DoJ sues Sheriff Arpaio for civil-rights abuses

[miles]

Post #19.

Oh, you mean the alleged actions.

Even you should know better than that.

 

[CNYCarol]

You're full of shit. The VAST majority of Americans are not concerned with Obama's vote getting schemes, they are concerned about the fucking economy. That Sheriff has been re-elected time and time again by the people of Arizona. Fuck Eric Holder and his Soviet style show trials, and fuck the terrorist defending law firm he comes from.

God Bless Sherriff Joe Arpaio!!!

 

[KingOrfeo]

Oh, you mean the alleged actions.

Even you should know better than that.

Well, they all seem to be pretty well-documented, and this here's a court of public opinion, not law. Certainly the DoJ needs to prove them all in a court of law (federal). Shouldn't be a problem.

Assuming arguendo the truth of the allegations, does anyone care to defend Arpaio's actions?

Didn't think so.

 

[miles]

Well, they all seem to be pretty well-documented, and this here's a court of public opinion, not law. Certainly the DoJ needs to prove them all in a court of law (federal). Shouldn't be a problem.

Assuming arguendo the truth of the allegations, does anyone care to defend Arpaio's actions?

Didn't think so.

Yeah, there's that pesky "proof" thing.

Would you care to defend pedophilia?

I didn't think so.

 

[KingOrfeo]

Yeah, there's that pesky "proof" thing.

Would you care to defend pedophilia?

I didn't think so.

So, you can't do it. Didn't think so. We can now add "coward" to your list of failings.

 

[richard_daily]

So, you can't do it. Didn't think so. We can now add "coward" to your list of failings.

He added "coward" to the list years ago.

 

[badbabysitter]

This thread is the exact parallel of the Zimmerman case.



KO's wanting to discuss the penalty phase of the trial having already heard all the evidence and pronounced the white guy guilty based upon the most unreliable of sources, the voices in his head and press reports from the always reliable MSM who can find racist rocks from 30 years ago, anecdotes from 1965 and the cost of Sarah Palin's remodeling but for the life of them cannot find a single one of Obama's drug buddies even when they're out on the back nine with Barry...

Righ.. because just like Arpaio , Zimmerman has a long detailed history of misuse of taxpayer funds, racial profiling, illegal campaign contributions, and obstruction of justice


oh wait, it doesn't?


oh...my bad, you're just pulling the race card in a pathetic attempt to say this is " blame the white guy"


another shining example of someone cheerleading Boss Hogg

 

[richard_daily]

Righ.. because just like Arpaio , Zimmerman has a long detailed history of misuse of taxpayer funds, racial profiling, illegal campaign contributions, and obstruction of justice


oh wait, it doesn't?


oh...my bad, you're just pulling the race card in a pathetic attempt to say this is " blame the white guy"


another shining example of someone cheerleading Boss Hogg

Basically, what AJ is saying is:

"Poor, poor white guy, can't catch a break, and is so persecuted."

That's how he does.

 

[about_average]

The VAST majority of Americans are ... concerned about the fucking economy.

I have to agree. Most Americans don't give a shit about the bill of rights, until something directly impacts them.
In fact, a significant percentage think we have too many rights.
Some years back (I wish I could find it on the net) a poll asking people if they believed in this and that (individual amendments and statements from the constitution presented as pending bills) found that an amazingly high percentage of people opposed them.

 

[miles]

So, you can't do it. Didn't think so. We can now add "coward" to your list of failings.

Throb, did I say anything about supporting/defending Arpaio? I didn't did I? You fabricate stuff then argue against it.

What is your fucking malfunction?

Lying piece of shit.

 

[Sean Renaud]

I have to agree. Most Americans don't give a shit about the bill of rights, until something directly impacts them.
In fact, a significant percentage think we have too many rights.
Some years back (I wish I could find it on the net) a poll asking people if they believed in this and that (individual amendments and statements from the constitution presented as pending bills) found that an amazingly high percentage of people opposed them.

