Main Menu

Archive | Who’s Who

Information about people and web sites that discuss Barack Obama

De Facto Arpaio

Former Deputy Chief Brian Sands of the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office has written a memoir titled “Arpaio De Facto Lawman” detailing his experiences with Sheriff Arpaio and the office. Stephen Lemons of the Phoenix New Times has an article on it. Fine Stephen, but we already know that Sheriff Joe is a narcissist. Tell us about the birthers!

For that, you will have to buy the book, and you will not be disappointed. The birthers get their own short chapter (7) titled, duh, “Birthers.” It mentions “probable cause,” a concept Sheriff Arpaio was not too fluent in. Sands puts it this way in terms of the Obama birth certificate investigation:

Arpaio’s perspective is I want to be involved, so let’s figure out how to establish an excuse for the reasonable test.

One of the questions surrounding the Cold Case Posse investigation was: just who was the Cold Case Posse. Sands answers this by saying:

At first, Zullo had several other Posse people “working” on the case, two of whom were civil private practice attorneys. The attorneys, for whatever reasons, distanced themselves. Now it was primarily Zullo and the newly-recruited [Brian] Reilly.

Enter Jerome Corsi, who was given office space by Arpaio. The Hawaii trip is discussed. When Deputy Chief Sands questioned Zullo about what evidence he had that would lead to a probable indictment, Zullo said nothing.

Sands does not take a firm stand about where Obama was born, but he maintains skepticism about Arpaio and the CCP investigation and makes this reasonable statement:

When the State of Hawaii came out and officially said that Obama was born in the State and denied Arpaio’s claims of not maintaining secure records[, y]ou would think nothing more could be investigated.

Of additional interest, Sands confirms Brian Reilly’s story on some detail points, some up until now, unpublished.

Update: A comment from Brian Reilly

Having just completed reading chapter 7, entitled "Birthers," I have a few comments to make about former Chief Deputy Sand’s new Kindle book on Amazon.

Sands wrote that Arpaio asked us as Tea Party members to do a petition requesting the birth certificate investigation, and we were to bring the petition back to Arpaio. This was not an accurate statement. When we first met with Arpaio on August 18, 2011, we presented him with a petition with 242 signatures that we gathered the previous night on August 17, 2011. The petition idea was mine and mine alone. Arpaio knew nothing about the petition idea until it was presented to him at the August 18 meeting. At the August 18, meeting, Arpaio asked us to write a formal letter requesting an investigation of the Obama birth certificate and he said "put me in a box" and told me to come back to give all of our evidence and the petition and the letter to him on August 22, 2011, which I did alone.

Additionally, Chief Deputy Sands confirmed that I was unhappy with the conduct of the Zullo birth certificate investigation. (I was not impressed at the time with the biased way in which the investigation was being conducted along with other issues related to liability and I resigned from the Cold Case Posse. )

Chief Deputy Sands also confirmed that no taxpayer dollars were to be used in the investigation, and in fact tax dollars were used.

Sands also confirmed that Zullo had a few years of law enforcement, not the "decades" of law enforcement experience that Carl Gallups has advertised on his Freedom Friday radio show.

Of special note was what Sands related about Zullo’s lack of evidence regarding the birth certificate investigation. Very telling indeed.

I was very impressed with Chief Deputy Sands when I met him on August 18, 2011 when I was a Tea Party member and also when I was a Cold Case Posse member. Chief Sands was the only one to question whether the Jerry Corsi provided "witnesses" were actually considered "experts" and whether they had ever testified in court as experts. As a Cold Case Posse member, I can honestly say, I respected Chief Sands and his "by the book" approach to police work.

And one final note, Sands confirmed that Zullo and I were the only Cold Case Posse members who were actively involved in the investigation.

Other critical books about Joe Arpaio:

50

Taitz files a bunch more motions in immigration suit

imageOrly Taitz is seeking to expand the scope of her recent lawsuit (Taitz v. Johnson) to not just  quarantine or deport undocumented children from Central America; she’s injecting (no pun intended) Ebola! She filed 4 motions titled, “Motion to Expedite Due to Exigent Circumstances of Deadly Ebola Epidemic.” She wants to stop all arrivals in the US from places with Ebola, and quarantine anyone who has entered the US from one of those countries in the past 21 days. She moves to:

  • Expedite
  • Stop entry
  • Quarantine anyone who has visited a country where there is an Ebola epidemic
  • Retain jurisdiction and assure compliance
  • Certify a class
  • Admit Taitz Pro Hac Vice

Read more:

278

Arpaio: Can’t prove birth certificate fraud

Here’s an excerpted section from Arpaio’s July 31 interview at TruNews:

Bruce Walker: One last question, on the subject of your ongoing investigation of Mr. Obama’s identity issues. Is there anything new developing in that case?

Arpaio: Well, it’s not his identity. It’s the birth certificate, a document that we are convinced is a fraudulent document, government document. That’s all I’ve been launching an investigation, not where he came from, and we’re still working at that. When you have a crime, you like to know who committed it, so we’re still working it. It hasn’t gone anywhere. People think I dropped it, no—been working it for two and a half years, but you want to make sure you have the proper evidence.

Bruce Walker: There has been speculation that your team is close to identifying the individual who fabricated the birth certificate that was placed on the White House web  site.

