|
Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today. |
26th August 2017, 11:39 AM | #81 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 60,375
|
I actually agree, but the problem with the Pardon is it gives a seal of approval to what Apraio did.
And the chances of him serving a day in prison was small. The courts almost certainly would have given him a suspeneded sentence, or, of worst came to worst,Trump could have communted his sentence (NOT the same as a pardon). But coming even before the sentence ,Trump is basically throwing out the rule of law and giving as green light for Cops to treat minorities like crap. |
__________________
Pacifism is a shifty doctrine under which a man accepts the benefits of the social group without being willing to pay - and claims a halo for his dishonesty. Robert Heinlein. |
|
26th August 2017, 11:41 AM | #82 |
Master Poster
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 2,860
|
An 85 year-old man who as an elected official has repeatedly violated the Constitutional and human rights of large numbers of people, both American citizens and otherwise. Who, as an elected official, is responsible for conditions in his jails that have resulted in death of innocent human beings. Who, as an elected official, faked an assassination attempt against him to discredit his political opposition.
That is what you are defending a pardon for... |
26th August 2017, 11:59 AM | #83 |
Guest
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 29,742
|
Too bad Trump pardoned him, he should have been allowed a jury trial, instead of a bench trial.
Viva la constitution! |
26th August 2017, 12:05 PM | #84 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 20,571
|
|
__________________
My new blog: Recent Reads. 1960s Comic Book Nostalgia Visit the Screw Loose Change blog. |
|
26th August 2017, 12:18 PM | #85 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Iowa USA
Posts: 12,131
|
|
__________________
"Sufficiently advanced malice is indistinguishable from incompetence. = godless Dave |
|
26th August 2017, 12:20 PM | #86 |
Cowardly Lurking in the Shadows of Greatness
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Arizona
Posts: 5,718
|
If they meant to emulate Malcom X's murderer, then surely they would have mentioned the murderer's name? Malcolm X was an activist.
|
__________________
Normal is just a stereotype. |
|
26th August 2017, 02:19 PM | #87 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 5,083
|
|
26th August 2017, 02:47 PM | #88 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 14,076
|
|
26th August 2017, 03:42 PM | #89 |
Straussian
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 15,419
|
Yeah, he's 85. I'm glad Republicans are able to show some mercy. It's not like we'd ever need to make example out of a lawless lawman. Remember when Clinton pardoned Marc Rich, and then Democrat apologists said that he hadn't been in the country in almost twenty years? I don't. Marc Rich STILL hasn't returned as per the condition of his pardon, so I suppose it has completely faded from public consciousness as an example of corruption.
Anyway, this Trump pardon feels more like a warm up. |
__________________
Cain: Don't be a homo. Diablo: What's that supposed to mean? Cain: It's a heteronormative remark meant to be taken at face-value. |
|
26th August 2017, 05:39 PM | #90 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 32,635
|
|
__________________
1. He'd never do that. 2. Okay but he's not currently doing it. 3. Okay but he's not currently technically doing it. 4. Okay but everyone does it. 5. He's doing it, we can't stop him, no point in complaining about it. 6. We all knew he was going to do it which... makes it okay somehow. 7. It's perfectly fine that's he's doing it. |
|
26th August 2017, 05:51 PM | #91 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 21,203
|
I guess this guy will be up for a pardon next year......
|
__________________
It must be fun to lead a life completely unburdened by reality. -- JayUtah I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question. -- Charles Babbage (1791-1871) |
|
26th August 2017, 05:52 PM | #92 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 21,203
|
|
__________________
It must be fun to lead a life completely unburdened by reality. -- JayUtah I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question. -- Charles Babbage (1791-1871) |
|
26th August 2017, 06:20 PM | #93 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 8,709
|
|
26th August 2017, 07:11 PM | #94 |
Sarcastic Conqueror of Notions
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 32,814
|
Interesting, you can reject a pardon. The case revolved around Wilson pardoning a guy to force a reporter to testify on who his sources were. And the question of whether accepting a pardon admits guilt is still up in the air, as you can be pardoned for things you aren't even being indicted for, much less convicted. |
__________________
"Great innovations should not be forced [by way of] slender majorities." - Thomas Jefferson The government should nationalize it! Socialized, single-payer video game development and sales now! More, cheaper, better games, right? Right? |
|
26th August 2017, 07:41 PM | #95 |
Featherless biped
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Aporia
Posts: 26,431
|
The extraordinary becomes normalised and one day you wake up in a third-world dictatorship.
|
26th August 2017, 07:48 PM | #96 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 8,709
|
|
26th August 2017, 07:55 PM | #97 |
Master Poster
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Blackstone River Valley, MA
Posts: 2,298
|
|
26th August 2017, 08:00 PM | #98 |
Featherless biped
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Aporia
Posts: 26,431
|
|
26th August 2017, 08:07 PM | #99 |
Self Employed
Remittance Man Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 46,649
|
People do get what "a pardon" is, right?
