Cochise County Sheriff Dannels ceding authority to feds? & Update

Recall of Sheriff Mark Dannels brewing

In an exclusive interview with News, Southern Arizona rancher Ed Ashurst says that if the Cochise County Board of Supervisors doesn’t reverse its recent vote on allowing the deputizing of federal agents for work as “peace officers” on the border in Cochise County, there is a strong likelihood of a recall movement aimed at fledgling Sheriff Mark Dannels, whom he calls a pawn in a Federal power grab — a role predecessor Larry Dever refused to accept. Ashurst says “the numbers are growing by the hundreds every hour” to “fight to the death” against the agreement, for which he says Border Patrol wrote the wording, and allows deputized Border Patrol Agents to be able to arrest American citizens.

Listen to the complete and disturbing interview HERE. (Ignore the loud noise at the beginning, it soon subsides.)

Archived blog posts on the Federal Observer by Ed Ashurst can be read here.


Sheriff Dannels Rescinds Provisional Cross-Certification:

Greetings to my fellow citizens,

It has been brought to my attention that some have found great difficulty in the provisional cross-certification granted to our recently delegated Border Patrol agents assigned to our Regional Border Team. In contrast, others have expressed their support regarding this action.After meeting with those for and against, it appears a division within the ranching community has been created.

As I have expressed to you, the primary purpose of the regional border team is to enhance your quality of life and provide you some relief with issues that are directly related to the border.

After meeting with leadership and members of the Regional Border Team, it was agreed upon that it is best to not divide our ranching community over this issue, but embrace our Regional Border Team’s mission that serves to enhance our ranching community. As of this time, the provisional cross-certification to our Border Patrol Agents assigned to this team has been rescinded.

The Regional Border Team will continue in partnership utilizing our expertise and resources to help bring awareness and enforcement to those that consciously choose to violate our freedoms and liberties.

As a member of the Southwest Border Sheriffs, Western Border Sheriffs, National Sheriffs Association, Border Security Committee, the Alliance to Combat Transnational Threats, and your Sheriff, I will continue to be a voice regarding our border issues.

Mark Dannels

Cochise County Sheriff

17 Responses to Cochise County Sheriff Dannels ceding authority to feds? & Update

  1. AZ Native says:

    Caving to the feds is a fool’s errand. It is never in our best interests or that of America’s future. If Sheriff Dannels goes along with these ploys to undermine the USA, he should be recalled!

    • eubykdisop says:

      Well, it’s a one way street. As Arizona empowers federal agents, the feds disempower local Arizona law enforcement.

      “Arizona Sheriff’s Officers Turn in Federal Credentials”

      “December 21, 2011”

      “PHOENIX – Dozens of Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s jail officers lined up at a news conference in Phoenix Wednesday to ceremoniously hand in their federal credentials a week after they were stripped of the ability to verify the immigration status of inmates.”

      “The Department of Homeland Security announced Dec. 15 that more than 90 of Arpaio’s Maricopa County jail officers could no longer check whether inmates were in the county illegally.”

      “The decision followed the release of a scathing Department of Justice report that said Arpaio’s office has a pattern of racially profiling Latinos, basing immigration enforcement on racially charged citizen complaints and punishing Hispanic jail inmates for speaking Spanish.”

      “In October 2009, Immigration and Customs Enforcement stripped Arpaio of his power to let 100 deputies make federal immigration arrests, but still allowed his jail officers to determine the immigration status of people in jail.”

  2. Andre Leonard says:

    Folding up like a lawn-chair is the path of least resistance and usually reserved for those who like to be guided.

    It’s fairly easy as it requires nothing but following orders. It the preferred path for those who like not a right to self determination.

  3. eubykdisop says:

    Not a new issue. This is from more than five years ago:

    “Sheriff’s Department has deputized 76 federal agents”

    “by Carli Brosseau on Jan. 11, 2008”

    “The Pima County Sheriff’s Department deputized 76 federal agents to enforce state law in the past year, according to department personnel records. Seventeen others are being added this month.”

    “State law allows a sheriff to sign off on a request for state law officer certification, which then gets sent to the state law enforcement accreditation agency for safekeeping.”

    “But there is another way for setting up such an arrangement – a memorandum of understanding, which has to be approved by the county Board of Supervisors.”

    “Pima County Sheriff Clarence Dupnik blames that strategy for the public outcry at Tuesday’s board meeting over a proposal to deputize a Border Patrol agent.”

    “He said the cross-certification, the legal term for deputizing a law officer certified by a federal agency or another state, was only up to the board because the Border Patrol insisted on it.”

    “Under most circumstances, the act of giving federal or other state law officers the power to enforce Arizona law falls under the radar, as it has 93 times in the past year in Pima County.”

