Category: The Law

She must think she is royalty or something

One of our credentialed intellectual superiors that thinks they belong to a special class that absolves them from the plethora of laws and regulations they foist on us peons, again showed us how broken our legal system really is. Mrs. Clinton, whom believes America owns her the title of POTUS because it is her turn, again shows how little respect she has for the system she seeks the highest office of. In a display of disconnect with reality that should frighten anyone with a modicum of intelligence, she answered questions querying the possibility that her people, under her direction, had wiped her highly illegal mail servers with the stupid kind of snark she believes shows her superiority to the rest of us rubes who she would have no problem turning the partisan legal system out on. Note that having such servers, let alone destroying evidence like she did when people found out about them and asked her to deliver that evidence for legal evaluation, would have landed anyone else in jail because they would be violation of congressional laws put in place to safeguard sensitive and secret information. Others have been punished – harshly – for far less than what is obvious to everyone was done by her and her staff.

I am not sure if she was just flaunting the fact that she believed she was above the law by wearing that ugly orange jump suit, or if she subconsciously was making another snarky remark for the jail time anyone else that had committed this string of crimes would be facing. This medusa must have some serious shit on the Obama administration. The lack of action by the legal entities in this administration, especially after they so vigorously crucified others for far less, is astounding. They have to know how the general populous is viewing this freak show, but its as if they don’t care. Then again, Obama is also a crime boss and believes himself royalty as well, so maybe it is just one crime boss helping out another. I for one have held for a long time that I would never trust the corrupted system run by agents of the left to fairly treat someone like me while on the other hand allowing one of their own to get away with practically anything, and so much of what has transpired over the last 7 years prove that I was right to feel that way.

She obviously did this because she had nothing to hide!

Democrats are fucking criminals. Have no doubt about it. The son of a bitch in the WH has been running his administration like a crime syndicate boss for close to 7 years now, and his underlings are no better. In fact, the leading democrat according to all the intelligentsia, just had to professionally wipe her illegal email servers because she didn’t want anyone to know the depths of these people’s depravity. In fact, I suspect that the main reason the Obama admin does nothing about this is because this stuff was horribly damaging to their racket as well. This nation no longer is one of laws, but one of connected people, and the only people getting privileged treatment are those that serve the democratic machine.

Can anyone imagine any republican getting away with the dismantling of the US legal system, the abuses of power by government agencies, and the outright disregard for the people of this country like these democrats get away with? I know we get told they are evil and bad, but even Nixon got stopped for asking the IRS to do something illegal. These crooks are breaking the law every fucking second of the day, and the media gives them a pass. This country is doomed.

The answer is a resounding “Yes”: next question?

Investors Business Daily has an oped up titled “Clinton Email Scandal: People Need To Know If She’s A Crook” where the question is asked:

Corruption: Some day the Clintons’ over-the-horizon trail of scandals will catch up with them. Given that Hillary might be the target of an FBI probe, that day could arrive soon.

The Clintons became convinced many decades ago that they are above the law. Nothing has persuaded them otherwise, not even that pesky impeachment of Bill. Hillary’s use of a personal email account powered by a private server while she was secretary of state, however, might be her undoing.

And we haven’t even mentioned the Benghazi scandal, and the investigation into that terrorist attack, which led to the uncovering of the private server.

That alone should be enough to bring down Clinton’s presidential ambitions.

As the title of my post indicates, the answer is damned obvious already, and only the usual shitbags pretend it is otherwise. Then again, this is the age of Obama, and stories like this one where the DOJ investigates itself and finds no wrong doing, of course make it evident that lady justice is trapped in the Obama WH basement, with a gimp ball in her mouth, and a train of democrat crooks lining up to take their turn raping her.

Pollard to go Free

Jonathan Pollard is going to be paroled:

In July 2014, after Jonathan J. Pollard had served 29 years of a life sentence for spying on behalf of Israel, his hopes for freedom were thwarted when a federal panel denied his request for parole.

But that hearing set in motion an intense scramble by lawyers for Mr. Pollard to ensure a different result a year later, when he would be eligible for parole after serving 30 years. They wrote letters, cited statistics and introduced evidence that their client met two legal standards for parole: that he had behaved well in prison, and that he posed no threat of returning to a life of espionage.

On Tuesday, the effort finally succeeded, as the United States Parole Commission announced that Mr. Pollard, 60, met the legal standards and would be released just before Thanksgiving.

On the strict letter of the law, they were correct. However, the government have objected to it and apparently has not. The official reason is that Pollard is no longer a threat and is in poor health. The rumored reason is that it is to smooth over relations with Israel after the Iran deal (although this appears very unlikely to work).

My position on Pollard has brought me into conflict with some people, including many fellow Jews. I think his sentence was entirely justified. The excuse that he only sold secrets “to our ally” did not impress me. As I have noted many times, even our allies have different interests from us. We keep secrets from them; they keep secrets from us. We spy on them; they spy on us. There’s nothing shameful about that. Pursuing the interests of one’s country is a leader’s job. There’s nothing wrong with Israel spying on us or paying one of our citizens for secrets. But there is something wrong with that citizens selling them. That’s called treason.

And Doug Mataconis reminds us that Pollard’s spying was far from benign:

When Pollard was first sentenced in 1985, for example, then Defense Secretary Casper Weinberger penned a blistering letter to the Judge, some of which classified, in which he laid forth the manner in which Pollard’s actions had endangered American national security. For example, while it wasn’t widely reported at the time, it became known to the United States that the Israelis had used some of the information Pollard had provided to them to trade with the Soviet Union for the safe release of Jews living in the USSR, thus handing vital American intelligence to our principal adversary at the time. Additionally, over the years other leaders in the U.S. intelligence community made it known that Pollard had also offered to sell classified information to three other nations other than Israel, an accusation which certainly makes him a far less sympathetic figure. The antipathy toward Pollard was so high at one point that in 1998, then CIA Director George Tenant threatened to resign if he was released.

As someone who is against massive prison sentences for all but the worst criminals, I suppose I should be OK with this. Pollard is in failing health and it’s not like he’s going to start spying again. But if we are to release Pollard, it’s not a victory. It’s the end of a sad saga that began when Pollard decided to betray his country.

How sad things are…

Rasmussen has a poll that asked people if they bought Obama’s most recent attempt to hide the fact that under his administration the IRS conveniently targeted his political opponents right before an election, and the sad thing is that the result was that only 52% of likely US voters believe that this was highly illegal and a directed political attack. I suspect that amongst the democrat voting block there are two issues that drive this number. The first that these democrat voters are predominantly low information voters: they get their news from comedians or DNC apparatchiks like the NYT or PSMNBC, which pretend to be doing unbiased news, but are nothing but shills for the DNC. But I suspect that there is also a large block that know this was illegal and a dangerous abuse of power they would never, ever, have gone along with, but they don’t care to admit that now, because it benefited their guy and their side.

These idiots are the ones that make totalitarian systems possible. They are fine with abuses of power and law breaking as long as it is done by their guys – explained away as a necessary evil in their battle against the enemy – and never figure out that eventually they will be in the line of fire themselves until it is too late. One can forgive the low information voter. After all, stupid is as stupid does. But willfully ignoring criminal activity is another thing. And during the Obama term we sure as hell have seen some unbelievable abuses of power. From this IRS scandal to the things going on in the ME (Benghazi. Iran deal, and more), to the attack on Walker Hal posted about, these people have shown they operate like a criminal syndicate. And we as a country are all suffering for it. When the rule of law crumbles as it is doing now, sooner than later, you will get those that decide to take the law into their own hands.

Walker Vindicated … Again

Color me surprised:

Dealing Gov. Scott Walker a victory just as his presidential campaign gets underway, the Wisconsin Supreme Court in a sweeping decision Thursday ruled the governor’s campaign and conservative groups had not violated campaign finance laws.

The ruling means the end of the investigation, which has been stalled for 18 months after a lower court judge determined no laws were violated even if Walker’s campaign and the groups had worked together as prosecutors believe.

This is the infamous “John Doe” investigation where government agents basically had an ongoing far-reaching investigation that involved, essentially, harassing Walker’s supporters and any other conservatives within reach with midnight raids, gag orders and endless investigation:

In international law, the Western world has become familiar with a concept called “lawfare,” a process whereby rogue regimes or organizations abuse legal doctrines and processes to accomplish through sheer harassment and attrition what can’t be accomplished through legitimate diplomatic means. The Palestinian Authority and its defenders have become adept at lawfare, putting Israel under increasing pressure before the U.N. and other international bodies. The John Doe investigations are a form of domestic lawfare, and our constitutional system is ill equipped to handle it. Federal courts rarely intervene in state judicial proceedings, state officials rarely lose their array of official immunities for the consequences of their misconduct, and violations of First Amendment freedoms rarely result in meaningful monetary damages for the victims.

Investigators would conduct armed police raids on the houses of Wisconsin conservatives. They seized computers, phones and as many documents as they could get their hands on. They then issued gag orders preventing the targets their neighbors what was going on. All this because of supposed violation of campaign finance laws; laws we now know were not broken.

You can read more from the WSJ:

For the past few days, I’ve been talking to the targets of the task force of Milwaukee Democratic prosecutors, the Wisconsin Government Accountability Board and Special Prosecutor Francis Schmitz. Their experiences, on the record here for the first time, reveal the nasty political sweep of an investigation that invaded privacy with surveillance of email accounts, raided homes with armed law enforcement, and swarmed individuals with subpoenas demanding tens of thousands of documents while insisting on secrecy.

