• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Sheriff Joe Arpaio: Good guy, or bad guy?

Sheriff Joe Arpaio: Good guy, or bad guy?

  • Good guy.

    Votes: 17 36.2%
  • Meh, some of each.

    Votes: 9 19.1%
  • Bad guy.

    Votes: 17 36.2%
  • Who is Sheriff Joe Arpaio?

    Votes: 4 8.5%

  • Total voters
    47
Uhhh i think hes a nut wacko, terrible guy...

A US district court judge ruled in 08 and 10 that the Maricopa County jails violated the constitutional rights of the inmates.
He refused to cooperate with the Department of Justice when he was accused of discrimination and unconstitutional search and seizures.
Judge John Leonardo of Pima County Superior Court found that Arpaio "misused the power of his office to target members of the (Board of Supervisors) for criminal investigation."

Then why do conservatives ignore this ?
IMO, a ton of reform is necessary here, in our entire "criminal justice system".
At this point , I am neither pro nor con...
Unlike many, I do have an open mind - maybe too open at times.
I have little faith and trust in the info that I do have..
He has a long long list of targets that he targeted with his abuse of power.
He violated the election law.
Misused over 100 million in funds.
The Munnel Memo exposed him and his second in command on years of misconduct.
Then why do conservatives ignore this ?
IMO, a ton of reform is necessary here, in our entire "criminal justice system".
At this point , I am neither pro nor con...
Unlike many, I do have an open mind - maybe too open at times.
I have little faith and trust in the info that I do have..
 
Thats basically it. Scumbag sympathizers do not like him so every accusation and negative rumor about the man they see as true. Funny how these scumbag sympathizers accuse him of doing all this stuff but he hasn't been convicted yet.
I may be one of those "scumbag sympathizers", Rage.....But, at this point in time, and with the lousy sensationalism based media that we have, I accuse not !
Reform in our media is necessary......NO MORE LIES !!!! from anyone !
 
I don't think the kind of prison reforms he advocates are the kind of prison reforms we need.
I disagree, it is what we need more of. While its a sound bite, many interviewed prisoners say they plan to stay clean as not to go back to jail. Chain gang work are all vollunteers. Tents keep cost down for taxpayers.
Guess you prefer a nice retreat for prisoners?
 
Joe response to the illegal actions of his Chief deputy and lead prosecutor was the "I don't recall" line. In the spirit of innocent until proven guilty, let take him at his word and assume he really didn't know. Do you really think someone who can't even spot years of illegal activities done in public by own his department is fit to be a Sheriff?
"I don't remember" , or pushing it off on subordinates and saying he wasn't aware, does not get him off the hook, IMO. In fact, it just makes him look not in control of his own department and/or incompetent... which is actually worse than being corrupt.


I disagree, it is what we need more of. While its a sound bite, many interviewed prisoners say they plan to stay clean as not to go back to jail. Chain gang work are all vollunteers. Tents keep cost down for taxpayers.
Guess you prefer a nice retreat for prisoners?
How does a not liking the way things are done warp the most absolute opposite extreme of "nice retreat"?
 
Arpaio is a complete disaster. Contrary to what the news media says, the real action is not in his jail or immigration policy, but in local corruption. Joe's office has engaged in blatantly abusive behavior going back more than a decade. You get misspent taxpayer payer dollars, trumped up charges on political enemies, illegal campaign funding and ethical violations all over the place. Arpaio's subordinates and associates have already been dismissed and are now before the court. Arpaio is now at the stage where he switches between claiming he doesn't remember or saying it was all his underlings fault. I do believe in the concept of innocent until proven guilty. However, the evidence against the Sheriff's office is clear. Joe was either complicit or is so hideously incompetent he didn't notice rampant corruption among his direct subordinates.
So why isn't he in jail?
 
Thats basically it. Scumbag sympathizers do not like him so every accusation and negative rumor about the man they see as true. Funny how these scumbag sympathizers accuse him of doing all this stuff but he hasn't been convicted yet.

The only person to bring this up in this thread are his defenders. My dislike of him doesn't stem from enforcing immigration laws. It comes from crapping on the Constitution and either being very corrupt or very incompetent.
 
The only person to bring this up in this thread are his defenders. My dislike of him doesn't stem from enforcing immigration laws. It comes from crapping on the Constitution and either being very corrupt or very incompetent.
With all this massive badness, why hasn't the State Attorney General investigated?
 
Last edited:
"I don't remember" , or pushing it off on subordinates and saying he wasn't aware, does not get him off the hook, IMO. In fact, it just makes him look not in control of his own department and/or incompetent... which is actually worse than being corrupt.