Listen I loathe both Trump and Arpaio but people are acting like Trump somehow went outside the system and did something he wasn't supposed to be able to do. Saying a pardon is "subverting the legal system" ignores that pardons are built into the legal system by design. But legally and Constitutionally... this is exactly why we have pardons, so the President can override legal proceedings. It's built into the system. This wasn't some shady, underhanded "Technicality" he performed it is literally the letter and the spirit (speaking in a purely legal and constitutional sense, not my personal opinion of it which I find odious) the concept. |
__________________
"If everyone in the room says water is wet and I say it's dry that makes me smart because at least I'm thinking for myself!" - The Proudly Wrong. |
|
26th August 2017, 08:17 PM | #100 |
Featherless biped
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Aporia
Posts: 26,431
|
|
26th August 2017, 08:30 PM | #101 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 6,701
|
I'm not super versed on this, but I'm taking this as an opportunity to learn.
As I understand it, Arpaio's conviction was rooted not just in arbitrary federal law, but in violations of constitutional rights. I don't believe the precedents for pardons include too many examples of presidential pardons for constitutional violations. If the President has the power to overrule the constitution with a pardon, then he has removed any checks on power. Trump has also been investigating preemptive pardons and the ability to pardon himself, and both those questions are not entirely resolved. |
__________________
The weakness of all Utopias is this, ... They first assume that no man will want more than his share, and then are very ingenious in explaining whether his share will be delivered by motorcar or balloon. -G.K. CHESTERTON |
|
26th August 2017, 08:30 PM | #102 |
Self Employed
Remittance Man Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 46,649
|
|
__________________
"If everyone in the room says water is wet and I say it's dry that makes me smart because at least I'm thinking for myself!" - The Proudly Wrong. |
|
26th August 2017, 08:38 PM | #103 |
Self Employed
Remittance Man Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 46,649
|
Perhaps there are no precedents (although how exactly pardoning someone for a "constitutional violation" is any different then pardoning someone for a crime isn't clear to me) but there is nothing in the letter or legal and Constitutional spirit of the concept of the pardon that this is a violation of.
You are correct it is, sort of, an unchecked power. The only check is us electing better Presidents. I'm not made that people are angry at Trump for doing this, hell I'm angry at Trump for doing this, but a lot of people are acting as if he pulled some dirty, underhanded legalize trick when all he did was... exactly by the books what the office of POTUS allows him to do. He did something morally wrong, he didn't do anything procedurally wrong. |
__________________
"If everyone in the room says water is wet and I say it's dry that makes me smart because at least I'm thinking for myself!" - The Proudly Wrong. |
|
26th August 2017, 09:05 PM | #104 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 6,701
|
But if the right to pardon supercedes constitutional rights, then it isn't just an unchecked power to get people out of jail, it's an unchecked power to do literally anything.
Especially when you combine it with preemptive pardon and self pardon. It would mean that a President and his agents could do literally anything with no legal consequences. For an extreme example, just to prove a point, what if the President decided to suspend elections? No legal effort to have them go forward would succeed if the President simply pardoned anyone who violated that legal order to and kept elections from happening. Technically, if there is no sort of law immune to pardons, and it could be done preemptively, he could have anyone who tried to impeach him murdered, pardon the murderers, pardon himself for giving the order, and continue presidenting. He could have any reporters who tried to tell the public thrown in a dungeon and pardon everyone involved with doing so. Obviously, although he is a massive twat, Trump isn't likely to be planning anything quite like that, but the precedent that a presidential pardon is higher than the bill of rights certainly constitutes a degree of power that hasn't been exercised in pardons before, and wasn't the intent of the framers. |
__________________
The weakness of all Utopias is this, ... They first assume that no man will want more than his share, and then are very ingenious in explaining whether his share will be delivered by motorcar or balloon. -G.K. CHESTERTON |
|
26th August 2017, 09:11 PM | #105 |
Guest
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 29,742
|
|
26th August 2017, 09:20 PM | #106 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 6,701
|
Interesting question.
