Tuesday, October 25, 2016


Professor Who Predicted Last Five Elections Says Trump Has 87% Chance of Winning despite polls showing Hillary ahead

By Paul Joseph Watson

October 24, 2016

Political science professor Helmut Norpoth, who has accurately called the results of the last five presidential elections, still asserts that Donald Trump has an 87% chance of defeating Hillary Clinton despite Clinton being ahead in the polls.

Norpoth’s model has correctly predicted the outcome of the popular vote for every election since 1996, including the 2000 race where Al Gore won the popular vote but George W. Bush took the presidency.

“It usually turns out that the candidate who does better in his party’s primary beats the other guy who does less well,” said Norpoth, adding that Trump’s margin of victory in New Hampshire and South Carolina compared to Clinton (who lost in New Hampshire) was crucial to his model.

The other factor is the “swing of the pendulum,” which makes it far more likely for a change of government if one party has been in power for two terms.

Norpoth said he has gone “all in” on a Donald Trump victory and is sticking with his bet.

“There are also quite a few colleagues of mine who have a prediction that Trump is going to make it,” added the professor.

Many Trump supporters are now claiming that the media narrative that the election result is a foregone conclusion is a trick designed to convince potential Trump voters to stay home on November 8.

A confidential memo allegedly obtained from Correct The Record, a Democratic Super PAC, reveals a plan to “barrage” voters with high frequency polls that show Hillary ahead in order to “declare election over,” while avoiding any mention of the Brexit vote (which completely contradicted polls that said Brexit would fail).

Emails revealed by Wikileaks show how Democratic operatives planned to encourage “oversamples for polling” in order to “maximize what we get out of our media polling.” In other words, sample more Democrats than Republicans in order to make people believe that Hillary’s lead is far greater than the reality of a tight race.

Norpoth’s forecast of a Trump victory mirrors what’s taking place in the betting markets, with British bookmakers William Hill revealing last week that 65% of all bets on the market have backed Trump to win the election, a similar phenomenon to what happened before the Brexit vote, where the polls were proven completely wrong.

EDITOR’S NOTE: I hope Prof. Norpoth’s prediction will come to pass, but I’m afraid he may have been smoking some funny tobacco.


By Bob Walsh

Kathleen Kane, 50, used to be real hot stuff in the Democrat political arena and was the Attorney General for Pennsylvania. She is now a number on an orange jump suit.

Kane was sentenced to from 10-23 months as a guest of the people of the state with an additional eight years probation. The sentencing judge asserted that her revenge scheme was the result of her "all-consuming ego" and her inability to make the transition from politician to civil servant. She was convicted of perjury and obstruction of justice as well as a buttload of assorted misdemeanors..

She is currently free on $75,000 pending appeal. Her 15-year old son sniveled to the judge for leniency. She argued that loss of her law license and career was adequate punishment. She did not testify at her trial.

She was convicted for having a political aide leak confidential information to a press source, then tried to frame a political rival as the leaker. She then lied under oath about the whole mess.


By Bob Walsh

For many years BUICK was considered to be an extremely reliable car. It was also known as the Doctor's Car. It was solid, upscale and reliable without being ostentatious. It's there again, at least according to Consumer Reports.

Yup, Buck has made it into the top five of the most reliable cars, a position that no American product has held since the 1980s. Right behind Lexus and Toyota. (Well, some Toyotas are made here too.)


By Bob Walsh

God Knows Who (or maybe What). The polls are running anywhere from +1 for Trump to +11 for the Hildebeast. The "good" polls with an excellent track record and good procedures are running about 2-4% in favor of Hillary. There will, in my humble opinion, be a significant closet Trump vote. In addition most polls over-report on Democrats due to the way they are set-up and run. Further, at least according to the recent WickiLeaks dump, the Dems have a long track record of manipulating polling results and pressuring their allies in the media to over-report good results and ignore bad results in an effort to drive down Republican voters. After all, people like to vote for the winner and if they think the Hildebeast has it in the bag they may stay home. Or, if the Dems believe their own propaganda enough THEY might stay home. Such things have happened before.

I would be a lot happier if Trump could focus and quit distracting himself with crap like promising to sue the women who are allegedly slandering him. It's a personal problem. I don't care about it.

Hope clouds reason. I HOPE Trump can pull this off. Therefore I THINK he can pull it off. Maybe I am just whistling past the graveyard. Maybe not. Fortunately for me there are a few must-win Trump states in the east that will probably tell the story early. If Trump can carry Florida, North Carolina, Pennsylvania and Ohio there is a real good chance he can pull this off. If he looses in all of them, he is toast.

I will no doubt sit around the television with my lady-friend (who is a Hildebeast supporter, or at least a Trump hater), eating pizza and may very well be cursing at the television. It may not be fun, but it will be interesting.

EDITOR’S NOTE: Enjoy your pizza by eating early on election eve, Bob – before the results start coming in. I’m afraid a better title would have been TWO WEEKS UNTIL DOOMSDAY.


How quickly should officers who kill return to work?

By Kate Mather

Los Angeles Times
October 23, 2016

This summer, for the first time in his nearly five years as a Los Angeles police officer, Eden Medina shot someone.

Police say Medina opened fire July 28 as Omar Gonzalez fought with officers after a car chase ended in a Boyle Heights cul-de-sac. Police have released few details about the shooting, but said at least one witness saw the 36-year-old with a gun before Medina fatally shot him.

Twelve days later, the Hollenbeck Division gang officer fired his gun again, killing Jesse Romero two weeks shy of his 15th birthday. The Aug. 9 shooting prompted protests and criticism of the LAPD, amplified by the renewed national scrutiny over policing as well as conflicting accounts over whether Romero fired a gun at officers before he was shot.

The shootings offer a window into how the LAPD treats officers who fire their guns. While shootings by police have received much attention, they remain relatively rare events. In 2015, for example, the LAPD reported more than 1.5 million contacts between police and the public. Of those encounters, 21 ended with deadly gunfire from officers.

But it’s even more unusual for an officer to fatally shoot two people in such a short period of time.

The case raises questions about how much training and psychological help the LAPD provides officers who fire their weapons and whether they spend enough time away from the job after a deadly encounter.

LAPD spokesman Josh Rubenstein said Medina returned to the field six days after the first shooting. The officer was cleared by a department psychologist and the police chief, he said.

“We take every single instance very seriously,” he said. “Any officer-involved shooting is tragic for the community and for the officer. It’s very difficult.”

LAPD officers typically return to the field one to two weeks after a shooting and can do so even before they complete a training refresher course that usually lasts between 30 minutes and an hour, according to a recent report by the Police Commission’s inspector general.

It is unclear whether Medina finished that training before returning to work. Rubenstein declined to comment, saying it was part of the officer’s personnel file.

Police officers in Washington, D.C., and Dallas typically don’t return to their full duties for almost a month after a shooting, according to the inspector general’s report. Officers in Las Vegas spend as long as two or three months out of the field. Dallas and Las Vegas also send officers to a full day of individualized training before they’re back on the job.

Earlier this month, the civilian commission that oversees the LAPD directed the department to expand training for officers after they fire their guns and ensure they complete that training before returning to the field.

Matt Johnson, the commission’s president, told department brass he was concerned that LAPD officers generally spend less time off patrol after shootings than police at other agencies. Johnson also said he believed officers should be required to attend more than one session with a psychologist.

“These are traumatic events, and one mandatory session does not seem adequate to me,” he said. “Someone could have a great session and frankly, pull the wool over your eyes, and you don’t see the trauma that they’re going through.”

Rubenstein, the LAPD spokesman, said the department is willing to take another look at that approach as part of its broader review of how officers use force.

A lawyer representing Romero’s mother accused the LAPD of showing “complete gross negligence” by sending Medina back to the field within a week of the first shooting. Whether or not the officer was justified in firing his gun, attorney Humberto Guizar said, he should have spent more time away as a “cooling down” period.

“I have friends who are police officers — they worked for 35 years and they never shot a civilian,” Guizar said. “This is an officer who killed somebody 12 days before he killed our kid. How could that happen?”

Medina’s attorney insisted there was no connection between the two shootings, saying the officer reacted reasonably based on the circumstances of each situation. Both Gonzalez and Romero had a gun, attorney Larry Hanna noted. The timing, he added, was "just a coincidence.”

Hanna described Medina as a hard-working cop who, as a gang officer, worked a difficult assignment in a tough neighborhood.

“Being in one shooting was very hard on this officer. Being in two? It’s hard on them,” Hanna said. “They don’t want to be out there having to do this. They also don’t want people pointing guns at them.”

The LAPD puts officers through a “rigorous process” before returning them to work after a shooting, Hanna said. “This officer was ready,” he said.

Most law enforcement officers spend their entire careers without firing their guns in the line of duty. How departments treat officers who do, however, varies from agency to agency.

LAPD officers must meet with a psychologist within a week of firing their guns. Officers must be cleared by a psychologist before the chief decides whether they can return to work, though the psychologist may require officers to attend additional counseling sessions after they’re back on the job. Officers may request extra meetings.

Officers also receive what’s called a general training update — a refresher course that includes a review of the LAPD’s policy for using deadly force and time in a simulator where officers react to various real-life scenarios that could lead to using that deadly force.

Police in Dallas, however, must attend three mental health evaluations after a shooting — a week, three months and six months later. Las Vegas officers are required to attend at least two sessions and are then evaluated by a board of department officials before an undersheriff signs off on returning that officer to the field.

Los Angeles County sheriff’s deputies who are involved in shootings — whether they pulled the trigger or not — must check in with a psychologist within days, then again two weeks and four months later, sheriff’s officials said. They generally return to work between a week and 10 days after a shooting.

