Skip to comments.SHERIFF ARPAIO MEETS TODAY’S D.O.J. DEADLINE (PRESS RELEASE 1/4/12)
Posted on 01/12/2012 3:52:13 PM PST by Tigen
SHERIFF ARPAIO MEETS TODAYS 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 Sheriffs Office will continue to cooperate with the federal governments 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 DOJs 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 todays letter, was a political sideshow that was both unfortunate and misleading and as such, prompted an apology to the Sheriffs Office by the second in command of the Department of Justices 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 Arpaios office to provide documents. Despite this, the Maricopa County Sheriffs Office and Sheriff Arpaio remain ready and willing to engage in constructive dialogue with federal officials once the Sheriffs 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 Sheriffs 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 Arpaios 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 Sheriffs Office. But in the final analysis, as Sheriff of this county, I will not tolerate being micromanaged by Washington, DC, Arpaio says.
Get ‘em, Joe.
Has Holder ever made an appearance in Phoenix?
I’d love to see Sheriff Joe arrest him and throw in the slammer.
Sic em Joe!
Why can't we have him as a Presidential candidate?
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."
Whatya going to do Holder/Obama?
Thank you for the source document that explains a lot of what is happening. Everyone should take the time to read it.
Civil rights are for the few in power - we are an African Dictatorship or a Banana Republic the way these public servants abuse their power.
Now that they are in power, ITS PAYBACK TIME! The law be damned.
Sheriff Joe ought to be running the DOJ, at least he’d maintain the justice and balance of law as constructed in the constitution.
I thought of one way I might consider voting for Romney.
I think Holder and Zer0 have bitten off more than they can chew here, they can't get much of anything through the courts before the election without cooperation, but Republicans and alternative media can trumpet Justice Dept obstruction, non transparency and Justice Dept criminal activity daily.
What the DOJ did with their unsubstantiated pronouncements was probably slander and, to the extent that it could be construed as a threat, would be a felony by virtue of threatening to prosecute in exchange for quid pro quo actions; i.e., backing off the Obama eligibility investigation.
Of course, just like Gore when he was caught campaigning from his VP office, the response would be “there is no controlling legal authority”. Perhaps Joe could bring charges of extortion in State court?!
Thanks for posting the article. It was by far the most positive and encouraging (to a conservative) article I’ve seen today. Nearly everything else had to do with political in-fighting.
If he's going to do anything other than be the Maricopa cty sheriff I would rather he gave seminars across the country on how to be a county sheriff.
Mentorship would be a good thing.
Here is another good sheriff who is doing the education thing...
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.