Green Room

Exclusive Interview: Sheriff Joe Arpaio Investigating Obama, Thinks There’s “Fire” as Well as “Smoke”

posted at 8:04 am on March 1, 2012 by

As most Americans shift their eyes from Michigan and Arizona towards Super Tuesday, a long simmering issue for some seems to have finally gained momentum. For weeks there has been a quiet murmur in the birther community that “America’s Toughest Sheriff,” Joe Arpaio, also known as “Sheriff Joe,” was on the verge of some big announcement.

I interviewed Sheriff Joe to find out.

Yesterday, the Drudge Report posted a World Net Daily article that celebrated the fact that even mainstream media outlets like ABC and NBC were requesting credentials to the press conference.

“The event is tomorrow at 1 p.m. Mountain Standard Time in Phoenix, 3 p.m. Eastern, and will be live-streamed by WND.

The topic of discussion will be an investigation by Arpaio’s Cold Case Posse into concerns about Obama’s eligibility. It’s the first time an official law enforcement report has addressed many of the allegations about the presumptive 2012 Democratic nominee for president.

The issues include Obama’s eligibility under the U.S. Constitution’s requirements, questions about his use of a Connecticut Social Security number and the image of his purported birth certificate from Hawaii.”

World Net Daily has recently come under fire by the Huffington Post, who, in its best copy and paste fashion, accused the Sheriff Joe of being “bribed.”

Huffington Post:

“That cozy relationship defines Corsi and WND’s coverage of Arpaio and the investigation. It has been so fawning and biased that it appears to be an effort to guarantee that the probe generates a result favorable to Corsi and unfavorable to Obama — in other words, a form of bribery. On top of that, Corsi is violating journalistic ethics by playing both sides of the fence — writing about an investigation he not only instigated but participated in.”

While most of the Huffington Post claims are unsubstantiated, some people may have legitimate concerns about the scope and quality of the investigation. To address those concerns, WND has offered free copies of the report.

“In addition to the live-streaming, WND will make available to the public, the same day by email, the official report distributed to media by Arpaio’s investigators. Those interested in receiving the report can sign up for the free service.

Top national media organizations have indicated their plans to attend, and bookings for radio and television reports are in the works. Expected are reporters from the Associated Press, Reuters, Univision, the Washington Times and NBC, CBS and ABC affiliates, as well statewide radio networks, among many others.

When reached by me by phone this evening in Arizona, Sheriff Joe spoke of his reasons for the investigation. An elected official with over 20 years in law enforcement, Sheriff Joe told me that it was an independent, fair and non-politically motivated attempt to have qualified individuals examine the evidence.

In response to a request from over 250 tea party members in Arizona,Arpaio formed a five man “posse” Arpaio called his all-volunteer group the Cold Case Posse and the posse acted independently of the Sheriff office. “Since they were independent, I can fully guarantee that no tax dollars where used to fund this investigation,” Sheriff Joe stated.

A quick Wikipedia search yields that the use of a “posse” is not new in Arizona.

Building upon Maricopa County’s 50-year-old program, Arpaio expanded the all-volunteer citizen posse through heavy recruiting. The volunteers perform many duties for the sheriff’s office:

  • Search and rescue
  • Emergency communications
  • Prisoner transport
  • Traffic control
  • Backup for sworn deputies
  • Office administrative duties
  • Holiday Mall Patrol (which provides motorist assistance and security for shoppers during the holiday shopping season)
  • Deadbeat parent details targeting men and women with outstanding arrest warrants for failure to pay child support
  • Assisting in immigration sweeps

The timing of the press conference has raised a number of eyebrows as Arpaio faces increasing pressure from a years long investigation by the Department of Justice.  An email sent out by  a group called Grassfire Nation reports that over 100,000 petitions were delivered to the DOJ by Arpaio supporters and informed members of attempts by the DOJ to have Arpaio put a stop to those petitions.

Though Arpaio gave few details of today’s announcement, he spoke confidently about the members of his posse which include three former law enforcement officers and two retired attorneys. According to a number of sources, today’s announcement will lead to some serious questions that will demand answers.

Sheriff Joe puts it bluntly:

“There is new evidence that can prove fraud, forgery and other criminal offenses, I am not accusing the President of committing such acts but these are not just allegations. There are a lot of smoke screens and a lot of smoke. Where there’s smoke, there’s fire”

Recently in the Green Room:

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmm.

44Magnum on March 1, 2012 at 8:45 AM

Someone could produce a picture of a baby being born underneath a “Welcome to Kenya” sign with the name Barack Obama around its neck and this story would STILL be ignored.

Rohall1215 on March 1, 2012 at 8:50 AM

To be followed by a lot of attacks against the messenger and no follow up on any of the possible merits of the information presented…

Spiders from Mars on March 1, 2012 at 8:52 AM

Likely nothing solid. But it is nice that he’s hitting back against the politicized Obama DOJ.

I still don’t think you are a natural born citizen unless both parents were citizens at the time of your birth/no dual citizenship/a citizen only of this county. That rules out obama and rubio.

aniptofar on March 1, 2012 at 8:56 AM

I still don’t think you are a natural born citizen unless both parents were citizens at the time of your birth/no dual citizenship/a citizen only of this county. That rules out obama and rubio.

aniptofar on March 1, 2012 at 8:56 AM

And pretty much everyone else. Both my grandmothers came to this country, so my mother and father aren’t citizens, and thus I’m not a citizen. Even though I can trace my ancestry back until the time of the Mayflower. You have one parent who is a US citizen, congratulations, you are a US citizen. There’s enough on real issues to kick the marxist out of office, we don’t need the black helicopter crowd.

rbj on March 1, 2012 at 9:32 AM

a long simmering issue for some seems to have finally gained momentum

finally!

so much fail.

sesquipedalian on March 1, 2012 at 10:21 AM

I’d bet it’s this.

WeekendAtBernankes on March 1, 2012 at 10:33 AM

You have one parent who is a US citizen, congratulations, you are a US citizen.

rbj on March 1, 2012 at 9:32 AM

Based on what law, may I ask?

The few Supreme Court cases which reference the concept of “natural born citizen” refer to the definition of the term contained in The Law of Nations, written by Emmerich de Vattel, a Swiss-German philosopher of law. In that book, the definition of a “natural born citizen” appears, in Book I, Chapter 19, § 212, of the English translation of 1797 (p. 110), and says, in pertinent part: “The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens.”

So to be a natural-born citizen of a nation, a person must (1) be born in that nation, and (2) be born of parents who are citizens of that nation.

Note that the term speaks of parents/citizens in the plural; it does not say of born of “a” parent who is “a” citizen. As we all know, Barry Obama was born of only one U.S. citizen parent, his mother. His father was Kenyan and a citizen of the British Empire at the time of Barry’s birth.

AZCoyote on March 1, 2012 at 10:33 AM

AZCoyote on March 1, 2012 at 10:33 AM

Ever hear of “anchor babies?” You’re born in this country (with some exceptions) you are a US citizen. While we may look to Vattel to help us make a decision on citizenship, he’s not dispositive on the issue.

US soldier stationed in Germany, marries a German girl. They have a baby. You’re going to tell me, and that soldier, that his kid isn’t a US citizen?

rbj on March 1, 2012 at 10:53 AM

You’re going to tell me, and that soldier, that his kid isn’t a US citizen?

Rules for people born between December 23, 1952 and November 13, 1986?

When one parent was a US citizen and the other a foreign national, the US citizen parent must have resided in the US for a total of 10 years prior to the birth of the child, with five of the years after the age of 14.

WeekendAtBernankes on March 1, 2012 at 11:16 AM

rbj on March 1, 2012 at 10:53 AM

You’re confusing terms. There is a difference between native-born citizens and natural-born citizens. The Founders required that a U.S. president be a natural-born citizen and that term, as defined at the time (see, de Vattel), meant a person born in the U.S. to two U.S. citizen parents.

AZCoyote on March 1, 2012 at 12:03 PM

And pretty much everyone else. Both my grandmothers came to this country, so my mother and father aren’t citizens, and thus I’m not a citizen. Even though I can trace my ancestry back until the time of the Mayflower. You have one parent who is a US citizen, congratulations, you are a US citizen. There’s enough on real issues to kick the marxist out of office, we don’t need the black helicopter crowd.

I don’t understand why this is a Black Helicopter issue, I agree there is enough to throw the marxist out but the question of whether he is eligible to be President doesn’t seem whacked out like suggesting that the U.S. committed 9-11. It seems to me the reason this is such a huge conspiracy theory is because the Lamestream media deemed that opinion

jmw on March 1, 2012 at 12:42 PM

I still don’t think you are a natural born citizen unless both parents were citizens at the time of your birth/no dual citizenship/a citizen only of this county. That rules out obama and rubio.

aniptofar on March 1, 2012 at 8:56 AM

Agreed. Unfortunately, that counts Jindal out as well, but rules are rules and the constitution is the basis of that rule.

AH_C on March 1, 2012 at 1:28 PM

Anita, it is so good to see you here at HA! I have missed your posts. Are you doing anything on acorn?

I do plan to watch sheriff Joe’s press conference this afternoon. I hope it isn’t all hype and there is some news we don’t already know though?
L

letget on March 1, 2012 at 2:29 PM

AZCoyote on March 1, 2012 at 10:33 AM

1) there has never been any reference to Vatel in regards to the natural born Citizen clause in any supreme court case;
2) natural born Citizen derives from the concept of natural born Subject under English common law which found that anyone born within borders of a country was necessarily a subject/citizen of said country;
3) While you are entitled to your own opinion, not one judge in approxmately 100 birther lawsuits has ever agreed with your argument that natural born citizen requires birth in U.S. and 2 citizen parents;
4) Most recently a Federal District judge in E.D. of VA held that a natural born Citizen is one born in the U.S. period. See Tisdale v. Obama, No. 3:12-cv-00036-JAG (E.D. Va. Jan. 23, 2012) (dismissing complaint challenging Obama’s eligibility; finding that Obama is “natural born citizen” because he was born in Hawaii);
5) describing somebody as a “natural born ballplayer” or a “natural born lollipop sucker” indicates that the belief that they have had that characteristic since birth. It does not connote that they had that charecteristic since birth and their parents also had that characteristic. Same understanding of the words can be used on natural born Citizen. The plain meaning of the words is to be applied in construing the constitution;
6) See Blackstone’s commentaries for understanding of what phrase “natural born” means and meant at time of constitution writing.

New_Jersey_Buckeye on March 1, 2012 at 3:04 PM

I just saw most of this press conference live.

They said they have even identified the manufacturer of the computer where the forged birth certificate was housed before it was uploaded by the White House, and that key INS documents from the week of Obama’s birth are missing from the National Archives, which has no explanation.

They have numerous affidavits from multiple individuals also, including a former federal official who stated that at Bill Ayers house he was directly told that Barack Obama was a foreign student and that the Ayerses were helping him with his schooling. This was around the time that Obama supposedly registered for selective service, and the WND presentation showed THAT document to be a fraud also, having been stamped with a physically altered stamp.

The reporters there were of course irate, demanding to know the political affiliateions of the investigators and trying to trip them all up into accusing Obama of ordering the fraud, which they would not do.

Arpaio rocks!

BemusedMalkinite on March 1, 2012 at 4:37 PM

OOPS, affiliations is what I meant, sorry.

BemusedMalkinite on March 1, 2012 at 4:38 PM

I watched the Press Conference and I can say that the evidence presented was very damning. Do I think anything will come of it? No, sadly I think it will be repressed like everything else not helpful to The Won. Kudos to Sheriff Joe and his Posse though.

