Pardon us
Did President Trump err on Joe Arpaio? Readers aren’t shy in their assessments
Arpaio victim of Obama administration
WHEN I WAS SENTENCED for contempt of court, there were no hearings to determine sentencing, no pretrial conference, no jury, no review of sentencing guidelines. Simply the judge felt that his ruling has been ignored and he meted out what he felt was appropriate to gain compliance with his order or punish for not doing so.
A judge can issue a contempt order for wearing the wrong colored tie, anything that upsets a judge. Contempt of court has no sentencing guidelines, no jury, and is purely at the discretion of the court, which makes it very difficult to appeal.
... In my case in 1992, it was a judge who had a reputation for being anti-business. Some weeks after he issued the contempt order, which was suspended based upon continued compliance with his orders, it was determined that his court did not have jurisdiction as he was enforcing OSHA regulations at a mining operation which should have been under the federal Mine Safety and Health Administration, and he withdrew the case, vacated his orders and my bond, and admitted “potential judicial liability” where you can sue a judge for damages for wrongful jurisdiction of the law, where he was messing around where he shouldn’t have. Unfortunately, attorneys to do such are rare to find.
Now, Sheriff Joe (Arpaio) was a case where the law may have been on his side, but because the Obama administration didn’t want to test the law by trial, they circumvented the process by finding a judge who would issue an order which may not have stood up under appeal and then play “gotcha’ by issuing a contempt order . ... LELAND T. “TOM” TAYLOR Albuquerque
Trump’s use of pardon is dictatorial
THE MOST DISTURBING thing about (President Donald) Trump’s pardon of former sheriff Joe Arpaio is this action sends a message to the world that not only is he above the law, but his friends and family are also. There is a name given to leaders who abuse their power. Dictators. SARA GRIFFITH Albuquerque
Trump’s action rejects rule of law
DURING THE CAMPAIGN for president, Donald Trump made a number of promises. The ones he emphasized most prominently were apparently “red meat” for his base . ... Now, as president, Trump places great value on keeping his promises — even to the point of shutting down the government of the United States if Congress doesn’t fund “the wall.”
... In an effort to satisfy his base, Trump has an irrational desire to fulfill his promises at any cost. However, Trump’s inability to keep his “promises” has grave significance for the country.
Trump promised “Jobs, jobs, jobs.” I will “create thousands of new jobs...” ... However, six months into his position,Trump has failed to fill, or even nominate individuals to the approximately 400 jobs for which he is directly responsible. This failure has resulted in even more jobs in government being vacant. As a result of gross understaffing, the smooth wheels of the federal government are grinding exceedingly slow and thereby impeding and crippling many key functions of the nation. Thus, given the opportunity to independently fulfill his jobs promise within his own circle, Trump comes up short.
Trump trumpeted: “I am the law-and-order candidate ... My administration is determined ... to restore law and order and justice for all Americans ...” ... By granting this pardon (of former Sheriff Joe Arpaio) prior to sentencing, prior to exercise of the sheriff’s right to appeal, prior to asking for and receiving a recommendation from the Justice Department, Trump has essentially “thumbed his nose” at the rule of law. This is not the first time he has engaged in such behavior. Based on racial grounds, Trump has said he does not trust a federal judge to be impartial. After receiving an adverse ruling, Trump severely criticized the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals as unfair. On numerous occasions, Trump has attempted to influence federal officials to drop investigations and/criminal charges involving his personal friends. All these actions undermine the rule of law and the administration of justice.
Make no mistake, Joe Arpaio is a convicted criminal who, as an administrator of the law, chose to break the law. The signal has been sent: If you are a friend, relative, employee of Trump, you are likely to be pardoned for your criminal behavior. This comes close to destroying our system of law and justice.
The inevitable conclusion from these broken promises — his assertion that, “I will be president for all people” — is that the president is a hypocrite, not to be trusted, a person who acts primarily out of self interest. The nation cannot long endure this type of behavior without a total corruption of its values. Thus, creating a path to curb the president is urgent! HERBERT J. HOFFMAN Albuquerque
Many Obama pardons were far worse
THE LIBERAL hypocrisy in ignoring all of (former President) Obama’s pardons and bashing President Trump for pardoning Sheriff Arpaio is as laughable and it is predictable. At least in the case of Sheriff Arpaio, the man was trying to make his community safer by pursuing the bad guys. Obama pardoned out-and-out traitors and drug offenders of all sorts.
The common denominator for Obama’s pardons was his hatred for our Constitution. He did everything he could to destroy it and did a lot of damage. The activist judiciary he put in place over his eight years of war against America is now carrying on the fight.
If I were President Trump I would formally charge any and all who obstruct federal immigration law. I would hire an army of lawyers and fight the war in the courts knowing the deck is stacked there against the Constitution and more clearly common sense. I would maintain a constant barrage of legal action against those who will not support the sovereignty of this country, for a country without sovereign borders is not a country and nothing more than a wasteland of lawlessness and chaos. TOM CHILDRESS Albuqueruque
Gorsuch should resign in protest
RE: THE ARPAIO pardon. Would the Honorable Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States of America Neil Gorsuch now resign? Would he do that out of patriotism? Would he do that to preserve the integrity of the court? Would he do that to smother an appearance of impropriety?
Like C. Everett Coop, who turned out to be an actual doctor, or John Ashcroft, who turned out to be an actual lawyer, could Neil Gorsuch turn out to be an actual justice in the circumstance of a predator’s pardon? MARCUS WHITE Albuquerque
Trump believes he is all-powerful
OUR CURRENT PRESIDENT believes he has unlimited and unchecked powers to pardon anyone, including himself, at any time. While he is correct in this assumption, he makes a fatal flaw in his logic and argument of the presidential powers of a pardon. Trump, and all of his supporters, forget (that) in order to pardon someone, there must be a “crime against the Constitution” which is being pardoned. So, logically if Trump decides he, his family members, and any/all of his closest campaign associates are seeking a presidential pardon for their escapades in 2016, then the very act of issuing a pardon is a clear admission of guilt for a “crime against the Constitution” and in this case multiple crimes against the Constitution. There cannot be a blanket pardon for unnamed crimes or acts committed!
If Trump pardons his family members and associates, this very act would be looked upon as obstruction of justice. This would be seen as Trump circumventing the CIA, FBI and Justice Department investigations with the sole purpose, in Trump’s mind, of ending them. Pardons would only aid any department in continuing their investigations, as those targeted in the investigation would now be free from prosecution for any crime they may have committed.
Lastly, any pardon Trump tries to issue on his own behalf would be questionable as to if he could actually be above the Constitution to do this, would not exempt him from any impeachment charges in Congress. So I welcome Trump’s decision as to whether or not he will start issuing pardons for the “crimes against the Constitution” his family and associates are, so far, alleged to have committed. I especially welcome Trump to issue a pardon for himself. NATALIA COGGINS Albuquerque
EDITOR’S NOTE: According to the U.S. Constitution, “The President...shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offences against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.”— Article II, Section 2, Clause 1.
Let’s compare previous pardons
EVERYONE’S HAVING A hissy fit over Sheriff Joe’s pardon, as if there is some wrongdoing involved and, once again, no matter what Trump does, it is considered wrong.
Let’s have a recap of the pardons (Presidents) Clinton and Obama bestowed and their relationship with that person and what their crime was. Then let’s hear the criticism about Sheriff Joe’s pardon. And keep in mind all the years the jail he ran was considered a model. BETTY HAWLEY Albuquerque