POTUS 2017

A place to bring a contemplative / Dharmic perspective and opinions to current events and politics.
Locked
pulga
Posts: 1319
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 3:02 pm

Re: POTUS 2017

Post by pulga » Sat Aug 26, 2017 2:53 pm

Mr Man wrote:
It’s hard to imagine how Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpaio could possibly stoop any lower in his zeal to arrest and humiliate people who are, or look like, immigrants, whether they have legal status or not. But Arpaio, who is clearly challenged in the department of human decency and dignity, is at it again. Telemundo 52, recently reported that Maricopa County Sheriff Arpaio forced a pregnant Latina who went into labor while detained to give birth while shackled to the bed. After a reportedly brutal arrest, Alma Minerva Chacon, went into labor the same night of her arrest and was rushed to the hospital with her legs and hands chained. The self-proclaimed “America’s Toughest Sheriff” is notorious for his racial profiling and brutal treatment of immigrants, including instituting chain gangs for females and juveniles, the introduction of pink underwear for male inmates, the parading of people in shackles to a segregated “tent city” in the Arizona desert, surrounded by electric fences. It’s not real clear just who Arpaio thinks he’s protecting and serving when he denies a request from a hospital to unchain a mother during her delivery and prohibits her from holding her newborn baby.
And yet he was re-elected Sheriff again and again for 23 years. Contrary to what is implied in the quote, Arpaio was inclined to humiliate white jail inmates as much as he was those of other races. Apparently most of the voters in Maricopa County approved of such behavior. It could even be argued that it wasn't his policies, but his age that finally led to his election defeat. But I suppose demographics probably played a role as well.

pulga
Posts: 1319
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 3:02 pm

Re: POTUS 2017

Post by pulga » Sat Aug 26, 2017 2:56 pm

chownah wrote: edit: can you bring a reference about the obama administration being convicted of the same crime?
chownah
Just type "Obama Administration Contempt of Court" into Google.

chownah
Posts: 7376
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:19 pm

Re: POTUS 2017

Post by chownah » Sun Aug 27, 2017 3:14 am

pulga wrote:
chownah wrote: edit: can you bring a reference about the obama administration being convicted of the same crime?
chownah
Just type "Obama Administration Contempt of Court" into Google.
Thanks for that. I checked it out. It is not the same crime at all. The sheriff was jailed on a charge of "CRIMINAL contempt"....while the obama administration was convicted of "CIVIL contempt". They are really two different things.....really different.
Here is the court ruling which shows that the obama admin was charged with CIVIL contempt:
http://www.politico.com/static/PPM191_feldman.html
chownah

pulga
Posts: 1319
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 3:02 pm

Re: POTUS 2017

Post by pulga » Sun Aug 27, 2017 4:06 am

chownah wrote:
Thanks for that. I checked it out. It is not the same crime at all. The sheriff was jailed on a charge of "CRIMINAL contempt"....while the obama administration was convicted of "CIVIL contempt". They are really two different things.....really different.
Thank you for the correction. Both may lead to incarceration, though of course there was no person to take the fall for the Obama Administration if the judge had deemed incarceration warrantable.
Like those charged with criminal contempt, the court may order incarceration of people held in civil contempt. However, unlike individuals charged with criminal contempt, people held in civil contempt are generally not given the same constitutional rights that are guaranteed to criminal contempt defendants.

Those held in civil contempt generally must be given notice of the contempt sanctions and an opportunity to be heard, but usually are not guaranteed a jury trial. Also, their contempt does not need to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt, while criminal contempt charges must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. Finally, criminal contempt involves a specified sentence (jail and/or fine), while civil contempt sanctions can be more indefinite, lasting until either the underlying case is resolved or the party in contempt complies with the court order. -- Civil Contempt of Court
Given the current political climate would Arpaio been treated fairly -- and humanely considering his advanced age? He claims to have acted in exasperation when federal laws weren't being enforced in the county under his jurisdiction. Should he have been merely fined or sentenced to jail for up to six months? The President didn't think it was worth the risk, and he probably empathized with the sheriff when it came to immigration laws being ignored.

chownah
Posts: 7376
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:19 pm

Re: POTUS 2017

Post by chownah » Sun Aug 27, 2017 5:11 am

pulga wrote:
chownah wrote:
Thanks for that. I checked it out. It is not the same crime at all. The sheriff was jailed on a charge of "CRIMINAL contempt"....while the obama administration was convicted of "CIVIL contempt". They are really two different things.....really different.
Thank you for the correction. Both may lead to incarceration, though of course there was no person to take the fall for the Obama Administration if the judge had deemed incarceration warrantable.
Like those charged with criminal contempt, the court may order incarceration of people held in civil contempt. However, unlike individuals charged with criminal contempt, people held in civil contempt are generally not given the same constitutional rights that are guaranteed to criminal contempt defendants.

Those held in civil contempt generally must be given notice of the contempt sanctions and an opportunity to be heard, but usually are not guaranteed a jury trial. Also, their contempt does not need to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt, while criminal contempt charges must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. Finally, criminal contempt involves a specified sentence (jail and/or fine), while civil contempt sanctions can be more indefinite, lasting until either the underlying case is resolved or the party in contempt complies with the court order. -- Civil Contempt of Court
Given the current political climate would Arpaio been treated fairly -- and humanely considering his advanced age? He claims to have acted in exasperation when federal laws weren't being enforced in the county under his jurisdiction. Should he have been merely fined or sentenced to jail for up to six months? The President didn't think it was worth the risk, and he probably empathized with the sheriff when it came to immigration laws being ignored.
Given the current political climate has arpaio been treated fairly when he was a major supporter of trump's long ago campaign about where obama was born etc. as I mentioned above? I think that trump was just repaying someone for help in propogandizing many years ago.

For those not following this closely, arpaio was pardoned BEFORE he was sentenced. It could be that a light sentence would have been given or even a suspended sentence. The fact that trump didn't wait for the sentenceing shows the propogandistic nature of the pardon. Trump could have waited to see if there was any reason to pardon him or not but if he had waited and if the sentence was inconsequential it would rob trump of the chance to propogandize the event. By pardoning him before sentencing let's his supporters (and others) to fantasize how awful it would be to do such a horrible thing to such an old man like throwing him in jail and with him having such fragile health....how cruel and uncaaring is the judicial system sometimes and how compassionate is our man pres. trump.

Trump could have waited to see if pardoning was even necessary but there was more propogandistic advantage in acting immediately.....and after all the sheriff had helped trump out with a major propoganda message at the outset of the obama administration.
chownah

pulga
Posts: 1319
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 3:02 pm

Re: POTUS 2017

Post by pulga » Sun Aug 27, 2017 5:31 am

chownah wrote: Trump could have waited to see if there was any reason to pardon him or not but if he had waited and if the sentence was inconsequential it would rob trump of the chance to propogandize the event. By pardoning him before sentencing let's his supporters (and others) to fantasize how awful it would be to do such a horrible thing to such an old man like throwing him in jail and with him having such fragile health....how cruel and uncaaring is the judicial system sometimes and how compassionate is our man pres. trump.
Good point. The President should have waited until Arpaio was actually sentenced.

chownah
Posts: 7376
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:19 pm

Re: POTUS 2017

Post by chownah » Tue Aug 29, 2017 4:30 am

pulga wrote:(SPEAKING OF THE PARDONED SHERIFF): He's an 85-year-old man in poor health: jail-time would have most certainly shortened his life considerably if not ended it.
Wow! This old man in poor health is thinking of running for the US Senate.

Sheriff pardoned by Trump may run for US Senate: report
https://www.yahoo.com/news/sheriff-pard ... 19910.html
I'm worried that this might shorten his life considerably :jumping: :rofl: :jumping:
How naive we are!
chownah

pulga
Posts: 1319
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 3:02 pm

Re: POTUS 2017

Post by pulga » Tue Aug 29, 2017 10:36 am

chownah wrote: Wow! This old man in poor health is thinking of running for the US Senate.
Love him or hate him, Arpaio is not a quitter. He'll be thinking that way on his deathbed.