Lou Turriaga, a director for the union that represents the LAPD’s rank and file, said he believed the department offered strong support for officers after shootings. It’s rare for police to fire their guns in the line of duty, he noted — Turriaga said he hasn’t during his 28 years as an LAPD officer — and each officer who does reacts differently.

“I’ve been out to shootings and you can see it in their eyes. Some of them, it’s not a problem,” he said. “Others look like a deer in headlights.”

On-duty LAPD officers have fatally shot 16 people this year, according to a Times analysis. Five of those shootings happened in Boyle Heights, including one where an LAPD officer was shot in the arm.

Conflicting accounts have emerged about the events that led up to Medina’s second shooting. The LAPD has said a witness told investigations that Romero fired a revolver at police after they chased him down the street. An officer then saw Romero crouched on the sidewalk, his arm extended. Fearing Romero was going to shoot, police said, Medina fired.

A woman who said she saw the shooting, however, told The Times she saw Romero throw the gun toward a fence. She said she heard the weapon fire when it hit the ground.

Medina is currently working an investigative assignment, the LAPD said. He hasn’t returned to the field since the second shooting. The department spokesman declined to say why, citing the ongoing inquiry and laws protecting a police officer’s personnel record.


By Ray Sanchez

October 21, 2016

The Milwaukee cop who fatally shot Sylville Smith in August watched TV coverage of the violent street protests that followed at a bar with a man who later accused the officer of sexual assault, according to a criminal complaint.

The unidentified man told investigators that Officer Dominique Heaggan-Brown sexually assaulted him while off-duty two days after the August 13 shooting death of Smith, a 23-year-old black man who police said was armed during a lethal confrontation that started with a traffic stop.

Heaggan-Brown, 24, who has been suspended from the force, was being held on $100,000 bail Thursday. It's unclear whether he has an attorney.

The alleged sexual assault occurred in the early morning of August 15 after a night of heavy drinking at a bar where the two men "sat and watched television as coverage of the Sherman Park protests aired," the criminal complaint said.

After allegedly assaulting the man at the officer's home, Heaggan-Brown took the accuser to a hospital and told a nurse the man "began to act weird and unresponsive" at a bar, according to the complaint.

Heaggan-Brown told a hospital security officer that the man was "completely out, zonked out of his gourd" after drinking, the complaint said.

Later, after seeing Heaggan-Brown in the emergency room, the man told hospital workers, "He raped me. He raped me," according to the complaint.

That morning Heaggan-Brown later sent a text message to a sergeant who had mentored him, saying he was "not so good" after having "a separate situation," the complaint said.

"Need your help big time," the text said. "Fucked up big time ... But need to handle this the most secret and right way possible."

When the sergeant met with Heaggan-Brown, the officer described the sex as consensual and said his accuser "was drunk and had 'medical issues,'" according to the complaint.

The sergeant also is under investigation, police Chief Edward Flynn told reporters Thursday.

Flynn said the allegations against Heaggan-Brown were "altogether awful" and "extraordinarily disappointing," but the investigation into Smith's death should be based on the circumstances of the shooting, not the officer's possible character, he said.

Heaggan-Brown is charged with two counts of second-degree sexual assault, two counts of prostitution and one count of capturing an intimate representation without consent. He's accused of offering two other men money for sex at his home, the complaint said.

The complaint said Heaggan-Brown and his accuser, both musicians, had connected on Facebook. At the bar the night protests rocked Sherman Park, the officer had "bragged about being able to do whatever the defendant wanted without repercussions."

Police said Heaggan-Brown turned over his phone to investigators and let them search his home, but most of his belongings had been moved out.

The phone turned up evidence that the officer propositioned two others for sex, as well as video and photos of alleged sexual encounters, according to the complaint.

An investigation into the sexual assault allegation resulted in the Milwaukee County district attorney's office filing the criminal complaint Wednesday, police said.

In addition to a criminal investigation, the internal affairs division will review the case.

Mike Crivello, president of the 1,600-member Milwaukee Police Association, said in a statement: "In any large organization there may be a time that one, or a few discredit the overall; this is by no means reflective of the overwhelming majority of good officers. The MPA condemns all criminal behavior by any member of society, whether part of this organization or not -- in all situations it is imperative that fact(s) are allowed to dictate the outcome."

Milwaukee, a city long torn by racial tensions, exploded with protests in August after Smith was shot after running from police during a traffic stop. Heaggan-Brown also is African-American.

For two nights, protesters torched a half-dozen businesses, smashed cars and hurled rocks at police.

Heaggan-Brown rose from a police apprenticeship program to became a cop on the rough-and-tumble streets of the city's northwest side.

After the shooting, the officer's name and photo were widely circulated on social media, with angry comments from people threatening to have him killed.

Some online posters described encounters with what they said was an overzealous officer.

Heaggan-Brown has six years of service with the Milwaukee police -- three as an officer, officials said. He entered the department as part of an apprentice program that recruits high school students and requires they complete college credits.

He was assigned to District 7 on Milwaukee's northwest side.

Heaggan-Brown was placed on administrative duty during an investigation into the August shooting.

Mayor Tom Barrett said police body camera footage showed Smith holding a handgun during the encounter. That video has not been released.

Police said the officer shot Smith after he failed to comply with orders to put his gun down, which was loaded with 23 rounds -- more than the officer was carrying.

Smith -- described by family as a caring father, a loyal friend and popular dancer in Milwaukee's thriving hip-hop scene -- was known to Heaggan-Brown before the fatal encounter in August, Smith's relatives and friends said at the time.

EDITOR’S NOTE: How did Heaggan-Brown ever pass the MPD’s background investigation before he was hired?


By Gina Barton and Ashley Luthern

Milwaukee Journal Sentinel
October 22, 2016

BROWN DEER, Wisconsin -- A Brown Deer police officer who shot an unarmed man after removing him from a county bus in March has been charged with aggravated battery with use of a dangerous weapon, a felony, according to a criminal complaint.

The man, Manuel L. Burnley Jr., 26, was face down on the ground when Officer Devon Kraemer shot him in the back, according to the complaint, which was issued Friday.

Charges in police shootings are extremely rare in Wisconsin.

In Milwaukee county, just two officers have been charged in fatal shootings in nearly 50 years, according to legislative research conducted in 2014. Only one of those shootings occurred while the officer was on duty. That research did not quantify charges in non-fatal shootings.

Charges are filed so infrequently in part because officers are authorized to use deadly force if they reasonably believe someone poses a threat to officers or to members of the public.

Kraemer told authorities she shot Burnley "because she feared for her safety and that of her partner," the complaint says.

But an expert retained by the prosecutor's office, Emanuel Kapelsohn, concluded that while Kraemer may have been afraid, that fear was not objectively reasonable.

"It was Kapelsohn's professional opinion that Kraemer's use of deadly force was not consistent with generally accepted standards for use of force in Wisconsin or nationwide," the complaint says.

According to the complaint:

The incident began when the bus driver flagged down the officers in the 8600 block of N. 60th St. because Burnley was arguing with her. Kraemer boarded the bus and told Burnley to get off, but he refused, using vulgar language and displaying a belligerent attitude. He did not threaten anyone on the bus or suggest he had a weapon.

Kraemer and her partner, Michael Leeman, removed Burnley from the bus. As they took him to the ground, they also fell. The two officers rolled Burnley onto his stomach; he struggled as they tried to handcuff him.

"Kraemer stated that she was unable to gain control of Burnley's left arm, and she drew her firearm, and pressed it against Burnley's back," the complaint says. "She then drew it back a short distance, to avoid a malfunction, and fired once, striking Burnley in the back, then immediately re-holstered her firearm."

After he was shot, Burnley asked what happened and heard Leeman respond by saying, "We just shot you" and using a racial slur, according to a document Burnley's attorney filed as a precursor to a civil lawsuit. Burnley is African-American; the two officers are white.

Burnley was hospitalized for 12 days and lost part of a lung as a result of the shooting. The bullet remains in his body and he is unable to work, according to his attorney, Jon Safran.

"Mr. Burnley is lucky to be alive and not paralyzed from being shot," Safran said Friday.

Kraemer has been placed on administrative leave with pay, according to a statement from Brown Deer Police Chief Michael Kass.

"As with any officer-involved shooting, the Brown Deer Police Department recognized that criminal charges were always a possibility," Kass said in a statement. "We fully understand and accept the need for this high level of scrutiny within the criminal justice system."

Milwaukee police conducted the investigation into the shooting at the request of Brown Deer police.

Brown Deer police had referred Burnley to the district attorney's office, requesting charges related to assaulting the two officers, but prosecutors did not charge him.

Kraemer has five years of experience with Brown Deer police and Leeman has two years of experience with the department.

If convicted, Kraemer faces a maximum possible penalty of 20 years in prison and $50,000 in fines. She would not be able to continue working in law enforcement since she would no longer be allowed to carry a gun under federal law.

Kraemer is the second police officer to be criminally charged by the Milwaukee County district attorney's office in as many days. On Thursday, Milwaukee Police Officer Dominique Heaggan-Brown, whose shooting of Sylville Smith prompted riots in the Sherman Park neighborhood, was charged with three felonies and two misdemeanors, including off-duty sexual assault. Smith's death remains under investigation.

The shooting of Burnley isn't the first time Brown Deer police training has been called into question in recent years.

In 2012, Brown Deer Police officials asked the state Department of Justice for training on how to handle domestic violence situations.

The request came amid sharp criticism in the wake of a shooting at Azana Salon and Spa that resulted in the deaths of three people and the suicide of the gunman. The shooter, Radcliffe Haughton, and his wife, who was among his victims, lived in Brown Deer. Less than two years before the spa shooting, officers saw Radcliffe Haughton point what appeared to be a rifle at his wife. Officers set up a tactical perimeter, told him he was under arrest and ordered him to surrender. He refused. A supervisor ordered officers to leave the scene 90 minutes into the standoff.

