Contact Form

Name

Email *

Message *

Showing posts with label Arpaio. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Arpaio. Show all posts

Thursday, March 8, 2018

Arpaio Is Feeling Vindicated!

Exclusive: Arpaio Tells Trump What to Do With Sanctuary State Calif.

 Print
Former Maricopa County sheriff and current U.S. Senate candidate Joe Arpaio lauded the Trump administration’s decision to sue California over its sanctuary state policy and called for the Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency to increase its presence in the state “big time.”
“It is a great move by President Trump,” Arpaio told The Western Journal. “They want sanctuary for the whole state of California. They don’t want ICE involved at all, which is very sad because that is going to increase the crime if you can’t stop people.”
“I hope the president is successful,” he said. “I think he should take an extra step. I think he should just send the federal people in there big time and enforce the federal law regardless of what the state wants to do.”
“Bring in a hundred or two hundred ICE agents and keep enforcing the federal laws regardless of what the sanctuary state of California wants,” Arpaio added. “That would be my advice.”
“America’s Toughest Sheriff” noted the irony in the fact that the same legal justification used by the Obama Justice Department to target him and the state of Arizona regarding the enforcement of immigration law is being employed by Attorney General Jeff Sessions against California.

The Western Journal Daily Email

Facebook
 
Politico reported the DOJ’s suit against California is modeled after the one brought by the Obama administration, which affirmed the federal government’s supremacy over the matter of immigration.
In 2010, then Attorney General Eric Holder suedArizona over state law S.B. 1070, which — in accordance with federal law — required any aliens in the United States to have proper identification at all times, and empowered state law enforcement officers (including Arpaio’s sheriffs) to attempt to determine immigration status during “lawful stop, detention or arrest” for other suspected crimes.
Additionally, it barred state and local officials or agencies from restricting enforcement of immigration laws, and imposed penalties on sheltering, hiring or transporting unregistered aliens.
“Setting immigration policy and enforcing immigration laws is a national responsibility,” Holder stated at the time regarding his decision to sue Arizona over the law. “Seeking to address the issue through a patchwork of state laws will only create more problems than it solves.”

Do you think Trump will listen?

   
Completing this poll entitles you to The Western Journal news updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
You're logged in to Facebook. Click here to log out.
Holder further argued that the Constitution “forbids” Arizona from replacing federal policy “with its own state-specific immigration policy.”
The Supreme Court, by-in-large, agreed with the Obama administration’s argument in 2012, finding immigration law is the purview of the federal government. However, it did affirm the ability of state law enforcement officials to seek to ascertain the immigration status of those stopped for other suspected criminal activity.
“The National Government has significant power to regulate immigration,” Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote in the majority opinion. “Arizona may have understandable frustrations with the problems caused by illegal immigration while that process continues, but the State may not pursue policies that undermine federal law.”
Sessions’ suit against California alleges obstruction of federal immigration enforcement and targets three “sanctuary state” focused laws passed by the legislature in 2017.
RELATED: Irony: Obama DOJ’s Immigration Suit Against AZ Laid Foundation For Trump’s Suit Against CA
S.B. 54 prohibits state and local officials from sharing information with federal immigration officials and also bars the transfer of certain immigrants into federal custody.
A.B. 450 forbids private employers from cooperating with the federal government with immigration enforcement at the workplace.
Finally, A.B. 103 attempts to regulate detention facilities used by the federal government to hold immigration prisoners.
Arpaio wished Sessions’ DOJ well in the suit and believes it will likely be successful.
“I think the feds will win this one,” the lawman said, but noted the 9th U.S. Circuit of Appeals may prove problematic in the near term.
Arpaio is currently a candidate for U.S. Senate in Arizona. His challengers for the Republican nomination include Congresswoman Martha McSally and former state Sen. Kelli Ward.
What do you think?

Wednesday, August 16, 2017

Enforce The Law And Go To Jail--The Rule In America

Breaking: Trump Breaks Silence on Sheriff Joe… Get Ready for Riots

 Print

Maricopa County’s “Sheriff Joe” Arpaio might have been hit with hard news two weeks ago, but the former Arizona lawman might be getting a life-changing phone call from President Donald Trump soon.
The president has confirmed he is looking at officially pardoning the controversial sheriff, according to a Fox News report.
“I am seriously considering a pardon for Sheriff Arpaio,” Trump stated on Sunday. “He has done a lot in the fight against illegal immigration. He’s a great American patriot and I hate to see what has happened to him.”

