Gay marriage, Obamacare and the pillorying of Judge Roberts by the right. Enough foolishness.

Jeezz.. with this crew. What do you think he could do?

I like Judge Roberts.  I don’t always agree with him, but I get where he is coming from. I argue with my conservative friends who bash him for not “stopping bad legislation.”

To this I say the following- It is not his job to stop our nation from being or doing stupid things. All he can do is give us a chance, through the democratic process, to stop ourselves.  Which I argued he did when he let Obamacare stand.  He believes that no court should be an activist court. Sadly, there are occasionally five judges who do, and did so in the gay marriage dispute.  Which I will point out, Roberts vehemently disagreed with.

From his dissent;

Nowhere is the majority’s extravagant conception of judicial supremacy more evident than in its description—
and dismissal—of the public debate regarding same-sexmarriage. Yes, the majority concedes, on one side are
thousands of years of human history in every society known to have populated the planet. But on the other
side, there has been “extensive litigation,” “many thoughtful District Court decisions,” “countless studies, papers,
books, and other popular and scholarly writings,” and“more than 100”amicus briefs in these cases alone.
Ante at 9, 10, 23.
What would be the point of allowing the democratic process to go on? It is high time for the Court
to decide the meaning of marriage, based on five lawyers’ “better informed understanding” of “a liberty that remains
urgent in our own era.”
Ante, at 19.
The answer is surely there in one of those amicus briefs or studies. Those who founded our country would not recognize the majority’s conception of the judicial role. They after all risked their lives and fortunes for the precious right to govern themselves. They would never have imagined yielding that right on a question of social policy to unaccountable and unelected judges. And they certainly would not have been satisfied by a system empowering judges to override policy judgments so long as they do so after “a quite extensive discussion.” Ante, at 8. In our democracy,debate about the content of the law is not an exhaustion requirement to be checked off before courts can impose their will. “Surely the Constitution does not put either the legislative branch or the executive branch in the position of a television quiz show contestant so that when a given period of time has elapsed and a problem remains unresolved by them, the federal judiciary may press a buzzer and take its turn at fashioning a solution.” Rehnquist, The Notion of a Living Constitution, 54 Texas L. Rev. 693, 700 (1976). As a plurality of this Court explained just last year, “It is demeaning to the democratic process to presume that voters are not capable of deciding an issue ofthis sensitivity on decent and rational grounds.”
Schuette v. BAMN, 572 U. S. ___, ___ –___ (2014) (slip op., at 16–17).
The Court’s accumulation of power does not occur in a vacuum. It comes at the expense of the people. And they
know it. Here and abroad, people are in the midst of a serious and thoughtful public debate on the issue of same-
sex marriage. They see voters carefully considering same-sex marriage, casting ballots in favor or opposed, and
sometimes changing their minds. They see political leaders similarly reexamining their positions, and either
reversing course or explaining adherence to old convictions confirmed anew. They see governments and businesses
modifying policies and practice s with respect to same-sex couples, and participating active ly in the civic discourse.
They see countries overseas democratically accepting profound social change, or declining to do so. This deliberative process is making people take seriously questions that they may not have even regarded as questions before. When decisions are reached through democratic means, some people will inevitably be disappointed with the results. But those whose views do not prevail at least know that they have had their say, and accordingly are—in the tradition of our political culture—reconciled to the result of a fair and honest debate. In addition, they can gear up to raise the issue later, hoping to persuade enough on the winning side to think again. “That is exactly how our system of government is supposed to work.” Post, at 2–3 (SCALIA, J., dissenting).
But today the Court puts a stop to all that. By deciding this question under the Constitution, the Court removes it
from the realm of democratic decision. There will be consequences to shutting down the political process on an
issue of such profound public significance. Closing debate tends to close minds. People denied a voice are less likely
to accept the ruling of a court on an issue that does not seem to be the sort of thing courts usually decide. As a
thoughtful commentator observed about another issue, “The political process was moving . . . , not swiftly enough
for advocates of quick, complete change, but majoritarian institutions were listening and acting. Heavy-handed
judicial intervention was difficult to justify and appears to have provoked, not resolved, conflict.” Ginsburg, Some
Thoughts on Autonomy and Equality in Relation to Roe v. Wade , 63 N. C. L. Rev. 375, 385–386 (1985) (footnote
omitted). Indeed, however heartened the proponents of same-sex marriage might be on this day, it is worth acknowledging what they have lost, and lost forever: the opportunity to win the true acceptance that comes from
persuading their fellow citizens of the justice of their cause. And they lose this just when the winds of change
were freshening at their backs.

 

After reading this dissent, those who still want to pillory Roberts Alinsky style should take pause.  What he is saying is that SCOTUS should not be in the middle of changing the intent of the people or Congress or making laws out of whole cloth.  He is trying to not allow an activist court while herding five activists judges like bi-polar cats.

Roberts gives religion a huge push with his next comments, literally telegraphing to the religious groups that their RIGHT, as described in the first amendment is real, while a created right out of two clauses is not.  When the two are in conflict, the real right will win. One hopes. If it doesn’t, get ready for some serious civil disobedience.

Respect for sincere religious conviction has led voters and legislators in every State that has adopted same-sex
marriage democratically to include accommodations for religious practice. The majority’s decision imposing same-
sex marriage cannot, of course, create any such accommodations. The majority graciously suggests that religious
believers may continue to “advocate” and “teach” their views of marriage. Ante , at 27.
The First Amendment guarantees, however, the freedom to “exercise” religion. Ominously, that is not a word the majority uses. Hard questions arise when people of faith exercise religion in ways that may be seen to conflict with the new right to same-sex marriage—when, for example, a religious college provides married student housing only to
opposite-sex married couples, or a religious adoption agency declines to place children with same-sex married
couples. Indeed, the Solicitor General candidly acknowledged that the tax exemptions of some religious institutions would be in question if they opposed same-sex marriage. See Tr. of Oral Arg. on Question 1, at 36–38. There
is little doubt that these and similar questions will soon be before this Court. Unfortunately, people of faith can take
no comfort in the treatment they receive from the majority today. Perhaps the most discouraging aspect of today’s decisions the extent to which the majority feels compelled to sully those on the other side of the debate. The majority offers a cursory assurance that it does not intend to disparage people who, as a matter of conscience, cannot accept same-sex marriage. Ante, at 19.
That disclaimer is hard tosquare with the very next sentence, in which the majority explains that “the necessary consequence” of laws codifying the traditional definition of marriage is to “demea[n] or stigmatiz[e]” same-sex couples.
Ante, at 19.

The majority reiterates such characterizations over and over. By the majority’s account, Americans who did nothing more than follow the understanding of marriage that has existed for our entire history—in particular, the tens of millions of people who voted to reaffirm their States’ enduring definition of marriage—have acted to “lock . . . out,” “disparage,”

“disrespect and subordinate,” and inflict “[d]ignitary wounds” upon their gay and lesbian neighbors. Ante, at
17, 19, 22, 25. These apparent assaults on the character of fairminded people will have an effect, in society and in
court. See post, at 6–7 (ALITO, J., dissenting).
Moreover, they are entirely gratuitous. It is one thing for the majority to conclude that the Constitution protects a right tosame-sex marriage; it is something else to portray everyone who does not share the majority’s “better informed
understanding” as bigoted. Ante, at 19.
In the face of all this, a much different view of the Court’s role is possible. That view is more modest and restrained. It is more skeptical that the legal abilities of judges also reflect insight into moral and philosophical issues. It is more sensitive to the fact that judges are unelected and unaccountable, and that the legitimacy of their power depends on confining it to the exercise of legal judgment. It is more attuned to the lessons of history, and what it has meant for the country and Court when Justices have exceeded their proper bounds. And it is less pretentious than to suppose that while people around the world have viewed an institution in a particular way for thousands of years, the present generation and the present Court are the ones chosen to burst the bonds of that history and tradition.
* * *
If you are among the many Americans—of whateversexual orientation—who favor expanding same-sex marriage, by all means celebrate today’s decision. Celebrate the achievement of a desired goal. Celebrate the opportunity for a new expression of commitment to a partner. Celebrate the availability of new benefits. But do not
celebrate the Constitution. It had nothing to do with it.
I respectfully dissent.

 

So what is the difference now? For years the gays, who successfully piggy-backed their cause onto the black civil rights movement have been the underdog. With the ruling by the majority, the religious groups are now the minority and now the underdog.  Get ready for some serious court cases working their way up the chain. Obama has only twenty months or so to go.  Most of this damage won’t be heard under his administration or his ideology- unless we elect Hillary.

On a side note, have you notice gays who target Christians never targeted a black baker or a black church? Why? Because blacks were loyal allies to the democrats on this one. And they will learn, once again, their role as “useful idiots” will cost them dearly when the first gay couple shows up at their church doors demanding to be married. It is inevitable because that is how militant gays roll!

Now to Obamacare.  And I’ve argued this before, so I’ll be brief.  Roberts believes that SCOTUS has no right to legislate from the bench. He also believes the Court has no right to change legislation IF that legislation has been constitutionally passed.   Their only duty is to make sure any acts of the other two branches do not HARM people unconstitutionally.

Now understand, he does this with four activist liberal, and some questionably functional members… and Kennedy.

