• Get involved.
    We want your input!
    Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.

    After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
    If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.

    After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
    https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/

    Thanks in advance and have fun!
    RadioDiscussions Administrators

Ankarlo, Sheriff Joke's best lackey

L

Legend City

Aunt Carlos is all giddy that Sheriff Joke went out and arrested the New Times reporters.

This guy is scary in his manlove for Joe.
 
Frankly, I am shocked to hear that Ann Karlo or anyone else in media would support the current legal action against New Times. Whether or not you like or dislike New Times, what is happening to New Times (IMHO) is an attack on the First Amendment protection of a free press and smacks of political retribution.
 
And just watch what you post Legend City, don't want to get Arpaio mad or he'll be spying on this board next. As for Ankarlo, I couldn't imagine any on-air host getting behind such overreaching 1st amendment attacks, but I've heard him slobber all over Sheriff Joe in the past so who knows? I've heard that Mack do it too.
 
DistantAntenna said:
One of the subpoenaed writers was on Charles Goyette this morning and was really pissed. It was truly great radio.
Click to expand...

That reporter needs to be arrested for discussing the subpoena!!! :mad: ;D

That any government agency can go on such a broad fishing expedition against the press scares the living tar out of me!! :eek:

No wonder Ann Karlo is kissing Joe's rear, he doesn't want to get caught in the crosshairs of Sheriff Joe!!

"Be careful, you're messing with the Sherrif!" - Sheriff Joe Arpaio

...and he really means it! :mad:
 
It will be interesting to hear if Mac is another bootlicker.

Nicklebag Joe has got to go, he is an embarrassment to all carbon based life.
 
No Mac today, we have Kid doing the show!

And what a gift, right before airtime, all the charges dropped against New Times.

A victory for freedom of speech.

Poor Darryl, his Fueher is beat! I'm sure he is bummed that he supported Arpaio and his tactics.
 
Andrew Thomas looked extremely nervous in his press conference. Iirc, Sheriff Joe mentioned he made the arrests of the New Times management at the behest of the AG's office. I wonder if it was the special ed prosecutor who made the request, or if it was actually Andrew Thomas who made the request. Anyhow, the media proved a formidable force to be reckoned with against the AG's office and Sheriff Joe. ;D
 
I watched the press conference, its up on NT's website.

Thomas should be nervous.

He dyed his red hair, shaved off his creepy mustache, and wants to be Gov.

Its not gonna happen.

Thank god the Good Guys won.

As for Aunt Carlos, he is still cleaning his tongue from licking Arpaio's boots.
 
KOHS said:
Andrew Thomas looked extremely nervous in his press conference. Iirc, Sheriff Joe mentioned he made the arrests of the New Times management at the behest of the AG's office. I wonder if it was the special ed prosecutor who made the request, or if it was actually Andrew Thomas who made the request. Anyhow, the media proved a formidable force to be reckoned with against the AG's office and Sheriff Joe. ;D
Click to expand...
THANK you, KOHS.

Finally, somebody realized that this isn't ::) some evil plot ::) on the part of Joe Arpaio; in cases where probable cause isn't observed by a peace officer, an Arrest Warrant has to be issued from somewhere else.

Hate on the Arpaio Man all you want (I don't have a dog in this fight one way or the other), but please try to be more accurate about the legality of his actions as Sheriff.
 
Thanos007 said:
KOHS said:
Andrew Thomas looked extremely nervous in his press conference. Iirc, Sheriff Joe mentioned he made the arrests of the New Times management at the behest of the AG's office. I wonder if it was the special ed prosecutor who made the request, or if it was actually Andrew Thomas who made the request. Anyhow, the media proved a formidable force to be reckoned with against the AG's office and Sheriff Joe. ;D
Click to expand...
THANK you, KOHS.

Finally, somebody realized that this isn't ::) some evil plot ::) on the part of Joe Arpaio; in cases where probable cause isn't observed by a peace officer, an Arrest Warrant has to be issued from somewhere else.

Hate on the Arpaio Man all you want (I don't have a dog in this fight one way or the other), but please try to be more accurate about the legality of his actions as Sheriff.
Click to expand...
 
Aunt Carlos had Steven Lemons on today. Ankarlo got schooled!

Every time Steven had a point, Darrell quickly changed the subject.

Darrell is a part time Phoenician, its obvious he doesn't know much about this place.

Then Aunt Carlos put up a question on the website about whether people think Arpaio is corrupt and was shocked when 47% said they thought he was corrupt.
 
If Aunt Carlos got taken to school bysomeone on this issue it's pretty obvious that we now know why his ratings are in the toilet. Auntie could have easily retorted with "They published the Joe's address, you lose". Break the law, pay the price, it's really that simple.

To be fair, however, it is a complete abuse of power to force the New Times to turn over info about the users/readers on their website. On that point I think we can all agree.
 
Its not against the law to print Arpaio's address, he is a public servant, that is common knowledge.

The law that was put in to prohibit it being published on the net (where it is in several places) is the problem.

It was a bad law rushed in during the early days of the net.

New Times could buy a billboard and put his address on it, its not against the law.
 
Legend City said:
Its not against the law to print Arpaio's address, he is a public servant, that is common knowledge.

The law that was put in to prohibit it being published on the net (where it is in several places) is the problem.

It was a bad law rushed in during the early days of the net.

New Times could buy a billboard and put his address on it, its not against the law.
Click to expand...
You just said it was against the law and it's not in the same post, while saying "but it's a bad law".

Sure, they could post his address on a billboard, but they didn't, they posted it on their website which was against the law, end of story. Is it a bad law? Sounds like it to me, but laws are laws, period.
 
Its moot, the data is published all over the web, New Times published it after seeing it there.

Because its a bad law, they would never get charged with it.

And all this time, Joe is hiding the dough.
 
Legend City said:
Its moot, the data is published all over the web, New Times published it after seeing it there.

Because its a bad law, they would never get charged with it.

And all this time, Joe is hiding the dough.
Click to expand...

You are correct in that what they uncovered about our beloved sheriff seems accurate, but it doesn't excuse law breaking, bad law or otherwise.
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom