Originally Posted By: Giacomo_Vacari
Originally Posted By: Ciment
Originally Posted By: OakAsFan
Pardoning someone convicted of violating the constitution undermines the constitution itself. Never has a president disregarded the supreme law of the land in such a grand fashion. Just another reason for congress to highly consider invoking the 25th amendment to remove Trump from office.


you have a short memory: Wikopedia

"Marc Rich (born Marcell David Reich; December 18, 1934 – June 26, 2013) was an international commodities trader, hedge fund manager, financier and businessman.[1] He was best known for founding the commodities company Glencore and for being indicted in the United States on federal charges of tax evasion and making controversial oil deals with Iran during the Iran hostage crisis. He was in Switzerland at the time of the indictment and never returned to the United States.[2] He received a controversial presidential pardon from U.S. President Bill Clinton on January 20, 2001."

What Clinton did is pardon a traitor. That is a far greater crime than the alleged crime that the sheriff did.


Those are two different things and Marc Rich did not violate the constitution and Clinton pardoned him due to certain powers in D.C. that wanted him pardoned as most of those deals were on their behalf. Arpaio violated the constitution, what makes it even worst is that he had served in the military and law enforcement.


I get it now, there are different rules for leftist liberals.

So I can commit any crime, as long as I do not get caught leaving the country. Therefore, because I was never convicted it is okay to pardon me. You must have good pot in the west coast.