Is Trump’s word worth anything?

Just a thought that has been bopping about my brain quite a bit in recent days; what if President Donald J. Trump is just toying with the mindset of 40892-424?

TRUMP: What will he do with Rod?

That number, of course, being of federal Bureau of Prisons inmate Rod Blagojevich, whom Trump last week started up a public stink about by suggesting he’s inclined to consider clemency for the one-time Illinois governor.

FOR WHAT IT’S worth, Blagojevich this week formally filed the request to the president seeking some form of pardon from the 14-year prison term he’s now serving – and of which he has completed about half.

Now, it’s truly in the hands of Trump as to what will happen.

Trump may have spewed a lot of trash talk last week about how Blagojevich was merely guilty of saying stupid things and how he thinks the prison term is excessive – even though the legal system all the way up through the Supreme Court of the United States has ruled in ways to uphold the conviction and sentence.

But from the three-plus decades of time I have spent writing about government, politics and the legal system, one thing I have learned is that some people truly are evidence of the cliché “talk is cheap.”

AND IF YOU look at this objectively, Trump has already gained everything he would expect to get out of granting any form of clemency to Blagojevich.

If he were to decide to do nothing and leave Blagojevich in the Colorado-based prison where he has been held since 2011, I don’t think he’d suffer a thing.

If anything, he’d probably gain a bit in the public estimation of the people who are inclined to want Rod to rot in prison for the full 14 years of his sentence (they’re probably offended that his scheduled release in May 2014 means he gets one year, four months of time off for good behavior).

BLAGOJEVICH:Pondering his fate

As for the idea that Trump went back on his word, the majority of people already think Donald is an untrustworthy character (remember the 3 million more in 2016 who wanted “President Hillary R. Clinton?”). His reputation wouldn’t suffer in the least.

THE THOUGHT THAT Trump is merely trying to stir up trouble, particularly amongst those in the Chicago political establishment who would have a personal interest in the Blagojevich case’s eventual outcome, has been bopping about my brain ever since Trump opened his mouth on the issue.

It stepped up even further this week when White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders told reporter-type people the president hasn’t made up his mind about what to do with Blagojevich – no matter what he said the week before.

“The president hasn’t made a final decision on that,” she said. “But as you know, the president doesn’t base his decisions off the criticism of others, but on what he thinks is the right decision to make, and that’s what he’ll base it on.”

So was last week just an effort to stir up rage and anger amongst Chicago Democrats – almost none of whom actually voted for him two years ago?

BECAUSE THE THING that consistently has had me wondering is, “What does Trump think he gains from granting any form of clemency (even a commutation of a prison sentence to ‘time served’) to Blagojevich.

The one trend that has cropped up in seeing the way Trump uses presidential pardon power is that he uses it to reward his allies. Granting a pardon to one-time Maricopa County, Ariz., Sheriff Joe Arpaio so he could avoid serving jail time allowed Trump to protect a person who shared his extremist attitudes on immigration – while also offending the people whom Trump has been trying to demonize since ‘Day One’ of his campaigning.

What high  court thought no longer really matters

Even though Blagojevich was far from anything resembling a social liberal on issues, to the ideologues inclined to like Trump, that makes not one bit of difference.

Although if Trump really wanted to perform some form of “justice,” he’d let the Blagojevich request for clemency sit idly by and do nothing with it. Just like Blagojevich was the guy who, as governor, rejected 93 percent of the just over 1,000 clemency requests he acted on – while doing nothing with another 2,800 requests from people whose last chance at relief was gubernatorial consideration.

  -30-

Pardoned Arpaio cheats ‘justice,’ yet someone must pay. Will it be Trump?

It wasn’t surprising to learn that President Donald J. Trump would feel compelled to grant a pardon (his first act of clemency) toward one of the most repulsive characters ever to wear a law enforcement badge.
 

TRUMP: President of the xenophobes?

Offensive? Yes. Immoral? Of course!

