Sheriff Joe Arpaio Has Now Been Held In Criminal Contempt

Discuss political news items / current events.
Post Reply
freedomforall
Gnolaum ∞
Posts: 16479
Location: WEST OF THE NEW JERUSALEM

Re: Sheriff Joe Arpaio Has Now Been Held In Criminal Contempt

Post by freedomforall »

lundbaek wrote:It should be no surprise that Sheriff Arpaio's trial has been pushed back. The people pushing for his conviction and incarceration on charges ( trumprd-up IMO ) want more time to make their case because they want desperately to send a message that any opposition to illegal immigration will result in severe retribution/reprisal. In the 29 years we have lived in Arizona I have noted these tactics used against other good elected state government officials who fought for constitutional government against groups ( that included prominent local LDS Church so-called leaders ) intend on circumventing constitutional and moral principles to achieve their goals. Evan Meacham, Russell Pearce, and Joe Arpaio I have especially high regard for.
I don't know if I am posing this the proper way, but here goes......I thought sheriffs are sovereign in that they do not have to do everything high Gov. commands of them. My point is this...if Arpaio is fighting the system, what right does government have in accusing him of anything when it comes to defending the Constitution?
What am I missing here?

Also, are members of Oathkeepers anywhere to be found in Arpaio's defense?

freedomforall
Gnolaum ∞
Posts: 16479
Location: WEST OF THE NEW JERUSALEM

Re: Sheriff Joe Arpaio Has Now Been Held In Criminal Contempt

Post by freedomforall »

Is this the position Arpaio is in?
Hanging-From-A-Limb.jpg
Hanging-From-A-Limb.jpg (55.57 KiB) Viewed 2299 times

lundbaek
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 11123
Location: Mesa, Arizona

Re: Sheriff Joe Arpaio Has Now Been Held In Criminal Contempt

Post by lundbaek »

It is my understanding from discussion/conversation with a leader in the local Oathkeepers organization that they are not defending Sheriff Arpaio because they consider him to be "NOT a constitutionalist" and "driven by ego" which caused him to appear to many voters as a bigot, which I believe he is not. I have been aware myself that he is certainly not a strong constitutionalist, but their contention is that he is severely lacking in that way. Truth be known, his replacement, Penzone, is even further removed from constitutional principles, so that election makes things worse.

We have to realize that, as I said above, the open borders and amnesty advocates want desperately to send a message that any opposition to illegal immigration will result in severe retribution/reprisal, and they are powered up by globalists and proceeding full speed ahead and damn the Constitution and laws relating to immigration.

User avatar
Joel
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 7043

Former Maricopa Sheriff asking supporters to help pay for his legal defense

Post by Joel »


User avatar
Joel
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 7043

Judge rejects Arpaio request for jury trial in criminal-contempt case

Post by Joel »

Judge rejects Arpaio request for jury trial in criminal-contempt case

PHOENIX - A federal judge has rejected former Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio's request for a jury trial in his criminal-contempt case.

The case is now set for a bench trial before Judge Susan Bolton, scheduled to start April 25.

Arpaio's attorneys had argued for a jury trial so they could question the motives of the judge who referred the criminal-contempt charge for trial. They suggested Federal Judge Murray Snow's anger at Arpaio had led to the referral.

Arpaio is charged with intentionally ignoring Snow's orders in a long-running racial-profiling case.

U.S. Justice Department prosecutors said Arpaio wanted the political spectacle that a jury trial would bring. But the law, they said, didn't grant Arpaio a right to a jury trial.

In her one-page order, Judge Susan Bolton agreed with the prosecution, noting there is no right to a jury trial if the potential sentence is six months or less. The maximum sentence for criminal contempt is six months in prison.

Bolton also dismissed Arpaio's claims that there would be an "appearance of impropriety" in a bench trial.

"This Court does not believe there is any such appearance," Bolton said.

The 84-year-old Arpaio lost his bid for a seventh term in office last November. He was handily defeated by Democrat Paul Penzone.

Since this is a criminal case, Arpaio, not the county, has to pay for his own defense.

User avatar
Elizabeth
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 11796
Location: East Coast Australia

Re: Sheriff Joe Arpaio Has Now Been Held In Criminal Contempt

Post by Elizabeth »

Where is justice in America?

freedomforall
Gnolaum ∞
Posts: 16479
Location: WEST OF THE NEW JERUSALEM

Re: Sheriff Joe Arpaio Has Now Been Held In Criminal Contempt

Post by freedomforall »

Elizabeth wrote: March 3rd, 2017, 1:48 am Where is justice in America?
Judges now are under the Navy rule where the Judicial system is ruled by the law of the sea, not the Constitution of the land. Therefore, the due process of law does no longer apply. Ever notice where a Judge will exclaim, "this is my courtroom?" They make all the decisions and tell everyone what to do...or else there is hell to pay. Until we get back to the Constitution as the Supreme law of the land, from shore to shore, freedom and Judicial justice will continue to erode. Have you ever seen the 100 mile Constitution zone all around the US border?

User avatar
Elizabeth
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 11796
Location: East Coast Australia

Re: Sheriff Joe Arpaio Has Now Been Held In Criminal Contempt

Post by Elizabeth »

I am just thankful I was born in Australia, although our best times are also behind us, we are still the best place to be in the world.

larsenb
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 10812
Location: Between here and Standing Rock

Re: Judge rejects Arpaio request for jury trial in criminal-contempt case

Post by larsenb »

Joel wrote: March 3rd, 2017, 1:44 am
Judge rejects Arpaio request for jury trial in criminal-contempt case

PHOENIX - A federal judge has rejected former Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio's request for a jury trial in his criminal-contempt case.

The case is now set for a bench trial before Judge Susan Bolton, scheduled to start April 25.


In her one-page order, Judge Susan Bolton agreed with the prosecution, noting there is no right to a jury trial if the potential sentence is six months or less. The maximum sentence for criminal contempt is six months in prison. . . . . . . .

The 84-year-old Arpaio lost his bid for a seventh term in office last November. He was handily defeated by Democrat Paul Penzone.

Since this is a criminal case, Arpaio, not the county, has to pay for his own defense.
Where on earth did they dig up the idea that he had no right to a jury trial?? It ain't in the Constitution, as far as I know.

Bravo to Arpaio for taking action that fully exposed the fraudulent Obama 'Birth Certificate' that Obama issued while in the White House. Obama is the one that should be under indictment, for that little piece of criminality alone.

Arpaio should be awarded one of our highest medals for this piece of excellent work.

lundbaek
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 11123
Location: Mesa, Arizona

Re: Sheriff Joe Arpaio Has Now Been Held In Criminal Contempt

Post by lundbaek »

Arpaio is not getting the support or appreciation that I would like to see him get. Far too many people do not realize the danger to our nation from the illegal immigration that he was trying to stop. And most Mormons are still not "awake to a sense of our awful situation". Too many think they are being charitable by allowing and welcoming illegal immigrants into this country, and do not realize they are supporting a treasonous cause. And Arpaio's successor, Sheriff Penzone, shows every indication of permissiveness toward illegal immigrants.

larsenb
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 10812
Location: Between here and Standing Rock

Re: Sheriff Joe Arpaio Has Now Been Held In Criminal Contempt

Post by larsenb »

lundbaek wrote: March 3rd, 2017, 6:19 pm Arpaio is not getting the support or appreciation that I would like to see him get. Far too many people do not realize the danger to our nation from the illegal immigration that he was trying to stop. And most Mormons are still not "awake to a sense of our awful situation". Too many think they are being charitable by allowing and welcoming illegal immigrants into this country, and do not realize they are supporting a treasonous cause. And Arpaio's successor, Sheriff Penzone, shows every indication of permissiveness toward illegal immigrants.
Sad and discouraging.

freedomforall
Gnolaum ∞
Posts: 16479
Location: WEST OF THE NEW JERUSALEM

Re: Judge rejects Arpaio request for jury trial in criminal-contempt case

Post by freedomforall »

larsenb wrote: March 3rd, 2017, 1:59 pm
Joel wrote: March 3rd, 2017, 1:44 am
Judge rejects Arpaio request for jury trial in criminal-contempt case

PHOENIX - A federal judge has rejected former Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio's request for a jury trial in his criminal-contempt case.