Gabriel Malor shows just how empty this investigation was:

The theory of the prosecutor’s case was that conservative groups had illegally coordinated with candidates for office by means of issue advocacy. Applying well-settled principles of election law, the Wisconsin high court holds that this goes too far because “[d]iscussion of issues cannot be suppressed simply because the issues may also be pertinent in an election.” The courts have long treated express advocacy—that is, speech directly supporting a candidate for election—as wholly separate from issue advocacy—that is, speech about political issues. The court explains that, insofar as the Wisconsin statute purports to regulate issue advocacy the way that it does express advocacy, it is overbroad and vague under both the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and Wisconsin’s own Article 1, Section 3.

Read the whole thing. The judges were brutal on the prosecutors saying their investigation was “unsupported by reason” and “employed theories of law that do not exist in order to investigate citizens who were wholly innocent of any wrongdoing”. This isn’t just saying there’s no evidence; this is saying the investigation was a complete travesty designed entirely to harass Wisconsin conservatives.

The Democrats had a lot riding on this. Just a few months ago, they were writing smug posts on how the John Doe investigation was going to crush Walker’s Presidential campaign. Now the investigation is in ruins, their slimy tactics open for the world to see.

I am honestly amazed by what we’ve seen in Wisconsin. Vicious election fights. Recall elections. The legislature fleeing the state. An aggressive intrusive useless investigation from the people who’ve spent the last decade vilifying Ken Starr for his “politicized investigations” that … um … produced thirty felony convictions.

And all of this just to get one governor. What the heck?

How Social Justice systems always play out

Chavez fooled enough people in his country to go along with the usual redistributive nonsense that SJW, capitalizing on the envy and greed of those that for whatever reason feel their existence justifies their needs, peddle to grab power. he’s now dead, and his social experiment, resulting in one failure after another, has come to ,a href=”http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/southamerica/venezuela/11754156/Venezuelan-farmers-ordered-to-hand-over-produce-to-state.html” target=”_new”>this:

Venezuela’s embattled government has taken the drastic step of forcing food producers to sell their produce to the state, in a bid to counter the ever-worsening shortages.

Farmers and manufacturers who produce milk, pasta, oil, rice, sugar and flour have been told to supply between 30 per cent and 100 per cent of their products to the state stores. Shortages, rationing and queues outside supermarkets have become a way of life for Venezuelans, as their isolated country battles against rigid currency controls and a shortage of US dollars – making it difficult for Venezuelans to find imported goods.

Pablo Baraybar, president of the Venezuelan Food Industry Chamber, said that the order was illogical, and damaging to Venezuelan consumers.

“Taking products from the supermarkets and shops to hand them over to the state network doesn’t help in any way,” he said. “And problems like speculating will only get worse, because the foods will be concentrated precisely in the areas where the resellers go.

There is power in this approach, Pablo. This move by the Venezuelan government may not make sense to someone that genuinely wants to let the market figure this stuff out, but it makes perfect sense if you look at it from the stand that the government can grandstand and pretend they are doing it to help, but then use it to control people. And collectivism, despite the bullshit you get sold by the SJW, is all about control. The power to punish those that you deem to have violated whatever arbitrary line you have drawn and to keep the others in line out of fear is central to the command economy politics of collectivism.

Be it hard core communism, the state owned socialism of Franco and the Nazi party, the crony-capitalism socialism of the west, or anything in between, the system can’t survive without the state’s ability to control and punish dissent. The end result, when you run out of other people’s money is the rationing of basic necessities – from toilet paper to soap – and the government confiscating the production of labor, like in this case, leading to a drastic decline in productivity across the board. After all, who wants to work hard to get the same reward as the people that do absolutely nothing?

This is what the social revolution will always play out as. Ask the Greeks how close they are to just this.

Sandra Bland

The big news this week is the arrest and subsequent death of Sandra Bland. An activist soon to start a job at Prairie View A&M, she was arrested after being pulled over for failing to signal a turn, then found dead in her cell. Her death was ruled a suicide but is now being investigated as a murder

Yesterday, dash cam footage was released. In it, Bland is told to put out her cigarette by the officer. When she refuses, the situation escalates almost immediately as the officer orders out of the car, threatens her with a taser and arrests her. There is then a confrontation off camera where the officer says she assaulted him, which was the reason she went to jail (although she was arrested before the assault).

A lot of things to unpack here.

First, was the officer within his power to order her out of the car? Jacob Sullum goes over the legal issues and the answer is “maybe”.

