Sheriff Joe Arpaio Slams Chris Christie Over Trump Pardon

Joe Arpaio
What a great role model - defending the rule of law, even when Liberal Judges are unwilling to...

New Jersey Governor Chris Christie (R) was excoriated by former Sheriff Joe Arpaio after Christie very loudly and publically complained that Sheriff Joe was pardoned by Trump.

“I think he was a U.S. Attorney, he should know the laws. You don’t have to say you’re guilty for a pardon, and I am not guilty, and the president understood that,” Arpaio said while talking on a radio show on Wednesday. He added, “Why doesn’t he study the laws?”

Arpaio’s remarks came as a response to the comments made by the governor on an MSNBC show on Wednesday.

“My understanding has always been that one of the prerequisites you look for in giving a pardon is contrition for what you were convicted of,” the governor said. “I didn’t see that in Sheriff Arpaio.”

Christie went as far as to claim that he would not have pardoned Arpaio, claiming that “Americas Toughest Sheriff” was guilty of racial profiling and outright racism – as if those words have any meaning in this day and age.

“This is not one that I would have done,” Christie admitted, while acknowledging that Trump has “the absolute right” to take the actions he did.

Christie’s came a firestorm of criticism of Trump after he announced the pardon for the former sheriff on Friday.

Democrats on the House Judiciary Committee have written to Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.) calling for an investigation of the matter soon.

The letter reads, “Sheriff Arpaio was convicted for criminal contempt of court because he ignored orders from a federal judge to stop engaging in racial profiling.  The pardon not only disregards the rule of law, it directly flouts the courts themselves by signaling that it is acceptable for parties to ignore court orders.”

The letter concluded, threatening an investigation into Trump’s use of the Presidential Pardon. “It is also our Committee’s unique and pressing responsibility to conduct oversight of the President’s use of executive power—particularly when that power is expressed as a pardon that only serves to endorse the transgressions committed by the offender.  If we do not examine this use of the pardon power, we fear that the Committee will be seen by our constituents—and by future generations—as also having endorsed the Sheriff’s conduct.”

It is strange, how quickly Democrats come to the defense of the rule of law when it suits them. Someone should ask their opinion of Sanctuary Cities, which fount federal law, and represent a serious national security threat to the entire nation.