Its surprising how much you can accomplish if you don't care who gets the credit
It has been reported to us that the reversal of the Pardon of Sheriff Joe Arpaio, which Judge Susan Bolton threatened to withhold, has been granted and will go unchallenged. Considering that Bolton had slim authority to reject the Pardon of a sitting President, this comes as no surprise.
Said our source, Arpaio's lawyer did a great job putting Bolton on the spot. Can you explain, he asked the Judge, why it is that we are here because you received 30 letters asking you to reject this Pardon, all from Democrats in DC? Crickets from the Judge.
Supposedly, the Judge left the door open for others in a similar situation as the Sheriff was put in to also face a rejection of a pardon. We have to assume that will hold up so long as President Trump is in office. it's no secret that this judge is not above legislating from the bench, siding with the accused and against the victim, even to the point of giving a light sentence to a man who raped an 13 year old girl, despite a plea bargain struck with the accused for a stiffer sentence.
Most legal and Constitutional scholars tell us that this case should never have been heard in federal court. Federal courts do not have jurisdiction over state cases, which this was. We expect this was more about the Judge not liking SB1070 even though part of that is till the law. She punished the Sheriff for following the law against orders by the Obama Attorney General. This would never have stood up in the Supreme Court which is the only court that can make a final ruling on state cases, not a federal court. Or so we are told, not being attorney's ourselves.
The bottom line is that the Sheriff did not show up in court this morning, the gallery was full of his supporters, Arpaio's lawyer did not get an answer as to why the Judge was acting on partisan democrat demands and reluctantly ruled to allow the Pardon to stand.
We are wondering just what this charade cost taxpayers to soothe the Judge's last nerve while bowing to demands of those who would never make a similar demand against a democrat?
Maybe, the Democratic Party needs to be investigated under the RICO act.
Agree with John. This judge is part of the Swamp that needs to be drained. She needs to be removed from office immediately for wasting taxpayer dollars and time. She had no rights to hear the case in the first place, then to go on a mere 30 letters all from Democrats, is very partisan and racist showing her racist ideology.
I was planning on attending this morning but wasn't able to so I'm glad there were a lot of supporters there. I sent out emails, iMessages, put it on FB, and another put it out as an Event, we alerted a lot of people. Thank you to all who were able to show up in support of Sheriff Joe.
REMOVE SUSAN BOLTON. SHE IS NOT A JUDGE BUT A ONE SIDED EXECUTIONER.
The last two voting cycles I have gathered information as to who the liberal judges were and sent it out to my list of email recipients. THIS case highlights why it is so important to "NOT RETAIN" liberal judges. It is not really that difficult to get lower court judges removed. If we act in concert we could actually get 50 to 60% of liberal judges removed in just one vote. Hopefully we will act united better next time around. Lower court judges are our first line of defense, from which point we can start affecting decisions at higher levels............because higher lever courts simply will never 'hear' many cases that are dismissed or decided by CONSERVATIVE judges.