It looks like until 1966, there was no such thing. Cheff v. Schnackenberg, draws a line at petty offenses and a six month sentence, meaning that there is no jury trial for a contempt charge carrying less than six months. https://supreme.justia.com/cases/fed.../373/case.html |
__________________
The weakness of all Utopias is this, ... They first assume that no man will want more than his share, and then are very ingenious in explaining whether his share will be delivered by motorcar or balloon. -G.K. CHESTERTON |
|
26th August 2017, 09:30 PM | #107 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: US of A
Posts: 16,613
|
Trump tried to shut down the Arpaio case last spring. Jeff Sessions, of all people, said, "No, you can't do that."
https://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...=.6dff2f90c616 |
26th August 2017, 09:38 PM | #108 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Dharug & Gundungurra
Posts: 16,809
|
It would seem that Trump has pardoned Arpiao for the current conviction only, i.e. the contempt of court. So while Trump's action is reprehensible, it does not stop Arpiao being charged and convicted in the near future of other crimes he has committed. I gather there is a laundry list of these, enough to keep him in court for years, and even in jail to prevent him fleeing justice. So Sheriff Joe is not out of the woods yet.
|
__________________
...our governments are just trying to protect us from terror. In the same way that someone banging a hornets’ nest with a stick is trying to protect us from hornets. Frankie Boyle, Guardian, July 2015 |
|
26th August 2017, 09:39 PM | #109 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 21,203
|
Contempt of court is considered a prerogative of the court, and "the requirement of a jury does not apply to 'contempts committed in disobedience of any lawful writ, process, order, rule, decree, or command entered in any suit or action brought or prosecuted in the name of, or on behalf of, the United States.'
|
__________________
It must be fun to lead a life completely unburdened by reality. -- JayUtah I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question. -- Charles Babbage (1791-1871) |
|
26th August 2017, 09:49 PM | #110 |
Guest
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 29,742
|
|
26th August 2017, 09:50 PM | #111 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: US of A
Posts: 16,613
|
That's kinda the point. The president is expected to exercise judgment and restraint. Typically, he pardons people who have already completed their legal process, including serving their sentences, after consultation with the Justice Department. Exceptions, like Nixon, Weinberger etc., are rare and always controversial. In this particular case, Arpaio has a long, documented history of civil rights violations and abuse of prisoners, and he was held in contempt by a federal judge. To pardon him as Trump did sends a message that his friends can do anything they want and get away with it.
What a great message to send to all the people under investigation by Robert Mueller: You cover my back and I'll cover yours. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.b4c0b34d598c And reports by Arpaio's "customers:" https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...erve-a-pardon/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.1b14c55742cc |
26th August 2017, 09:51 PM | #112 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 21,203
|
785. Jury Trial
The Supreme Court has adopted the standard set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 1(3) regarding the definition of a "petty offense," insofar as it has ruled that imprisonment for no more than six months for contempt is constitutionally permissible without a jury trial. Taylor v. Hayes, 418 U.S. 488 (1974). See also Frank v. United States, 395 U.S. 147 (1969) (sentence of three years probation permissible without jury trial). However, the Court has declined to rule that contempt proceedings, at least as to organizations, resulting in fines of greater than the amount set out in 18 U.S.C. § 1(3) are automatically entitled to jury trials. See Muniz v. Hoffman, 422 U.S. 454, 477 (1975). A court may, during the course of a trial, impose successive summary contempt orders resulting in an aggregate sentence of imprisonment of more than six months in the absence of a jury trial. Such sentencing is permissible so long as no one contempt order carries a sentence of greater than six months. If, however, the court chooses to impose a single finding of contempt at the termination of the trial, imprisonment for longer than six months is constitutionally impermissible without a jury trial, even if the judge calculates the sentence of imprisonment for each contempt at six months or less. See Codispoti v. Pennsylvania, 418 U.S. 506 (1974). If the contempt falls within the purview of 18 U.S.C. § 402, contempts constituting crimes, then the contemnor is automatically entitled to a jury trial by reason of 18 U.S.C. § 3691. There was no requirement for a Jury trial. |
__________________
It must be fun to lead a life completely unburdened by reality. -- JayUtah I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question. -- Charles Babbage (1791-1871) |
|
26th August 2017, 09:55 PM | #113 |
Guest
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 29,742
|
|
26th August 2017, 09:58 PM | #114 |
Master Poster
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 2,860
|
|
26th August 2017, 10:00 PM | #115 |
Guest
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 29,742
|
|
26th August 2017, 10:09 PM | #116 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: US of A
Posts: 16,613
|
He doesn't have to be convicted of crimes to be unfit and abusive. Arizona has paid out more than $50 million in settlements for misconduct by Arpaio and his department.
http://aattp.org/sheriff-joe-arpaios...er-50-million/ http://www.vocativ.com/underworld/cr...fty-price-tag/ |
26th August 2017, 10:10 PM | #117 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 21,203
|
|
__________________
It must be fun to lead a life completely unburdened by reality. -- JayUtah I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question. -- Charles Babbage (1791-1871) |
|
26th August 2017, 10:28 PM | #118 |
Master Poster
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 2,860
|
|
26th August 2017, 10:30 PM | #119 |
Master Poster
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 2,860
|
|
26th August 2017, 10:58 PM | #120 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: US of A
Posts: 16,613
|
|
Thread Tools | |
|
|