Tag Archives: Judicial Stuff

Uncategorized

An “F” grade in MY H.S. class!

Obama warns ‘unelected’ Supreme Court against striking down health law

President Obama, employing his strongest language to date on the Supreme Court review of the federal health care overhaul, cautioned the court Monday against overturning the law — while repeatedly saying he’s “confident” it will be upheld….The president, adopting what he described as the language of conservatives who fret about judicial activism, questioned how an “unelected group of people” could overturn a law approved by Congress

The Supreme Court is merely “an unelected group of people”?! Well, yes, that’s the way the Constitution sets it up, the last time I looked. Article II Section 2, and Article III section 1. Of course if one has the view that anything that limits the grandiose sweep of executive power is a mere archaism that should be ignored at will, then this WOULD be annoying. (Tough rocks, B.O. – you’re not First General Party Secretary, or Reichsfuhrer…at least not yet!)

AS for the bit about “judicial activism”…there is also a fundamental error in that also.  “Judicial activism” is extending the Constitution to say or do something that is beyond the bounds of what is Constitutionally stated as being a part of the powers granted to the government.  It is NOT, as in the present case, applying the standard of the Constitution to determine whether an act at issue is constitutionally granted.  As the prez goes on with his pseudo-reasoning he then states:

“I’m confident that the Supreme Court will not take what would be an unprecedented, extraordinary step of overturning a law that was passed by a strong majority of a democratically elected Congress,” Obama said.

At BEST this is wildly disingenuous; at worst he’s totally immersed in some form of governmental psychosis where his view of the reality of constitutional review, established in the early days of the republic by Justice John Marshall in Marbury v. Madison 5 US 137 (1803). Laws have been overturned on average of about every 16 months or so since then…not QUITE unprecedented OR extraordinary.

…and Obama claims to have been a constitutional scholar? Really?

If he came up with today’s comment as a submission in a H.S. history or government class that I was teaching, it would earn an “F” grade, for having missed the whole main point that applies in this situation.

Uncategorized

PETA Wastes Court’s Time

Federal Judge Dismisses PETA Lawsuit Claiming SeaWorld Whales Are Slaves

An effort to free whales from SeaWorld by claiming they were enslaved made a splash in the news but flopped in court Wednesday….A federal judge in San Diego dismissed an unprecedented lawsuit seeking to grant constitutional protection against slavery to a group of orcas that perform at SeaWorld parks, saying the 13th amendment applies only to humans.

What? What sort of logic did he use that was apparently something that PETA was/is unable to comprehend.

“As ‘slavery’ and ‘involuntary servitude’ are uniquely human activities, as those terms have been historically and contemporaneously applied, there is simply no basis to construe the Thirteenth Amendment as applying to non-humans,” Miller wrote in his ruling.

A big “DUH!” for PETA.

Constitution Watch

1st Amendment Upheld by Supremes

1 Comment

Something else this week for the so-called “progressives” to knash their teeth about! Oh dear!

High court voids curbs on political ad spending

In a decision with profound implications for the role of money in American campaigns, the Supreme Court on Thursday gave interest groups, unions and corporations the right to pour money into issue advertising in political races – reigniting the passionate battle over the influence of cash on the electoral process.

The 5-4 decision punched a hole in the complex web of federal campaign-finance laws and rules in finding that those groups should have the same rights to spend money on political ads as any person. Direct contributions by corporations and unions to individual candidates are still forbidden.

This does NOT just affect organizations. Having access to effective political speech means having access to mass media. This means paying for advertising. If one is not a George Soros with piles of cash at hand, there is no serious way for an individual on their own to make their voice heard in the political marketplace.

However, if a group of like-minded individuals gets together, pools their resources, and enters the political fray, according to the McCain-Feingold law this was rendered illegal, since all groups were prohibited from political speech at the time of an election. Never mind that the specific reason that the 1st Amendment was enacted was to especially protect political speech!

Supporters cheered the ruling, which they said returns the country to the core free-speech precept that political speech should be protected, no matter who or what is speaking.

Critics warned that the foundations of American democracy are at stake and that big businesses will be able to spend enough money to influence elections.

…also big unions, and political action groups of all sorts. Remember, in spite of the weeping and wailing of the left, a lot of corporations’ leaders are demonstrably biased to the left. Besides, many corporations will be reluctant to be too outspoken, since a sizable part of their customer base will be partisans of the party they might oppose (which ever side is favored).

In stark language, the court acknowledged that it was overturning its own precedents, but Justice Anthony M. Kennedy, writing the majority opinion, said the justices were now returning to “ancient First Amendment principles.”

Yes! This is critical! It’s past time to recognize once again the fundamental source of our “unalienable rights” obtained from the “Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God” as immortally stated in the Declaration of Independence. If this reasoning is removed from consideration, as it the common practice of the day in the world of political science, there is no other principle to base rights on other than the Maoist justification that “Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun.” THAT’s why they wrote the Bill of Rights in the first place, to make SURE that those unalienable rights were spelled out in more detail than the original Constitutional text itself.