How does a not liking the way things are done warp the most absolute opposite extreme of "nice retreat"?

Similar to what Obama does inregards to Fast and Furious. Let Holder take the blame.

So if you don't like what Joe A runs his jail, you either want harsher conditions or less harsher. Which is it? That is why I stated retreat for prisoners must be the choice. Joe A does a good job on jails given the constraints the county supervisors place on him
 
So why isn't he in jail?

The wheels of justice move at a goddamned glacial pace. It took 6 months after the Munnel memo to get Hendershott fired and another 6 months to get Hendershott to testify before the court.

With all this massive badness, why hasn't the State Attorney General investigated?

It has, along with the FBI and DOJ.
 
The only person to bring this up in this thread are his defenders. My dislike of him doesn't stem from enforcing immigration laws. It comes from crapping on the Constitution and either being very corrupt or very incompetent.

How has he crapped on the Constitution?

It has, along with the FBI and DOJ.

And last I heard they have never found Joe to be in violation of anything that would send him to jail.
 
He is an ass, but the voters prefer him to those among us who think that we can change human behavior by rewarding them for breaking the law. Surely treating them worse than we treat our troops in the middle east is acceptable?
 
He is an ass, but the voters prefer him to those among us who think that we can change human behavior by rewarding them for breaking the law. Surely treating them worse than we treat our troops in the middle east is acceptable?

They probably get treated better since there is no threat of road side bombs or IEDs and they get a daily shower and hot meal.
 

The FBI did this same type of investigation not to long ago. Again, last I heard the FBI had cleared him of those charges. Just because Obama targets him again doesn't mean squat.


The judicial system is working on the case. If Arpaio is innocent, it would still show incompetence. How could he not know the corruption being carried out by his direct subordinate?

I already addressed this in post #23.
 
DrunkenAsparagus;1059926024 The judicial system is working on the case. If Arpaio is innocent said:
Same way Obama says he knew nothing or was not involved in Fast and Furious. Obama claims he will get to the bottom of it. Sherriff Joe has taken action to correct deficiencies in his office. 30 some have lost jobs.
So let me ask, if Sherrif Joe as a Democrat, would he get a pass like Obama and Holder?
Until Joe is convicted in a court of law, he is innocent. I will even give Obama and Holder that much. Either way, you willing to apply the same standard to Obama and Holder, that is they are incompentent?
 
Is anybody really naive enough to believe that lack of prosecution/conviction is somehow proof of innocence?

And spare me the "innocent until proven guilty" myth crap.
 
Is anybody really naive enough to believe that lack of prosecution/conviction is somehow proof of innocence?

Until he has been convicted all the claims against him by scumbag sympathizers are nothing more than just claims.Seeing how these scumbag sympathizers seem to have a grudge against Sheriff Joe Arpaio then all the claims against him are suspect. Because you can say he did this and he did that but it doesn't mean squat until it has been proven in a court of law.

And spare me the "innocent until proven guilty" myth crap.


Coffin v. United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Coffin v. United States, 156 U.S. 432 (1895), was an appellate case before the United States Supreme Court in 1895 which established the presumption of innocence of persons accused of crimes.
 
Last edited:
Is anybody really naive enough to believe that lack of prosecution/conviction is somehow proof of innocence?

And spare me the "innocent until proven guilty" myth crap.

Apario is innocent until proven guilty. I'll not call him a criminal until it is proven in a court of law. The point is that his office has engaged in numerous public acts of corruption for years under his watch and the only defense against his complicity is being unaware of what was going on. If Arpaio is innocent he is incompetent, if guilty he is a criminal. Either way, he is not fit to lead the Sheriff office.
 
Is anybody really naive enough to believe that lack of prosecution/conviction is somehow proof of innocence?

And spare me the "innocent until proven guilty" myth crap.

Well in that case I claim that you stole 10 million dollars from me. By your logic you are guilty. Give me my money back!
 
Apario is innocent until proven guilty. I'll not call him a criminal until it is proven in a court of law. The point is that his office has engaged in numerous public acts of corruption for years under his watch and the only defense against his complicity is being unaware of what was going on. If Arpaio is innocent he is incompetent, if guilty he is a criminal. Either way, he is not fit to lead the Sheriff office.

Underlined: agreed. But gotta prove he is first.

Bold: Unless his suborinates commited crimes overtly there is no reason to believe that anyone, much less Arpaio, would have caught them at thier crimes if they worked in the same department. That whole trust issue ya know.
 
Sheriff Joe is a Patriot does his job better than most.

From what I cab tell the only people who don't like him are criminals and cry baby weaklings who don't stand for law and order.
 
Sherrif Joe likes pink panties.
 
Back
Top Bottom