President Trash called Arpaio a patriot. He is a Neuropeon soldier for racism/white supremacy. Undeceiver Dr. Blynd defines patriotism  - the degree of voluntary servitude evinced, the result of one successful treason- until the next one is necessary. [MORE]

From [HERE] An Arizona federal trial judge should have erased sheriff Joe Arpaio’s criminal contempt verdict and other rulings after President Donald Trump granted a pardon, the U.S. Justice Department said Wednesday in a statement to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. Arpaio is a racist. 

The Justice Department’s statement was a response to an earlier court order that directed the government to say what position, if any, prosecutors would take in Arpaio’s appeal.

Main Justice took no position on whether the appeals court should appoint a friend-of-the-court to defend the judge’s ruling from October. The appeals court will likely appoint a lawyer to advocate in defense of U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton of the District of Arizona.

Bolton in October said the president’s pardon of Arpaio, although valid, “does not erase a judgment of conviction, or its underlying legal and factual findings.” Bolton earlier found him guilty of violating a court order that commanded he stop certain immigration-related law enforcement practices. Arpaio was awaiting sentencing for contempt at the time the president pardoned him.

“The court found defendant guilty of criminal contempt. The president issued the pardon. Defendant accepted. The pardon undoubtedly spared defendant from any punishment that might otherwise have been imposed. It did not, however, ‘revise the historical facts’ of this case,” Bolton wrote in her order.

The Justice Department in the trial court had urged Bolton to vacate her earlier orders. The government will continue that advocacy in the Ninth Circuit appeal. Arpaio is represented in the Ninth Circuit by racist suspects at the Phoenix firm Wilenchik & Bartness.

“There is no case law directly addressing whether vacatur is appropriate under the circumstances at issue here—when a presidential pardon moots a criminal prosecution after a finding of guilt but before a judgment of conviction is entered,” John Keller of the DOJ’s public integrity section, wrote in court papers in September.