Replies

Oh they got Arpaio cold in the first and second paragraphs according to the clowns at AZ Central Committee! First para..

" Federal investigators concluded there was sufficient evidence to bring charges against public officials during their years-long abuse-of-power investigation targeting Maricopa County law-enforcement agencies"

Then it all falls apart in the third paragraph as we get this!

"Ultimately, federal prosecutors in August 2012 closed the three-year FBI criminal investigation and grand-jury probe into Sheriff Joe Arpaio, former County Attorney Andrew Thomas and their top deputies, saying there would be no indictments due to a lack of evidence or an insurmountable burden of proof."

What's that psycho term? Oh yes, Cognitive dissonance!

Ha ha! Nice. I insulted the authors by mentioning that one of them might be Jamese, but your post caused me to realize 'Non-Sequitur' is the more fitting former-freeper monicker.

That the feds "concluded there was sufficient evidence" was information the authors discovered by painstakingly removing the blackout markings. To do so they had to naturally first scan the document, but when viewing the digital copy they were surprised to discover that there were not suddenly a plethora of layers that could be easily dragged around to reveal the content that was originally hidden underneath the heavy black strokes. Thus, they were forced to take an exacto knife to the computer monitor in order to separate the redaction bars from the text beneath them. It just so happens that when clearing away the marring blotches from the phrase . . .

"was in sufficient evidence"

. . . there was a remnant of residue apparently obscuring a couple characters at the beginning of the word "sufficient"; however realizing that the shielded characters were unlikely to shed further light on the matter, they dropped the razor and recorded the sentence as well as they could.