Arpaio set to crack 'birther' coconut

reply to post by KonquestAbySS



You dont know Arapio very well then, most of us remember him here on ATS.


*edit to add* You can always do a google news search on him and scroll through all the pages of it to see yourself.

Originally posted by juveous

Originally posted by Blackmarketeer
reply to post by jtma508

 

The Arizona taxpayers are paying for it of course. Joe and his "posse" are sticking the bill for their jaunt to Hawaii on the backs of the taxpayers. Makes you wonder who is minding the store in Maricopa county since their sheriff has better things to do than, say, be a sheriff. And apparently this sheriff thinks he is a higher authority than the Arizona Secretary of State.

I thought his cold case posse was voluntary. Are you just assuming tax payers pay for it, or have some proof?

You know what they say about assuming...

The cold-case posse has spent about $40,000 on the investigation so far, according to the Sheriff's Office. The posse gets its money through donations.

In the past, Arpaio has touted the investigation's total reliance on donated money and volunteers. Arpaio said the volunteer posse is in the midst of a criminal investigation but refused to discuss details or what drove the posse member and deputy to Hawaii.

www.u... satoday.com/news/nation/story/2012-05-22/arizona-sheriff-obama-birth/55130160/1?AID=4992781&PID=4169894&SID=qig60yur8eka

Originally posted by Southern Guardian
reply to post by R_Clark

 

Why is Arpaio sending his posse to Hawaii (again?) to demand the release of more documents when:

A) He already declared a long form birth certificate fraudulent
B) He already refuses to believe Hawaiian officials on this matter, he believes there is a cover up.

What's the point? Putting publicity aside? Is his posse going to break in the Hawaiian department of health? Are they going to meet up with Trumps undercover investigators? It's been a year now.

edit on 23-5-2012 by Southern Guardian because: (no reason given)

One answer is that he knows he doesn't have enough evidence to actually convict anyone, so if by confronting the authenticity of the physical BC would be able to hold someone responsible.

reply to post by Resurected

You dont know Arapio very well then, most of us remember him here on ATS.

Ok, first off...When you talk about a media whore that is talking about someone who takes up a lot of television time. I tune into CNN, FOX MSNBC and have not seen anything lately about this investigation...I think you are talking about another media whore.

how would a detective know a real one from a forgery anyway ?

assuming it never existed obama has had a lot of time to sneak a fake master set of books into the right place

so even if we were allowed to view it, what would we gain ?

that's the weakness of the whole ID system, it isn't proof of anything, the best thing you can accomplish is a concensus of opinion

if joe's case, we already know the opinion his detective would reach is allowed to view the BC

and is he going after mittens yet ? paul ?

reply to post by syrinx high priest

and is he going after mittens yet ? paul ?

Funny how you through Paul in there haphazardly

Originally posted by KonquestAbySS

Ok, first off...When you talk about a media whore that is talking about someone who takes up a lot of television time. I tune into CNN, FOX MSNBC and have not seen anything lately about this investigation...I think you are talking about another media whore.

Is your exposure to media limited solely to TV? I think you should step away from the TV and realize that "media" means far more than TV. In fact, the least efficient means of becoming a media whore IS by television. The internet is far more effective.

Secondly, this whole "Obama aint a prez cuz he aint a citizen" nonsense is SO outplayed, SO over-talked and SO nonsensical that it's almost not worthy of discussion, almost. It's only redeeming quality is in showing how one (in this case many millions) can be duped into precisely what it is you, Konquest, are duped into... believing media hype. No one here is a Death and Records specialist, nor a document analysis specialist, yet you are so adamant on how "you know the facts" of this tired old discussion? Let me guess, this "posse" and the birthers have all spent collectively 20 minutes with Photoshop and they become document archive specialists and handwriting analysts?

Originally posted by juveous
One answer is that he knows he doesn't have enough evidence to actually convict anyone,

Or maybe, he doesn't have any relevant evidence at all?

so if by confronting the authenticity of the physical BC would be able to hold someone responsible.

So they declare the birth certificate fraudulent, they believe there's some big cover up involving Hawaiian health officials, and yet they go to Hawaii anyway to demand, without authority, that they want to see the actual birth certificate, believing already that there is some cover up going on.

Does this make sense to you?

reply to post by juveous

I thought his cold case posse was voluntary. Are you just assuming tax payers pay for it, or have some proof?

Nope, it's on the taxpayers dime.

Sheriff Arpaio Sends Publicly Funded Deputy To Hawaii On 'Birther' Hunt

But now there's news that Arpaio is using public money on his quest to investigate President Obama's birth certificate. Both the Arizona Republic and Honolulu Star Advertiser report that Arpaio sent his deputy, Brian Mackiewcz, to Hawaii in part because of what Arpaio said were "security issues," related to the investigation.

Good thing Maricopa county is so crime-free that they can spare their sheriff and a deputy on jaunts to Hawaii for 'Birther' fantasies.

reply to post by alphabetaone

Is your exposure to media limited solely to TV? I think you should step away from the TV and realize that "media" means far more than TV. In fact, the least efficient means of becoming a media whore IS by television. The internet is far more effective.

