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?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.
What am I missing here?
Also, are members of Oathkeepers anywhere to be found in Arpaio's defense?