Category: The Law

Categories
Commentary Economy Education Elections Opinion The Law

One law, one page. No state law will be stricter than Federal Law. Part 18.

Winning in the courts.

One law, one page. No state law will be stricter than Federal Law. Part 18.

Where there is a State law that’s similar to Federal law, the state law cannot be stricter than the federal law. Example. If the Federal EPA says gas milage for all cars is 25mpg., no state can have a higher mpg.

There are no exceptions. States like California need to be reigned in. This extends the Supremacy Clause.

The Supremacy Clause of the Constitution of the United States (Article VI, Clause 2) establishes that the Constitution, federal laws made pursuant to it, and treaties made under its authority, constitute the “supreme Law of the Land”, and thus take priority over any conflicting state laws.[1] It provides that state courts are bound by, and state constitutions subordinate to, the supreme law.

 

Categories
Back Door Power Grab Corruption Democrat Elections Harris Cartel Immigration Leftist Virtue(!) Reprints from others. The Courts The Law

Leftists in panic: SCOTUS Lets Virginia Resume “Purge” of Voter Rolls of Non-citizens Before Election.

Reported by USA Today, an obvious leftist publication.

Leftists in panic: SCOTUS Lets Virginia Resume “Purge” of Voter Rolls of Non-citizens Before Election.

WASHINGTON − The Supreme Court on Wednesday allowed Virginia to reinstate a purge of suspected noncitizens from voter rolls.

Over the objections of the three liberal justices, the court accepted an emergency request from state officials to intervene after lower courts stopped a state program that had removed more than 1,600 names since Aug. 7.

The majority did not give a reason for their decision, which is common in emergency orders.

Virginia Gov. Glenn Youngkin, a Republican, called the order a “victory for commonsense and election fairness.”

Danielle Lang, senior director for voting rights at the Campaign Legal Center, which represented advocacy groups in the lawsuit, called it “outrageous” to allow “a last-minute purge that includes many known eligible citizens.”

Sign-up for Your Vote: Text with the USA TODAY elections team.

“But the voters will decide this election, not the courts,” Lang said. “Eligible Virginia voters should know that regardless of this purge they can register to vote on Election Day & cast their ballots.”

Voting rights groups fought the state policy because it removed naturalized citizens from the rolls if they had previously declared themselves noncitizens on motor vehicle forms. Youngkin’s program had notified suspected noncitizens they would be removed if they didn’t affirm their citizenship within 14 days.

But because years might have passed since the motor vehicle declarations, advocacy groups and the Justice Department challenged the program in court, arguing naturalized citizens were being removed from the voter rolls.

The advocacy groups quoted Prince William County Registrar Eric Olsen, who said at an election board meeting Sept. 30 that his office reviewed 162 people listed as noncitizens in the state’s computer system and found 43 had voted previously. But his office checked and found all 43 had verified their citizenship − some as many as five times − but were still dropped from voter rolls.

A Trump supporter who was purged from the rolls told Cardinal News he suspects he forgot to mark his citizenship status on the Virginia Department of Motor Vehicles form when he renewed his driver’s license.

Another voter, who showed NPR her passport, said she doesn’t know why the DMV incorrectly recorded her as a noncitizen.

In addition to blocking further purges, U.S. District Judge Patricia Giles ordered the state to restore the registrations of those canceled since Aug. 7 because federal law prohibits voter purges within 90 days of an election when voters may not have enough time to fix errors. A federal appeals court upheld that decision.

But Virginia Attorney General Jason Miyares told the Supreme Court the federal “quiet period” provision doesn’t apply to removing noncitizens from the voter rolls because they never should have been on the rolls.

Even if a citizen is mistakenly purged from the rolls, Miyares said, that person can re-register to vote and cast a provisional ballot.

The Justice Department argued that Virginia could still investigate specific individuals – including any of the 1,600 – it suspects are noncitizens but can’t use a broad-based removal method this close to an election.

“Everyone agrees that States can and should remove ineligible voters, including noncitizens, from their voter rolls,” Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar told the Supreme Court. “The only question in this case is when and how they may do so.”