The case is now set for a bench trial before Judge Susan Bolton, scheduled to start April 25.


In her one-page order, Judge Susan Bolton agreed with the prosecution, noting there is no right to a jury trial if the potential sentence is six months or less. The maximum sentence for criminal contempt is six months in prison. . . . . . . .

The 84-year-old Arpaio lost his bid for a seventh term in office last November. He was handily defeated by Democrat Paul Penzone.

Since this is a criminal case, Arpaio, not the county, has to pay for his own defense.
Where on earth did they dig up the idea that he had no right to a jury trial?? It ain't in the Constitution, as far as I know.

Bravo to Arpaio for taking action that fully exposed the fraudulent Obama 'Birth Certificate' that Obama issued while in the White House. Obama is the one that should be under indictment, for that little piece of criminality alone.

Arpaio should be awarded one of our highest medals for this piece of excellent work.
This has been explained above.
Plus, read this: The Gospel Key To Our True Constitution, Formerly...The United States Has Two Constitutions

freedomforall
Gnolaum ∞
Posts: 16479
Location: WEST OF THE NEW JERUSALEM

Re: Sheriff Joe Arpaio Has Now Been Held In Criminal Contempt

Post by freedomforall »

lundbaek wrote: March 3rd, 2017, 6:19 pm Arpaio is not getting the support or appreciation that I would like to see him get. Far too many people do not realize the danger to our nation from the illegal immigration that he was trying to stop. And most Mormons are still not "awake to a sense of our awful situation". Too many think they are being charitable by allowing and welcoming illegal immigrants into this country, and do not realize they are supporting a treasonous cause. And Arpaio's successor, Sheriff Penzone, shows every indication of permissiveness toward illegal immigrants.
Good is now evil, and evil good.

freedomforall
Gnolaum ∞
Posts: 16479
Location: WEST OF THE NEW JERUSALEM

Re: Sheriff Joe Arpaio Has Now Been Held In Criminal Contempt

Post by freedomforall »

larsenb wrote: March 3rd, 2017, 8:11 pm
lundbaek wrote: March 3rd, 2017, 6:19 pm Arpaio is not getting the support or appreciation that I would like to see him get. Far too many people do not realize the danger to our nation from the illegal immigration that he was trying to stop. And most Mormons are still not "awake to a sense of our awful situation". Too many think they are being charitable by allowing and welcoming illegal immigrants into this country, and do not realize they are supporting a treasonous cause. And Arpaio's successor, Sheriff Penzone, shows every indication of permissiveness toward illegal immigrants.
Sad and discouraging.
SIXTH AMENDMENT—IN ALL CRIMINAL PROSECUTIONS, THE ACCUSED SHALL ENJOY THE RIGHT TO A SPEEDY AND PUBLIC TRIAL

Entire 6th Amendment pertains to criminal prosecutions
Criminal prosecutions are a typical way for a tyrant to eliminate or silence those who oppose his improper activities
Not only removes opponents—discredits them at the same time
Bill of Rights contains strong provisions to protect freedom by preventing use of criminal proceedings to eliminate opposition—have already referred to several—grand jury—double jeopardy—self incrimination—due process of law
Speedy trial is an important safeguard
Without requirement of speedy trial tyrant might delay trial so that in effect imprisoning without trial [p. 67]
Delaying trial can be a form of intimidation to accused and others—emotional stress of uncertainty
Public trial is another important safeguard
One of characteristics of fairness is willingness to have public see proceedings
Secret trial is likely to be a kangaroo type of trial where due process principles of fairness and justice are ignored
If trial is unfair a public trial alerts others to fact that their own freedom is in jeopardy
Those who might assist with defense are able to attend
Show of support from spectators may have some influence on judge and jury

SIXTH AMENDMENT—IN ALL CRIMINAL PROSECUTIONS, THE ACCUSED SHALL ENJOY THE RIGHT TO . . . AN IMPARTIAL JURY OF THE STATE AND DISTRICT WHEREIN THE CRIME SHALL HAVE BEEN COMMITTED, WHICH DISTRICT SHALL HAVE BEEN PREVIOUSLY ASCERTAINED BY LAW

