What’s the point, Joe? There’s no “good name” for you to get back. So just scurry away with your ill-gotten pardon and be happy you’re not in a pink jumpsuit.
1 Like
No, a pardon restores all rights. In fact, a number of people seek a pardon simply so they can vote again.
1 Like
That’s an oxymoron for all times. When their partners and husbands stop killing them, only then will there possibly be sanctity attached to their gender.
3 Likes
Dear Joe,
Man up, buttercup.
4 Likes
I am afraid that Chief Justice John Roberts will come in to bat for felon Arpaio. Roberts stepped in for Governor Transvaginal Ultrasound after he was convicted for taking suitcases of cash, Rolexes, expensive cars and stealing from the Governor’s Mansion as governor of Virginia. Republican religious conservatives are very loyal to, and look out for each other.
1 Like
lol… hard to keep track. I keep seeing his face, and I forgot.
1 Like
Kinda like the FBI and the IC…
Let a thousand flowers, er, civil suits, bloom!
What the Roberts court did for O’Donnell is what Senator Menendez of NJ is hoping will work in his defense now that he’s on trial for something similar. It’ll be based on what exactly is a gift.
2 Likes
the ‘convicted felon’ issue. Are convicted felons in Arizona allowed to keep firearms?
ETA I guess this questions been answered
1 Like
“if granted after conviction, it removes the penalties and disabilities and restores him to all his civil rights. It gives him a new credit and capacity. There is only this limitation to its operation: it does not restore offices forfeited, or property of interests vested in others in consequence of the conviction and judgment.”
in the latrine would be appropriate
But but…that judge was making rulings against me and not letting me stonewall the Trump University plaintiffs…because he was a MEXICAN and he knows I am STRONG on the border (whatever the fuck that means in his fucked up stupid head)…and that judge in Hawaii, which is an island, so it is surrounded by water, ya know…and this judge who really treated Joe Arpaio horribly she probably hates me because of my totally innocent Locker Room Talk…
Maybe a misspelling of scared woman?
You seem to have forgotten that this was a unanimous decision of the eight member court. Perhaps you’ve just suppressed it. This was clearly a matter of the law, not partisanship. Had it been a matter of partisanship, the court would have been deadlocked 4-4.
Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.
1 Like
which his attorney said he thinks he would have won.
If that is the case, then you should say “thanks, but no thanks” to the pardon.
Please do not confuse a pardon with a “not guilty” ruling. They are NOT the same thing.
Does this mean that Arpaio cannot run for office? I hope so, because he’s a festering menace to civil society.
1 Like
It am sure that the Justices can find ways to justify anything they want once the have made up their mind. The 8-0 decision says nothing. Even Dredd Scott had a 7-2 majority and the 5-4 split on Bush v. Gore was awful nonetheless.
There is lot of horse trading that happens in the Supreme Court. Justices yield to their colleagues on their pet cases. In this case, the other justices were simply being “nice” to Justice Roberts who was relatively new.
What McDonnell did in office was horrendous and this was the Court way to legalize bribery immediately after ruling that money was free speech and corporations were people/
In my opinion, John Roberts went out of the way to rescue McDonnell. I don’t believe Roberts’ motivation were pure or purely legal.
You understand how perilous a journey it is to be a woman.