WASHINGTON, D.C. – After being convicted of criminal misdemeanor contempt, former Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio has come out swinging, arguing the judge was biased and asking why President Trump is abandoning him, considering Arpaio was an early campaign supporter whose conviction reflects the determination to enforce immigration laws the Trump Justice Department is now exhibiting.

"Where is President Trump on this case?" Arpaio asked Infowars.com in an exclusive interview. "This is a witch hunt against me that is being carried forward by Obama holdovers in Attorney General Sessions' Department of Justice."

"I'm being convicted for honestly trying to enforce the immigration laws that Trump swore during the campaign he would uphold if elected president," Arpaio insisted.

Arpaio was one of Trump's early supporters, endorsing Trump formally in a statement issued on Jan. 27, 2016.

"Donald Trump is a leader. He produces results and is ready to get tough in order to protect American jobs and families," Arpaio said in a statement released by Trump's campaign at that time. "I have fought on the front lines to prevent illegal immigration. I know Donald Trump will stand with me and countless Americans to secure our border."

Starting in January 2016, Arpaio began appearing with Trump at campaign rallies, endorsing Trump's promise to "build a wall" as a needed measure to enforce aggressively immigration laws already on the books.

"I have great respect for Sheriff Arpaio," Trump said in an official campaign statement, accepting Arpaio's endorsement.  "We must restore law and order on the border and respect the men and women of our police forces. I thank him for his support of my policies and candidacy for president."

"A biased judge"

Arpaio's attorney, Mark Goldman, Goldman & Zillinger PLLC in Scottsdale, Ariz., explained to Infowars.com in an exclusive telephone interview and follow-up email that the judge in the case, U.S. District Susan R. Bolton, was so biased against Arpaio that she could have written her opinion before the trial even started, stating her prejudice from the start that Arpaio was guilty of misdemeanor civil contempt guilty conviction.

"The court, in its findings of fact and conclusions of law totally ignored all of the overwhelming evidence at trial that exonerated the Sheriff," Goldman told Infowars.com. "Most importantly, there was no testimony or other evidence produced that in any way proved that the order was 'clear and definite' which it must be in order to prove that the order could be disobeyed in the first place."