Even wingnuts should be frightened by this
- Thread starter RichardPeterJohnson
- Start date
Which part?
Using a PI to investigate comments made regarding conspiratorial efforts of a judge to undermine an election?
Racial profiling?
Enforcing immigration laws?
Most of what I read seemed ok to me. Moreover, your attempt at comparing this to what happened in Wisconsin (if what was posted was accurate) is ridiculous.
Using a PI to investigate comments made regarding conspiratorial efforts of a judge to undermine an election?
Racial profiling?
Enforcing immigration laws?
Most of what I read seemed ok to me. Moreover, your attempt at comparing this to what happened in Wisconsin (if what was posted was accurate) is ridiculous.
Sure, it's ok for an elected law enforcement officer to use his position of power to investigate a political opponent for spite and intimidation. It is unbelievable that you can't see this.
I guess I am not too worried about what a sheriff in Arizona does. Besides, the sheriff in Mingo County was doing all that an more and the county prosecutor was helping him out. The feds busted them last year.
If a WV state official or a federal official or agency were doing that sort of thing I would be more concerned, fortunately nobody has to worry about being investigated by the IRS for political reasons.
If a WV state official or a federal official or agency were doing that sort of thing I would be more concerned, fortunately nobody has to worry about being investigated by the IRS for political reasons.
2 points here im assuming you are intentionally not getting which separates it from the thread you were intending to mock through comparison.
1. A private investigator was being used not entities of the Sheriff's office.
2. It was done only after the judges wife made the claim that the judge interfered and tampered with an election. Mind you, an election for a position the judge was against.
Further, you understand that had Joe used actual investigators and tax payer dollars he would then have been liable for ethics violations. He did it the right way. Had the investigation turned up any misdeeds the information could then be turned over to the officials to conduct a formal investigation.
You attempt to make a claim of impropriety yet fail to see the irony of the judge being the one who was abusing the power of his position. So I guess to your original point, yes, it frightens me to the lengths your party will go to stamp out opposing positions and views.
Thanks for playing. I'll actually be curious to see where this one goes. Keep us posted.
Last edited:
