December 15, 2016


News and Views


Humans, even if they do happen to be young, are low in intelligence and emotionally disturbed when they share things like this as a way of hurting another. HURTING MEANS FUN TO THEM. Facebook isn’t all good, by any means. The good news in this article is that Facebook took down at least one site that was showing this photograph. Thanks, Mr. Zuckerberg!


https://www.yahoo.com/beauty/lizzie-velasquez-speaks-out-following-cruel-meme-171438198.html

Lizzie Velasquez Speaks Out Following Cruel Meme
Maggie Parker
Yahoo Beauty
December 14, 2016


Lizzie Velasquez has put herself out there by way of motivational speaking and Internet fame, but she never signed up to be the subject of a cruel meme. Velasquez, who was born with a rare, undiagnosed congenital disease that causes the inability to put on body fat, came upon a meme using her picture and poking fun at her frail appearance.

Brave woman that she is, she shared the meme herself to call attention to the carelessness with which we entertain ourselves on the Internet.

The meme features a photo of her standing next to a tree and reads, “Michael said he would meet me behind this tree for a bit of fun. He’s running late, will someone please tag him and tell him I’m still waiting.” Which, by the way, wouldn’t have been funny even if it didn’t poke fun at someone’s condition. It’s a poorly made meme for so many reasons.

“I’m writing this post not as someone who is a victim but as someone who is using their voice,” Velasquez began. “Yes, it’s very late at night as I type this but I do so as a reminder that the innocent people that are being put in these memes are probably up just as late scrolling through Facebook and feeling something that I wouldn’t wish on my worst enemy. No matter what we look like or what size we are, at the end of the day we are all human. I ask that you keep that in mind the next time you see a viral meme of a random stranger. At the time you might find it hilarious but the human in the photo is probably feeling the exact opposite,” she expressed, pointing out something most of us are probably guilty of without even realizing it. “Spread love not hurtful words via a screen.”

And even though she did post it late at night, her mature response to the meme was a huge hit. Hours later she shared a video thanking her followers for their support. “Today I posted what I did at 3 a.m. just thinking whoever was up late was going to see it and as of recently there’s almost 10,000 of you that have shared my post,” she said graciously.

“I posted what I did as a way to use my platform that you guys have given me. To be able to use my voice and say, just, when you see something online remember that there is a human that is being affected by it,” she said, painting memes in a whole new light. “It might be funny at the time but there is someone who’s probably not feeling that it’s that funny. Think before you tweet, think before you share, think before you like. Because we just want to be accepted. That’s it.”

She informed her Facebook followers that one of the groups that promoted this mean meme had been shut down by Facebook. “I’m over the moon with gratitude!!!!! Positive change is possible when we all work together!!!” she wrote.

This isn’t the first time Velasquez has inspired the world with her wisdom. In 2006, an anonymous person posted a video of Velasquez at age 13 and titled it “The World’s Ugliest Woman.” Unfortunately, it went viral. But years later, it’s her response that everyone remembers. She wrote a letter to the user who posted the video asking why that person did such a cruel thing and explaining how it affected her. “Every time I thought I might be pretty, or that I’d finally fit in, or that maybe having this syndrome isn’t so bad — all of that was demolished as soon as I found your post,” she wrote. “Please believe me when I say finding that video felt like a curse at the time, but little did I know it was one of the biggest blessings in disguise I’ve ever had in my life,” she said so eloquently.

Since then, Velasquez has written books, given speeches with TED, and become the subject of an award-winning documentary. She’s gone from cyberbullying victim to cyberbullying activist.

Let’s keep in touch! Follow Yahoo Beauty on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and Pinterest.


How we look is terribly important to each of us, and in a modern rather self-satisfied culture like we have in the USA today, it is even more so. I wasn’t born into a family who had so much money that we would even be admitted to “high society” circles, anyway; but I was told by family, church, in my case the Girl Scouts, and in our small-town environment overall that physical beauty was secondary to “inner beauty,” which involves being a caring and warm person, honesty, and those good things. Unfortunately, these days, with churches that are sometimes less about fellowship than about finances, and with a fascinating Internet which is sometimes like a fairyland and others like a house horrors, people are not often enough bringing up kids to learn to interrelate with others of whatever group identity or age, in a COMMUNITY.

