Obama is Going After Sheriff Joe…Shocking!

reply to post by Xcalibur254

So your saying that infringing on the constitutionally granted rights of US citizens take a back seat to immigration law enforcement?

Where is the infringement? If I was an American of Middle-Eastern or a Hispanic decent I would expect a little bit of extra scrutiny at the airport or near the border (respectively) in this day and age.

Arpaio is illegally stopping, detaining, and arresting US citizens for simply being Hispanic.

Stopping someone for fitting a profile (in this case possibly a Hispanic driving a Suburban or van with 12 people inside) is not illegal to the best of my knowledge. Detaining someone who has violated a law is not illegal to my knowledge. Nobody gets “arrested” for being Hispanic…that is a straight up lie; they either broke the law or couldn’t be identified by authorities (no ID) and were detained.

Then if they complain about his illegal practices he causes even more legal troubles for them.

Example??

I don't see how any true American can support Arpaio since he has persistently shown his disregard for the Constitution.

He’s one of the few people actually upholding the constitution and protecting the sovereignty of this nation, sir!

Where does the constitution grant foreigners the right to violate the sovereignty of the US of A??

reply to post by guohua


It's direct from the DoJ's December report which, once again, I have posted on page 3. Although I will admit my numbers were a little off. They are actually four to nine times to pull over Hispanics. To quote the report directly:

Based upon a recent statistical study, commissioned by the Department of Justice ("Department"), of MCSO traffic stop activities on Maricopa County roadways, Latino drivers are four to nine times more likely to be stopped than similarly situated non-Latino drivers.

While we're at it let's continue with the rest of the offenses under the Discriminatory Policing heading:

Our review (which was conducted with the assistance of our expert law enforcement consultants) of all of the traffic-related incident reports generated by MCSO's Human Smuggling Unit ("HSU") over a three-year period showed that roughly one-fifth of the reports, almost all of which involved Latino drivers, contained information indicating that the stops were conducted in violation of the Fourth Amendment's prohibition against unreasonable seizures.

Individual accounts regarding MCSO deputies stopping Latinos on the basis of their appearance corroborate the use of discriminatory policing practices.

Our investigation uncovered a number of instances in which immigration-related crime suppression activities were initiated in the community after MCSO received complaints that described no criminal activity, put rather referred, for instance, to individuals with "dark skin" congregating in one area, or individuals speaking Spanish at a local business. The use of these types of bias-infected indicators as a basis for conducting enforcement activity contributes to the high number of stops and detentions lacking in legal justification.

reply to post by captaintyinknots

I love how immigration duties are "all about defending the constitution", yet we ignore the part where it says all are innocent until proven guilty.

Convenient, huh?

When has this happened??

This statement is based on a false premise so it really doesn’t deserve a response but I feel the urge to find out why you think this way after providing no supportive evidence to back up your premise.

Who had their constitutional rights violated??

reply to post by seabag


If he's upholding the Constitution explain the qualities of his jails. He's feeding rancid food to people who are crammed like sardines in cells with no proper ventilation causing dangerously high temperatures while not allowing detainees with preexisting medical conditions access to their medication. And I'm not talking about convicted felons here. These are the conditions that people who haven't even undergone a trial are subjected to. In other words he is subjecting innocent people to conditions that infringe on their basic human rights. Then of course there is the fact that the DoJ has found evidence in the MCSO's own records that the MCSO violated the Fourth Amendment on a number of occasions.

reply to post by Xcalibur254

If he's upholding the Constitution explain the qualities of his jails. He's feeding rancid food to people who are crammed like sardines in cells with no proper ventilation causing dangerously high temperatures while not allowing detainees with preexisting medical conditions access to their medication. And I'm not talking about convicted felons here. These are the conditions that people who haven't even undergone a trial are subjected to. In other words he is subjecting innocent people to conditions that infringe on their basic human rights. Then of course there is the fact that the DoJ has found evidence in the MCSO's own records that the MCSO violated the Fourth Amendment on a number of occasions.

Then show me what the constitution says about the level of amenities he is required to provide. You’ve simply made up your mind about him and you’re just regurgitating what you’ve heard in the media.

I call what he’s providing THE WAY JAIL SHOULD BE! If you don’t like it, keep your butt out of trouble. If you’re a law abiding citizen you have nothing to worry about, do you? Nobody gets arrested without probable cause, sir.

If I'm wrong...prove it and stop with the talking points.

Originally posted by HauntWok
reply to post by OldCurmudgeon

 

So your of the camp that believes a police state is an ok place to live. For me, even being asked for my ID without doing anything wrong is reason enough for me to give the officer a verbal thrashing they aren't likely to forget.

Sorry, if you want to live in a police state, that's not ok with me. Sheriff Arpaio is running his country like a fascist utopia.

They were arrested, not just detained, they were taken into custody not just detained like you were. They were taken to a jail, booked into the system, along with a lot of other human beings that Arpaio's men and then afterwards released probably after having some money taken from them for "booking fees".

Arizona is by no stretch of the imagination a police state HW...
I would not suggest 'verbally' attack an officer of the court...
A facist uptopia... sorry, that is hilariously insane...
The two men were stopped for a reason, which you have never presented... it was determined there was 'probable cause' to arrest them... if you were not there then you know little more than I do and I suggest your responding illogically and radically... possibility they were acting irrationally as you suggest and yelling at the officers??? We don't know... and obviously they were released at some point... you still didn't state what the charges were... so this is a lame argument with no substance on your part.
Please return with facts, not a prejudiced opinion.

reply to post by Xcalibur254


OK, Found it, A Report Generated by The Department of Justice,,,, OK.
Thank you for the source.

Originally posted by OldCurmudgeon
Arizona is by no stretch of the imagination a police state HW...

You live in Arizona?

Bet you listen to Rush.

reply to post by Annee

Bet you listen to Rush.

What does that have to do with the price of tea in China?

Anybody who cries about the unconstitutionality of what Joe has done yet can’t back it up with any facts is listening to too much MSM IMO.

Not only is Joe a free man, he’s the duly elected Sheriff of Maricopa County and has been reelected several times consistently over a period of 20 years. If he’s such a bag then why is he not wearing a pink jumper? Oh wait…is that unconstitutional too?

Originally posted by seabag
Not only is Joe a free man, he’s the duly elected Sheriff of Maricopa County and has been reelected several times consistently over a period of 20 years.

Yes - I know.

I live in Arizona and have been following his escapades for 20 years.

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by OldCurmudgeon
Arizona is by no stretch of the imagination a police state HW...

You live in Arizona?

Bet you listen to Rush.

Yes I do Annee... as I have posted several times... moved here in 1997... and no, I find both Rush Limbaugh as well as Howard Stern revolting and disgusting and both are idiots in my opinion...

Originally posted by OldCurmudgeon

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by OldCurmudgeon
Arizona is by no stretch of the imagination a police state HW...

You live in Arizona?

Bet you listen to Rush.

Yes I do Annee... as I have posted several times... moved here in 1997... and no, I find both Rush Limbaugh as well as Howard Stern revolting and disgusting and both are idiots in my opinion...

I love Howard Stern. You do have to understand it is an act. I liked him better 35 years ago.

Around here businesses blast Rush over the radio every day. I don't know how they do business. They must think customers are hard of hearing.

reply to post by seabag


As I said, these are people who have been arrested but not tried. Thus they are still innocent. Now let's look at specific part of the Fifth Amendment. The part that states the law cannot punish those who have not undergone due process. Last time I checked a sheriff's office is considered part of the law and denying detainees basic necessities such as medication is punishment. Thus Maricopa County Sheriff's Office violated the Fifth Amendment. I'm sure you could also argue for cruel and unusual punishment. Of course this is not just my opinion, Judge Neil V. Wake decided on October 22, 2008 that Arpaio's jails violated the Constitution. This decision was upheld in 2010 by the Ninth District Appeals Court. So if the Judicial Branch (also known as the branch tasked with interpreting the Constitution) deemed the conditions of his jails to be unconstitutional then they are unconstitutional.

As for the second part of your post, it either shows naivete or willful ignorance. Every person that is arrested is not guilty. Do you truly believe that it is right to subject even one innocent person (legally all of the people were innocent as these were pre-trial jail conditions) to conditions such as these. Of course this belief also ignores the fact that Arpaio has been found guilty of Abuse of power by Judge John Leonardo. So it doesn't even matter if you are innocent. If Arpaio doesn't like you who will trump up charges to subject you to unconstitutional conditions.

reply to post by Annee


Frankly Annee... I long ago developed a total dislike and lost all faith in both parties, especially the far left and the far right...

Originally posted by OldCurmudgeon
reply to post by Annee

 

Frankly Annee... I long ago developed a total dislike and lost all faith in both parties, especially the far left and the far right...

OK - - hand shake.

I am actually a 40+ year Goldwater Republican (minus the Christian part). But times have changed. There is no Rep/Dem anymore. I don't know what the Hell is going on.

Jerry Brown (I'm sure you know who he is) - - recently said - - - when he first entered politics - - you called up "the other guy" - - met for dinner and drinks - - discussed and hashed out a compromise. He says Today - - - there is nothing like that. He says - - no one cares. Its "My way or the highway".

Sad state of affairs this government.

The DOJ report is a biased joke.

Of course they are going to stop dark skinned people more than white people. It's the darK skinned people who are coming over the borders. Nothing racist about that, it's just smart to go after your the people who fit the profile.

Since when does the US Constitution serve to protect illegal aliens? It doesn't, Yet that report makes it sound like it does.

That report is TRASH.

reply to post by Xcalibur254


Apparently, some (traitorous) Americans think that it's just jim dandy for cops to pull over someone on the basis of their skin color.

Those Americans should build a waybac machine to Nazi Germany because they'd absolutely LOVE it there. They'd have such a SMASHING time in a fascist state.

Do you see what America is seeing or are you too blind, people?

What about the OP?

I highly doubt it.

You'll cheer on this idiotic figurehead, ignoring any and all of the abuses he perpetuated because he too, hates Obama.

Congratulations, ignoramuses.

reply to post by Xcalibur254


The problem with Mr.Seabag and similar posters is that they stubbornly refuse to see this whole issue for what it really is: An attempt to deflect any and all negative attention away from Arapaio so he can resume this folk-hero nonsense.

I don't know about the rest of you but it makes me uncomfortable that a soldier would advocate for a fascist state where people are pulled over for shady reasons and denied their constitutional rights (Sheriff Joe approved!).

reply to post by seabag


Your first sentence is reason alone for a rational poster to take one look and LAUGH OUT LOUD because it makes no friggin' sense!

This is the kind of America you're more than willing to defend?

You sir, are an embarrassment to our military and our country.

Double Post.