Conservalicious on March 1, 2012 at 4:55 PM

2) natural born Citizen derives from the concept of natural born Subject under English common law which found that anyone born within borders of a country was necessarily a subject/citizen of said country;

3) While you are entitled to your own opinion, not one judge in approxmately 100 birther lawsuits has ever agreed with your argument that natural born citizen requires birth in U.S. and 2 citizen parents;

5) describing somebody as a “natural born ballplayer” or a “natural born lollipop sucker” indicates that the belief that they have had that characteristic since birth. It does not connote that they had that charecteristic since birth and their parents also had that characteristic. Same understanding of the words can be used on natural born Citizen. The plain meaning of the words is to be applied in construing the constitution;

New_Jersey_Buckeye on March 1, 2012 at 3:04 PM

“plain meaning of the words”, eh? As though no person in her/his right mind should dare disagree with your “facts” because the issue is black & white, with no gray area, right? What you say sounds soooo convincing and unquestionable – should we be very surprised if we were to find that you left out evidence which contradicts you, or not?

“The Constitution does not, in words, say who shall be natural-born citizens. Resort must be had elsewhere to ascertain that. At common-law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives, or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners.

From the same ruling:

“Some authorities go further and include as citizens children born within the jurisdiction without reference to the citizenship of the parents. As to this class there have been doubts, but never as to the first.”

You know where that’s from? I guess you’ve never heard of Minor vs. Happersett, a USSC case from 1875? If you haven’t heard of it, and you’re interested, you should look into why you haven’t heard of it until now – the reason might surprise you!

So, in 1875, the USSC said something quite different from the opinions packaged as facts that you posted here, which means your sophistry and propaganda could use some more tinkering! :)

Bizarro No. 1 on March 1, 2012 at 7:45 PM

I’ve been busy, and didn’t notice this thread. With indulgence of the management, let me repost in its proper place this comment I just posted elsewhere on the site:

Data points, folks, and arrange them however you want.

1. Trump raises the call for 0bama’s birth certificate to fever pitch.

2. 0bama releases a birth “certificate” riddled with immediately visible problems.

3. Osama bin Laden killed a few days later, completely erasing the “certificate,” and examination thereof, down the memory hole.

And then, to recap:

4. Sheriff Joe Arpaio has a news conference scheduled to release the results of his Cold-Case investigation into the 0bama “birth certificate.”

5. Brietbart collapses and dies.

6. Arpaio news conference overlooked in conservative blogosphere, due to Brietbart death.

7. Bomb squad called to Rush Limbaugh’s house.

Wow, the news sure is full of major happenings involving conservatives today.

Arpaio makes his long-awaited announcement on any other day, and it’s news.

Released March 1, 2012?

It’s down the memory hole, along with the original birth “certificate.”

cane_loader on March 1, 2012 at 7:55 PM

cane_loader on March 1, 2012 at 8:03 PM

Anita,
Thank you for this post. Please do a new, updated post, including the information that sheriff Arapio made public today, and we, the readers, will do our best to inform/bug Ed and Allahpundit to promote it to the front page.

ITguy on March 1, 2012 at 8:20 PM

will do our best to inform/bug Ed and Allahpundit to promote it to the front page.

ITguy on March 1, 2012 at 8:20 PM

Good luck.

There is a news embargo on this topic across the board.

The fact that it was even allowed in the Green Room means that yes, this is serious.

cane_loader on March 1, 2012 at 8:25 PM

Update: Ed Morrissey has weighed in… I may not agree with his perspective on this issue, but I respect him for at least acknowledging the press conference and the conclusions of Sheriff Arpaio’s Cold Case Posse:

Arpaio: Obama birth certificate is a fraud
posted at 9:15 am on March 2, 2012 by Ed Morrissey

ITguy on March 2, 2012 at 11:02 AM