In Obamacare he twisted function of the law to match the intent of its designers.  He knew the law is crap, he’s not blind, but is it constitutionally passed crap? The answer, sadly, is yes.  I think privately he knows it will fall apart or get modified over time, but is not the duty of SCOTUS to stop us from allowing our representatives to pass bad laws.  It is their duty to stop those bad laws from violating our constitutional rights.  See Citizens United for an example.

How many people voted in 2008 presidential race  for the democrat? By group there is this.  By totals there is this.  There is a great simple interactive graph at the NY times that shows how they voted in the primaries, showing who voted for Clinton or Obama, which was a harbinger of what was going to happen to McCain- arguably Hillary’s male doppelganger.

Then they threw up Obamacare care, pushed the mess through with some shenanigans, and Obama signed it.  Maybe hardball politics but constitutional. If you’ll note, no Republicans sued because the dems cheated.

Sixty-nine million people voted for Obama and the dems.  Blame them.

Five hundred thirty seven elected federal office holders were in power when it passed.  Blame them.

A number of states accepted their fate eagerly and created the exchanges.  Blame them.

Other lower judges split over the same constitutional issues.  Blame them.

Bureaucrats succumbed without a fight.  Blame them.

The media lied about Obamacare from the start.  Please blame them.

And four other justices jumped at the chance to push it through for activists reasons.  Blame them.

Roberts believes it is not his job or SCOTUS job to stop us for voting for corrupt fools and then letting those same fools make bad law.  He gave us that chance in 2012. He will, and has stepped in, when those laws offend the rights of citizens.  See Heller and Hobby Lobby.

We blew it. Sixty-five million gave Obama four more years, during which THIS happened. So..hello? For those of you who stayed home in protest- blame yourself.  Then LEARN from your mistake.

He has encouraged religious groups to come to the court to seek protection when, and it will be when, the governments strike them.

And I believe he will defend those rights.  Getting four others to join him is going to be iffy.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Posted in politics | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

CAIR and the Jedi mind trick on the FBI, “there are no terrorists here.”

This came to me when I was watching the Kelly File interview of the surviving woman of the Alton Nolen beheading attack in Oklahoma.  It was funny because just the day before that I had wondered if there were any updates to the attack. I Googled it and found nothing since 2014.

Nothing.  He was arrested, everybody moved on.  Why?  Partially because the federal government works hard to avoid dealing with domestic terrorists.  Since the MSM is in its pocket, they do the same.  Nolen was pushed out to the public as just another angry black guy with revenge on his mind for being suspended.  Another criminal black.  Which I think is just lazy and frankly a little racist.  What does that mean exactly?  They can’t help it?  That if you are a criminal black guy, it is expected that you end up someday beheading women in anger?  Sad.

Truth is, Alton Nolen was a recent and ardent convert to Islam. A “Jailhouse Jihadi” to be exact. He attended a mosque where some pretty radical things were spoken.  He Facebooked  and supported terrorists acts across the globe, including beheadings.  THIS is Alton Nolen.  Witnesses to the attack, including the woman, said he kept shouting things in Arabic ending with Allah Akbar.  Not for nothing pal, but…. sounds a little terroristy to me.

 

Nolen at the mosque. Uh… one check mark here, I think?

So why did the FBI, after recovering so much information suddenly do a Frank Drebin and say “nothing to see here, move along.”   A lot of it has to do with how Muslims have managed to change the definition of terrorism within the federal government and how that makes the FBI react to what individual agents may think is a terrorist attack.  Here is the Jedi mind trick CAIR pulled on the FBI.  “There are no terrorists here.”

Terrorism is defined in the U.S. by the Code of Federal Regulations as: “..the unlawful use of force and violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives.” (28 C.F.R. Section 0.85)

This is a broad definition but allows for a limiting of defined terror attacks by opinion, not by the facts of the event.

Further domestic terrorism is defined as this.

• Domestic terrorism is the unlawful use, or threatened use, of force or violence by a group or individual based and operating entirely within the United States or its territories without foreign direction committed against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives.

So why isn’t Nolen a domestic terrorist and Dylan Roof is?  Are neither terrorists or both?  Nolen was angry, Roof was angry.  Nolen felt a certain group was causing his anger, so did Roof.  Nolen targeted and killed members of that certain group while shouting why he was doing it as justification.  So did Roof.

Yet….

Right now the FBI, that prefers to monitor terrorism until the act happens or is about to happen, is starting to round people up.  Unusual and maybe a reaction to the fear of the approaching July 4th holiday.   For them to jump means they know something we don’t. Like maybe they need to get back to catching bad guys and not pleasing the PC gods.

Good luck with that.

 

 

 

 
Posted in politics | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Politicians refuse to talk about race, because there are no comfortable answers. So they blame a flag.

At this point, even a moderately intelligent child would go “WTF? The flag did it?”  At least that would be the takeaway of this if you listened to the MSM and the shallow politicians in this nation.  The flag did it.  At some point you just throw up your hands and give up.

This did it? Nothing else? No alternate possibilities? Come on. You aren’t even trying anymore!

Here is the sad fact, Senator Pinckney of South Carolina was a advocate for many causes- many liberal, a member and spokesman for the AME church and one can assume a known factor in race issues in South Carolina.  He was also the first black man to be targeted for being those things since MLK.  I repeat, he was the FIRST black man targeted since MLK.

He wasn’t killed because of a flag. He wasn’t killed because he was black.  There are plenty of blacks running around Roof could have killed, probably standing on every street corner in certain parts of South Carolina, so it wasn’t his race or his color or lack of opportunity.  It was because of who HE was and what he represented.

Here is his wiki. Oddly short.   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clementa_C._Pinckney

Here is a short Youtube interview with Henry Gates.  (Do you remember him?  Yep, arrested by Cambridge police, commented on by Obama and part of the “Beergate” thing. Obama’s first of many attempts to broad brush all police institutionalized racists.)

 

Pinckney takes the time in this short interview to talk about the blacks’ role in politics and how they had an obligation to influence the political sphere.  He is right.  They have a role, just like everyone else, but not the role of shutting out political debate by using Political Correctness along the lines of “If you criticize me, you are a racists” kind of thing.  Because without a voice, people tend to find other ways to protest.

Pinckney highlights a few names in his talk, Richard H Cain and Robert Smalls . Both South Carolina historical figures playing a role in black freedom during the Civil War and the founding of the AME church in South Carolina.

(Smalls is interesting reading.  He apparently, as a slave, stole a transport ship and sailed it, along with his crew and their families into the North during the Civil War, giving the North the maps of the mines and defensive layout of Charleston Harbor.)

Pinckney was an educated, intelligent, loyal democrat who worked to change the landscape of South Carolina in favor of his people.

Dylan Roof disagreed with his efforts and shot him for it.

Because of Political Correctness, this act is kicked under the rug and everybody starts saying “if only we could get rid of the flag things would better. ”    Why?

Because if the politicians would push political correctness aside and ask why is it that we cannot talk to each other OUTSIDE political correctness, certain hard truths would arise.

Nobody wants to talk about the eight hundred pound angry, black, armed and violent (and increasingly Islamic) young man  in the room.  Why? Because they know how he got there, they know he is partially their creation, and they do – not – know – how – to – stop – him!

That guy (or girl) is not Pinckney, Pinckney rose above all of that, he was part of the talented ten percent W.E. B. Dubois spoke about.  But did Pinckney address this issue honestly, or did he kick the can down the road, blaming the usual suspects?

On the other end, we have in a Washington Post article, Karen Attiah, stating that millennials are racists as their parents.  That’s a lot to chew on.  And by and large not true. Especially when she lets her veneer slip a little with this comment-

The shooting suspect in Charleston has been identified as Dylann Roof, a white 21-year-old. He was arrested (peacefully, one should add) at a traffic stop. Many will argue about what words we will use to describe Roof, whether he should be described as a mentally disturbed kid (a description rarely applied when the alleged perpetrator isn’t a white male) or a rational adult responsible for his alleged actions. His age matters, but not for the reasons you may think.

Obviously, her position is he was arrested peacefully- because he’s white- not that he gave up (unlike Mike Brown and the recent cop killer in New Orleans).  Or, that his actions were from a mentally disturbed mind- because he is white- but if a black youth shoots up a group of people, as they did in Detroit and Chicago recently, those black youths are thugs.  (BTW- they are.) In this short paragraph, At the same time,  Attiah signals to us her worldview and makes my case about why we can’t be honest about race in America.

