On Saturday, June 23, 2012, thousands of protesters from Puente Arizona, the Unitarian Universalist General Assembly, the United Church of Christ, and left-leaning activist groups held a rally and vigil at the infamous Maricopa County Tent City Jail-- while Phoenix Tea Party and militiamen held a counter rally.
Immigrant rights protesters, bathed in candle light, sang and listened to speeches about standing up to Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio and his forces of hate-- while militiamen dressed in camouflage uniforms brandished their weapons and shouted angrily about their rights.
Predictably, amateur videos and photos were uploaded as the scene unfolded, but for a more in-depth view of the demonstration, check out this video by Phoenix independent videographer Dennis Gillman, after the jump.
Left-wing Facebook pages, blogs, and online-only radio news shows are on fire with charges and counter charges about the Arizona Democratic Party's backroom politics, party darlings, and the quest for party solidarity during the 2012 elections. For those of you safely ensconced down here in sunny Baja Arizona, here's a news flash you won't see in the Arizona Daily Star: for weeks, a tiny band of Democrats have been picketing in front of the Arizona Democratic Party headquarters and protesting the party's practices.
The crux of the matter is the appearance of favoritism by the Arizona Democratic Party, the Maricopa Democratic Party, and the Pima County Democratic Party. So, everyone has favorite candidates; what's the big deal you ask? It's OK for individuals to have favorites-- candidates they work for and raise funds for; it's decidely not OK for the party to choose "party darlings" and grease the skids for them during the primary season. Favoritism during a primary season squashes dissent, suppresses the candidacy of challengers, creates bad blood in the party, and hurts democracy. Here are a few examples.
Pima County
In the CD8 special election to fill Gabrielle Giffords' seat, former Giffords' aide Ron Barber stepped into the race after several Baja Dems announced their candidacy or were thinking about it (publically)-- State Senators Paula Aboud and Matt Heinz, State Representative Steve Farley, and Southern Arizonan Nan Walden. Everyone expected Barber to be the sentimental shoe-in favorite and a placeholder Congressman for the CD8 seat but not to run in the general election for the new CD2 seat (a bluer district thanks to redistricting). After Barber announced he would run in the November general election, all of his would-be primary challengers-- except Heinz-- mysteriously dropped out. (Consipracy theorists like myself assumed people were strongly encouraged to step aside and make way for Barber.) In the Arizona Daily Star recently, Pima County Democratic Party Chair Jeff Rogers was qouted as saying there are people in the party who are encouraging Heinz to drop out. Personally, I think Blue Dog Barber has been a huge disappointment in the 2 or so weeks he has been in Congress-- most recently voting with Republicans and pandering to the National Rifle Association by voting to hold Attorney General Eric Holder in contempt of Congress. I lament that the other Dems dropped out of the primary so quickly; Heinz should definitely stay in the race.
In the 2012 CD7 election, the Democratic Party decided to not allow Congressman Raul Grijalva's primary challengers access to party data, which would have facilitated targeted precinct walking and phone banking. (Don't get me wrong here; I am in no way criticizing the Congressman. I like Grijalva, one of the true progressives in Congress, and in the spirit of full disclosure, I have donated a whopping $90 to his campaign, and my husband has canvassed for him many times.) It keeps incumbents on their toes when they have challengers.
Speaking of incumbents, in the 2011 local elections, the Pima County Democratic Party Executive Committee endorsed the three City Council incumbents almost 6 months before the primary. Only Councilwoman Regina Romero had a primary challenger, but who knows how many would-be challengers were stopped in their tracks by this pre-emptive move. In addition, the party spent thousands of dollars to bankroll a website and smear campaign against Romero's Democratic challenger Joe Flores. This was unnecessary nastiness against a fellow Dem, in my opinion. There was no way Flores would have overtaken Romero, so why stir up bad blood in the party? Endorsing all of the incumbents is a bad practice. Councilwoman Shirley Scott (a died-in-the-wool Blue Dog who was tainted by the long-running Rio Nuevo scandal) should have been primary'ed. Councilman Paul Cunningham (a neophyte Blue Dog) had been appointed to his seat; the Democrats never got a chance to size him up against other Dems.
Maricopa County
Facebook is on fire with charges that Maricopa County Democratic Party Chair Ann Wallack, Arizona Democratic Party Executive Director Luis Heredia, and newly elected Arizona Democratic Party Chair Bill Roe are determining which Dem primary candidates are "viable" and, consequently, are steering money and "boots on the ground" toward those candidates with the bucks-- thus ensuring that the lesser known and poorly funded candidates will fall by the wayside (according to the people making the charges). There is even a Facebook page created to oust Wallack from her position as county chair. (Here's a hint for the activists: find an elected precinct committee person to run against her for party chair when the party reorganizes after the November election.)
Two "party darlings" often used as examples are Ann Kirkpatrick for Congressional District 1 and Paul Penzone for Maricopa County Sheriff. There are charges that Wallack has strongly endorsed Penzone over reform candidate John Rowan and has manipulated meeting agendas to deny Rowan and his supporters time at the podium. This is clearly meddling with the primary process. As county chairs, both Wallack and Pima County's Rogers should give all primary challengers equal access to party resources, databases, and legislative district meetings (where said "boots-on-the-ground" meet to hear candidates and issues).
There are further charges that the statewide party is acting in a racist manner-- particularly toward Kirkpatrick's challenger Wenona Benally Baldenegro. Benally Baldenegro, who has vowed not to take corporate donations, has raised less than one tenth the funds Kirkpartick has. I think the charges of widespread racism in the party maybe a bit thin (particularly since the Pima Dems' "party darlings" are Latinos), but there is evidence of favoritism before the primary. For example, there are charges that Heredia (a Latino) started an e-mail campaign encouraging people to drop their support for Benally Baldenegro (a Navajo who is married to a Latino). If this happened (and I say "if" since I have not seen said e-mail), it is definitely manipulative and inappropriate.
My point is...
The party should not be choosing which candidates are viable. All Dems should be treated equally by the party and given an equal chance to succeed or fail on the merrits of their ideas and the strength of their campaign organizations. All declared candidates, who have filed papers, should be given equal access to party resources, voter data, and party foot soldiers and should be allowed to speak at statewide and local party functions.
The people should choose candidates in the primary election; it is NOT the party's role to take sides.
The bottomline is...
The bottomline is that we need to get money out of our election system. It appears as if a primary deciding factor in the party's determination of candidate "viability" is money. According to the Federal Elections Commission website, Progressive candidate Benally Baldenegro had raised around $75,000 by March 31, 2012. Blue Dog corporate candidate Kirkpartick-- who had more than that in her coffers last year before Benally Baldenegro even entered the race-- had raised over $990,000 by March 31, 2012.
Psychologically, people want to back a winner. Rightly or wrongly, the vast money difference between these two makes it appear as if Kirkpatrick is the better candidate because she has the big bucks.
Dream with me for a while about a publicly financed elections-- not unlike the Arizona Clean Elections system or Tucson's clean elections system. What if after qualifying with a certain number of signatures and $5 donations, all candidates received the same amount of money to run their campaigns? What a concept-- a truly level playing field. Although there would undoubtedly be far less advertising, maybe we would have improved communication and real messaging-- instead of spin, lies, and smear campaigns.
With publicly financed elections, maybe the voice of "the little guy"-- as my Mom would put it-- would be heard.
As anticipated, 1000s of protesters from the Unitarian Universalist Church, the United Church of Christ, Puente Arizona, and other groups descended upon Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio's Tent City Jail last night.
Here is a news round up for the event, since it was not covered by southern Arizona news outlets.
Tonight-- June 23-- the Unitarian Universalists, Puente Arizona, and members of other liberal groups, including Progressive Democrats of America, will hold a peaceful vigil at the Maricopa County Tent City Jail to protest cruel and unusual punishment of immigrants and other prisoners.
Just as we all had expected, another stunt meant to undermine enforcement of immigration laws, the passage of SB1070, and of Sheriff Arpaio who enforces those laws has been launched! Left-wing and Marxist agitators are planning what their organizers claim to be a "massive protest" on Saturday evening, June 23 at 8 PM at Sheriff Joe's "Tent City".
Many of these agitators are being bussed in from out of state in order to do the dirty work required to unseat the good Sheriff in November. RidersUSA has been called upon by a number of organizations, including our friends at Sons of Liberty Riders to stand with them against the enemies of this country, our Constitution and the American way of life!
It’s time again to support the Rule of Law and show that "we the people" will not stand for outsiders, criminals and their supporters to take over our streets without facing resistance from dyed in the wool, American Patriots! We need to send a strong message, that the Rule of Law reins Supreme in this Country and no amount of pressure from these assorted groups of anarchists, open borders proponents, Socialists, Marxists and general malcontents will ever gain the upper hand! "Not in our house, not in our town, not in our country" is our firm commitment!!! If you would like, please meet with fellow RidersUSA members and our friends at Sheriff Joe's Tent City. Parking of the bikes will be at 3226 West Durango Street (35th Ave & Durango), Phoenix. We will begin grouping here between 7:00 and 7:30 PM. Bring water and a flashlight.
Bussed in to do their dirty work? Approximately 4000 Unitarian Universalists from across the country are in Phoenix this week for their Justice General Assembly-- four days of social justice workshops, worship, and witness actions... like the action tonight at the jail. As for "dirty work", it has been reported that the Unitarians were caught singing in downtown Phoenix the other day.
The vigil starts at 8 p.m. I'm hoping that the Side of Love will wash over the Tea Party, Sheriff Joe, and that abominable Hell Hole they call the Tent City Jail.
Saturday night-- at the Tent City, a symbol of shame and cruelty-- the side of hatered and bigotry (AKA Sheriff Joe) will meet those standing the side of love (AKA a few thousand Unitarian Universalists, parterning with Puente Arizona, and social justice other groups).
Approximately 4000 UUs from across the country are in Phoenix this week for their annual General Assembly, four days of workshops on social justice, community service, worship, and action.
Saturday's vigil at the Tent City is being billed as the UUs' Standing on the Side of Love Wittness for Justicebecause, obviously, there is no justice for the inmates in the Tent City (especially when the temperatures are over 110 degrees).
We will shine a light on the culture of cruelty perpetrated in our name by state governments that pass anti-immigrant laws like SB 1070 that lead to racial profiling and discrimination; and by a federal government whose practices both at the border and via an increasingly for-profit system of mass detention and deportation have created a culture of fear that terrorizes entire communities, makes us all less safe, and simply does not reflect our nation’s values.
From AZCentral...
"The main point is to show national disapproval of Arizona's immigration laws," [UU spokesman Steve] Carl said. "Arizona is at the forefront of human violations and leading the way for other states in the country."
In response to the thought of 1000-4000 liberal pacifists showing up at his doorstep, Sheriff Joe has decided to lock down all six of the Maricopa County Jails for Saturday. Come on, Joe, are you afraid of a few thousand old white folks? I guess you are. If they were brown, you could just beat them up, run them off with dogs and guns, or lock them up.
If you want to join in the peaceful demonstration, check out the event on Facebook or the UU website.
You can never have too many witnesses to injustice.
The latest polling from Public Policy Polling (PDF link) indicates that Romney is leading in Arizona by 7 points (50%-43%), which is within the margin of error (+/-4.4%), but likely represents a small true advantage.
I don't find that terribly surprising, given the GOP registration advantage and the strong Mormon population and activation in Arizona. Arizona will be closer than 2008, and Obama may actually win Arizona this year, but it will be a damn close thing.
What I did find VERY surprising, were the polling results when a potential Vice Presidential candidate was added to the mix. The scamps at PPP added some of the top political figures from Arizona as potential running mates for Romney: Governor Brewer, Senator John McCain, and Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio.
Adding Janet to the ticket actually HARMS Romney! He loses 2% when she's the VP - in Arizona! No favorite daughter effect for our Governor!
Senator McCain doesn't fair any better. Given the cratering of his popularity in his own party, that he doesn't make it MUCH worse for Romney is actually what is surprising. I guess you can just chalk it up to the fact that many GOP voters are already holding their noses to vote for Romney, so they can't really smell the VP.
Then there is America's "Toughest Sheriff" Arpaio. At a poorly preserved 70-something, Joe is even less likely a VP than the mouldering McCain, but PPP tried him out, none-the-less. The results were almost to hand the race to Obama.
Now, all of these results are also within the margin of error, so they are all statistically the same, but what is clear, is that adding any of these top GOP local leaders to the Romney ticket does not improve Romney's performance - just the opposite, in fact.
Arizona really LOVES it favorite sons and daughters... NOT!
Maricopa County Sheriff "Crazy Uncle Joe" Arpaio has been under several federal investigations and an ongoing grand jury investigation for years, and he has cost Maricopa County millions of dollars in legal fees and settlements over the years as a result of his unlawful actions.
The disciplinary panel dismissed a few charges, but it found "clear and convincing evidence" that Thomas and Aubuchon abused their prosecutorial powers while trying to prosecute county Supervisors Mary Rose Wilcox and Don Stapley, Superior Court Judge Gary Donahoe, and others. The panel found that Thomas and Aubuchon launched unethical attacks on their political enemies.
Thomas and Aubuchon's attempted prosecutions were not in the interests of justice; often they were only aimed at embarrassing or burdening their enemies, the panel found.
The federal investigation of "Crazy Uncle Joe" Arpaio that has received the most media attention is the Department of Justice investigation into racial profiling by the MCSO in conducting immigration sweeps and the treatment of prisoners. For months the DOJ has been trying to obtain the MCSO cooperation with a remedial program and Arpaio and his lawyers have stonewalled and resisted cooperation every step of the way.
We have been treated to months of speculation about a lawsuit and insipid editorial taunts from the Arizona Republic that if the DOJ has anything on Arpaio they should just sue him already. On Thursday, the DOJ sued "Crazy Uncle Joe" Arpaio. To the editors of the Arizona Republic: Happy now? Now STFU.
After a few rounds of threats, the Justice Department announced finally its lawsuit against the Maricopa County Sheriff's Office and Sheriff Joe Arpaio this morning.
The "reign of terror" in the state of Maricopa recently documented by the ethics panel of the Arizona Supreme Court in the disbarment of former Maricopa County Attorney Andrew Thomas is unraveling.
"King" Russell Pearce has been disgraced in the first successful recall of a Senate leader in our nation's history.
Andrew Thomas and his accomplice in crime, Lisa Aubuchon, have been disbarred.
But the ringleader of this "reign of terror," Maricopa County Sheriff "Crazy Uncle Joe" Arpaio, so far has evaded Justice and being held accountable for his rank corruption.
The lead attorney in the U.S. Justice Department's efforts to resolve a civil-rights complaint with Sheriff Joe Arpaio has cut off verbal communication with Arpaio's attorney, saying the entire affair is best left for the courts to decide.
* * *
"It is clear that DOJ's concerted effort to attain voluntary compliance by your client has failed," Deputy U.S. Assistant Attorney General Roy Austin wrote to Arpaio attorney Joe Popolizio.
"It is also clear that we should not discuss anything else by telephone because you will not accurately portray those conversations," Austin continued. "At this point, it is best to let a court determine the appropriateness of appointing an independent monitor as well as imposing other relief in order to address MCSO's constitutional and federal statutory violations."
* * *
A Justice Department spokeswoman did not comment late Wednesday on when the federal government would sue the Sheriff's Office.
One of the targets of Crazy Uncle Joe Arpaio's politically motivated witch hunts, County Supervisor Mary Rose Wilcox, recently settled her claim against Maricopa County for a rumored $1 million. She had this to say to the Arizona Capitol Times (subscription required). Wilcox: Arpaio is ‘next big step’ after Thomas disbarment | Arizona Capitol Times:
Failed corruption investigations launched by America’s self-proclaimed toughest sheriff have succeeded in getting one of the lawman’s top allies disbarred.
And despite Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s efforts to distance himself from cases at the center of a legal ethics panel inquiry that cost a pair of former county prosecutors their careers — the fallout has moved closer.
“Sheriff Arpaio is the next big step,” said Mary Rose Wilcox, a Maricopa County official who has been at odds with the sheriff and his allies. “He will fall.”
Shame. That's what disbarment amounts to. It is the ultimate sanction of an attorney for acts that are inconsistent with the professional ethical standards for practicing law: frankly, that's sometimes not a terribly high bar to clear. But Andy Thomas missed it by a mile. Thomas was disbarred today by a three member disciplinary panel of the Arizona Supreme Court. (coverage in the NYT, Arizona Republic, and AP Wire)
Thomas joins such notable disbarred attorneys as Alger Hiss, Spiro Agnew, Richard Nixon, Mike Nifong (of the Duke lacross case), and local ne'er-do-wells such as Lourdes Lopez (of the Bradley Schwartz murder) and Ken Peasley (knowingly eliciting false testimony in a capital murder case).
I can only imagine the impact Thomas' corruption would be having on the already sullied image of Arizona should he actually have been nominated and become Arizona's Attorney General. Given the margin between Horne and Thomas was about 1/5th of one percent, it was quite a narrow miss. That would have been a historic disbarment, indeed.
Republican Maricopa County Supervisor Don Stapley, one victim of Thomas' witch-hunts, had this to say:
"I listened to Judge O'Neil's public statement from the bench this morning. I was flooded with feelings. The strongest among them came when Judge O'Neil found, ". . . by clear and convincing evidence, that Mr. Thomas and Ms. Aubuchon acted with no substantial purpose other than to embarrass and burden Don Stapley."
"Three years ago, I was indicted for all the wrong reasons. The burden imposed on me, on my sweet wife Kathy and on our children is almost impossible to describe. I listened with mixed feelings when O'Neil said "Andrew Thomas is hereby disbarred for his conduct."
"Part of our burden is lifted with the disbarment order. Sadly, the burden will never be fully assuaged."
"I have had personally confirmed that "a prosecutor's power is a dangerous power." The new County Court Tower has a significant phrase engraved on its face. It says "The First Order of Society is Justice." The court today has served justice."
Thomas made the following statement upon learning of the Panel's findings:
"Today corruption has won and justice has lost. I brought corruption cases in good faith involving powerful people, and the political and legal establishment blatantly covered up and retaliated by targeting my law license. Arizona has some of the worst corruption in America, according to a recent national survey. The political witch hunt that's just ended makes things worse by sending a chilling message to prosecutors: Those who take on the powerful will lose their livelihood."
"I will be holding a news conference tomorrow, not today, and have no further statement to make today on the travesty we have just witnessed. I will have further details on the time and location later today or tomorrow morning."
I certainly agree with Thomas that Arizona has some of the worst corruption in America; we just disagree where the corruption lies. Today's findings make it clear and convincing exactly who is corrupt: Andy Thomas, his supporters and conspirators in the AZGOP machine.
Thomas resorts here to the all-too-common GOP tactic of calling the kettle black: allege that your political opponents are doing the exact thing you are accused of in the hopes that it makes your opponent's very well-founded and reasonable claim seem implausible by your baseless and misleading use of the same terms. Accused - and found responsible for - political witch-hunting and corruption? Claim your accusers are engaging in a "political witch-hunt" and "corruption", so that people will tune out the newly meaningless "he said, he said" noise that ensues.
It should be very interesting to see what Thomas will say at his planned press conference. I suspect that it will involve an elaboration on how his oppenents are conspiring against him, and I expect to hear the words "political witch-hunt" and "corruption" ad nauseum.
Thomas' disbarment brings a new, and surely unwelcome, focus on his partnership with Sheriff Arpaio. Arpaio's involvement in the very investigations and cases for which Thomas has been disbarred was so uncomfortably deep and compromising that Arpaio had to sacrifice his own chief deputy, Dave Henderschott, in order to claim his hands were clean. Perhaps the DOJ may finally come to realize that expecting Arpaio to cooperate with their years-long investigation of discrimination and civil rights abuses under Arpaio's leadership of MSCO is a fool's errand.
I just hope that the come-uppance of Thomas, and the coming lawsuit against Arpaio, will teach the people of Arizona a lasting lesson about the damage that hyper-partisan, vindictive, self-agrandizing, scapegoating, race-baiting, and ideologically-motivated politicians like Arpaio and Thomas can do when placed in law enforcement roles with nearly unfettered discretionary powers. I guy can hope, can't he?
See video of the Panel's findings and and local coverage of the findings after the click...
Undeterred by documentary evidence and repeated judicial rejection, a group of conspiracy theorists who say President Obama was born in Africa have sued the California secretary of state to demand that she verify the eligibility of all presidential candidates before putting them on the November ballot.
* * *
The lawsuit filed by Republican primary write-in candidate John Albert Dummett Jr., Markham Robinson of the American Independent Party of California and five others also alludes to "questions concerning the eligibility" of Mitt Romney to vie for the role of commander in chief. The birthers' lawyer, Gary Kreep of Ramona, said Wednesday that his clients wanted the issue of Romney's eligibility raised because of his parents' long residency in Mexico.
Ah, you didn't see that one coming, now did you? One birther explained that Mitt Romney's citizenship is up for debate because his dad was born in Mexico. Birthers want proof that Mitt Romney was born in America. "Thats right, Mitt Romney's father was born in the Mexican colony that Mitt's great-grandfather founded after fleeing the United States so he could stay married to Romney's four great-grandmothers."
Today's press conference made it pretty clear (as if it wasn't already) that the bill is aimed at President Obama, as people are still trying to push the continuously debunked conspiracy that the president was born in another country.
Arpaio and Seel were joined by "birther" squad lead investigator Mike Zullo, Representative David Burnell Smith, Senator Lori Klein, and some tea party folks to speak on behalf of Seel's bill. State Representative Jack Harper was also in the audience, as was infamous conspiracy nut Jerome Corsi.
I'm not going to nitpick at the latest buffoonery from Sheriff Joe Arpaio. Plenty of folks are already doing that... and totally missing the point of Arpaio's actions. I'm going to explain the very rational motivations behind Arpaio's showmanship.
Arpaio clearly has two major motivations in this latest move:
1) to bolster his allegation that the DOJ is investigating his department as an act of political retaliation, i.e. "I exposed Obama's forgery, so he's out to get me before I can unmask his conspiracy." There was no truly compelling motive for the Obama Administration to go after Arpaio, so by making this sensationalistic charge, Arpaio creates a compelling story for anyone who is already inclined to dislike Obama, and isn't really paying attention beyond the latest headlines.
2) to bilk the idiots in the Tea Party and Birther camps (not that those are mutually exclusive...) out of money and gather a national data base of potential donors to his campaign and causes.
An investigative “Cold Case Posse” launched six months ago by “America’s toughest sheriff” – Joe Arpaio of Arizona’s Maricopa County – has concluded there is probable cause that the document released by the White House last year as President Obama’s birth certificate is a computer-generated forgery.
The posse says it has identified at least one person of interest in the alleged forgery of Obama’s birth certificate.
* * *
Mike Zullo, Arpaio’s lead investigator, said his team believes the Hawaii Department of Health has engaged in a systematic effort to hide from public inspection any original 1961 birth records it may have in its possession.
“Officers of the Hawaii Department of Health and various elected Hawaiian public officials may have intentionally obscured 1961 birth records and procedures to avoid having to release to public inspection and to the examination of court-authorized forensic examiners any original Obama 1961 birth records the Hawaii Department of Health may or may not have,” Zullo said.
The investigators say the evidence contained in the computer-generated PDF file released by the White House as well as important deficiencies in the Hawaii process of certifying the long-form birth certificate establish probable cause that a forgery has been committed.
* * *
Arpaio believes a congressional investigation might be warranted and has asked that any information relevant to the investigation held by other law enforcement agencies be forwarded to his office.
The Cold Case Posse advised Arpaio that they believe forgers committed two crimes. First, they say it appears the White House fraudulently created a forgery that it characterized as an officially produced governmental birth record. Second, the White House fraudulently presented to the residents of Maricopa County and to the American public at large a forgery represented as “proof positive” of President Obama’s authentic 1961 Hawaii long-form birth certificate.
“A continuing investigation is needed to identify the identity of the person or persons involved in creating the alleged birth certificate forgery and to determine who, if anyone, in the White House or the state of Hawaii may have authorized the forgery,” Arpaio said.
The results show for Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio's "birther" investigation into President Obama's eligibility is apparently so important that it's going to be steamed live on a conspiracy-theory website.
That's right -- World Net Daily, which has been the mouthpiece for the latest inquiry into the repeatedly debunked conspiracy theory, is going to deliver the embarrassment live to anyone willing to watch.
The sheriff's office previously confirmed that Arpaio's judgment day for Obama is March 1, and all Arpaio has told New Times is that the key to the "investigation" could be Hawaiian twins and microfiche, which you can read about by clicking here.
World Net Daily founder Joseph Farah announced the live-streaming plans yesterday, and is also urging people to sign up for a mailing list to receive the "official report distributed to media by Arpaio's 'Cold Case Posse.'"
Farah, along with fellow conspiracy theorist and World Net Daily contributor Jerome Corsi, are the same ones who were seeking donations to fund the posse's "investigation" -- funds which also went to the World Net Daily/book-sale fund for a free copy of Corsi's "birther" literature.
Arpaio said earlier this week that he took on the "investigation" into Obama's eligibility to be president because he was "doing him a favor" by intending to clear his name.
The sheriff reiterated that he takes his job as sheriff "very seriously," and said he's not headlining the birth-certificate results show just for some media attention.
"I don't have press conferences just to get my name on television," Arpaio said, as we chuckled. "When I have a press conference, I talk about something."
If you just need to get on that mailing list for the Obama eligibility report, click here.
How is this clown still in office?
UPDATE: From WND: The event is [Thursday] at 1 p.m. Mountain Standard Time in Phoenix, 3 p.m. Eastern, and will be live-streamed by WND.
Top national media organizations have indicated their plans to attend, and bookings for radio and television reports are in the works. Expected are reporters from the Associated Press, Reuters, Univision, the Washington Times and NBC, CBS and ABC affiliates, as well statewide radio networks, among many others.
Because of the circumstances, a decision was made to hold the press conference at the sheriff’s training center on the outskirts of Phoenix, rather than at the downtown office.
Without releasing any details, Arpaio has said the findings “could be a shock.”
“When fascism comes to America, it will come wrapped in the flag and waving a cross, and will claim the label Americanism”
Arizona's own Goebbels, Russell Pearce, is now attempting to raise money for Ban Amnesty Now using the phase-out of the 287(g) program as a panic button.
What Pearce fails to mention is that DHS is also rolling out a new program, Secure Communities, which accomplishes the same immigration status checks on all persons booked in local jails across 15,000 jurisdiction in 44 states (whereas 287(g) is only in about 60 jurisdictions), without the liability and constitutional violations created by unleashing xenophobic hate-baters like Sheriff Joe Arpaio on an innocent public.
Is the circus in town? Because this clown, Birther "Crazy Uncle Joe" Arpaio, is about to show us "The Greatest Show on Earth" (my apologies to Ringling Brothers and Barnum & Bailey Circus).
Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpaio will reveal the findings of his office's investigation into the authenticity of President Obama's birth certificate on March 1st, he announced Tuesday.
"Once again I take my elected sheriff's status very serious and when the people ask me to do something, I try to do it regardless of the repercussions, the politics," Arpaio said Tuesday at the Maricopa County Republican Party Lincoln Day Lunch and Straw Poll. "So on March 1st I will have a press conference and reveal what we found out during that investigation. And I don't have press conferences just to have my name on television."
Ahahahaha! I'll bet he said that with a straight face. This clown is nothing but a prima donna who constantly seeks media attention from the conservative media noise machine to get his name on television.
One phone call to the state of Hawaii would have taken care of it. The Hawaii State Department of Health made an exception to release a copy of President Obama's long form birth certificate. They granted that exception in part because of the tremendous volume of requests they had been getting. President Barack Obama's long form birth certificate can be seen here (PDF).
Oooohh, I can't guess what this clown "Crazy Uncle Joe" is going to reveal -- spoiler alert! FAUX News chyron: "BREAKING NEWS: Sheriff Joe Arpaio says Obama's birth certificate a fake!" Birther queen Orly Taitz and Birther king Donald Trump will join our Three Stooges on FAUX and Friends to discuss. Stay tuned!
Seriously? In their attempt to delegitimize President Obama as other than American, the conservative media noise machine has opted to revive this entirely debunked and discredited birther wingnut conspiracy theory yet again? And "Crazy Uncle Joe" Arpaio is the clown they are going to trot out for it?
The State House Committee on Military Affairs and Public Safety passed HCM2005, which expresses the august and considered judgment of the Arizona House that dismantling internal border patrol checkpoints and "relocating these agents from the streets and highways to the border fence, stationing them three hundred feet apart, and providing a constant patrol along the border fence will stop the crossing of illegal immigrants and result in little need for border patrol agents in the interior of this state."
You sure that 200 feet apart wouldn't be a better deterrent, guys? Come on. This sort of attempt to micro-manage Federal immigration policy and practices is just more political grandstanding by the anti-immigrant AZGOP.
The seeming unconcious hypocrisy of folks who complain about the intrusiveness of the border patrol's permanent internal checkpoints, but none-the-less support intruding on Latino-looking American citizens and residents using local police anywhere in the state, never ceases to amaze.
It's sometimes surprising what comes out of the mouths of our elected representatives on this topic. In the following clip you get to watch State Rep. David Gowan (R-LD30) bellyache about how he doesn't like the Federal government bugging folks like him (non-Hispanic-looking folks, presumably) about their immigration status inside our borders. Apparently, however, it's fine with Gowan for the State of Arizona to do so (as he is a proponent of the SB107), which is intrusive in EXACTLY this way.
Gowan says:
“We're talking the difference between the federal government and the State doing law-enforcement. There is a higher criteria that comes with the federal government. And that's the essence of this, is the federal government, what I was talking about earlier, asking about our citizenship inside America is what perturbs me.”
WTF? What higher criteria? I suspect that criteria is simply whether Gowan, and folks like him, feel that the "right people" are in charge of the law enforcement officers in question. If the officers are "properly" trained only to harass brown people -- like Sheriff Joe's crew -- it's OK. But if the officers are "improperly" trained not to racially profile -- like the Border Patrol under the communist Kenyan Obama -- then Gowan no likey.
See Gowan make an ass-hat of himself after the click... (h/t to Sarah Muench for pointing out the video)
Sheriff Arpaio responded to the DOJ's Civil Rights Division by the deadline set by AAG Thomas Perez, but he did so in a rather unusually passive aggressive fashion (see his attorney's letter [pdf link]: he's made his own discovery demands (106 of them!) and set his own deadline. He seems to be acting like the DOJ's investigation is under investigation.
He did not respond personally, but through a letter signed by his attorneys at Jones, Skelton & Hochuli, P.L.C., Popolizio and Jones, hereinafter, 'the mouthpiece'. The letter contained two "Exhibits" and was all on the attorneys' letterhead.
My overall impression of the document is that is ultimately a rather detailed and aggressive discovery demand for every bit of evidence on which the DOJ based the conclusions laid out in their letter of investigative findings. Considering there is currently no litigation pending, it's a very unusual response. What makes it even more odd is that all of the evidence that Sheriff Joe's mouthpieces demand was originally produced by the MSCO itself in response to the DOJ's lawsuit seeking disclosure for its investigation.
Nearly everything Sheriff Joe demands was disclosed by him to the DOJ, and thus are presumably his own records. Did he not keep copies? Is he just too lazy to review his own records? Does he want the DOJ to draw him a road map to defending against a lawsuit against his office?
Those items Joe wants the DOJ to produce that did not come from his office strike me, quite frankly, as demands for attorney work product and consultations with experts which, even if litigation were pending, would not be discoverable. Essentially, Sheriff Joe wants the DOJ to give him every scrap of evidence they might use against him, and the entire paper trail of their investigation of his office.
To say that the DOJ will not assent to his demands is putting it mildly. This response is more of a propaganda tool than a response. Joe's propaganda spin will go like this:
"I wanted to cooperate. I provided everything they ever asked for. All I wanted to know was what evidence they based their conclusions on, and they won't say. Their investigation is just a secretive political hit job. How can I possibly help put my office in compliance when they won't even tell me how they determined my office was violating the law? All I want is some help understanding why they think there are violations occurring, and they have just proven they are just out to get me. I offer to help them, and they just filed suit. Blah, blah, blah..."
Poor Joe.
Let's start with the cover letter.
First, there is the bald-faced lie with which it begins. The mouthpiece claims Joe has made "good faith voluntary efforts" to achieve compliance with the DOJ's investigation. Bullshit. He stonewalled the investigation and it required a federal lawsuit to get him to allow DOJ investigators access to MSCO records, facilities and personnel. The mouthpiece alleges that 'the dispute' between them over the 'scope' of the investigation 'was ancient history': if you call a year ancient, perhaps...
It just gets worse from there. The mouthpiece alleges the MSCO and Joe stand ready to cooperate "regardless of this political gamesmanship, the undisclosed broken promise, and the misleading portrayal of this matter in the media..." You are seeing a press release, not a response to serious allegations of systemic civil rights violations.
The mouthpiece then claims that Joe wants a "constructive dialogue" but "will not cower at the threat of litigation, either." Further, such a "constructive dialogue" can only occur "if the DOJ provides the underlying facts and information for its findings." Why? Because "only with all of the underlying facts and information relevant to the DOJ's conclusions in hand... can we truly evaluate these findings, determine their merit and make any neccessary changes and adjustments to the MSCO..."
Did you get that? Joe wants to judge whether he thinks the DOJ's investigation has merit. He's so stuck in authoritarian law-enforcer mode that he does not seem to realize that he's being accused of being the lawbreaker.
Imagine if the next perp that MSCO picks up wants to investigate how MSCO came to accuse him before he'll accept that he's under investigation? The perp wants the names and addresses of all his victims and the individual cops who picked him up. He wants every internal email or memo regarding his case. Discovery by an accused is one thing, but what Sheriff Joe is proposing is outrageous.
His mouthpiece goes on "if the DOJ's stance is to conceal the facts underlying its findings unless forced to reveal them in litigation, that stance is absurd, counterproductive, unfortunate, and contrary to it guidelines." What, did you run out of adjectives, mouthpiece?
What is actually absurd is the list of 106 civil discovery demands contained in 'Exhibit 2'. It is entitled "Requests for Facts and Information" and repeats the baldfaced lie about "the complete cooperation of the MSCO you have enjoyed", then asserts that "the DOJ is obligated to make every effort to secure the voluntary compliance of the MSCO which, at this juncture, depends on the DOJ's mere provision of the factual detail behind its findings."
Merely respond to these 106 extensive demands we are making. Oh, is that all?
The letter proceeds step-by-step to demand definitions, documentation, and all factual and procedural background for every factual assertion in the DOJ's finding letter.
Now, call me crazy, but I think Joe knows exactly what the DOJ based its findings on. The mouthpiece outlines in great detail in 'Exhibit 1' exactly what the MSCO provided the DOJ: 230 interviews (145 inmates, 85 staff, more with Joe and command staff), 86,398 pages of documentation, 931 Gigs of records and documents, 165 boxes of documents, etc. Could it be that the DOJ used all that information to make its findings? Imagine that...
So what does Joe demand as his price of cooperation? Let's take a look at a few sample 'requests'.
"1. Please provide a complete copy of the recent statistical study that the DOJ commissioned regarding MCSO traffic stop activities on Maricopa County roadways which purportedly concludes that Latino drivers are four to nine times more likely to be stopped than similarly situated non-Latino drivers."
Seems like a reasonable sort of request. No big thing. Just show us the goods and we'll judge whether the report is reliable. Right. Now the accused gets to judge whether the evidence against him is good enough. But wait there's more...
In 'request' 2, we get this:
"2. ... Please also provide the identity, files,reports, notes, writings, relevant to the conclusions of each law enforcement expert consultant who concluded that these HSU stops were in violation of the Fourth Amendment. The curriculum vitae of each expert is also requested."
Now, I'm not a civil litigator, but I'm pretty sure that such material (except the c.v.s) would not be discoverable. What Joe and his mouthpiece are demanding here are the means by which to investigate and attempt to undermine, discredit, or intimidate those experts. The part about notes and writings is especially disturbing; those materials are work for hire in anticipation of litigation and thus absolutely non-discoverable work product.
Joe wants the DOJ to strip naked before he'll consent to even talk to them.
Even odder, Joe wants the work product of every expert the DOJ ever consulted in their investigation (see 'request' 22), whether their advice contributed to the DOJ's findings or not. That's so not going to happen.
Now, that's all pretty disturbing, but check this out:
"3. Please describe, with particularity, each "individual account" regarding MCSO deputies stopping Latinos on the basis of their appearance. In doing so, please identify the individual by providing a name and contact information so that we may conduct our own interviews. We would also request any statements provided to the DOJ, either recorded or written, which memorialized these individual accounts and any factual information regardingthese alleged discriminatory stops including, but not limited to, the date and time of each stop."
OK, now this is getting bizarre. Joe wants the names and contact information of the victims of MSCO racial profiling, so they can 'conduct their own interviews'? This is like a rapist wanting to inview his own victim. It's absurd. The MSCO is asking for the exact tools they need to further intimidate and attempt to undermine the victims of their own civil rights violations.
That may seem bad, but they are just getting started.
They want the same particularized victim information for people who reported the police misconduct underlying every allegation the DOJ makes. This includes immigration detainees, prisoners in MSCO's own jails, even citizens who reported MSCO retaliation against individuals who criticize police practices! He wants that information for victims of retaliatory detention, arrest without cause, and unfounded civil lawsuits! He wants the DOJ to identify and lay bare to retaliation the very people his office is accused of victimizing!
This has the danger of retaliation and initimidation written all over it!
Joe and his mouthpiece actually think the DOJ is going to identify whistleblowers, some of whom are in Joe's own custody, in his own jails, or under his own command, for him to 'investigate' their allegations? He's clearly insane.
Or just full of shit.
This is not a request for any sort of reasonable information sharing or discovery, it is an excuse not to cooperate and give himself a legitimate sounding excuse for his continued non-cooperation. "They won't tell me what I did wrong! Wah, wah, wah."
This skein of utterly non-responsive clap-trap and out-right lies, in combination with Joe's recent announcement that he will seek reelection signals just one thing: Joe's hunkering down.
The DOJ will get no cooperation. Voluntary compliance is not going to happen. Joe knows he's going down, and he's digging in for a protracted propaganda and legal war, and he'll do anything, including going after whistleblowers in his own office, in his own jails, and among the public he was entrusted to keep safe and instead victimized, to continue running things the way he likes.
Days before the Insight Bowl in Tempe on December 30, in which the Iowa Hawkeyes play the Oklahoma Sooners, Crazy Uncle Joe Arpaio was in Iowa introducing Governor Goodhair Rick Perry of Texas and insulting Iowa Hawkeyes fans by confusing them with Ohio State Buckeyes. Oh, there will be signs in the stands at the Insight Bowl carried by Hawkeyes fans. Rick Perry's sidekick confuses Buckeyes and Hawkeyes:
Sports fans sometimes aren't considered the sharpest tools in the shed, but at least we know our team mascots and symbols. The same can't be said for a key associate of presidential candidate Rick Perry, however.
The Texas governor was in Iowa today, to speak at a West Side Conservative Club breakfast in Des Moines. There, he was introduced by Joe Arpaio, the Arizona sheriff who has stirred controversy with his rigid enforcement of immigration laws.
Arpaio made mention of getting to know Iowans, and then said, "Was it the Buckeyes?"
The booing audience had to shout out a correction that the University of Iowa is the "Hawkeyes."
Governor Goodhair, according to Politico.com, did manage some damage control. He took the microphone and noted there also were some fans of the Iowa State Cyclones in attendance and chided Arpaio, saying: "You know how to get an Iowa crowd riled up."
“Every barrel of oil that comes out of those sands in Canada is a barrel of oil that we don’t have to buy from a foreign source,” Mr. Perry said in Clarinda, earning a loud round of enthusiastic applause [from his equally ignorant audience.]
Um, Governor Goodhair, Canada is a "foreign country." This comedy duo will be touring Iowa the rest of this week.
We here at BfAZ have expended considerable pixels over the past few years following, and criticizing, the abuses of Andrew Thomas as Maricopa County Attorney, and then his campaign for Arizona's Attorney General - and what a nightmare Attorney General Andrew Thomas would have been...
We've been harsh, and we've been critical. And we've been justified.
We saw an attorney violating ethical norms of the profession of law, and abusing his office in a flagrant and professionally offensive manner. We did not think him fit to excercise the tremendous discretion granted to a County Attorney. We feared the damage he might have done as Attorney General of our State.
His conduct during and prior to the State Bar hearing certainly did not improve my own opinion of him. He was arrogant. He displayed no recognition that anything he had done might be wrong, and no remorse. He tried mightily to derail the process, arrogating a position for himself above the ethical standards of our profession.
Now he faces almost certain disbarment. And I've literally never heard of any case where such a sanction was so well deserved and, more importantly, so necessary to restore public trust in the institutions of justice.
The closing argument of the Bar's Counsel has been filed and it is a doozy of a read. It is well-crafted and makes a powerful and undeniable case for disbarment of Andy Thomas, and Lisa Aubuchon, as well. Truly, even though I have followed Andy's career and the case against him, I had only a fragmented impression of the course of intimidation, abuse of power, and downright criminality that characterized Thomases time as County Attorney.
Reading the closing gave me a much clearer view of the utter abandonment of principle and obsession with revenge that Thomas unleashed upon the people and government institutions of Maricopa County. I now have a better appreciation for how a politically ambitious media-hound devoid of principles can wreak utter havok with the impartial administration of the law.
I can only summarize and give some choice tidbits here. I strongly recommend that you read the closing in full if you want to understand what has been going on with the Court Tower issue and Thomases legal vendetta with the Maricopa Board of Supervisors and the County Courts. It is 24 pages that reads like a novella of political skullduggery.
Thomas is accused of 22 violations of 5 different ethical rules:
7 violations of the rule prohibiting conflicts of interest
6 violations of the rule prohibiting the use of means to burden or embarrass another
4 violations of the rule prohibiting conduct that prejudices the administration of justice
3 violations of the rule prohibiting engaging in dishonesty
2 violations of the rule prohibiting engaging in criminal conduct
The heart of the complaint, and by far the most serious ethical charge, is that he and Aubuchon filed felony charges against Maricopa Superior Court Presiding Criminal Judge Gary Donahoe with no evidence of any criminal activity whatsoever. That action involved comitting the crime of perjury and accounts for Claims 24 through 30 of the closing.
In the course of that monstrous misuse of the criminal process, he and Aubuchon filed completely false charges that did not describe any criminal conduct. "There was never any evidence that he (Donahoe) had obstructed an investigation or hindered an investigation. Filing false charges against a sitting Superior Court judge is dispicable misconduct for a prosecutor."
This Claim standing alone would fully justify Thomases disbarment. Indeed, restoring the public's trust in the system of justice requires that Thomas be sanctioned in such a severe manner.
Any public figure who would defend Thomas after this hearing quite simply has no respect for the rule of law and is a partisan fanatic who will excuse any illegal, immoral and unethical conduct so long as it is done by a member of his own faction.
Of course, there are also Claims 1 through 23 and 31 though 33, all of which also describe serious unethical behavior, these include:
conflict of interest and dishonesty about a Grand Jury proceeding to Gila County Attorney Daisy Flores
filing an incompetent and meritless RICO indictment without statutory authority, against their own clients and persons with statutory and constitutional immunities for decisions claimed to be conspiratorial conduct (the closing notes this episode "displayed massive incompetence, total lack of judgment and extreme arrogance")
a vendetta against Supervisor Don Stapley and his associates that embraced conflicts of interest, misrepresentations to the courts, improper attempts to influence judges decisions, charging crimes without jurisdiction because of statutes of limitation expiry and improper public statements about a pending case
Perhaps the Claims that will have the most resonance and continuing relevance to Arizona's politics is that begining with the first charges against Supervisor Stapely and continuing through the attempt inimidate Judge Donhoe with false criminal charges, there was a concerted effort and conspiracy among Thomas, Aubuchon, the embattled Sheriff Joe Arpaio and his then-Chief Deputy Hendershott to take control of the Board of Supervisors. Henderschott even testified during the hearings that their goal was to force the County into recievership by their harrassment and misuse of criminal process.
There is a certain delicious irony that Arpaio may end his own career with MSCO in federal recievership.
Disbarment is a well-deserved and necessary end to the public career of Andy Thomas. His disbarment in Arizona is sufficient foundation for disbarment in any other jurisdiction where he may be licensed to practice, and sufficient cause to deny him a license should he seek to reapply to any jurisdiction in the future. Thomas has amply demonstrated his unfitness for the practice of law, let alone discretionary control of the devastating power of the state in criminal matters.
I expect that someday, and I think that day is not too far off, when Thomas is disbarred and Arpaio is no longer Sheriff, the tale of their crusade of intimidation and misfeasance of office will make some enterprising reporter a very fine book. I would be the first to line up for a copy. The tale of Thomas and Arpaio would make a modern American morality tale of how power can corrupt small-minded men given power and discretion they haven't the judgment or ethical compass to use safely.
After being kept alive for days following a fight with officers in one of Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s jails, a Latino military veteran died late Tuesday when he was taken off life support by doctors at a Phoenix hospital, his family’s attorney told Talking Points Memo. Latino Vet Injured In Arpaio’s Jail Dies | TPMMuckraker:
Ernest “Marty” Atencio was 44. He was injured early Friday morning, just hours after the Justice Department accused the Arizona sheriff of running an agency that regularly violates the rights of Latinos.