Trump also indicated that he will likely make a decision on the Arpaio pardon in the next few days.
The 85-year-old retired officer was found guilty on July 31 of misdemeanor contempt of court from his time in office when he continued to back enforcement efforts against illegal immigrants in Maricopa County, Arizona.
He could face up to six months in jail for that charge, although he has not yet been sentenced.
Liberals piled on Arpaio for enforcing state and federal laws near the border with Mexico. The sheriff became hero to many conservatives as he gained a national profile for fighting illegal immigration during the Obama era.
It looks like Trump is one of his many fans.
“Is there anyone in local law enforcement who has done more to crack down on illegal immigration than Sheriff Joe?” Trump said, according to Fox. “He has protected people from crimes and saved lives. He doesn’t deserve to be treated this way.”
Word of the president’s possible pardon quickly reached the tough but aging former cop.

“I am happy he understands the case,” Arpaio said to Fox News. “I would accept the pardon because I am 100 percent not guilty.”
It’s likely that a potential pardon from Trump would throw open-border advocates into a tizzy, and demonstrations in Arizona and elsewhere are not out of the question.
When you boil it all down, however, Sheriff Joe was basically hauled into court for doing his sworn duty: enforcing the laws of his state and the nation.
It seems bizarre that a law enforcement officer is being punished for doing exactly what his job title states.
Arpaio may be controversial, but he believed in protecting the citizens of his state from the chaos of a wild border… and if Trump decides to take action, Sheriff Joe might be getting the last laugh.
Please share this article on Facebook if you believe that immigration and border laws need to be enforced.
What do you think of Sheriff Joe and this development? 

Sunday, December 27, 2015

Guess Who Is Going To The Western Conservative Conference


image: http://www.wnd.com/files/2015/08/Trump-6002.png
Donald Trump
Donald Trump
By Paul Bremmer
GOP presidential primary front-runner Donald Trump will be taking his seemingly bulletproof campaign to Scottsdale, Arizona, in March for the Western Conservative Conference, where he has been confirmed as a speaker.
Others expected to address the sessions during the March 18-19, 2016, meetings include former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, Sheriff Joe Arpaio, Rep. Trent Franks, R-Ariz., former NRA president Sandy Froman, and Scottie Nell Hughes of the Tea Party News Network.
Reps. Matt Salmon and Paul Gosar, both Arizona Republicans, will serve as co-chairs of the conference, and previous GOP presidential candidate Herman Cain will deliver the opening keynote address.
The Western Conservative Conference is described as the “premier gathering of conservatives in the western U.S.”
It follows a format similar to CPAC or the Values Voter Summit, featuring plenary sessions with guest speakers and panels, breakout sessions covering specific issues, book signings, exhibits, a luncheon, and a dinner reception.
In fact, the WCC used to be called Western CPAC, according to Floyd Brown, president of the Western Center for Journalism. Brown will serve as one of several co-hosts of the conference, as he has in the past, and the WCJ will be one of many sponsoring organizations.
“Traditionally we’ve had conservatives come from all over the country to these conferences, and they’ve been well-attended (usually 500 to 1,000 people), and it’s a great place for conservatives to network and get to know other conservatives and to discuss the issues that are going to really impact this presidential election, and also the congressional races in 2016,” Brown told WND in an interview.
Planned topics for panel discussions include the media, immigration, taxes, Second Amendment rights, free speech, threats to freedom of religion, and more.
Brown, the author of “Killing Wealth, Freeing Wealth: How to Save America’s Economy and Your Own,” also said he will speak at the conference, but he does not yet know what his topic will be.
Brown noted the conference will be held in Arizona the weekend before the Arizona primary. As such, conference organizers have invited most of the current GOP presidential candidates to speak, including Jeb Bush, Marco Rubio, Ted Cruz, Ben Carson, and Carly Fiorina. So far only Trump and Huckabee have confirmed.
Brown said the idea is to let ordinary conservatives influence the eventual nominee.
“We always believe that the more conservatives can have direct interface with the eventual winner, the more likely he or she is to pursue a conservative agenda,” Brown said.
Other invited speakers include Ann Coulter, Sheriff David Clarke, Mark Levin, Sarah Palin, Katie Pavlich, Judge Jeanine Pirro, and Heritage Foundation president Jim DeMint.
In addition, WND founder and CEO Joseph Farah will receive the Western Center for Journalism’s Hero of Freedom Award during a dinner gala celebrating the 25th anniversary of Farah’s founding of the WCJ. Rush Limbaugh has been invited to present the award.
Brown praised Farah for his “unwavering commitment to news without bias and an agenda.”
“I think, of anybody in the modern conservative movement, he typifies what I think you should have in journalism, and that is an aggressive watchdog of government,” Brown stated. “Journalism traditionally has had that role of being government’s watchdog, and too often in modern journalism, the mainstream media has become more of a lapdog than a watchdog of government.”
More information about the Western Conservative Conference is online at the official conference website.