    • Night Owl says:

      This move by the Cochise County Board of Supervisors occurred last week! Did you read the “update” letter from Sheriff Dannels? This issue was not five years old! Sheriff Dannels, fearing a recall after all of the recent negative publicity, has just recinded the policy in response to the outcry.

      • eubykdisop says:

        Did you read this?

        “Sheriff’s Department has deputized 76 federal agents”

        “by Carli Brosseau on Jan. 11, 2008″

        “The Pima County Sheriff’s Department deputized 76 federal agents to enforce state law in the past year, according to department personnel records. Seventeen others are being added this month.”

        Now, that was about federal agents being deputized by a Sheriff’s Department in Arizona to enforce state law. The date is January 11, 2008. That was OVER five years ago, or are you unable to do simple subtraction. So, the issue IS over five years old.

        Now, the last time you pulled this garbage with me was when you tried to mislead SRAZ readers into believing that third party and independent candidates don’t win elections. After I posted a list of third party and independent candidates who had won congressional seats and governorships, you suddenly fell silent. It would appear that you either have a learning problem or a memory problem. Either way, I’m here to help you get through that!

      • eubykdisop says:

        Furthermore, Night Owl, this is NOT just a local issue. It is a national issue. Sheriffs in other states are currently addressing local police powers for feds.

        “Oh yes he can: Sheriff strips Feds of local enforcement powers”

        “July 09, 2013”

        “Sheriff John D’Agostini is taking the unusual step of pulling the police powers from the federal agency because he says he has received “numerous, numerous complaints.”

        “In a letter obtained by CBS13, the sheriff informs the federal agency that its officers will no longer be able to enforce California state law anywhere in his county….”

      • eubykdisop says:

        You want to know about the national effort at a federal power grab by the Liberal left? Try this!

        “Delaware leads nationwide move to strip county sheriffs of power”

        “January 31, 2013”

        “If the sheriffs lose their arrest ability then Delaware will be a de facto police state.” -Delaware Sussex County Sheriff Jeff Christopher

        “In their role as their counties’ chief law enforcement officer, sheriffs answer only to the U. S. Constitution, not to Washington, D.C. That is why liberty-loving Americans, fearful of the growing power of the federal government, look to the sheriffs as a check. Indeed, on the matter of the Obama regime’s gun control and gun ban, more and more county sheriffs are saying “no.”

        “It should come as no surprise then that the forces of tyranny mean to curtail the powers of the county sheriff, if not abolish the institution altogether. In that nefarious effort, the State of Delaware is leading the way.”

        “In April 2012, Pat Shannan of American Free Press first alerted us to the machinations of Delaware Attorney General Beau Biden, son of VPOS Joe Biden.”

        “Although Delaware’s State Constitution stipulates that the office of the sheriff is a constitutionally created position and sheriffs “shall be conservators of the peace within the counties . . . in which they reside,” Biden sent out mandates to commissioners informing them that their sheriffs no longer have arrest powers. In an opinion released February 24, 2012, State Solicitor L.W. Lewis said that neither the state nor the common law grants arrest powers to the county sheriffs.”

        “On May 10, 2012, Delaware’s House of Representatives passed HB 325 by an overwhelming 36-2 majority. On June 14, 2012, the state Senate passed HB 325 by a 12-3 majority. On June 19, 2012, Governor Jack A Markell, a Democrat, signed HB 325 into law.”

        “This bill makes the Delaware law clear that the county sheriffs and their deputies do not have arrest authority. Historically the sheriffs and deputies have not exercised arrest authority and the Attorney General’s office has given an opinion that the sheriff’s “power to arrest is no greater than that shared by any citizen.”

    • Tucson Voter says:

      Question. Did you bother to listen to the complete interview? It’s very compelling stuff! Your articles have little to do with the subject at hand. Bringing Sheriff Clarence Dupnik into this discussion is a bit of a wander. He’s a certifiable liberal old goon who learned a new word, “vitriol.”

      THIS is the guy we call “Dumbnik” blaming the Tucson shooting on talk radio.

    • eubykdisop says:

      I understand, Tucson Voter. You need a little help. Always happy to help the comprehension challenged! Here, I’ll connect the little dots for you!

      You see, this is not something new. This has been going on for long time. If you look at the date of the article, it’s from January, 2008! Are you with me so far Tucson Voter? Good! Then let’s move on, shall we?

      The next thing you’ll notice, if you can read, is that 76 federal agents were deputized by the Pima County Sheriff’s Department to enforce state law. Well, my goodness! That’s exactly the same thing the article tells us is going on today! Get it? Same thing today as over five years ago? Do you have it now, Tucson Voter? Good!

      Now, WHO did it is irrelevant. It doesn’t matter if it was Snidely Whiplash who did it five years ago. You see, Tucson voter, the POINT is that this has been going on for quite some time. It is and has been an ONGOING problem. There is a HISTORY of it.

