Ariz. Sheriff Joe Arpaio has been pardoned by Pres. Trump. The sheriff was arrested for holding illegal aliens in his jail until Ice officials could pick them up for deportation. Another words he was arrested for doing his job. He refused an order from a political correct liberal judge to not hold these law breakers. This was a good decision by our President especially when you see mayors and governors refusing to obey the law and claiming they are sanctuary cities why weren't any of them charged for not enacting the law. You know why" pure political correctness and the liberal medias whacky way of thinking

Absolutely false.

He was jailed for REFUSING to obey lawful orders by his legal superiors.

<<<Arpaio got in trouble for disobeying a court lower court ruling that was politically motivated ruling, which did get over turned. Therefore, the ruling he violated was not correct. What he was doing, following a state law meant to bolster federal immigration law, was indeed lawful.

If the administration at the time had been enforcing federal immigration laws, none of this would have ever happened. The Feds encouraged illegal behavior, the state enacted and enforced a law (via a county sheriff) to counteract the illegal behavior, the feds said the state law was illegal, the state has no right to enforce a law if the feds choose to ignore it, the Sheriff ignored the Feds, the Feds convicted the Sheriff, the illegal law turns out to be legal, the Sheriff gets pardoned by an administration pledging to enforce federal immigration law so that the illegals do not exist in the first place. His case could have been a very interesting precedent for the sanctuary cities, perhaps it still is.<<<<<<

In other words,Arpaio and the State of Arizona put a Crimp into the "Sanctuary-Doctrine" of the Obama ADMIN,thus the Witch-hunt against Arpaio!

<<<Here's why he was charged with contempt: His deputies continued to arrest and deliver undocumented immigrants to federal authorities when there were no state charges against them, long after a local Judge named Snow banned the practice. Yet illegal immigrants are already in violation of federal law simply being illegal immigrants — except in the Obama/Holder world of "let's not uphold that law." So there you go. Arpaio was charged with criminal contempt for attempting to uphold federal immigration law. And that means the good guy was arrested for arresting the bad guys. You do see the irony there?<<<

yea, he was arrested for doing what the government wanted him to do, and his liberal superiors didn't like him ENFORCING THE LAW..

I always liked Sherriff Joe and his "Tent city"


Arpaio set up a "Tent City" in 1993 as an extension of the Maricopa County Jail for convicted and sentenced prisoners. Arpaio described Tent City as a concentration camp. Tent City was located in a yard next to a more permanent structure.
On July 2, 2011, when the temperature in Phoenix hit 118 °F (48 °C), Arpaio measured the temperature inside Tent City tents at 145 °F (63 °C). Some inmates complained that fans near their beds were not working, and that their shoes were melting from the heat. During the summer of 2003, when outside temperatures exceeded 110 °F (43 °C), Arpaio said to complaining inmates, "It's 120 degrees in Iraq and the soldiers are living in tents and they didn't commit any crimes, so shut your mouths!"

but soldiers DO get compensation and benefits,,,so,, not QUITE the same

And criminals get "compensation" they get room and board and often free legal representation. They chose to do what they did to get themselves in that situation so it is really a fair comparison.

there is no compensation without any freedom, it doesn't happen
its like saying a rape victim was 'compensated' with a meal
or a pow is being 'compensated' with bread and water


compensation allows a FREE person CHOICES,, imprisonment gives someone else total authority over another persons life,, huge difference

even if the imprisoner provided enough for their prisoner to not die,, that is not the 'compensation' that free men and women get to use how they CHOOSE for their own lives,,,

The point would be to discourage a choice of life in crime.

Is Tent city, the hell hole bad enough to discourage? I think so lol

Now if we could only dismantle the incarceration complex assembly line, the machine is a well oiled, chances are slim.

understood, we still have this 'civilized' idea of how much 'discouragement' is reasonable and how much is downright abusive,,,

hehehe!
It has begun,ACLU is soiling it's collective Knickers
And so are the Dems!

so the liberal mayors of sanctuary cities should be charged and prosecuted for refusing to obey lawful orders by their legal superiors.. I hope so

And how much "freedom" does someone in the military have? If they just get up and leave they will get dishonorable discharged and court Marshall. When you sign the dotted line you sign your life away for a period of time, just like when you commit a crime you run the risk of giving up your freedom for a period of time. So it is a good comparison, sometimes prisoners have even more rights and benefits than others.

they have the freedom of anyone who signs a contract of employment

they can leave when they are not working, they can spend time alone, with friends, with family, they can spend their money on health food, candy or booze, they can go to sleep (outside of bootcamp or on duty) when they want, watch what they want, when they want, live wherever they can afford that they want, amongst whome they want, get up when they want

what do you mean how much freedom?

it is still an awful comparison,,lol

I like this one!

Was just going to stay out of this until I read that.

If somene is in active duty status, liberty is a request that goes up the chain of command and can be revoked at anytime by anyone within that chain of command.

That includes BAQ and ComRats. That's what it was called when I was in the service.

I remember a list of bars, restaurants and other establishments that were restricted to all military personnel. The MPs would make rounds and arrest any military people they saw at those places. I can also remember being warned about attending public speeches and rallies that it could look bad if I were associted at those events.

What is important to realize is that even though you signed a contract, Uncle Sam owns your butt till that contract is satisfied. Any liberties you are afforded are there because they have been requested and approved. The military can just as easily lock down the bases and prevent you from going anywhere.

In the 7 years I was active duty, there were many times I could not 'go home' to be with my family because the base was on lockdown. I have had liberty requests denied without reason.

While it may 'appear' service members are free to do as they choose, that freedom is granted and can be revoked at anytime without reason. It falls under the oath that is taken when you sign up.

no offense to service members

I have military family and was a military wife

there is a difference between 'can sometimes go on lockdown' and constantly on lockdown indefinitely


comparing the mild list of 'restrictions' FOR PAY AND BENEFITS to having someone control every minute of your life,, is still quite ridiculous to me

not even close

your family can be provided for, you can leave with a positive mark and you are compensated

you leave with a potential retirement, plenty of 'perks' and civilian discounts for housing, education,,etc,, and with social status

contrary to prison where you are only given the basics to keep you alive to continue using your labor

and where there are no 'perks' whatsoever when you are 'out' and in fact quite an obstacle to moving on with life by obtaining housing, education, work

and where your family gets NADA



my husband not once had someone make him get up UNLESS HE WAS ON DUTY(during work hours) on the ship

if anything happened to spouse or child it was paid for by the military


my husband not once had someone else control when and what he ate EXCEPT ON DUTY

my husband partied weekends, even if he could not go to EVERY BAR he could go,, is the point


,, the loss of freedom is not even close to the same

it is a job, you sign to give of your own free will in return for what you are going to be COMPENSATED with,,,,

"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

Deal with it.

I heard he was only looking at 6mo in jail, so that would probably work out to 30 days with an ankle bracelet. And the guy is 85yrs old, so they are making a bigger deal out of it than it is.