By Jessica Chasmar
The Washington Times
March 24, 2016
A 12-year-old Florida girl has been arrested and charged after she pinched a male student's butt at school.
Breana Evans was hauled away by police and booked into juvenile detention after the incident earlier this month at Milwee Middle School in Longwood, just north of Orlando, a local CBS News affiliate reported.
The girl now faces misdemeanor battery charges.
"Lord, lord, lordy ... what has this world come to?" Breana's father, Ray, told the local news station. "Kids can't even be kids, and that's basically what it is. She's 12 years old, she was acting like a 12-year-old child."
According to the incident report, the boy whom Breana pinched initially told a school resource deputy that he didn't want to press charges. Breana was only suspended, until the boy's mother got involved and called the police, CBS News reported.
Ray Evans said he thinks the boy's mother overreacted.
"I'm sorry my kid touched your kid, but I'm sorry because you need some help I think, too overprotective. Let your kid be your kid," he said.
Breana said she was only joking and that the butt pinch was part of a game that a lot of kids play at the school.
"I regret it because I didn't know it would lead to this," she said. "I feel like it's just stupid, just a stupid charge that shouldn't have to happen."
The Seminole County state attorney said that if Breana completes the diversion program and completes her community service, classes and passes all the drug tests, the charge will be dismissed and her record would be clean, CBS News reported.
EDITOR’S NOTE: Shit, I would have been thrilled if a girl in my sixth-grade class had played grab-ass with me.
As for the boy’s mother in this case … how do you spell A-S-S-H-O-L-E?
Saturday, March 26, 2016
L.A. TO PAY NEARLY $6.9 MILLION IN POLICE SHOOTING THAT LEFT MAN PARALYZED
By Emily Alpert Reyes
Los Angeles Times
March 23, 2014
For years, Los Angeles had waged a legal battle that ultimately went all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court, trying to overturn a verdict to pay $5.7 million to a man who was shot by police.
City attorneys argued that officers were justified in shooting Robert Contreras, who was fleeing a van that witnesses had linked to a drive-by shooting in South L.A.
But Contreras, who was left paralyzed by the shooting, triumphed over and over in the courts. In December, the U.S. Supreme Court turned down the city appeal, and on Wednesday the City Council approved paying nearly $6.9 million including interest and legal fees in the hotly contested case.
City lawyers “have run out of remedies.... They really don't have a choice” but to pay the money, said Dale K. Galipo, the lead attorney representing Contreras.
Galipo added that the case was significant because it showed that even if someone was allegedly involved in criminal activity, “if police officers act inappropriately and use excessive force against that person, they can still be held responsible.”
The legal dispute centered on a confrontation in September 2005. Two Los Angeles Police Department officers chased and shot Contreras after he ran from a white van that witnesses said was involved in a drive-by shooting.
Officer Mario Flores and Det. Julio Benavides, who was a police officer at the time, said that they had seen a gun in Contreras’ hand as he fled and that he had turned toward them with an object in his hand. They opened fire and shot Contreras multiple times, hitting him in the side and back.
After he was shot, Contreras was found to be carrying a cellphone. No weapon was found on Contreras or nearby after an extensive search.
Contreras, who pleaded no contest to attempted murder in the drive-by shooting and served time in state prison, later sued the city and the officers who shot him, accusing them of using excessive force.
In 2012, the City Council balked at a proposed $4.5-million settlement in the case, only to see a jury order the city to pay a bigger sum — $5.7 million — to Contreras.
During that trial four years ago, a U.S. district judge did not allow city lawyers to tell jurors that Contreras was a known gang member and that another man in the van told investigators that Contreras had gotten out of the vehicle armed with a gun, according to records obtained earlier by The Times.
City Atty. Mike Feuer sought to have the judgment thrown out, arguing that when the situation was viewed from “the officers’ on-scene perspective, not with 20/20 hindsight, their use of force was entirely reasonable under the 4th Amendment.” An internal police inquiry had cleared the officers of wrongdoing.
But the U.S. Supreme Court turned down the city appeal without comment in December, allowing the $5.7-million judgment to stand. In the past, the court had said that police could use deadly force to stop a fleeing suspect only if that person poses a threat to officers or the public.
The U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals had also rejected city attempts to overturn the judgment, emphasizing that no gun was recovered from the scene.
Galipo said the city had also struggled to make its case that Contreras posed a threat to the officers because the man had been shot in the back. “Clearly the jury did not believe it,” he said.
The city payout approved Wednesday includes the $5.7-million court judgment first awarded by a jury four years ago, plus accrued interest and more than $1.1 million in attorney fees.
Galipo called the sum “a life-changer” for his client. Feuer spokesman Rob Wilcox declined to comment on Wednesday’s decision.
Los Angeles Times
March 23, 2014
For years, Los Angeles had waged a legal battle that ultimately went all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court, trying to overturn a verdict to pay $5.7 million to a man who was shot by police.
City attorneys argued that officers were justified in shooting Robert Contreras, who was fleeing a van that witnesses had linked to a drive-by shooting in South L.A.
But Contreras, who was left paralyzed by the shooting, triumphed over and over in the courts. In December, the U.S. Supreme Court turned down the city appeal, and on Wednesday the City Council approved paying nearly $6.9 million including interest and legal fees in the hotly contested case.
City lawyers “have run out of remedies.... They really don't have a choice” but to pay the money, said Dale K. Galipo, the lead attorney representing Contreras.
Galipo added that the case was significant because it showed that even if someone was allegedly involved in criminal activity, “if police officers act inappropriately and use excessive force against that person, they can still be held responsible.”
The legal dispute centered on a confrontation in September 2005. Two Los Angeles Police Department officers chased and shot Contreras after he ran from a white van that witnesses said was involved in a drive-by shooting.
Officer Mario Flores and Det. Julio Benavides, who was a police officer at the time, said that they had seen a gun in Contreras’ hand as he fled and that he had turned toward them with an object in his hand. They opened fire and shot Contreras multiple times, hitting him in the side and back.
After he was shot, Contreras was found to be carrying a cellphone. No weapon was found on Contreras or nearby after an extensive search.
Contreras, who pleaded no contest to attempted murder in the drive-by shooting and served time in state prison, later sued the city and the officers who shot him, accusing them of using excessive force.
In 2012, the City Council balked at a proposed $4.5-million settlement in the case, only to see a jury order the city to pay a bigger sum — $5.7 million — to Contreras.
During that trial four years ago, a U.S. district judge did not allow city lawyers to tell jurors that Contreras was a known gang member and that another man in the van told investigators that Contreras had gotten out of the vehicle armed with a gun, according to records obtained earlier by The Times.
City Atty. Mike Feuer sought to have the judgment thrown out, arguing that when the situation was viewed from “the officers’ on-scene perspective, not with 20/20 hindsight, their use of force was entirely reasonable under the 4th Amendment.” An internal police inquiry had cleared the officers of wrongdoing.
But the U.S. Supreme Court turned down the city appeal without comment in December, allowing the $5.7-million judgment to stand. In the past, the court had said that police could use deadly force to stop a fleeing suspect only if that person poses a threat to officers or the public.
The U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals had also rejected city attempts to overturn the judgment, emphasizing that no gun was recovered from the scene.
Galipo said the city had also struggled to make its case that Contreras posed a threat to the officers because the man had been shot in the back. “Clearly the jury did not believe it,” he said.
The city payout approved Wednesday includes the $5.7-million court judgment first awarded by a jury four years ago, plus accrued interest and more than $1.1 million in attorney fees.
Galipo called the sum “a life-changer” for his client. Feuer spokesman Rob Wilcox declined to comment on Wednesday’s decision.
MAN CLIMBS TREE, TRIGGERS DAYLONG STANDOFF
By Evan Bush
The Seattle times
March 23, 2016
Seattle police negotiators spent a frustrating day Tuesday trying to coax a man down from an 80-foot-tall tree outside the downtown Macy's store after a passer-by called 911 to report that someone had scaled the massive conifer.
As of 9:30 p.m., more than 10 hours after the 911 report, the man still had not come down. (Update: The 28-year-old man climbed down from the tree shortly before noon Wednesday. He was taken into custody and will receive a medical evaluation.)
"It is quite a spectacle, honestly," police spokesman Patrick Michaud said Tuesday afternoon. The incident attracted onlookers, closed off downtown streets and spawned a parody Twitter account: @Man_In_Tree.
"We want to make sure he's OK and that he can get down from the tree without hurting himself or someone else," Michaud said. "We're on his schedule -- we're not going to rush it with someone at the top of a tall tree. If you rush it, it could become dangerous."
Police and firefighters responded to Stewart Street and Third Avenue around 11:20 a.m. Tuesday after receiving reports that the man had climbed about 70 feet up the sequoia tree in a street median. Officers, believing the man posed a danger to himself, pedestrians and motorists, closed several surrounding streets.
Police said the man also claimed to be carrying a knife.
Negotiators used an extended ladder from a truck to climb near the man and try to persuade him to get down. The man responded by yelling obscenities and, at one point, hurled an apple at medics.
Witnesses say the bearded man in a red-knit cap and checkerboard-pattern jacket also tossed pieces of tree branch.
"He's just been up in the tree for a few hours now, cussing at people and throwing pine cones," witness Braden Foley said.
The tree has been decorated during Christmastime.
Around 2:45 p.m., the man began stripping off branches from the top and tossed them at a police negotiator. The negotiator caught most of them.
The daylong standoff impacted downtown traffic for hours.
Two King County Metro Transit routes, the 25 to Portage Bay and Laurelhurst and the 66 to Roosevelt and Northgate, were rerouted. Those lines were diverting outbound to the north of the tree using Virginia Street, then returning to Olive Way east of Fifth Avenue.
Also, some electric trolley buses were being pushed through a transition zone on Stewart Street, where the Fire Department asked electric buses to retract their power poles, transit spokeswoman Rochelle Ogershok said. These buses were being repositioned at the end of a new run, so they weren't carrying passengers, she said.
Some watching the scene unfold said the tree-climber may be a homeless man who frequents the area.
"I've seen him around downtown," James Arriola said.
Michaud, the police spokesman, said as far as he knew, police were not contemplating seeking criminal charges against the man.
"I think we're more concerned about him getting out of the tree safely. And, if he needs any mental (health) help, to get that help for him. That's our first concern," he said.
Foley praised police for the way they handled the situation. "They're doing a great job controlling the area. It seems like they're controlling him. They're getting pine cones consistently thrown at them," he said.
Matt Louie, who was running errands downtown on a day off from work, said he planned to stay and watch the man until the situation was resolved.
"I got nothing but time. It's a nice day; he's probably got a great view. I'm sure his perspective is a bit off the norm."
The Seattle times
March 23, 2016
Seattle police negotiators spent a frustrating day Tuesday trying to coax a man down from an 80-foot-tall tree outside the downtown Macy's store after a passer-by called 911 to report that someone had scaled the massive conifer.
As of 9:30 p.m., more than 10 hours after the 911 report, the man still had not come down. (Update: The 28-year-old man climbed down from the tree shortly before noon Wednesday. He was taken into custody and will receive a medical evaluation.)
"It is quite a spectacle, honestly," police spokesman Patrick Michaud said Tuesday afternoon. The incident attracted onlookers, closed off downtown streets and spawned a parody Twitter account: @Man_In_Tree.
"We want to make sure he's OK and that he can get down from the tree without hurting himself or someone else," Michaud said. "We're on his schedule -- we're not going to rush it with someone at the top of a tall tree. If you rush it, it could become dangerous."
Police and firefighters responded to Stewart Street and Third Avenue around 11:20 a.m. Tuesday after receiving reports that the man had climbed about 70 feet up the sequoia tree in a street median. Officers, believing the man posed a danger to himself, pedestrians and motorists, closed several surrounding streets.
Police said the man also claimed to be carrying a knife.
Negotiators used an extended ladder from a truck to climb near the man and try to persuade him to get down. The man responded by yelling obscenities and, at one point, hurled an apple at medics.
Witnesses say the bearded man in a red-knit cap and checkerboard-pattern jacket also tossed pieces of tree branch.
"He's just been up in the tree for a few hours now, cussing at people and throwing pine cones," witness Braden Foley said.
The tree has been decorated during Christmastime.
Around 2:45 p.m., the man began stripping off branches from the top and tossed them at a police negotiator. The negotiator caught most of them.
The daylong standoff impacted downtown traffic for hours.
Two King County Metro Transit routes, the 25 to Portage Bay and Laurelhurst and the 66 to Roosevelt and Northgate, were rerouted. Those lines were diverting outbound to the north of the tree using Virginia Street, then returning to Olive Way east of Fifth Avenue.
Also, some electric trolley buses were being pushed through a transition zone on Stewart Street, where the Fire Department asked electric buses to retract their power poles, transit spokeswoman Rochelle Ogershok said. These buses were being repositioned at the end of a new run, so they weren't carrying passengers, she said.
Some watching the scene unfold said the tree-climber may be a homeless man who frequents the area.
"I've seen him around downtown," James Arriola said.
Michaud, the police spokesman, said as far as he knew, police were not contemplating seeking criminal charges against the man.
"I think we're more concerned about him getting out of the tree safely. And, if he needs any mental (health) help, to get that help for him. That's our first concern," he said.
Foley praised police for the way they handled the situation. "They're doing a great job controlling the area. It seems like they're controlling him. They're getting pine cones consistently thrown at them," he said.
Matt Louie, who was running errands downtown on a day off from work, said he planned to stay and watch the man until the situation was resolved.
"I got nothing but time. It's a nice day; he's probably got a great view. I'm sure his perspective is a bit off the norm."
Friday, March 25, 2016
TAXPAYERS GETTING SOAKED BY BILLIONAIRE SPORTS TEAM OWNERS
The video is 19 minutes long but well worth viewing and hilarious to boot.
(Sorry, but the right part of the screen is cut off. To view the full screen, click on The Unconventional Gazette link below the photo of BarkGrpwlBite.)
(Sorry, but the right part of the screen is cut off. To view the full screen, click on The Unconventional Gazette link below the photo of BarkGrpwlBite.)
WHEN A TOP COP CAUGHT THE GOVERNOR HAVING AN AFFAIR, HE KISSED HIS JOB GOODBYE
Alabama Top Cop Fired, Accuses Governor of affair
By Josh Moon
Montgomery Advertiser
March 24, 2016
Alabama Gov. Robert Bentley has carried on an affair with a married staffer and potentially committed a felony by misusing state resources to facilitate the affair, the former head of the state's law enforcement agency publicly alleged Wednesday.
Spencer Collier, who was fired Tuesday from his position as the head of the Alabama Law Enforcement Agency (ALEA), told reporters that he held direct conversations with Bentley about his affair with senior political adviser Rebekah Caldwell Mason. Collier provided specific details of those conversations, going so far as to name when they occurred, dates, other parties present and subject matter. Bentley was married at the time the affair began.
"This has been a difficult time for my family and for the Bentleys," Collier said to open his press conference at the office of Montgomery attorney Kenny Mendelsohn. "I am disappointed in the man (Bentley) that I looked up to."
Collier said he learned of Bentley's affair by accident in August 2014, after the governor left his personal cell phone behind at an event. A text message on the screen was from Mason and it was sexual in nature, he said.
A short time later, a member of Bentley's security staff brought Collier a tape recording that had been provided by a member of Bentley's family, Collier said. On it, he said he heard Bentley and Mason carrying on a conversation that was sexual in nature.
"Body parts were discussed," Collier said. "It was very obvious what it was, what was taking place."
Collier said he dismissed Bentley's normal security team and he and another senior member escorted Bentley to an event in Greenville. During the trip, Collier said he confronted Bentley about the affair.
"He hung his head, he didn't deny it," Collier said. "He asked me how to get out of it."
Collier said he informed Bentley during that trip that an affair with Mason could easily violate the law should he provide her state resources, or even use state resources, to carry out the affair or cover it up.
Bentley assured him that he was not misusing state funds, so Collier said he let it go. Even after Bentley allegedly called Collier the following day and said he couldn't break off the affair, Collier said he was confident at that time that the governor was not misusing state funds.
However, that perception changed, Collier said. During conversations with other state workers, particularly those who handled Bentley's travel arrangements, Collier said he started to believe that Bentley has misappropriated state resources, although he admitted to having no proof.
Collier said Bentley has admitted to him within the last month that the affair is ongoing with Mason.
"He has told me that he is madly in love with Mason, but he's a man of honor and will not ask her to divorce her husband," Collier said.
Collier was originally placed on medical leave by Bentley a month ago, following an odd series of events related to the ongoing prosecution of Alabama House Speaker Mike Hubbard. An assistant attorney general for the state had requested an affidavit from Collier on a specific matter, but Bentley instructed Collier to remain out of the case and not submit the affidavit.
Collier said he had no choice as a law enforcement officer to cooperate.
"Bentley and (Mason) were furious with me," Collier said.
On Tuesday, Bentley relieved Collier of his duties and at the same time alleged that an investigation at ALEA had turned up misused funds. Collier vehemently denied that allegation.
"You can turn ALEA upside down and there won't be missing funds there," Collier said. "I'll be happy to cooperate with any investigation into that."
EDITOR’S NOTE: It should be emphasized that Gov. Bentley is an honorable man because he will not ask his playmate to divorce her husband.
By Josh Moon
Montgomery Advertiser
March 24, 2016
Alabama Gov. Robert Bentley has carried on an affair with a married staffer and potentially committed a felony by misusing state resources to facilitate the affair, the former head of the state's law enforcement agency publicly alleged Wednesday.
Spencer Collier, who was fired Tuesday from his position as the head of the Alabama Law Enforcement Agency (ALEA), told reporters that he held direct conversations with Bentley about his affair with senior political adviser Rebekah Caldwell Mason. Collier provided specific details of those conversations, going so far as to name when they occurred, dates, other parties present and subject matter. Bentley was married at the time the affair began.
"This has been a difficult time for my family and for the Bentleys," Collier said to open his press conference at the office of Montgomery attorney Kenny Mendelsohn. "I am disappointed in the man (Bentley) that I looked up to."
Collier said he learned of Bentley's affair by accident in August 2014, after the governor left his personal cell phone behind at an event. A text message on the screen was from Mason and it was sexual in nature, he said.
A short time later, a member of Bentley's security staff brought Collier a tape recording that had been provided by a member of Bentley's family, Collier said. On it, he said he heard Bentley and Mason carrying on a conversation that was sexual in nature.
"Body parts were discussed," Collier said. "It was very obvious what it was, what was taking place."
Collier said he dismissed Bentley's normal security team and he and another senior member escorted Bentley to an event in Greenville. During the trip, Collier said he confronted Bentley about the affair.
"He hung his head, he didn't deny it," Collier said. "He asked me how to get out of it."
Collier said he informed Bentley during that trip that an affair with Mason could easily violate the law should he provide her state resources, or even use state resources, to carry out the affair or cover it up.
Bentley assured him that he was not misusing state funds, so Collier said he let it go. Even after Bentley allegedly called Collier the following day and said he couldn't break off the affair, Collier said he was confident at that time that the governor was not misusing state funds.
However, that perception changed, Collier said. During conversations with other state workers, particularly those who handled Bentley's travel arrangements, Collier said he started to believe that Bentley has misappropriated state resources, although he admitted to having no proof.
Collier said Bentley has admitted to him within the last month that the affair is ongoing with Mason.
"He has told me that he is madly in love with Mason, but he's a man of honor and will not ask her to divorce her husband," Collier said.
Collier was originally placed on medical leave by Bentley a month ago, following an odd series of events related to the ongoing prosecution of Alabama House Speaker Mike Hubbard. An assistant attorney general for the state had requested an affidavit from Collier on a specific matter, but Bentley instructed Collier to remain out of the case and not submit the affidavit.
Collier said he had no choice as a law enforcement officer to cooperate.
"Bentley and (Mason) were furious with me," Collier said.
