannot be granted within the Department of Justice or by the President.  Please also be aware that if you were to be granted a presidential pardon, the pardoned offense would not be removed from your criminal record.  Instead, both the federal conviction as well as the pardon would both appear on your record.  However, a pardon will facilitate removal of legal disabilities imposed because of the conviction, and should lessen to some extent the stigma arising from the conviction.  In addition, a pardon may be helpful in obtaining licenses, bonding, or employment.  If you are seeking expungement of a federal offense, please contact the court of conviction.  If you are seeking expungement of a state conviction, which the Office of the Pardon Attorney also does not have authority to handle, states have different procedures for “expunging” a conviction or “clearing” the record of a criminal conviction.  To pursue relief of a state conviction, you should contact the Governor or state Attorney General in the state in which you were convicted for assistance.

I know, I know, I know... Joe and Don operate above the law, rules, and policies.   We're supposed to make this a special case for him and wipe out the conviction based on handwaving from the king, unlike how all those "hundreds and thousands of pardons handed down by previous Presidents" were handled.

[driftdiver]

@IsailedawayfromFR

Nobody is denying the right of the POTUS to issue pardons.

Yes, because convictions stand regardless of pardons. 

And the DOJ is part of the Executive Branch.  The head of the Executive Branch is ignoring the guidelines of his own Administration.

I don't know what you mean about runaway judge -- the judge is following the usual procedure, and it's Trump who has changed things (e.g., not waiting for the judicial wheels before issuing his pardon, not waiting 5 years after conviction, pardon for misdemeanor, etc.).

But maybe this will answer your question about how it is for most peons, not St. Joe and God Don:

FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS CONCERNING EXECUTIVE CLEMENCY
https://www.justice.gov/pardon/frequently-asked-questions-concerning-executive-clemency
I know, I know, I know... Joe and Don operate above the law, rules, and policies.   We're supposed to make this a special case for him and wipe out the conviction based on handwaving from the king, unlike how all those "hundreds and thousands of pardons handed down by previous Presidents" were handled.

@Suppressed
You appear to have no issue with the political nature of the prosecution.   Why is that?

The judge ordered him NOT to enforce the law.  An order of questionable validity in the first place.

[IsailedawayfromFR]

@IsailedawayfromFR

Nobody is denying the right of the POTUS to issue pardons.

Better read what your fellow lib says about that. http://www.gopbriefingroom.com/index.php/topic,281405.msg1454538.html#msg1454538 He/she/it thinks the judicial branch decides what is or not a pardon.  Fundamentally, that says the Executive reports to him, as he is the only interpreter of the Constitution. 

Yes, because convictions stand regardless of pardons. 

  So a judge who ruled in a case was over-ruled by a Constitutionally-allowed Presidential pardon, yet continues to have the Executive branch stand before him/her/it as he/she/it refuses to just let it go away?  Do you not comprehend why that is not petty, spiteful and downright stupid?  Why didn't any other judge in the thousands of pardons issued by other Presidents take on with the same logic?    Reason:  IT IS A POLITICAL HACK WHO IS THE JUDGE.

And the DOJ is part of the Executive Branch.  The head of the Executive Branch is ignoring the guidelines of his own Administration.

What in the hell difference is that?  Who originally issued those guidelines anyway?  Bet you a thousand it was not under the auspices of the current President.  You do not seem to understand what is in the Constitution.  It vests ALL Executive power within one person.  Not his underlings, unless he decides otherwise, not in past presidents or their underlings.  The CURRENT President.

It is very telling that some people believe the Constitution is only what an un-elected entity in the Judicial branch thinks it is.  That branch is making a mockery of everything the Founders intended for the people of this country - to be self-directed by the citizens.   

[Taxcontrol]

I wonder if a Judge couple be found in contempt for this action?  As @jmyrlefuller says, Trump did not issue a commutation, as was done for Scooter Libby, it was a full Pardon, and I don't think a Federal Judge can dictate the terms of that.

The House should be drafting Impeachment charges for Bolton right now.

President Trump should issue a concept of the President citation to the judge. Pure theater but would be a nice to see.

[driftdiver]

What I don't get is why supposed conservatives are siding with the leftist political prosecution at the root of this whole fiasco.   Can someone explain that one to me?

[Suppressed]

What I don't get is why supposed conservatives are siding with the leftist political prosecution at the root of this whole fiasco.   Can someone explain that one to me?

Because conservatives care about the rule of law, not your liberal preference for political favors and treating people different based on who they are.

1) Joe Arpaio was detaining people without evidence of a crime.
2) An injunction against that loathesome behavior was issued.
3) Arpaio bragged about ignoring the legal order.
4) Then switched stories during defence, pretending it wasn't willfull (i.e., criminal) contempt.
5) During legal proceedibgs, his own braggadocio was used against his latter claim.
6) He was convicted for intentionally, willfully, violating a legal court order.

[truth_seeker]

Because conservatives care about the rule of law, not your liberal preference for political favors and treating people different based on who they are.

1) Joe Arpaio was detaining people without evidence of a crime.
2) An injunction against that loathesome behavior was issued.
3) Arpaio bragged about ignoring the legal order.
4) Then switched stories during defence, pretending it wasn't willfull (i.e., criminal) contempt.
5) During legal proceedibgs, his own braggadocio was used against his latter claim.
6) He was convicted for intentionally, willfully, violating a legal court order.

And then the duly elected President pardoned him. Should be the end of that.

[Suppressed]

And then the duly elected President pardoned him. Should be the end of that.

Exactly.  The penalty goes away, and the conviction stays on his record, just like it does for everyone else.

[Cyber Liberty]

Exactly.  The penalty goes away, and the conviction stays on his record, just like it does for everyone else.

Meanwhile, Sheriff Arpaio still has a court date that neither he, nor the Prosecutors I imagine, are the least bit interested in paying for.  As was asked upthread, I wonder if the FALN terrorists or Marc Rich, who Clinton Pardoned, ever had to defend their Pardons in court as Arpaio is being compelled to do.   

[driftdiver]

Meanwhile, Sheriff Arpaio still has a court date that neither he, nor the Prosecutors I imagine, are the least bit interested in paying for.  As was asked upthread, I wonder if the FALN terrorists or Marc Rich, who Clinton Pardoned, ever had to defend their Pardons in court as Arpaio is being compelled to do.   

Or that manning dufus who had his sentence commuted.

[Suppressed]

Meanwhile, Sheriff Arpaio still has a court date that neither he, nor the Prosecutors I imagine, are the least bit interested in paying for.  As was asked upthread, I wonder if the FALN terrorists or Marc Rich, who Clinton Pardoned, ever had to defend their Pardons in court as Arpaio is being compelled to do.   

Do you have a source on the claim that he has to defend the pardon?

[driftdiver]

Do you have a source on the claim that he has to defend the pardon?

There are a multitude of articles on it.  Do a google.

[Cyber Liberty]

Do you have a source on the claim that he has to defend the pardon?

Google it yourself.

[IsailedawayfromFR]

And then the duly elected President pardoned him. Should be the end of that.

Unless you are a lib on this board which says that the judge gets to decide what constitutes a pardon.

[240B]

What we continue to see, since Trump was elected, is a concerted national effort of Courts to overthrow the Executive Branch of government.


This is a civil war. It is an attempted coup d'etat by the Judicial over the Executive. America is founded on three foundations. The Executive, the Legislative, and the Judicial. Since the majority of the Legislative and Judicial branches do not recognize the authority of President Trump as leader of the Executive branch simply based on the fact that they do not like him, they are actively blocking (usurping) his authority at any chance they get.


Far from 'interpreting law', the Legislative branch has now taken it upon themselves to create 'law'. And more than that, they are now cancelling Executive orders and creating new ones, based on no authority whatsoever.


If the goal is to disrupt America; if the goal is to disrupt the functioning of the American government, then it doesn't matter if what they are doing is constitutional, or even if it is legal. The amount of time and effort it will take the Trump administration to 'right-the-ship' is their goal. It is a direct form of sabotage. If the goal is just to throw a wrench into the works, it doesn't matter. Just the time it takes to fix it is enough for the saboteur.


They know this. They are counting on it. Until the Supreme Court (if there is still such a thing) puts some kind of blanket restriction on these little nobody judges, to stop them from directly interfering with American National Policy, even if Trump or his administration decides to name a new highway it will be blocked by some judge in some court somewhere in Nowhereville, just to make them have to deal with it.


If disruption is the only goal, without consideration of actual success or even if it makes sense, then that is the simplest thing in world to accomplish. And that is exactly what they are doing.

[Oceander]

Tinfoil hat time

[driftdiver]

Tinfoil hat time

They've wiretapped the President.  Doesn't get much worse.

[Oceander]

They've wiretapped the President.  Doesn't get much worse.

That has nothing to do with this lawless Sheriff or the inexplicable support for his lawless behavior. 

[skeeter]

That has nothing to do with this lawless Sheriff or the inexplicable support for his lawless behavior.

Apparently its explicable to all but you and one or two other dead enders.

[Fishrrman]

240b wrote:
"...Until the Supreme Court (if there is still such a thing) puts some kind of blanket restriction on these little nobody judges, to stop them from directly interfering with American National Policy, even if Trump or his administration decides to name a new highway it will be blocked by some judge in some court somewhere in Nowhereville, just to make them have to deal with it."

Your entire post was right-on.
But... how to put an end to this?

My solution was posted here, if you care to read it:
http://www.gopbriefingroom.com/index.php/topic,281332.msg1453766.html#msg1453766

I call it "The Trump Doctrine".

[Oceander]

They've wiretapped the President.  Doesn't get much worse.

Apparently based on a warrant.  Sounds like Trump stepped in some deep doo-doo after the election.  Shouldnt have been hanging around with the likes of Manafort or Flynn.  Lie down with dogs, get up with fleas, or worse.