Studies have found a negligible number of suspected noncitizens vote, presumably because of the threat of criminal charges and deportation if caught. Studies by the Brennan Center for Justice and the libertarian Cato Institute have found noncitizen voting is essentially nonexistent.

But Republicans have made removal of suspected noncitizens a focus of their voter integrity lawsuits this year.

So, leftist studies show non-citizens aren’t on the voter rolls? Really? Despite proof that they are? How — uhm — LEFTIST of them.

Categories
Biden Cartel Censorship Commentary Corruption Democrat Elections Government Overreach Links from other news sources. Opinion Politics The Courts The Law Voter Fraud

If this is what we have to do to win. 90 Lawsuits filed against voter fraud.

Election stickers during Nevada’s presidential primary election in Las Vegas earlier this year. Republican groups have filed numerous lawsuits challenging voting rules across the country, including one filed in Nevada this month.Credit...Bridget Bennett for The New York Times

If this is what we have to do to win. 90 Lawsuits filed against voter fraud.

In many of the states and counties you have Democrats trying to go around or just totally ignore present law.

“Our legal efforts are fighting to fix the problems in the system, hold election officials accountable, protect election safeguards and defend the law. While Democrats want a system open to fraud without safeguards, that counts illegal votes, we are committed to securing the election so every legal vote is protected,” Gineen Bresso, who is running the election integrity operation for the Republican National Committee and the Trump campaign, said in a statement.

Categories
Biden Cartel Commentary Corruption Crime Elections Harris Cartel Links from other news sources. Politics The Law Voter Fraud

How could this be? Democratic Candidate Arrested on Multiple Felony Voter Fraud Charges.

Caught another Democrat cheating.

How could this be? Democratic Candidate Arrested on Multiple Felony Voter Fraud Charges.

Every time I see an article on voter fraud I think about this loon in California who claimed to have checked all fifty states for voter fraud and only found one case. And supposedly a Republican.

Well, I haven’t checked all fifty states, but it seems as if every time there is an article on voter fraud, it’s a Democrat. A Democratic Party candidate is being charged with a bevy of felony counts, all related to alleged voter fraud.

Terry Andrew Heflin, the 45-year old candidate for a commission seat in Clay County, Alabama, was arrested Tuesday on seven counts of unlawful use of absentee ballots, according to a news release from the Alabama Attorney General’s office. Each unlawful use of the ballots comes with a punishment ranging from one to 10 years in prison.

Categories
Biden Biden Cartel Corruption Elections Government Overreach Lawfare The Law Trump Weaponization of Government.

MEGA WINNING! Judge Cannon Dismisses Classified Documents Case: Unconstitutional Appointment of Jack Smith

Judge Aileen Cannon has dismissed the high-profile classified documents case, citing the unlawful appointment of Special Counsel Jack Smith.

This decision comes as a significant blow to the Biden regime and the Department of Justice, raising questions about the integrity of the entire investigation.

Attorney General Garland violated the Constitution by appointing Jack Smith to conduct this politically motivated persecution against President Trump.

The decision effectively halts the prosecution led by Special Counsel Jack Smith, appointed by Attorney General Merrick Garland.

In her ruling, Judge Cannon wrote:

Former President Trump’s Motion to Dismiss Indictment Based on the Unlawful Appointment and Funding of Special Counsel Jack Smith is GRANTED in accordance with this Order [ECF No. 326]. The Superseding Indictment is DISMISSED because Special Counsel Smith’s appointment violates the Appointments Clause of the United States Constitution. U.S.

Const., Art. I, $ 2, cl. 2. Special Counsel Smith’s use of a permanent indefinite appropriation also violates the Appropriations Clause, U.S. Const., Art. I, § 9, cl. 7, but the Court need not address the proper remedy for that funding violation given the dismissal on Appointments Clause grounds.

The effect of this Order is confined to this proceeding.

The court found that Smith’s appointment did not adhere to the Appointments Clause, which requires that principal officers of the United States be appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate.

The Special Counsel’s use of a permanent indefinite appropriation was also deemed a violation of the Appropriations Clause, although the court did not address the remedy for this funding violation given the dismissal on Appointments Clause grounds.

The case, which stemmed from a grand jury indictment on June 8, 2023, charged Trump with 31 counts of willful retention of national defense information and additional conspiracy and concealment charges against Trump and his co-defendants, Waltine Nauta and Carlos De Oliveira. The indictment was later expanded to 42 charges in a superseding indictment.

President Trump previously filed a motion to dismiss Jack Smith’s classified documents charges based on the “unlawful appointment and funding of Special Counsel.”

Day one of the expanded evidentiary hearing was held last month.

According to NBC News, President Trump’s lawyers “argued that an officer like the special counsel must be appointed “by law” and that the special counsel should be categorized as a “principal officer” and subject to Senate confirmation. The statutory text cited by the special counsel’s office “does not authorize” the U.S. attorney general’s appointment of the special counsel, his lawyer, Emil Bove, argued.”

Cannon did question whether Attorney General Merrick had any oversight role in seeking the indictment against Trump.

Jack Smith’s prosecutor James Pearce refused to answer and claimed it would be against policy to answer the question.

“Why would there be any heartburn to answer whether the attorney general signed off on the indictment?” Cannon asked.

Recall, Conservative Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas questioned Jack Smith’s authority as special counsel in his concurring opinion on the high court’s presidential immunity ruling.

Last month, the Supreme Court ruled 6-3 that Trump has absolute immunity for his core constitutional powers. Former presidents are entitled to at least a presumption of immunity for their official acts.

The Supreme Court ruled that there is no immunity for unofficial acts.

Clarence Thomas questioned Jack Smith’s authority because he was a private citizen when he was tapped as a special prosecutor.

“I write separately to highlight another way in which this prosecution may violate our constitutional structure. In this case, the Attorney General purported to appoint a private citizen as Special Counsel to prosecute a former President on behalf of the United States. But, I am not sure that any office for the Special Counsel has been “established by Law,” as the Constitution requires. Art. II, §2, cl. 2. By requiring that Congress create federal offices “by Law,” the Constitution imposes an important check against the President — he cannot create offices at his pleasure. If there is no law establishing the office that the Special Counsel occupies, then he cannot proceed with this prosecution. A private citizen cannot criminally prosecute anyone, let alone a former President,” Clarence Thomas said.

Clarence Thomas argued that no other former US President has been prosecuted for official acts despite numerous past Presidents taking actions that would argue constitutes crimes.

“No former President has faced criminal prosecution for his acts while in office in the more than 200 years since the founding of our country. And, that is so despite numerous past Presidents taking actions that many would argue constitute crimes. If this unprecedented prosecution is to proceed, it must be conducted by someone duly authorized to do so by the American people. The lower courts should thus answer these essential questions concerning the Special Counsel’s appointment before proceeding,” Clarence Thomas wrote.

Thomas also argued that Jack Smith is not senate confirmed (Trump’s lawyers are also using this argument before Judge Cannon).

“The Constitution sets forth how an office may be created and how it may be filled. The Appointments Clause provides: “[The President] shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Department.” Art. II, §2, cl. 2. The constitutional process for filling an office is plain from this text. The default manner for appointing “Officers of the United States” is nomination by the President and confirmation by the Senate. Ibid. “But the Clause provides a limited exception for the appointment of inferior officers: Congress may ‘by Law’ authorize” one of three specified actors “to appoint inferior officers without the advice and con-sent of the Senate.” NLRB v. SW General, Inc., 580 U. S. 288, 312 (2017) (THOMAS, J., concurring). As relevant here, a “Hea[d] of Department”—such as the Attorney General—is one such actor that Congress may authorize “by Law” to appoint inferior officers without senatorial confirmation. Art. II, §2, cl. 2.

Thomas once again reiterated that a special prosecutor must be senate confirmed.

