says. we must respect the rule of law unless he doesn t like that rule of law, and then he calls the man who flouted the law a hero and pardons him. he takes away every sense the justice system judged him and found lacking. do you agree with that? no, not the way it s characterized. i will say this. i have been making this case on the judiciary committee, on the airwaves, and i don t remember if i ve written about it or not. i m concerned americans believe the broader definition, not racial profiling but profiling itself, that they believe there s a federal law against it and it s wrong. i want to make the point it s necessary for law enforcement. it gets slippery. yes. and that s why there s a directive from the justice department. i think that s an appropriate directive. and the sheriff flouted it. why is it a slippery slope? you ve lived this slippery slope. when you start learning about some, you start judging all.
by the justice department. that is what they told joe arpaio he was doing and they said stop it. i don t agree. what don t you agree with? i don t agree profiling is wrong. if you take profiling away from the tools of law enforcement you couldn t describe a criminal in any way whatsoever. you re simplifying the issue, congressman. what happens when you profile? that s not generalized. there s a difference between racial profiling and a broader profiling with all of the descriptions that are there. i say it s wrong and the justice department says you shall not racially profile if that s the only component. if it s a component in a broader profile he was rounding up people, some who wound up being citizens, and that s what his guys were doing and what did his defense lawyer say? after all the bravado to reporters saying i m going to
good to see you, as always, congressman. justify the pardon. what is your case? well, i watched this unfold, chris, from my seat on the judiciary committee in the house of representatives. we had democrats in majority and we had president obama elected. and i saw that justice department react to what i thought was a political statements of the democrats on the judiciary committee and start to put the squeeze on joe arpaio because they didn t want enforcement of our immigration laws down in maricopa county. i made a trip down there to visit sheriff joe. i wanted to see what was going on. i talked to him at length about his process and his words to me were he was avoiding any kind of ethnic profiling. it s really not race but ethnic profiling, and he was compiling with the law. he had a 287-g agreement. he also had over a period of
law. again, the president has the right to pardon basically anyone he wants to. the question is whether or not it was right to reward joe arpaio for something the federal court found to be wrong. there s the issue. let s discuss it. we have congressman steve king, republican from iowa supports the pardon of sheriff arpaio. good to see you, as always, congressman. justify the pardon. what is your case? well, i watched this unfold, chris, from my seat on the judiciary committee in the house of representatives. we had democrats in majority and we had president obama elected. and i saw that justice department react to what i thought was a political statement so the democrats on the judiciary committee and start to put the squeeze on joe arpaio because they didn t want enforcement of our immigration laws in maricopa county. i made a trip down there to visit sheriff joe. i wanted to see what was going on. i talked to him at length about his process and his words to me
law enforcement, you couldn t describe a criminal in any way whatsoever. i will say that you re simplifying the issue, congressman. what happens when you profile? that s not generalized. there s a difference between racial profiling and a broader profiling with all of the descriptions that are there. i say it s wrong and the justice department has issued a directive that says you shall not racially profile if that s the only component. but if it s a component in broader profile what broader profile? he was rounding up brown people. he was rounding up brown people, some of who wound up being citizens. and that s what his guys were doing, and what did his defense lawyer say? after all the bravado to reporters saying i m going to continue, i don t care what the judges say. that s called contempt by definition, by the way. and this is supposed to be a law and order presidency. i don t agree. with him defying the federal judge. hold on, congressman. if you don t agree with him