Community is about cooperation, and I am firmly of the opinion that when loving adults do not teach their kids patiently and daily how to get along with others, we can degenerate as a society into a real-world enactment of THE LORD OF THE FLIES. If you haven’t read that, go to your local library and borrow it. It was written by William Golding in 1963, another era of teenagers gone wild. It tells what parents need to realize about the human being. At least half of our capacity to be gentle, fair-minded individuals is LEARNED and not inborn. So, gently but firmly TALK to your children about the world of WISDOM which they need to incorporate into themselves as they grow. Then maybe we can have a country that is nurturing rather than merely challenging. Being “competitive” may be a good Capitalist virtue, but it is secondary to cooperation.



http://www.cbsnews.com/news/dylann-roof-case-trial-charleston-church-shooting-jury-deliberations/

Dylann Roof trial: Jurors reach verdict
CBS/AP
December 15, 2016, 1:51 PM

Play VIDEO -- Roof trial reveals disturbing new evidence
Play VIDEO -- Prosecutors say Dylann Roof had alleged "hit list" of black churches in his car


CHARLESTON, S.C. -- Jurors have reached a verdict in the trial of Dylann Roof, who is charged with killing nine black worshipers in a South Carolina church.

About an hour into their deliberations on Thursday, the jury said it wanted to rehear part of Dylann Roof’s videotaped confession. It sent a note to U.S. District Judge Richard Gergel asking to listen again to Roof being questioned and talking about how many people he might have killed.

Roof told FBI agents he killed about five people, and was later surprised when the agents told him nine people were shot and killed in June 2015 at Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal church.

Gergel decided to set up the two-hour confession where jurors could watch as much or as little as they wanted to.

The court was once again at ease mid-Thursday afternoon after being briefly back in session due to the jury’s request, CBS Charleston affiliate WCSC reported.

The jury’s decision in the case - in which Roof faces 33 federal charges including hate crimes and obstruction of religion - must be unanimous. If Roof is convicted, the same panel will reconvene Jan. 3 to begin considering if he should be sentenced to death or life in prison.

The jury, made up of nine whites and three blacks, heard from witnesses who testified Roof made multiple trips to Charleston in the months before the June 2015 attack at Emanuel AME Church. They also heard from two survivors.

Dylann Roof’s lawyer has asked jurors to consider what was going on in his head as he planned the killings of the nine worshipers.

Defense attorney David Bruck conceded in his closing argument Thursday that Roof killed the victims and even praised the FBI investigation. But Bruck also argued Roof was a suicidal, impressionable loner who never grasped the gravity of what he did.

The defense put up no witnesses. They tried to present evidence about his mental state, but the judge ruled it didn’t have anything to do with his guilt or innocence.

A prosecutor said Thursday that Roof was full of hate and “immense racial ignorance” when he carried out the attack in Charleston. In his closing argument, assistant U.S. Attorney Nathan Williams mocked Roof for calling himself brave in his racist-filled journal and his confession to the FBI, saying the real bravery came from the victims who tried to stop him as he fired 77 bullets at Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal church.

“Those people couldn’t see the hatred in his heart any more than they could see the .45-caliber handgun and the eight magazines concealed around his waist,” Williams said.

Williams’ 50-minute closing argument filled the court with tension. At times, the prosecutor raised his voice, saying Roof was a cold, calculated killer.

“Hatred had no place in that sanctuary,” said the prosecution in their closing argument, WCSC reported. “But hatred came to those tables just the same.”

The church should be a place of safety, the government argued. It should be a place where Rev. Clementa Pinckney, a victim of the shooting, could bring his daughter, and where Felicia Sanders, a survivor, could bring his granddaughter.

Some family members of victims dabbed their eyes with tissues, and jurors appeared emotional when Williams, after apologizing to them, showed crime scene photos of each person killed alongside a small picture of them while alive.

Those pictures included 26-year-old Tywanza Sanders, who was killed with his 87-year-old aunt Susie Jackson. Sanders was shot despite telling Roof they meant no harm.

Williams said Roof’s message of racial hatred failed. Instead, he said the good of all of those faithful churchgoers won out.

“This defendant chose to take their lives. He chose to break their bodies. But he does not get to choose who they were,” Williams said.

Roof said in his confession, a journal found in his car and a statement he posted online that he wanted his killings to lead to a return of segregation or perhaps a race war. Instead, the single biggest change to come from the June 17, 2015, killings was the removal of the Confederate flag from in front of the South Carolina Statehouse after it spent 50 years flying over the capitol or on its grounds.

Williams recounted other evidence, like how Roof sat in the Emanuel AME parking lot for 28 minutes in his car, likely loading the 88 bullets - a number embraced symbolically by racists - into eight magazines. The 22-year-old white man then sat in the prayer service for nearly 45 minutes before opening fire as the worshippers closed their eyes for the final prayer.

In the defense’s closing argument, Bruck said Roof was just imitating what he saw on the internet.

Roof’s mental problems led him to accept all the racist lies he read as truth, and give his life to “a fight to the death between white people and black people that only he” could see and act on, Bruck said.

Prosecutors successfully objected several times to Bruck’s arguments about Roof’s mental health. U.S. District Judge Richard Gergel has ruled that is only permissible in the penalty phase, and Roof has said he intends to get rid of Bruck and be his own lawyer again during that part of the trial.

Prosecutors got a chance to respond to Bruck’s closing, and assistant U.S. attorney Stephen Curran pointed out Roof was responsible for his own actions no matter the reason he turned into a hate-filled killer.

“He walked into the church with murder in his heart,” Curran said. “That’s why, when they closed in prayer, he shot them dead.”

Roof never had any regrets, sticking to his assertion that the killings had to happen after he researched “black on white crime” on the internet. He said he chose a church because that setting posed little danger to him.

Also placed into evidence were dozens of photographs of Roof - a strange travelogue of him alone at South Carolina sites important to the Civil War or African-American history. There also were photos of him holding the Confederate flag.


The lack of awareness in our country of mental health issues while they are more manageable is a major problem, and then the lack of long term hospital beds for those who need them. This is one more fairly typical case of a disturbed individual going unnoticed.


http://www.cbsnews.com/news/facebook-fake-news-plan-poynter-institute-fact-checking/

Facebook unveils new plan to try to curb fake news
By SHANIKA GUNARATNA CBS NEWS
December 15, 2016, 1:17 PM

22 Photos -- Don't get fooled by these fake news sites
Photograph -- facebook-flag-fake-news.jpg, Facebook will make it easier for users to flag fake news. FACEBOOK
Photograph -- facebook-sharing-fake-news.jpg, Facebook will alert users if independent fact-checkers have determined a story is fake news. FACEBOOK


After months of public pressure, Facebook is announcing new steps it is taking to to curb the spread of fake news on the social network. The plan includes new tools to make it easier for Facebook users to flag fake stories, as well as a collaboration with the Poynter Institute, a highly respected journalism organization, to independently investigate claims.

Here’s how Facebook says the new process will work:

Facebook will rely primarily on individual users to flag obvious hoaxes on the platform. Though users can currently flag stories by clicking on the upper right corner of the post, the company said it’s experimenting with several methods to make the flagging process easier.

Once posts are flagged as potential fakes, third parties gets [sic] involved. Specifically, Facebook is forging a new partnership with Poynter, which since 2015 has mobilized fact-checkers from all over the world under an initiative called the International Fact Checking Code of Principles. Facebook said that based on reports from users as well as “other signals,” which the company did not elaborate on, it will refer suspicious stories to these fact-checking organizations for vetting.

If Poynter’s fact-checkers determine the story is fake, it will be marked as “disputed” on Facebook. The story will still appear on Facebook, but with the “disputed” flag and a link to a corresponding article explaining the reasons it should not be trusted.

Disputed stories will rank lower on users’ News Feeds and companies will not be allowed to promote them as ad content. Users will still be allowed to share the disputed stories on Facebook, but the stories will carry those warnings with them.