chownah
Posts: 7376
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:19 pm

Re: POTUS 2017

Post by chownah » Tue Aug 29, 2017 2:16 pm

pulga wrote:
chownah wrote: Wow! This old man in poor health is thinking of running for the US Senate.
Love him or hate him, Arpaio is not a quitter. He'll be thinking that way on his deathbed.
Yeah, he'll continue to do everything he can to get people to act on his racist impulses....that is why he should be in jail. It is beyond the pale that a life long racist who acts out criminal contempt of court by acting out racist policies should be pardoned so that he can continue to work for action impementing racism.
chownah

chownah
Posts: 7376
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:19 pm

Re: POTUS 2017

Post by chownah » Thu Aug 31, 2017 4:03 am

I'm not wanting to be too aggressive on the issue of the pardon but I do think that it is really a threat to democratic principles for various reasons and here is a humorous explanation which I think pretty covers the various aspects:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=49CKGw8DXcw
chownah

Buddha Vacana
Posts: 607
Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2016 7:16 am

Re: POTUS 2017

Post by Buddha Vacana » Sun Sep 10, 2017 4:18 am

Trump review leans toward proposing mini-nuke

So that's it. Trump is looking to make the use of nuclear bombs fashionable again. And the media are cheering it between the lines.

I dont even raise the issue of the DACA in which the US government becomes a threat to people born on US soil who have never lived anywhere else.

It looks like every single thing we have warned about and been railed for as being overly alarmist when discussing Trump is actually happening.

chownah
Posts: 7376
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:19 pm

Re: POTUS 2017

Post by chownah » Sun Sep 10, 2017 5:17 am

I dont even raise the issue of the DACA in which the US government becomes a threat to people born on US soil who have never lived anywhere else.
Just a clarifiction. DACA is about children born outside the US who were brought to the US by their parents who were undocumented immigrants.....and have lived in the US almost all of their lives.
chownah

Buddha Vacana
Posts: 607
Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2016 7:16 am

Re: POTUS 2017

Post by Buddha Vacana » Sun Sep 10, 2017 6:22 am

chownah wrote:
I dont even raise the issue of the DACA in which the US government becomes a threat to people born on US soil who have never lived anywhere else.
Just a clarifiction. DACA is about children born outside the US who were brought to the US by their parents who were undocumented immigrants.....and have lived in the US almost all of their lives.
chownah
Indeed, my bad. Thanks for pointing this out.

It makes it sound a bit less horrendous, although in many cases it probably makes little difference.

Anyway, of much greater concern is Trump administration's agitation for nuclear warfare, with backing from the war industry and the mainstream media.

User avatar
Kim OHara
Posts: 4968
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2009 5:47 am
Location: North Queensland, Australia

Re: POTUS 2017

Post by Kim OHara » Wed Sep 13, 2017 7:45 am

Pope launches thinly veiled attack on Trump, saying: 'History will judge climate change deniers'

The Pope also hopes Trump will reconsider his decision to end Daca

...Asked whether politicians have a responsibility to work with other countries to prevent climate change, the Pope responded: “All of us have a responsibility, all of us, small or large, a moral responsibility."

"We have to take it seriously. We can’t joke about it,” he added. “Each person has their own. Even politicians have their own.”

His Holiness spoke as Hurricane Irma pummelled Florida with punishing wind and rain. Days before, Hurricane Harvey had submerged parts of Texas in massive floods. Some experts predict the combined damage could cost the US economy up to $290bn.

Scientists have long warned that the warming of the Earth's oceans and atmosphere could strengthen future hurricanes. The latest storms marked the first time two Category 4 hurricanes had hit the continental US in a single hurricane season.

“If we don’t turn back, we will go down,” Pope Francis told reporters ominously. ...
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world ... 40851.html

I'm with the Pope on this. :smile:
And I can't actually think of anything on which I'm with Trump. :shrug:

:thumbsup:
Kim

User avatar
cjmacie
Posts: 688
Joined: Wed Dec 26, 2012 4:49 am

Re: POTUS 2017

Post by cjmacie » Wed Sep 13, 2017 7:58 am

Buddha Vacana wrote:...Anyway, of much greater concern is Trump administration's agitation for nuclear warfare, with backing from the war industry and the mainstream media.
Any documentation for this assertion? (Other than partisan commentators.)

Locked

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests