DOJ Investigation of Sheriff Arpaio: Napolitano’s Payback to Left wing contributors


Follow the money. If you pore over Napolitano’s last campaign finance reports, you will find a significant amount of money from illegal immigrant sympathizers, and probably even fundraisers thrown by them. No doubt the powerful illegal immigrant lobby pulled some strings to get Napolitano the DHS nomination – notice she was Obama’s first choice and early on. Now, it’s payback time. She’s said publicly since taking office as Homeland Secretary that she’s suspicious of Sheriff Arpaio violating civil rights. Working with the pro-illegal immigrant groups, she has put pressure on the Department of Justice to launch an investigation.

All for what? The politically correct charge of racial profiling. What a waste of tax dollars. It’s not possible to extricate the fact that illegal immigrants are mostly brown-skinned Hispanics from Mexico and Central America. But since illegal immigrants are responsible for a significant amount of crime, in order to reduce crime rates, it makes sense to reduce their numbers. What is the Sheriff supposed to do, just ignore illegal immigrants in order to avoid racial profiling charges? Give them extra special treatment above Americans?

The Sheriff also goes on raids of “deadbeat dads” every Mother’s Day. Some of us disagree with those kinds of raids, but do we ask for DOJ investigations into them? Of course not. The solution is to vote him out of office if you don’t like his methods. This is not going to happen, because he’s the most popular Sheriff in America, and the vast majority of his methods are immensely successful. Some want to make his office a non-elected position, appointed by county supervisors, because they know he’s wildly popular with the people and they can never defeat him at the ballot box – they want to defeat the will of the people. This is also a stupid idea because who says the appointment process will produce anyone better – instead of being accountable to the people, the Sheriff will be accountable – and under the influence of – the supervisors who appointed him.

When you have corrupt groups like ACORN protesting outside of Arpaio’s office – probably using paid protesters thanks to the millions ACORN received from the stimulus bill – you know the accusations are sketchy. Long before ACORN’s crimes went public nationally, it already had a reputation as the most corrupt voting registration organization in Arizona.

We’re in for a scary era under President Obama. Expect to see expensive, lengthy investigations for racial profiling that ultimately go nowhere pop up all around the country as liberal political correctness runs unchecked with the Democrats in control of the Executive and Congressional branches. We predict this “investigation” of Arpaio will drag out until the next administration, when it will be quietly dismissed.

Sheriff Arpaio “endorsed” Napolitano in a close race for governor a few years ago, running a political ad praising her a few days before the election. Interesting how Napolitano treats her friends.


Comments

  1. Now the House, led by John Conyers, is investigating Arpaio. Conyers was named the 11th most corrupt politician in Washington in 2006 by Judicial Watch.

    1. Rep. John Conyers (D-MI) – According to complaints released by the House Ethics Committee recently, aides to Representative John Conyers (D-MI) alleged their former boss repeatedly violated House ethics rules, forcing them to serve as his personal servants, valets, and as campaign staff while on the government payroll.

  2. We’re in for a scary era under Joe Arpaio and Andrew Thomas. Expect to see expensive, lengthy investigations for everything lame under the sun that ultimately go nowhere pop up all around the county as corrupt power grabbing runs unchecked with these two in control of Law Enforcement and Prosecution. We predict this “investigation” of those who question then will drag out until the next popular target, when it will be quietly dismissed.

  3. Roger,

    You sound like a friend of supervisor Don Stapley, who has been indicted for criminal behavior he’d been doing since the 1980’s, that everyone knew about but looked the other way all these years. Finally, even though he’s a Republican, people finally quit looking the other way and asked the Sheriff to investigate him. Naturally Stapley and his cronies on the board of supervisors are making a public outcry over the prosecution, trying to confuse people into thinking it’s a county feud instead of what it really is – prosecuting a high-level official for criminal acts.

    We’ve seen this happen over and over again – someone gets caught, and goes to the media with a disinformation campaign trying to blame the prosecutor and police in order to get out of punishment. Since the media doesn’t like Sheriff Arpaio or prosecutor Thomas they play it up. It’s despicable. I hope he gets sent away for years. Most of us little people play by the rules and we’re never rewarded with $100k black shiny beamers like the one he drives.

  4. Tucson Vice says

    Racial profiling is unconstitutional. I guess we won’t let that get in the way.

    What tripe.

  5. Funny how the Mexican drug cartels have made the border the most dangerous area of the world after Pakistan, according to the feds, yet Arpaio is now being investigated for trying to crack down on the border problem. Seems like a huge waste of money on conflicting fed interests.