Where Attiah goes wrong- well she goes wrong in several areas- but the one about millennials is this; she thinks Roof existed  in a vacuum.  That his world is our world.  Which is not true.  Roof lives in a young world FILLED with racial strife and violence, much of it promoted by certain leaders in the black communities.  Look at Ferguson and Baltimore. Look at how blacks are killing blacks en masse, yet the black leaders somehow find a way to blame “the white guy.”  Even in the Baltimore riots, it wasn’t long before someone tried to lay the blame of sixty years of black democratic rule on the white Republican governor who was in office for five months.  Then there is others like Roof, but of a different color- like Eric Sheppard.  He issued his own manifesto. Which, by the way, reminded me of this:

Here is Sheppard’s first paragraph…I think-

Let me Clear the Air and Set the Record Straight once and For All on Questions Inquiries Suggestions and otherwise in regards to this Entire Ordeal. We Will Determine who Is Truly Guilty and Who is Truly Innocent Throughout the Course of this Literary Revelation. Many still question the possibility of my surrendering to the people who call themselves “authorities”. To Give you a Simple Answer, No! I will Not Turn Myself Over to Any White Man and I will Ensure this With my Own Will to Self-Defend and To Annihilate those Who Come After Me. These same people who you all know as “legal officials/police officers/sheriff/detectives” or any other falsified label of ‘authority’ only know wickedness and devilish behavior. It SHOULD be clear by now that this is a White Supremacist Nation Owned, Operated, and Controlled by White People. Yes it is ALL white people who help to maintain this wicked nation to a greater or lesser degree given the default status aided to them by virtue or vice of White Privilege. Thus all functionalities, codes, rules, policies, curriculums, cultures and social criteria created or concocted therein are Meant to Benefit Whites ALONE AND EXCLUSIVELY! The recent yet ongoing hideous & disgusting rash of white supremacist brutality (police brutality) as well as All other forms of European Aggression on Afrikan people here in Amerikkka; as well as the emanating circumstances that have precipitated into a sick/vile pattern show CLEARLY that “white” people can and will escape Just Punishment (Justice) so long as it is In alignment and Cooperation with the White Supremacist Agenda of Afrikan Genetic Annihilation of ANY form. Extreme Cognitive Dissonance causes ALL of You white people to Deny this TRUTH however when Afrikan People Drop the ‘Realistics’, Kick the Ballistics and Present to You the Statistics Recorded and Documented by Your Own white mathematicians and social scientist you revert to weak racist and ignorant “justifications” to affirm your false sense of correctness in the continuity of your White Supremacist Power System Structure (Racism).

(On a side note, Sheppard, even after threatening to fight to the end, was arrested for having a gun on campus and terror threats by the police- because he gave up.  As he should have.  See, how that works?)

Worse, and where I wish I could get Attiah to pay attention to, is the actual lives young  kids live, especially young isolated white kids who can’t defend themselves.  A  world where beating up young white kids, or whites in general have become a pastime for far too many young angry black kids.  THIS is their reality.  Spend some time with Colin Flahtery on his Youtube videos and books and you will see a totally different version of the world.   A world nobody wants to talk about. This Kroger attack is a perfect example.  As is the case in College Town Texas nobody heard about.

THIS IS ROOF’S WORLD!

As highlighted in the intro video on Flaherty’s  YouTube website, one black commentator says that if the police patrolled white neighborhoods like they did black, the crime rate would be as high. Uhh, no it wouldn’t it.   That is a “blind to reality” statement.  In predominately white neighborhoods crime would be reported all the time, especially if at the levels and types of crimes we see in the inner city.  White people like cops showing up and arresting bad guys.  The “snitches get stitches” rule does not apply.   Further, crimes don’t occur because of the police being there, the police show up because the crimes occur.  Jeezz…

Roof said part of his “awakening” was the Zimmerman trial.  If this made him angry, he was in good company.  Many people across the nation were horrified to see how the “state” abused Zimmerman for political purposes, as it did Darren Wilson and others, oddly during national election cycles.   People were angry, but there was no political outlet or justice.  Corey is still working. Scott is still the governor.  Holder retired with honors.  Obama was reelected.  So, the life of an innocent man counts as nothing.  That stings.  And people remember.

But the real question is this; Did Pinckney address any of what we know is the reality, that inner cities are fragmenting, that there is a Balkanization going on within America,  even in colleges, driven by political forces? Did he stand up and say enough!? Or did he play a part in the effort- at least in the warped view of his assassin Dylan Roof?

Regardless, once again we have missed a chance to really address issues that could make our nation better, and we’ve collectively blamed a flag from a long dead era.  While these flags continue to foment violence.

black nationalist flag rally

 

 

Hmm… where’s a good reporter from the Washington Post when you need one?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Posted in politics | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

Discussing Waco, RICO and the case with my MENSA bright buddy.

I decided to give my old partner a call about the Waco case. He understandings  RICO in and out and would help me make sure I was on the right path. He had been in Europe and didn’t really know what happened, so he spoke to me from a more technical aspect.

The trouble with talking with him is when you open his brain you hope to find a three chapter novella and end up with a ten chapter text book!  All the while hoping to remember what all he said and why he said it.

So let me get to it, and as this process works out I’ll probably be adding to the post.

RICO is a statute designed to target groups.  Whether that group is small, loosely knit, old, new, hidden or operating in the open.  The concept is to link separate acts by individual members into a whole by stating that each “predicate” act is somehow part of an effort to service the whole.

For example, a loosely knit low level group would have been Charlie Manson and the “family.”  I am watching a very good show on NBC called “Aquarius” with David Duchovny.  In it he plays a detective in 1967 that ends up dealing with Manson and the “Family” prior to the Tate murder.  That prompted me to go back and revisit the history of Manson, especially when I saw California employing the “conspiracy to commit” statute to round up the whole group including Manson, who gave the orders but didn’t participate in the crimes.

In essence, that is RICO.

To keep this in some kind of order, I’m going to apply three areas. Again, I understand the basics, my buddy the details, and I’m sure there are far more educated professionals out there- including state and federal prosecutors- who can do a better job than me.  What I want to do is boil it down and apply it to Waco so people visiting the site can get a handled on the “why’s and how’s” of the charging process.

Principle 1: What is RICO or more specifically how does it apply?  The RICO goal is simple- to be able to attack an organization in such a way as to identify and link individuals as a whole so they can be charged that way.  Simply put, if LE (law enforcement which includes police and prosecutors) can identify a group of individuals acting in concert in order to further a goal of the group they can called it a criminal organization and pursue RICO.

The Bandidos and Cossacks fit that description.  In fact, one of the identifying criteria is the common dress and actions- vests and being bikers.   In this case, it seems the individuals were targeted because of the biker affiliation.  You can make the same argument for Crips, Bloods and the BGDs.

Image

This is a gang. Not a Glee episode. Similar identifying colors or symbols are part of the identification process.

So is this. The question is if this is a criminal gang.

All RICOS contain predicate actsNot all identified organizations are criminal. To be identified as criminal they must, well commit certain criminal acts.  The Boys Scouts and your local church are organizations, they just aren’t CRIMINAL organizations.  RICO lists what it demands must be certain types of predicate acts that can be used as underlying charges.  Not all crimes fit, many are left out. If any member of that group commits two listed acts in the furtherance of the group that person can be charged with RICO. From Wiki:

RICO predicate offenses

Under the law, the meaning of racketeering activity is set out at 18 U.S.C. § 1961. As currently amended it includes:

For example, if biker A commits an extortion and then commits the attempted murder of a rival gang (over territory which equates to profit for the group), he has his two predicate acts and is inside the RICO wheel.   These predicate acts should occur over time, up to ten years, but don’t have to.  In this case, you may see the prosecutors file predicate acts from the incident.

However, if a biker hates his neighbor and shoots him out of spite, unless other bikers are involved in the crime, chances are the murder charge would be held as an individual act and not fall under RICO and would not strengthen the case.

The feds have their predicate acts.  The states have theirs.  Each state can be different.  Each state’s rules of discovery, confinement, thresholds of probable cause can also differ.  I know when I was working I would run into bad guys from other states and they would tell me what happened to them “back home.”  There is a big difference between each state. Sometimes we forget that when we apply what we think can be done to what is being done.

Principle 2: The Rumsfeld rule of “unknowns.”  Rules of discovery and procedure differ from state to state and from the states to the federal government. My buddy related some of his experiences with the feds in court with certain filings by defense attorneys. I had told him about the filings we were seeing and he laughed.  “Of course they did.  They are losing the other hearings dealing with bail and probable cause, so they file these.”  He went on to explain he would fully expect the defense counsels to file.

The problem as he sees it was the tremendous impact the arrests had on the system.  He said that most defense attorneys have no experience in federal law or RICO issues.  Most are misdemeanor DUI types who  went up on the Internet, did a little studying and think they can walk into a federal court and swing a motion around.  It usually pisses off the judge and amuses the prosecution.  Like I said, RICO is a different kettle of fish.

If the feds take the case, and they might for a few reasons, things will get even muddier.  Their “discovery” isn’t much. I don’t like that, but it is what it is.  I asked him why they didn’t take it, and he said simply they may just not want to mess with it.  They can funnel their intel into the state case, provide support and simply let the State have it. If the State wins, they are happy. If the State’s case is weak and they lose, the feds will simply point to the State and blame them.  Win-win.

What does that mean to the Bandidos.  We are in a Rumsfeld world. We don’t know what the feds know, but we can assume they have had the Bandidos and the rest under surveillance at some level.  My buddy gave an example.  “Let’s say the bikers gangs meet in other locations.  The feds photograph and record those meetings.  Biker Bob is seen at three  earlier meetings and at the Waco event.  He can’t say it was an accident he showed up there.  He’s identified as part of an identified gang.  Principle 1 is met- for him.  That has to go on for all the people arrested.  They will claim they have no idea what happened or why they were there.  Prosecutors have to prove different.

