Reach for the sky, varmint!
Posted on 01/12/2012 3:52:13 PM PST by Tigen
SHERIFF ARPAIO MEETS TODAY’S D.O.J. DEADLINE PROMISES TO CONTINUE FULL COOPERATION WITH INVESTIGATION BUT WILL NOT COWER AT THREAT OF LITIGATION
(Phoenix, AZ) In a letter authorized by Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio, attorneys for the Sheriff tell DOJ officials in no uncertain terms that the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office will continue to cooperate with the federal government’s “racial profiling” investigation. But the letter also states reciprocal transparency is critical and demands full cooperation from the Justice Department to provide, in writing, information and facts which can prove, or disprove, the findings made public in a surprise press conference on December 15, 2011. At that media event, the U.S. Assistant Attorney General of the DOJ’s Civil Rights Division, Thomas Perez, under the supervision of Eric Holder, head of the US Department of Justice, flew to Phoenix to accuse the MCSO of racially profiling Latino drivers and called this action one of the most egregious acts of racial profiling by any law enforcement agency anywhere. That press conference, according to today’s letter, was a political sideshow that was both unfortunate and misleading and as such, prompted an apology to the Sheriff’s Office by the second in command of the Department of Justice’s Civil Rights Division.
“What we want for the Department of Justice to do is play ball,” Sheriff Arpaio said today. “In other words, provide whatever proof they may have to back their findings - proof which, by the way, they have refused to give to us or to the media. And if they cannot prove their findings, which I suspect to be the case, then stop the political posturing,” Arpaio says. The ironic twist is that the federal government now refuses to disclose the information or documents they claim prove their charges. Only a little over a year ago, the DOJ filed a lawsuit compelling Arpaio’s office to provide documents. Despite this, the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office and Sheriff Arpaio remain ready and willing to engage in constructive dialogue with federal officials once the Sheriff’s counsel receives the information requested from the federal government. The Sheriff has asked for a definitive response from the DOJ by January 18th. According to Deputy Director Jack MacIntyre, “The Sheriff is only asking the DOJ for basic justice – which includes the ability to evaluate charges made against us by them and to examine what evidence really exists. The timing of the DOJ report was political, the short response time allotted was unfair and the recruitment of Homeland Security and pro-immigration groups to attack the Sheriff publicly was also prejudicial. They need to better understand what cooperation and working together for the better good entails.” The information being requested of the DOJ will help Sheriff’s officials to determine what changes and remedies, if any, may be necessary. The DOJ report, on its face, cites only a handful of allegations but does not show any system-wide problems. The letter from Arpaio’s attorneys makes a final point very clear to the Justice officials: that litigation is a “foolish choice” and should be avoided. Litigation, the letter states, is too costly, too time consuming and will ultimately end in delaying precisely what the federal government officials say they so desire – reforms and changes in the Sheriff’s Office. “But in the final analysis, as Sheriff of this county, I will not tolerate being micromanaged by Washington, DC,” Arpaio says.
The racist communist base eats it up. It's Obamas red meat.
Reach for the sky, varmint!
“Reach for the sky, varmint!”
Okay, that was an html fail. Back to bootcamp! :(
This is going to far.
Mr. Issa, where are you???
“Without providing such information, the DOJ expects us to proceed in a vacuum and institute requested changes blindly, without considering the facts upon which the DOJ bases its findings.”
Yep, this amounts to “Heel, dog. Do not question your master’s authority!” It’s the same attitude the administration exhibited towards the sheeple while ramming through the highly unpopular and unwanted Obamacare law. Arrogance is way too mild a term to describe this mentality.
Read "Injustice" by J. Christian Adams. We went way beyond "too far" years ago. This is what you get when you "elect" lawlessness: lawlessness.
“There, fixed it for ya, FJ:’
Thanks! Showoff. ;)
Would you mind terribly pm-ing me to let me know what I did wrong?
Old Case Posse.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.