“We believe in giving people a voice and that we cannot become arbiters of truth ourselves, so we’re approaching this problem carefully. We’ve focused our efforts on the worst of the worst,” Facebook’s vice president of News Feed, Adam Mosseri, said in the statement.

Poynter has reported extensively on Facebook’s fake news problem in recent months. Alexios Mantzarlis, head of Poynter’s international fact checking network, wrote an extensive critique of the social network’s approach to fake news before the election — the tipping point at which the problem received widespread attention — called “Facebook’s fake news problem won’t fix itself.” In it, he wrote: “Facebook isn’t just another medium hoaxers can use to spread misinformation, or a new source of bias-confirming news for partisan readers. It turbocharges both these unsavory phenomena.”

Facebook, long believed to be applying sophisticated analysis to users’ every click, also shared that it’s experimenting with ways to penalize articles that users appear to distrust. If clicking on and reading an article appears to make users less likely to share it by significant margins, Facebook may interpret that as a sign.

“We’re going to test incorporating this signal into ranking, specifically for articles that are outliers, where people who read the article are significantly less likely to share it,” Mosseri said.

Facebook did not elaborate on how it could differentiate between articles individuals decided not to share for subjective reasons (i.e. the article was too long for users’ liking, included writing they perceived as bad, etc.) and articles individuals decided not to share because they found them disreputable.

Lastly, Facebook said it is targeting the money behind fake news, specifically the legions of spammers who disseminate content that masquerades as real news through URLs that are intentionally similar to the URLs of well-known news organizations — thus deceiving readers who are not critical of their sources. The spammers then make money off the ads on those dubious sites.

To target these profit centers, Facebook said it is eliminating the ability to “spoof” or impersonate domains on its site as well as taking a more critical look at certain content sources to “detect where policy enforcement actions might be necessary,” the company said.

CNET News executive editor Roger Cheng said the company really needed to take action to address the problem. “Facebook has been under fire for this fake news flap. They obviously needed to do something. A lot of these elements seem like they’re logical steps to kind of help with the fake news scourge,” Cheng told CBS News.

Facebook’s latest announcement provides some answers, but leaves many questions. For instance, what is the threshold required for the number of users to flag a certain piece of content before that content is sent up the food chain for verification? What are the details of the financial relationship and oversight process between Facebook and Poytner? If swarms of Russia-paid trolls coordinate, for instance, to flag The New York Times’ recent reports on Russia’s hacking attempts on the U.S. election, will Poynter’s fact checkers have to spend time independently verifying these reports? How will Poynter prioritize the content that’s flagged, and what guidelines will it use for fact checking?

“The idea of making it easier to report fake stories is a good one in theory, but that could also be something that could be abused,” Cheng said.

The pressure on Facebook to announce concrete steps to combat fake news has been building for months, but reached a fever pitch after the election. In the weeks since, several outside developers have rolled out plug-ins to help users identify fake news on the social network, creating added pressure on Facebook to act aggressively and more quickly to target what is now a well-know [sic] issue.

In a poll released Thursday by the Pew Research Center, two-thirds of Americans say the phenomenon of fake news has created confusion about facts and current events.

Sixty-four percent of those surveyed said fake news causes “a great deal” of confusion, and nearly a quarter said they have shared fake news themselves — 14 percent said they shared something they knew was fake at the time, and 16 percent said they shared something and only later realized it wasn’t true.


I HAVE TAKEN ONE ARTICLE BEFORE I REALIZED IT WAS FAKE, AND JUST YESTERDAY FOUND A STORY ABOUT THE CAMP LEJEUN MARINE ABUSE SCANDAL. MOST OF THOSE STORIES ARE ACCURATE, BUT THIS ONE WAS FULL OF ERRORS THAT I DON’T THINK A NATIVE ENGLISH SPEAKER WOULD MAKE, FROM MISSPELLINGS TO TOTALLY ERRONEOUS WORD USAGE, AND YET THE TITLE USES “USA” IN ITS HEADING. IT ALSO OCCURS TO ME THAT RATHER THAN BEING WRITTEN BY AN ISIS MEMBER OR RUSSIAN SPIES, PERHAPS IT WAS EVEN WRITTEN BY A COMPUTER. THERE WAS AN INTERESTING ARTICLE ON THAT PRACTICE LAST YEAR.