BUT IT IS totally in character when one considers Trump would not want to be a guy who would want one-time Maricopa, Ariz., Sheriff Joe Arpaio punished. He probably thinks it wrong that a law enforcement officer would wind up having to do jail time – even the miniscule sentence that Arpaio was facing.

So the president went ahead and used his power of clemency to undermine the federal prosecutors who got a criminal conviction earlier this year against Arpaio, and were seeking his sentencing come October – when he was likely to face up to six months in jail (probably at a minimum-security facility where extra effort would be made to ensure he was not attacked by other inmates).

Arpaio will never have to face that moment of standing before a judge and hearing that he’s now just another convict. He’ll never have to sit in a cell as punishment for his crimes.

Which, in all honesty, was a moment that a segment of our society was eager to see happen. I suspect that Trump feeling nothing but spite for those people most repulsed by Arpaio were his strongest motivations for issuing a pardon.

FOR ALL I know, Trump may not even truly comprehend what it was that Arpaio did wrong that brought his time as the Phoenix area’s sheriff before prosecutors to begin with.

Arpaio is the guy who likes to think he’s the rough-and-tough lawman who cracks down on criminals. He’s the guy who ran his jail under overly harsh conditions, and he was the one whose deputies often conducted raids of Latino neighborhoods in search of people without valid visas to live in this country.

I’m sure some nitwits will claim that Arpaio is merely the guy who made jail inmates wear pink underwear. But he was the guy who was calling for harassment of people with no real probable cause. Unless you believe being Latino is criminal?

ARPAIO: Won't do the time for his crime

What ultimately got Arpaio into legal trouble is when the courts ruled that the sheriff’s tactics exceeded the limits of the law, yet he persisted with them anyway.

BECAUSE HARASSING PEOPLE whose ethnic origins lie within Mexico was more important to him than actually following the letter of the law to which he was supposed to uphold. Particularly ironic considering that Arizona’s origins lie within Mexico and the Spanish colonies, and one could argue that the people Arpaio was protecting were the real “foreigners.”

But with Trump’s desire to rely solely on the xenophobes with particularly irrational hang-ups with regards to Mexico, it’s no wonder he’d seek to protect Arpaio.

Particularly since his campaign promise of erecting a wall along the U.S./Mexico border is one likely never to come true, he has to be able to claim to have done something that the nativist element of our society. Does protecting Arpaio from having to do laundry detail while serving time in a minimum-security prison facility make up for it? I’m sure Trump is hoping so.

What is going to make this particular pardon stand it is that Arpaio really didn’t fit the usual guidelines for clemency. Usually, someone has to wait a few years before they can even apply for a pardon.

THE POINT BEING that the person in question must actually serve the time. The point of a pardon being to ease the level of shame they must go through during the rest of their lives because of their actions that put them in prison for a stint.

Wonder what he thinks of pink shorts now?

In that regard, Arpaio is likely to go through his life as an unapologetic ass who will “get away” with his actions that brought great harm to people. He’ll probably die thinking he did nothing wrong – even though the Supreme Court of the United States itself has said that accepting a pardon IS an admission of guilt.

But karma has a way of biting back; someone is going to have to suffer for this act of clemency being issued.

Which could wind up being Trump himself, since he has now besmirched his legacy in ways that he likely will never fully appreciate as the xenophobic president, but which the Trump name will have a hard time living down for generations to come.

  -30-

EDITOR’S NOTE: A poll last week by OH Predictive Insights said only 21 percent of Arizona residents wanted the president to offer clemency to Joe Arpaio – who ceased being sheriff last year after losing a re-election bid. It will be interesting to see how big a plummet Trump takes in his own approval ratings; as he had only 35 percent support in the Gallup Organization’s presidential approval poll taken just before he issued his clemency Friday night – likely hoping people would be focused on Hurricane Harvey’s devastation in Texas to pay any attention to Arpaio.

Will Gov. Rauner commit political suicide w/ immigration-related move?