“Before the President or a Department Head can appoint any officer, however, the Constitution requires that the underlying office be “established by Law.”1 The Constitution itself creates some offices, most obviously that of the President and Vice President. See §1. Although the Constitution contemplates that there will be “other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for,” it clearly requires that those offices “shall be established by Law.” §2, cl. 2. And, “established by law” refers to an office that Congress creates “by statute.” Lucia v. SEC, 585 U. S. 237, 254 (2018) (THOMAS, J., concurring); see also United States v. Maurice, 26 F. Cas. 1211, 1213 (No. 15,747) (CC Va. 1823) (Marshall, C. J.).”

In her detailed opinion, Judge Cannon emphasized the importance of the separation of powers and the role of Congress in the appointment process. She highlighted that none of the statutes cited by the Special Counsel—28 U.S.C. §§ 509, 510, 515, and 533—provided the Attorney General with the authority to appoint a Special Counsel with the full powers of a United States Attorney.

“The Appointments Clause is a critical constitutional restriction stemming from the separation of powers, and it gives to Congress a considered role in determining the propriety of vesting appointment power for inferior officers,” Cannon wrote.

“The Special Counsel’s position effectively usurps that important legislative authority, transferring it to a Head of Department, and in the process threatening the structural liberty inherent in the separation of powers,” she added.

Original article here:

Categories
Back Door Power Grab Biden Cartel Crime Drugs Elections Government Overreach The Courts The Law Weaponization of Government.

The Surveillance State is Already Here: Are Cops Using Cell Simulators to Track Your Every Move?

 

StingRay? Hailstorm? HUH?

Simply put, these are spy devices used by various federal, state, and local agencies that turn your cell phone into a homing beacon, letting them listen to your incoming and outgoing phone calls and read your emails and texts. And it os so precise that it can track you down to the very room you are in if you’re carrying your cell phone. But the various agencies don’t like to talk about them. Hmm. Why? What could possibly go wrong?

The StingRay is an IMSI catcher with both passive (digital analyzer) and active (cell-site simulator) capabilities. When operating in active mode, the device mimics a wireless carrier cell tower to force all nearby mobile phones and other cellular data devices to connect to it. The newer “Hailstorm” device works similarly but can also eavesdrop on 4-G phones and devices.

A StingRay can be used to identify and track a phone or other compatible cellular data device even while the device is not engaged in a call or accessing data services!

What’s even scarier is that and cellphone use in the area of a StingRay device, is sucked up as well as the “target”. According to DOJ POLICY (not a law) any data obtained on innocent bystanders must be deleted in 60 days. SERIOUSLY? Once they get hands on your data they have it forever. If their claims were true, then how can the intelligence agencies be able to comb through millions of people’s data YEARS after it was intercepted? Oops!

SIDEBAR:

Despite claims that your vote is anonymous — at least for in-person ballots — the fact is each ballot has a unique id number  (several in fact). And when you vote in person, your ballot’s serial number is recorded in the election official log book next to your name. Guess what, they can then go back and see who you voted for, all without you knowing. Whether it is actually being used this way is moot. The plain fact is that it CAN be used this way. Bring back the mechanical machines that only total votes. — TPR

Disrupting service AKA DENIAL OF SERVICE (isn’t that a crime?)

The FBI has claimed that when used to identify, locate, or track a cellular device, the StingRay does not collect communications content or forward it to the service provider. Instead, the device causes a disruption in service. Under this scenario, any attempt by the cellular device user to place a call or access data services will fail while the StingRay is conducting its surveillance. On August 21, 2018, Senator Ron Wyden noted that Harris Corporation confirmed that Stingrays disrupt the targeted phone’s communications. Additionally, he noted that “while the company claims its cell-site simulators include a feature that detects and permits the delivery of emergency calls to 9-1-1, its officials admitted to my office that this feature has not been independently tested as part of the Federal Communications Commission’s certification process, nor were they able to confirm this feature is capable of detecting and passing-through 9-1-1 emergency communications made by people who are deaf, hard of hearing, or speech disabled using Real-Time Text technology.”

In fact, it has already been used during mass demonstrations, so the protestors could not talk to each other. I leave the legality and constitutionality of such uses as an exercise for the student.

 

The FBI has claimed that when used to identify, locate, or track a cellular device, the StingRay does not collect communications content or forward it to the service provider.

Yeah, right!

There are no laws currently on the books at any level of government (*except UTAH) regulating the use of this equipment. Several court cases have determined that use of these machines constitutes Warrantless searches and as such their use violates the 4th amendment, but no case has made it to the SCOTUS yet..

 

Federal Agencies Known to Use Cell Site Simulators:

Federal Bureau of Investigation

Federal Bureau of Investigation

Drug Enforcement Administration Drug Enforcement Administration

U.S. Secret Service U.S. Secret Service

Immigration and Customs Enforcement Immigration and Customs Enforcement

U.S. Marshals Service U.S. Marshals Service

Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives

IRS Internal Revenue Service

U.S. Army U.S. Army

U.S. Navy U.S. Navy

U.S. Marine Corps U.S. Marine Corps

U.S. National Guard U.S. National Guard

U.S. Special Operations Command U.S. Special Operations Command

National Security Agency National Security Agency

CBP

Customs and Border Protection

Still think you’re safe from unconstitutional searches and seizures?

Categories
Back Door Power Grab Biden Biden Cartel Censorship Corruption Journalism. Lawfare New York The Courts The Law Uncategorized Weaponization of Government.

MORE LAWFARE! (They’ll be coming for others soon) Epoch Times CFO Arrested and Charged with $67 Million Money Laundering Scheme

MORE LAWFARE! (They’ll be coming for others soon) Epoch Times CFO Arrested and Charged with $67 Million Money Laundering Scheme

The charges against Guan “do not relate to the Media Company’s newsgathering activities,” the Bidem DOJ noted in a press release.

Prosecutors alleged the money laundering scheme benefited “a multinational media company headquartered in Manhattan, New York.” The Epoch Times is headquartered on West 28th Street in Manhattan.

By  

The chief financial officer of conservative global news outlet The Epoch Times has been arrested and charged with leading a yearslong scheme to launder at least $67 million in illicit funds, federal prosecutors said Monday.

The scheme — which involved cryptocurrency, tens of thousands of prepaid debit cards, fraudulently obtained unemployment insurance benefits and stolen personal information — fueled a massive increase in The Epoch Times’ reported annual revenue, prosecutors alleged.

Weidong “Bill” Guan, 61, is charged in U.S. District Court in lower Manhattan with one count of conspiracy to commit money laundering and two counts of bank fraud.

Guan was arrested Sunday morning, and pleaded not guilty on Monday afternoon before a federal magistrate judge in Manhattan, according to a court notice. He was released on a $3 million personal recognizance bond, and his travel is restricted to parts of New York and New Jersey, among other restrictions. [Guess they’re trying to look more ‘even-handed’ –TPR]

Guan “conspired with others to benefit himself, the media company, and its affiliates by laundering tens of millions of dollars in fraudulently obtained unemployment insurance benefits and other crime proceeds,” U.S. Attorney Damian Williams said in a statement.

“When banks raised questions about the funds, Guan allegedly lied repeatedly and falsely claimed that the funds came from legitimate donations to the media company,” Williams said.

The Epoch Times is not mentioned by name in the indictment. But Guan is listed as Epoch Times’ chief financial officer on the nonprofit media company’s most recent tax return, filed in late 2023.

Prosecutors alleged the money laundering scheme benefited “a multinational media company headquartered in Manhattan, New York.” The Epoch Times is headquartered on West 28th Street in Manhattan.

Prosecutors allege the scheme by Guan and his co-conspirators caused the company’s revenue to jump from “approximately $15 million to approximately $62 million” between 2019 and 2020.

According to The Epoch Times’ publicly available IRS nonprofit tax returns, in 2019 the company reported program revenue of $15.5 million. The following year, The Epoch Times reported tax-exempt revenue of $62.7 million.

Guan, a resident of Secaucus, New Jersey, managed the Epoch Times’ “Make Money Online team,” which carried out the scheme to buy “crime proceeds” and transfer them to bank accounts linked to the media outlet, according to his indictment.

From 2020 to 2024, the team allegedly used a crypto platform to buy tens of millions of dollars in crime proceeds at discounted rates, of 70 to 80 cents on the dollar, in exchange for cryptocurrency. The crime proceeds, which came from sources including “fraudulently obtained unemployment insurance benefits,” were loaded onto tens of thousands of prepaid debit cards, prosecutors alleged.

After purchasing the crime proceeds, participants allegedly used stolen personally identifiable information to open various types of accounts and transfer the proceeds into bank accounts linked with the media outlet and related entities.

Gotcha now!

They were often laundered again through other accounts, including Guan’s own personal bank and crypto accounts, according to prosecutors.

To hide the illegal nature of the proceeds, Guan and his co-conspirators allegedly lied to banks and other entities about their sources.

An attorney for Guan could not immediately be reached, but a case docket showed late Monday that Guan had been appointed a public defender.

A spokesperson for the Manhattan U.S. Attorney’s Office declined to provide any additional comment on the indictment against Guan, which was filed in late May and unsealed Monday.

The bank fraud counts each carry a maximum sentence of 30 years in prison, while the conspiracy holds a 20-year maximum prison sentence. The charges against Guan “do not relate to the Media Company’s newsgathering activities,” the Department of Justice noted in a press release.

NBC News and other outlets have reported on The Epoch Times’ affiliation with the Chinese religious group Falun Gong, which in recent years has supported former President Donald Trump as an ally in its opposition to the country’s ruling Chinese Communist Party.

Categories
Affirmative Action Corruption Gun Control How sick is this? Racism The Law WOKE

Protecting Yourself from a Bully with a Badge (When You’ve Done Nothing Wrong.) Part 2

Protecting Yourself from a Bully with a Badge (When You’ve Done Nothing Wrong.) Part 2

Cop Gets FIRED After Troopers Call Out His INSANE Behavior

The  main focus of this episode happened in my home state, on a road that I regularly traveled: US Route 23, on Independence Day 2023

video
play-sharp-fill

AN “ASSAULT RIFLE” TRAINED ON THE TRUCK!

While the main idiot here is the cop, we see at the 1:02 mark an OHP (Ohio Highway Patrol – aka State police) officer exiting his vehicle WITH AN “ASSAULT RIFLE” TRAINED ON THE TRUCK — over a mud flap! I would also pull away if I saw an ASSAULT RIFLE aimed at me for no apparent reason! Note this officer copsplained his reason for doing that the truck driver had made “direct eye contact” with the officer signaling him to pull over — something that is physically impossible given the Patrolman was in his car while the Driver was in the cab of his truck. PRIMA FACIE, there is physically NO WAY this could occur given the difference in heights of the car and the cab of the truck, So this right off was a bad call.

Getting to the meat of this video:
From about 4:16 OHP radio:”Circleville PD has a dog” 4:19(OHP):“That’s a dog. Come to me!” “You don’t want bit!”
4:25 Circleville COP:“Get on the ground, or you’re gonna get bit!”
Here, we can see two conflicting orders: Come to me (OHP) and Get on the ground, or you’re going to get bit! (Circleville cop)

My personal opinion is that this cop was NOT in charge and should have kept his mouth shut and kept that dog in the cruiser. But what do I know, right?

From this point on OHP repeatedly tells the cop not to release the dog, which the cop ignores. The cop runs towards the trucker who is clearly seen to have his hands in the air. At about the 4:43 mark the cop RELEASED the dog, who runs away from the trucker towards the OHP officers.

Trucker was already on his knees when the cop ordered his dog — which had veered off — to ATTACK!
Dog hasn’t been pulled off the trucker who was on his knees with his hands in the air when the Circleville cop ordered the dog to attack him. The cop is just standing there instead of calling the dog off.

HERE’S WHERE IT GETS REALLY UGLY:

At 4:45 the Cop ORDERS THE DOG TO ATTACK! Against a man ON HIS KNEES ALREADY!! The dog attacks for at least 10-12 seconds before he is finally made to stop.