FOR SOME NET RESEARCH ON FOREIGN INTRIGUE, GO TO A SEPARATE BLOG POSTING EARLIER TODAY CALLED: “THEUSATIMES.NET.”

SEE THE ARTICLE IN QUESTION:

http://theusatimes.net/news/us/four-marines-charged-in-boot-camp-abuse-scandal/



WILD TANGENT TO THE FACEBOOK ARTICLE:

ACRONYMS annoy me, as do people who invent them. In the old days, you could always tell how a business made its’ money, what the true legal name was, who owned it, what region of the country it represented, what you’d want to buy or do there. And, yes, you’d have to get into your car and visit the place to do business. Now everything is “on the Net,” you will never see the business owner to tell whether or not he is honest, intelligent and pleasant, and you can spend some time figuring out WHICH ENTITIES the acronym stands for.

The acronym that’s annoying me most right now is CNET, which is used above as though it were a familiar term. It's one of those company names that has emerged while I wasn't paying attention, but the article fails to explain it. I was taught many years ago that in any serious writing, shortcut term like these should be spelled out fully ONCE the very first time that it is used in the article, with the acronym placed in parentheses beside it, and from then on use the handy short hand term each time.

I quickly found CNET at two promising sites -- http://www.globalacronyms.com/cnet and http://acronyms.thefreedictionary.com/CNET. The Free Dictionary is the best. It gave me fourteen choices to the globalacronyms’ four, and suggested Wikipedia. I always want MORE information rather than less, so I went to my favorite site, Wikipedia. It turns out that CNET is, quoting that article, “CNET Networks" redirects here. For the successor online media company, see CBS Interactive.” “CNET (stylized as c|net) is an American media website that publishes reviews, news, articles, blogs, podcasts and videos on technology and consumer electronics globally. Founded in 1994 by Halsey Minor and Shelby Bonnie, it was the flagship brand of CNET Networks and became a brand of CBS Interactive through CNET Networks' acquisition in 2008.[3][4][5][6] CNET originally produced content for radio and television in addition to its website and now uses new media distribution methods through its Internet television network, CNET Video, and its podcast and blog networks. In addition CNET currently has region-specific and language-specific editions.”


http://www.dictionary.com/browse/acronym

British Dictionary definitions for ac-ro-nym Expand

acronym
/ˈækrənɪm/

noun
1.

a pronounceable name made up of a series of initial letters or parts of words; for example, UNESCO for the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization

Derived Forms
acronymic, acronymous (əˈkrɒnɪməs) adjective

Word Origin
C20: from acro- + -onym

[In case you didn’t know, “C20”: is apparently a clever new shorthand way of saying “of the 20th Century.”]

Cite This Source

Word Origin and History for ac-ro-nym

n.
word formed from the first letters of a series of words, 1943, American English coinage from acro- + -onym "name" (abstracted from homonym ; see name (n.)). But for cabalistic esoterica and acrostic poetry, the practice was practically non-existent before 20c.


https://www.google.com/search?q=acro&oq=acro+&aqs=chrome..69i57j0l5.2757j0j8&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8#q=acro+words

acro-
a combining form with the meanings "height,'' "tip end,'' "extremities of the body,'' used in the formation of compound words: acrophobia. Also, [esp. before a vowel,] acr-.

Forum discussions with the word(s) "acro-" in the title: No titles with the word(s) "acro-".

acro- - WordReference.com Dictionary of English
www.wordreference.com/definition/acro-



http://www.essence.com/news/dc-marching-bands-not-paticipating-trumps-inauguration

Sitting Out: DC-Area Marching Bands Are Not Here For Donald Trump’s Inauguration
Is this a concerted effort to send a message to the new president-elect?
By Paula Rogo
Dec, 15, 2016

RELATED GALLERY
15 Black Celebrities Who Are Definitely Not Here For A Donald Trump Presidency
RELATED CONTENT, NEWS
Tough Love: John Legend Is "Pretty Disappointed" With Kanye For Donald Trump Support


Donald Trump may have just announced the performer for his inauguration, but it looks like it may be tougher finding a DC-based marching band to perform on the day.