“His entire family was by his bedside when he passed,” the family’s attorney, Mike Manning, said. His parents, two brothers and three sons were there to make the decision.
Atencio had been taken to St. Joseph’s Hospital and Medical Center in critical condition with injuries from the fight. Doctors later determined he had been shocked at least four times with a Taser, according to Manning.
Earlier on Tuesday, Manning said Atencio was brain dead and his family had flown to Phoenix to decide whether to take him off life support.
Phoenix police arrested Atencio after he was seen kicking on the door of an apartment and then harassing a woman walking down the street. Manning said Atencio suffered from bipolar disorder and had been off his medication.
Phoenix officers processed him and took him to the Maricopa County jail for holding. At the jail, however, Atencio began struggling with officers from both Phoenix and Maricopa County law enforcement, according to statements by both agencies.
Neither agency has detailed exactly what happened during the struggle. The sheriff’s office has yet to release a video of the incident to Phoenix police, Atencio’s family or the public.
Ernest "Marty'' Atencio, who lapsed into unconsciousness after being shot by a stun gun after an altercation early Friday at the Fourth Avenue Jail in Phoenix, was removed from life support Tuesday afternoon, his family's attorney announced Wednesday.
"Marty's family conferred with doctors yesterday and talked among themselves and then had him taken off life support,'' attorney Michael Manning said. "He was brain dead.''
Manning said Atencio was pronounced dead shortly after being taken off life support.
Atencio was arrested for assault late last Thursday night by Phoenix police. Officials Monday said that while being booked into the Fourth Avenue Jail, which is run by the Maricopa County Sheriff's Office, Atencio struggled with officers, was shot with a stun gun and placed in a "safe cell."
About 15 minutes later, medical personnel checking on Atencio found him unresponsive, performed CPR and then transported him to a hospital, according to a written statement from Sheriff's Office spokesman Jeff Sprong.
Manning said Atencio's family is waiting for the results of the autopsy, which will take place in the next several days, before deciding on any further action.
"We are giving the Sheriff's Office the benefit of the doubt at this point,'' Manning said. "But we want to see the (jail) video of what happened, and we want to see it now.''
The simple fact is that Perez is Latino, and that in itself burns up the racists and xenophobes who support Arpaio. I suggested that this fact alone might become a point of propaganda (see the very end of the post) in attacking the Obama Administration's investigation of Arpaio (which, I might remind everyone, began under Bush).
Well, it has happened. Much more quickly, and publicly, than I ever expected.
First, Bruce Ash took the argument to the Buckmaster Show, claiming that the fact that the DOJ used a Latino spokesman to announce the CRD's findings was suggestive that political opportunism lay behind the investigation's handling. (Off-site link to audio, advance to about 20:30 for Ash's comments).
In fact, Bruce, Perez is not some Latino mouthpeice trotted out to attack Arpaio, as you insinuate. He happens to actually head the Civil Rights Division: who better to present the CRD's findings than the boss?
Well, perjury has a legal meaning: the facts lying behind Expose Obama's accusation are a joke. Malkin's charges stem from pure malice and the mere fact that he seems to have worked on issues important to the working poor - a cardinal sin in Malkins creepy world view.
Well, it took a lot less time for Arpaio's allies to drag their defense of Arpaio into the gutter and desperately try to change the subject from the serious allegations in the CRD's finding letter. And it didn't stay a whisper campaign, as I expected. Even I can be surprised by how low Arizona's rightwing can sink.
The attack dogs of the right are trying to impugn the integrity of a dedicated and professionally accomplished public servant with baseless slurs. They clearly seek to portray the Obama Administration's efforts to protect the civil rights of Latino-American citizens and legal Latino residents of Maricopa County as a political witch-hunt designed to whip the Latinos community into a voting frenzy for 2012.
In a related story, Napolitano's moved to cut off the MSCO's means of discriminatory practices by suspending their 287g access to ICE immigration records. I said I thought that was a political mistake because it allowed Arpaio to claim the Administration was hindering immigration enforcement. They didmake such claims, of course. Well, that charge has been answered by Homeland Security moving 50 new agents into Maricopa County to take over the role that MSCO 287g certified agents has been doing. So much for that argument. 50 ICE agents working full time will accomplish much more in combating illegal immigration than the hundred or so 287g certified officers of MSCO working part-time on immigration ever could.
The terms of the Memoradum of Agreement under which the MSCO's 287g officers operate specifically require cooperation in any investigation concerning civil rights. The simple fact is that Napolitano was exercising considerable forbearance in not cutting off MSCO sooner, when Arapio was stonewalling the CRD's investigation for over a year. If any criticism can be leveled at Homeland Security in their handling of these circumstances it is that they should have announced the new ICE officers at the same time they cut off MSCO, so as not to give Arpaio and his allies an opening for their ridiculous rhetoric.
Arizona and the residents of Maricopa County, especially, deserve better than such gutter politics.
The "Sunday Square Off" roundtable hosted by Brahm Resnik evaluated the legal and political fallout for Sheriff Joe Arpaio and Arizona Republicans from the U.S. Justice Department's civil rights case against the sheriff.
For nearly two decades Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio has seemed an invincible political juggernaut. Few dared to run against him, and those who criticized him publicly feared that they might themselves be targeted for retribution.
But longtime critics are detecting a shift in the political winds, saying the one-two punch of a blistering Justice Department letter alleging civil-rights abuses and a scandal involving more than 400 mishandled sex-crimes cases may have finally shaken Arpaio. They say the five-term Republican lawman's policing tactics targeting illegal immigrants have given Arizona a black eye and the time may be right for the state's GOP heavyweights such as Gov. Jan Brewer and U.S. Sens. John McCain and Jon Kyl to try to pressure him out of office.
Barring that, critics believe that Arpaio could at last be vulnerable to either a Republican primary challenger or a moderate-to-conservative Democrat in the 2012 general election.
Federal investigators on Thursday outlined allegations of rampant racial profiling against Latinos and other illegal policing practices in the Maricopa County Sheriff's Office. Justice Department officials also accused Arpaio's office of unlawfully retaliating against people who complain about its activities and policies. That alleged abuse of power by Arpaio also is the focus of a separate federal criminal probe.
* * *
The allegations of mismanagement and unprofessionalism have increased the drumbeat of calls for Arpaio's resignation. But Arpaio still has plenty of supporters, some of whom demonstrated in Phoenix on Thursday after the Justice Department issued its report. Some of his political allies in Arizona and across the country also rallied to his defense[.]
* * *
Many others in the GOP so far have said nothing.
"Where is John McCain and Jon Kyl?" said Frank Sharry, executive director of America's Voice, a national group that advocates for comprehensive immigration reform. "They're national leaders, and they're letting the reputation of Arizona be trashed by a thug like Arpaio? You know the kind of moral and political strength McCain and Kyl have. ... At a minimum, one would think that the adults in Arizona would step forward and say, 'All right, the crazies have been running the asylum for too long. Let's work to create a pro-business climate in Arizona, a bipartisan approach to solving tough problems, and stop making Arizona the laughingstock or the bogeyman of the rest of the country.' "
McCain, the 2008 Republican presidential nominee, and Kyl, the Senate minority whip, publicly expressed concern about reports that Arpaio's agency failed to follow up on more than 400 alleged sex crimes between 2005 and 2007. Some of the cases involved children.
"Victims of abuse not only deserve the respect of law enforcement, but their rights must also be protected throughout the criminal justice process," McCain and Kyl said in a Dec. 8 joint written statement.
Neither McCain nor Kyl was available for comment on the Justice Department's inquiry.
Brewer is waiting to hear Arpaio's side of the story.
"I think everybody's concern is that we don't want anyone's civil rights violated," Brewer told reporters Friday. "That has always been of big concern to me."
There is precedence in Arizona for a coordinated effort by Republican leaders to push for an embattled GOP official to step down.
In January 1988, McCain, then a freshman senator, and Kyl, then serving in the U.S. House, held a news conference with then-U.S. Reps. Jim Kolbe and Jay Rhodes to call for the resignation of controversial then-Gov. Evan Mecham, who was facing a recall election over his incendiary decision to rescind Arizona's original paid holiday honoring Martin Luther King Jr. as well as other issues. Retired U.S. Sen. Barry Goldwater, the 1964 GOP presidential nominee, had led the way a few months earlier by saying Mecham should quit. Mecham, remembered today for numerous intemperate comments and verbal gaffes, refused to step down and eventually was impeached and removed by the Arizona Legislature before the recall election was held.
"Truthfully, I do believe that the leaders of the party should consider having that type of a discussion," said former Maricopa County Attorney Rick Romley, a longtime Republican critic and political foil of Arpaio's. "Barry Goldwater did that with Mecham. I think that's leadership for the good of the party. Whether or not the person would listen is always another matter."
* * *
Former Arizona Attorney General Grant Woods, a Republican, said he believes there is a chance that GOP leaders still will stand up against Arpaio.
"The seriousness of the situation is pretty unprecedented," said Woods, who thinks Arpaio should quit. "Would he care? I doubt it. That would be analogous to Mecham in some respects -- he didn't really care, either."
