WILL HE SIGN IT, AND IF SO, WHEN?
by Sharon Rondeau
(Aug. 18, 2017) — Infowars’s Jerome Corsi is reporting that a presidential pardon for former Maricopa County Sheriff Joseph M. Arpaio has been readied for President Donald Trump’s signature.
As Corsi reported on Tuesday, Trump is traveling to Phoenix on August 22 for rally. In Friday’s article, Corsi left open the possibility that Trump would not sign the pardon but speculated that executing it before his arrival in Phoenix would energize Trump’s political base.
In November Trump won the state of Arizona by less than four percentage points, although Arpaio endorsed him early in the presidential campaign.
Trump and Arpaio share June 14, Flag Day, as their birthday.
On July 31, Arpaio was found guilty by U.S. District Court Judge Susan R. Bolton of misdemeanor criminal contempt of court stemming from a finding by U.S. District Court Judge G. Murray Snow of civil contempt in May of last year.
Both allegations arose from a lawsuit filed in late 2007 by a number of Hispanic plaintiffs who claimed that Arpaio’s immigration patrols unfairly targeted them as having allegedly been present in the county illegally.
Arpaio’s attorneys have argued that Snow and Bolton each showed obvious bias against Arpaio and that the U.S. Justice Department charged their client under an improper statute, as the appropriate law’s statute of limitations had expired. On August 14, the two law firms representing Arpaio petitioned the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona, where both Bolton and Snow preside, for a new trial or, alternatively, for the contempt conviction to be vacated.
On Friday Corsi reported that in addition to the two motions submitted to the federal court on Arpaio’s behalf, assuming sentencing takes place as scheduled for October 5, Arpaio’s legal team plans to file an ethics complaint against Bolton.
Over his 24 years as Maricopa County Sheriff, Arpaio earned a reputation for aggressive enforcement of federal immigration law, conducting workplace raids to find perpetrators of identity theft, and, more recently, for his commissioning of an investigation into the long-form birth certificate image posted on the White House website in April 2011 declared the following year by investigators to be a “computer-generated forgery.”
Following two telephone interviews Corsi conducted with Arpaio after Bolton announced her ruling, Fox News’s Gregg Jarrett published an article reporting that Trump was “seriously considering” issuing a pardon to the 85-year-old former lawman self-described as “America’s toughest sheriff.”
As Corsi noted, Trump retweeted Jarrett’s article on Monday.
Last fall, Arpaio had sought a seventh term as Maricopa County Sheriff but lost to Democrat Paul Penzone, a retired Phoenix police sergeant. The Justice Department made its announcement that it would prosecute Arpaio several days before early voting began in Arizona.
In order for a pardon request to be considered, a petition must be submitted to the Office of the Pardon Attorney (OPA), which is part of the U.S. Justice Department. Article II, Section 1 of the U.S. Constitution gives the president the authority to “grant reprieves and pardons for offenses against the United States, except in cases of impeachment.”
How many is “many”? Ten, tops, that can be publicly identified? And how do you quantify those who “remained silent” simply because they did not agree with Lakin’s beliefs?
If Lakin truly believed there was a contradiction between his oath and orders, then Lakin shouldn’t have pleaded guilty to disobeying orders because during his guilty plea he acknowledged that the orders he was given were lawful.
Lakin was not alone in questioning Obama’s credentials. Many military members, both active and retired, both enlisted and officers did come forth to state objections. However, many others were more concerned for their careers, pensions, and etc. and kept mute.
Knowing the truth and taking no action, did these members violate their oath of office?
Whatever moral duty Lakin may have felt that he had (that almost no other officer expressed having), Lakin pleaded guilty to disobeying orders.
No excuse? Lakin was upholding the US Constitution and his officer’s oath. He had a moral duty to question aka Obama and the American people had every right to know the truth about aka Obama’s phony background and fraudulent documents. Lakin is a man of honor, integrity and human decency. Obama sycophants on the other hand have a patently anti-American, anti-Christian, anti-family, anti-life agenda. They thrive on lies, deceit and treasonous behavior as they gleefully attack and destroy the founding principles upon which America was built and divide our citizenry. Truth be damned.
@Gary Wilmott,
Lakin has no excuse because even if he had been able to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Obama was illegally holding office and even if Congress and the Courts agreed that Obama was illegally holding office and even if Obama had been impeached for illegally holding office, pursuant to US law, all orders issued by Obama while illegally holding office would still have been lawful orders and Lakin would still be guilty of failure to obey a lawful order and/or failure to deploy.
Apairo should release the Gut Wrenching Universe Shattering Information and Trump should release the amazing things his investigators found in Hawaii!!!
Charles Benson is correct: accepting a pardon is an admission of guilt that would also moot an appeal or a request for a new trial.
There is no indication that the president is aware of Terry Lakin, let alone considering a pardon for him.
If Joe was smart, he’d instead continue fighting for a retrial, as at least then he can still claim he is innocent. If he accepts a pardon from The President, its the same as going “I am guilty.”, and he’ll just end up playing right into the hands of those who have been accusing him of wrongdoing.
What about Terry Lakin??????????????????????????????????????
BANNON’s Time is up – No big loss! [BUNDY Ranch ]
http://dailycaller.com/2017/08/17/bannons-time-is-up/
[When Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio who was a strong and articulate supporter of the President and his criticism of our current Immigration policies, was indicted for civil rights violations of prisoners in his custody the Obama Justice Department made certain he was tried under the wrong statue to deny him a jury trial. The Justice Department illegally monitored the Sheriffs communication with his lawyer as well as improperly communicating directly with the judge during his trial Arpaio’s prosecution is a political hit job and the government’s misconduct in his prosecution are certainly grounds for dismissal by the Trump Justice Department. Steve Bannon never mentioned the case to President who was shocked to learn about Arpaio’s conviction when he didn’t know about his trial. All of Arpaio’s phone calls to Bannon to protest his treatment by the Trump Justice Department went unanswered]
https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=2175318942694771&id=1532843870275618
The fact that Arpaio is in jail shows how far the left and Democrats have gotten to control the press, judicial system and social engineering. The creeps that are and run the Democratic Party are all Clinton types, Godless no-body’s that are too full of themselves to be real for anything in life, ego maniacs that are all losers. They can steal and lie but are not real in life.
He has not been sentenced yet and is still a free man, although under conviction.