“The government may regulate corporate political speech through disclaimer and disclosure requirements, but it may not suppress that speech altogether,” Justice Kennedy wrote in an opinion overturning a 1990 case and part of a separate 2003 case that upheld most of the McCain-Feingold campaign-finance laws, enacted in 2002.

This sounds about right, as far as it goes. The same principle now needs to be extended even further. The minority dissenting opinion accidentally highlights this need:

[Justice Stevens] said the ruling turns over power to corporations and unions at the expense of political parties, who will have a tough time fighting back because of the restrictions on their own fundraising and spending.

Use the same standards of disclosure and disclaimer for political parties as there will be for OTHER organizations…and turn THEM loose too! Here’s one Mao idea that would work, if ACTUALLY implemented: “Let 1000 flowers bloom.”

Uncategorized

Huckster’s Plans take Torpedo Hit

Former Arkansas Gov. Huckabee has controversial record of freeing criminals

Former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee’s record of freeing criminals from prison was controversial even before news that the man sought for questioning in the killing of four Lakewood police officers had a lengthy prison sentence commuted by Huckabee.

The original parole and clemency papers from Arkansas may be viewed here.

The one-time Republican presidential contender granted twice as many pardons and commutations as the previous three governors of Arkansas combined, The Associated Press reported in 2007. In all, he issued 1,033 pardons and commutations during more than 10 years as governor — an average of about one every four days.

The Arkansas Huckster’s prison chickens are coming home to roost.

Huckabee’s ‘Willie Horton moment’

Mike Huckabee’s chance to be president of the United States could be going up in smoke this week.

The former Arkansas governor and Republican presidential wannabe is at the center of a story involving a “person of interest” in the shooting deaths Sunday of four police officers in the state of Washington….

This story has a long way to go before it’s played out. But, if Huckabee pardoned a man who went on to kill four cops, this will be a lot worse than the Willie Horton incident of the 1988 presidential campaign….

Huckabee’s credentials to lead the Republican party to victory in 2012 would evaporate if Clemmons indeed is the killer in the Washington case.

That’s not exactly something a “get tough on crime” political party would want on the resume of its leader.

Another RINO bites the dust!?

Uncategorized

B.O. Opposes Defense of Marriage

Obama backs marriage act repeal

The Obama administration continued its half-a-loaf approach to gay rights issues Monday by filing documents claiming that federal laws banning same-sex marriage are discriminatory, even as the federal government continues to defend them.

In its nine-page brief, the Justice Department stated that the Obama administration opposes the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act as discriminatory and supports its repeal. Yet the motion also calls for the dismissal of a lawsuit filed by a gay California couple seeking to overturn the federal marriage law.

A little schitzo here? At least DoJ still recognizes some semblance of an obligation to go through the motions of defending Federal law against challenges.

So, otherwise , given the pattern of B.O.’s ideological background over the years, what’s to be surprised about this?

Oh, right – he DID say something about not favoring gay marriage during the campaign, but hey, that was just campaigning, so who was REALLY counting THAT!

Uncategorized

CA Constitution Amendment by Vote: What a Concept!

Prop. 8 upheld by California Supreme Court

The California Supreme Court today upheld Proposition 8’s ban on same-sex marriage but also ruled that gay couples who wed before the election will continue to be married under state law.

The decision virtually ensures another fight at the ballot box over marriage rights for gays. Gay rights activists say they may ask voters to repeal the marriage ban as early as next year, and opponents have pledged to fight any such effort. Proposition 8 passed with 52% of the vote.

Although the court split 6-1 on the constitutionality of Proposition 8, the justices were unanimous in deciding to keep intact the marriages of as many as 18,000 gay couples who exchanged vows before the election. The marriages began last June, after a 4-3 state high court ruling striking down the marriage ban last May.

The concept of a court overthrow of a CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT is sort of wierd for the Chief to wrap his mind around to begin with…don’t Supreme Courts INTERPRET Constitutional Law…not decide what parts of a Constitution can/should be valid? Apparently even in California this is still the case, at least for now.

Constitution Watch, National Insecurity

News of the Day

NKorea widens threat, limits US options

North Korea’s nuclear test makes it no likelier that the regime will actually launch a nuclear attack, but it adds a scary dimension to another threat: the defiant North as a facilitator of the atomic ambitions of others, potentially even terrorists.

It presents another major security crisis for President Barack Obama, already saddled with wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and a nuclear problem with Iran. He said Monday the U.S. and its allies must “stand up” to the North Koreans, but it’s far from clear what diplomatic or other action the world community will take.

So far, nothing they’ve done has worked.

THAT’s the understatement of the year!