This cop was eventually fired, but not for siccing his dog on the helpless trucker, but for lying during the investigation!!

What is truly unbelievable is that THE COURTS said he was wrongfully terminated, turned his firing into a ‘resignation,’ fixed his record so he could go work for another police department, and allowed him to “adopt” the dog he used as a deadly weapon for $1!

Comments on the video:

@chitownracing
Even the dog knew he wasn’t a threat, he ran right past him.

@alixena9340
Exactly. The dog is trained to detect the person that is the threat and deal with them. The dog does not have to be told any history. That dog determined that the dude was not a threat and so went looking elsewhere for the actual threat.

@RumbelinGrumbelin
“Come to me!” “Get on the ground”
Good lord, I swear they create situations like this on purpose so they can escalate force

@trashsplashtucker
Update: Rose got a $225,000 settlement from the city with a lawsuit. The shitty cop got $40,000 for the “termination without cause” lawsuit, his firing removed from his record in favor of a forced “resignation”, a “neutral” letter detailing the time he worked for the county (essentially a letter of recommendation for another county to hire him after his “resignation”), and a deal to purchase the dog he used as a weapon from the city for $1. Gotta love our “justice” system.

@mangoismangois1672
They just proved this man’s fear of police very right

@budc.8172
Sounds like this mans fear of stopping was COMPLETLY justified.

@boanoah6362
“I told him if he doesn’t get on the ground he’s going to get the dog.”

Says the officer who ordered his dog to attack the suspect WHILE HE WAS ON THE GROUND SURRENDERING! The fact this cop didn’t get prison time for an actual literal war crime is deeply upsetting.

@Ott3rKing
The fact that the highway patrol were telling them to not release the dog and that one trooper was walking away covering her face tells you everything you need to know about how bad this situation is.

Here, it isn’t merely an ego-tripping corrupt cop, but a corrupt judge, a trooper lying about the initial contact, and the other State troopers doing the bare minimum for the Trucker. 

And all over a missing mud flap!

From the open road to a person’s house:

This one shows the victim was killed in her own house by a cop that went lurking around her house without identifying himself and fired off his gun less than 2 seconds after the victim looked out her window to see what/who was making the noise in her back yard:

video
play-sharp-fill

The red flags were there, but the PD ignored them and ignored their own psychologist’s warning that the man was a narcissist and lacked the temperament needed for the job.

And police wonder why they aren’t trusted?

Next, Good cops.

Categories
Biden Cartel Commentary Elections Links from other news sources. The Law

New Georgia election law. The good, bad, and the ugly.

It's a good start.

New Georgia election law. The good, bad, and the ugly. Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp has signed an election reform measure. Senate Bill 189, which updates the earlier SB 202, the Election Integrity Act of 2021.

The good. Removes the Secretary of State from the State Election Board and bars local election officials, elections board and Secretary of State employees from securing state contracts specific to voting equipment. It also sets deadlines for submitting absentee ballots, establishes additional ballot chain of custody rules. The expansion of the ability to challenge and potentially remove ineligible voters from the voter rolls.

The bad. Some of the features don’t start till 2025 and 2026.

The ugly. The ACLU of Georgia said it planned a legal challenge. Plus the same old Secretary of State is going to oversee this.

Categories
Biden Cartel Corruption Government Overreach Lawfare Reprints from others. The Courts The Law Trump

CNN Legal Analyst Stunned by Stormy Daniels’ ‘Disastrous’ Courtroom Admission: ‘A Big Deal’

Long in the tooth Stormy Daniels
CNN Legal Analyst Stunned by Stormy Daniels’ ‘Disastrous’ Courtroom Admission: ‘A Big Deal’
By Allison Anton for Western journal, May 8, 2024

(with additions by TPR)

When even the most hysterically anti-Trump news outlet has been forced to admit the star witness in the current trial against the former president lacks credibility, you know that case is in trouble.

The case in question was the “hush money” trial Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg has brought against Donald Trump regarding the alleged illegality of a payment supposedly made to porn star Stormy Daniels to prevent her from speaking about an alleged affair.

Taking the stand on Tuesday, and irritating the entire courtroom with an unending string of needless details, Daniels’ testimony forced even a CNN legal expert to cast doubts on her overall credibility.

Senior CNN legal analyst Elie Honig appeared on a panel on Anderson Cooper’s show, discussing Daniels’ testimony and cross-examination by the defense.

video
play-sharp-fill
(I noted that the clip portrays another panel member, Norman Eisman—without realizing it—as just another Trump-hating witch hunter. He wrote a book “TRYING TRUMP -A guide to His First Election Interference Criminal Trial” and served as a Democratic ‘special counsel’ on Trump’s first impeachment trial(!) If that doesn’t shout BIASED!! I don’t know what could possibly make it any MORE obvious. — TPR)

While his peers were more impressed with Daniels’ testimony, especially under cross-examination, Honig admitted he had “the exact opposite impression.”

According to Honig, while Daniels was “plausible on her explanation of what happened in that hotel room” in 2006, she nevertheless fell flat on her face with the cross-examination.

In Honig’s words, in the cross-examination, “her responses were disastrous.”

Citing one of the questions put to Daniels, Honig said “‘Do you hate Donald Trump?’ Yes, of course she does. That’s a big deal. When the witness hates the person whose liberty is at stake, that’s a big d**n deal.”

As Honig pointed out, her statements left a great weak spot for the defense to exploit: “The defense is going to say, she’s willing to defy a court order … She’s not going to respect the order of a judge, why is she going to respect this oath she took?

“So,” Honig concluded, “I thought it went quite poorly.”

Ouch.

She previously signed a statement saying her story about the one-night stand was false.

Now, of course, Honig was only articulating what most who have been paying attention (without being blinded by Trump Derangement Syndrome) already knew quite well.

Daniels’ whole motivation in going after Trump has been the same as everyone else who has been prosecuting him — to prevent him from winning the presidency again in November.

She freely admitted on the stand that she hated him. Daniels admitted she has thus far failed to pay the money she owed to Trump (~$500,000 — TPR)  because it “wasn’t fair.” She has previously stated that she would go to jail before she’d pay “that shit” what she owed per court order.

The Post Millennial likewise reported that Judge Juan Merchan, despite tossing out the defense’s mistrial request, nevertheless had to admit Daniels went into far too much detail and was “difficult to control.”

LAS VEGAS, NEVADA – JANUARY 26: Copies of adult film actress/director Stormy Daniels’ book “Full Disclosure” are displayed during a signing at the 2019 AVN Adult Entertainment Expo at the Hard Rock Hotel & Casino on January 26, 2019 in Las Vegas, Nevada. (Photo by Ethan Miller/Getty Images)

For these and many other reasons (including previously signing a statement (see below) saying her story about the affair was false), Daniels was not a credible witness, and could only hinder rather than help the prosecution.

“Over the past few weeks, I have been asked countless times to comment on reports of an alleged sexual relationship I had with Donald Trump many, many, many years ago.

“The fact of the matter is that each party to this alleged affair denied its existence in 2006, 2011, 2016, 2017 and now again in 2018. I am not denying the affair because I was paid ‘hush money’ as has been reported in overseas owned tabloids. I am denying this affair because it never happened.”

–Statement of Stormy Daniels Jan 30, 2018 — prior to Trump’s State of the Union address — and her “interview” afterwards with Jimmy Kimmel.

And the fact that even a CNN legal expert could readily admit that her cross-examination was disastrous for the prosecution was incredibly telling.

Why should a witness who says they hate the defendant and who has refused a court order to pay that defendant be listened to?

Even the most legally ignorant member of the jury had to be asking questions about her credibility after she admitted that.

Daniels cannot be trusted to tell the truth. But, between her active social media presence and eager appearances on shows like The View, that should have been clear before the trial ever started.

It was only because of the blind prejudice of folks like Alvin Bragg that this trial got as far as it did in the first place.

So why was she even allowed to testify? Three reasons: TDS, she took her clothes off regularly for pay, and $$$$$$ in publicity and far-left, deep-pocket donors. — TPR