Kilmer17 Posted May 10, 2012 Share Posted May 10, 2012 Do you think the DOJ is pure and nonpartisan? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bang Posted May 10, 2012 Share Posted May 10, 2012 Do you think the DOJ should investigate a lawman with a list of complaints a country mile long? ~Bang Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
No Excuses Posted May 10, 2012 Share Posted May 10, 2012 Still waiting for an answer. When would it have been appropriate for them to make the announcement? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kilmer17 Posted May 10, 2012 Share Posted May 10, 2012 Do you think the DOJ should investigate a lawman with a list of complaints a country mile long?~Bang Yes. What is wrong is picking and choosing what to investigate based on the political winds, and timing them for political gain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bang Posted May 10, 2012 Share Posted May 10, 2012 So it's best to let a potential felon continue to do what he does until the right can be assured it won't be a political move. Which is when, exactly? Could it be they, like other law agencies, move when they have a solid case? Or do we just want to trust that you know what's up better than they do? ~Bang Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prosperity Posted May 10, 2012 Share Posted May 10, 2012 Yes.What is wrong is picking and choosing what to investigate based on the political winds, and timing them for political gain. so when should he have been prosecuted? yesterday or tomorrow? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGoodBits Posted May 10, 2012 Share Posted May 10, 2012 so when should he have been prosecuted? yesterday or tomorrow? Clearly they should have waited until after the election 6 months from now so nobody would think it's politically motivated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kilmer17 Posted May 10, 2012 Share Posted May 10, 2012 So it's best to let a potential felon continue to do what he does until the right can be assured it won't be a political move.Which is when, exactly? Could it be they, like other law agencies, move when they have a solid case? Or do we just want to trust that you know what's up better than they do? ~Bang Again I have ZERO faith that the DOJ is acting in any manner OTHER than that of a political extension of the White House. Should they investigate? Sure. Are they right? Maybe. But so is a broken clock twice a day. I never figured you to be an "ends justify the means" kind of guy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DjTj Posted May 10, 2012 Share Posted May 10, 2012 Again I have ZERO faith that the DOJ is acting in any manner OTHER than that of a political extension of the White House.Do you have any faith that anyone in the government anywhere is doing anything without any political considerations? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bang Posted May 10, 2012 Share Posted May 10, 2012 Again I have ZERO faith that the DOJ is acting in any manner OTHER than that of a political extension of the White House.Should they investigate? Sure. Are they right? Maybe. But so is a broken clock twice a day. I never figured you to be an "ends justify the means" kind of guy. When a guy has as many complaints against him, it's not "ends and means" it's investigating a potential criminal, and doing what's right. The investigation has been going on for several years now. Nearly two years in fact. If even HALF of the allegations bear out to truth, he's the exact sort of person that this country USED to despise... pretty much universally. Now he's a hero. Now partisanship hides a despot. It's shameful. I never figured you for a "let a crook walk unless i can be sure it's not a political investigation" guy. ~Bang ---------- Post added May-10th-2012 at 09:17 PM ---------- Clearly they should have waited until after the election 6 months from now so nobody would think it's politically motivated. And I'm sure the people he'll abuse his power against in the interim will understand. ~Bang Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prosperity Posted May 10, 2012 Share Posted May 10, 2012 Again I have ZERO faith that the DOJ is acting in any manner OTHER than that of a political extension of the White House.Should they investigate? Sure. Are they right? Maybe. But so is a broken clock twice a day. I never figured you to be an "ends justify the means" kind of guy. you are brainwashed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henry Posted May 10, 2012 Share Posted May 10, 2012 you are brainwashed More likely he's just bored. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Predicto Posted May 10, 2012 Share Posted May 10, 2012 They HAVE been investigating him. Im questioning the timing of the ANNOUNCEMENT that the DOJ is suing him. I think the DOJ has lost all credibility over the last decade. I dont trust them to do what's right if it's not also politically advantageous. And we shouldnt applaud them for doing something right, when they also are doing wrong, or choosing NOT to do something right when it's NOT politically advantageous. Except you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about in this case. You are just blowing general smoke out of your butt. I've been following the Arpaio stuff for years and years, and this has been building for a while. It's not easy to get an elected state law enforcement official out. The inquiries began under Bush, and when Obama came in, the DOJ spent a long time investigating to make sure they had all their ducks in a row because they knew they would get accused of partisanship if they didn't have an airtight case. Then they tried to get Arpaio to make voluntary changes to his department and enter into a consent decree without the need for a lawsuit. Arpaio said at first that he would cooperate, but then he stonewalled, and dragged on the negotiations, and a few months ago, the DOJ got fed up and told him that they weren't going to let him stall any further because he was just jerking their chain. Suddenly, Arpaio started a birth certificate investigation for additional political cover, and his pet District Attorney got disbarred for corruption implicating Arpaio, and it all came to a head. Which brings us to now. ---------- Post added May-10th-2012 at 02:37 PM ---------- Yes.What is wrong is picking and choosing what to investigate based on the political winds, and timing them for political gain. And what is stupid is asserting that this is what happened here when you have zero clue about the facts. ---------- Post added May-10th-2012 at 02:38 PM ---------- More likely he's just bored. True dat. He's still the master. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted May 10, 2012 Share Posted May 10, 2012 Yahoo: The Justice Department Has Had It with Sheriff Joe The article includes a lot of links to other news outlets. I thought I'd quote the first and last sentences, because they may bear on the latest fight in the thread: The Justice Department has been threatening since at least December to sue Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio for civil rights violations against Latinos if he and his officers didn't clean up their act, and on Thursday the feds finally did. Arpaio has always been an outspoken critic of easing immigration policy, and he's a big-time birther, both of which has endeared him to the Newsmax crowd. But the Justice Department sees a problem in the apparent racial profiling it found in his department, and has been trying to force him to change its practices through negotiations since its report was released in December. Last month, the department said Arpaio was negotiating in bad faith, which meant the only alternative was the lawsuit, which it has now finally filed. Like I said, the article has a lot of links (which I haven't followed.) The article, itself, really doesn't say much, and the few quotes from the actual allegations seem ludicrously mild. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted May 10, 2012 Share Posted May 10, 2012 why no criminal charges? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DjTj Posted May 10, 2012 Share Posted May 10, 2012 why no criminal charges?Probably politically motivated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deejaydana Posted May 10, 2012 Share Posted May 10, 2012 why no criminal charges? We talking Holder or Arpaio? Seriously... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aREDSKIN Posted May 10, 2012 Share Posted May 10, 2012 Yeah, reading the full article really shows that it is pretty bad there, I hope they strip him of his tin star and throw his butt in general population. Geeze, talk about due process. I'd bet this is just a Holder et al political charade. But we'll see. I'll let the legal course take it's turn. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bang Posted May 10, 2012 Share Posted May 10, 2012 Geeze, talk about due process. I'd bet this is just a Holder et al political charade. But we'll see. I'll let the legal course take it's turn. He gets his due process,, but there's nothing wrong with rooting from the gallery for a criminal to go down. ~Bang Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Predicto Posted May 10, 2012 Share Posted May 10, 2012 why no criminal charges? Its a different case. This is a civil case to take judicial control of the Maricopa County Sheriff's Department. Criminal charges may or may not be filed against Arpaio in state or federal court, but they wouldn't be part of this lawsuit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsburySkinsFan Posted May 11, 2012 Author Share Posted May 11, 2012 Geeze, talk about due process. I'd bet this is just a Holder et al political charade. But we'll see. I'll let the legal course take it's turn. This is what flies all over me. First the Right props Arpaio up as their hero for going out of his way to violate the due process of them brown people from the wrong side of the border and then all of the sudden when the Feds step in they scream about giving him his due process of law. This is one place where I so much want to go back to the juvenile understanding of the Golden Rule which is "Fine he's acting te way people want to treat him, so denying him due process is the way he wants to be treated.". I wish I could do that, and it makes me mad but we will as a nation give him something he was celebrated for denying to others. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bang Posted May 11, 2012 Share Posted May 11, 2012 Two wrongs and what they don't make, ASF I do still cling to the ideal that we're better than that. That's my idea of "American Exceptionalism". ~Bang Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thiebear Posted May 11, 2012 Share Posted May 11, 2012 Arpaio is taking what should be taking place: If someone is here illegally they should be turned over to the Feds and deported if a felon or put into process if a regular person. Instead he is the over the top Occupy illegals guy dems can point at and say see, this is what everyone is like. he needs to be beat but in Arizone i'm guessing people are tired of no enforcement at all so they overlook the over the top enforcement. Its been a decade of this: Would be nice if they would investigate, then do the charges, then prosecute and get it over with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aREDSKIN Posted May 11, 2012 Share Posted May 11, 2012 This is what flies all over me. First the Right props Arpaio up as their hero for going out of his way to violate the due process of them brown people from the wrong side of the border and then all of the sudden when the Feds step in they scream about giving him his due process of law. This is one place where I so much want to go back to the juvenile understanding of the Golden Rule which is "Fine he's acting te way people want to treat him, so denying him due process is the way he wants to be treated.". I wish I could do that, and it makes me mad but we will as a nation give him something he was celebrated for denying to others. I was actually referring to your post as the judge, jury and executioner. But be that as it may & is so palpably predictable I'll let the judicial system take it's course. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinsmarydu Posted May 11, 2012 Share Posted May 11, 2012 Yeah, reading the full article really shows that it is pretty bad there, I hope they strip him of his tin star and throw his butt in general population. NOOOO...put him in his own pink tent city!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.