North Korea fires sixth missile in defiance of US demands for end of aggression

North Korea has fired another short-range missile in defiance of warnings from the United States, bringing the total numbers of launches in the past three days to six.

The defiance of the North has prompted the US to warn that it will “pay the price” for continuing to ignore the international community. Susan Rice, the US ambassador to the United Nations, said the UN Security Council was united in its determination to punish North Korea and that Pyongyang would learn that its actions “have consequences”.

REALLY – Why would the NorKs expect anything more than another application of hot air from Washington?

(Hmmm…maybe THAT’s why B.O. et al are worried so much about CO2 and Glowbull Warming!)

So much for B.O.’s guaranteed assurance that a new spirit of willingness to talk with then will get a positive result, meanwhile, Iran is watching with interest from the wings of the world stage.

Meanwhile, back on this side of the pond…B.O. gives us a SCOTUS designee who is, based on her own words, unqualified to serve:

A Judge’s View of Judging Is on the Record

In 2001, Sonia Sotomayor, an appeals court judge, gave a speech declaring that the ethnicity and sex of a judge “may and will make a difference in our judging.”

In her speech, Judge Sotomayor questioned the famous notion — often invoked by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg and her retired Supreme Court colleague, Sandra Day O’Connor — that a wise old man and a wise old woman would reach the same conclusion when deciding cases.

“I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn’t lived that life,”

So much for equal justice under the law. Apparently now it’s to be acceptable to judge based on ethnicity and gender, instead of evaluating each cased based on the body of the law and the Constitution. Prima facie, this is in direct contradiction to the oath of office, but apparently fits in with B.O.’s stated drive for “empathy” on the bench in apparent favoring of judgement favoring a clear bias towards the politically correct shibboleth of the moment.

Got help the United States of America!

Uncategorized

B.O.’s Subversion of Legal System

It doesn’t matter WHO B.O. submits for appointment to SCOTUS…the real damage is his statement defining his attitude towards the conduct of jurisprudence…as ably spelled out by Jeff Jacoby:

Lady Justice’s blindfold

Judicial dispassion — the ability to decide cases without being influenced by personal feelings or political preferences — is indispensable to the rule of law. So indispensable, in fact, that the one-sentence judicial oath required of every federal judge and justice contains no fewer than three expressions of it: “I …do solemnly swear that I will administer justice without respect to persons, and do equal right to the poor and to the rich, and that I will faithfully and impartially discharge and perform all the duties incumbent upon me …under the Constitution and laws of the United States, so help me God.”

After examining some of the Biblical roots of our judicial system (secularists read it and weep!) Jacoby brings that original background as applied in the establishment of our Constitutional republic:

Without judicial restraint there is no rule of law. We live under “a government of laws and not of men,” to quote John Adams’s resonant phrase, only so long as judges stick to neutrally resolving the disputes before them, applying the law and upholding the Constitution even when doing so leads to results they personally dislike. That is why the judicial oath is so adamant about impartiality. That is why Lady Justice is so frequently depicted — as on the sculpted lampposts outside the US Supreme Court — wearing a blindfold and carrying balanced scales.

Then…the heart of the problem with B.O.’s attitude: emotionalism should trump the law:

And that is why President Obama’s “empathy” standard is so disturbing, and has generated so much comment.

Time and again, Obama has called for judges who do not put their private political views aside when deciding cases. In choosing a replacement for Justice David Souter, the president says, he will seek not just “excellence and integrity,” but a justice whose “quality of empathy, of understanding and identifying with people’s hopes and struggles,” would be “an essential ingredient” in his jurisprudence. In an interview last year, he said he would look for judges “sympathetic” to those “on the outside, those who are vulnerable, those who are powerless.”…But such cardiac justice is precisely what judges “do solemnly swear” to renounce. Sympathy for others is an admirable virtue, but a judge’s private commiserations are not relevant to the law he is expected to apply.

If Obama means what he says, he wants judges who can be counted on to violate their oath of office.

…and so B.O. then would violate his OWN oath of office…but what else is new about THAT?

National Insecurity

Donk Border Folly

The Donkey Party is feelin’ its oats these days, so some of they’ve decided it’s time to open up the borders, and destroy effective enforcement in an area that is a hot spot in the massively escalating cross-border drug wars.

Justice Dept. Investigates Arizona Sheriff for Enforcing Immigration Law

The Department of Justice (DOJ) has launched an investigation of the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office in Arizona following requests by congressional Democrats and allegations by liberal activists that the department has violated the civil rights of illegal aliens.

Reps. John Conyers (D-Mich.), Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.), Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.), and Robert Scott (D-Va.) requested the investigation, and activists groups such as National Day Laborer Organizer Network and ACORN launched petition drives and rallies in support of the probe.

