Judge orders civil contempt hearing for Arizona lawman Arpaio

a reply to: Phage

Semantic games are not helpful.

If you don't want to talk about, just don't respond, no harm or foul.

a reply to: greencmp

The phrase you are concerned about did not come from the judge.
It is a contempt of court case. The sheriff was ordered to clean up his act by the judge and he didn't.

www.azcentral.com...

a reply to: Phage

No, it was Snow himself that said that. It looks like this is what prompted Snow to proceed:

And finally, they said, Arpaio could not be accountable for the actions of a "rogue" former deputy who had secretly recorded traffic stops and stashed IDs, driver's licenses and license plates in his home.

It looks like we won't know any of the details about this if it is going to criminal contempt trial.

I still don't see how this could be referred to as "immigration enforcement operations", do you?

a reply to: greencmp

No, it was Snow himself that said that.

Can you prove the quote from him? In the article in the OP it is not included in any direct quotation.

a reply to: Phage

From the OP's link:

In the latest ruling, Snow said attorneys for the Latino drivers had shown "sufficient evidence" to warrant the contempt hearing on a range of grounds, including failing to stop immigration enforcement operations as ordered by the court.

It certainly looks that way to me.

a reply to: greencmp

It certainly looks that way to me.

Right. "Sufficient evidence" is in quotes. That means the judge actually said (or wrote) those words. Not the part that isn't.

originally posted by: RainbowSkye

originally posted by: doompornjunkie

a reply to: buster2010



Wow Buster why don't you tell us how you really feel?



Living in AZ i'm quite happy with Arpaio, prison shouldn't be all sunshine and unicorns. Cages and hard labor for all criminals citizens or not!

Ditto.

Had some friends go to tent city for DUI. It was enough for them to ensure a safe ride home after that.

If jail is miserable.. people won't want to go! Brilliance right?

a reply to: Phage

If this is to be attributed to anyone other than Snow, it would be the author of the article simply paraphrasing a quote.

a reply to: greencmp

Yes. A paraphrase is not a quote. It is an editorialization.

Like I said:

Can you prove the quote from him? In the article in the OP it is not included in any direct quotation.

Everyone knows by now that Holder and Obama have an agenda to use illegals like toilet paper just for votes by pretending to want to help them, and that agenda is in violation of the federal gov's duty to enforce border laws, which would, if enforced, show that illegals aren't going to get a free ride, and Obama can't get free votes for that, so when Arpaio does his job as per the effing laws, in come the retards to point there finger at Joe, and call him a racist.

That is quite clear.

a reply to: NoCorruptionAllowed

so when Arpaio does his job as per the effing laws, in come the retards to point there finger at Joe, and call him a racist.

What part of the law allows for detaining people because they look Mexican?

originally posted by: NoCorruptionAllowed
Everyone knows by now that Holder and Obama have an agenda to use illegals like toilet paper just for votes by pretending to want to help them, and that agenda is in violation of the federal gov's duty to enforce border laws, which would, if enforced, show that illegals aren't going to get a free ride, and Obama can't get free votes for that, so when Arpaio does his job as per the effing laws, in come the retards to point there finger at Joe, and call him a racist.



That is quite clear.

Straight to the point and down to the real agenda

ETA: next time I need someone to just come in and say it like it is, i'll be sending you a PM lol

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: greencmp

Yes. A paraphrase is not a quote. It is an editorialization.

Like I said:

Can you prove the quote from him? In the article in the OP it is not included in any direct quotation.

That would be stretching journalistic flexibility to say the least, the term must have been uttered by Snow.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: thesaneone
I don't live there.
How's Arpaio's system been working out for you? Illegal entries all gone?

I can't say for sure I'm not in Maricopia county but he must be doing something right if he keeps getting re-elected.

a reply to: thesaneone

I can't say for sure I'm not in Maricopia county but he must be doing something right if he keeps getting re-elected.

Obama got re-elected.
Same principle?

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: thesaneone

I can't say for sure I'm not in Maricopia county but he must be doing something right if he keeps getting re-elected.

Obama got re-elected.
Same principle?

Six times?
Now your just reaching.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: thesaneone

I can't say for sure I'm not in Maricopia county but he must be doing something right if he keeps getting re-elected.

Obama got re-elected.

Same principle?

Dems got their a$$e$ handed to them in midterms.
Same principal?

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: greencmp

Yes. A paraphrase is not a quote. It is an editorialization.

Like I said:

Can you prove the quote from him? In the article in the OP it is not included in any direct quotation.

Please, you are better than this. Treat it as an hypothetical if necessary but, consider the question.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: NoCorruptionAllowed

so when Arpaio does his job as per the effing laws, in come the retards to point there finger at Joe, and call him a racist.

What part of the law allows for detaining people because they look Mexican?

Reasonable suspicion and probable cause.

a reply to: greencmp
There is no point in hypotheticals.

Arpaio will subject to a hearing on contempt of court charges because the judge believes he failed to follow court orders.