Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Debates Forum

Debates Forum

  1. Subscriber FMF
    a.k.a. John W Booth
    02 Mar '12 05:22 / 1 edit
    Will courting Tea Party favour give Arpaio's own legal problems some post-fact status?

    Will allegations of abuse of power, illegal racial profiling and revelations showing the sheriff failed in his duty to tackle sex-crimes, end up being framed as state-sponsored persecution of someone willing to "speak truth to power"?
  2. Subscriber kmax87
    You've got Kevin
    02 Mar '12 22:04
    Originally posted by FMF
    Will courting Tea Party favour give Arpaio's own legal problems some post-fact status?

    Will allegations of abuse of power, illegal racial profiling and revelations showing the sheriff failed in his duty to tackle sex-crimes, end up being framed as state-sponsored persecution of someone willing to "speak truth to power"?
    Given that Trump already gave up on the birther issue, Joe seems a little late and as one columnist recently mentioned, he is in a nose dive to irrelevance, taking the tattered Tea Party/GOP reputation on this issue with him.

    But he sounds a true believer, with every evidence that points to his fantasy dismissed as nothing more than further proof of the scale of conspiracy that is being mounted against the American peoples to rob them of their freedoms.

    Should the Democratic party dignify his assertions with a response. No. Why would you give the lunatic fringe oxygen.


    At the end of the day Joe's record as Sheriff is damning enough. Profiling of Latinos, Tent prisons, you would have to be blind not to see his birthing efforts as no more than a smokescreen to get government off his back for his years of malfaesance.
  3. Standard member bill718
    Enigma
    02 Mar '12 22:25
    Originally posted by FMF
    Will courting Tea Party favour give Arpaio's own legal problems some post-fact status?

    Will allegations of abuse of power, illegal racial profiling and revelations showing the sheriff failed in his duty to tackle sex-crimes, end up being framed as state-sponsored persecution of someone willing to "speak truth to power"?
    Frankly I think this stuff will blow over. It's typical election year trash talk. Both sides do it.
  4. 03 Mar '12 00:29
    Living here in Az I will be SO happy when that clown fades into the sunset. What a bigot. He's cost Maricopa Cnty endless millions in lawsuits.
  5. 03 Mar '12 12:26
    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, comprised of former law enforcement officers and lawyers with law enforcement experience, has interviewed dozens of witnesses and examined hundreds of documents. It also has taken numerous sworn statements from witnesses around the world.

    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.

    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.

    Among the evidence released at the press conference are five videos – which can be seen at the end of this article – to demonstrate why the Obama long-form birth certificate is suspected to be a computer-generated forgery.

    The videos consist of step-by-step computer demonstrations using a control document. They display the testing used by the investigators to examine various claims made by supporters of the April 27 document.

    The investigators contend the videos illustrate their conclusion that the features and anomalies observed on the Obama long-form birth certificate were inconsistent with features produced when a paper document is scanned, even if the scan is enhanced by Optical Character Recognition, OCR, and optimized.

    Additionally, the posse says, the videos demonstrate that the Hawaii Department of Health Registrar’s name stamp and the registrar’s date stamp were computer-generated images imported into an electronic document, as opposed to rubber stamp imprints inked by hand or machine onto a paper document.

    “That we were able to cast reasonable suspicions on the authenticity of the registrar stamps was especially disturbing, since these stamp imprints are designed to provide government authentication to the document itself,” Zullo said
    emphasizing that if the registrar stamps are forgeries, the document itself is likely a forgery.

    The investigators also chronicled a series of allegedly inconsistent and misleading representations that various Hawaii government officials have made over the past five years regarding any original birth records held by the Hawaii Department of Health.