The investigation focuses on Sheriff Joe Arpaio and dozens of officers under his command who were trained through the Department of Homeland Security’s Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s Agreements of Cooperation in Communities to Enhance Safety and Security (ACCESS), which partners federal and local law enforcement to enforce immigration laws. (The Homeland Security’s Immigration and Customs Enforcement division is known popularly as ICE.)

What a concept. Enforce the law (for a change), and become subject to a DoJ investigation hit team.

This would be laughable if it wasn’t so ridiculous. Apparently Sheriff Joe isn’t supposed to enforce the immigration laws down there…too many illegal Mexicans are getting busted, which, to the moonbats in DoJ and their Donk Cong instigators is prima facie evidence of some form of discrimination.

Hmmmmm. (Think! Think!) Oh yeah! Illegal Mexicans (and some other Latinos/Latinas) are coming across the border in large numbers, committing (felonious) crimes in large numbers, and getting busted…in appropriately large numbers. ¡No problemo!

Maybe if they weren’t doing the crimes, they wouldn’t be doing the time. What a concept! Apparently one that the A.G. Napolitano and her ‘crats can’t wrap their minds (if they haven’t totally lost them) around.

Uncategorized

There goes the neighborhood…!

ACLU to open South Dakota office

The American Civil Liberties Union says it will open a new office in South Dakota so the organization can significantly expand its work on civil liberties in the state.

The ACLU in recent years has won a number of lawsuits dealing with voting rights and other issues in South Dakota, but it has done its work in the state through an office located in North Dakota.

Oh joy. Just what we need – the American Communist Lawyers Union. NOT!

Constitution Watch, Culture Wars

SD Abortion Debate on National Review Site

Ramesh Ponnaru posting on NRO’s THE CORNER site has given a Slate article a blast for, as he tags it:

SNEERING at SOUTH DAKOTA

I’ve long admired William Saletan’s work, and so I was taken aback by his post on South Dakota’s new informed-consent law on abortion, which has a much higher snark-to-substance ratio than I have come to expect from him. The law requires abortionists to tell women seeking their services that abortion “will terminate the life of a whole, separate, unique, living human being.” According to Saletan, the South Dakota legislators are “lying to women about their bodies.”

The post goes on to logically dismantle Saletan’s attempt at argument:

It’s actually a little hard to tease out Saletan’s argument. As far as I can make out, he has two objections to the word “separate” in the required message. First, he does not consider the embryo “separate” because, for example, it is implanted in and nourished by a mother’s womb. But obviously the word “separate” has multiple meanings; there is no contradiction or even tension in saying that an embryo is a being separate (=distinct) from the mother while also being within her. An infant is nourished by others without calling into question its separateness in the relevant sense.

Argument 1(b) is that the embryo isn’t separate because maternal RNA directs its growth. Saletan has made a big deal out of this point in the past. But his argument still makes no sense. Yes, the embryo’s RNA is derived from the mother and crucial to its development. So is half the embryo’s DNA. The other half is from the father, but the embryo is a being distinct from the father. So too is it distinct from the mother. Saletan’s argument is a bit like taking someone literally when he says that a baby has “his father’s eyes.”

Second, I think Saletan is trying to say that if the embryo is a separate being from the mother, then there can be no objection to removing it from the womb (and thus causing its death). The pro-life position collapses into logical incoherence. If the embryo is already separate, that is, what can be wrong with separating it from the mother? I hesitate to ascribe this position to Saletan because it seems so pathetic. Again, he is trading on the different meanings of the word “separate” as though ignorant of the way language operates. Rephrase the argument: “If the embryo is distinct from the mother, what can be wrong with physically removing it from the mother?” You can see that the argument has no force. In addition, abortion is not typically a mere removal of an embryo or fetus from the mother with the unfortunate side-effect of killing it. Killing it is almost always both the goal and the method of the procedure.

It’s always nice to see deft verbal rapier work, and the final conclusion is best of all:

In short, the rubes of South Dakota are right and the sophisticated sneerer is wrong.

Amen!

H/T to e-mail correspondent for this one.

Defense Matters!

Charges Dropped in USMC Case

2 Comments

Military judge dismisses charges in Haditha killings

A military judge dismissed charges Tuesday against a Marine officer accused of failing to investigate the killings of 24 Iraqis. Col. Steven Folsom dismissed charges against Lt. Col. Jeffrey Chessani after finding that a four-star general overseeing the case was improperly influenced by an investigator probing the November 2005 shootings by a Marine squad in Haditha.

“Unlawful command influence is the mortal enemy of military justice,” Folsom said. “In order to restore the public confidence, we need to take it back. We need to turn the clock back.”

This turned out well. The fix was in against Chessani, and the others…but there was enough of a public flap created about this, that not even Donk Cong. Murtha’s statement of the guilt of the Marines, and the willingness of the USMC top brass of the time to throw some troops under the bus of political correctness was able to prevail.