At the time, police experts told the Journal Sentinel that leaving without making an arrest was a breach of basic police protocol and created a risk to the public.


Bay Area hip-hop artist Paris accuses SFPD of routinely exhibiting racial bias as it metes out justice

By Paris

October 18, 2016

"All niggers must fucking hang."

"White power."

"Niggers should be spayed. I saw one an hour ago with 4 kids."

These words weren't uttered by Klansmen in 1960s Mississippi. They weren't a chant overheard at some racist skinhead revival. They weren't even spoken by average citizens in a spate of Donald Trump-induced bigotry.

These sentiments were privately shared among cops in San Francisco within the past five years.

Twice now—once in March 2015 and again this April—troves of texts and other communications from San Francisco police officers have revealed unsettling racism and homophobia in the rank and file. Add to that 11 police-involved fatalities between May 2013 and May 2016—nine of which involved people of color—and it's easy to see why the San Francisco Police Department was subject to a scathing Department of Justice review last week for allegedly discriminating against people of color in a systematic way.

For those of us who've had encounters with cops in San Francisco—deserved or otherwise—this comes as no surprise. We've long known the department was lacking; now it's official. The true test will be what happens in the non-binding report's wake, and given that the feds have been reluctant to even call the department's actions straight-up racist (as they did in Baltimore this summer), it's hard to be optimistic.

Needless to say, the sentiments espoused in those text messages don't inspire confidence that the SFPD can turn things around. "It's highly unlikely [the] SFPD can reform itself," as San Francisco Public Defender Jeff Adachi said last week. Still, the DOJ review itself was conducted by its Office of Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS Office) and initiated at the behest of Mayor Ed Lee and former Chief Greg Suhr after the police killing of Mario Woods. And the report details 94 findings and well over 200 non-binding recommendations intended to help the department rectify its shortcomings.

According to the feds, the department has a myriad of problems, including those relating to issues with transparency and bias, accountability, data collection, and internal oversight and hiring. (The report also chronicles apparent efforts by the San Francisco Police Officers Association to thwart the implementation of reforms.) Perhaps most glaringly, even though blacks comprise less than 6 percent of San Francisco's population at this point, the DOJ report found that 37 percent of the department's nearly 550 use-of-force incidents over the last three years—and nearly 15 percent of its traffic stops—involved African Americans.

It's worth noting that the SFPD is nearly equal parts white and minority, which lends credence to the idea that racial prejudice is an inherent characteristic of policing in America. Indeed, if a diverse department in a diverse city (San Francisco is nearly half Asian and Latino) routinely exhibits racial bias as it metes out justice, what hope is there for the remaining 16,000 or more agencies nationwide—many of which are mostly white—to be any better?

Nevertheless, Mayor Lee and interim Police Chief Toney Chaplin maintain that the SFPD is committed to implementing every recommendation in the report, and cite the rollout of body cameras, a new use-of-force policy, and implicit bias training and sanctity of life practices as evidence the department is moving in the right direction.

The problem, according to the Police Body Worn Cameras Scorecard and as evidenced by individual cases where body-camera-toting cops shot and killed unarmed people, is that the adoption of new technology in departments nationwide is sporadic, and any attendant accountability less than automatic.

The SFPD's General Order on Body Worn Cameras explicitly requires officers to "activate their BWC equipment to record" detentions and arrests, consensual encounters, traffic and pedestrian stops, vehicle and foot pursuits, uses of force, searches, arrest warrants and more. However, that same order outlines no definitive penalty for officers who opt to not active their cameras, effectively rendering the entire exercise moot when attempting to measure officer culpability in matters of potential misconduct. Why not include a criminal penalty for officers accused of brutality (or worse) who don't activate their cameras? Or mandatory firing, at least?

We've all seen just how little progress has been made, with the killings of Keith Lamont Scott, Philando Castile and others serving as a constant reminder that police reform still has a long way to go in America. Even the police department in Ferguson, Missouri, which has supposedly binding reforms detailed in legal settlements as a result of the DOJ's civil rights division review (unaffiliated with the COPS Office that conducted the SFPD report), remains mired in racial tension and is dangerously understaffed. And the governor's race in Missouri is basically a fight between two white dudes about who's tougher on crime and who's more supportive of cops.

One would expect an assumed bastion of progressive ideals like San Francisco to do better. Sadly, it hasn't.

The recorded killing of Woods, a 26-year-old black man shot by several cops on the street after brandishing a knife, remains a point of contention for many concerned with police malfeasance, and was a key impetus for the COPS Office review. Even if the officers involved are never charged, I see the Woods killing as akin to murder—if someone who wasn't a cop did this, it would almost certainly be treated like one—as evidenced by unedited video documentation. The case has come to exemplify for many of us in the Bay Area just how unjust the justice system can be. The fact that no one has been made to answer for this man's death, and that the police who ended his life quickly went back on the job, only serves to deepen the sting of this latest flimsy report.

Besides, the San Francisco Police Officers Association—the group whose official positions are often reflexively conservative and unsympathetic to concerns of those citizens the SFPD routinely targets—has shown zero interest in attempting to mend relations with the minority community. Leadership even went so far as to formally denounce San Francisco 49ers quarterback Colin Kaepernick's protest of police misconduct.

There is at least a small ray of hope, though, as some officers nationwide seem to be waking up to the fact that past mistreatment by the police has helped fuel a deep mistrust of law enforcement within predominately black and Hispanic communities. The apology from the president of the International Association of Chiefs of Police's on Monday, who nodded to the "role that our profession has played in society's historical mistreatment of communities of color," is an encouraging sign, at least.

But for many of us in the San Francisco Bay Area, it's hard to shake off a deeply pessimistic outlook about prospects for police reform. After all, the DOJ's review of the SFPD is non-binding, comprised of only recommendations. Without regulatory teeth that bite, the question of "who polices the police?" remains more relevant here than ever.

Monday, October 24, 2016


When the American flag passed by during a homecoming parade in Leesburg, wheelchair-bound Arek Trenholm used all the strength he had to stand up in honor of Old Glory

16-year-old Arek Trenholm of Leesburg, Florida is a spina bifida victim. He has been wheelchair-bound for the past 10 years.

Earlier this month Arek was sitting in his wheelchair watching Leesburg’s high school homecoming parade. As the American flag approached, Arek used all the strength in his arms to force himself to stand up in honor of Old Glory.

His mother says that despite his debilitating illness, he’s been standing for national anthems, pledges of allegiance and flags since he was very young. You can’t get much more patriotic than that.

Compare Arek’s patriotism to the disloyalty of assholes like Colin Kaepernick. Compare Arek’s pride in our flag to the disgraceful performance of the national anthem by Denasia Lawrence before an NBA game in Miami where she knelt as she sang and ripped open her jacket to display her Black Lives Matter t-shirt.

Arek puts to shame all those assholes that are kneeling during the playing or singing of the anthem. Furthermore he also puts to shame NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell and the coaches of high school, college and pro teams who support the kneeling of their players during the national anthem.

God bless Arek Trenholm!


by Bob Walsh

Colorado City, Arizona and Hildale, Utah are right across the border from each other. The small cities are mostly inhabited by fundamentalist Mormons who still practice polygamy in violation of law in both Utah and Arizona.

It has been alleged that, if you live there and you are not a member in good standing of the FLDS church AND currently in the good graces of the leadership of that church various city services, like police protection, are not available to you. A federal judge is about to have a say.

Judge H. Russel Holland will, on Monday, make a ruling that will almost certainly make some changes, and maybe HUGE changes, in how these cities operate their local government.

Four years ago a complaint was filed asserting that Short Creek (the collective name for these two towns) essentially takes its marching orders from the FLDS leadership.

About seven months ago a jury agreed with the assertion that if you were on the outs with the church bad things happened to you. Some of these bad things were denial of city services. One of the options that the judge is considering is disbanding the Marshal’s Office that provides police services, which would turn that duty back over to the county governments on their respective sides of the state line.

The state of Arizona is considering decertifying the Marshal’s office in Colorado City.


Gunmen hit windshield of pursuing Madera, California police unit with civilian ride-along injured by flying glass

The Fresno Bee
October 23, 2016

Madera police are looking for the people who fired more than a dozen rounds at an officer as he tried to pull over their vehicle early Sunday morning.

The officer was unhurt, but a civilian who was doing a ride-along received minor cuts from glass from the patrol car’s windshield. Police found the vehicle, a Mazda SUV, a few blocks from where the officer last saw it. In a search of the area, police said they found an AR15-style pistol and other evidence.

The shooting happened about 4:30 a.m. as the officer tried to stop the Mazda on Howard Road at Schnoor Avenue. The Mazda failed to pull over and led the officer on a pursuit through neighborhoods in west Madera.

When the Mazda turned onto Lighthouse Drive from Mainberry Drive, the front passenger pointed a gun out the window and fired nine rounds at the officer’s patrol car. The officer continued pursuing and as the Mazda approached Shannon Avenue, the passenger fired four more rounds, three of them striking the patrol car. Two of the bullets hit the windshield, narrowly missing the officer and the civilian on a ride-along in the front passenger seat.

The patrol car was disabled, police said, putting an end to the pursuit.

The officer had just finished training and was on his second week as a solo officer, said the department, which praised his coolness under fire.

The investigation is continuing.

EDITOR’S NOTE: On the dash cam video, the female ride-along can be heard yelling “No, no, no … don’t follow him” as the gunmen in the fleeing SUV fire their first volley of shots at the cop car.

If the ride-along was a criminal justice student, I’ll bet there’s a good chance she will now change her major.