    In addition, investigators say they have developed credible evidence that President Obama’s Selective Service card was a forgery, based on an examination of the postal date stamp on the document. Also, records of Immigration and Naturalization Service cards filled out by passengers arriving on international flights originating outside the United States in the month of August 1961, examined at the National Archives in Washington, D.C., are missing records for the week of President Obama’s birth.

    http://www.wnd.com/2012/03/sheriff-joes-posse-probable-cause-obama-certificate-a-fraud/
  6. Subscriber FMF
    a.k.a. John W Booth
    03 Mar '12 12:28
    Originally posted by utherpendragon
    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, comprised of former law enforcement of ...[text shortened]... irth.

    http://www.wnd.com/2012/03/sheriff-joes-posse-probable-cause-obama-certificate-a-fraud/
    Are you yourself a "birther", utherpendragon? I know you're just presenting some details about the news story here, which is good for the thread, but in the past - on this forum - you've stated you're not a "birther", isn't that right?
  7. 03 Mar '12 12:34
    Originally posted by FMF
    Are you yourself a "birther", utherpendragon? I know you're just presenting some details about the news story here, which is good for the thread, but in the past - on this forum - you've stated you're not a "birther", isn't that right?
    That is correct.
  8. Subscriber FMF
    a.k.a. John W Booth
    03 Mar '12 12:37
    Originally posted by utherpendragon
    That is correct.
    What about the OP question? Do you think Arpaio's own legal problems will be helped to any degree - at least in the court of public opinion - by running with the "birther" tactic?
  9. 03 Mar '12 12:48
    Originally posted by FMF
    What about the OP question? Do you think Arpaio's own legal problems will be helped to any degree - at least in the court of public opinion - by running with the "birther" tactic?
    Its hard to say one way or the other. He does appear to have a lot of public support.
  10. Subscriber FMF
    a.k.a. John W Booth
    03 Mar '12 12:57
    Originally posted by utherpendragon
    Its hard to say one way or the other. He does appear to have a lot of public support.
    Do you believe that it would be appropriate for his "public support" to have any bearing on the legal troubles he faces? I know he needs to get elected again, and "public support" is key to that happening - and probably affects his decision making on a range of things - but should "public support" influence investigations into whether he failed in his duties as a sheriff?
  11. 03 Mar '12 13:01
    Originally posted by FMF
    Do you believe that it would be appropriate for his "public support" to have any bearing on the legal troubles he faces? I know he needs to get elected again, and "public support" is key to that happening - and probably affects his decision making on a range of things - but should "public support" influence investigations into whether he failed in his duties as a sheriff?
    Well, thats what the public support is about. That he has not "failed in his duties" as you say, but IS doing his duties and is being attacked by the current administration for political reasons.
  12. Subscriber FMF
    a.k.a. John W Booth
    03 Mar '12 13:07 / 2 edits
    Originally posted by utherpendragon
    Well, thats what the public support is about. That he has not "failed in his duties" as you say, but IS doing his duties and is being attacked by the current administration for political reasons.
    So it was perhaps alright in your mind [please clarify if I'm wrong] that the sheriff neglected proper procedures and follow up in 400 sexual assault cases, if he has "public support" on his side? You think his alleged "duty" to take the "birther" case to court trumps his "duty" [or the failure to do his duty that is being investigated for] towards hundreds and hundreds of sex crime victims in his county?

    edit: horrendous grammar
  13. Subscriber FMF
    a.k.a. John W Booth
    03 Mar '12 13:14
    Originally posted by utherpendragon
    [The sheriff] is being attacked by the current administration for political reasons.
    You are claiming the allegations against Arpaio, and investigations into his conduct, are trumped up and based on "political reasons"?
  14. 03 Mar '12 13:21 / 1 edit
    Is that Eric Holders beef with the sheriff ?
    I thought it was violating the Constitution and federal law by discriminating against Latinos.
  15. Subscriber FMF
    a.k.a. John W Booth
    03 Mar '12 13:27
    Originally posted by utherpendragon
    Is that Eric Holders beef with the sheriff ?
    I thought it was violating the Constitution and federal law by discriminating against Latinos.
    Well I will leave it to you to look into the details of Arpaio's legal problems, that's if you're interested.

    Do you wonder at all if the sheriff being busy creating publicity for the "birthers" might have contributed in any way to his alleged neglect of some of his other responsibilities as sheriff, or might have contributed to some degree to his alleged errors with regard to abuse of power and proper, legal law enforcement in his county?