Copyright 2015 WND

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2015/12/trump-heading-west-with-bulletproof-campaign/#9iUwQxSiZg7dto5J.99

Monday, July 27, 2015

Two Outspoken Patriots Might Go To Mexico


Sheriff Joe Arpaio
Sheriff Joe Arpaio
During a radio interview Sunday, Sheriff Joe Arpaio declared his determination to go to Mexico to “straighten out the illegal immigration and drug smuggling problem,” and he suggested Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump accompany him.
The high-profile sheriff of Maricopa County, Arizona, also suggested the U.S. deploy its military inside Mexico to work with the country’s own military and law enforcement to stop illegal immigration and drug smuggling at their sources.
“I want to go to Mexico City or somewhere in Mexico to talk to the officials,” Arpaio exclaimed. “Now if Donald Trump wants to go with me, he can go with me. Because we both will talk about the economy, which is very critical.  So I’m not going to give in on this one.”
Arpaio was interviewed for “Aaron Klein Investigative Radio,” broadcast on New York’s AM 970 The Answer and Philadelphia’s NewsTalk 990 AM and online.
If he does visit Mexico, the famous sheriff warned, “I’m not going to go as a tourist. I’m going as a top law-enforcement official if I go.”
Arpaio spoke about some of his ideas to help with Mexico’s fledgling economy. He suggested Trump invest in real estate there to generate domestic jobs.
“If I was with him (Trump), you know what’s I’d say?” he asked Klein. “Hey, I’ll build two Trump towers in Mexico. Start hiring people there to get jobs so they don’t have to hop the fence and come into the Unites States. So I look at this as an economic problem, too. Not just a law enforcement, political problem.”
Arpaio said his border-security plan involves sending U.S. troops inside Mexico.
He said he would tell Mexican President Enrique Peña Nieto “bilaterally that we would be happy to send our military across the border to work with their military and their federal police together and stop the drugs and stop the illegal immigration before it reaches the border.”
“That’s how you solve these cases whether it’s drug or anything else,” he maintained. “That would be my advice.”
Arpaio said he was serious about his offer to travel to Mexico, and has already made some inquiries. He said he encountered “resistance” from both the U.S. and Mexican governments and “I’ve had threats from cartels.”
“I don’t worry about it,” he added, referring to the cartel threats.
Two weeks ago, Trump and Arpaio appeared together at a rally in Phoenix, Arizona, to condemn illegal immigration and its harmful effects.
“Mexico – I respect the country,” Trump said at the time. “They’re taking our jobs, they’re taking our manufacturing, they’re taking our money, they’re taking everything, and they’re killing us at the border.”
image: http://www.wnd.com/files/2015/07/trump_at_border.jpg
Donald Trump at U.S.-Mexico border
Donald Trump at U.S.-Mexico border
Just last Thursday during a visit at the U.S.-Mexico border, Trump indicated Hispanics “already do” love him because the billionaire businessman promises he’ll bring U.S. jobs back to American shores so those here legally will have opportunities to work.
“I’ll take jobs back from China, I’ll take jobs back from Japan,” Trump said. “The Hispanics are going to get those jobs, and they’re going to love Trump.”

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2015/07/sheriff-joe-deploy-u-s-military-inside-mexico/#mXX4Lvpcd5PZpP1R.99

Tuesday, December 23, 2014

Arpaio Suit Moving Ahead. Will It Stop The Illegal Presidential Actions? We Hope The Entire Judicial System Has Not Been Corrupted.