Catholic school teacher Randi Zurenko is charged with 232 child sex offences 'after sleeping with schoolgirls and filming their lesbian trysts'

By Jennifer Smith

Daily Mail
October 22, 2016

A female Catholic school teacher has been charged with more than 200 child sex offences after allegedly having sex with schoolgirls and filming their trysts.

Randi Zurenko from Millerstown, Pennsylvania, was arrested on Thursday.

Police believe the 33-year-old sexually abused two girls at Bishop McDevitt High School in Harrisburg hundreds of times between 2013 and 2016.

She is facing 13 counts of institutional sexual assault, 153 of sexual abuse of children, 33 of unlawful contact with minors, 20 of dissemination of obscene material to a minor and 13 counts of corruption of minors.

The woman first abused one of the girls at a park in 2013, Dauphin County's District Attorney's Office said.

She massaged her, undid her bra and plied her with alcohol on a number of occasions, police believe.

The girl, who has since graduated from the school, was underage at all times.

Zurenko allegedly went on to abuse the second girl from October 2015 until now, taking photographs of her half-nude and of them together while they had sex.

She sent her nude 'selfies' and was also admitted to taking photographs of the student on her phone.

They are alleged to have sex in a number of different locations including Zurenko's home. Their last encounter was on Friday.

Police interviewed the woman on Tuesday, just four days later.

'During the course of the interview Zurenko admitted to providing both victim 1 and victim 2 alcohol while they were students at Bishop McDevitt.

'She also admitted that, while employed as a teacher at Bishop McDevitt High School, she had a sexual relationship with victim 2, a current student at the school.

'Zurenko also admitted to taking nude photographs of victim 2,' a statement released by the District Attorney's Office said.

'Many of the charges relate to what we call sexual abuse of children or child pornography,' District Attorney Sean McCormack later told WGAL.

The school placed her on administrative leave in response to the investigation.

'It is with great sadness that we have learned that criminal charges have been filed against staff member Mrs Randi Zurenko,' officials said in a statement.


French prison inmate sharing his cell with dozens of rats sues jail as his lawyer complains he has to 'jump over them' when he visits

By Hannah al-Othman

Daily Mail
October 22, 2016

A French prisoner is suing the jail where he is being held after he was forced to sleep, eat, and shower surrounded by rats.

The unnamed inmate managed to film a video of his conditions inside the rat-infested prison, which shows dozens of the vermin gnawing at rubbish on the floor.

The footage was reportedly shot at Sequedin prison in Nord department in northern France, close to the city of Lille.

The situation has even prompted complaints from the prisoner's lawyer, who has said he has to jump over rats when he goes to visit clients in the jail.

Olivier Cardon slammed the 'deplorable conditions' his client was living in, as he also raised concerns about his own working conditions.

'My client eats with rats in his cell,' Mr Cardon said.

'He takes his shower with rats. The water in his shower stinks because there are rats in the pipes. Rats also scurry around the courtyard where my client walks.'

France's prisons have come under heavy scrutiny in recent weeks, with campaigners filing a complaint against the French government over living conditions on the inside.

The French-based International Prisons Observatory (OIP) backed its complaint with statements from inmates at Fresnes prison, who described overcrowding and filthy conditions in the jail near Paris.

'We are infested with bedbugs, bitten every night on the face, on the neck, the shoulders, the back, the legs and the arms,' one inmate said, while another described the stench of dead rats, and a third said he had to share his cell with up to 300 cockroaches.

The OIP has previously warned about overcrowding in French prisons, where the number of inmates soared this summer to 68,819 people for 58,507 places.

At the end of May, the authorities confirmed to the OIP two cases of leptospirosis in prisoners, an infection mainly transmitted by rats.

A justice ministry spokesman told AFP news agency that measures had been taken to tackle the rat infestation, but that the process would take time.

EDITOR’S NOTE: Shit, I don’t know why they are complaining. When I attended Oklahoma A&M (now Oklahoma State University), the fucking dorm was full of rats. Several times I woke up in the middle of the night with a rat crawling over me.

Sunday, October 23, 2016


The damaging emails released by Wikileaks should have torpedoed the Hillary campaign to the same extent the pussygate video and those groping allegations have torpedoed the Trump campaign. But those damaging emails have been overshadowed by claims that the hacking was done by the Russians on orders of that evil Putin.

The FBI, the CIA, NSA and Homeland Security all say there is evidence the hacking originated in the Kremlin. Oh! Those are all government agencies and each is headed by an Obama appointee.

We know how trustworthy the FBI is when Director James Comey found Hillary guilty only of carelessness in her private email server scandal. And we know how trustworthy the CIA is at intelligence gathering when it was so sure that Saddam Hussain had weapons of mass destruction, which he did not have. So why should we believe these agencies now, especially when Obama is fighting hard to keep Trump from getting elected?

Even if the Russians are behind the leaked emails … to quote Hillary … “What difference – at this point, what difference does it make?”

At this point, when Trump’s presidential campaign is barely treading water, those leaked emails could have been a lifeline. But by injecting the Russians into this controversy, the government, Hillary and the pro-Hillary media have very cleverly overshadowed those damaging emails and allowed the Hildebeast’s campaign to dodge a destructive torpedo.

The media onslaught against Trump continues with more sexual assault allegations, but what you hear mostly about Hillary’s emails is ‘the Russians did it.’


By Bob Walsh

There was an (alleged) drive-by shooting in a decent neighborhood in north Stockton, CA. a couple of days ago. The victim is an 11-year old boy who is in critical condition due to a gunshot wound to the head. His elder brother, 18, asserts the kid was the victim of a drive-by. The cops don't think so and I don't blame them.

The shooting went down on Thursday just after 5 p.m. When the cops arrived they found nobody (except the brother) that said anything that would lead them to believe the shooting was a drive-by. No shouting, no peeling-out of a getaway car. Just the one gun shot. And when the cops showed up they found a handgun that had recently been fired underneath the 11-year old.

The cops are pretty sure the gun they found under the kid was the gun that shot him. They are dong various forensic things that will tell them if that was the gun that injured the child and if the child had GSR on his hands or clothes. They don't know who owns the gun. In CA a person under 21 can not legally own a handgun so, at least legally, it didn't belong to the 18-year old brother.

The brother was questioned and released. So far.

The 11-year old s at U. C. Davis Hospital and is, according to unofficial information, unlikely to survive.

So, what really happened. Was the kid playing with the gun in the front yard and accidentally shoot himself? Did the brother shoot him? Was there somebody else there that we don't know about yet? The 18-year old was tested for GSR, the results of that test have yet to be released.

It is even possible the older brother heard a shot and was not present and actually believes that there was a drive-by. That, however, is not where I would put my money.


How can “people of Jewish faith back the Democratic party which over the last 50 years has been so clearly anti-Israel, so clearly anti-Jewish Israel?”

Former Red Sox Pitcher Curt Schilling is seriously considering challenging Elizabeth Warren in 2018 for her seat in the U.S. Senate.

During a recent interview with CNN’s Jake Tapper, the former pitcher and presumptive senate candidate asked:

I would like to ask you something as a person who is practicing the Jewish faith and has since you were young.

I don't understand - and maybe this is the amateur non-politician in me - I don't understand how people of Jewish faith can back the Democratic party which over the last 50 years has been so clearly anti-Israel, so clearly anti-Jewish Israel.

I don't know what else would need to be done, said or happen for people to understand that they don't… the Democratic is only aligned with Israel because we have agreements in place that make them have to be.

Curt asked a good question, one for which I’m sure he will be accused of anti-Semitism by liberal Jews.

Schilling had been a longtime ESPN baseball analyst, but earlier this year he got fired for making comments on Facebook opposing the right of transgenders to use the restrooms of their choice.

There’s nothing anti-Semitic about Curt’s question. I myself cannot understand why America’s Jews continuously vote overwhelmingly Democratic. The only reason I can think of is because, having been persecuted throughout history, Jews feel obligated to support the party that purports to protect and support minorities.


Arizona settlers and U.S. soldiers set out to kill all Apaches, women and children included, similar to how the Poles and their Nazi conquers set out to exterminate Poland’s Jews

As a refugee from Nazi Germany who came to this glorious country in 1936, I have been a strong supporter of Israel, the last refuge for Jewish people who are persecuted and not wanted in other countries of the world.

I do not believe Israel should return the West Bank and East Jerusalem to the Palestinians, lands that they captured after repelling an attack on the Jewish state by the combined armies of Arab countries.

The Arabs, the Europeans and the United States are demanding that Israel relinquish the captured territories. Whoa there! After WW2, Poland kept about 25 percent of pre-war Germany. Nobody is hollering for Poland to return that territory back to Germany. But not so with Israel. Fuck the damn Jews!

If you ask me, Poland did not deserve to get one square inch of Germany. Once Hitler’s army conquered Poland, the Poles eagerly helped the Nazis find and round up Polish Jews for shipment to the extermination camps, all of which were built in Poland. The Poles were happy to have the hated Jews gassed and cremated, thereby finally getting rid of them.

And the U.S. should be the last nation to demand that Israel give up territory it captured from invading armies. What about the land stolen from America’s Indians? Almost every bit of American land was taken from the Indians who were treated horribly by the government and settlers. Nobody is hollering for us to give the Indians their land back. But not so with Israel. Fuck the damn Jews!