On Tuesday, Bentley relieved Collier of his duties and at the same time alleged that an investigation at ALEA had turned up misused funds. Collier vehemently denied that allegation.
"You can turn ALEA upside down and there won't be missing funds there," Collier said. "I'll be happy to cooperate with any investigation into that."
EDITOR’S NOTE: It should be emphasized that Gov. Bentley is an honorable man because he will not ask his playmate to divorce her husband.
CONGRESSWOMAN WANTS TO MAKE AMERICA SAFE … FROM BURNER PHONES
By Bob Walsh
United State Representative Jackie Speier, (D-San Mateo), is arguably the most stupid person in Congress, and that is saying something. I have stepped in stinky stuff in the gutter that is smarter than she is. Never-the-less she is a member of Congress and wants to outlaw burner cell phones.
If Ms. Speier has her way ALL cell phones sold in the U. S. would be trackable to the initial buyer. Even those very basic cell phones, commonly called burner phones, would have to be tracked by the retailer with VERIFIED ID information on the initial purchaser. This information would be maintained in a data base which could be accessed by the government with a warrant.
Chucky Schumer, (D-New York) ran this same idea up the flagpole back in 2010, but nobody saluted.
EDITOR’S NOTE: I previously referred to Speier as a “kooky congresswoman” because each month she gets up to give a speech on the House floor in which she reads aloud the names of people killed in mass shootings the month before. Kooky Jackie also has a memorial wall to gun violence victims outside her office.
On March 15Speier, a firm opponent of the right to bear arms, introduced a bill banning the importation of assault rifles that was supported by 32 of her fellow Democrats.
It pains me to disagree with Bob, but when it comes to burner phones, Speier is right on track.
Burner phones are cellphones with prepaid time that the user discards once the paid-for minutes have been used up. ISIS and other jihadists have been using burner phones to thwart American and European intelligence agencies from tracing the phones to the terrorists using them.
Accordingly, Speier’s bill would enhance our homeland security.
United State Representative Jackie Speier, (D-San Mateo), is arguably the most stupid person in Congress, and that is saying something. I have stepped in stinky stuff in the gutter that is smarter than she is. Never-the-less she is a member of Congress and wants to outlaw burner cell phones.
If Ms. Speier has her way ALL cell phones sold in the U. S. would be trackable to the initial buyer. Even those very basic cell phones, commonly called burner phones, would have to be tracked by the retailer with VERIFIED ID information on the initial purchaser. This information would be maintained in a data base which could be accessed by the government with a warrant.
Chucky Schumer, (D-New York) ran this same idea up the flagpole back in 2010, but nobody saluted.
EDITOR’S NOTE: I previously referred to Speier as a “kooky congresswoman” because each month she gets up to give a speech on the House floor in which she reads aloud the names of people killed in mass shootings the month before. Kooky Jackie also has a memorial wall to gun violence victims outside her office.
On March 15Speier, a firm opponent of the right to bear arms, introduced a bill banning the importation of assault rifles that was supported by 32 of her fellow Democrats.
It pains me to disagree with Bob, but when it comes to burner phones, Speier is right on track.
Burner phones are cellphones with prepaid time that the user discards once the paid-for minutes have been used up. ISIS and other jihadists have been using burner phones to thwart American and European intelligence agencies from tracing the phones to the terrorists using them.
Accordingly, Speier’s bill would enhance our homeland security.
20 YEARS FOR A CRIME HE DIDN’T COMMIT … MAYBE/PROBABLY
By Bob Walsh
It seems likely that Richard Rosario, now 40, just did a 20-year stretch in New York for a crime he didn’t commit, thanks in large part to in incompetent lawyer.
Rosario asserts that he was in in fact in Florida in 1996 when George Collazo, 16, was murdered. He had 13 witnesses who could vouch for his presence in Florida. It seems that his lawyer didn’t exactly exert himself to run down these witnesses.
Two eye witnesses said Rosario gunned down Collazo during an argument in the street. There was zero physical evidence of any kind to support the witnesses.
His conviction has now been overturned. The D A has not opposed that move, though may yet refile the case.
The matter came to a head two months after the 27-year D. A. retired and days ahead of a planned “DATELINE” piece on the case. I am confident those two things are purely coincidental.
It seems likely that Richard Rosario, now 40, just did a 20-year stretch in New York for a crime he didn’t commit, thanks in large part to in incompetent lawyer.
Rosario asserts that he was in in fact in Florida in 1996 when George Collazo, 16, was murdered. He had 13 witnesses who could vouch for his presence in Florida. It seems that his lawyer didn’t exactly exert himself to run down these witnesses.
Two eye witnesses said Rosario gunned down Collazo during an argument in the street. There was zero physical evidence of any kind to support the witnesses.
His conviction has now been overturned. The D A has not opposed that move, though may yet refile the case.
The matter came to a head two months after the 27-year D. A. retired and days ahead of a planned “DATELINE” piece on the case. I am confident those two things are purely coincidental.
DEATH THREATS AND A NOT GUILTY PLEA FOR TROOPER IN SANDRA BLAND ARREST
By Leif Reigstad
Houston Press
March 23, 2016
Yesterday, former Texas state trooper Brian Encinia pled not guilty to perjury, a charge stemming from his role in the arrest of Sandra Bland in Waller County last summer. According to the Los Angeles Times, Encinia's lawyer said his client "has received a steady stream of threatening calls and letters" since Bland's in-custody death, which sparked nationwide protests over the treatment of minorities by law enforcement agencies.
Bland was found hanging in her cell, three days after she was arrested when a traffic stop turned confrontational. Dash cam footage shows Encinia attempted to physically pull the 28-year old African-American woman from her car and threatened to use a taser on her. She was pulled over for allegedly failing to signal a lane change.
Bland's death was ruled a suicide. Multiple law enforcement agencies are investigating the circumstances of her in-custody death. In December, a Waller County grand jury declined to charge officials in the Waller County Jail or the Waller County Sheriff's Office. Two weeks later, the same grand jury indicted Encinia for perjury because of statements he made in his report of the arrest about pulling Bland out of her vehicle to "further conduct a safe traffic investigation." Encinia was fired earlier this month.
In the affidavit for Bland's arrest, Encinia wrote that Bland "became combative and uncooperative" and refused to leave her car. Encinia wrote that Bland then "was removed" from the car, but became "more combative," so he handcuffed her. According to Encinia, Bland began swinging her elbows and kicked Encinia in the shin, and "force was used to subdue Bland to the ground" as she continued to "fight back." However, dash cam footage contradicts Encinia's account. If convicted, he could face a $4,000 fine and a year in jail.
Bland's mother, meanwhile, has filed a wrongful death lawsuit in federal court against Waller County law enforcement organizations and Encinia. That case is set to go to trial in January 2017.
EDITOR’S NOTE: While the traffic stop was probably legit, Encinia appeared to let it escalate into a questionable arrest and to cover his ass, he submitted a false report.
As for Bland’s suicide, community activists and her family are trying to make it appear as though she was murdered by racist jailers.
In the blame game, Encinia is a sitting duck because if he had not arrested her, she would not have ended up in jail. Personally I would not hold the former trooper responsible, but then I won’t be on the jury that hears the civil case against him.
Houston Press
March 23, 2016
Yesterday, former Texas state trooper Brian Encinia pled not guilty to perjury, a charge stemming from his role in the arrest of Sandra Bland in Waller County last summer. According to the Los Angeles Times, Encinia's lawyer said his client "has received a steady stream of threatening calls and letters" since Bland's in-custody death, which sparked nationwide protests over the treatment of minorities by law enforcement agencies.
Bland was found hanging in her cell, three days after she was arrested when a traffic stop turned confrontational. Dash cam footage shows Encinia attempted to physically pull the 28-year old African-American woman from her car and threatened to use a taser on her. She was pulled over for allegedly failing to signal a lane change.
Bland's death was ruled a suicide. Multiple law enforcement agencies are investigating the circumstances of her in-custody death. In December, a Waller County grand jury declined to charge officials in the Waller County Jail or the Waller County Sheriff's Office. Two weeks later, the same grand jury indicted Encinia for perjury because of statements he made in his report of the arrest about pulling Bland out of her vehicle to "further conduct a safe traffic investigation." Encinia was fired earlier this month.
In the affidavit for Bland's arrest, Encinia wrote that Bland "became combative and uncooperative" and refused to leave her car. Encinia wrote that Bland then "was removed" from the car, but became "more combative," so he handcuffed her. According to Encinia, Bland began swinging her elbows and kicked Encinia in the shin, and "force was used to subdue Bland to the ground" as she continued to "fight back." However, dash cam footage contradicts Encinia's account. If convicted, he could face a $4,000 fine and a year in jail.
Bland's mother, meanwhile, has filed a wrongful death lawsuit in federal court against Waller County law enforcement organizations and Encinia. That case is set to go to trial in January 2017.
EDITOR’S NOTE: While the traffic stop was probably legit, Encinia appeared to let it escalate into a questionable arrest and to cover his ass, he submitted a false report.
As for Bland’s suicide, community activists and her family are trying to make it appear as though she was murdered by racist jailers.
In the blame game, Encinia is a sitting duck because if he had not arrested her, she would not have ended up in jail. Personally I would not hold the former trooper responsible, but then I won’t be on the jury that hears the civil case against him.
SO YOU THINK THE NORTH KOREANS ARE STUPID
Kim Jung Un had no military experience whatsoever before Daddy made him a four-star general. This snot-nosed twerp had never accomplished anything in his life that would even come close to military leadership.
He hadn't even so much as led a Cub Scout troop, coached a sports team, or commanded a military platoon.
So he is made the "Beloved Leader" of North Korea.
Terrific!!!
I'm sorry... I just remembered that we did the same thing. We took an arrogant phony community organizer, who had never worn a military uniform, and made him Commander-in-Chief.
A guy who smoked pot, graduated from Columbia University and Harvard Law School, but had never held a real job, worked on a budget, or led anything more than an ACORN demonstration, and we made him "Beloved Leader" of the United States - Twice!!!!!
So if you think North Koreans are stupid... I'm sorry I brought this up about Kim Jung Un.
Never mind!
He hadn't even so much as led a Cub Scout troop, coached a sports team, or commanded a military platoon.
So he is made the "Beloved Leader" of North Korea.
Terrific!!!
I'm sorry... I just remembered that we did the same thing. We took an arrogant phony community organizer, who had never worn a military uniform, and made him Commander-in-Chief.
A guy who smoked pot, graduated from Columbia University and Harvard Law School, but had never held a real job, worked on a budget, or led anything more than an ACORN demonstration, and we made him "Beloved Leader" of the United States - Twice!!!!!
So if you think North Koreans are stupid... I'm sorry I brought this up about Kim Jung Un.
Never mind!
Thursday, March 24, 2016
HOMEOWNER SHOOTS, KILLS TEEN BURGLARY SUSPECT
The slain teen’s sister says, “You have to understand… how he gonna get his money to have clothes to go to school?”
By Gaby Fleischman
CBS Miami
March 11, 2016
MIAMI -- Relatives of a 17-year-old are angry the teenager was shot and killed by a homeowner who police say was protecting her property.
The sister of the teen who died identified him as Trevon Johnson. She said he was a student at D. A. Dorsey Technical College.
“I don’t care if she have her gun license or any of that. That is way beyond the law… way beyond,” said Johnson’s cousin Nautika Harris. “He was not supposed to die like this. He had a future ahead of him. Trevon had goals… he was a funny guy, very big on education, loved learning.”
On Thursday, police say Johnson burglarized a home south of 79th Street near I-95 — just blocks away from where he lives.
The 54-year-old woman told police her surveillance system alerted her to the break-in of her home. She said she rushed home and found the teen climbing out of a window.
“She observed a subject leaving the home through the rear,” said police Det. Dan Ferrin.
Miami-Dade police said there was a confrontation and shots were fired. Police said they were on scene seconds after the shooting and gave CPR to the teen. Johnson was rushed to the hospital where he was pronounced dead.
“What’s wrong with her,” asked Johnson’s sister Nisha Johnson. “She did not have to shoot him.”
“It’s no reason she should have waited until I think he walked out the yard to try to shoot him,” said Harris. “If she called the police already why would she shoot him?”
Relatives said they don’t believe Johnson stole anything from the home but detectives would not confirm that.
“You have to look at it from every child’s point of view that was raised in the hood,” said Harris. “You have to understand… how he gonna get his money to have clothes to go to school? You have to look at it from his point-of-view.”
Police said the homeowner is cooperating with detectives and was taken to a police station for questioning.
“She’s a person that is a little distraught because this is her home that someone obviously was in,” Ferrin said.
Investigators said they’re still trying to sort all of this out and want the public to remember that, if possible, it’s best not to take these types of situations into your own hands.
“If there’s any type of situation that happens or they believe there’s a burglary at the home or any type of confrontation, dial 911. Have the police make that confrontation,” Ferrin said. “That’s what we’re here for.”
The case has been handed over to state attorney’s office but, so far, no charges have been filed against her.
EDITOR’S NOTE: For a guy who was “very big on education, loved learning,” Trevon Johnson apparently never learned that breaking into people’s houses is a crime. As for “how he gonna get his money to have clothes to go to school,” how about by getting a job?
I hope they do not file any charges against the homeowner. In California she'd be facing the death penalty.
By Gaby Fleischman
CBS Miami
March 11, 2016
MIAMI -- Relatives of a 17-year-old are angry the teenager was shot and killed by a homeowner who police say was protecting her property.
The sister of the teen who died identified him as Trevon Johnson. She said he was a student at D. A. Dorsey Technical College.
“I don’t care if she have her gun license or any of that. That is way beyond the law… way beyond,” said Johnson’s cousin Nautika Harris. “He was not supposed to die like this. He had a future ahead of him. Trevon had goals… he was a funny guy, very big on education, loved learning.”
On Thursday, police say Johnson burglarized a home south of 79th Street near I-95 — just blocks away from where he lives.
The 54-year-old woman told police her surveillance system alerted her to the break-in of her home. She said she rushed home and found the teen climbing out of a window.
“She observed a subject leaving the home through the rear,” said police Det. Dan Ferrin.
Miami-Dade police said there was a confrontation and shots were fired. Police said they were on scene seconds after the shooting and gave CPR to the teen. Johnson was rushed to the hospital where he was pronounced dead.
“What’s wrong with her,” asked Johnson’s sister Nisha Johnson. “She did not have to shoot him.”
“It’s no reason she should have waited until I think he walked out the yard to try to shoot him,” said Harris. “If she called the police already why would she shoot him?”
Relatives said they don’t believe Johnson stole anything from the home but detectives would not confirm that.
“You have to look at it from every child’s point of view that was raised in the hood,” said Harris. “You have to understand… how he gonna get his money to have clothes to go to school? You have to look at it from his point-of-view.”
Police said the homeowner is cooperating with detectives and was taken to a police station for questioning.
“She’s a person that is a little distraught because this is her home that someone obviously was in,” Ferrin said.
Investigators said they’re still trying to sort all of this out and want the public to remember that, if possible, it’s best not to take these types of situations into your own hands.
“If there’s any type of situation that happens or they believe there’s a burglary at the home or any type of confrontation, dial 911. Have the police make that confrontation,” Ferrin said. “That’s what we’re here for.”
The case has been handed over to state attorney’s office but, so far, no charges have been filed against her.
EDITOR’S NOTE: For a guy who was “very big on education, loved learning,” Trevon Johnson apparently never learned that breaking into people’s houses is a crime. As for “how he gonna get his money to have clothes to go to school,” how about by getting a job?
I hope they do not file any charges against the homeowner. In California she'd be facing the death penalty.
AN END RUN AROUND THE SECOND AMENDMENT
Massachusetts chose to deploy its prosecutorial resources to prosecute and convict a woman of a criminal offense for arming herself with a nonlethal weapon that may well have saved her life
By Bernard Goldberg
BernardGoldberg.com
March 22, 2016
Last year, the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts – the highest court in the state — upheld the criminal conviction of a woman named Jaime Caetano who was arrested and convicted because she possessed what the authorities said was an unlawful weapon. The weapon was a stun gun, which she obtained for self-defense against her abusive and violent ex-boyfriend.
The Massachusetts court said that individuals had no right to have a stun gun, that it was “not the type of weapon that is eligible for Second Amendment protection” — because the Constitution only protects guns that were in common use at the time the document was written. In other words, stun guns didn’t exist when the Second Amendment was written so they’re not covered by the Second Amendment.
However one feels about guns, or the Heller decision that said individuals, not just militias, have the right to bear arms, the reasoning in Massachusetts borders on the absurd. Followed to its illogical conclusion, the Massachusetts court might also rule that broadcast journalists have no First Amendment protection because radio and television didn’t exist when the First Amendment was written.
The case went to the U.S. Supreme Court and in a unanimous decision this week – rare in cases involving guns – the Justices struck down the lower court ruling. So how could the Massachusetts judges get it so wrong that even four liberal U.S. Supreme Court Justices knocked down their ruling — and their reasoning? Could it be that this was nothing more than an end run by liberal judges who just don’t like guns?
That’s pretty much what U.S. Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito believes. “The Commonwealth of Massachusetts was either unable or unwilling to do what was necessary to protect Jaime Caetano, so she was forced to protect herself,” he wrote. “To make matters worse, the Commonwealth chose to deploy its prosecutorial resources to prosecute and convict her of a criminal offense for arming herself with a nonlethal weapon that may well have saved her life. The Supreme Judicial Court then affirmed her conviction on the flimsiest of grounds.”
According to Alito, “if the fundamental right of self-defense does not protect Caetano, then the safety of all Americans is left to the mercy of state authorities who may be more concerned about disarming people than about keeping them safe.”
By Bernard Goldberg
BernardGoldberg.com
March 22, 2016
Last year, the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts – the highest court in the state — upheld the criminal conviction of a woman named Jaime Caetano who was arrested and convicted because she possessed what the authorities said was an unlawful weapon. The weapon was a stun gun, which she obtained for self-defense against her abusive and violent ex-boyfriend.
The Massachusetts court said that individuals had no right to have a stun gun, that it was “not the type of weapon that is eligible for Second Amendment protection” — because the Constitution only protects guns that were in common use at the time the document was written. In other words, stun guns didn’t exist when the Second Amendment was written so they’re not covered by the Second Amendment.
However one feels about guns, or the Heller decision that said individuals, not just militias, have the right to bear arms, the reasoning in Massachusetts borders on the absurd. Followed to its illogical conclusion, the Massachusetts court might also rule that broadcast journalists have no First Amendment protection because radio and television didn’t exist when the First Amendment was written.
The case went to the U.S. Supreme Court and in a unanimous decision this week – rare in cases involving guns – the Justices struck down the lower court ruling. So how could the Massachusetts judges get it so wrong that even four liberal U.S. Supreme Court Justices knocked down their ruling — and their reasoning? Could it be that this was nothing more than an end run by liberal judges who just don’t like guns?
That’s pretty much what U.S. Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito believes. “The Commonwealth of Massachusetts was either unable or unwilling to do what was necessary to protect Jaime Caetano, so she was forced to protect herself,” he wrote. “To make matters worse, the Commonwealth chose to deploy its prosecutorial resources to prosecute and convict her of a criminal offense for arming herself with a nonlethal weapon that may well have saved her life. The Supreme Judicial Court then affirmed her conviction on the flimsiest of grounds.”
According to Alito, “if the fundamental right of self-defense does not protect Caetano, then the safety of all Americans is left to the mercy of state authorities who may be more concerned about disarming people than about keeping them safe.”
CALIFORNIA AG BACKS LEGISLATION ON POLICE SHOOTINGS THAT IS HALF-GOOD, HALF-BAD
AG Kamala Harris is backing a bill that will enable her to post detailed reports of all California police shootings on her website
California Assemblywoman Jacqui Irwin, D-Thousand Oaks, has submitted a bill that if passed would require all California law enforcement agencies to submit a detailed report of any police shooting to the state attorney general’s office by computer. The agencies will have to disclose the age, race and gender of the person shot, whether the person was armed and, if so, what type of weapon was possessed.
