Image 01 Image 03

Obama DOJ Pursuing Criminal Charges Against Sheriff Joe Arpaio

Obama DOJ Pursuing Criminal Charges Against Sheriff Joe Arpaio

They finally found someone they want to prosecute.

On the day before early voting began in Arizona, Obama’s Department of Justice decided to pursue charges against Sheriff Joe Arpaio, a widely known opponent of illegal immigration.

This is nothing short of stunning.

The Associated Press reports, via NBC News:

Feds to Pursue Contempt Charges Against Sheriff Joe Arpaio

Prosecutors said Tuesday they will charge Sheriff Joe Arpaio with criminal contempt-of-court for defying a judge’s orders to end his signature immigration patrols in Arizona, exposing the 84-year-old lawman to the possibility of jail time and clouding his political future as he seeks a seventh term.

The announcement in federal court sets in motion criminal proceedings against the sheriff less than a month before Election Day and comes as he has taken on a prominent role on the national political stage in 2016, appearing alongside Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump on several occasions.

Arpaio has acknowledged violating the order to stop the immigration patrols but insists his disobedience wasn’t intentional.

U.S. District Judge Murray Snow previously recommended criminal contempt charges against Arpaio but left it up to federal prosecutors to actually bring the case.

Prosecutor John Keller said in court that the government will bring a misdemeanor contempt charge, with the next step being a court filing, possibly in the next day, that’s akin to a criminal complaint.

Arpaio could face up to six months in jail if convicted of misdemeanor contempt.

The best part of the report comes at the end…

“No one is above the law, and today’s announcement in court epitomizes the strength of the judicial system,” Democratic opponent Paul Penzone said.

No one is above the law? You could’ve fooled us.

Here’s a video report from ABC 15 News in Arizona:

Sean Davis of The Federalist noted the irony on Twitter:

The politicization of our federal government is now complete and the message being sent is loud and clear. Anyone who’s part of the leftist coalition gets a pass. Anyone who isn’t is fair game.

Featured image via YouTube.


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


Let’s see, if you break the law, multiple laws, multiple times, “no reasonable prosecution”
If you try to enforce existing laws you ARE prosecuted
We are so screwed

    Dejectedhead in reply to Lewfarge. | October 12, 2016 at 12:08 pm

    That’s been my take as well. Plus the selective prosecution. Fast and Furious, swept under the rug. Benghazi? Disregard. Emailgate? Nothing to see here. Enforcement of immigration laws? You get the full force of the DoJ and a spotlight on anything you do.

Well, if anyone has any remaining doubts as to whether the injustice department is a rigged entity, all of that doubt should now be removed.

Holder, Lynch, Obama and Comey… All co-conspirators that deserve prosecution for failing to do the people’s business PERIOD!

“This is nothing short of stunning.”

Nonsense, Alister. There’s NOTHING “stunning” about this.

Sheriff Joe is completely in control of this, and he’s forcing the issue.

He’s wrong. The judge is right. Obey the law, Joe.

    Icepilot in reply to Ragspierre. | October 12, 2016 at 11:54 am

    “Sheriff Joe is completely in control of this, and he’s forcing the issue. Obey the law, Joe.”
    You say that as if the Judge’s opinion makes Sheriff Joe guilty – not so. And “control” includes the right to a jury, which will never convict.

      Ragspierre in reply to Icepilot. | October 12, 2016 at 12:02 pm

      No. You’re just as wrong as you can be.

      There is no “guilt” or “innocence” here, and this will never come before a jury.

      Contempt is very cut-and-dried, and you don’t just trip into contempt of court. Sheriff Joe has had AMPLE opportunitIES to comply with a court’s order here and all kinds of due process. He’s defied the court.

      He’s wrong to do that, unless his position is one of civil disobedience, which would require him (IMNHO) to resign his office. Outside that, he’s just being a lawless prick.

Humphrey's Executor | October 12, 2016 at 10:18 am

Hillary lied under oath to congress, a crime the FBI didn’t look into because congress didn’t say the magic words, “pretty please with sugar on top.” (Recall, for example, she testified that her attorneys had read every e-mail in screening them for official/classified records when in fact they did not, as the FBI concluded).