The Chief isn’t holding his breath waiting for Murtha to apologize for his “rush to judgement” statements against the Marines.

National Insecurity

A Positive Note!

McCain attacks Guantánamo ruling

A good one from McCain…after all too many instances of moonbattery lately from him on oil drilliing, glowbull warming, etc.

John McCain on Friday described the decision by the Supreme Court to allow Guantánamo Bay prisoners to challenge their detention in US courts as “one of the worst decisions in the history of this country”. The Republican presidential candidate said he agreed with the four dissenting justices on the nine-member court that foreign fighters held at the detention camp were not entitled to the rights of US citizens.

He criticised Barack Obama, his Democratic opponent, for supporting the decision and said it highlighted the importance of nominating conservative judges to the Supreme Court. His remarks represented a hardening of his position from his more moderate initial response to the ruling on Thursday, signalling a strategic decision by the McCain campaign to make it an election issue.

As noted in a previous posting…stuff like this only re-emphasizes the critical nature of the judicial appointment process.

National Insecurity

Lib SCOTUS Judges Do Thier Own Thing

1 Comment

Court says detainees have rights, bucking Bush

Logic? We don’t need no stinkin’ logic!

In a stinging rebuke to President Bush’s anti-terror policies, a deeply divided Supreme Court ruled Thursday that foreign detainees held for years at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba have the right to appeal to U.S. civilian courts to challenge their indefinite imprisonment without charges.

The Chief likes the statement made by Jon over at SD Politics about this:

I think the dissenters are likely correct. This is an example of the courts stepping in to superimpose their policy preference for that of the president and Congress. While granting habeas corpus rights and access to civilian courts to enemy combatants might be good policy (emphasis on “might”), that doesn’t mean that the Constitution demands it.

Why might these people not have such rights? First, terrorists have no legal rights, not even under the Geneva Accords. Why? First, they are not soldiers. They do not fight for a nation, therefore they are not signatories to the Geneva Accords and cannot claim protection. Their very method of action, not wearing uniforms and targeting civilians, violates international law. By not fighting for a nation and not wearing a uniform they do not even have the rights of POWs, rights granted to legitimate soldiers, which terrorists are not.

Remember all the depictions in old war movies, with partisans, spies, infiltrators, etc. were subject to summary execution?
This actually happened frequently…with both sides.

The precedent for this for the United States goes all the way back to the hanging of British Major Andros, who was involved in carrying communications while in civilian clothes in the Benedict Arnold case of treason.

The rule has been: no uniform, no legal rights – life, and death is tough! The GITMO crew is getting off easy!

G-d help us from more liberal SCOTUS Judges…which brings us back again to the matter of the upcoming Presidential election: Obamanation, Abomination; same difference!

Uncategorized

Viral Organization Actively Replicating

ACLU unveils big expansion plans for US heartland

The American Civil Liberties Union announced by far the largest fundraising campaign in its 88-year history Monday, eying a dramatic expansion of its work on social justice issues in relatively conservative states such as Texas and Florida.

The campaign’s goal is $335 million, with $258 million already raised through behind-the-scenes solicitations over the past year, ACLU executive director Anthony Romero said. Major donors include billionaire financier George Soros, who gave $12 million through his Open Society Institute.

George Soros? ’nuff said. It’s an ill wind for sure.

Officials of two conservative legal groups often at odds with the ACLU were not pleased by the fundraising announcement, which came during the ACLU’s annual membership conference in Washington.

“The most dangerous organization in America is trying to become more dangerous,” said Mike Johnson, senior legal counsel for the Alliance Defense Fund.

Mathew Staver, founder of the Florida-based Liberty Counsel, said the ACLU “already has been an antifamily and in some cases anti-religious liberty and anti-life organization. Any future expansion would simply increase its destructive presence and be concerning to people of conservative, moral values,” Staver said.

The Chief fully concurs.

Uncategorized

California judges?…’nuff said.

California’s top court legalizes gay marriage

California’s Supreme Court declared that gay couples in the nation’s biggest state can marry – a monumental but perhaps short-lived victory for the gay rights movement Thursday that was greeted with tears, hugs, kisses and at least one instant proposal of matrimony.

The Chief supposes it would be a cheap shot in this context to describe California as the land of fruits and nuts…so I won’t go there.

Also, in all due fairness, it must be noted that there were threee justices who opposed this ruling for various reasons: kudos to them!

Next event: a push to amend the Califunny Constitution to remove the whole thing from the reach of the activist judges.

Uncategorized

SanFran Misses the Target

State high court shoots down S.F. handgun ban

The Chief is frankly amazed that there is still this much sanity left in the California judicial system. There may still be hope for them out there!

The state Supreme Court dealt a final blow Wednesday to San Francisco’s voter-approved ban on handguns, rejecting the city’s appeal of a lower-court ruling that sharply limited the ability of localities to regulate firearms.

The court’s unanimous order was a victory for the National Rifle Association, which sued on behalf of gun owners, advocates and dealers a day after the measure passed with 58 percent of the vote in November 2005. The initiative has never taken effect.

The ordinance, Proposition H, would have forbidden San Francisco residents to possess handguns, exempting only law enforcement officers and others who needed guns for professional purposes. It would have also prohibited the manufacture, sale or distribution of any type of firearms or ammunition in San Francisco.

Score one for the good guys.

Uncategorized

Blow to Campus P.C. in California Case

CSU students not ready to make nice – and they don’t have to

The 417,000 students at California State University’s 28 campuses are expected to be civil to one another, the university says in its policy manual.

It sounds innocuous – but a federal magistrate says it’s an unconstitutional restriction on speech when the policy is used to investigate or discipline students, such as the College Republicans whose members stomped on two flags bearing the name of Allah during an anti-terrorism rally at San Francisco State last year.

Dang! A California Federal judge ruling against political correctness! Who woulda thunk it!

Uncategorized

FBI Acting as Staatspolizei?

FBI chief orders internal probe

FBI Director Robert S. Mueller III ordered an internal investigation into whether bureau agents interfered with midterm congressional elections by disclosing a corruption probe that undermined the re-election bid of Republican Rep. Curt Weldon weeks before the Nov. 7 vote.

Political influence in the FBI? Where could THAT be coming from? Wouldn’t you know…a Clintonista:

The federal investigation of Mr. Weldon and his daughter was requested by Melanie Sloan, a former assistant U.S. attorney during the Clinton administration, who heads the liberal watchdog group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington. Miss Sloan said in an interview that her request was sent after a Los Angeles Times report in 2004 suggested Mr. Weldon, a senior member of the House Armed Services Committee, helped steer defense contracts to his daughter’s business consultancy.

The outcome of the whole thing?

He was later cleared of the charges by the House Standards of Official Conduct Committee.

Of course, he also lost his re-election bid, so the efforts of Ms. Sloan were successful from the point of view of the Clintonian Donks, to whom political triumph is the ultimate goal of the universe.

Uncategorized

Iran Wrap

Iran vows to use ‘smart’ bomb on enemies

Conventional sword-rattling again.

Iran vowed Sunday to use a new 2,000-pound “smart” bomb against its enemies and unveiled mass production of the new weapon, state television reported. The government first announced development of the long-range guided bomb Thursday, saying it could be deployed by the country’s aging U.S.-made F-4 and F-5 fighter jets

Iran: Nuclear activities have not halted

Meanwhile, in addition to conventional sword-rattling, they keep up with the nuclear sort, also.

Iran said Sunday its nuclear activities have not halted or slowed down, rejecting reports that it has not significantly expanded its uranium enrichment program this summer as planned. “There has been no slowing down, no halt and no retreat. Our activities continue on the same basis we began our peaceful nuclear program,” Foreign Ministry spokesman Mohammad Ali Hosseini told reporters.

So, take them at their word. Then, the question becomes, given the ideology of the Mullahs and their political mouthpiece Ahm-mad-on-a-jihad Ahmadinejad, can the world accept a nuclear Iran?

Israeli says Hamas is training hundreds abroad

Hamas has sent hundreds of its fighters abroad for military training, most of them to Iran, the Israeli Army’s deputy chief of staff says, and Israel has the names of more than 100 of them.

In addition to Iran’s contributions, Ham-ass has a lot more going on than this…which bodes no good for Israel.

National Insecurity

Same Judge, Same Case, Same Result: Same Sedition

Judge Strikes Down Part of Patriot Act

A federal judge struck down a key part of the USA Patriot Act on Thursday in a ruling that defended the need for judicial oversight of laws and bashed Congress for passing a law that makes possible “far-reaching invasions of liberty.”

U.S. District Judge Victor Marrero immediately stayed the effect of his ruling, allowing the government time to appeal. Justice Department spokesman Dean Boyd said: “We are reviewing the decision and considering our options at this time.”

As an alternative philosophy the Chief would offer this tag from Cicero:

SILENT LEGES INTER ARMA. (In time of war, the laws are silent.)

Uncategorized

Moonbat Judge Halts Immigration Screening

1 Comment

Judge Halts Illegal Immigrant Notices

The Social Security Administration has sent out “no-match” letters for more than two decades warning employers of discrepancies in the information the government has on their workers. Employers often brushed aside the letters, and the small fines that sometimes were incurred, as a cost of doing business.

But this year, those letters will be accompanied by notices from the Department of Homeland Security outlining strict new requirements for employers to resolve those discrepancies within 90 days or face fines or criminal prosecution, if they’re deemed to have knowingly hired illegal immigrants.

The judge’s ruling Friday temporarily prohibits the government from enforcing the new rules, which were scheduled to take effect Sept. 14.