At least one D.C. public school marching band has participated in the past five inaugural parades, but none applied for consideration this year, NBC Washington reports.

Subscribe to our daily newsletter for the latest in hair, beauty, style and celebrity news.

When asked, a D.C. Public Schools spokeswoman said she was not aware of any band in the district that had applied to participate in Trump's inaugural parade scheduled for Jan. 20.

High schools and universities in neighboring Maryland and Virginia counties also appear to have skipped application as well -- each giving their own reasons from a heavy schedule to the need to rebuild their bands.

Howard University’s band director John Newson admitted that his band --- which performed during Obama’s first inauguration --- did not apply due to budgetary constraints. But he guessed that politics played a role with why many schools have opted out of such an honor.

"I think everybody knows why and no one wants to say and lose their job," he told NBC.

Are other schools around the country applying though? It is hard to tell but there appears to have been less interest this year, according to an Arizona company that organizes band trips for schools across the country.

"We didn't get the response that we got the last time, with Obama. Some groups responded, but with some groups it was crickets," Music Celebrations International marketing director Luke Wiscombe said. "We're seeing a little less enthusiasm to be a part of this event."



EXCERPT: "I think everybody knows why and no one wants to say and lose their job," he told NBC.”

So Trump will have Kanye West entertaining for the Inauguration, but the po’ folks will just stay home. This is painful to see, because it can only be interpreted as a hard put down, all things considered, but he is going to have a thick skin in order to have that job. There are a lot of people who really don’t like him personally as well as in his official capacity. It’s gonna be a hard four years.



http://www.salon.com/2016/12/14/the-latest-judge-says-colorado-electors-cant-switch-votes/

Colorado electors can’t switch votes, judge rules
They're all voting for Hillary Clinton anyway
AP STAFF, ASSOCIATED PRESS
WEDNESDAY, DEC 14, 2016 07:00 AM EST

Photograph -- Polly Baca, right, listens as attorney Jason Wesoky speaks after arguments in a lawsuit were heard Monday, Dec. 12, 2016, outside the federal courthouse in downtown Denver. Two Democratic electors are trying to be freed of Colorado's requirement that they vote for the winner of the state's popular vote in the presidential election this past November. (AP Photo/David Zalubowski)(Credit: AP)


DENVER — A Colorado judge is ordering the state’s nine electors to vote for Hillary Clinton.

Two electors had sued in hopes of being freed from the requirement so they could join Republicans in picking a compromise candidate who isn’t Donald Trump.

The longshot effort aimed to deny Trump the presidency through the Electoral College that votes Dec. 19.

But Denver Judge Elizabeth Starrs ruled that the state’s electors will have to vote for Clinton. Any who fail to do so can be replaced.

The ruling is the second against the two electors, who have appealed the other decision to a federal court.

Colorado law requires its electors to vote for the candidate who won the state’s popular vote. Clinton won Colorado, though Trump won the majority of electoral votes last month.


Most or all of these last minute attempts to unseat Trump will just serve to work off emotional energy, I’m sure. What’s done is done.



http://www.cbsnews.com/news/sheriff-joe-arpaio-dives-back-into-president-barack-obama-birtherism/

Outgoing Sheriff Joe Arpaio revisits debunked Obama birtherism
CBS/AP
December 15, 2016, 4:01 PM

Photograph -- In this Jan. 9, 2013, file photo, Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio speaks to reporters in Phoenix. AP
Play VIDEO -- Ta-Nehisi Coates on Obama's impact on race and the White House
14 PHOTOS -- Joe Arpaio: Self-proclaimed "Toughest sheriff in America"
Play VIDEO -- Michelle Obama hits Trump on debate performance, birtherism


PHOENIX -- Sheriff Joe Arpaio of Arizona has fixated on the authenticity of President Barack Obama’s birth certificate for more than five years, going so far as to send a deputy and member of his volunteer posse to Hawaii to question officials.