Our treatment of the Indians was deplorable. Here is an example of how the members of just one tribe, the Apaches, were treated:

From the book “Shadows at Dawn” by Karl Jacoby

After the U.S. acquired the territory that is now Arizona through the Gadsden Purchase and the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, U.S. soldiers and settlers began to populate those lands. The Apaches had roamed those lands for centuries and at first greeted these new arrivals peacefully. But as more came and threatened their sustenance, they reacted with savagery. The Americans responded with equal and astonishing savagery, including the killing of infants:

"By the 1860s, the majority of settlers in the territory had adopted a policy of killing all Apaches they encountered: '[I]t was the rigid rule all over the country to shoot these savages upon sight.' In the minds of many Arizonians, the elusive character of the Apache justified such actions. ... On [one] occasion, after several Anglo miners ambushed a party of Indians, one of the participants cut the heads off five of the Apaches slain in the encounter and used their brains to tan a deerhide -- behavior that unnerved some Anglo onlookers and brought peals of laughter from others.

"A similar blending of Apache killing and spectacle was engaged in by King Woolsey, an Arizona rancher who would receive a 'resolution of thanks' from the territory's Legislative Assembly in 1865 for leading several scouts of 'civilian volunteers' against the Apache, including the one Allyn recorded in which the raiders slew thirty or so Apaches during a parley. In 1861, Woolsey killed the leader of an Apache band with a shotgun blast. '[D]etermined to make a conspicuous mark of the dead chief,' he dragged the man's body to a nearby mesquite tree and hung the corpse by the neck. The body dangled in this spot for several years for all to see. 'One of the feet and both hands had been cut off or torn away by the coyotes,' reported a visitor. 'The head was thrown back, and the eye-sockets glared in the sun.' ...

"The shared code of violence between civilians and the military emerged even more clearly when Conner and his compatriots met with the Apache leader 'Mangus' under a flag of truce. During their parley, Conner's party seized Mangus, whom they then turned over to a U.S. Army unit. That evening, Conner saw the sol¬diers guarding Mangus heat their bayonets in a campfire and apply the red-hot blades to the chiefs legs and feet. When Mangus told the sentinels in Spanish chat he was 'no child to be playing with,' the soldiers shot and killed him on the excuse that he was trying to escape. One of the guards, borrowing a knife from the unit's cook, then scalped Mangus. A few days later, soldiers dug up his body and mutilated it further, decapitating the Apache leader and boiling his head. ...

"In ... campaigns [against the Apache], parties of Americans, typically led by a Pima, Papago, or Mexican scout, tried to surprise the Apache in their rancherias [settlements], ideally striking just before daybreak when the Indians were least prepared. Such a strategy inevitably meant that the attackers not only encoun¬tered potential raiders -- healthy young Apache men -- but women, children, and the elderly. For some Americans, such distinctions mattered little: they killed all the Indians they could, often justifying the dispatching of women with the claim that they were especially ruthless in torturing prisoners. The civilian scout leader Woolsey, for example, [wrote] ... 'It sir is next to impossible to prevent killing squaws in jumping a rancheria even were we disposed to save them. For my part I am frank to say that I fight on the broad platform of extermination.' ...

"On those occasions when children were seized, they were often treated more like orphans than prisoners of war. ... In contrast, the conscious targeting of children generated far more unease, as revealed in a series of incidents involving a settler known as 'Sugarfoot Jack.' In the course of yet another campaign against the Apache, a band of American civilians, having found a rancheria, proceeded to burn the wick¬iups and other supplies to prevent any surviving Apaches from reclaiming them. In his search of the camp, Sugarfoot Jack happened upon an Apache infant, whom he tossed into one of the fires and watched burn alive. Revolted at Sugarfoot's behavior, several other Americans attempted to reclaim 'the little, black, crisped body' from the flames. But 'the skin peeling off every time it was touched made the "boys" sick,' and they left the dead child in the still-smoldering ashes. Meanwhile, Sugarfoot Jack located yet another Apache infant. Soon he could be seen to 'dance it upon his knee and tickle it under the chin and handle the babe in the manner of a playful mother.' When he tired of this game, Sugarfoot drew his pistol, a heavy dragoon revolver. Plac¬ing his weapon against the child's head, he pulled the trigger, 'bespatter[ing] his clothes and face with infant brains.' "

Saturday, October 22, 2016



Hillary looks unstoppable but there are still 20 reasons I dread the day she walks into the White House (and free sex from Madonna is just one of them)

by Piers Morgan

Daily Mail
October 21, 2016

Hillary Clinton is now red-hot favourite to become the first female President of the United States.

Virtually every poll has her with a commanding lead over Donald Trump.

Of course, it’s not over yet

The polls might be as hopelessly wrong as they were about Trump’s chances of winning the Republican nomination.

(The world’s No1 electoral prediction expert Nate Silver gave the tycoon a 2% chance of achieving that target..)

There might well be a large number of people in the bowels of Middle America preparing to vote for him whilst pretending not to when asked.

We saw this phenomenon recently with the EU Referendum in Britain where nobody thought we would actually BREXIT from Europe until we woke up on June 24 and discovered we had.

This has been a highly erratic and unpredictable race and with 18 days left to go, anything could still happen to change the dynamic and result.

As the former British Prime Minister Harold Macmillan once said when asked what he feared most in politics: ‘Events, dear boy, events.’

So yes, Trump could still pull off one of the biggest shocks in American political history. He has, after all, spent the past 16 months confounding all logic about US presidential elections.

But let’s assume for a moment that Hillary is going to win.

I’ve made it clear that whilst Trump’s a friend of mine, I wouldn’t vote for, or endorse him even if I could, which I can’t. I simply don’t agree with him about too many issues from guns and Muslim bans to climate change.

However, I wouldn’t vote for, or endorse Hillary either.

I think she’s a dreadful candidate, a sentiment clearly shared by many others as she has attracted the worst approval ratings of any major-party presidential nominee in history – rivalled only by Trump.

Here are 20 reasons why I think Hillary Rodham Clinton would make a terrible President.

1) I don’t trust her. The email scandal just about summed up her complete inability to tell the truth. An expert lawyer who became Secretary of State with multiple BlackBerries but didn’t have a clue how emails or servers work or what constitutes classified material? Oh pur-lease, Madam Pinocchio, do you think we’re all completely stupid?

2) She’s greedy. I mean properly, outrageously, snout-in-the-trough avaricious. A woman who for decades has exploited her political status to fill her boots with tens of millions of dollars, fuelled by $200k-a-pop speeches from her Wall Street chums like Goldman Sachs.

3) Hillary’s a rank hypocrite. She bangs on ad nauseam about women’s rights but sucks up to and solicits cash for the Clinton Foundation from draconian regimes like Saudi Arabia that stone women to death and refuse to let them even drive cars.

4) She’s a dangerous war-mongerer. The Iraq War was an unmitigated fiasco that led to turmoil throughout the Middle East and spurred the rise of ISIS. It was the biggest foreign policy disaster since Vietnam and Hillary voted for it. She was also heavily responsible for the dismal Libya invasion. When people say they don’t trust Trump with his finger on the nuclear trigger, I suggest Hillary the Hawk is far more likely to press it.

5) She’s a flip-flopper extraordinaire. On endless issues from Iraq to gay marriage, Israel to TPP and the Keystone Pipeline, Hillary will say one thing but think nothing of saying the complete opposite later if it’s politically expedient.

6) She has a chronic superiority complex. Never was this more vividly exposed than with her disgraceful comment that half of Trump’s supporters were ‘a basket of deplorables’. That’s tens of millions of fellow Americans she was insulting, many of them honest, hard-working people.

7) She’s an embellisher of stories to make herself look better. We all remember her heroic tale of having to flee sniper fire in Bosnia with her daughter Chelsea in 1996. There was just one problem – she didn’t.

8) She’s held lots of jobs but performed none of them particularly well. As Secretary of State she was widely considered inefficient, ineffectual and complacent - sometimes to lethal consequence as we saw with the Benghazi fiasco that cost the lives of Ambassador Stevens and three other Americans. Hillary’s undeniably very experienced, but how valuable is all that experience if you’ve never excelled at anything you’ve done?

9) She’s oddly charmless. I’ve watched her speaking at the debates and various rallies, and indeed at last night’s Al Smith dinner, and she exudes the warmth and wit of a sour-faced Pit Bull terrier. As for that perpetual creepy Jack Nicholson ‘Shining’ smirk she does.. UGH.

10)Her health remains a major concern. That video of her keeling over after leaving a 9/11 memorial service was deeply troubling. Particularly when we know she had a serious head injury after passing out in 2012. Hillary is 69 next week and doesn’t exude good health, fitness or vitality, which are fairly essential components of being a modern day President. Trump’s 70 but has extraordinarily impressive energy.

11)She carries with her a dripping sense of entitlement based on her gender that is deeply irritating. Hillary may as well have two tattoos on her forehead proclaiming: ‘Born to be First Female President’ and ‘Vote for me – I’m a woman!’

12)She wouldn’t inspire me to open a cookie jar, and I normally need no encouragement to do that. Contrast her oratory style with someone like Michelle Obama – whose fire and passion has electrified this race in recent weeks. Hillary’s a dull, lifeless, robotic speaker by comparison.

13)She’s not Bill, one of the smartest, most brilliantly charismatic politicians America has ever seen. There’s a sense with Hillary that she’s riding on the coattails of her husband’s huge popularity. Would she be anywhere near winning the presidency if many Americans weren’t thinking this was a way of getting Bill back to the White House too? I don’t think so.

14)I fear that beneath the constant, smug, apple-cheeked smirk lies a fairly unpleasant piece of work. Former Secret Service agents have painted a picture of a vengeful, mistrustful, abusive, angry, sarcastic, demanding, disorganised, unpunctual boss.

15)She would push for a new cold war with Russia in an effort to prove her toughness with Vladimir Putin. You can tell this by the hateful rhetoric which spews from her mouth every time she mentions his name. This is a very worrying thing for the world.

16)Republicans hate her even more than they hate President Obama. This will be a massive issue if she wins. Obama’s woeful inability to do business with the opposition rendered him incapable of even passing a single new gun law after Sandy Hook. What hope for Hillary, with all her Washington enemy-making over the past 40 years, to achieve any meaningful deals?

