DoJ: Arpaio is a bad bad man.

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**A Kvlt Ghost**

I would never let such trifles as context or conjunction stand in the way of sarcasm

But yes, I was just being a jerk, carry on!

**Jihadin**

Think Arizona summers, but with no access to air conditioning, sinks, liquid foods, etc. He also denied them medical care, including ongoing medications for both physical and mental ailments.

Arizonia summers a bit cooler compare to Iraq/Afghanistan. No mercy for for lack of air condition. You can survive without it. Trust me you can. As for sinks how long was the line? Anybod washing their feet in the sinks?, Clarify liquid food (soup?) Malingers and Sick Call rangers are frowned upon.. Need an example of denying physical and mental meds "he" denied.

**sebster**

AustonT wrote:I'm surprised someone who lives in Austrailia has such a verbose opinion of a county sheriff in Arizona. That said, a lot of what you wrote is spot on. He's misappropriated funds, threatened local politicians, and three of his senior deputies has been dismissed or quit due to corruption charges. In the town where my wife's family and we live in they failed to investigate over 400 sex crimes in the period where the PD was closed. So I can see the "Wall of distrust" argument, as this is primarily a spainish speaking community.

I've followed American politics for a long time, and run into a lot of stories on Arpaio because of it. His story is kind of familiar because I've worked in government most of my career, and where I live is, basically, a glorified mining town, so I know his type. We're lucky that we don't elect law enforcement, but I've met plenty of representatives that think the same as this guy.

Sheriff Joe lives off his anti illegal immigration stance, and when the protests of SB 1070 (our illegal immigration legislation) were outside the 4th avenue jail were waving Mexican flags, I have trouble not seeing his point. It's not like were being overrun by French Canadians. So I have little doubt that Latinos feel targeted. If they are legal immigrants or citizens and they had their rights violated then I want Sheriff Joe taken to the cleaners, if not I want the illegals out. /shrug. I wish Paul Babeu was our Sheriff but he won't run against Joe.

It seems that's just part of the stupid parts of politics, that demands you've gotta be on one side or the other. Seems like most people just can't acknowledge that immigration reform is needed, but that Arpaio is a corrupt dickhole, or that Arapaio is a corrupt dickhole but that immigration reform is needed.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Jihadin wrote:It individuals that enforce the standards not just one individual. Granted one indivdual sets the "atmosphere" on how his/her organization is to abide by the standards so its on the individuals to put everyone in check. For a "corrupt" official there's no smoking gun on him. Figure a 3 year investigation would have found something to nail him.

Corruption only really produces a smoking gun when someone is taking money. Even then it isn't that clear. Most often corruption involves use of political power to grant favours for political backers, and to punish or intimidate opponents.

I'm often surprised how little these kinds of issues bother Americans, there just seems to be culture that accepts people in political office will act as they please, but I've never seen acceptance of the level of corruption that Arpaio has gotten up to. It's just bizarre.

I mean, I'll say it again, he used state resources to investigate political opponents who committed no crime, and obviously committed no crime. What he did was anti-democratic, and a gross waste of state resources.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Jihadin wrote:But still in the job. You think he be in jail by now wouldn't you?

Because the investigation of political corruption is extremely difficult, and politically sensitive, and so it takes a long time.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

dogma wrote:That being said, in areas where either the perception of crime, or crime itself, are relatively high it isn't unusual to see voters adopt a preference for politicians that are "tough on crime". regardless of whether or not those measures are effective. In essence, people generally prefer feeling good about what their elected officials say to electing officials that produce consistently positive results.

Studies have shown people view politicians more favourably when they act tough on crime, even among groups who consider crime not a significant problem, or who consider penalties for crimes already sufficient. It's all about appealing to the need in our monkey brains for our leaders to be tough, hardened alpha males.

I guess what I'm saying is that people are seriously fethed in the head, and this produces some really weird politics.

**Jihadin**

Latest update. I would have done the same

PHOENIX—Dozens of Sheriff Joe Arpaio's jail officers lined up at a news conference in Phoenix Wednesday to ceremoniously hand in their federal credentials a week after they were stripped of the ability to verify the immigration status of inmates.

Arpaio spoke at the same news conference, saying he's going to hold the federal government to its promise to send 50 federal agents to do such screening in his jail. But he predicted there will be illegal immigrants in jail who won't be deported and will be put back on streets.

"I want to see how many agents are going to be coming to our jail," the sheriff said. "I want to see how long it will take for 50 agents from across the country to work in our jails."

The Department of Homeland Security announced Dec. 15 that more than 90 of Arpaio's Maricopa County jail officers could no longer check whether inmates were in the county illegally.

The decision followed the release of a scathing Department of Justice report that said Arpaio's office has a pattern of racially profiling Latinos, basing immigration enforcement on racially charged citizen complaints and punishing Hispanic jail inmates for speaking Spanish. The sheriff has denied the allegations.

Homeland Security officials had no immediate comment on Arpaio's comments on Wednesday, but later pointed to a Dec. 21 letter that Immigration and Customs Enforcement sent to a county official, saying federal agents will staff the county's jails on a 24-hour, seven-day-a-week basis and that immigrants who pose public safety threats will be taken into federal custody and won't be released, Morton said in the letter.

On Monday, the agency said in a letter to U.S. Sen. Jon Kyl that it would send immigration agents to screen jail inmates in Arizona's most populous county. Arpaio's aides say only one Immigration and Customs Enforcement officer has worked at the county jails since last week.

Homeland Security's decision wasn't the first time Arpaio's federal immigration powers were cut.

In October 2009, Immigration and Customs Enforcement stripped Arpaio of his power to let 100 deputies make federal immigration arrests, but still allowed his jail officers to determine the immigration status of people in jail.

**Melissia**

AustonT wrote:Melissa's mixed messages hurt my head.

There is nothign mixed about my message when it is read by a rational person.