To listen to the ideologues of Illinois, Gov. Bruce Rauner is going to do some serious

RAUNER: On the outs w/ ideologues

harm to his political reputation next week, if he follows through with his talk that implies he’s going to sign into law a measure meant to restrict law enforcement across the state from meddling into immigration enforcement.

Most famously, Chicago and Cook County, have declared themselves to be sanctuary cities – where people who might not have legal residency status to be in this country don’t have to worry every time they come into contact with local police for a traffic ticket or other matter.
 

TRUMP: Most definitely in good standing

EVEN SOME SUBURBS such as Evanston and Oak Park, along with nearby cities such as Gary, Ind., have declared themselves welcoming cities, which is a status meant to ensure that local police don’t get involved in federal immigration enforcement unless essential for local interests.

Now, the General Assembly this spring approved a measure it calls the Trust Act, which would prevent Illinois law enforcement entities – including local cops across the state – from arresting or detaining anyone based on suspicion of illegitimate immigration status.

Local police would only be allowed to detain a person who is not a .U.S. citizen or legal resident if there is an arrest warrant for that particular individual.

To many people, it is merely common sense that local police are busy enough enforcing local laws and that federal authorities are the ones with jurisdiction to handle the nuances of immigration law – which go farther than the notion of deporting everybody who isn’t like themselves.

BUT TO THE ideologues who support these kinds of ridiculous crackdowns (and likely idolize all of Donald Trump’s stupid-talk on the issue), the fact that Rauner has called the Trust Act “very reasonable” is offensive. The fact that both the Chicago Sun-Times and Chicago Tribune reported that he is inclined to sign the bill on Monday is a major negative action.

WALSH: Rauner is 'done'

One Republican legislator from the part of Illinois near St. Louis said that Rauner approving this measure would be the “last straw” that would tick off rural Illinoisans who have been solid Rauner backers.

The Sun-Times quoted Republican activist-types, including former Rep. Joe Walsh of the northwest suburbs, as saying that Rauner approval for this measure as dooming him politically. “Governor Rauner is done,” Walsh said in Trump’s favorite medium – the 140 characters of Twitter.

Now as one who has followed the political debate over immigration policy and the need for reform for years, it doesn’t shock me to learn that the ideologues are taking a hard line that bears no tie to rationality.

IT WOULD SEEM the fact that Rauner has gone through his two-plus years as governor openly hostile to much of Chicago’s interests to try to garner the rural support isn’t sufficient.

Showing quarter on this issue is one that would undo everything else. Just as it was no accident that the Trump presidential campaign’s initial inanity was to criticize Mexicans and much has focused on non-Anglo people with strong ethnic ties to other parts of the world, they want the governor to behave in the same manner.

Would a Trump pardon for Arpaio be viewed ...

Even though amongst law enforcement officials, the concept of jurisdiction is a strong one, and cops usually are aware of when they have no authority to take on a particular incident. So why they’re expected to run roughshod over jurisdiction in immigration cases really makes little to no sense.

Of course, what these ideologues want is for someone to reinforce their own irrational hang-ups about our society. Trying to apply logic won’t work for Rauner in this case.

I WASN’T KIDDING when I wrote that they want more nonsense-talk like that of Trump – who just this week while in Phoenix hinted he’s inclined to give a pardon to former Maricopa County, Ariz., Sheriff Joe Arpaio. He’s the cop who throughout the years was so vociferous in his efforts to crack down on immigration that he violated federal court orders that were meant to restrict him from harassment.

... similar to when President Ford pardoned Nixon?

Arpaio faces sentencing in October for his contempt of court conviction, and he could get some jail time – a thought that would please many people who have been harassed by him throughout the years. Yet Trump says he’s inclined to offer a pardon – which would pre-empt the possibility of incarceration.

A move that would be perceived by some as more despicable than when then-President Gerald R. Ford pardoned Richard Nixon for his Watergate-era offenses.

I have no doubt that some will lionize Trump if he does that, just as they will lambast Rauner if he follows through with his talk on the Trust Act. Stances that actually say more about the depraved ideals those people have, more than anything about the governor or president themselves.

  -30-