17)Her baggage is horrendous. From Whitewater to Vince Foster, Hillary’s past is scandalously dubious and troublesome. Does this matter? Yes. It goes to the heart of her character. She’s dodgy, period.

18)The way she attacked Bill’s lovers in the past leaves an unedifying taste in the mouth given all her lofty moral pronouncements about the way Trump treats women. Hillary didn’t just stand by her philandering man, she trashed the women he bedded. Very unfortunate for the self-styled Emmeline Pankhurst of US politics.

19)She’s chillingly ambitious to the expense of anything else in her life. It seeps from every pore. This is a career politician who has repeatedly shown she will trample over anyone and anything that gets in her way, and who conveniently overlooks moral and ethical issues if they don’t suit her agenda or progression to power.

20) Madonna has offered to perform free oral sex for anyone who votes for Hillary. I literally cannot think of a single more compelling reason not to vote for her.

EDITOR’S NOTE: A blow job from Madonna is the only reason I can think of that would possibly make me vote for the Hildebeast.


By Bob Walsh

Jessica Williams, 29, never made it to 30. She was driving a stolen car on May 19 when she was terminally rehabilitated in the Bay View district by the local constabulary. Ms. Williams crashed her stolen car and attempted to flee from the cops. Williams was Black. The cop that shot her was not. She did not appear to be armed and was in fact not armed.

This shooting, among others, has led the SFPD to adopt a policy of NOT shooting at moving cars unless the driver is KNOWN to have a deadly weapon other than the vehicle and threatens to use that other weapon. This change is strongly supported by the United States DOJ. (Damn, what a surprise there.)

The suit seeks unspecified monetary damages for the dead criminal’s mother.


By Bob Walsh

Ryan Walterhouse, 26, is an officer with the Oakland, CA Police Department. He was charged yesterday with engaging in prostitution and obstructing justice.

It seems that Waterhouse had a consensual commercial encounter with a whore early this month in a motel in Castro Valley, an unincorporated part of Alameda County. He is also alleged to have tipped her off on anti-prostitution action by the police on at least two occasions.

He was arrested when he reported to work on Wednesday. It seems that Officer Walterhouse was ratted out by one of his fellow officers as at least some of his illegal behavior took place on duty.

The officer is looking at two misdemeanor counts of engaging in prostitution and two felony county of obstruction. He was freed almost immediately on bail.

EDITOR’S NOTE: You could have entitled this THE PERILS OF WORKING WITH A RAT.


By Bob Walsh

Art Calderon was, at one time, a big-deal California state senator. He is about to become a guest of the people after being convicted of acceptance of bribes. He had the balls to plead with the judge for house arrest. The judge told him to pound sand.

Calderon pleaded guilty to two instances of mail fraud and accepting bribes. Some of that was cash money, some was jobs for family members.

His brother, former state assemblyman Thomas Calderon, got ten months for money laundering. They were of course Democrats, something the news stories fail to mention.


Woman Beaten in River Oaks Parking Lot Over Alleged Affair With High-Profile Divorce Lawyer, Guard Says

by Zach Despart

Houston Press
October 20, 2016

Houston police say they are continuing to investigate an assault that occurred at a high-profile River Oaks attorney’s office building Saturday night, sending a woman to the hospital with lacerations and possible broken ribs.

Although the security guard at the offices says the victim told him her attacker was the wife of prominent divorce attorney Bobby Newman, police have yet to make any arrests and Newman himself declined to comment on the altercation. Police say the victim hasn't identified her attacker to them.

“At this point in time, it's incumbent on her to talk to investigators if she would like to pursue this further,” Houston Police Department spokesman Kese Smith said.

Rigoberto Haroldson, a security guard at 3355 West Alabama, said he was sitting at his desk in the lobby of the building around 9 p.m. Saturday when he saw a woman exit the lobby and walk outside, just as a vehicle pulled in. Moments later, he said he heard a woman screaming and ran outside to investigate.

In the parking area, Haroldson said he saw a woman beating the woman he had just seen leave the building.

“The attacker's back was towards me and I saw the victim on the [ground], curled up in a ball, and the assailant was kicking her in the back, towards the rib area,” Haroldson said.

As the woman continued the assault, Haroldson said he heard her yelling.

“She was screaming about an affair between the victim and her husband,” Haroldson said.

The guard said when he asked what was going on, the attacker got in her car and fled the scene – but not before threatening to kill the victim. Haroldson said he called 911 and helped the victim into the lobby. He said she appeared dazed, had a laceration on her forehead and sustained injuries to her ribs.

Haroldson said while police were en route, the woman told him not to tell anyone about the attack and said repeatedly that she needed to call “Bobby Newman.” Newman's law firm, Lilly, Newman and Van Ness, is located on the fourth floor of 3355 West Alabama. Newman has worked high-profile divorce cases including that of Houston Astros owner Jim Crane.

After a friend of the victim, police and medical personnel from the Houston Fire Department arrived and began asking questions, Haroldson said the victim disclosed who beat her.

“When the police asked her who it was who attacked her, I was present – her friend, the medical team and police were present – when we all heard her say the name Lily Newman.”

Lillian Newman is the wife of Bobby Newman, Harris County marriage records state. Multiple attempts to reach Lillian Newman were unsuccessful. Reached at his office Tuesday afternoon, Bobby Newman said, “I'm aware of an altercation that took place, but I'm really not wanting to comment on any of this.”

Smith, the police department spokesman, confirmed that officers responded to an assault at the address on Saturday evening. Smith said the report officers wrote states the victim told a witness who her assailant was, but declined to tell police who attacked her.

Smith said firefighters transported the victim to the hospital with possible broken ribs, and detectives have reached out to the victim for additional information about the beating.

Haroldson said his company has given security camera footage, which he believes should have captured the assault, to the police.

EDITOR’S NOTE: Looks like Lillian Newman did the Texas two-step dance on Bobby’s mistress.

I think I see a divorce lawyer getting dragged into divorce court shortly.


A Mexican judge has rejected an appeal by drugs lord Joaquin "El Chapo" Guzman against his extradition to the U.S.

BBC News
October 20, 2016

The foreign ministry approved the extradition in May but Guzman's lawyers have been fighting the decision in a district court.

They say they will now take the case to a higher court.

The head of the Sinaloa Drug Cartel was recaptured in January after escaping for a second time from a maximum security prison.

Mexico has said it expects to extradite Guzman to the U.S. by February. He faces multiple charges in the US, including drug trafficking and murder.

In a statement, the Mexican attorney general's office said the federal judge had "decided to reject the protection" sought by Guzman.

Andres Granados, one of Guzman's lawyers, said he would seek a Supreme Court hearing and might take the case to the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights.

"We are not defeated," he told AFP news agency.

Guzman is being held in a maximum security prison in Ciudad Juarez, near the U.S. border. He was arrested in January after six months on the run following his escape through a tunnel in his jail cell.

He had already escaped a maximum security facility once before, spending 13 years at large.

Mexico agreed to transfer Guzman in May after the U.S. guaranteed he would not face the death penalty.


By Charles Krauthammer

The Washington Post
October 20, 2016

The case against Hillary Clinton could have been written before the recent WikiLeaks and FBI disclosures. But these documents do provide hard textual backup.

The most sensational disclosure was the proposed deal between the State Department and the FBI in which the FBI would declassify a Hillary Clinton e-mail and State would give the FBI more slots in overseas stations. What made it sensational was the rare appearance in an official account of the phrase "quid pro quo," which is the currently agreed-upon dividing line between acceptable and unacceptable corruption.

This is nonetheless an odd choice for most egregious offense. First, it occurred several layers removed from the campaign and from Clinton. It involved a career State Department official (he occupied the same position under Condoleezza Rice), covering not just for Clinton but for his own department.

Second, it's not clear which side originally offered the bargain. Third, nothing tangible was supposed to exchange hands. There was no proposed personal enrichment - a Rolex in return for your soul - which tends to be our standard for punishable misconduct.

And finally, it never actually happened. The FBI turned down the declassification request.

In sum, a warm gun but non-smoking. Indeed, if the phrase "quid pro quo" hadn't appeared, it would have received little attention. Moreover, it obscures the real scandal - the bottomless cynicism of the campaign and of the candidate.

Among dozens of examples, the Qatari gambit. Qatar, one of the worst actors in the Middle East (having financially supported the Islamic State, for example), offered $1 million as a "birthday" gift to Bill Clinton in return for five minutes of his time. Who offers - who takes - $200,000 a minute? We don't know the "quid" here, but it's got to be big.

In the final debate, Clinton ran and hid when asked about pay-for-play at the Clinton Foundation. And for good reason. The e-mails reveal how foundation donors were first in line for favors and contracts.

A governance review by an outside law firm reported that some donors "may have an expectation of quid pro quo benefits in return for gifts." You need an outside law firm to tell you that? If your Sultanic heart bleeds for Haiti, why not give to Haiti directly? Because if you give through the Clintons, you have a claim on future favors.

The soullessness of this campaign - all ambition and entitlement - emerges almost poignantly in the e-mails, especially when aides keep asking what the campaign is about. In one largely overlooked passage, Clinton complains that her speechwriters have not given her any overall theme or rationale. Isn't that the candidate's job? Asked one of her aides, Joel Benenson: "Do we have any sense from her what she believes or wants her core message to be?"

It's that emptiness at the core that makes every policy and position negotiable and politically calculable. Hence the embarrassing about-face on the Trans-Pacific Partnership after the popular winds swung decisively against free trade.

So too with financial regulation, as in Dodd-Frank. As she told a Goldman Sachs gathering, after the financial collapse there was "a need to do something because, for political reasons . . . you can't sit idly by and do nothing."