My friend went on to say if the feds have an ongoing investigation that doesn’t mean they were planning to arrest anyone right away and maybe this event pulled the pin early for them.  If so, and there is intelligence, Title 3 wiretaps and CIs or undercovers, the feds will provide the information but will not reveal HOW they got that information. Where I’m from, keeping a CI’s identity safe is hard at the State level.  At the federal level they are very reluctant to give up their sources.  And I assume the rules of FEDERAL law favors that.

What that means is WE may never know the who, only the what.

Principle 3:   Why did everybody go to jail.  His answer was a little different than mine. I felt the police and the prosecutors had no choice. All the victims, evidence and suspects/witnesses were right there in an acre or so of crime scene. Extraordinary times calls for extraordinary responses.

He gave another take- one of continued violence and mayhem.  What if they arrested a few, let the rest go and the bikers took up positions around the area, renting motel rooms and staying close.  Then there would be further confrontations and revenge retaliations between the two groups, within Waco, endangering innocent civilians.

Sometimes people forget our other duty as policemen which is to maintain the peace and order in our community.  That is paramount.  If the police let the bikers go and a dozen more shootings happened and innocent people were killed it would be the fault of the police for not stopping the threat.

I agree with him.  It isn’t like the bikers aren’t capable of and not willing to kill each other in front of innocent people, and endangering those people.  In fact, that is exactly what happened in Waco. So the police may have swept up the bikers much like police do rioters.  They have no clue which one threw the brick through a window of a business or started the fire. But they know if they don’t round them up, the brick throwing and arson will continue, and that cannot happen.

 

 

 

 

Posted in politics | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

The end result of of the liberals running out of targets. The snake eating its tail.

Snake Eating Itself Symbol | The Cult of Eternity’s Path – Steal this Snake Cult: Tattoo Ideas, Carl Jung, Serpent Tattoo, Ouroboros Knots, Tattoo Inspiration, Serpent Ouroboros Tattoo, The Cult, Knots Tattoo, Snakes

Progressive ideology eventually eats itself.

It begins.

We all know what happened to the “useful idiots” that blindly supported Communism and Nazism.  In the end, when the leaders of the movement decided they didn’t need them anymore, they killed the useful idiots off.

It makes sense. If you have an influential voice convincing people to follow the monstrous path you want them to go down, it only makes sense you cannot risk those useful idiots realizing at a later date what a horrible choice it was and speaking out against you.  So you kill them off.

In America, as we speak, the beginning of this implosion is making itself known.  Brian Williams was not the first, and he will not be the last.   With trigger warnings and micro aggression, it looks like a race to the bottom when it comes to who can be offended first and seek revenge the most.   The trouble is most decent people are also smart enough to keep their heads down as the roving bands of PC elitists roam the battlefield shooting the wounded, so they end up chewing on their own tails.

In the McKinney incident, where a black teen invited others into a private pool, as a way to make money- and it turned into a flash mob problem, there was one black man who stood up and said it wasn’t racial, but rather another example of kids acting out, that man was immediately targeted as some kind of sell out.  Even though he is black.

Now over at Gateway Pundit it is revealed Obama is wanting to move urban people into rich suburban neighborhoods under diversity.

Now this…
This week the Obama administration moved forward with regulations designed to help diversify America’s wealthier neighborhoods.
The Hill reported, via NewsAlert:

The Obama administration is moving forward with regulations designed to help diversify America’s wealthier neighborhoods, drawing fire from critics who decry the proposal as executive overreach in search of an “unrealistic utopia.”

A final Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) rule due out this month is aimed at ending decades of deep-rooted segregation around the country.

The regulations would use grant money as an incentive for communities to build affordable housing in more affluent areas while also taking steps to upgrade poorer areas with better schools, parks, libraries, grocery stores and transportation routes as part of a gentrification of those communities.

“HUD is working with communities across the country to fulfill the promise of equal opportunity for all,” a HUD spokeswoman said. “The proposed policy seeks to break down barriers to access to opportunity in communities supported by HUD funds.”

Okay, that is just some seriously funny shit right there. Those rich people gave him money, votes, blind support and for their efforts they are going to wake up one day and look out the window to see Tanisha and D-Dog pulling into THEIR own driveway next door!  Worse, the government wants citizens to live where and how the government wants them to live.  And those useful idiots STILL support him!

But, says Stanley, the underlying thrust of the rule change is more revolutionary than forcing racial and ethnic diversity on the suburbs:

The new HUD rule is really about changing the way Americans live. It is part of a broader suite of initiatives designed to block suburban development, press Americans into hyper-dense cities, and force us out of our cars. Government-mandated ethnic and racial diversification plays a role in this scheme, yet the broader goal is forced “economic integration.”

The ultimate vision is to make all neighborhoods more or less alike, turning traditional cities into ultra-dense Manhattans, while making suburbs look more like cities do now. In this centrally-planned utopia, steadily increasing numbers will live cheek-by-jowl in “stack and pack” high-rises close to public transportation, while automobiles fall into relative disuse.

To help us understand this vision, Stanley turns to San Francisco and its “Plan Bay Area” program:

Essentially, Plan Bay Area attempts to block the development of any new suburbs, forcing all population growth over the next three decades into the existing “urban footprint” of the region. The plan presses 70-80 percent of all new housing and 66 percent of all business expansion into 150 or so “priority development areas” (PDAs), select neighborhoods near subway stations and other public transportation facilities. This scheme will turn up to a quarter of the region’s existing neighborhoods–many now dotted with San Francisco’s famously picturesque, Victorian-style single-family homes–into mini-Manhattans jammed with high-rises and tiny apartments. The densest PDAs will be many times denser than Manhattan.

Okay, I’m really laughing now.  Someone should keep a list of the imploding victims.

Welcome to Obama’s world you idiots. Come on in, the boiling water is fine.

Posted in politics | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

Getting a handle on the last effort of the Obama administration- defanging the police- by rule and race.

Waco.  Cleveland. Ferguson. Baltimore.  All different events, all different situations, all have one similar theme running through them.  The police are the bad guys.

There has been much written about the “problem” of the police becoming too powerful and too lethal.  Some situations do in fact support the theory that the police are  no longer peace officers, but lethal law enforcement officers who will shoot a citizens for little or no reason.

The trouble with identifying the reason for the problem is it is covered up in political, radical ideology, and a hatred for the rule of law and civil society- mostly pushed by the people who are in the cross-hairs of that civil society or lovers of “chaos” and anarchy as drivers of change, and by a group of people (liberals) who now realize their theories and policies have created the environment where crime and amoral behavior abounds. (No, not  the Clinton White house…okay, yeah maybe that too.)

What is really troubling is Barack Obama represents all three sets. He comes from a communist upbringing (didn’t say he was one, but he was sure influenced by them) which loved the concept of revolution to drive fundamental change- think Mao.  He is a black man with a huge chip on his shoulder.  He is a liberal who is intent on changing the face of our society and refuses to admit his people (liberals) caused a lot of this problem.

And he has fellow travelers.  Eric Holder is one. So is Loretta Lynch. They come from a stable of educated blacks who have been taught and believe in a different version of America where all their ills are caused by others.

True believers

 

 

 

 

 

 

They are hellbent on changing the way America handles those who cannot conform rather than having those who cannot conform change their ways to be part of America.

Or put this way- This

versus – this

They way they are going to do it is the same way Michelle Obama has compromised school lunches. If you take the money, you have to follow the rules.

WILLIAMSON, W.V. – Students and parents are rallying to the defense of a teacher who is accused of violating federal school snack rules.

The Williamson PreK-8 teacher, who was not identified, would give her students “wrapped candy” as a reward for their hard work and good behavior.

Because the practice was an alleged violation of the federal rules championed by first lady Michelle Obama, Mingo County Schools Director of Child Nutrition Kay Maynard “placed a call to officials at the West Virginia Department of Education (WVDE) to report the incident,” the Williamson Daily News reports.

Maynard also spoke to Williamson PreK-8 principal Shannon Blackburn, telling him about the possibility of a monetary fine for the teacher.

When news spread, parents and student mobilized, collecting pennies to pay the potential fine on the teacher’s behalf.

Administrators at the WVDE decided the teacher’s violation was not a “deliberate attempt” to break Michelle Obama’s rules and said instead of fining the teacher, they required the department to “develop a corrective action plan to include training on child nutrition policies.”

By participating in the National School Lunch Program, the school district must adhere to edicts handed down from Washington, D.C.

Those rules state that food, such as “wrapped candy,” cannot be used as “a reward and it cannot be withheld as a punishment.”

Administrators with Mingo County Schools claim the federal rules were developed “to help educators encourage students to make healthy decisions.”

If they’re not strictly followed, schools can be required to return federal school lunch money, be penalized for state and federal food service programs, or make all schools in the county vulnerable to similar punishment.

Imagine that rigid set of rules being applied by federal bureaucrats to local law enforcement. And those rules will simply fit whatever agenda that group has, like how the EPA or the IRS or the DOJ makes changes to fit their needs, not ours.  So if the police refuse to follow a rule or violate it, they can be fined, charged, arrested, and prosecuted.

What kind of rules do you think Obama wants to enact?