And then there are demagogues like Rep. John Kavanagh, R-Fountain Hills, who called the Justice Department investigation a political "smear job" and "a sneak attack on Arpaio." Although he had not read the report, Kavanagh said “I don’t believe the report, and I stand by Sheriff Arpaio.” GOP stalwarts stand by Arpaio; Dems say DOJ report not political - Arizona Capitol Times. Idiot.
Arpaio's latest troubles follow the ballot-box defeats of two of his key allies in his fight against illegal immigration. Andrew Thomas, county attorney from 2005 to 2010, last year lost his primary race for Arizona attorney general. More recently, former Arizona Senate President Russell Pearce, R-Mesa, the author of Arizona's controversial Senate Bill 1070, was ousted in a recall election.
* * *
An opposing candidate could run against Arpaio solely on the issue of dereliction of duty with regard to the botched sex-crimes cases and not even have to mention immigration, said Sharry of America's Voice.
"I suspect this will be the beginning of the end for Arpaio," Sharry said. "He rode an issue that is deeply emotional and deeply frustrating and milked it for as much publicity and popularity that he could. Now you can see that the tide has turned in Arizona and elsewhere."
Sheriff Joe says, "We're going to work with them. We have for three years. But one thing I'm not going to agree to is to be controlled by some federal monitor or something. I'm the elected sheriff here, and I report to the 4 million voters in the county."
Arpaio doesn't seem to realise that a federal 'monitor' is exactly the means by which the DOJ enforces consent decrees under 14141. Perhaps he's only making sweet because his deputies just killed one of his prisoners with Tasers.
As for "working with them", that only occurred under a court order, not because Joe's happy to help. He stonewalled the DOJ on access to records, personnel and facilities for over a year, until the DOJ hauled his butt into court.
Even as Joe pulls back on the rhetoric and makes some conciliatory sounds, he remains under the impression that he has a choice whether to work with the Feds on fixing his deeply flawed agency. He will negotiate in good faith a consent decree which will include federal officers in key positions to ensure compliance, or he will serve out his term a virtual prisoner of his own office, with federal implementation and compliance officers running his agency in all but name.
Better change your tone, Joe. Arizona expects better.
The DOJ has released a public Letter of Findings concerning its investigation into the Maricopa County Sheriffs Office's (MSCO) practices which infringe on the civil rights of the citizens of Maricopa County. Most of those abuses and illegal practices concern Equal Protection and Due Process violations of Latino citizens and legal residents (not, as Arpaio would contend, the rights of undocumented aliens).
Here is some coverage of from the DOJ Civil Rights Division's (CRD) presser, and the full transcript of the CRD's Statement. Sorry for the use of FOX footage (and the annoying ad), but it was the most extensive excerpt of the DOJ's presser I could find.
You will note that in Arpaio's responses, he simply denies any pattern of infringement of civil rights and instead attacks the DOJ as trying to block Arpaio's efforts at enforcing immigration law. Here's more FOX coverage throwing softballs to Arpaio regarding the allegations for him to swat down unchallenged by any facts.
Note carefully the DOJ's stated intention to cooperate with Sheriff Arpaio in negotiating an agreement to address their concerns, and the contrast with the divisive polemical attacks in Arpaio's response.
What does the DOJ's finding under section 14141 (42 U.S.C. 14141) actually mean?
Firstly, what this is NOT, is any sort of demand by the DOJ that Arpaio resign.
Just the opposite, in fact. The Civil Rights Division specifically notes in both its finding letter and presser that it wants very much to work with Arpaio to remedy his agency's policies and practices to conform with best practices and stop the civil rights violations they found in their multi-year investigation of his office.
It is Arpaio who is failing to cooperate, and making this into a show-down. He stone-walled the DOJ's investigation for over a year, refusing to release records and make personnel and facilities available to DOJ investigators. Finally, the DOJ had to sue the MSCO to gain access to those resources to complete their investigation.
Section 14141 was enacted in 1994 as part of an omnibus crime package. It was intended to give more enforcement power to the DOJ's CRD to reform public justice institutions, including police departments, prisons and juvenile detention facilities. It gives the DOJ a right of action to seek injunctive and equitable redress in federal court of any patterns of practice resulting in civil rights violations.
The findings which the CRD have published establish that the CRD's investigation has found evidence that patterns and/or practices of the MSCO are resulting in constitutional violations. The letter puts MSCO on notice of the subjects on which the MSCO will need to enter into negotiations for reform under a legally enforcable consent decree, or face a federal lawsuit to force reform.
MSCO is not unique in facing such an investigation. Several police departments around the country have been similarly investigated and subsequently entered into consent agreements with the DOJ (24 that I'm aware of) concerning similar alleged practices. As far as I'm aware, however, this is the first time that the sort of systemic racial profiling and discriminatory practices have been the subject of a 14141 action against a police agency by the DOJ.
The CRD gave Arpaio a 60 day deadline during which they intend that he should begin to design and implement reforms of policies and practices, and enter into negotiations with the CRD on an enforceable consent decree. Instead of indicating that he would work with the CRD, Arpaio has publicly counter-attacked and denied any need of reform. It seems likely, judging by Arpaio's response to the CRD's findings that he will use this time to rally political support and throw mud at the DOJ. He does not appear to be amenable to negotiating a settlement.
That public and divisive intransigence is, so far as I'm aware, unprecedented. It could be that cooler heads will prevail and Arpaio will dial it back and sit down with the CRD to start work on an agreement. But he may not, and that puts us in some entirely unprecedented legal and political territory.
What are the tools DOJ can use to force reform?
The DOJ can obtain equitable and injunctive relief from the federal courts to ensure that procedures are put in place to address the alleged systemic violations.
Historically, this involves negotiating a consent decree outlining the needed reforms, procedures, systems, training and oversight needed to end the violations. Generally, one or more monitors or compliance officers are appointed to directly oversee the implementation process once a consent decree is in place.
That historical method of implementation of 14141 reforms seems, at least initially, unlikely to be workable with Arpaio at the helm of MSCO.
Ultimately, the consequences could include civil contempt judgements against MSCO, if Arpaio refuses to comply with court orders. It could even include a federal receivership of departments or facilities that demonstrate an ongoing pattern of non-compliance. I don't believe this has ever happened in the context of a police agency, but it has been done for specific detention facilities. Ultimately, it is possible that the Maricopa jails could be taken from Arpaio's control if violations continue and Arpaio refuses to address the problems CRD has found in his jails.
I can't stress enough that it is unprecedented for a police agency to seriously and publicly deny any problem and resist entering into negotiations toward a consent decree. I'm simply not aware of any situation that 14141 has been used against police agency headed by a political figure who bases his legitimacy on the very conduct the DOJ finds to be a violation of the Constitution. I have looked at the prior actions CRD has brought under 14141 and at the literature discussing those procedures, and have been unable to locate any real parallel to the situation with MSCO.
Part of this stems from the fact that 14141 has only been law for roughly 15 years. The real parallels with police agencies who stubbornly insist on maintaining discriminatory and illegal practices predate 14141, and where fought by the DOJ with inferior legal tools. It was, in fact, to more effectively combat problematic principals like Arpaio that Congress passed 14141, but the DOJ hasn't yet had to deal with open defiance of its autohority and findings in a 14141 action. In a sense, this might be a welcome opportunity for the professional staff at the CRD to really give 14141 a real test of its effectiveness.
Police agencies tend to be run by competent and reasonable professionals who are having problems with oversight and training that result in systemic violations. I don't know that 14141 has ever been used to try to reform of intentional policies and cultural norms tht promote constitutional violations. Principal directors tend to be quite cooperative and even eager to work with the DOJ to fix problems in their agencies. The MSCO and Arpiao seem likely to pose an entirely different set of legal and political challenges to CRD's enforcement strategy.
What the legal and political consequences could be when the DOJ and its CRD are faced with an intransigent and popular political figure intent on resisting any changes is uncharted territory. If Arpaio wants to double down and try to wait out the DOJ in hopes of a regime change in 2014, he might well succeed in the long term. That is, unless he decides at some point that he's had enough and retires when things get too hot. He is an old man, after all.
A high profile fight in the national media which airs all of Arpiao's dirty pink laundry would likely be very damaging both to Arpaio and to Arizona, but might well play perfectly to the local political constituency on whom Arpaio relies. Arpaio may relish the national attention he would garner by defying the DOJ so openly. The DOJ would have to get creative in crafting a legal strategy to address an obstreperous Arpaio; their only experience with 14141 enforcement seems to be predicated on a fairly good-faith attempt by the local stakeholders to reach a mutually satisfactory consent decree.
What would stubborn resistance to DOJ authority mean for MSCO and Maricopa residents?
It's hard to say, as its never really happened before, but we've already seen one compliance tool brought to bear by Homeland Security. Napolitano has already stripped Arpiao's agency of its 287g access to immigration status information based on the CRD's letter of findings. In her statement, Napolitano states that by continuing to allow MSCO personnel to participate in 287g programs, she would effectively be making DHS a party to the constitutional violations CRD found. It is understandable and correct that the head of DHS refuse to be involved, even vicariously, in enabling civil rights violations.
