Donald Trump and US politics

Still awaiting Jennik reply. Or any other who claims with certainty that Arpaio is racist. (I merely suspect he is.)

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

Still awaiting Jennik reply. Or any other who claims with certainty that Arpaio is racist. (I merely suspect he is.)

I assumed you were merely concern trolling, since the level of ignorance necessary to honestly ask that question is staggering. The evidence, which I'm confident you're already aware of, can be found in hundreds of articles like these.

Trump Pardons Former Sheriff Joe Arpaio, Who Illegally Targeted Latinos

Anti-Defamation League slams Arpaio pardon: 'We stand today with the Latino community'

What you need to know about former Arizona sheriff Joe Arpaio’s record on illegal immigration

The problem is, you're most likely using the same standard for racism as many other modern right-wingers (and yes, the views you constantly espouse on this forum place you firmly in that category regardless of your laughable claims of centrism). If there's no footage of Arpaio using racial epithets or literally hanging non-whites, it's not reasonable to call him racist. As I recall saying to you and the other right-wingers in this forum many months ago, the fact that you've personally redefined racism to mean something ridiculously narrow doesn't change the reality of racism.

Any reasonable person will accept that Arpaio is racist given the overwhelming evidence against him. Modern right-wingers like yourself simply aren't reasonable, though. Reality denial has become an integral part of your existence. You hold others to completely unrealistic standards in order to deny clear and obvious facts about reality. Your delusion is willful and strong.

"

Jennik wrote:

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

Still awaiting Jennik reply. Or any other who claims with certainty that Arpaio is racist. (I merely suspect he is.)

I assumed you were merely concern trolling, since the level of ignorance necessary to honestly ask that question is staggering. The evidence, which I'm confident you're already aware of, can be found in hundreds of articles like these.

Trump Pardons Former Sheriff Joe Arpaio, Who Illegally Targeted Latinos

Anti-Defamation League slams Arpaio pardon: 'We stand today with the Latino community'

What you need to know about former Arizona sheriff Joe Arpaio’s record on illegal immigration

The problem is, you're most likely using the same standard for racism as many other modern right-wingers (and yes, the views you constantly espouse on this forum place you firmly in that category regardless of your laughable claims of centrism). If there's no footage of Arpaio using racial epithets or literally hanging non-whites, it's not reasonable to call him racist. As I recall saying to you and the other right-wingers in this forum many months ago, the fact that you've personally redefined racism to mean something ridiculously narrow doesn't change the reality of racism.

I do not have a narrow definition of racism. I do think it's perfectly reasonable to say things like "I suspect Joe Arpaio is a racist." For example, I have already said I suspect he's a racist.

For instance, your HuffPo link:

"

Former Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio... was convicted of criminal contempt last month for violating a 2011 order that barred Arpaio and his office from detaining individuals solely based on suspicions about their legal status.

Illegal immigration is a crime. If Arpaio's officers had a reason for this suspicion that was not based on the ethnicity of the individual -- maybe they pull over a vehicle with Mexican license plates -- then that's not racist. If they pull over people just because they're Latino -- and Arpaio is probably supporting this -- then that's racist.

"

U.S. Department of Justice’s Civil Rights Division concluded... Arpaio’s officers called Latinos “wetbacks,” “Mexican bitches,” “fucking Mexicans” and “stupid Mexicans,” the Justice Department...

Some of Arpaio's subordinates were certainly racist. This leads one to believe Arpaio himself is probably racist; at a minimum, he hasn't done enough to eliminate racism from the office he is responsible for.

"

...and Latino drivers were four to nine times as likely to be stopped by his officers as non-Latino drivers were.

It could be that Latinos commit a disproportionate amount of crime in Arpaio's county. But it could also be not that (or disproportionately, but not to the scale of 4-9 times), in which case that's systemic racism.

From your WaPo link:

"

In 2013, U.S. District Judge G. Murray Snow found the sheriff’s office engaged in systemic racial profiling of Latinos in its anti-illegal-immigration efforts. Snow ordered the agency to stop detaining people solely because they were suspected of being undocumented.

But Arpaio resisted. He was charged with, then convicted of, criminal contempt of court for intentionally violating Snow’s order. Arpaio’s attorneys now are asking U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton for a new trial or to reconsider her verdict, arguing Arpaio was wrongfully denied a jury trial. Typically, a jury trial is not required when the defendant’s maximum sentence is six months in jail — which Arpaio faces at his October sentencing.

Emphasis mine. I am behind a pardon for anyone denied a jury prior to a sentence of months of imprisonment. How is it even constitutional?

Furthermore, how can a law enforcement agency effectively enforce a law if it is prohibited from detaining those suspected of it, unless also suspected of an additional crime?

Overall, Arpaio is very likely a racist, but I haven't seen a smoking gun. His subordinates were certainly racist, and he bears responsibility for that, whether he is racist or not. However, such responsibility should have been a matter for a jury of his peers... especially considering that the District Court bizarrely ordered him to stop enforcing a law, and his contempt conviction was for ignoring that order.