The country’s first black president called for a nationwide mobilization to reverse inequalities and said the cause will remain a mission for the rest of his presidency and his life. “There are consequences to indifference,” Obama said.

Helping launch a foundation to assist young minorities, Obama said the catalysts of protests in Ferguson, Missouri, and in Baltimore were the deaths of young black men and “a feeling that law is not always applied evenly in this country.”

“They experience being treated differently by law enforcement — in stops and in arrests, and in charges and incarcerations,” Obama said. “The statistics are clear, up and down the criminal justice system. There’s no dispute.”

The new organization, My Brother’s Keeper Alliance, is an outgrowth of Obama’s year-old My Brother’s Keeper initiative, which has focused on federal government policies and grants designed to increase access to education and jobs.

While the effort predates the tensions in Baltimore that erupted after the death of Freddie Gray while in police custody, the significance of the new private-sector alliance has been magnified by the spotlight the riots placed on low-income minority neighborhoods.

“Folks living in those communities, and especially young people living in those communities, could use some help to change those odds,” Obama said.

Obama repeatedly drove home the point during his 10-hour visit to New York, echoing the same themes from his speech at Lehman College in the Bronx to high-dollar Democratic Party fundraisers in Manhattan to an appearance on CBS’ “Late Show with David Letterman.”

“For far too long, for decades, we have a situation where too many communities don’t have a relationship of trust with the police,” he told Letterman. He said he wants young minority men in particular to know “we’re going to invest in you before you have problems with the police, before there’s the kind of crisis we see in Baltimore.”

(On a side note, this is going to be Obama’s “Clinton Foundation” deal.  Which is why he and Jarrett are working behind the scenes to undermine Hillary.  They want the old white guys out, and the new cool hip black couple in.)

Other politicians have been even more direct, pointing out the best way to handle black criminals is to get out of their way.  One politician, and I can’t find the quote, said the problem of police shooting suspects is when the suspect runs, the police chase them. And when they jump over a fence, the police jump over that fence and land on top of them. And end up fighting over the gun, and the police shoot the suspect. So  the answer is quit chasing them.

I mean it would work, but is that the solution? Everybody would run then.  In cars, on foot, on bikes. Shoot it would be “Halt police!” and then “shit” and walk back to your car.

This is part of what the FBI director commented on. An honest but cautious statement.

“I worry that this incredibly important and difficult conversation about race and policing has become focused entirely on the nature and character of law enforcement officers when it should also be about something much harder to discuss,” Comey said. “Debating the nature of policing is very important but I worry that it has become an excuse at times to avoid doing something harder.”

Comey also name checked the deaths of Eric Garner, Michael Brown as well as slain police officers NYPD officers Wenjian Liu and Rafael Ramos, a reference to what has been a bloody and tumultuous year between minority communities and law enforcement.

The speech before students at Georgetown University was unusual for Comey and the FBI, which usually only narrowly discusses race issues when dealing with civil rights investigations.

This agency in particular for decades had a conflicted relationship with African Americans, spending years monitoring and investigating civil rights leaders including Rev. Martin Luther King on suspicion of ties to communism.

“Police officers on patrol in our nation’s cities often work in environments where a hugely disproportionate percentage of street crime is committed by young men of color. Something happens to people of good will working in that environment,” Comey said.

As a result, he said, officers often treat young black men, who may look like others they have locked up, differently from young white men walking down the same street.

“We need to come to grips with the fact that this behavior complicates the relationship between police and communities they serve,” Comey said.

He is right.  He’s looking for a new job, but he’s right!  Something does happen when you go to work in a combat zone for thirty years.  Seriously. What else could happen?

Here is one protestor in Baltimore.  Study the photo. She is supposed to be a disadvantaged person striking back. Notice she has a rock in one hand, and an Iphone in the other.  Her clothes are clean and her hair is made up- hundreds of dollars to do.  Her skin tone indicates she isn’t all that black.  Many NE cities have diverse generational backgrounds.  Yet, she is throwing a rock at a person she doesn’t know, or have any personal conflict with so she can prove she’s “down with the cause.”   This is what is torturing our society.

And Obama approves.

Iphone and a hair weave? Where’s the poverty?

What many on the left want is to have the police “excuse” this behavior BASED on her race.  Or somehow have a different set of rules and polices based on race. That, in my opinion, is racist in of itself. And worse, will cause people who need some kind of guidance to further spin out of control.

And the police officer on the street will be unable to function.  We all know what federal rules look like.  Imagine trying to apply something like the IRS tax code to a street situation that is fluid and ongoing!  Jeezz! The officers will simply refuse to engage to protect their jobs, and their bosses will support them.

And the streets will burn.  (PS- love the shirt in the photo)

Rally Held In Baltimore Day After Charges Announced Against Officers Involved In Freddie Gray Death

Sunday The Wall Street Journal crunched the numbers on America’s startling new crime wave (after a two-decade decline) and listed seven cities that have seen noticeable, and sometimes shocking, spikes in murders and other violent crimes.

Seven cities were worthy of note. To no one’s surprise, all seven of those cities are run by Democrats. With the exception of New York City, Democrats have enjoyed one-party rule in these cities for decades. [emphasis is mine]:

Gun violence is up more than 60% compared with this time last year, according to Baltimore police, with 32 shootings over Memorial Day weekend. May has been the most violent month the city has seen in 15 years.

The last Baltimore Republican mayor left office in 1967.

In Milwaukee, homicides were up 180% by May 17 over the same period the previous year. Through April, shootings in St. Louis were up 39%, robberies 43%, and homicides 25%. “Crime is the worst I’ve ever seen it,” said St. Louis Alderman Joe Vacarro at a May 7 City Hall hearing.

Milwaukee’s last Republican mayor left office in 1906.

The last Republican mayor of St, Louis left office in 1949.

Murders in Atlanta were up 32% as of mid-May. Shootings in Chicago had increased 24% and homicides 17%. Shootings and other violent felonies in Los Angeles had spiked by 25%; in New York, murder was up nearly 13%, and gun violence 7%.

Democrat mayors have run Atlanta since 1942.

Chicago hasn’t seen a Republican mayor since 1931.

Rudy Giuliani, the first Republican mayor of New York in nearly 30 years, cleaned up the city. He left office in 2001. The crime spike in that city can be directly connected to Bill de Blasio, who campaigned in 2013 on ending Guiliani’s (and Michael Bloomberg’s) most effective policing techniques.

Those citywide statistics from law-enforcement officials mask even more startling neighborhood-level increases. Shooting incidents are up 500% in an East Harlem [New York] precinct compared with last year; in a South Central Los Angeles police division, shooting victims are up 100%.

 

And it is not even August yet!

Welcome to the Mao taught Obama learned theory of “Chaos.”

 

 

 

 

 

 

Posted in politics | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Even the Egyptians are laughing. A short but hilarious video of how little they think of Obama.

The table slapping is great!  I must be part Egyptian! One claims his eight year old daughter has bigger biceps!   It is a reminder the entire world watches us- all the time.

 

Posted in politics | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Pulling the pin on the last grenade. The Left won’t admit it, but their “progressive way” is over.

For a long time the Left in America has been playing with social engineering – we all know this to be true.  Some things might work a little. However, the vast, VAST majority of things do not, yet we are prevented from saying so.  As many know, political correctness is a disease that kills debate, and often prevents honest discussions that could lead to positive solutions.

In one area, the liberal effort to change a society, that of black America, has been a horrible experience for everyone in it and affected by it.  I could cite the stats on single parents and troubled kids or how black men have walked away from their responsibilities as almost a matter of some kind of honor and acclaim.  How fathering six kids from six women is a sign of accomplishment rather than disaster.  Or how generational welfare and affirmative action has not raised up that critical mass as much as hoped.  Yes, there is a growing black middle class, but it should be far farther along with the trillions spent on funding it. And as we have witnessed a number of those who did “make it out” are just as angry and suffering from victimhood as those still stuck inside.  So what was accomplished after all?

So what happened?  As some have said, it is like we have two problems; 1. After all the effort and the excuses and the programs and the promises we are still in trouble as a culture and a nation partially due to the unyielding, entrenched subculture, mostly within our liberal cities, that has metastasized into a very dangerous element in our society.  2. And, many of our leaders on both sides of the spectrum are unable to admit we are simply out of good ideas and plans.

Because of this conundrum, our leaders have decided what most people do when given a choice to admit – they keep lying and making excuses.  This is akin to the soldier in the trenches down to his last grenade, realizing he can’t get out, and decides  “F it” and pulls the pin.  He knows it won’t make a difference, he’s just out of any other options.

Obama and his ilk are that soldier.  His “grenade” is the new policy of letting certain elements of our society get away with uncivilized behavior because dealing with it and stopping it is “racists” and “police abuse.” That policy is based on a theory of restorative justice.  I’ve read up on the theory, it would work IF the offender could be made to give a shit.  Trouble with that is, by and large, the offender doesn’t.  From Wiki:

According to John Braithwaite (2004), restorative justice is:

…a process where all stakeholders affected by an injustice have an opportunity to discuss how they have been affected by the injustice and to decide what should be done to repair the harm. With crime, restorative justice is about the idea that because crime hurts, justice should heal. It follows that conversations with those who have been hurt and with those who have inflicted the harm must be central to the process.

The process of restorative justice necessitates a shift in responsibility for addressing crime. In a restorative justice process, the citizens who have been affected by a crime must take an active role in addressing that crime. Although law professionals may have secondary roles in facilitating the restorative justice process, it is the citizens who must take up the majority of the responsibility in healing the pains caused by crime.[4

My first thought when reading this- “WTF?”  The Conservative Treehouse has an example of this kind of behavior in one of their articles.  Take the time.

Here are some more:

Again, I’m thinking none of the  kids in these videos can be made to feel “responsible.”  Why? Because if they did, they wouldn’t do it in the first place.  Right? Sometimes it is all about entitlement, immediate self gratification and victimhood.  Remember this essay?

Over in the educational field, Oakland reveals how the feds want to deal with minority students acting out in class. Now remember, classes only function when students are behaving.  But because certain students are the results of generations of welfare, single mothers, projects, no discipline, gangs, Rap culture, etc., etc., it is now apparent they CANNOT behave so the teachers have to work around them, rather than teach to the kids there to learn.  Seriously, last pin on the last grenade time!

Here’s Oakland’s take.

The state already bans suspension for willful defiance from kindergarten through third grade, and Oakland’s decision extends it through high school. The new policy, which goes into full effect July 1, 2016, also bans expulsions and the practice of involuntary transfers — moving students from one school to another — for willful defiance infractions.

Student Dan’enicole Williams, a McClymonds High School sophomore, said the ban will force educators and administrators to focus on why students are behaving a certain way rather than just suspending them.

Oakland Unified will become one of a handful of California school districts that restrict suspensions to more serious offenses and eliminate the punishment for willful defiance — a broad category of misbehavior that includes minor offenses such as refusing to take a hat off or ignoring teacher requests to stop texting and more severe incidents like swearing at a teacher or storming out of class. San Francisco and Los Angeles are also among those districts.

The state already bans suspension for willful defiance from kindergarten through third grade, and Oakland’s decision extends it through high school. The new policy, which goes into full effect July 1, 2016, also bans expulsions and the practice of involuntary transfers — moving students from one school to another — for willful defiance infractions.

Student Dan’enicole Williams, a McClymonds High School sophomore, said the ban will force educators and administrators to focus on why students are behaving a certain way rather than just suspending them.

“They never take time out, if someone is sleeping in class, to ask what’s wrong,” she said. “They may be acting that way because they didn’t eat the night before.”

As in other urban districts, African American students are disproportionately among those suspended, specifically for willful defiance in Oakland.

“We’re getting pushed out of schools,” said Dan’enicole, 15, who is African American and Italian American. “They don’t care about us.”

Oakland has been criticized for the disproportionate suspensions, leading to an investigation by the U.S. Department of Education’s Office of Civil Rights and a 2012 voluntary agreement that required the district to employ a range of practices that reduced suspensions. Among them are the district’s Manhood Development classes for African American males as well as restorative justice, which requires victims and offenders to talk about the behavior and ways to address it.

Willful defiance suspensions for African American students in Oakland declined from 1,050 incidents in 2011 to 630 in 2014, according to district officials. That number is expected to drop significantly this school year as well.

Community activists from the Black Organizing Project, Public Counsel and Californians for Justice, among others, applauded the school board vote, but said more was needed to address the needs of disadvantaged students in the district.

Members of those organizations urged the district to pour at least $2.3 million into alternative discipline programs, including Manhood Development and restorative justice, which Superintendent Antwan Wilson vowed to include in his budget for the 2015-16 school year.

“This is about reintegrating students into the classroom rather than excluding them from learning,” Wilson said in a letter to the community earlier Wednesday, which included his funding promise. “The work is worth it. Removing willful defiance and scaling up more restorative practices at schools throughout the district is incredibly important.”

Let’s be honest here.  Many of those kids act out for reasons beyond the capability of teachers to handle. They can’t fix it.  In truth, it isn’t their job to fix it.  And it may not be fixable at all.  Now the teachers are expected to take the abuse and then keep the kid in the class, unpunished, in hopes that he won’t do it again.

Taking bets?

Think about this for a second, he isn’t saying the  bureaucrats can’t hammer whites and Asians, apparently that happens all the time, it is that black kids are off limits…because they are black…again the racism… sad… .  In fact, if you are an Asian in California, you may not even get into a good school- because you are too good at being a student…?  Yeah, Lefties at their finest. At some point the subgroups are going to be attacking the other subgroups for the last bit of free stuff and favoritism.  Like I said- it’s over except for some fat lady singing.

Obama doesn’t want the police to target blacks either because, (and get ready for the real racism here),  he believes they can’t help themselves- but it’s not their fault.  Who is the racist again? This effort to ignore crime and bad behavior is in a way like a parent relenting to a spoiled child.  If the parent refuses to see the bad behavior they can tell everyone that what a great kid they have.  This is what the MSM and the Left wants to do, create a world where we don’t admit, report or deal with bad behavior IF that bad behavior is related to a certain group.  In a few years, they will report how great the reduction in crimes  were, like that was the goal- not the safety of the community.

But to stave off the reality of the collapse Obama wants to federalize how police deal with certain races.  (I actually hate saying that out loud, but I didn’t vote for this transformative guy.) He wants to be able to control local police in this effort to cover up the mess HIS progressive friends made of America for the last fifty years. If the police can’t chase bad guys, who happen to be black, and less bad guys are caught, the stats will report there is less black crime.  See a win!  Of course the cities will be dismal holes of crime and violence, but if you don’t live there, and the MSM doesn’t report it, is it real? Not a great plan, but if that’s  all you got, then that’s all you got!

President Barack Obama has introduced his plan for a progressive takeover of state and local policing.

“We have a great opportunity… to really transform how we think about community law enforcement relations,” he said March 2.

“We need to seize that opportunity… this is something that I’m going to stay very focused on in the months to come,” Obama said, as he touted a new interim report from his Task Force on 21st Century Policing.

Obama also instructed his media allies to help federalize policing, and to sideline the critics of centralized policing rules. “I expect our friends in the media to really focus on what’s in this report and pay attention to it,” he instructed.

 Obama is using the crisis sparked by the August 2014 shooting of Michael Brown, who was killed after assaulting a shopkeeper and a policeman in Ferguson, Mo. Obama and his deputies stoked the subsequent controversy in the run-up to the 2014 election, in the hope of boosting African-American turnout. The mobilization effort failed, partly because local law-enforcement officials released a video showing Brown’s strong-arm robbery of a store shortly before the fatal shooting.

Now Obama is trying to expand progressive control by attaching more conditions to federal funding of state and local law-enforcement efforts. “We can expand the [federally-funded] COPS program… to see if we can get more incentives for local communities to apply some of the best practices and lessons that are embodied in this report,” he said.

Also remember, Obama was the one that started the mess in Ferguson and his allies funded the protests my putting millions into it.  The city burned because Obama wanted it to burn. He needed a “crisis.”  Just like Zimmerman and the Fast and the Furious.

Obama is also working to prevent the military from giving the police gear that might make them look too aggressive.

In previewing the president’s trip, the White House said that effective immediately, the federal government will no longer fund or provide armored vehicles that run on a tracked system instead of wheels, weaponized aircraft or vehicles, firearms or ammunition of .50-caliber or higher, grenade launchers, bayonets or camouflage uniforms. The federal government also is exploring ways to recall prohibited equipment already distributed.

In addition, a longer list of equipment the federal government provides will come under tighter control, including wheeled armored vehicles like Humvees, manned aircraft, drones, specialized firearms, explosives, battering rams and riot batons, helmets and shields. Starting in October, police will have to get approval from their city council, mayor or some other local governing body to obtain it, provide a persuasive explanation of why it is needed and have more training and data collection on the use of the equipment.

The issue of police militarization rose to prominence last year after a white police officer in Ferguson fatally shot unarmed black 18-year-old Michael Brown, sparking protests. Critics questioned why police in full body armor with armored trucks responded to dispel demonstrators, and Obama seemed to sympathize when ordering a review of the programs that provide the equipment. “There is a big difference between our military and our local law enforcement and we don’t want those lines blurred,” Obama last in August.

But he did not announce a ban in December with the publication of the review, which showed five federal agencies spent $18 billion on programs that provided equipment including 92,442 small arms, 44,275 night-vision devices, 5,235 Humvees, 617 mine-resistant vehicles and 616 aircraft. At the time, the White House defended the programs as proving to be useful in many cases, such as the response to the Boston Marathon bombing. Instead of repealing the programs, Obama issued an executive order that required federal agencies that run the programs to consult with law enforcement and civil rights and civil liberties organizations to recommend changes that make sure they are accountable and transparent.

This is the end. Oh, we’ll wander around for a while, but the tipping point has passed. Imagine the mess we’ll have when and if benefits get cut and armed “unrepentant” types- of all stripes- show up trying to burn something down. The police will not be able to-or will be prevented from responding.  As it happened in Baltimore, and in Ferguson BECAUSE the Feds and the anarchists were involved.  (BTW- here’s a tidbit on that conspiracy.)

The best the police can hope for is to create a cordon of ice cream trucks and Nike kiosks around the angry folks, hoping they will tire themselves out before entering other areas where they will run amok, burning and killing.

Not a great plan, but like I said, if your are out of grenades…

 

 

Posted in politics | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

Watching good people go a little nuts. The Conservative Treehouse grows a conspiracy. The Texas Biker shootout.

First, I love the TCTH gang.  I discovered them during the Zimmerman shooting.  They did great work detailing the case- and getting it right from the beginning.  I figured out what happened in five minutes- thug beats man who he thought wasn’t armed- and was wrong.

Over and over again, they have jumped on bad policing, bad media, bad agendas (Fast and Furious and IRS scandals) and have been proven right in the end.   But like Tiger Woods in his prime, even they can send one into the pond.  I fear, this is that one.  Trouble is when you see conspiracies everywhere, and are right most of the time, when one looks like it, but isn’t, you can’t tell it apart.

First, to the “conspiracy.” To set up hundreds of bikers so they can be shot down in public by police, thus advancing an anti-gun/anti-biker agenda would take what?  Think through that for a second.  How many people, including armed bikers, do you have to get to coordinate such an operation?  How many police, all decent people, would go along with such a murdering spree.  It isn’t like Waco PD has it out for a HUNDRED bikers!

Sometimes a complex problem is solved by simply drawing the straightest line from beginning to end. Wouldn’t it be more likely that the bikers did what they did- fight and shoot- and the police did what they did- shoot back?  Now, you can argue that maybe not everybody shot was shooting.  But there is no way the police, in a shootout can tell 99%ers from 1%ers.  (More on that later.)

Here are the facts:

A deadly weekend shootout involving rival motorcycle gangs apparently began with a parking dispute and someone running over a gang member’s foot, police said Tuesday.

Waco police Sgt. W. Patrick Swanton said an uninvited group appeared for Sunday’s meeting of a loose confederation of biker gangs at a restaurant.

There is no one denying this to be true.  A rival gang showed up and started a fight.  It’s not like it hasn’t happened before and before and before. ( I like the last one, it was at a toy giveaway for tots at Christmas! I have to share!)

(Three people, including a firefighter collecting donated presents for children, were wounded Sunday when gunfire erupted between rival motorcycle gangs gathered for a Christmas toy drive at a Riverside County saloon, authorities said.

The shootings occurred about 3:30 p.m. outside Maverick Steakhouse in Norco, where participants in the Spark of Love toy drive — most of them bikers — delivered toys to be distributed to needy children.

Authorities said none of the injuries was life-threatening. About 100 bikers were being detained late Sunday for questioning, sheriff’s officials said.

The incident left toy drive organizers demoralized. Jeanette Seay, 39, of Brea said local law enforcement had been wary of the event because it involved so many bikers.

“They didn’t want us in their town, and this is why,” she said.)

Hmmm… a lesson here??

And the bikers are deadly to police. This undercover officer was shotgunned serving a warrant on a Mongols biker gang.

One man was injured when a vehicle rolled over his foot. That caused a dispute that continued inside the restaurant, where fighting and then shooting began, before the melee spilled back outside, Swanton said.

Authorities offered few details. It was not clear which gang was responsible for running over the biker’s foot or which gang the aggrieved biker belonged to.

When the shootout was over, nine people were dead and 18 wounded.

Police have said five biker gangs from across Texas had gathered in part to settle differences over turf.

Jimmy Graves, who described himself as an ambassador for the gang known as the Bandidos, disputed that claim, saying the groups had planned to discuss laws protecting motorcycle riders and other topics such as trademarks for club logos.

But he acknowledged that differences with other groups, such as the Cossacks, have been “simmering and brewing.”

According to some reports the dead were Cossacks.  That makes some sense.

What bothers me is the instant criticism from the “treepers” on how wrong it was to kill bikers en masse.  I’ll argue there were two hundred bikers, nine got killed maybe not all by police and the rest arrested.  A shitty massacre if you ask me. Sounds like the police quit shooting when bikers quit screwing around with their guns. A massacre is when you kill them all, not nine out of two hundred.  Seriously, get a dictionary.

One poster bitched there was video of the police with “assault rifles” entering the restaurant.  To which I reply  “I hope the so!  They were in a gunfight.  There are no rules in a gunfight! Except one-  bring the biggest gun you have you can shoot accurately!”  And the fact ONLY bikers were shot is a sign the police did just that. Had they had only pistols, God know where some of the rounds would have ended up.

But that doesn’t stop the criticism.  In the defense of the Treepers, the authorities, especially under Obama lie a lot.  But there is a difference in this particular case.  However, this is the type of comments I’ve seen- this being a calmer one.

“If the police were stationed at Don Carlos restaurant surveying TP from outside, then where was the threat to them or another biker, and HOW could they perceive from a distance what was going on in the parking lot? Who exactly was in the parking lot having a dispute with a biker…… and was there an ear piece and microphone being surveyed by cops in another area. C’mon, it doesn’t take tinfoil to know police know how to survey from a distance or in a van with mic on a plant.

This is not Darren Wilson, a single cop out doing his duty keeping streets safe. This was a sting of some sort planned in advance. The police already admitted there were off duty police in the area, yeah right. I doubt the police were going to just mill around and grab a donut. They had a goal, an agenda. What was it? To instigate a disturbance because Twin Peaks and bikers were not saluting their warnings? Finally arrest and catch some MC bikers? Follow the money? An ex-marine was killed too.”

One of the other posters noted a slightly different story. Hopefully, she won’t get hammered like I did.

Just one of the dozens of bikers inside a Texas restaurant during a wild gang shootout fired a gun, security video showed.

Nearly 200 people were arrested after the bloody Sunday rampage in the parking lot of Waco’s Twin Peaks “breastaurant.” The shootout among rival bike gangs left nine people dead and another 18 injured.

None of the nine surveillance video angles released to the Associated Press showed the parking lot, where the gunfire erupted after one member’s foot was run over, cops said.

However, video did record Twin Peaks’ patio. At least three people were holding handguns, but only one fired into the parking lot, the video showed.

Uh… I guess this is where the ATF (who I hate BTW) did some ninja stuff and got bikers to shoot at bikers INSIDE the restaurant.

Sundance was demanding video and thinks if the police won’t share with him, they must be hiding something.   What if the video they do release shows exactly what happened- the biker gangs shot at each other, and the police shot them.  Then what? (More on that later too.)

Let’s talk weapons:

Cops said they discovered at least 1,000 weapons inside the blood-splattered restaurant after the shooting, but later announced that estimated number may have been a high guess. By Wednesday night, police recovered 318 weapons — 118 handguns, 157 knives and 43 others, including an AK-47 — but were still counting more.

The knives, guns and blunt objects were stashed around Twin Peaks — including in its toilets and inside bags of tortilla chips — and were likely left in a rush effort to ditch evidence.

Hmmm…. 118 handguns out of two hundred bikers.  That’s  a lot of guns- for a peaceful meeting to discuss political agendas.  I’m thinking somebody isn’t being truthful, or maybe someone at TCTH will claim they were all “throw downs.”  On a side note, notice how the bikers threw away the evidence so they can’t get charged.  (Even more on that later.)

Now I will admit freely anytime I see ATF near something I get nervous. They are a horrible agency that truly does screw up a lot from Ruby Ridge to Waco to Fast and Furious.  They are political. Nobody likes them. And they get into so much trouble the FBI gets tired of bailing them out.  I’m hoping it wasn’t the ATF shooters that got all the bikers.  If so, I won’t change my mind on the accountability for the bikers- after all they started it- but it would go a long way to explaining what TCTH guys think were itchy fingers.

Law enforcement continue to investigate the motorcycle gang related shooting at the Twin Peaks restaurant.

Let’s talk police response.  Bottom line is the police tried to stop the meeting. Why? Because prior meetings caused violent confrontations and the police officer’s duties are these:  “Keep you safe, keep your family safe, keep your stuff safe.”  Now, one “treeper” took exception to my stating such.  He conflates what the police are forced to do by their political handlers with what they are innately designed to do.  I remember my Chief coming up with yet another program. I told him what I said here, “Chief our job is simple, keep people safe, their families safe, their shit safe. If after we accomplish that we have time and energy to do others things then fine. But UNTIL then, we have to stay on course.”

He didn’t listen.  He had a degree and stuff… .

But I still believe the police should find ways to avoid killing first.  Yes, there has been a militarization of the police and I am against it. And yes, some of the newer generation may be quick on the trigger because of bad training and tactics. But they are facing a country that is starting to fray.  And they are getting killed far too often for just wearing a uniform.  What would you do?

What should the police do when they have the following facts before them:  1. Rival biker gangs are assembling in a public place occupied by innocent civilians. 2.  The bikers are armed. 3. The bikers have had violent confrontations before, in a public place occupied by innocent civilians, so obviously they don’t give a shit about people. 4. It is the job of the police to prevent innocent people from getting hurt or killed.

Sundance- who runs TCTH and is very good at what he does, hasn’t offered a resolution, just complaints.

So have many others, including the complaint that this is part and parcel of the government’s effort to disarm America…  yeah I know.  Fast and Furious was that.  This was a fuck up extraordinaire.  But at some point people just can’t tell them apart with Obama and his ilk pulling every frayed thread they can find on this sweater called America.