The Declaration of Independence spoke of “a long Train of Abuses and Usurpations” evincing “a Design to reduce them under absolute Despotism
One of the facts listed in support of that charge was “depriving us, in many Cases, of the Benefits of Trial by Jury”—this was done by extending the jurisdiction of the admiralty courts where there were no juries
Apart from the separate Bill of Rights added by the first ten amendments, the Constitution itself guaranteed the right of trial by jury in all criminal eases (Article III, Section 2, Clause 3)
Alexander Hamilton in Federalist No. 83: “The friends and adversaries of the plan of the convention (the Constitution), if they agree in nothing else, concur at least in the value they set upon the trial by jury; or if there is any difference between them it consists in this: the former regard it as a valuable safeguard to liberty; the latter represent it as the very palladium of free government.” (a palladium is an important safeguard or protection) [p. 68]
The importance of trial by jury to the preservation of freedom itself is largely lost sight of today—modem emphasis is on more rapid trials and reliance on skill of judge
Importance of jury trial is in preservation of freedom—provides protection for individual who speaks out against oppressive actions by government officials who might seek to silence him through “arbitrary methods of prosecuting pretended offences.” (Federalist No. 83)
The judge is an officer of the government—where the government is oppressive he is not likely to oppose it—in fact his continuance in office as a judge is probably dependent on his willingness to cooperate with the wishes of the tyrant
But a jury of the peers of the accused can protect him by refusing to find him guilty
A serious problem has arisen from losing sight of the jury’s function as a preserver of freedom
Tyrant wants to get rid of someone who he knows has not committed a crime so there is nothing a jury can convict him of
Tyrant passes a law making something that person does a crime
A trial is held and the jury is told their function is limited to judging the facts—if the person has done the particular act they must convict him
By depriving the jury of the right to judge the law as well as the facts its function as a protector of freedom is greatly impaired
At the time of adoption of the Bill of Rights the jury was able to protect individuals against unjust laws through its clearly recognized right to judge both the law and the facts
Even if the facts clearly showed that the person did the act the law said was a crime the jury could refuse to convict him on the ground that they felt that under the circumstances it would be unjust to do so
John Jay was a lawyer and one of the most respected men in the colonies at the time of independence—he had been president of the Continental Congress—he was the author of the first New York constitution and that state’s first Chief Justice—he was one of the [p. 69] negotiators of the peace treaty with England ending the Revolutionary War—he was one of the authors of The Federalist—he was the first Chief Justice of the United States
The following is part of a charge to a jury given by Chief Justice John Jay in 1794 (ratification of the first 10 Amendments was completed in 1791)

“It may not be amiss, here, Gentlemen, to remind you of the good rule, that, on questions of fact, it is the province of the jury, on questions of law, it is the province of the court to decide. But it must be observed that by the same law which recognizes this reasonable distribution of jurisdiction, you have nevertheless a right to take upon yourselves to judge of both, and to determine the law as well as the fact in controversy. On this and on every other occasion, however, we have no doubt, you will pay the respect, which is due to the opinion of the court: For, as on the one hand, it is presumed, that juries are the best judges of facts; it is, on the other hand, presumable, that the courts are the best judges of law. But still both objects are lawfully within your power of decision.” (Georgia v. Bailsford, 3 US 1, 1794)
The jury’s right to decide the law as well as the facts was gradually eliminated over a period of many years
To a considerable extent the change was brought about by judges refusing to allow juries to judge the law in spite of statutory and state constitutional provisions to the contrary (Lloyd E. Moore, The Jury, Tool of Kings, Palladium of Liberty, p. 179)
That disregard of law by judges in arrogating to themselves the legal rights of juries emphasizes the importance of juries as protectors of individuals
The value of a jury as a protection against tyranny is not limited to a situation where someone takes over a government and seeks to eliminate opposition
Judges are human and sometimes they become unreasonable and let themselves be influenced by their own prejudices
United States Supreme Court opinion in Duncan v. Louisiana, 391 US 145, 1968: “Providing an accused with the right to be tried by a jury of his peers gave him an inestimable safeguard against the corrupt or overzealous prosecutor and against the complaint, biased or eccentric judge.” [p. 70]
Impartial jury—no protection for individual standing up for freedom if government officials he criticizes can choose as jurors their own men who they know will convict him
Jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law
Jury familiar with general standards and attitudes and circumstances in community
Their own general knowledge of the surrounding facts would make it difficult for a prosecutor to mislead them
Their general familiarity with the people and circumstances would help them in judging the law as well as the facts—even if the accused did the act which the law says is a crime, is he really being brought to trial for some other reason
Previously ascertained by law
Tyrant might try to juggle district boundaries to get jury less familiar with circumstances and that can more easily be persuaded by prosecutor
Cannot do so—district must have been previously set by law