Giving the appearance that something had to be done. That's not why Elizabeth Warren supported Dodd-Frank. Which is the difference between a conviction politician like Warren and a calculating machine like Clinton.

Of course, we knew all this. But we hadn't seen it so clearly laid out. Illicit and illegal as is WikiLeaks, it is the camera in the sausage factory. And what it reveals is surpassingly unpretty.

I didn't need the Wiki files to oppose Hillary Clinton. As a conservative, I have long disagreed with her worldview and the policies that flow from it. As for character, I have watched her long enough to find her deeply flawed, to the point of unfitness. But for those heretofore unpersuaded, the recent disclosures should close the case.

A case so strong that, against any of a dozen possible GOP candidates, voting for her opponent would be a no-brainer. Against Donald Trump, however, it's a dilemma. I will not vote for Hillary Clinton. But, as I've explained in these columns, I could never vote for Donald Trump.

The only question is whose name I'm going to write in. With Albert Schweitzer doubly unavailable (noncitizen, dead), I'm down to Paul Ryan or Ben Sasse. Two weeks to decide.

EDITOR’S NOTE: Like Krauthammer, I too cannot vote for Trump, that loud mouthing buffoon. I will not cast a vote for president, but I will vote for down ballot candidates. I realize that not voting for Trump is the same as voting for Hillary, but the bitch is going to win anyway, and it’s beginning to look more and more like she’ll win by a landslide.

Friday, October 21, 2016


Donald Trump has been telling his followers that the election is rigged. During the final debate, Trump refused to say he would accept the results of the election if he lost. So, can the election be rigged?

The election has already been rigged, but not at the polling place. It has been rigged by the media which has been out to destroy Trump and has done a pretty good job of it. The New York Times, among other stories damaging to Trump, released the story about him not paying any federal income taxes. NBC leaked the Hollywood Access pussygate video to the Washington Post which then gleefully released it to the public.

Meanwhile the media all but ignored Hillary’s steady stream of lies, but it pulled out old video clips to show where Trump was lying. It gave Hillary’s ‘basket of deplorables’ short shrift while jumping all over Trump’s big mouth. And it has pretty well let Hillary slide on the damaging emails released by Wikileaks.

That’s how the election has been rigged. The media has poisoned Trump in the minds of the voters.

I seriously doubt that a presidential election can be rigged at the polling place. Sure, ther will always be some voter fraud, but not enough to affect the outcome of the election. There just aren’t that many dead people voting. Nor are there that many people voting two or more times. And illegal immigrants are most unlikely to go out and vote.

Now that is not to say that local elections are not rigged. Chicago is notorious for votes by the dead being cast. In the Rio Grande Valley of Texas, there are some counties in which more dead people vote than live ones. How do they do that? Simply by not removing the names of people from the voter rolls after they have died.

But when you get to statewide and national elections, they are not going to be successfully rigged. There is only one statewide election that I know of in which the outcome was successfully rigged. It was subsequently uncovered that thousands of dead voters in Jim Wells County, Texas helped Lyndon Johnson overcame a 20,000-vote deficit to win the 1948 Democratic runoff primary for the U.S. Senate by 87 votes.

While Trump may not accept the outcome of the election if he loses, he will have lost because Hillary got more electoral votes than he did, not because the election was rigged.


By Bob Walsh

Unless you have been living in a cave in Asscrackistan you are aware that California-based Wells Fargo bank is in deep trouble. It recently came to light that their employees ROUTINELY created new checking and credit card accounts for their clients without their knowledge or permission, moving money around to make their productivity numbers look better. What they did in fact was commit fraud and identity theft and the formerly great state of California may initiate criminal charges. (Who goes to prison when a corporation is convicted of a crime?)

About seven weeks ago it came out that about 5,300 people had been fired from the bank for diddling with about 2 million accounts.

Former Chief Thief at Wells Fargo, John Stumph, has been forced to resign due to the hoorah. He denies any knowledge that this was going on and thought the 5,300 firings were routine turnover. (OK,. I made that last part up, just a little bit.) Stumph also resigned from the boards of Target and Chevron.

Wells Fargo stock has fallen over 9% in the last six weeks.

Oh what a tangled web we weave etc. etc. etc.


By Bob Walsh

Nicholas McWherter was (allegedly) a deeply religious young man who simply lost his way and died in a jail of police gunfire merely because he shot a S.F.P.D. cop in the head.

I don't know about you, but when I feel lost I turn on the GPS, check a map or (and I realize this is a violation of the man code) ask for directions. Any of these could be literal or metaphorical.

Cops responded to a call of a man acting erratically (what is erratic in S. F. anyway?) and threatening people The initial responding cops did not know that McWherter was armed and he shot a cop in the face, then fled. He was shot and eventually blasted with flash-bang grenades and taken into custody. He died Sunday, five days after being shot.

The wounded officer is still in the hospital and may never return to duty. He had two years on the force.


By Bob Walsh

An Butte County, CA. jury did something really unusual on Tuesday and found a Police Officer guilty in an on-duty homicide last Thanksgiving.

Patrick Feaster was a cop in the small town of Paradise. Dash cam footage shows Feaster shooting Andrew Thomas, 26, in the neck after a short high-speed chase which ended in Thomas crashing his car. Thomas' wife was in the car and died at the scene. Thomas hung in there for a few weeks after the shooting.

Thomas was climbing out a window of the car, which was laying on it's side. Officer Feaster alleges that the shooting was in fact unintentional. The jury didn't buy it.

Officer Feaster was sacked last February. He has been free on bail and will continue to be so until his sentencing in December. He is facing five years for involuntary manslaughter.


Georgia executes Gregory Paul Lawler who killed an Atlanta police officer and wounded another officer

By Kate Brumback

Associated Press
October 20, 2016

JACKSON, Ga. -- A man convicted of killing an Atlanta police officer and wounding a second officer with an AR-15 rifle was executed late Wednesday, becoming the seventh inmate put to death in Georgia this year.

Gregory Paul Lawler, 63, was pronounced dead at 11:49 p.m. at the state prison in Jackson after he was injected with the barbiturate pentobarbital. He was convicted of murder in the October 1997 slaying of Officer John Sowa and for critically wounding Officer Patricia Cocciolone.

The Georgia Supreme Court said in a statement Wednesday it had unanimously denied defense requests to halt execution plans originally set for 7 p.m. Defense attorneys later appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, which also declined to stop the execution late Wednesday night.

Lawler didn't make a final statement and refused an offer of a prayer. Then he lay on the gurney with his eyes closed as the lethal drug flowed, taking several deep breaths and yawning before becoming still.

Cocciolone arrived in a wheelchair and sat in the front row of the witness area, as did Fulton County District Attorney Paul Howard whose office prosecuted Lawler.

The seven executions in Georgia this year are the most in a calendar year in the state since the death penalty was reinstated nationwide in 1976. Georgia executed five inmates last year and five in 1987.

Georgia is one of five states that have carried out executions this year for a total of 17 nationwide. Texas has executed seven inmates, while Alabama, Florida and Missouri have executed one apiece.

Sowa and Cocciolone were responding to a report of a man hitting a woman the evening of Oct. 12, 1997, and arrived at a parking lot to find Lawler trying to pull his drunken girlfriend to her feet. Lawler quickly left and went to his apartment nearby, and the officers decided to help his girlfriend get home.

When they knocked on the door, Lawler cursed, yelled and told the officers to leave. Once his girlfriend was inside, he tried to shut the door on them. Sowa put his hand up to keep the door from shutting and said they just wanted to make sure the girlfriend lived there and that she would be safe.

Lawler grabbed an AR-15 rifle and fired 15 times as the officers fled, using bullets that can penetrate body armor, prosecutors said.

When other officers responded to Cocciolone's radio distress call, they found Sowa lying near the sidewalk and Cocciolone on the ground in the front yard. Both officers' pistols were still in their holsters.

The responding officers got Lawler's girlfriend out of the apartment, and Lawler finally surrendered after a six-hour standoff.

Lawler's attorneys argued that a diagnosis last month of autism spectrum disorder helps explain why their client acted as he did in the encounter with the officers. That disorder, which wasn't diagnosed at the time, caused Lawler to misinterpret the officers' intentions and led him to believe he was in danger and needed to fight for his life, his attorneys argued.

The disorder also caused him to behave in a way that may seem inappropriate when he testified at his trial and again when he was interviewed recently by investigators for the State Board of Pardons and Paroles, his lawyers wrote in a clemency application. Because of his autism, they wrote, he "has often been mistakenly perceived as cold, callous, or remorseless."

The parole board, which is the only authority in Georgia with power to commute a death sentence, declined to grant him clemency Tuesday.

On Wednesday, Lawler had visits from one family member, a lawyer and a paralegal, a Department of Corrections spokeswoman said. She also said Lawler ate a meal he requested that included steak, baked potato with sour cream and ice cream.


I used to think I was just a regular guy, but… I was born white, which now, whether I like it or not, makes me a racist.

I am a fiscal and moral conservative, which by today’s standards, makes me a fascist.

I am heterosexual, which according to gay folks, now makes me a homophobe.

I am non-union, which makes me a traitor to the working class and an ally of big business.

I believe in the 2nd Amendment, which now makes me a member of the vast gun lobby.

I am older than 60 and retired, which makes me a useless old man.

I think and I reason, therefore I doubt much that the mainstream media tells me, which must make me a reactionary.

I am proud of my heritage and our inclusive American culture, which makes me a xenophobe.

I value my safety and that of my family and I appreciate the police and the legal system, which makes me a right-wing extremist.

I believe in hard work, fair play, and fair compensation according to each individual's merits, which today makes me an anti-socialist.