  6. Conservative says

    Tucson Vice: the problem with racial profiling is it’s easy to claim that it’s occurring because illegal immigrants are brown-skinned. I have friends who work for the Sheriff and they can attest to the fact there is no racial profiling and the Sheriff doesn’t have a racist bone in his body. The investigation is being instigated in an attempt to stop him from arresting illegal immigrants. Cuz they can’t beat him at th polls, they’re going for the murky constitutional rights violations accusations which are difficult to fight. Will also take up a lot of his time dealing with the investigation which will hamper him and slow him down. Really nasty politics.

  7. ” I have friends who work for the Sheriff and they can attest to the fact there is no racial profiling and the Sheriff doesn’t have a racist bone in his body.”

    Haha, what convincing testimonials. Biased much?

  8. Tim, have you ever looked at the ethnic composition of the employee’s at Sheriff’s Office? I would estimate that close to 1/2 of the Sheriff’s employees are Hispanic. If the Sheriff is racist, then why do so many Hispanics choose to work for him? Because THEY know him, THEY work around him, and THEY know better than the biased liberal media and pro-illegal immigrant lobbies that he’s NOT racist.

  9. There’s an even better article on this topic at Libertys Apothecary – http://libertysapothecary.com/?p=704

  10. Tim St.

    Don’t know Don Stapley and don’t live in his District. I do know the law that was clearly written and how Thomas has twisted it to his liking. You believe what you what out of blow hole and I’ll stick to the truth.
    Want to talk about corruption, bribery etc. How about double paying your closest friend who know all of your secrets. Send them on nice vacations to Honduras while you’re at it. Sadly, that’s all being done on our dime.

  11. Methinks the whole you-must-be-racist-because-you’re-against-illegal-immigration thing is getting way, way too old.

    Show me an illegal immigrant from Norway in Arizona, and I’ll be the first in line to demand deportation.

  12. Lets all remember who gave the big endorsement to Napolitano….Yup our famous Sheriff Joe.

  13. Tucson Vice says

    You don’t have to be a racist to be guilty of racial profiling. It is still unconstitutional, with or without racism. The problem comes when people are being detained or pulled over because of how they look and before having given the police any legal reason to believe they have done anything wrong. It constitutes among other things, an illegal search.

    Roger,

    Napolitano’s victories were not contingent upon his support. She could just as easily have won without him. He probably did this for his own benefit, not hers. Lets not pretend that he had anything to do with her successes.

  14. James Davidson says

    “Sheriff Arpaio “endorsed” Napolitano in a close race for governor a few years ago, running a political ad praising her a few days before the election. Interesting how Napolitano treats her friends.”

    Arpaio was never her friend. When a Judas sells out, the buyer has nothing but contempt for the Judas. The old Judas sold himself to Napolitano, and she washed her hands of him when she got through using the Old Judas. Boo Hoo. He’s crying now like a little girl.

  15. “The problem comes when people are being detained or pulled over because of how they look and before having given the police any legal reason to believe they have done anything wrong.”

    And, you have yet to prove that that’s what’s happening. To assume that’s what is going on also violates the Constitution – something about burden of proof being on the accuser…

    All I see day after day in the papers, online, and elsewhere, are people who are screaming that we “must be racist, since all the focus is on brown-skinned people.”

    And, as I say, it’s getting old.

  16. I keep reading on conservative sites about the millions (it was billions on Intellectual Conservative) that ACORN has been provided by the federal government. Can anyone provide any source documentation? Thanks.

  17. Tucson Vice says

    I’m not worried about proving anything to you…proof usually comes in the form of evidence and fact and reason…all things that, time and again, you folks have proven unable to do deal with.

    Your suggestion that a personal assumption violates the constitution is fantastic. Call me crazy but I don’t think that applies to public debate. I could accuse you of being a gay abortionist right now, and constitutionally, I wouldn’t have to prove a thing. If this standard were applied to normal conversation and print media, than the National enquirer, Sonoran Alliance and every other tabloid out there would be out of business. That, though, is a whole different can of worms.

    Anyway, as I said before, I don’t think that racial profiling makes someone a racist. It simply isn’t constitutional, even if the sheriff’s office finds it an easier way of catching criminals.

  18. If you have credible evidence that Secretary Napolitano has done something illegal, you should take that to the Maricopa County Attorney’s office so an investigation can begin.

  19. “…proof usually comes in the form of evidence and fact and reason…”

    You refuse to produce ANY evidence that racial profiling is occuring as a matter of policy, and then go on to say that I ignore the evidence.

    And you call ME ‘fantastic’!

Leave a Reply