http://www.inspiredconstitution.org/jh_ ... 3.html#p61

lundbaek
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 11123
Location: Mesa, Arizona

Re: Sheriff Joe Arpaio Has Now Been Held In Criminal Contempt

Post by lundbaek »

I believe the main purpose of this prosecution of Joe Arpaio is to send the message that you don't interfere with illegal immigration in this here part of Arizona.

freedomforall
Gnolaum ∞
Posts: 16479
Location: WEST OF THE NEW JERUSALEM

Re: Sheriff Joe Arpaio Has Now Been Held In Criminal Contempt

Post by freedomforall »

lundbaek wrote: March 4th, 2017, 9:51 am I believe the main purpose of this prosecution of Joe Arpaio is to send the message that you don't interfere with illegal immigration in this here part of Arizona.
Joe Arpaio, the Bundy's, the Hammond's, Lavoy Finicum...= government tyranny and taking away property rights so the elite can usurp more power and control of "we the people." See a pattern forming here?

User avatar
Joel
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 7043

Arpaio resumes bid to recuse judge from profiling case

Post by Joel »

Arpaio resumes bid to recuse judge from profiling case

PHOENIX (AP) - Former Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio plans to resume his bid to get a federal judge disqualified from a racial profiling case even though the lawman has been out of office for more than two months.

An Arpaio attorney said in court papers Friday that his client intends to keep pursuing his recusal request against U.S. District Judge Murray Snow, who ruled in 2013 that sheriff's officers had profiled Latinos and last year recommended a criminal contempt-of-court charge against Arpaio for defying an order to stop his immigration patrols.

The contempt case is believed to have contributed to Arpaio's crushing defeat in the November election against Paul Penzone after 24 years in office.

Arpaio made the recusal request the day after he was officially charged with misdemeanor contempt-of-court.

His attorneys argue the judge had improper private conversations with an official hired to monitor the sheriff's office on behalf of the court, saying the encounters included discussions about whether the sheriff's office had committed contempt of court. They said ethics rules for federal judges prohibit such conversations.

It's the second time Arpaio has tried to get Snow to disqualify from the case.

The judge rejected the first attempt in July 2015 when the sheriff alleged that questions by the judge about secret investigations conducted by Arpaio created an appearance of judicial bias.

Earlier in the profiling case, Arpaio succeeded in getting another federal judge to recuse herself from the case after his lawyers questioned her impartiality.

Arpaio faces an April 25 trial on the contempt charge.

He has acknowledged prolonging his immigration patrols after Snow issued the order, but insisted his defiance wasn't intentional.

He has pleaded not guilty to the charge. If convicted, the 84-year-old Arpaio could face up to six months in jail.

User avatar
Joel
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 7043

Re: Sheriff Joe Arpaio Has Now Been Held In Criminal Contempt

Post by Joel »

Arpaio's new lawyer wants trial delay because of bar mitzvah

PHOENIX - The new attorney defending Joe Arpaio in his criminal contempt case wants the trial delayed at least two months because the attorney's family is preparing for a bar mitzvah.

The former Maricopa County sheriff's trial is scheduled to start April 25.

In a court filing, attorney Mark Goldman said he needed time to "get up to speed in the case." Goldman added:
The Goldmans have a scheduling conflict as their only son’s Bar Mitzvah is being held on April 29, 2017. The Bar Mitzvah and all of the events surrounding it, were scheduled wellover a year ago... In addition, The Goldmans will be hosting several out-of-town guests, including family members and friends, who will start arriving on or about April 23, 2017.
The filing indicates that Arpaio's longtime criminal defense attorney, former federal prosecutor Mel McDonald, is no longer on the case. McDonald could not be reached for comment Monday.

