Connect with us

Congress

Democrats Want to Invalidate Trump’s Pardon of Sheriff Joe Arpaio

The Democrats simply cannot fathom the idea of working with the President, and would rather spend their time opposing his every move.

Published

on

House Democrats moved last week to invalidate a pardon granted to former Maricopa County, Ariz. Sheriff Joe Arpaio on the grounds that it takes power away from the judiciary branch.

“House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y., and Rep. Eric Swalwell, D-Calif., a member of the House leadership, were among the lawmakers who filed a brief last week to urge a federal appeals court in California to invalidate one of President Donald Trump’s most controversial pardons,” said Roll Call. 

Trump pardoned Arpaio in 2017 after he was convicted of contempt for disobeying a federal judge’s order mandating that he not detain people suspected of being in the country illegally. Arpaio dismissed the conviction as a “political witch hunt.” The pardon was praised by Arizona governor Doug Doucey, but denounced by the usual open-borders shills in the GOP establishment – late Sen. John McCain, and Sen. Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.).

Trending: CDC Admits There is No Proof COVID-19 is Airborne Virus and They Have Been Misleading the Public All Along

Now, Democrats want to re-litigate Arpaio’s pardon in their ongoing effort to disrupt the Trump administration at all costs. Coming off an embarrassing two-year conspiracy theory about Russian “collusion” which turned out to be another political witch hunt, the party is grasping at straws to find a message. Some have yet to accept the findings of Special Counsel Robert S. Mueller III’s investigation, and instead are choosing to remain in denial.

take our poll - story continues below

Did Kyle Rittenhouse act in self defense?

  • VOTE NOW: Did Kyle Rittenhouse act in self defense when he shot three BLM rioters? 

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Big League Politics updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

“Nadler, Swalwell and the other Democratic members of Congress, in the brief, told the 9th Circuit that Trump’s pardon of a contempt of court charge infringed on the power of the judicial branch to impose sanctions for disobedience — just like a pardon of a contempt of Congress charge would infringe on the power of the legislative branch,” the report said.

Nadler’s House Judiciary Committee held Attorney General William P. Barr in contempt of Congress for ignoring their orders to testify in front of them regarding the results of the Russian “collusion” investigation.

Some believe that challenging Arpaio’s pardon is a test-run by Democrats to see what would happen in the event that Trump decides to pardon Barr.

Leave it to the Democratic Party to use a decorated Sheriff, who dedicated his life to keeping America safe, as a political pawn in a plot to oppose Trump.


Follow Peter D’Abrosca on Twitter: @pdabrosca

Like Peter D’Abrosca on Facebook: facebook.com/peterdabrosca

Preorder Peter D’Abrosca’s Book: Enemies: The Press vs. The American People”

Congress

Democrat Congressmen Introduce Term Limits Legislation for SCOTUS Justices As Trump Prepares Nominee

Interesting timing.

Published

on

Three Democrat members of Congress are introducing legislation to institute term limits for Supreme Court justices, as President Trump prepares to nominate his third candidate for the court following the death of progressive liberal Ruth Bader Ginsburg.

Democrats Joe Kennedy, Ro Khanna, and Don Beyer are proposing legislation that would limit SCOTUS justice to a maximum term of eighteen years on the court.

take our poll - story continues below

Did Kyle Rittenhouse act in self defense?

  • VOTE NOW: Did Kyle Rittenhouse act in self defense when he shot three BLM rioters? 

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Big League Politics updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

Khanna has proposed an idea that would allow Presidents to appoint two judges in each term. “Senior” members of the court would be required to basically retired for every new member of the court.

It’s pretty funny the Democrats are uniting behind these proposals the moment they appear primed to lose control of the Supreme Court for a generation. They weren’t complaining when Obama was trying to replace Antonin Scalia with progressive Merrick Garland, even going so far as claiming that the stealth liberal was entitled to the seat. Reports emerging Friday suggest that President Donald Trump intends to nominate Amy Coney Barrett, a mostly conservative judge with a pro-life and immigration hawk judicial record.

The judicial branch of government is arguably the most flawed element of American governance, and it’s highly questionable how institutions such as the Supreme Court are able to appoint themselves a nearly unlimited amount of political power.

A better reform proposals would be to institute term limits for justices that only go into effect after the current members of the court vacate their seats. Anything else is simply a political power grab.

Continue Reading
It's time to name Antifa a terror org! Sign your petition now!


Trending