I'd love to see what exactly was being discussed. I think most Americans suport the important (IMO) parts of the Constitution but fully realize that large portions of it are at best irrelevant today and others are poorly worded and should be more precisely worded.

 

[about_average]

I'd love to see what exactly was being discussed. I think most Americans suport the important (IMO) parts of the Constitution but fully realize that large portions of it are at best irrelevant today and others are poorly worded and should be more precisely worded.

I really wish I could find it. But some were more shocking than others, like the police should be able to search your house any time they want, without a warrant.

 

[KingOrfeo]

I'd love to see what exactly was being discussed. I think most Americans suport the important (IMO) parts of the Constitution but fully realize that large portions of it are at best irrelevant today and others are poorly worded and should be more precisely worded.

The most irrelevant parts are the Senate and the Electoral College.

 

[KingOrfeo]

Throb, did I say anything about supporting/defending Arpaio? I didn't did I? You fabricate stuff then argue against it.

What is your fucking malfunction?

Lying piece of shit.

Well, then, there's at least one Liticon who does not care to defend Arpaio's actions alleged or actual, which is kindasorta reassuring so far as it goes. Anyone else? vetteman? renard? Beuller? Beuller?

 

[unregistered]

 

[Sean Renaud]

The most irrelevant parts are the Senate and the Electoral College.

I'd argue that the whole you need to be a natural born American to run for President is a bit dated. It was put in place to prevent European Royalty from showing up, getting elected and signing us over. I feel comfortable saying that that no foreigner could get elected and certainly not one with strong ties to their home nation. There are a million reasons Arnold should never be President but his country of birth is not one of them.

I'm fairly certain that any conflict that elevated to a point where the US military was even considering asking to shack up at my place would be so fucked up that I'd be begging the general to make my living room the command center simply for the security they'd put up around someone that important.

 

[unregistered]

 

[cjh]

All trumped up politically correct bullshit. So where did the Sheriff actually violate the law? Gimme the statute.

Here is what the complaint says: The United States is authorized to initiate this action against Defendants Maricopa County, MCSO, and Arpaio (collectively, “the Defendants”) under the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994, 42 U.S.C. § 14141, and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000d to 2000d-7, and its implementing regulations, 28 C.F.R. §§ 42.101 to 42.112.

 

[richard_daily]

Here is what the complaint says: The United States is authorized to initiate this action against Defendants Maricopa County, MCSO, and Arpaio (collectively, “the Defendants”) under the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994, 42 U.S.C. § 14141, and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000d to 2000d-7, and its implementing regulations, 28 C.F.R. §§ 42.101 to 42.112.

You shouldn't have bothered, vet is a wingnut of the highest degree... he will defend the death the "right" for Arpaio to profile, make racist remarks, and discriminate... it's the vision for this country that vet believes in.

 

[semen4her]

You shouldn't have bothered, vet is a wingnut of the highest degree... he will defend the death the "right" for Arpaio to profile, make racist remarks, and discriminate... it's the vision for this country that vet believes in.

As a flaming racist he can justify his beliefs.

 

[miles]

Well, then, there's at least one Liticon who does not care to defend Arpaio's actions alleged or actual, which is kindasorta reassuring so far as it goes. Anyone else? vetteman? renard? Beuller? Beuller?

There aren't enough of these to describe you.

 

[cjh]

You shouldn't have bothered, vet is a wingnut of the highest degree... he will defend the death the "right" for Arpaio to profile, make racist remarks, and discriminate... it's the vision for this country that vet believes in.

it's sort of crazy that he thinks the law might not prohibit the acts alleged.

 

[KingOrfeo]

All trumped up politically correct bullshit. So where did the Sheriff actually violate the law? Gimme the statute.

No, please clarify. Is the "bullshit" the accuracy of the accusations, or the gravity of them? That is, do you refuse to believe Arpaio did these things? Or do you, rather, believe these are things he should have done, or, at least, that a sheriff should be allowed to do? You need reference no statutes, unless you wish. This is more in the nature of a political argument, and the propriety of the statutes themselves is open for debate.

 

[unregistered]

 

[unregistered]