The trial delay, if granted by Federal Judge Susan Bolton, would be the third in the criminal contempt case.

Arpaio, who was booted out of office by voters last November, is charged with intentionally ignoring a federal judge's orders in his racial profiling case.

Goldman is a longtime associate of Arpaio's and former County Attorney Andrew Thomas

User avatar
Joel
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 7043

Re: Sheriff Joe Arpaio Has Now Been Held In Criminal Contempt

Post by Joel »

Ex-Phoenix sheriff wants his campaign talk banned at trial

PHOENIX (AP) — For nine years, Joe Arpaio enjoyed solid popularity as the sheriff of metro Phoenix by locking up immigrants in the U.S. illegally and regularly telling news reporters that no one would stop his crackdowns.

The former lawman who made his fight against illegal immigration a fixture of his speeches and media interviews during his last three campaigns asked a judge on Friday to prohibit prosecutors from mentioning those statements at his April 25 trial on a criminal contempt-of-court charge.

Arpaio, who was defeated last November after 24 years as sheriff for sprawling Maricopa County that encompasses Phoenix, faces the misdemeanor charge for disobeying a court order to halt his immigration patrols, which continued for 17 months after a judge issued the order.

To win a conviction, prosecutors must prove that Arpaio intended to violate the judge's order. The 84-year-old Arpaio, who would face up to six months in jail if convicted, has acknowledged prolonging the patrols, but insists he did so unintentionally.

Mark Goldman, one of Arpaio's attorneys, said it would be prejudicial to use his client's comments during campaigns at his trial and that the remarks "were campaign posturing and not made under oath."

Statements made by politicians during campaigns aren't indicative of what politicians will actually do while in office, Goldman wrote in a court filing.

He characterized campaign speeches as political posturing aimed at winning votes, saying Arpaio made the statements during his political races to bolster his reputation for being tough on illegal immigration.

"It would be naive for anyone to truly believe that any politician will actually do everything he says he will," Goldman wrote.

Goldman did not specify which statements he wants excluded as evidence in Arpaio's trial.
U.S. District Judge Murray Snow, who presides over the profiling case that Arpaio lost nearly four years ago, said in an earlier ruling that Arpaio ignored the order because he believed continuing his immigration enforcement efforts would help his 2012 campaign.

Snow also has said Arpaio's office issued news releases indicating that he was aware of the court order but that he would continue to enforce federal immigration laws.

Goldman said letting statements made by Arpaio during his campaigns to be used at trial will have a chilling effect on protected political speech about issues of public importance.

"It will only encourage candidates to hide their views, which will increase opacity in government and voter dissatisfaction with government officials," Goldman wrote.

The decision on whether to allow Arpaio's campaign statements at his trial will be up to U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton, who also will decide the lawman's guilt or innocence.

Lawyers for Arpaio also have asked Bolton to bar Latinos who were illegally detained when the court order was violated from testifying at trial, arguing that their testimony would hurt Arpaio's case and is irrelevant in determining whether he committed a crime.

User avatar
Joel
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 7043

Longtime Joe Arpaio attorney asks to step down

Post by Joel »


User avatar
Joel
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 7043

Arpaio loses bid to dismiss contempt case

Post by Joel »


User avatar
Joel
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 7043

Arpaio wants to call Sessions as witness at contempt trial

Post by Joel »


User avatar
Joel
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 7043

Judge delays Arpaio contempt case

Post by Joel »


freedomforall
Gnolaum ∞
Posts: 16479
Location: WEST OF THE NEW JERUSALEM

Re: Judge delays Arpaio contempt case

Post by freedomforall »

Joel wrote: April 14th, 2017, 7:24 pm
Hey, merely looking at the still, first frame of this video is a great ad for Kia Motors. :-?

User avatar
Joel
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 7043

Re: Sheriff Joe Arpaio Has Now Been Held In Criminal Contempt

Post by Joel »

fyi as a tangent,Hyundai and Kia are recalling nearly 1.2 million cars and SUVs because the engines can fail

http://6abc.com/automotive/hyundai-and- ... e/1849456/

Post Reply