      Now, do try a little harder to improve your reading comprehension, Tucson Voter, so that you don’t post comments which make you appear to be… slow.

      • Tucson Voter says:

        Interesting that you would pick the moniker Snidely Whiplash as an example, which so well fits your own boorish comment style. Of course this was January 2008. As I pointed out, Dupnnik’s comments were made after the Tucson shooting. I live in Dupnik’s county and know a thing or two about him.

        Not only can I read and comprehend, but I actually do. There is no “help” you are able to provide.

        Apparently you were never taught that hurling snappish insults is not the way to win folks to your side. I hope you’re not a precinct committeeman. You’d turn off more people than you’d persuade.

        My wife read your uncouth response and concluded you probably live alone and are perpetually angry.

      • eubykdisop says:

        Ah, yes! Classic Liberal style tactics! If you can’t address the facts, attack, LOL!

        Oh, and you were just so nice and considerate with me!

        “Did you bother to listen to the complete interview?” Did I “bother”?

        “Your articles have little to do with the subject at hand.” Well, how exceedingly genteel of you, LOL!

        Gee, let me try again. I’m very patient, especially with the comprehension challenged.

        You see, WHO has nothing to do with it. It’s irrelevant. The point is that there is a long-standing, ongoing problem with federal agents being deputized to carry out state and local law enforcement duties. Now, are you intellectually capable of separating the person from the action or is that entirely beyond you?

        “My wife read your uncouth response and concluded you probably live alone and are perpetually angry.” LOL! Oh, I’ve heard that stuff countless times from left wing Liberals! Are you a Liberal?

        Well here, let’s exchange insults. How about this?

        I’m surprised that the prison lets you blog from your cell. You probably live in Massachusetts so that you could marry a man! Is your “wife” a man or a woman?

        Isn’t this fun! Why we could probably go on insulting each other for days, although that wouldn’t contribute much to the blog! But then Liberals always enjoy being disruptive to Conservative blogs!

  4. eubykdisop says:

    Tucson Voter:

    Now let me help you out a little more! This isn’t just an Arizona issue, it is a BIG national issue. There is a lot of concern about federal agencies taking over state and local law enforcement duties. Here are a few headlines on the subject:

    “Davis County deputizes federal agents to enforce local laws in foothills”

    “By Bryon Saxton, 08/28/2012”

    “FARMINGTON — Deputizing two U.S. Forest Service agents as Davis County Sheriff’s deputies will further extend the long arm of the law in the Davis foothills.”

    “Federal Agents Deputized as Special Officers of the Louisiana State Police”

    “Baton Rouge, LA — Almost 200 federal law enforcement agents were commissioned as Special Officers of the Louisiana State Police allowing them to act as Louisiana peace officers, and assist state and local agencies that are protecting the public after Hurricane Gustav slammed into coastal and central Louisiana on Labor Day.”

    “Will a New Colorado Law Give Local Police Powers to the Secret Service in That State?”

    “Mike Opelka, Apr. 5, 2013”

    “A proposed new law in Colorado could give Secret Service employees local police powers in the that state.”

    “This new power has many concerned that Secret Service personnel will be used to arrest or force county sheriffs to enforce the state’s new gun laws.”

    Do you get it now, Tucson Voter? This is a long-standing problem which is national in scope. Now, add this to the mix!

    “1.6 Billion Rounds Of Ammo For Homeland Security? It’s Time For A National Conversation”

    • Steve says:

      You’re an arrogant jerk. This is a discussion arena, not a boxing ring.

      • eubykdisop says:

        Yes, Steve, you’ve said that before. And you, sweetheart, are a rude Cretin. The Liberals are out in force today. They just can’t stand Conservatives posting at Conservative blogs, LOL!

  5. kevinfmyers says:

    With 3,140 county in the United States here does the Sheriff get his power?

    I don’t know what the Federal Government is going to do about the sheriffs. Sheriffs are Constitutional officers, not U. S. Constitution but state constitution.

    The people created The Constitution which empowers the Federal government to protect the people. Also, The Tenth Amendment reserves to the states respectively, or to the people, any powers the Constitution did not delegate to the United States, nor prohibit the states from exercising.

    The office of sheriff is created by the Constitution of the several states. The sheriff is bound by the oath to uphold the Constitution of the state and answerable only to the people of the county NOT the Federal Government or even the state. The office of sheriff IS a part of the checks and balances of the United States of America. It is there to prevent the Federal Government from doing what it is trying to do today.

    One need to look no farther than Arizona’s own Sheriff Richard Mack to know that the Federal Government has no authority in the workings of the local sheriff’s office.

    • eubykdisop says:

      Right you are, Kevin, and THAT is what the flap is all about. All we have to do is to look at Sheriff Arpaio to see why the Liberal leftists want to disempower sheriffs. ;-)