  • Text smaller
  • Text bigger
holder-obama630
A federal judge in Washington listened to arguments Monday in a case that could stop President Obama’s amnesty plan cold, but a decision isn’t expected for days, possibly even several weeks.
U.S. District Judge Beryl Howell heard a request from attorney Larry Klayman of FreedomWatch on behalf of his client, Maricopa County, Arizona, Sheriff Joe Arpaio, to immediately stop the implementation of the executive action Obama announced Nov. 20, which effectively grants amnesty to an estimated 5 million illegal aliens.
Klayman said he was pleased the judge held an expedited preliminary injunction hearing.
“This was important because as we speak, millions of illegal aliens are in the process of being granted amnesty,” he said. “As presented to the court, a large number of these illegal aliens will be back onto the streets of Maricopa County and the nation as a whole. Many of these illegals are repeat criminal offenders. This puts a great strain on the resources of Sheriff Arpaio’s office and endangers the people of Maricopa County.”
Klayman said, win or lose, the case likely will go to the Supreme Court, which “will be the final arbiter of whether the president’s actions are constitutional or not.”
Earlier, Klayman argued Obama “cannot end-run Congress based on his own ‘emperor-like’ actions.”
“By his own admission 22 times in the past, Obama lacks the power to take this unconstitutional executive action,” Klayman said. “To allow this to stand would amount to trashing our constitutional republic and set a bad precedent for future presidents. I am hopeful that the court will grant us the preliminary injunction, in order that the status quo of our current law can remain in effect, and allow the next Congress the right to enact any new legislation that can help solve our border and illegal immigration problems.”
He explained that if Obama’s “unconstitutional executive action” goes forward, Arpaio’s law enforcement duties and responsibilities “will be irreparably harmed.”
The sheriff, before the hearing, said,  the president’s “unconstitutional act” will have “a serious detrimental impact on my carrying out the duties and responsibilities for which I am encharged as sheriff.”
“Specifically, it will severely strain our resources, both in manpower and financially, necessary to protect the citizens I was elected to serve,” he said.
WND reported earlier when another federal judge declared the amnesty unconstitutional.
And Klayman said an injunction preventing the program from being implemented “will work no harm to defendants, as the status quo of existing law enacted by Congress will be preserved. It is not right or just that the president and the other defendants circumvent the will of the people in our republic, simply because they believe that the new Congress will not [toe] the line to their goals for immigration reform.”
Howell already has made a ruling in Arpaio’s favor, ordering a fast track for case arguments and hearings.
Two Justice Department lawyers representing Obama in the case had asked for the deadline for their initial response to be delayed until late January. But the judge ordered it submitted immediately and then scheduled Monday’s hearing.
WND reported Arpaio’s complaint argues the timing is crucial, because the government already is pouring resources into meeting the orders, and the offer of amnesty likely will draw a whole new flood of illegal aliens.
See Klayman’s comments after hearing:
The president’s decision, Klayman wrote, “orders direct DHS personnel including the Customs and Border Protection (CBP) and ICE to immediately suspend enforcement of immigration laws with regard to any who appear to be eligible for the new deferred action programs, even though such persons might not yet be able to apply for formal recognition.”
The instructions also tell law enforcement officials to “immediately” begin identifying those who could be given the special benefit.
Klayman said the federal government already has leased office space and begun the process of hiring 1,000 new workers to process the illegal aliens through Obama’s amnesty program.
All of those actions would be for nothing if a court rules that the program doesn’t meet the Constitution’s requirements, he wrote.
“By contrast if the implementation is simply delayed until a court decision, there will be no such harm,” he said.
Klayman explained that under current law, Arpaio will turn over to the DHS illegal aliens who commit crimes in his county to be deported.
“By contrast, under the defendants’ new executive actions, those persons will not be subject to deportation. Therefore, they will serve out their criminal sentences in Plaintiff Arpaio’s jails, costing his office enormous time and expense,” Klayman argued.
The ruling that the amnesty program is unconstitutional came last week from a federal judge in Pennsylvania.
“President Obama’s unilateral legislative action violates the separation of powers provided for in the United States Constitution as well as the Take Care Clause, and therefore, is unconstitutional,” said U.S. District Judge Arthur J. Schwab.
The judge noted Obama “contended that although legislation is the most appropriate course of action to solve the immigration debate, his executive action was necessary because of Congress’s failure to pass legislation, acceptable to him, in this regard.
“This proposition is arbitrary and does not negate the requirement that the November 20, 2014, executive action be lawfully within the president’s executive authority,” the judge wrote. “It is not.”
Quoting from a previous precedent, the judge said that in the “framework of our Constitution, the president’s power to see that the laws are faithfully executed refutes the idea that he is to be a lawmaker.”
“The Constitution limits his functions in the lawmaking process to the recommending of laws he thinks wise and the vetoing of laws he thinks bad,” Schwab said.
The judge said Obama’s contention that Congress had not worked in his time frame was largely irrelevant.

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2014/12/judge-hears-plan-to-stop-obama-amnesty-cold/#KqOPkoZT7cIRujJy.99