"

“[Arpaio] 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. … Is there anyone in local law enforcement who has done more to crack down on illegal immigration than Sheriff Joe?”
— Trump, quoted on Fox News, Aug. 13

I don't think Trump is wrong about Arpaio and illegal immigration, because prosecuting illegal immigration is not inherently racist (although I would love to see you disagree). And it is possible to have the virtue of strong law enforcement and the vice of racism at the same time.

I just read about the newest "muh Russia" bombshell. Essentially, some dude sent Trump's lawyer a sales pitch, Trump's lawyer responded with gtfo and that was it. This must surely be the end of Trump right?

Oh and the press got the emails from the House Intelligence Committee. I bet 2c Adam Schiff was the leaker.

I swear I wrote my previous post before reading this: http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/08/28/nolte-3-reasons-trumps-pardon-of-sheriff-joe-arpaio-is-awesome/

Wow, you agree with the most dishonest and delusional of right-wing propagandists. Shocking. Absolutely shocking.

That jackass repeatedly claims that all Arpaio was guilty of was "enforcing the law." You know that's complete bullshit, right? The crimes against humanity Arpaio's guilty of are common knowledge at this point. How the hell can you possibly link to that sort of incredibly dishonest propaganda as if it's anything other than garbage?

Again, your standards when it comes to believing right-wing insanity are absurdly low. Your standards when it comes to accepting reality are unreasonably high. This has resulted in you, like the rest of today's right, being very out of touch with reality. The ridiculous "anyone who exercises critical thinking arrives at my position" ego and arrogance doesn't help.

"

Sheriff Joe swore to uphold the law, not to uphold illegal orders given by a lawless president and his robed minions.

What a disgusting load of bullshit that article is. Who'd expect better from a right-wing hate site, though?

"

Jennik wrote:

That jackass repeatedly claims that all Arpaio was guilty of was "enforcing the law." You know that's complete bullshit, right?

I suspect he's guilty of more, as previously explained, so I would not use that phrase myself. But without question it's the only thing he has been found guilty of, as in convicted -- and consequently, the only thing Trump pardoned him for.

"

Jennik wrote:

The crimes against humanity Arpaio's guilty of are common knowledge at this point.

This is like saying the Clintons' serial murder spree is common knowledge. Show me proof.

"

Jennik wrote:

How the hell can you possibly link to that sort of incredibly dishonest propaganda as if it's anything other than garbage?

This article is pretty honest considering its clear bias. Honest about Tent City being horrible, honest about what Arpaio was convicted of, honest about the lack of jury trial. Same facts I pulled from your left-wing newspapers. Show me proof of a lie.

It's not funny that you're calling a news outlet an extremist hate site. That's much worse than calling CNN et al "fake news." The implications regarding their right to freedom of speech are all too clear. Stop it.

You're saying the same bullshit I've dismantled many times before. I'm not repeating myself.

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

This is like saying the Clintons' serial murder spree is common knowledge. Show me proof.

What an absolutely disgusting false equivalency. You're blindly denying reality just as hard as you go, but no rational person sees those two statements as remotely similar. You should be better than this. Also, the level of "proof" you require here is farcically high, as I've said before. You're not being skeptical. You're being a denialist. You're sitting at the table with flat Earthers and Holocaust deniers.

"

Jennik wrote:

Show me proof of a lie.

Propaganda doesn't necessarily have to contain anything untrue. Still, that article's absolutely littered with complete nonsense statements like the quote in my previous post that are simply not representative of reality. The level of dishonest spin in that article is staggering. The fact that these aren't obvious to you is very telling.

As is typical of denialists and extremists, your standards when it comes to things you want to believe are incredibly low. Your standards when it comes to things you don't want to believe are incredibly high. I could most likely never convince you even the most ridiculous of untrue statements in that article are false, just as I could never convince you of Arpaio's racism. You are simply too well-defended against reality for facts to break through.

Practically every sentence in that article contains insane right-wing propaganda. If you weren't already a right-wing zealot, you would have picked up on this.

"

The only time I get nervous about this American experiment of ours is when unelected thugs attempt to usurp the power of the people. I am talking about our robed masters, those we call judges.

Articles like this are the equivalent of WWII propaganda posters demonizing Jews and the Japanese. It's delusional, fear-mongering, right-wing extremist insanity. It feels so right and reasonable to you that you failed to even notice, though.

Jennik TL;DR - my rants = facts/proof.

Yeah. No.

I'm still waiting on evidence that Arpaio is a murderer who committed crimes against humanity. "It's obvious!" in the sphere of your delusional mind, isn't good enough. Those are serious crimes, and if they had ANY evidence for that, the Obama administration would have nailed him on it. But that's not what he was charged with.

Also, Breitbart is getting ready to grow "bigly" as Trump would say. Steve Bannon is coming back, and they're looking to get a channel on cable news. They'd effectively be a Fox News, just more to the right. Breitbart is getting ready to get massive amounts of exposure to the public. The alt-right might very well end up with a cable news channel! The beatings have just begun (politically)!