But Napolitano's principled stand is likely to be a very politically divisive move this early. Napolitano might have moved too quickly, before it is clear that Arpaio will refuse to implement any reforms. Loss of 287g certification certainly limits the ability of MSCO to violate the constitutional rights of Latinos, but it also makes immigration enforcement much more difficult for ICE in Maricopa county. The loss effectively reduces the number of boots on the ground doing immigration enforcement activities in Maricopa. it also gives Arpaio a fairly effective propaganda weapon in his claim that the Obama Administration is attempting to put MSCO out of the immigration enforcement business. The action further feeds into the paranoia and anger generated amongst Arpaio's supporters around the State by the Administration's ongoing effort to enjoin enforcement of SB1070.
Loss of access to immigration information could be only the tip of the enforcement spear; the MSCO and its jail facilities recieve millions in federal assistance and grants. That funding could ultimately be in jeopardy. Loss of those funds could sharply increase the cost of MSCO jails and programs to Maricopa residents.
Fines and penalties for non-compliance or contempt could ultimately be levied agains MSCO by the federal courts if Arpaio refuses to comply with court orders. Those costs would also ultimately be passed on to Maricopa taxpayers.
I don't know if it would be possible to hold Arpaio personally liable in any way, he likely enjoys at least some limited immunity as an elected official for his actions and those of his agency. It is possible that Arpaio might ultimately end up with some personal legal liability.
It seems likely that should Arpiao decide to pick a public fight with the CRD, there will be much less incentive for the CRD to keep its investigative findings private, as is generally done as a term of a consent decree. Should flurries of public records start coming out of the CRD regarding the violations it found, you might expect to see a lot of private section 1983 civil rights lawsuits filed on the basis of those documents and testimony.
14141 does not give a private right of action (only the DOJ may sue), but if the DOJ's investigations start producing documentation of violations that plaintiffs can get a hold of, it could produce a tidal wave of 1983 private civil rights violation litigation, which the County would be on the hook for, and which would pubicize much of the worst behavior of the MSCO under Arpaio. It is also not unknown for even elected officials to be hit with personal liability in some 1983 actions. This might be one way more than just Arpaio's political hide could be put into play by his intransigence.
What should we expect from Arpaio's camp in terms of political ploys?
We are already seeing the outlines of Arpaio's political defense. It is a mainly an aggressive offense.
In the short term at least it seems that Arpaio has decided that resistance and push-back are the stategy he wants to pursue regarding the civil rights violations against Latinos. First, he alleges that he is being persecuted for political reasons: pick you favorite flavor- Obama's presidential campaign's desire to court the Latino vote by attacking him, and/or AG Holder chumming the waters to cover the smell from the Fast and Furious scandal Arpaio's allies are out establishing these themes on the nets and all over FOX news.
The one area in which Arpaio seems to be pursuing a conciliatory line is his department's failure to adequately investigate hundreds of sex crimes. Arpaio has apologized publicly and vowed reform, including hiring an outside expert to oversee training and implementation of reforms.
I have not yet seen anything along this vein, but given the deeply racist views of Arpaio and many of his supporters, there is an obvious line of attack: Perez, the head of CRD, is Latino. I don't think will be a public ploy, but I am confident that it will play some part in Arpaio's more sotto voce propaganda campaign.
All of these counter-attacks are transparently false, given the long term nature of the investigation against MSCO and the well-supported findings (which Arpaio had best pray the CRD does not decide to further substantiate by releasing any raw data from its investigations), but they have propagandistic value and credibility to those whom Arpaio is appealing to.
It is unsurprising that Arpaio, faced with evidence of his mismanagement and the culture of bias he has created in his 20 years as Sheriff, would decide to double-down on further divisive and corrosive politics rather than focus on serving the people of Maricopa more effectively. After all, that is the modus operandi Arizonans have come to expect from a sadly dominant faction of the State GOP, which relies on demagoguery of immigration and race-baiting Latinos to maintain its power and distract from their incompetence and failures.
Crazy Uncle Joe Arpaio, the self-proclaimed "America's toughest sheriff" (the guy whines like a crybaby anytime he is criticized, how tough is that?) has had a very bad year heading into the 2012 election cycle.
"Simply screwing up in your job doesn't create criminal liability," said Maricopa Couty Attorney Bill Montgomery, adding he would not "join the chorus" calling for Arpaio's resignation.
Montgomery said it is not his call to hold Arpaio accountable for the bungled cases, but instead is up to voters in 2012.
No, but it does mean that you should resign or be fired for neglect of duties or utter incompetence. That's a real vote of confidence there from the County Attorney, by the way. With friends like these...
Federal authorities say a civil rights investigation of the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office has found some of the most egregious racial profiling in the country ever.
The three-year investigation found reasonable cause to believe that sheriff’s deputies racially profiled Latino drivers, illegally arrested and detained Latinos, retaliated against critics of Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s policies, and discriminated against inmates who don’t speak English by punishing them and denying them critical services.
Assistant Attorney General Thomas Perez, who heads the Department of Justice Civil Rights Division, said investigators pored through tens of thousands of pages of documents, interviewed Arpaio and his command staff, interviewed dozens of deputies, staff and inmates and statisticians and experts in racial profiling and police practices.
One expert, who the Department of Justice refused to name, did a statistical analysis of traffic stops and found that Latino drivers were between 4 and 9 times more likely to be stopped than non-Latino drivers.
“Overall, the expert concluded that his case involves the most egregious racial profiling in the United States that he has ever personally seen in the course of his work, observed in litigation, or reviewed in professional literature,” Perez said.
Perez said the next step is to seek a court-enforceable agreement to implement a corrective plan of action that would have oversight by a judge.
Perez said the department is giving the Sheriff’s Office 60 days to come up with a solution or face litigation and put millions of dollars in federal funding at risk.
The federal government is also investigating the Sheriff’s Office on allegations it abused its power in investigations of Maricopa County officials over the years, but the results of that investigation aren’t expected to be announced at the press conference.
The Justice Department's conclusions in the civil probe mark the federal government's harshest rebuke of a national political fixture who has risen to prominence for his immigration crackdowns and became coveted endorsement among candidates in the GOP presidential field.
Apart from the civil rights probe, a federal grand jury also has been investigating Arpaio's office on criminal abuse-of-power allegations since at least December 2009 and is specifically examining the investigative work of the sheriff's anti-public corruption squad.
The civil rights report said federal authorities will continue to investigate complaints of deputies using excessive force against Latinos, whether the sheriff's office failed to provide adequately police services in Hispanic communities and a large number of sex-crimes cases that were assigned to the agency but weren't followed up on or investigated at all.
* * *
"Arpaio's own actions have helped nurture MCSO's culture of bias," wrote Thomas Perez, who heads the Justice Department's civil rights division, adding that the sheriff frequently gave such racially charged letters to some of his top aides and saved them in his own files."
MCSO is broken in a number of critical respects. The problems are deeply rooted in MCSO's culture," he said Thursday.The Justice Department's expert on measuring racial profiling said it's the most egregious case of racial profiling in the nation that he has seen or reviewed in professional literature, Perez said.
* * *
The report will require Arpaio to set up effective policies against discrimination, improve training and make other changes that would be monitored for compliance by a judge. Arpaio faces a Jan. 4 deadline for saying whether he wants to work out an agreement. If not, the federal government will sue him and let a judge decide the complaint.
* * *
The report also said he and some top staffers tried to silence people who have spoken out against the sheriff's office by arresting people without cause, filing meritless lawsuits against opponents and starting investigations of critics.
One example cited by the Justice Department is former top Arpaio aide David Hendershott, who filed bar complaints against attorneys critical of the agency along with bringing judicial complaints against judges who were at odds with the sheriff. All complaints were dismissed.
The anti-corruption squad's cases against two county officials and a judge collapsed in court before going to trial and have been criticized by politicians at odds with the sheriff as trumped up. Arpaio has defended the investigations as a valid attempt at rooting out corruption in county government.
* * *
The Justice Department said it hadn't yet established a pattern of alleged wrongdoing by the sheriff's office in the three areas where they will continue to investigation: complaints of excessive force against Latinos, botched sex-crimes cases and immigration efforts that have hurt the agency's trust with the Hispanic community.Federal authorities will continue to investigate whether the sheriff's office has limited the willingness of witnesses and victims to report crimes or talk to Arpaio's office.
Crazy Uncle Joe Arpaio is a buffoon who gives professional law enforcement officers a bad name. He has got to go for the sake of the MCSO. If he will not do the honorable thing and resign, then Maricopa County voters must turn him out of office for his demonstrated incompetence and abuses of power. If Maricopa County voters fail to toss him out of office, it will say more about their lack of character and judgment than it will about Crazy Uncle Joe Arpaio's lack of character and judgment.
Russell Pearce Uses the End of 287g Program to Fundraise for BAN... Surprise!
By Michael Bryan
Not.
What Pearce fails to mention is that DHS is also rolling out a new program, Secure Communities, which accomplishes the same immigration status checks on all persons booked in local jails across 15,000 jurisdiction in 44 states (whereas 287(g) is only in about 60 jurisdictions), without the liability and constitutional violations created by unleashing xenophobic hate-baters like Sheriff Joe Arpaio on an innocent public.
Let's have a look at Pearce's fundraising pitch:
Continue reading "Russell Pearce Uses the End of 287g Program to Fundraise for BAN... Surprise!" »