Trump’s Attorney General Jeff Sessions is having a busy week. In addition to testifying before Congress over the insubstantial Russian hacking scandal, he is now expecting a subpoena in the contempt case against former Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpaio.
Arpaio is the famous Maricopa County lawman who spearheaded an investigation into the legitimacy of Obama’s birth certificate. His team found nine points of evidence suggesting that the document may have been forged. According to the sheriff, photographic analysis showed that the former president’s birth certificate was a retouched version of the birth certificate of one Johanna Ah’Nee.
In each of the nine points, the xeroxed letters and phrases are shown to be identical. If the reader will take the time to visualize how xeroxed characters frequently appear with randomized spots, flecks, and marks around them, it is easy to see how a copied Xerox letter or number could be matched to its original – in much the same way that fingerprints can be matched to their source.
Not only do the copy artifacts match, but the angle of the type is also identical in each of the nine points of mirroring. The documents were examined by two different forensic experts who live on different continents and never actively collaborated, yet they came to the same conclusions about the two birth certificates.
This may not be conclusive evidence that Obama’s birth certificate is a forgery, but it is strong evidence calling for further investigation. But further investigation is unlikely because now Arpaio is facing charges of contempt.
The charges concern Arpaio’s alleged refusal to follow the order of a federal judge to cease enforcing immigration laws.
That is to say, a federal judge ordered the sheriff to stop enforcing immigration laws, which would be a violation of the law itself. Essentially, Arpaio is being held in contempt for refusing to break the law. This is exactly what many people expect Sessions to say when he is called to the stand to testify: that Arpaio refused to follow an unlawful bench order by ending immigration enforcement activities in Arizona.
If you follow the mainstream media, you’ve probably heard that Arpaio was ordered to stop racial profiling activities, but the fact is he was asked to stop enforcing immigration laws – two very different things.
This, according to Arpaio’s attorney, Mel McDonald, is just the ‘latest round’ in a longstanding conflict between the sheriff and the federal government. Just as in recent years, when we have seen federal agencies targeting rural communities and local authorities over the right to land and sovereignty – all in the same time frame as the two decades-long campaign against Arpaio.
In similar conflicts, federal authorities would bring one charge against a family, farm, sheriff, or other local-level entity, and when they failed to achieve the desired result, new charges would be leveled with the same essential intended outcome. This would continue until something stuck, and the feds got what they are after. In this case, the federal government is interested in softening our already porous southern border.
Some legal analysts believe that Arpaio’s request for Jeff Sessions to testify on his behalf will not be honored since Sessions would be testifying against people who now work for him. After all, Sessions is now the nation’s top law enforcement officer. However, it is believed that the attorney general will want to testify in this case since he is known for his own tough stance against illegal immigration. If that is the case, it is likely that Sessions will testify to the effect that the judge who ordered Arpaio to stand down did so in violation of federal law.
This is not the first time Joe Arpaio has faced contempt charges. Over the years, many federal judges have leveled contempt charges against the Arizona sheriff in attempts to prevent him from being reelected under the guise of corruption or discrimination. Nevertheless, Joe Arpaio continued to win elections and keep his job as sheriff for over a quarter of a century. This left a legacy that locals will remember, but few who rely on mainstream news will ever understand.
But what is this all about? Sanctuary cities. The federal court that is pursuing Arpaio has also sanctioned federally designated municipalities for not cooperating enough with the federal mandate to take and shelter illegal immigrants.
Crime researcher Alicia Powe said, “Statistics show, from 2000 through 2014, sanctuary cities had higher crime rates than control cities. We examined 54 cities that implemented sanctuary ordinances. The data shows illegal aliens released by sanctuary jurisdictions commit more crimes than citizens.”
Ultimately, this is bigger than Sessions or Arpaio. This is about law enforcers taking a stand against blatant law breakers within our own government.
~ Liberty Planet