Congress has since made the formal request and the FBI has all the info, so what’s the status of that?

and clouding his political future

NBC might think so. Anybody else, maybe not so much.

“Arpaio has acknowledged violating the order to stop the immigration patrols but insists his disobedience wasn’t intentional…”

One must also remember that coming across the borders without permission is a crime. Although the judge has forbidden the law enforcement officer from pursuing this crime, these illegal immigrants frequently carry drugs for the organization which organizes the northward trip (also a crime), and quite often criminal aliens who have been deported are in the group (also a crime).

So just because a judge has decided not to enforce some laws, doesn’t make these people saints.

I know it’s wrong, but I have zero sympathy for this jackass. Make him wear pink and sleep in a tent in the desert for all I care.

Whats this guys crime? Enforcing the law?

You know what would have been sweet, sweet irony? If the protesters had been targeted and all the illegal aliens arrested and deported! 🙂


Arpaio’s poll numbers will go up and the election is over…Arpaio wins!

Sheriffs are a major obstacle to federal attempts to centralize law enforcement. I’ll be sending another 100 bucks to Joe.

The US Constitution grants limited police powers to the federal government. Sheriffs, on the other hand, are elected by the citizens of their county and have very broad police powers.

While federal laws supersede state and local laws, the federal government does not supersede state and local law enforcement.

In this case, the federal government has chosen to ignore the law and is requiring the local law enforcement to do the same.

The DOJ’s position is that federal immigration law supersedes Arizona law and that the option to ignore the law resides only with the federal government.

This is how men are welcomed to share lockers, showers and bathrooms with little girls.

Obama is Pro-Choice. He wants Immigration reform (e.g. refugee crises, mass exodus). Unfortunately, there is a left, right, center nexus that either agrees with him or avoids Emigration reform.

Let me get this straight. Sheriff Joe enforces our national immigration law with immigration patrols and is going to get charged.

Crooked Hillary breaks law about guarding classified information and she is given a get out of jail pass from the Obama administration.


    Ragspierre in reply to Common Sense. | October 12, 2016 at 2:22 pm

    No. Your usual propaganda formulation.

    Sheriff Joe is under a court order to do or refrain from doing WHAT-THE-FLUCK-EVER.

    Sheriff Joe…who COULD appeal that order…DEFIES it instead.

    Not a little, or once. REPEATEDLY. After being warned by the judge before which he appears.

    So, no, you lying…well, you know…this is NOT about “enforcing the law”.

    This is about defying the law. Acting lawlessly. Like an outlaw.

    And Sheriff Joe…who I’ve defended here betimes…needs to have his tail dragged through a knothole.

      gospace in reply to Ragspierre. | October 12, 2016 at 3:25 pm

      And where exactly do judges get the power to order law enforcement to not enforce the law? They don’t.

        Ragspierre in reply to gospace. | October 12, 2016 at 3:34 pm

        You’ll want to research that a LOT better, since you don’t know WTF you’re talking about.

        Not in general, and not in this instance.

      Common Sense in reply to Ragspierre. | October 12, 2016 at 3:34 pm

      The perfect post from
      gospace | October 12, 2016 at 3:23 pm

      Little hint: He’s in contempt of court for enforcing the law, written law, passed by legislatures, something a sheriff is elected BY THE PEOPLE to do.

      And a judge had found that his enforcement of the law is illegal.

        Ragspierre in reply to Common Sense. | October 12, 2016 at 3:49 pm

        I’ll try again for the slow and the liars here…

        No. He was not in contempt for ‘enforcing the law’.

        Exactly the opposite. Sheriff Joe was/is in contempt for NOT abiding by the law.

        Again, for the slow and liars, he COULD appeal. Maybe he even IS appealing, since I don’t pretend to know the precise details of this case (and neither do any of the morons sticking up for Joe…that have posted anything here, at least). But during the pendency of any appeal, he is duty-bound to obey the law as set out by the court.

    Maybe we could have Joe arrest obama?

    The Court was first apprised by the Government of the violations of its injunction on May 7, 2015. It admitted that it violated this Court’s injunction on at least 2,000 occasions—violations which have not yet been fixed. This Court has expressed its willingness to believe that these actions were accidental and not done purposefully to violate this Court’s order. Nevertheless, it is shocked and surprised at the cavalier attitude the Government has taken with regard to its “efforts” to rectify this situation.The Government promised this Court on May 7, 2015, that “immediate steps” were being taken to remedy the violations of the injunction. Yet, as of June 23, 2015—some six weeks after making that representation—the situation had not been rectified. With that in mind, the Court hereby sets a hearing for August 19, 2015, at 10:00 a.m. Each individual Defendant must attend and be prepared to show why he or she should not be held in contempt of Court. In addition to the individual Defendants, the Government shall bring all relevant witnesses on this topic as theCourt will not continue this matter to a later date. The Government has conceded that it has directlyviolated this Court’s Order in its May 7, 2015 Advisory, yet, as of today, two months have passed since the Advisory and it has not remediated its own violative behavior. That is unacceptable and,as far as the Government’s attorneys are concerned, completely unprofessional. To be clear, thisCourt expects the Government to be in full compliance with this Court’s injunction. Complianceas to just those aliens living in the Plaintiff States is not full compliance.

Imagine that Rags, someone in law enforcement (that should be enough of a clue even for you) ENFORCING the law. In this case immigration law.

This Sherif guy sounds like a right trouble maker doesn’t he. We can’t have people running around enforcing the law now can we??

    Ragspierre in reply to mailman. | October 12, 2016 at 4:14 pm

    Golly, lapdog, I think you’ll find that MOST law ENFORCEMENT officers…you know…ENFORCE the law.

    What very, very few of them do is go out and defy a court order.

    And, what you’ll ALSO find, WHEN they do, they’re found in contempt.

    Because they’re BREAKING the law they’re sworn to uphold.


      mailman in reply to Ragspierre. | October 12, 2016 at 5:39 pm

      Defying a court order to stop enforcing the law. Hahahahahhahaa…right…the god damn criminal should be locked up immediately!!! 🙂

buckeyeminuteman | October 12, 2016 at 3:51 pm

The sheriff is being arrested for refusing to refuse to follow the law. This is our Paul Revere moment. He just rode past our house and told us the British are coming. We now have two choices; to either do something about it or watch them come to pillage and take back our freedom. Voting to end the corruption in DC isn’t necessarily the only thing left we can do…

OK, having read more into this case, there’s some backing up I need to do.

First, normally contempt is a pure equitable remedy resting solely with the court itself. A court has “plenary power” (i.e., LOTS of power) to enforce it’s orders.

Second, the court in this case declined to exert that power, though it sure could have. Instead, it left the matter some weeks ago with the AG.

What’s happened here is that the AG has, or will, charge Joe with at least a count of criminal contempt, which is a LEGAL remedy, and it will involve a trial and a jury.

There may also be an obstruction of justice charge for ol’ Joe’s refusal to hand over tons of evidence in violation of the law.

Ol’ Joe appears to have been practicing gangsta government. Some of you just favor this kind of gangster over others. I don’t.

    mailman in reply to Ragspierre. | October 12, 2016 at 5:41 pm

    Exactly…HAD he done this in cahoots with hiLIARy he would be safe. After all, it all comes down to intent doesn’t it? Did he intend to purposely break the law or did he merely break the law by accent. After all, no reasonable prosecutor would surely try him would they?

Look, it’s no so ‘stunning.’ This is how fascists do it.

Though Eric Holder was bad? Loretta Lynch is the modern Roland Freisler:

If Hillary Clinton wins the presidency, get used to the idea of the United States breaking apart, or a civil war. Because one of those two scenarios will be coming.

Of course they are…he’s in.fected with an innate bias…because he’s white

Connivin Caniff | October 13, 2016 at 7:04 am

Time for widespread juror nullification.

President Trump will pardon Sheriff Arpaio. Then Arpaio will present all of his evidence regarding obama’s forged birth certificate to a Grand Jury. We shall see who has the last laugh…