Based on their comments in the video, Encinia and Bland clearly agreed that the escalation from warning to arrest was ridiculous, but they had diametrically opposed views of who was to blame. If only Bland had been more respectful and cooperative, Encinia thought, she could have been on her way. If only Encinia had not been so determined to assert his authority for its own sake, Bland thought, he never would have forced her out of the car, let alone handcuffed her and knocked her down.

Second, I keep thinking of what Radley Balko often says about police shootings: even if the shooting itself was justified, there were often errors and bad decisions leading up to that point. Even if arresting Bland for assaulting an officer was justified, the decisions leading up to that are questionable at best. I think that pulling Bland out of her car, threatening her with a taser and arresting her was a bit of an over-reaction to someone for talking back (mildly at first, but becoming more confrontational as the arrest proceeds as she yells at him and calls him “a pussy”).

Finally, there is the big issue of the circumstances of Bland’s death. All indications are that Bland was not the kind to kill herself and I think a full and thorough investigation is warranted. We’ve had a few of these incidents, including at least two incidents were a person who had been searched, handcuffed and placed in the back of a police car supposedly found a gun and shot himself to death.

That having been said … we should be prepared if it turns out that she did indeed kill herself. Suicides tend to be impulsive and Bland’s family wouldn’t be the first to be shocked by a unexpected suicide. Last year, we were told over and over again that there was no way Michael Brown would attack a police officer and then charge into gunfire. The argument convinced me to be skeptical of the officer’s version of events. But it turned out to be the truth. Sometimes people do stupid, irrational and tragic things.

So, yes, let’s investigate the death. And let’s also ask questions about why a routine traffic stop ended in an arrest. And let’s accept the answers, whatever they are.

The Nanny State Strikes Again

Every time I think we’ve reached a new low with people freaking out about kids, we manage to break through the bottom of the barrel:

Laura Browder said she had her 6-year-old daughter and 2-year-old son with her at Memorial City Mall for a job interview because she didn’t have enough time to line up child care. Browder sat her children down inside the food court near a McDonald’s and went to her interview, she said. The interview wasn’t for a job at the mall, but the food court was a meeting ground for each party.

Browder said she wasn’t more than 30 feet away from her children at any point and they were always in her line of sight. After Browder returned to her children, a police officer was on scene and arrested her.

The arrest came moments after Browder had accepted a job. She said she’s unsure how her arrest that day will affect her opportunity with that job.

CPS officials said they’re still in the early stages of their investigation, but added they could offer services to help Browder find suitable daycare.

This isn’t just ridiculous, it’s cruel. This is a single mother going to college trying to get a job. I’d be a bit nervous about leaving a 6-year-old and a toddler by themselves as way, but arresting her and charging her with abandonment is just absurd. Maybe there’s more to the story, but the information we have now makes it seem like an absurd over-reaction.

What could go wrong?

I am not surprised to hear that the crime syndicate running the country right now is basically collecting information on the serfs, and absolutely not surprised the emphasis on race is there. After all, the grief mongers have an election coming soon and running on the disastrous record of the last 7 years is not an option. Money quote:

A key part of President Obama’s legacy will be the fed’s unprecedented collection of sensitive data on Americans by race. The government is prying into our most personal information at the most local levels, all for the purpose of “racial and economic justice.”

Unbeknown to most Americans, Obama’s racial bean counters are furiously mining data on their health, home loans, credit cards, places of work, neighborhoods, even how their kids are disciplined in school — all to document “inequalities” between minorities and whites.

This Orwellian-style stockpile of statistics includes a vast and permanent network of discrimination databases, which Obama already is using to make “disparate impact” cases against: banks that don’t make enough prime loans to minorities; schools that suspend too many blacks; cities that don’t offer enough Section 8 and other low-income housing for minorities; and employers who turn down African-Americans for jobs due to criminal backgrounds.

Big Brother Barack wants the databases operational before he leaves office, and much of the data in them will be posted online.

So civil-rights attorneys and urban activist groups will be able to exploit them to show patterns of “racial disparities” and “segregation,” even if no other evidence of discrimination exists.

Funny this, because the last 3 months have I have experienced 3 scenarios where when prompted I told the people I wouldn’t disclose my race or didn’t want them to note it, and met with huge resistance. My dental assistant was flabbergasted that I wouldn’t let her note my race on the reams of paperwork the government demands be filled (one other question asked was if I owned fire arms and I told her the answer was “fuck off, slavers”). The two people that called me with their surveys – both of them with clear agendas – also were insistent that I provide race information. I refused. Adamantly. They were not happy.

Considering the agenda, I am not surprised they want to collect this. Considering their other corrupt activities, I have no doubt this will also be mishandled and presented in whatever way will benefit the social justice warrior class. But have no doubt that they will find a way to abuse this. That is the legacy of this band of thieves, after all.