I (and most of the folks I know), acquired a fair education without student loans (it’s called work) and no debt at graduation, which makes me some kind of an odd underachiever.

I believe in the defense and protection of the homeland for and by all citizens, which now makes me a militant.

Now, a sick old woman is calling me and my friends a basket of deplorable's.

Please help me come to terms with the new me…because I'm just not sure who I am anymore!

I would like to thank all my friends for sticking with me through these abrupt, new found changes in my life and my thinking! I just can't imagine or understand what’s happened to me so quickly!

Funny ... it’s all just taken place over the last 7 or 8 years!

As if all this crap wasn't enough to deal with… I'm now afraid to go into either restroom!

Thursday, October 20, 2016


Hillary helped herself by laying out her agenda while Donald hurt himself by refusing to say he would accept the outcome of the election if he lost

By any objective measure, you would have to say the third and final presidential debate was won by Hillary. On most issues she laid out a specific agenda. In doing so, she was also able to include personal attacks against Trump.

Trump on the other hand spent most of his time attacking Hillary and talked only in generalities on most of the issues. I think Trump hurt himself when he refused to say he would accept the outcome of the election, were he to be defeated. That was about the dumbest thing any candidate could have said!

Hillary’s supporters had to be pleased. She probably pulled more undecided voters, especially among the Millennials, over to her side.

Trump’s supporters were probably pleased with his attacks on Hillary, but I doubt if he caused any undecided voter to decide to vote for him.

The best thing about Wednesday’s debate is that it was the last of this election’s presidential debates. Now I can go back to watching some dumb TV shows instead of listening to the babble of the two worst presidential candidates in the history of our nation. Thank God the debates are over and done with!


As my readers know, I was a professor of Criminal Justice at College of the Mainland in Texas City. Also on the faculty was David Michael Smith – better known as Red David - an avowed Marxist and professor of Government. Actually what students got in his classes was a high dose of anti-Americanism.

Several years after I retired, former Galveston County Judge Ray Holbrook and a couple of other prominent citizens joined me in an effort to prevent the college from granting Red David tenure. During a public board meeting we were singed by the pro-Smith crowd in attendance. And we were also castigated by the Galveston County Daily News.

Red David was tenured by the unanimous vote of the college board of trustees. Later, one of the board members told me they had no choice because Smith was so popular. I responded that Hitler was also very popular in Nazi Germany.

After 15 years on the faculty, Red David finally got fired August 1, 2013. Since then he has been writing columns for the Galveston County Daily News. In his latest column Red David launched an all-out assault on Donald Trump. Here it is:


By David Michael Smith

Galveston County Daily News
October 19, 2016

Donald Trump is the most openly racist, misogynistic, authoritarian and dangerous presidential candidate in recent United States history. Born into bourgeois privilege and brought up to value wealth and power instead of morality and decency, Trump has long had a reputation for bigotry and mistreatment of people. In the 1970s, he and his father were sued for racial discrimination in housing and had to settle the lawsuits.

In the 1980s, Trump called for the execution of five young African-American men indicted and convicted of raping a white woman. The Central Park Five were later exonerated on the basis of DNA evidence and paid $40 million by the city of New York, but Trump continues to insist they are guilty. His sexual escapades outside of his first two marriages were routinely publicized by New York tabloids for years. And Trump has led the racist “birther” campaign against President Barack Obama, falsely claiming he had not been born in the United States.

The Republican Party is responsible for this deplorable candidate and his followers. Republicans have been exploiting white voters’ racism since Nixon’s “Southern strategy” in 1968. More recently, racist reactions to the profound demographic changes in our country, the election of our first African-American president, and the mass immigration of people of color led to the tea party movement within the Republican Party, the resurgence of far right hate groups, and the emergence of Trump as a presidential candidate.

In the past 16 months, Trump has given voters a long list of reasons to ensure he never comes anywhere near the White House. This list includes his slander of Mexican immigrants as “criminals, drug dealers, (and) rapists,” his call for mass deportations, his stereotyping of African Americans as living in “hell,” his call for “registering” Muslim Americans and excluding other Muslims from entering the United States, his derision of women as “pigs” or “dogs” based on their physical appearance, his recently publicized boasts about assaulting women, and his mocking of disabled people.

This list also includes Trump’s promotion of violence against protesters at his rallies, his threats against the mass media, his endorsement of torture and murdering the families of suspected terrorists, his threat to imprison the Democratic presidential nominee if he is elected, his threats of war against Iran and North Korea, his endorsement of nuclear proliferation, his dismissal of climate change as a hoax by China, his declaration that wages are too high and his opposition to unions.

Trump was already on track to lose the presidential election when that salacious 2005 recording surfaced. Now several women have come forward with charges of unwanted advances or sexual assault by Trump. Amid this growing scandal and the increasing likelihood of a larger-than-expected Democratic presidential victory on Nov. 8, some Republican politicians have jumped off the Trump train. Local right-wingers like George Grace and Ray Holbrook should get over their fears of African Americans, immigrants, women and progressive social change — and withdraw their support of Trump, too.

And here are the first 14 comments made in response to Red David’s column:

Michael Meador: There's still time to jump off the David Michael Smith Train......oh. Sorry. His Train was going out of town.........

Walter Manuel: Mr. Meador, David Michael Smith's train has left the station a long time ago. No one who has a single working brain cell cares about what David Michael Smith thinks....

Michael Neese: David Michael Smith, a government professor at the College of the Mainland for 15 years, was terminated on grounds of insubordination and violation of the campus code of ethics. The vote was 6-0, with one trustee abstaining. Enough said...
Reference: http://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/houston-texas/houston/article/Outspoken-professor-fired-vows-to-sue-4699648.php

Jarvis Buckley: See what happens when you mess with us Trumpsters. We Will ride the train all the way to the White House. Don't believe the polls. We are coming like a Tidal wave.

Emile Pope: Tidal waves are never good things. Has anyone ever been glad to see a tidal wave? Has one ever brought anything good to anyone?

David Smith: Jump off the train? Hes not our first choice... but hes better than anything you have.. we dont need a continuation of the last failed years .(8)the worst presdient in history ,out to destroy our country.. but then again thats right up your alley ..you know Hillarys a liar and yet you continue to support her.. that makes you part of the problem Doctor.. (Mike ..the DS train derailed a couple of years ago)

Carlos Ponce: So David Michael doesn't like Trump. This guest column from a Marxist anti-Israel ex-professor is not surprising. In fact it should get Trump additional votes. Note that David Michael attacks those who would vote for Trump calling them "racist". That's a step beyond Hillary calling Trump voters "deplorable" and "irredeemable". Typical Marxist ploy to use class and race warfare to divide the American people. Nothing new here. David Michael should find a country where Communism works to live in. Oh, wait, there isn't any.

Lisa Blair: Thanks Michael for a succinct analysis of how we got here. Spot on!

Diane Turski: Thank you, Dr. Smith, for your courageous article consolidating the facts surrounding the Republican nominee and how he got here! I also hope that more people will come to their senses and will abandon this totally unfit candidate - the worst American major party candidate in history!

Carlos Ponce: " I also hope that more people will come to their senses and will abandon this totally unfit candidate - the worst American major party candidate in history!" Yes, I agree, so don't vote for Hillary, the most corrupt individual ever to be nominated for president.

Emile Pope: Wasn't Richard Nixon forced to resign the office of President for several crimes including obstruction of justice? Spiro Agnew was also forced to resign from office. Guess they don't count because they had an "R" after their names... Wasn't Richard Nixon forced to resign the office of President for several crimes including obstruction of justice? Spiro Agnew was also forced to resign from office. Guess they don't count because they had an "R" after their names...

Josh Butler: Yes. Hillary is without a doubt more corrupt than Trump. To the author..... Can we please stop with these morality arguments? Trying to make these arguments in this election makes you look ignorant.

Carlos Ponce: Compared to Hillary, Trickie Dickie Nixon was a novice when it came to corruption. Nixon resigned because he was told his staff to "stonewall" the investigation into the Watergate break in. But isn't that what Hillary did in the Whitewater, Benghazi and email investigations? "I do not recall, I do not remember" in the Whitewater or its equivalent in FIFTY ONE TIMES. And THIRTY NINE times in the FBI questions about her email. If this is not OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE then do you really want to vote for someone with such a faulty memory?

Jarvis Buckley: Emile even you should know I was talking about the wave of Trump voters that's going to hit the poles on Election Day . Then again maybe you have Drank to much Kool aid.


By Bob Walsh

Mikyla Wren killed herself at the age of 14. Her parents and grandmother are, as one might expect, suing the school district over it.

Mundelein High School District 120 in Lake County, Illinois, is the defendant. Since the lawsuit has actually been filed they are declining comment. Interestingly enough, the family is NOT seeking a financial settlement but rather is attempting to force the district to comply with state law regarding suicide prevention policy.

Mikyla’s mother is a medical doctor, her grandfather a former member of the school district board and her grandmother a long time school district employee.

There is a law in Illinois, called Anne Marie’s Law. It requires that school districts have in place operational and age-appropriate suicide prevention plans and that the plan be reviewed and updated yearly. Allegedly the district’s plan has NOT been updated since 1999 in violation of the new law.

The district contacted the mother on October 15 of last year when they discovered the word “suicide” on her school-district issued laptop. The mother allegedly requested an immediate risk assessment. Mikyla was unable to see a school counselor until October 21. The counselor did not follow-up with the mother. Mikyla killed herself on October 26.

Generally speaking I am inclined to think the family is attempting to calm their own bad feelings about things with money when this happens. The family is not asking for any money beyond their actual legal costs. It is therefore possible that, in this case, it really is about the principle and not about the money.

In any case, if you have a legally mandated program you should follow the law. If you don’t you can get bit on the butt.