AG Kamala Harris is a strong backer of Irwin’s bill because she wants to put these reports on her Open Justice website for public viewing.
Making those reports available to the AG’s office for statistical purposes is a good idea, but allowing the public to view those reports is not. That’s carrying transparency too far, way too far and that’s why Irwin’s bill is half-good, half-bad.
The reports may be submitted before the investigation has been completed and will disclose the name(s) of the officer(s) doing the shooting, thereby leaving the cop(s) open to harassment.
Contrary to calming the ‘community’ down, rabble rousers will be able to cherry-pick those reports and stir up ‘community’ anger even when the police shooting was a righteous one.
KAMALA HARRIS BACKS A BILL THAT WOULD IMPROVE SISCLOSURES ON POLICE SHOOTINGS
California Atty. Gen. Kamala Harris supports legislation that she says would “bring criminal justice data reporting into the 21st century.”
By Jack Dolan
Los Angeles Times
March 21, 2016
California Atty. Gen. Kamala Harris wants to require police agencies to file detailed reports about officer-involved shootings to her office electronically, so they can be quickly and easily posted on a state website for public viewing.
Despite the heated national debate over police use of force, no reliable database tracks all police shootings in California, making it difficult for researchers to definitively answer some fundamental questions, including whether minorities are shot at disproportionately higher rates and which departments pull the trigger most often.
For years, state law required police departments to report deaths in custody, including fatal officer-involved shootings, but the requirement had little enforcement and many departments routinely neglected to file the required information.
And, there was no reporting requirement if a suspect was shot but not killed.
Last year, the Legislature passed a law requiring new, detailed reports on all police shootings that result in serious bodily injury or death. The departments will have to disclose the age, race and gender of the person shot, whether the person was armed and, if so, what type of weapon was possessed.
That law, however, allowed departments to provide the information on paper. The new bill backed by Harris and sponsored by Assemblywoman Jacqui Irwin (D-Thousand Oaks) would require departments to submit the information electronically, making it much easier to disseminate on the attorney general's Open Justice website.
"This legislation will bring criminal justice data reporting into the 21st century," Harris said.
The bill would also require departments to file traditional crime statistics electronically, including the numbers of murders, rapes, robberies and property crimes. Currently, 60% of departments submit that information on paper, requiring state workers to type it into computers before it can be analyzed and disseminated. The process is unnecessarily expensive and time-consuming, state officials said.
Harris, a Democrat who is running for U.S. Senate, has been criticized by some civil rights activists for not doing enough to increase accountability for police departments amid the national debate over shootings of young black men. Harris, who is the daughter of immigrants from Jamaica and India, is the top law enforcement officer in California.
Last year, she opposed a bill that would have made her office responsible for investigating police shootings. Currently, those investigations are handled by local prosecutors, who critics say are too close to the police to provide impartial oversight.
A Times investigation last month found that since 2004, there had been more than 2,000 officer-involved shootings in Southern California, with only one officer charged with a crime. He was acquitted.
California Assemblywoman Jacqui Irwin, D-Thousand Oaks, has submitted a bill that if passed would require all California law enforcement agencies to submit a detailed report of any police shooting to the state attorney general’s office by computer. The agencies will have to disclose the age, race and gender of the person shot, whether the person was armed and, if so, what type of weapon was possessed.
AG Kamala Harris is a strong backer of Irwin’s bill because she wants to put these reports on her Open Justice website for public viewing.
Making those reports available to the AG’s office for statistical purposes is a good idea, but allowing the public to view those reports is not. That’s carrying transparency too far, way too far and that’s why Irwin’s bill is half-good, half-bad.
The reports may be submitted before the investigation has been completed and will disclose the name(s) of the officer(s) doing the shooting, thereby leaving the cop(s) open to harassment.
Contrary to calming the ‘community’ down, rabble rousers will be able to cherry-pick those reports and stir up ‘community’ anger even when the police shooting was a righteous one.
KAMALA HARRIS BACKS A BILL THAT WOULD IMPROVE SISCLOSURES ON POLICE SHOOTINGS
California Atty. Gen. Kamala Harris supports legislation that she says would “bring criminal justice data reporting into the 21st century.”
By Jack Dolan
Los Angeles Times
March 21, 2016
California Atty. Gen. Kamala Harris wants to require police agencies to file detailed reports about officer-involved shootings to her office electronically, so they can be quickly and easily posted on a state website for public viewing.
Despite the heated national debate over police use of force, no reliable database tracks all police shootings in California, making it difficult for researchers to definitively answer some fundamental questions, including whether minorities are shot at disproportionately higher rates and which departments pull the trigger most often.
For years, state law required police departments to report deaths in custody, including fatal officer-involved shootings, but the requirement had little enforcement and many departments routinely neglected to file the required information.
And, there was no reporting requirement if a suspect was shot but not killed.
Last year, the Legislature passed a law requiring new, detailed reports on all police shootings that result in serious bodily injury or death. The departments will have to disclose the age, race and gender of the person shot, whether the person was armed and, if so, what type of weapon was possessed.
That law, however, allowed departments to provide the information on paper. The new bill backed by Harris and sponsored by Assemblywoman Jacqui Irwin (D-Thousand Oaks) would require departments to submit the information electronically, making it much easier to disseminate on the attorney general's Open Justice website.
"This legislation will bring criminal justice data reporting into the 21st century," Harris said.
The bill would also require departments to file traditional crime statistics electronically, including the numbers of murders, rapes, robberies and property crimes. Currently, 60% of departments submit that information on paper, requiring state workers to type it into computers before it can be analyzed and disseminated. The process is unnecessarily expensive and time-consuming, state officials said.
Harris, a Democrat who is running for U.S. Senate, has been criticized by some civil rights activists for not doing enough to increase accountability for police departments amid the national debate over shootings of young black men. Harris, who is the daughter of immigrants from Jamaica and India, is the top law enforcement officer in California.
Last year, she opposed a bill that would have made her office responsible for investigating police shootings. Currently, those investigations are handled by local prosecutors, who critics say are too close to the police to provide impartial oversight.
A Times investigation last month found that since 2004, there had been more than 2,000 officer-involved shootings in Southern California, with only one officer charged with a crime. He was acquitted.
NATIONAL SECURITY EXPERTS: ‘ISIS ARE FUCKING ASSHOLES’
The Onion
March 23, 2016
WASHINGTON—Updating the public about the deadly attacks carried out in Brussels yesterday by members of the Syria-based jihadist group, national security experts held a press conference in Washington this morning to notify Americans that ISIS are fucking assholes.
“As we work with our European colleagues to investigate these deplorable attacks and take measures to address terrorism concerns both at home and abroad, we strongly urge all citizens to keep in mind that ISIS are a festering shitpile of complete and utter fuckwads,” said National Security Advisor Susan Rice, adding that recent intelligence reports confirmed that members of ISIS are gigantic motherfucking pricks who are driven to commit acts of violence by a fervently held dumb-as-dogshit worldview. “We continue to work with security authorities around the world to prevent these soulless, rat-bastard assfucks from acting like the absolute sacks of shit that they are, and we stand with the international community in delivering a message to ISIS that they can go fuck themselves.”
At press time, Rice had submitted a detailed report to the White House recommending a balanced strategy for neutralizing ISIS that consisted of galvanizing the support of regional Sunni tribes and “shoving a fat one so far up ISIS’ ass they choke.”
March 23, 2016
WASHINGTON—Updating the public about the deadly attacks carried out in Brussels yesterday by members of the Syria-based jihadist group, national security experts held a press conference in Washington this morning to notify Americans that ISIS are fucking assholes.
“As we work with our European colleagues to investigate these deplorable attacks and take measures to address terrorism concerns both at home and abroad, we strongly urge all citizens to keep in mind that ISIS are a festering shitpile of complete and utter fuckwads,” said National Security Advisor Susan Rice, adding that recent intelligence reports confirmed that members of ISIS are gigantic motherfucking pricks who are driven to commit acts of violence by a fervently held dumb-as-dogshit worldview. “We continue to work with security authorities around the world to prevent these soulless, rat-bastard assfucks from acting like the absolute sacks of shit that they are, and we stand with the international community in delivering a message to ISIS that they can go fuck themselves.”
At press time, Rice had submitted a detailed report to the White House recommending a balanced strategy for neutralizing ISIS that consisted of galvanizing the support of regional Sunni tribes and “shoving a fat one so far up ISIS’ ass they choke.”
Wednesday, March 23, 2016
INCREDIBLE! IS INCREDIBLE!
A stain remover that actually removes stubborn stains
When our dog Cassie reached a ripe old age, she could no longer hold her pee. Because we did not want to put a beloved pet down until the vet told us it was time for her to go, she left pee stains throughout our house. Her favorite spot was on the carpet between the kitchen and the breakfast nook. I finally had to have the carpet ripped out and had it replaced with vinyl flooring. Cassie also left awful stains in the master bathroom and in a couple of other rooms. Regular stain removers failed to get the stains out. What to do?
Last week I went to Bed Bath & Beyond to look for a solution. The store manager steered me to a stain remover named “incredible!”. It was in a nondescript opaque white plastic bottle. I never heard of it. The manager assured me it would remove the pee stains from my carpets. So I took a chance and bought two bottles.
When I got home I tried it on the bad stain in the bathroom. Voila … the stain started disappearing as soon as I applied the stain remover and then it was gone!
Incredible! is easy to use. You just pour it on the stain and get a brush to scrub the fluid into the stain. As soon as you start scrubbing the stain starts to disappear and within a few more seconds the stain is completely gone. Then you simply blot up the wet carpet with a towel.
I’ve never seen it advertised but my sister tells me this product has been around for years.
Incredible Inc., a Houston company, says it removes pet stains, food, blood, wine, cosmetics, grease, coffee and tea from carpet, clothing and upholstery.
Incredible! is Incredible! It’s saved me the cost of hiring a carpet cleaning outfit. I highly recommend it.
When our dog Cassie reached a ripe old age, she could no longer hold her pee. Because we did not want to put a beloved pet down until the vet told us it was time for her to go, she left pee stains throughout our house. Her favorite spot was on the carpet between the kitchen and the breakfast nook. I finally had to have the carpet ripped out and had it replaced with vinyl flooring. Cassie also left awful stains in the master bathroom and in a couple of other rooms. Regular stain removers failed to get the stains out. What to do?
Last week I went to Bed Bath & Beyond to look for a solution. The store manager steered me to a stain remover named “incredible!”. It was in a nondescript opaque white plastic bottle. I never heard of it. The manager assured me it would remove the pee stains from my carpets. So I took a chance and bought two bottles.
When I got home I tried it on the bad stain in the bathroom. Voila … the stain started disappearing as soon as I applied the stain remover and then it was gone!
Incredible! is easy to use. You just pour it on the stain and get a brush to scrub the fluid into the stain. As soon as you start scrubbing the stain starts to disappear and within a few more seconds the stain is completely gone. Then you simply blot up the wet carpet with a towel.
I’ve never seen it advertised but my sister tells me this product has been around for years.
Incredible Inc., a Houston company, says it removes pet stains, food, blood, wine, cosmetics, grease, coffee and tea from carpet, clothing and upholstery.
Incredible! is Incredible! It’s saved me the cost of hiring a carpet cleaning outfit. I highly recommend it.
HATCHET VS. PISTOL ... GUESS THE OUTCOME
By Bob Walsh
Yesterday morning a regular customer, aged 60, was sitting around the local 7-11 in Burien, Washington sucking up a mug of coffee and shooting the breeze with the clerk.
As this mundane scene was under way a man wearing a mask and carrying a hatchet entered the store and attacked the clerk, age 58. The customer pulled out his licensed pistol and blasted the man with the hatchet. Mr. Hatchet died at the scene, the clerk was slightly injured in the hatchet attack. So far the cops are not releasing any names.
The King’s County S O is forwarding the whole thing to the D.A. but so far it looks as if the shooting was fully justified.
It is pretty much always better to have a gun and not need it rather than to need a gun and not have it. After all, when seconds count the cops are only minutes away
Yesterday morning a regular customer, aged 60, was sitting around the local 7-11 in Burien, Washington sucking up a mug of coffee and shooting the breeze with the clerk.
As this mundane scene was under way a man wearing a mask and carrying a hatchet entered the store and attacked the clerk, age 58. The customer pulled out his licensed pistol and blasted the man with the hatchet. Mr. Hatchet died at the scene, the clerk was slightly injured in the hatchet attack. So far the cops are not releasing any names.
The King’s County S O is forwarding the whole thing to the D.A. but so far it looks as if the shooting was fully justified.
It is pretty much always better to have a gun and not need it rather than to need a gun and not have it. After all, when seconds count the cops are only minutes away
DISGUSTING PERV GETS 208 YEAR SENTENCE
By Bob Walsh
Jose Flores, 35, of San Pablo, CA, is a disgusting lump of excrement. His girlfriend, Juana Damien, 38, is not much better. For a period of five years, from the time the girl was five years old, Flores molested and raped his girlfriend’s daughter, finally impregnating her when she was nine. She gave birth at age ten.
Her mom tried to hide her condition and tried to conceal the identity of the father of her child’s child. She also denied knowing what was going on though the fact that they lived in a small mobile home and Flores took video of himself having sex with the child makes that hard to believe. At least the judge and jury didn’t believe it.
Damien got six years as an accessory. Flores got 208 years for 45 counts of child sexual abuse. In the old days that meant that he would certainly die in prison. Probably about four days after hitting the mainline. Nowadays it doesn’t. You can’t hardly swing a dead cat in prison now without hitting a child molester.
Flores will be up for parole consideration under the current law when he is 60. That doesn’t mean he will get it, but he will be up for consideration. The current batting average for senior citizen parole is about one out of six. Maybe he will slip in the shower and crack his skull. Wouldn’t be much of a loss.
EDITOR’S NOTE: Only six years for Juana Damien ….. that’s a fucking miscarriage of justice. She should have gotten the maximum!
Jose Flores, 35, of San Pablo, CA, is a disgusting lump of excrement. His girlfriend, Juana Damien, 38, is not much better. For a period of five years, from the time the girl was five years old, Flores molested and raped his girlfriend’s daughter, finally impregnating her when she was nine. She gave birth at age ten.
Her mom tried to hide her condition and tried to conceal the identity of the father of her child’s child. She also denied knowing what was going on though the fact that they lived in a small mobile home and Flores took video of himself having sex with the child makes that hard to believe. At least the judge and jury didn’t believe it.
Damien got six years as an accessory. Flores got 208 years for 45 counts of child sexual abuse. In the old days that meant that he would certainly die in prison. Probably about four days after hitting the mainline. Nowadays it doesn’t. You can’t hardly swing a dead cat in prison now without hitting a child molester.
Flores will be up for parole consideration under the current law when he is 60. That doesn’t mean he will get it, but he will be up for consideration. The current batting average for senior citizen parole is about one out of six. Maybe he will slip in the shower and crack his skull. Wouldn’t be much of a loss.
EDITOR’S NOTE: Only six years for Juana Damien ….. that’s a fucking miscarriage of justice. She should have gotten the maximum!
MEET THE MEN SHAPING DONALD TRUMP’S FOREIGN POLICY VIEWS
By Missy Ryan
Chicago Tribune
March 21, 2016
Republican presidential contender Donald Trump on Monday provided five names on his foreign policy team after months of speculation over who could be advising the businessman frontrunner. Here's what we know so far about the advisers named by Trump in a meeting with the Washington Post.
Joseph Schmitz
Schmitz served as inspector general at the Department of Defense during the George W. Bush administration. A Los Angeles Times investigation in 2005 revealed a number of issues with Schmitz's term there:
"Schmitz slowed or blocked investigations of senior Bush administration officials, spent taxpayer money on pet projects and accepted gifts that may have violated ethics guidelines, according to interviews with current and former senior officials in the inspector general's office, congressional investigators and a review of internal email and other documents.
"Schmitz also drew scrutiny for his unusual fascination with Baron Friedrich Von Steuben, a Revolutionary War hero who is considered the military's first true inspector general. Schmitz even replaced the official inspector general's seal in offices nationwide with a new one bearing the Von Steuben family motto, according to the documents and interview," the Times reported.
He later became a senior official at the Prince Group, the parent company of defense contractor Blackwater. In an article in The Washington Post covering the move, Danielle Brian, executive director of the Project on Government Oversight, said, "The inspector general is a standard-bearer for ethics and integrity for the Pentagon. To see a person who has been holding that position cash in on his public service and go work for one of their contractors is tremendously disappointing."
In a brief phone call Monday, Schmitz confirmed that he is working for the Trump campaign and said that he has been involved for the past month. He said he frequently confers with Sam Clovis, one of Trump's top policy advisers, and that there has been a series of conference calls and briefings in recent weeks.
According to his LinkedIn profile, Schmitz attended the U.S. Naval Academy and Stanford Law School, and has worked in recent years for two small law firms bearing his name. His father is the late former Republican Congressman John G. Schmitz, who was also a member of the right-wing John Birch Society.
One of Schmitz's siblings is Mary Kay Letourneau, the ex-schoolteacher who received seven years in prison for child rape after starting a relationship with a 13-year-old student.
George Papadopoulos
Papadopoulos directs an international energy center at the London Centre of International Law Practice. He previously advised the presidential campaign of Ben Carson and worked as a research fellow at the Hudson Institute, a conservative think tank in Washington.
According to his LinkedIn profile, he has had meetings with the president of Cyprus and the prime minister of the United Arab Emirates. He obtained a Masters from the University of London in 2010 and an undergraduate degree from DePaul University in 2009.
A biography on Carson's website says Papadopoulos "designed the first ever project in Washington, D.C. think tank history on U.S., Greece, Cyprus and Israel relations at a symposium entitled 'Power Shifts in the Eastern Mediterranean: The Emerging Strategic Relationship of Israel, Greece, and Cyprus.'"
Papadopoulos did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Walid Phares
Phares is a provost at BAU International University, an institution in downtown Washington that was founded in 2013.
According to his LinkedIn profile and his personal website, Phares has taught at various colleges and universities and has advised members of Congress. He has also been an analyst for Fox News. He obtained his PhD from the University of Miami.
Phares attracted attention in 2012 when, as an advisor to Mitt Romney's presidential bid, a Mother Jones story linked him to armed Christian factions blamed for abuses in Lebanon's civil war:
"During the 1980s, Phares, a Maronite Christian, trained Lebanese militants in ideological beliefs justifying the war against Lebanon's Muslim and Druze factions, according to former colleagues. Phares, they say, advocated the hard-line view that Lebanon's Christians should work toward creating a separate, independent Christian enclave.
A photo obtained by Mother Jones shows him conducting a press conference in 1986 for the Lebanese Forces, an umbrella group of Christian militias that has been accused of committing atrocities. He was also a close adviser to Samir Geagea, a Lebanese warlord who rose from leading hit squads to running the Lebanese Forces."
He did not immediately respond to attempts by the Post to contact him.
J. Keith Kellogg Jr.
Retired Army Lt. Gen. Kellogg is a former commander of the 82nd Airborne Division. After the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq in 2003, he served as chief operating officer for the Coalition Provisional Authority in Baghdad. He has also worked at Oracle, CACI International, an intelligence and information technology consulting firm with clients around the world, and Abraxas, a risk mitigation firm.
Kellogg was interviewed by The Washington Post in 2005 soon after he joined CACI:
"I started my career in the U.S. military. Traditionally in the military . . . you either start with a technical background or a more leadership-focused one. I took the leadership path. The scope of responsibility starts from leading about 30 people to where I finished with 14,000 people that I led and managed. You are responsible for budget, housing, feeding, training, equipping, making sure that the families are taken care of. So it's a huge management responsibility."