Actually no smart guy I was making a point....Hahahaha, majority of Americans fail to read, or look for independent sources, however; the one whom I was replying to made it seem like Arpaio is blowing up the airways...


By the way. When I think of media whores I think of the Kardashians...

reply to post by KonquestAbySS




Me too frankly.....

Originally posted by Southern Guardian

Originally posted by juveous
One answer is that he knows he doesn't have enough evidence to actually convict anyone,

Or maybe, he doesn't have any relevant evidence at all?

so if by confronting the authenticity of the physical BC would be able to hold someone responsible.

So they declare the birth certificate fraudulent, they believe there's some big cover up involving Hawaiian health officials, and yet they go to Hawaii anyway to demand, without authority, that they want to see the actual birth certificate, believing already that there is some cover up going on.

Does this make sense to you?

Makes sense to me. What authority are you refering to? Is this off limits for investigating? What they expect to find is more forgery, i would say it would much harder for them to find a false negative with the physical BC, so why would obamabots be upset with this?

reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul


If its a genuine 1961 birth certificate, it sure wont have AFRICAN listed as his fathers race.

Originally posted by juveous

Makes sense to me. What authority are you refering to?

his authority as a County Sheriff - which is no authority at all outside his county AFAIK.

Is this off limits for investigating?

It is outside the jurisdiction of a County law enforcement agency

What they expect to find is more forgery,

Other than there never having been any forgeries by the Obama "camp" AFAIK and the "more" therefore being rubbish, I think you are correct - which shows that you are not expecting a dispassionate, rational inquiry either - they have a conclusion, and are looking for evidence to support it.

i would say it would much harder for them to find a false negative with the physical BC, so why would obamabots be upset with this?

IMO the country taxpayers have a right to be upset.

For my part I am not upset - just amused at the apparently never ending stupidity of birthers.

reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul


Meh, you could just as easily say they have a conclusion as much as you could say prediction. like you, i like the persistnece of anti-birthers. If i supported Obama i would be calling for his BC to be open to look at at any available consideration, same goes for other high public officials. They don't have a normal job, they are not normal citizens, they are responsible for the well being of the county, and should be subjected to scrutiny. The difference is the level of trust those have with the information provided. Funny, i don't even consider this a birther issue, it is an issue of appealing to superiority. Just take my word for it, don't bother with those silly forensics.

reply to post by R_Clark

Arpaio stands strong and disagrees how the situation was handled in Hawaii. He says he was stonewalled..

Of course he was stonewalled, he had absolutely zero legal reason to try and get anything.

Think about it, Arpaio is a sheriff from Arizona, he just tried to rob our president of his 4th Amendment right to be secure in his personal papers and effects from an illegal search and seizure.

If this sheriff did that to any of you, most of you would be on here tomorrow screaming up thread after thread after thread about how he is a nazi tyrant who goose steps all over your god given rights.

But, no, he does it to someone with whos different from you "politically" and it's an outrage that Hawaii didn't bend to his will even though he had absolutely no right or jurisdiction?

uh, huh, so, how does that work exactly?

reply to post by juveous

If i supported Obama i would be calling for his BC to be open to look at at any available consideration, same goes for other high public officials. They don't have a normal job, they are not normal citizens, they are responsible for the well being of the county, and should be subjected to scrutiny.

You make a good point I remember when I joined the Corps I had to show proof of my BC in order for me to serve my country...I am sure you did 2

And Hawaii have just released the Birth Certificate. AGAIN.

OF course, no matter how much documentation is released, it won't satisfy the birthers so why worry about them?

They'll still be complaining in 50 years that USA had a President once who wasn't an American.

reply to post by babybunnies

OF course, no matter how much documentation is released, it won't satisfy the birthers so why worry about them?

What do you care? Aren't you Canadian? Provide your input once you live in America.

No one can legally obtain a copy of your certified BC from a vital records office, outside of immediate family. For sheriff Joe to send his deputy to the Hawaii Dept. of Health to just ask for it, shows their clear lack of understanding of the law. Pretty embarrassing, considering they're supposed to be law enforcement officials.

HAWAII BIRTH CERTIFICATES
Hawaii Vital Records issues only certified copies of Hawaii birth certificates, which are typically acceptable for passport, social security, employment and personal identification purposes.

Who Can Order?
A certified copy of a Hawaii birth certificate is issued only to an applicant who has a direct and tangible interest in the record. The following persons are considered to have such an interest:

• the registrant (the person whom the record is concerned with);
  
• the registrant's spouse;
  
• the registrant's parent(s);
  
• a descendant of the registrant (e.g., a child or grandchild);
  
• a person having a common ancestor with the registrant (e.g., a sibling, grandparent, aunt/uncle, or cousin);
  
• a legal guardian of the registrant;
  
• a person or agency acting on behalf of the registrant;
  
• a personal representative of the registrant's estate;
  
• a person whose right to obtain a copy of the record is established by an order of a court of competent jurisdiction; and
  
• adoptive parents who have filed a petition for adoption and need to determine the death of one or more of the prospective adopted child's natural or legal parents