This is just nutso. The suit was brought by the AFL-CIO, no doubt preferring new workers to organize, but ignoring the situation of their CURRENT workers who are losing jobs, having wages driven down, etc. due to the loose state of our borders.

Uncategorized

Plamegate Closed by Judge’s Ruling

1 Comment

Plame Lawsuit Dismissed in CIA Leak Case

Former CIA operative Valerie Plame lost a lawsuit Thursday that demanded money from Bush administration officials whom she blamed for leaking her agency identity.

Plame, the wife of former Ambassador Joseph Wilson, had accused Vice President Dick Cheney and others of conspiring to disclose her identity in 2003. Plame said that violated her privacy rights and was illegal retribution for her husband’s criticism of the administration.

U.S. District Judge John D. Bates dismissed the case on jurisdictional grounds and said he would not express an opinion on the constitutional arguments.

this never even got into the salient point that Plame’s “secret status” had been a thing of the past, and at the time of her so-called “outing”, she was a desk analyst, no longer subject to the legal protections afforded to secret field agents.

This whole deal is really much ado about nothing, except an attempt to throw so much mud at the Bush administration that SOMETHING might stick – which didn’t happen except for the side-splatter that hit Scooter Libby.

Uncategorized

Lib Donk Calls for Clemency for Imprisoned Border Agents!

Feinstein to Bush: Free Ramos, Compean

This falls into the category of a “man bites dog” type of story. When Californias Lib Donk Senator Feinstein held hearings and decides that the prosecution and penalties of two border agents imprisoned for the shooting (wounding) of a drug smuggler who was attempting escape was excessive…there HAS to be merit to their case!

This is better than most of the REPUBLICANS are willing to do for crying out loud, to say nothing of Bush’s resolute ignoring of the case, at least thus far.

After presiding over a Senate hearing today, Sen. Dianne Feinstein has decided to ask President Bush to commute the sentences of former U.S. Border Patrol agents Ignacio Ramos and Jose Compean, an aide for the California Democrat told WND.

Feinstein will have a letter delivered to the White House tomorrow, said spokesman Scott Gerber. Following the Senate judiciary committee’s examination of the controversial prosecution, according to Gerber, the senator said “it became very clear the sentences did not match the crime.”

Ramos and Compean are serving 11- and 12-year prison sentences, respectively, after a jury convicted them of violating federal gun laws and covering up the shooting of a drug smuggler as he fled back to Mexico after driving across the border with 742 pounds of marijuana. U.S. Attorney Johnny Sutton’s office gave the smuggler, Osbaldo Aldrete-Davila, immunity to serve as the government’s star witness and testify against the border agents.

It’s high time that these dedicated former agents were sprung from the joint. It would be best if the Prez would grant a full pardon, but hey, after 18 months even a commutation would be an improvement for them.

Uncategorized

SD Exercises Death Penalty Again

Elijah Page executed

The state of South Dakota carried out its first execution in 60 years Wednesday night, taking the life of Elijah Page, 25, for a brutal torture slaying committed in 2000. Page, of Athens, Texas, died at 10:11 p.m. from a lethal injection administered at the South Dakota State Penitentiary.

He pleaded guilty to killing Chester Allan Poage, 19, of Spearfish, who was stabbed, beaten with rocks and forced to drink hydrochloric acid during a robbery of his home. The torture lasted two to three hours.

If the punishment fit the crime, Page got off easy, compared to what HE and his fellow perps did to Poage. At least there is SOME balance rendered by his execution.

SD Politics

Thune: Fairness Doctrine – NOT!

Reject Orwellian Calls for Broadcast ‘Fairness’

SD GOP Senator John Thune has rhetorically smacked one out of the park concerning the recent ongoing Republocratic Demmican discussions of the restoration of the so-called “Fairness Doctrine”.

From its birth, our nation has put a high value on independent thought and freedom of speech. Our Founding Fathers themselves saw their lot as conscientious insurrectionists seeking freedoms they believed were inalienable rights. They understood the importance of permitting freedom of conscience whether it be in the religious, political, or social sphere. Today we continue to fight to preserve these freedoms both here at home and in many dark corners around the world.

Unfortunately, some in Washington DC are reviving an old idea that the government can, and should, regulate the reporting of news, information and ideas. If we take them at their word, they are doing it in the name of “fairness.” But if we look deeper, we may see motives not nearly so noble.

From this excellent start, Sen. Thune goes on to trace the history and effects of the so-called Fairness Doctrine, before concluding:

Since 1987 we have seen even greater growth in how we get news and information including the rise of talk radio, internet news sites, and blogs, yet some critics on the left are calling for the reinstitution of the Fairness Doctrine. The efforts of these critics, who are especially offended by the success of conservative talk radio, should be rejected. Our support for freedom of conscience and freedom of speech means that we must support the rights granted to even those with whom we disagree. Giving power to a few to regulate fairness in the media is a recipe for disaster on the scale that George Orwell so aptly envisioned.