Kellogg did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Carter Page
Page, a longtime energy executive, told The Washington Post that he and other advisers have met with the Trump campaign. Page is a graduate of the United States Naval Academy and rose through the ranks at Merrill Lynch before founding his current firm, Global Energy Capital. He previously was a fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations where he focused on the Caspian Sea region and the economic development in former Soviet states, Carter told the Post in a phone call. He is also a fellow at the Center for National Policy in Washington and has a PhD from the University of London.
In a September 2014 article, Page appeared to blame NATO in part for provoking Russia.
While interventionist policies of the Soviet Union might have stood as the pivotal threat in Europe when Thatcher was rising to power as she argued at the time, similar aggressive policies of pushing NATO right to Russia's doorstep have instigated today's predicament.
EDITOR’S NOTE: Where did Trump dig these guys up? Off of his TV show? Never mind all the bickering within the Republican Party … his choice of foreign policy advisers is a good reason for him not to be the presidential nominee.
Chicago Tribune
March 21, 2016
Republican presidential contender Donald Trump on Monday provided five names on his foreign policy team after months of speculation over who could be advising the businessman frontrunner. Here's what we know so far about the advisers named by Trump in a meeting with the Washington Post.
Joseph Schmitz
Schmitz served as inspector general at the Department of Defense during the George W. Bush administration. A Los Angeles Times investigation in 2005 revealed a number of issues with Schmitz's term there:
"Schmitz slowed or blocked investigations of senior Bush administration officials, spent taxpayer money on pet projects and accepted gifts that may have violated ethics guidelines, according to interviews with current and former senior officials in the inspector general's office, congressional investigators and a review of internal email and other documents.
"Schmitz also drew scrutiny for his unusual fascination with Baron Friedrich Von Steuben, a Revolutionary War hero who is considered the military's first true inspector general. Schmitz even replaced the official inspector general's seal in offices nationwide with a new one bearing the Von Steuben family motto, according to the documents and interview," the Times reported.
He later became a senior official at the Prince Group, the parent company of defense contractor Blackwater. In an article in The Washington Post covering the move, Danielle Brian, executive director of the Project on Government Oversight, said, "The inspector general is a standard-bearer for ethics and integrity for the Pentagon. To see a person who has been holding that position cash in on his public service and go work for one of their contractors is tremendously disappointing."
In a brief phone call Monday, Schmitz confirmed that he is working for the Trump campaign and said that he has been involved for the past month. He said he frequently confers with Sam Clovis, one of Trump's top policy advisers, and that there has been a series of conference calls and briefings in recent weeks.
According to his LinkedIn profile, Schmitz attended the U.S. Naval Academy and Stanford Law School, and has worked in recent years for two small law firms bearing his name. His father is the late former Republican Congressman John G. Schmitz, who was also a member of the right-wing John Birch Society.
One of Schmitz's siblings is Mary Kay Letourneau, the ex-schoolteacher who received seven years in prison for child rape after starting a relationship with a 13-year-old student.
George Papadopoulos
Papadopoulos directs an international energy center at the London Centre of International Law Practice. He previously advised the presidential campaign of Ben Carson and worked as a research fellow at the Hudson Institute, a conservative think tank in Washington.
According to his LinkedIn profile, he has had meetings with the president of Cyprus and the prime minister of the United Arab Emirates. He obtained a Masters from the University of London in 2010 and an undergraduate degree from DePaul University in 2009.
A biography on Carson's website says Papadopoulos "designed the first ever project in Washington, D.C. think tank history on U.S., Greece, Cyprus and Israel relations at a symposium entitled 'Power Shifts in the Eastern Mediterranean: The Emerging Strategic Relationship of Israel, Greece, and Cyprus.'"
Papadopoulos did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Walid Phares
Phares is a provost at BAU International University, an institution in downtown Washington that was founded in 2013.
According to his LinkedIn profile and his personal website, Phares has taught at various colleges and universities and has advised members of Congress. He has also been an analyst for Fox News. He obtained his PhD from the University of Miami.
Phares attracted attention in 2012 when, as an advisor to Mitt Romney's presidential bid, a Mother Jones story linked him to armed Christian factions blamed for abuses in Lebanon's civil war:
"During the 1980s, Phares, a Maronite Christian, trained Lebanese militants in ideological beliefs justifying the war against Lebanon's Muslim and Druze factions, according to former colleagues. Phares, they say, advocated the hard-line view that Lebanon's Christians should work toward creating a separate, independent Christian enclave.
A photo obtained by Mother Jones shows him conducting a press conference in 1986 for the Lebanese Forces, an umbrella group of Christian militias that has been accused of committing atrocities. He was also a close adviser to Samir Geagea, a Lebanese warlord who rose from leading hit squads to running the Lebanese Forces."
He did not immediately respond to attempts by the Post to contact him.
J. Keith Kellogg Jr.
Retired Army Lt. Gen. Kellogg is a former commander of the 82nd Airborne Division. After the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq in 2003, he served as chief operating officer for the Coalition Provisional Authority in Baghdad. He has also worked at Oracle, CACI International, an intelligence and information technology consulting firm with clients around the world, and Abraxas, a risk mitigation firm.
Kellogg was interviewed by The Washington Post in 2005 soon after he joined CACI:
"I started my career in the U.S. military. Traditionally in the military . . . you either start with a technical background or a more leadership-focused one. I took the leadership path. The scope of responsibility starts from leading about 30 people to where I finished with 14,000 people that I led and managed. You are responsible for budget, housing, feeding, training, equipping, making sure that the families are taken care of. So it's a huge management responsibility."
Kellogg did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Carter Page
Page, a longtime energy executive, told The Washington Post that he and other advisers have met with the Trump campaign. Page is a graduate of the United States Naval Academy and rose through the ranks at Merrill Lynch before founding his current firm, Global Energy Capital. He previously was a fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations where he focused on the Caspian Sea region and the economic development in former Soviet states, Carter told the Post in a phone call. He is also a fellow at the Center for National Policy in Washington and has a PhD from the University of London.
In a September 2014 article, Page appeared to blame NATO in part for provoking Russia.
While interventionist policies of the Soviet Union might have stood as the pivotal threat in Europe when Thatcher was rising to power as she argued at the time, similar aggressive policies of pushing NATO right to Russia's doorstep have instigated today's predicament.
EDITOR’S NOTE: Where did Trump dig these guys up? Off of his TV show? Never mind all the bickering within the Republican Party … his choice of foreign policy advisers is a good reason for him not to be the presidential nominee.
WILL HILLARY GET CHARGED, OR WHAT?
FBI agents have been spreading the word that Director James Comey is getting stonewalled, despite uncovering compelling evidence that Clinton broke the law
By Charles Gasparino
New York Post
March 20, 2016
FBI chief James Comey and his investigators are increasingly certain that presidential nominee Hillary Clinton violated laws in handling classified government information through her private email server, career agents say.
Some expect him to push for charges, but he faces a formidable obstacle: the political types in the Obama White House who view a Clinton presidency as a third Obama term.
With that, agents have been spreading the word, largely through associates in the private sector, that their boss is getting stonewalled, despite uncovering compelling evidence that Clinton broke the law.
Exactly what that evidence is — and how and when it was uncovered during Comey’s months-long inquiry — has not been disclosed. For the record, the FBI had no comment on the matter, and government sources say no final decision has been made.
Clinton denies she did anything wrong, claiming she had no idea she was getting classified information (a violation of federal law) on her private server during her years as Obama’s secretary of state because the documents she received contained no such headings.
And as FBI director, Comey can only recommend charges to the hacks in the Obama Justice Department. Indeed, many law enforcement officials who know the FBI chief and the bureau’s inner workings believe the evidence would have to be overwhelming for Comey to even recommend charges, much less for DOJ to pursue them.
Still, some FBI staffers suggest the probe’s at a point where Comey might quit in protest if Justice ignores a recommendation to pursue a criminal case against Clinton.
Just how close Comey is to any recommendation — whether to indict or exonerate Clinton — is difficult to know. But agents believe the probe is nearing an end. A State Department staffer who set up Clinton’s email server, for instance, was recently granted immunity from prosecution to provide Comey’s team with evidence.
“You don’t start granting people close to Clinton immunity unless you are seriously looking at charges against your target,” one former official told me.
I’m also told Comey and his team increasingly doubt Clinton’s story. Most officials know private email servers are easier to hack into than secure government servers. They also know that even documents not labeled “classified” may be top secret.
That’s why they’re supposed to be sent only through government accounts. Those who don’t follow those rules, like former CIA Director David Petraeus, have faced consequences.
Another matter for Comey & Co.: whether Clinton comingled her official State Department business with her role at the Clinton Foundation, and whether she wiped clean messages that show her using her office at State for foundation work.
Law enforcement sources also say Comey’s record as a prosecutor shows he has zero tolerance for such abuses.
As US attorney for the Southern District after the Nasdaq stock market crashed, Comey led an obstruction investigation that targeted Internet banker Frank Quattrone. That probe focused on a single (and some would say non-dispositive) sentence from a single email he appeared to approve, “Let’s clean up those files.”
Quattrone was convicted and faced several years in jail, though a successful appeal and deferred prosecution agreement with the government put the matter to rest.
Comey’s prosecution of domestic diva Martha Stewart followed a similar pattern. Stewart sold shares of a company owned by one of her friends just before a corporate announcement sent the stock into a tailspin.
But she did not go to jail for what the feds began investigating: insider trading. Instead, Comey & Co. had to settle on obstruction-of-justice charges based on allegedly misleading information Stewart gave about her trade. Even this was no slam dunk: At trial, witnesses contradicted each other. At least one of the charges in the case was dropped. (One prosecution witness later faced perjury charges over his testimony but was eventually acquitted.)
Yet in the end, Comey prevailed. Stewart was convicted and sentenced to several months in prison.
Yes, there are key differences with these cases, the biggest being political: Comey had the backing of his boss, then-President George W. Bush, to address alleged Wall Street improprieties.
FBI sources say he has no backing from President Obama and Attorney General Loretta Lynch to recommend charges against the former secretary, since a Clinton presidency may be the best chance to preserve the Obama legacy.