Arpaio: You know, we have our ideas. I want to make sure we cross the t’s and be able to prove it. I know; I have my ideas. I can’t say it. I want to prove it. You know, we’re still working it; it’s not gone. We’ve come up with other sensitive situations that probably could be worse than the birth certificate, but once again, you gotta try to prove this—but nobody will take it anyway. I’ve talked to the whole world about having hearings and looking at this birth certificate. Nobody wants to talk. The media keeps covering up on it. I can’t believe this is happening in our country, that nobody wants to talk to us when we got evidence.

Bruce Walker: Do you foresee that the Department would issue a final report? Is there a possibility that there would be a referral to a grand jury for an indictment?

Arpaio: Well, we’re working on that. We’re trying to get somebody or some people interested in doing something, so a lot of options out there. But you know what? I’m the law-enforcing guy. I can’t prosecute. That’s up to prosecutors, or if Congress doesn’t want to look at it, should I turn it over to the Justice Department? I presume there would be a little conflict of interest there.

Bruce Walker: Pat Boone made a comment that he expects that some major announcement may be announced by September. Any possibility that this could happen by September?

Arpaio: Well, it’s the possibility. Really can’t… I’m not trying to play games, you know, this is a sensitive thing that we’re doing. I’m a sheriff, but I do have 30 years as a federal official in the Department of Justice, so I imagine I have a little credibility, not just some sheriff talking about it; I do have a background, and I guess we’re the only law enforcement agency in the United States that ever decided to look at this, or any law enforcement agency.

Bruce Walker: Well Sheriff, when you’re ready to make a statement, we will give you all the time you want to do it.

It sounds pretty much like what we have heard before except a confirmed possible for something in September.

A waste of money

So Orly Taitz wrote in an article yesterday [link to Taitz web site] that she had appealed Taitz v. Colvin to the 4th Circuit. I ran a search on PACER to find the case, wasting ten cents on getting no results as of close of business today. Taitz, no doubt, wasted a lot more filing a case that has zero chance of going anywhere. We’ll just have to wait for the text.

As I was writing this article, my browser rested on the Taitz site and some of those dodgy download messages started appearing.  I thought about adding a sidebar feature, a Taitz web site threat alert level, but that wouldn’t be good unless it was always up to date. Here is today’s alert anyway:

image

I’ve been impressed by the various judicial opinion’s I’ve read in the course of writing about Obama conspiracy stories. It’s sort of a mini legal education. I can’t read Judge Hollander’s decision in Taitz v. Colvin without hearing in the background, “See? This is how to frame a legal argument!”

The judge was not impressed

Plaintiff [Orly Taitz] can rest assured that if any reasonable grounds existed for me to recuse myself from this case, I would have done so, if for no other reason than to avoid spending precious time on such frivolous filings. But, my responsibilities require me to handle dutifully the cases assigned to me.

– Federal Judge Ellen L. Hollander
Taitz v. Colvin

And so Orly Taitz’s motion for reconsideration and recusal of the judge was summarily rejected in a 7-page memorandum. Judge Hollander makes it clear that she is quite familiar with who Orly Taitz is, and her litigation history on behalf of the “’birther’ movement.” Judge Hollander points out that the time limit provided by statute had already passed, when Taitz filed her motion.

Judge Hollander notes:

Ms. Taitz has not provided any legal authority for the proposition that, if the President were removed from office, this judge or the hundreds of other executive and judicial branch appointees selected by him and then confirmed by the Senate would also become disqualified from their offices.

Nor has any other birther cited any legal authority for this widely-birther-held theory.

Contemplating Orly

When I saw this statue, I immediately thought of Orly Taitz.

DC and  Statue

Maybe it was the eyes.

Orly has always been a difficult character to relate to, not really helped by my having an extended phone conversation with her. I have a moral imperative to view and speak of my neighbor in the best possible light; most people I have known throughout the years have been decent people. Orly strains that attitude.

All conspiracy theorists (and here I only include unreasonable theories) are working from a disadvantage. My understanding of them comes from Michael Shermer’s book, The  Believing Brain, and I see the conspiracist mindset as coming from a low-functioning nonsense filter. So I don’t think that being a conspiracy theorists makes someone a bad person, or even a stupid one. Indeed, my criticisms of Orly Taitz are only tangentially related to her being a conspiracy theorist. Here are some of them:

  • Incompetence. Orly Taitz is a lawyer and a very bad one. She has been repeatedly lectured by judges that she doesn’t follow procedures and that she doesn’t understand the law. She repeatedly violated court rules by failing to redact social-security numbers. She has bungled service in almost every case. She was sanctioned 3 times.
  • Lack of regard for others. At various times, Orly has solicited clients and then represented them badly, doing things that were in Orly’s interest, but not that of her clients. Connie Rhodes had to write the Court to tell them that the things Orly was filing were not on her behalf. She has blatantly violated the privacy of individuals by publishing their names, addresses, social-security numbers, and even birth certificates. She even egged on her readers to investigate the deaths of newborns who had nothing whatever top do with any public issue.
  • Dishonesty. The most recent instance of this was when Orly presented a petition to the Court claiming “new evidence” that she had known about for at least 6 months. I believe she lied to me when she claimed that she had public records of other names associated with Obama’s social-security number before the number was published on the Internet.
  • Bigotry. I have seen Orly demonize illegal immigrant children on her web site. Orly likes to seek sympathy because she is a mother, but she doesn’t seem to be very motherly towards other people’s children.
  • Immorality. This assumes the truth of reports of her having an extramarital affair. I take a dim view of adultery.

I recognize that everyone has their bad points; nevertheless, I can chose those people I like, and those I don’t. There are people I get along with, and those I would rather stay away from. Orly Taitz is just someone I don’t like.

99999 00000
?????????