I for one will strongly oppose any efforts to bring back the Fairness Doctrine or other policies similar to it. I have introduced legislation that would prohibit the FCC from reinstituting these policies, which is a good first step. I know the hair stands up on the back of my neck when I hear government officials offering to regulate the news media and talk radio to ensure fairness. I think most Americans have the same reaction. That is why I will do my part to ensure speech remains free and that Americans can continue to debate the issues of the day through our diverse forms of media in a free and open manner.

Hear, hear!

Uncategorized

McCainiac-Feingold Provision Nixed by Supremes

A good day for the Consatitution!

Court allows issue ads near elections

The court, split 5-4, upheld an appeals court ruling that an anti-abortion group should have been allowed to air ads during the final two months before the 2004 elections. The law unreasonably limits speech and violates the group’s First Amendment rights, the court said.

The Chief, not having had his brains sucked out by a law school, could never understand limiting political speech before an election….I mean, there IS the bit in the Constitution about “Congress shall make no law…abridging the freedom of speech…”, although Sen. John (Manchurian Candidate)McCainiac seemed to forget this basic fact.

Predictably enough, he’s not especially a happy camper about this ruling.

McCain: ‘Regrettable’ decision

Sen. John McCain (R-AZ.) (RINO-AZ)on Monday called the Supreme Court’s decision to weaken part of his campaign finance law “regrettable.”

How cruel of the Supremes to remember the Constitution actually is still there in spite of McCain’s Olympian determination of what’s REALLY best for us.

Others (besides the Chief) do not share his view of this:

Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, one of McCain’s main rivals for the GOP nomination, was quick to seize on the decision and made sure that voters knew it was a provision in the Arizona senator’s law that was struck down.

“Score one for free speech,” Romney said. “Today the Supreme Court reaffirmed the First Amendment by rejecting a key feature of McCain-Feingold. The law trampled the basic right of the American people to participate in their democracy. It also purported to reduce the influence of money in politics, but we now know that influence is greater than ever.

“McCain-Feingold was a poorly crafted bill,” Romney added. “Today’s decision restores, in part, to the American people a right critical to their freedom of political participation and expression.”

Hear, hear!

Culture Wars

Hate Speech: “Marriage”, “Family”?

Suit to decide workplace ‘hate speech’

The words “natural family,” “marriage” and “union of a man and a woman” can be punished as “hate speech” in government workplaces, according to a lawsuit that is being appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court.

This is another one of those cases that is so far out there that it staggers the imagination to realize how far things have devolved that the concept of marriage and family is under legal attack as “hate speech”. Hopefully the Supremes will uphold some degree of reason here…but…who knows anymore?

Uncategorized

Criminalization of Politics

Libby Found Guilty in CIA Leak Trial

Once the closest adviser to Vice President Dick Cheney, I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby was convicted Tuesday of lying and obstructing a leak investigation that shook the top levels of the Bush administration.

Four guilty verdicts ended a seven-week CIA leak trial that focused new attention on the Bush administration’s much-criticized handling of intelligence reports about weapons of mass destruction in the run-up to the Iraq war.

The Donks HAD to get someone, anyone, convicted…of anything they could come up with. Scooter Libby was the victim of a set-up artificial situation, generated by Prosecutor Fitzgerald.

This represents the criminalization of political opposition to the liberal politico-media complex. This is perfectly rational to a certain type of ideological viewpoint, and the process is detailed thoroughly in Solzhenitsyn’s GULAG Archipelago.

It’s one more example of one of Claire Wolfe’s statements:

“AMERICA IS AT THAT AWKWARD STAGE. IT’S TOO LATE TO WORK WITHIN THE SYSTEM, BUT TOO EARLY TO START SHOOTING THE BASTARDS”

Uncategorized

Rotten US Prosecution, Prosecutor in Border Case

Official: Mexican Drug Runner Shot by Border Agents Smuggled More Drugs Into U.S.

This is just WRONG!

The Mexican drug runner whose testimony sent two Border Patrol agents to prison for shooting him in the buttocks brought drugs into the United States more than once, thereby diminishing his credibility as a witness in the investigation, according to a California congressman.

That is bad enough, but unfortunately it gets even worse:

Rep. Dana Rohrabacher, R-Calif., presented new evidence in a Capitol Hill press conference Wednesday that revealed what he says was U.S. Attorney Johnny Sutton’s deliberate attempt to mislead the public about Osbaldo Aldrete-Davila’s involvement in the transport of a second load of drugs in October 2005.

Sounds like Sutton is another version of (NC Drake “Rape”) Prosecutor Nifong, with a concern for racking up convictions with no regard for either truth or justice. These guys need to do hard time themselves. What a travesty!