That leaves Comey in a bind: Does he do what is politically expedient and deny the reality that Clinton’s email server activities violated the law, or follow the evidence to wherever it takes him?
Here’s hoping he uses the same standards against Clinton as he used against Stewart and Quattrone.
EDITOR’S NOTE: Those who are looking for an indictment of Hillary are dreaming. Loretta Lynch, Obama’s Attorney General, will never allow that to happen.
By Charles Gasparino
New York Post
March 20, 2016
FBI chief James Comey and his investigators are increasingly certain that presidential nominee Hillary Clinton violated laws in handling classified government information through her private email server, career agents say.
Some expect him to push for charges, but he faces a formidable obstacle: the political types in the Obama White House who view a Clinton presidency as a third Obama term.
With that, agents have been spreading the word, largely through associates in the private sector, that their boss is getting stonewalled, despite uncovering compelling evidence that Clinton broke the law.
Exactly what that evidence is — and how and when it was uncovered during Comey’s months-long inquiry — has not been disclosed. For the record, the FBI had no comment on the matter, and government sources say no final decision has been made.
Clinton denies she did anything wrong, claiming she had no idea she was getting classified information (a violation of federal law) on her private server during her years as Obama’s secretary of state because the documents she received contained no such headings.
And as FBI director, Comey can only recommend charges to the hacks in the Obama Justice Department. Indeed, many law enforcement officials who know the FBI chief and the bureau’s inner workings believe the evidence would have to be overwhelming for Comey to even recommend charges, much less for DOJ to pursue them.
Still, some FBI staffers suggest the probe’s at a point where Comey might quit in protest if Justice ignores a recommendation to pursue a criminal case against Clinton.
Just how close Comey is to any recommendation — whether to indict or exonerate Clinton — is difficult to know. But agents believe the probe is nearing an end. A State Department staffer who set up Clinton’s email server, for instance, was recently granted immunity from prosecution to provide Comey’s team with evidence.
“You don’t start granting people close to Clinton immunity unless you are seriously looking at charges against your target,” one former official told me.
I’m also told Comey and his team increasingly doubt Clinton’s story. Most officials know private email servers are easier to hack into than secure government servers. They also know that even documents not labeled “classified” may be top secret.
That’s why they’re supposed to be sent only through government accounts. Those who don’t follow those rules, like former CIA Director David Petraeus, have faced consequences.
Another matter for Comey & Co.: whether Clinton comingled her official State Department business with her role at the Clinton Foundation, and whether she wiped clean messages that show her using her office at State for foundation work.
Law enforcement sources also say Comey’s record as a prosecutor shows he has zero tolerance for such abuses.
As US attorney for the Southern District after the Nasdaq stock market crashed, Comey led an obstruction investigation that targeted Internet banker Frank Quattrone. That probe focused on a single (and some would say non-dispositive) sentence from a single email he appeared to approve, “Let’s clean up those files.”
Quattrone was convicted and faced several years in jail, though a successful appeal and deferred prosecution agreement with the government put the matter to rest.
Comey’s prosecution of domestic diva Martha Stewart followed a similar pattern. Stewart sold shares of a company owned by one of her friends just before a corporate announcement sent the stock into a tailspin.
But she did not go to jail for what the feds began investigating: insider trading. Instead, Comey & Co. had to settle on obstruction-of-justice charges based on allegedly misleading information Stewart gave about her trade. Even this was no slam dunk: At trial, witnesses contradicted each other. At least one of the charges in the case was dropped. (One prosecution witness later faced perjury charges over his testimony but was eventually acquitted.)
Yet in the end, Comey prevailed. Stewart was convicted and sentenced to several months in prison.
Yes, there are key differences with these cases, the biggest being political: Comey had the backing of his boss, then-President George W. Bush, to address alleged Wall Street improprieties.
FBI sources say he has no backing from President Obama and Attorney General Loretta Lynch to recommend charges against the former secretary, since a Clinton presidency may be the best chance to preserve the Obama legacy.
That leaves Comey in a bind: Does he do what is politically expedient and deny the reality that Clinton’s email server activities violated the law, or follow the evidence to wherever it takes him?
Here’s hoping he uses the same standards against Clinton as he used against Stewart and Quattrone.
EDITOR’S NOTE: Those who are looking for an indictment of Hillary are dreaming. Loretta Lynch, Obama’s Attorney General, will never allow that to happen.
HERE ARE 6 ARGUNEBTS FOR AND AGAINST TRUNP … ALL ARE VALID
By Mark Davis
The Dallas Morning News
March 8, 2016
Consider the following three pro-Donald Trump statements:
1. The secret of Donald Trump’s appeal lies beyond normal politics; he has managed to attract a broad coalition that believes he can actually achieve what generations of do-nothing politicians have not;
2. The panic from his critics proves that he is onto something. The Hitler comparisons, the hand-wringing about the death of conservatism, and other wailing is mostly from establishment types petrified that they no longer run things;
3. Amid claims that he cannot beat Hillary Clinton, the magnitude of his victories and the breadth of his voter base indicate he might in fact be the strongest candidacy against her.
Now, consider the flip side:
1. Trump suffocates his attributes with a nearly daily dose of juvenile speech and behavior that is beneath the presidency;
2. His agenda contains a combination of inconsistent pronouncements and recent epiphanies which invite skepticism;
3. He speaks rarely, if at all, about the two most vital pillars of conservatism — fidelity to the Constitution and commitment to reduce the size of a bloated government.
Now, the payoff: I believe all six.
Most readers will probably approve of one list and reject the other. But what you see above is valid praise of Trump, followed by valid criticism.
Full disclosure: the second list is why I prefer Ted Cruz. But from the barbs leveled from the left to the even sharper hatreds heaped on him (and thus his voters) from unnerved Republicans, anti-Trump invective is the fad of the moment.
Derision of Trump among Republicans is the more intriguing, and it follows two main tracks. There are the conservatives who feel he is a phony who could damage the Republican brand and actually slow the path toward undoing the wrongs of the Obama years. These are people acting on principle, who are not buying what Trump is selling.
The other track is filled with establishment comfort-zoners, the tepid warriors who have seen their images diluted by the prospect of an outsider who cares not one sliver about the meekness and political correctness that have slowed them to a crawl.
Trump’s opponents are not satisfied finding alternatives and strongly backing them. They feel compelled to engage in breathless hand-wringing that has only helped him. The zenith of this mania is the “Never Trump” movement, a cult of Republicans enjoying the momentary tantrum that if he is the nominee, they will not vote for him.
Come November, once they are staring down the barrels of a Hillary Clinton presidency, with its guaranteed violence to the Constitution and additional years of soft borders and failure to fight global jihad, most will come to their senses.
Until then, brace for more anguish over how Trump will either kill the Republican party or conservatism itself.
The party might actually benefit from a cleansing rebirth from a sorry status quo. As for conservatism, one must have a dim view of it to believe it is squashable by one presidency. If Trump wins and achieves conservative goals, good for all of us. If he does not, traditional conservatives will have earned an I-told-you-so for the ages. They will mount a stronger argument for the consistency they have wished for all along. The planet will still turn on its axis.
If Trump is not your guy, back someone better. Then win or lose like a grownup. Meanwhile, remember that if the suddenly virile Republican establishment had been half this aggressive against Obama, we wouldn’t be having this drama in the first place.
The Dallas Morning News
March 8, 2016
Consider the following three pro-Donald Trump statements:
1. The secret of Donald Trump’s appeal lies beyond normal politics; he has managed to attract a broad coalition that believes he can actually achieve what generations of do-nothing politicians have not;
2. The panic from his critics proves that he is onto something. The Hitler comparisons, the hand-wringing about the death of conservatism, and other wailing is mostly from establishment types petrified that they no longer run things;
3. Amid claims that he cannot beat Hillary Clinton, the magnitude of his victories and the breadth of his voter base indicate he might in fact be the strongest candidacy against her.
Now, consider the flip side:
1. Trump suffocates his attributes with a nearly daily dose of juvenile speech and behavior that is beneath the presidency;
2. His agenda contains a combination of inconsistent pronouncements and recent epiphanies which invite skepticism;
3. He speaks rarely, if at all, about the two most vital pillars of conservatism — fidelity to the Constitution and commitment to reduce the size of a bloated government.
Now, the payoff: I believe all six.
Most readers will probably approve of one list and reject the other. But what you see above is valid praise of Trump, followed by valid criticism.
Full disclosure: the second list is why I prefer Ted Cruz. But from the barbs leveled from the left to the even sharper hatreds heaped on him (and thus his voters) from unnerved Republicans, anti-Trump invective is the fad of the moment.
Derision of Trump among Republicans is the more intriguing, and it follows two main tracks. There are the conservatives who feel he is a phony who could damage the Republican brand and actually slow the path toward undoing the wrongs of the Obama years. These are people acting on principle, who are not buying what Trump is selling.
The other track is filled with establishment comfort-zoners, the tepid warriors who have seen their images diluted by the prospect of an outsider who cares not one sliver about the meekness and political correctness that have slowed them to a crawl.
Trump’s opponents are not satisfied finding alternatives and strongly backing them. They feel compelled to engage in breathless hand-wringing that has only helped him. The zenith of this mania is the “Never Trump” movement, a cult of Republicans enjoying the momentary tantrum that if he is the nominee, they will not vote for him.
Come November, once they are staring down the barrels of a Hillary Clinton presidency, with its guaranteed violence to the Constitution and additional years of soft borders and failure to fight global jihad, most will come to their senses.
Until then, brace for more anguish over how Trump will either kill the Republican party or conservatism itself.
The party might actually benefit from a cleansing rebirth from a sorry status quo. As for conservatism, one must have a dim view of it to believe it is squashable by one presidency. If Trump wins and achieves conservative goals, good for all of us. If he does not, traditional conservatives will have earned an I-told-you-so for the ages. They will mount a stronger argument for the consistency they have wished for all along. The planet will still turn on its axis.
If Trump is not your guy, back someone better. Then win or lose like a grownup. Meanwhile, remember that if the suddenly virile Republican establishment had been half this aggressive against Obama, we wouldn’t be having this drama in the first place.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)