Truth is, sometimes there are only a series of bad choices and you pick the least bad one to work with.  In this case, the police tried to move the meeting. The owner, now facing millions of dollars in lawsuits, claims that didn’t happen.  I’m going with the police on this one only because that makes sense.  First rule of a fight- stop it from happening in the first place DIFFUSE the situation.  Cop 1o1.

Prepositioning snipers and shooters.  I’m less happy with this, but the alternative would be to not station nearby, knowing full well there was better than a fifty-fifty chance of a shootout (remember earlier links above- there have been many).  So, this is a big meeting, a right to assemble, by a group of people including violent armed members of well established biker gangs. What to do…

I challenged Sundance to give his ROE’s.  Let’s see how that plays out.  In this case, I am confused about the fact the bikers knew we knew- they knew- we knew AND THEY STILL STARTED SHOOTING!!  What is the IQ of some of these idiots??  “Hey Ralph, I think there are police snipers on the roof just waiting for us to do something stupid, so how about I shoot this guy right here!”

Jeezzz….

And it’s the cops’ fault…

Now it wasn’t like there were five bikers, or ten, or twenty. There were two hundred bikers and maybe twenty police?

Some of the arrested:

How in the world do you manage that? And worse, as some have complained not all the shot were 1%ers but honestly, how do you tell them apart? Shoot only the ones with guns? The ones shooting guns?  And how long do you hesitate? Long enough that they shoot off a round and hit a child?  Live with that…

Who in this bunch is a 1%er and who is a weekend wannabe?

Let’s talk wannabes.  I believe, firmly believe, that there is no such thing as a part time thug.  These 99%ers show up, play the part and worse ENABLE the 1%ers, who commit most of the crime.  And for what?  Coolness?  The chance to dip your toe in the bad boy pool like a teenage girl wanting to date the “bad boy” in school? Jeeeez… grow up.  Would we forgive people who wanted to be Bloods or Crips or BGF? No, of course not.  But here, because it is cool, too many think the police did it wrong.

I realize we love the anti-authority meme in our society. Everybody loves Billy the Kid- a sociopathic killer.  But nobody likes Pat Garrett who stopped him from more killing.  Everybody knows Bonnie and Clyde. Can you, off the top of your head, name the police officers who stopped their crime spree.  So yeah, I get it. I just think it is bullshit. I dealt with wannabes and they shot, beat and robbed just as efficiently as full timers.  Worse sometimes because they were working harder to “make it” in the gang.

Those bikers 1%ers and 99%ers all showed up to a place and time where there was a very, very good chance violence would occur.  And when it did, they all threw down their guns, hid the evidence, tried to avoid their part in it, and screamed “cops set us up!”  Really??

Which brings me to the “criminal history” part of this.  Bikers by their nature (travel in packs, tightnit groups) are hard to interdict.  They can traffic in drugs easily- how many bikers can one cop on patrol stop when they travel in thirty or fifty to a pack?  They can carry weapons and dump them easily. They can intimidate any patrolman by using sheer numbers.  So catching them is hard, unless you target them- which seems to be “unfair” to some.  Many officers- local, state and federal- have went undercover to make cases. None of them came out saying “Hey these guys are really cool! They just love biking and getting toys for kids at Christmas.”   Instead, they come out with stories that would curl your hair about what bikers do.

I was in the Vagos two-and-a-half years, I got into a lot of bar fights,” he said. “There was violence, there were serious crimes, every type of organized crime, murder, embezzlement, drug dealing. “I had to hold back, be observant, because if I committed a crime, I would be [locked up] too.

“Two of the members did a home invasion and a murder.

“They bought a lot of drugs and guns.”

Falco’s secret wiretaps and testimony led to 25 Vagos members going to prison for firearms, drug, assault and murder convictions.

He ended up in hiding in the witness protection program. “But I started to miss doing something I saw as important,” he said.

With two other undercover agents, Falco infiltrated a Mongols chapter in Virginia on the East Coast. Inside the Mongols from 2004 to 2005, he found similarities with the Vagos, “but they were much, much more violent.” “The difference between the Mongols and all other biker gangs is they brought in outside Hispanic street gang members,” he said. “They were 18, 19, 20 years old and they were willing to go to prison, they expected to.

“So they would go where the Hells Angels were. There might be cameras, but they’d walk right up and blow them away. “They almost stabbed a Hells Angel to death at a Chuck E. Cheese pizza joint … in front of children.

“They don’t care if they get caught.”

The Mongols were at war with the Mexican mafia. Falco’s chapter concentrated on dealing in methamphetamine and cocaine, and “planning and hunting down Hells Angels.”

“That’s what they live for,” he said.

“It doesn’t matter where they are, they have to continue the war against the Angels.

“It’s the same with the Outlaws.

Even the supporters of the biker gangs don’t deny the violence or the crime. It is like dealing with a bi-polar off his meds. “Yeah, they are badassed man, dangerous…but not deadly, kind cool…and lethal and criminal man….but not that much of a threat…except when they are!  You dig right?”

No, not really.  Like I said, everybody liked Billy the Kid except for the people he killed.

I’m convinced the reason the Waco PD and DA overcharged the whole group was to hang onto them until they could figure out what happened.  RICO won’t stand for the lot of them.  But some may find themselves in the soup over this.  Hey this isn’t the sixties baby. We have contact DNA capability now.  (So that means all those guns and knives will have DNA and guess what we have in custody on a felony- which means the police can get DNA.   Hmmm…. “That ain’t my gun that matched up to the bullet found in the car in front of the concealed officers!”  “We have your DNA on the grips and fingerprints on the unfired cases. You want to take another shot at your explanation?”  Guess who has a record now baby!)

Let’s set some points here:

1. Being a 99%er is not cool, and it is dangerous to everyone including you.  It enables and reinforces the 1%ers who everybody agrees are very deadly and criminal.  You want to ride with them.  Fine.  You get arrested, shot up or dead, don’t bitch.

2. The police aren’t into conspiracy. Unless it is the ATF, then all bets are off.  In this case, IF the local police were sucked into something, the conspiracy won’t hold.  Just like in Boston, when the locals found out the FBI knew the suspects BEFORE the bombing, the locals will let it out.

3. Just because it is a clusterfuck does not mean it is a coverup.  I’m pretty sure we’ll know who shot who as much as possible in what was literally a combat zone.  Which should remind everyone out there that being a police officer in a situation close to anarchy as you can get at a boobie bar, is very dangerous.

4.  I’m willing to listen to anyone who has a better idea on how the police could have handled a shootout, in a public place, with innocent civilians at risk.  How many babies, women and men do we let get killed before the police stop it?  Just a question.

5. This HUGE crime scene is not going to be sorted out in a day.  Hell, it may never be totally sorted out.  And no, the police aren’t going to release all the video just to make us internet junkies happy.

6. However, if it turns out dozens of rounds were fired by the bikers and some of those rounds were aimed at the police, will the conspiracy theorists let it go?

7. Lastly, don’t let this event allow the Left to push any anti-gun agenda.  The guns didn’t start the shootout- idiot bikers did.  Like they have before and will again. That is the nature of a free society. We have to put up with fools doing stupid things.   My issue is we don’t have to like it or support it.

They are criminals after all, and we aren’t.  Screw Billy the Kid.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Posted in politics | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

A liberal conundrum. Who do they side with in this mess?

A gay couple responds to the insult levied by a black man who had just suffered a spilled drink that the gay couple knocked over.  At some point, the Left is going to have to just throw up their hands and give up!

A gay couple was smacked with a wooden chair in a Manhattan barbecue restaurant after a heated argument escalated into a brutal beating.

Video of the incident taken by a fellow customer shows the man arguing with Jonathan Snipes, 32, and his boyfriend Ethan York-Adams, 25, before turning violent Tuesday night.

Snipes had a tooth knocked loose, bruised his head and had cartilage in his ear snapped as a result of the attack in New York City’s Chelsea neighborhood, which is known for having a large gay community.

‘These guys attacked us specifically because they knew we weren’t their type of people,’ he said.

He told DNA Info that he and York-Adams had gone to Dallas BBQ to celebrate Cinco De Mayo with margaritas.

Snipes received a text message around 11pm about a death in the family and had to leave quickly, but accidentally knocked over another table’s drink on his way out and was insulted.

‘White f****ts, spilling drinks,’ one of the other customers allegedly said.

Snipes said that when he confronted the table about the remarks, the altercation soon became physical.

View image on Daily Mail Online website

via daily mail and gateway. Lesson learned here.

Also, note the name after the @, the person who posted the video.

You can see the two gay couple, along with a few others, managed to control the angry black man, then let him up, assuming it was over.  How civilized of them!  Then they learned the vital lesson about street fighting, it ain’t over until EVERYBODY says it is over! Chair over the head time!

The level of strength used in swinging the chair was lethal intent. He wasn’t just swinging, he was swinging for the fences.

And the funniest part was the other black guy come up, not to render aid, but to get a better angle for a photo! That’s brotherly love for ya’!

Now, one wonders how the gay couple feels about the black man right now.  I’m betting they aren’t thrilled. Like I said, a liberal conundrum for sure!

 

 

Posted in politics | Tagged , , | Leave a comment