He earned plaudits from Donald Trump and became one of the nation’s leading voices on the debunked controversy over Mr.Obama’s birthplace. Arpaio plans to close his yearslong investigation Thursday, ending a chapter that critics denounced as a shameless ploy to raise money from his right-wing base.

The news conference from the media-savvy sheriff comes three weeks before the end of his 24 years as metro Phoenix’s top law enforcer and five weeks before Mr. Obama leaves office.

“We and anyone else who dared to question the document have been maligned, falsely labeled and grossly criticized,” Arpaio said, refusing to take questions from reporters.

The sheriff took up the “birther” mantle as he faced some of his worst legal troubles, including a racial profiling case that discredited his patrols targeting immigrants and a grand jury inquiry into his failed investigations of local political enemies.

He refused to back away from the investigation three months ago when Mr. Trump, an Arpaio ally, relented on his claim that Mr. Obama wasn’t born in the U.S.

Maricopa County Supervisor Steve Gallardo, a longtime Arpaio critic, said the investigation was a publicity stunt to raise the sheriff’s national political profile and bring in campaign dollars.

“He was trying to throw meat to his base, and that’s exactly what he did,” Gallardo said. “He threw red meat.”

At the news conference Thursday, Arpaio said the investigation was never about where President Obama was born, CBS affiliate KPHO reported.

“To this day I stated that I did not care where the president was born,” said Arpaio. “We were going to investigate a government possible forged document.”

“Today we’re going to set the record straight,” said Arpaio. “I believe you will be shocked by what you hear today. The implications will be profound.”

Arpaio wasn’t the only Arizona politician to plunge into the erroneous effort.

The Arizona Legislature passed a bill in 2011 that would have required Mr. Obama and other presidential candidates to prove they were U.S. citizens before their names could appear on the ballot. It was vetoed by the GOP governor.

Several Electoral College members even questioned Mr. Obama’s eligibility to serve as president as they cast their votes for Republican Mitt Romney four years ago.

Arpaio has said he launched the probe after nearly 250 people connected to an Arizona tea-party group requested it. He pressed forward despite aides warning he would be ridiculed.

In the 2014 documentary “The Joe Show,” Arpaio was seen brushing aside his publicist’s prediction that he would be viewed as a clown. The sheriff said the investigation would help his fundraising efforts.

“It may look nuts, but you know what, it’s going to be pretty good,” Arpaio said.

The sheriff won praise several months later in a tweet from Mr. Trump: “Congratulations to RealSheriffJoe on his successful Cold Case Posse investigation which claims BarackObama’s ‘birth certificate’ is fake.”

Arpaio farmed out the investigation to volunteers on his posse, which is funded through donations, in anticipation of criticism he was throwing away taxpayer money.

In 2012, he said the investigation revealed that there was probable cause to believe Mr. Obama’s long-form birth certificate was a computer-generated forgery and that the selective service card completed by Mr. Obama in 1980 was likely a fraud.

The facts say otherwise. Hawaii officials repeatedly confirmed Mr. Obama’s citizenship, and the courts rebuffed a series of lawsuits.

Arpaio insisted he wasn’t investigating whether Mr. Obama was a U.S. citizen but examining an allegation that the document was fraudulent. But critics say it was a calculated swipe at the identity and legitimacy of the nation’s first African-American president.

Though Arpaio promised no taxpayer money would be spent on the investigation, the sheriff sent a deputy to Hawaii to accompany the posse’s top investigator. The sheriff said the posse would reimburse his office for the costs of the deputy’s travel and time.

At one time, Arpaio said the posse spent $40,000 in donations on the investigation. It’s not known how much it ultimately cost and whether the agency was reimbursed.


Trump and Arpaio are cut from the same cloth – basically a combination of bully and clown. How did either of them make it so far? Could it be because of who the people of the USA are today? We were a better citizenry as little as 20 years ago. Things like these weren’t happening then. Craziness has taken over.