Category: Law & Order

Yeah, this is going to work out for the good. /sarc

Philadelphia Police Alter Low-Level Arrest Policies During Coronavirus Crisis

Philadelphia police will make significant modifications to the department’s protocol involving arrests, following guidance to mitigate the risk of spreading the coronavirus, officials announced on Tuesday.

Effective Tuesday, arrests for most non-violent offenses will only be made pursuant to an arrest warrant that will be served at a later date.

“This means that a person, who would ordinarily be arrested and processed at a detective division, will now be temporarily detained for the purpose of confirming identity, as well as completion of required paperwork,” police said in a statement. “At a later date, that person will be arrested pursuant to an arrest warrant.”……

If a police officer believes releasing an individual would pose a threat to public safety, the officer will notify a supervisor to review the circumstances and make an appropriate determination.

An internal memo from police commissioner Danielle Outlaw specifies that crimes including narcotics activity, theft, burglary, prostitution, stolen automobiles, vandalism and certain economic crimes will not necessarily result in detention, according to WHYY.

The department also will temporarily stop enforcing bench warrants to those who fail to show up to court, according to the memo.

Constitutional powers and issues during a quarantine situation.

The growing concerns about the coronavirus in the United States could lead to government officials considering isolation and quarantine as possible measures to contain the virus. So what does that mean in constitutional terms?

So far, people exposed to the COVID-19 virus have agreed to “self-quarantine,” or voluntarily remain in isolation in consultation with medical authorities. In Santa Clara, Calif., and San Francisco, officials have banned large gatherings. In New Rochelle, N.Y., Gov. Andrew Cuomo has established a “containment area,” while Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Wolf on Thursday closed down public schools in Montgomery County, a Philadelphia suburb.

But what happens if the federal officials or a state government needs to get directly involved in a situation where large population groups need to be isolated? Or what rights do individuals retain in border-entry situations?

According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (or CDC), state governments, and not the federal government, have most of the power to place people in isolation or quarantine under certain circumstances. But in some cases, federal and state officials have overlapping roles.

Link: List of Federal quarantine laws

The difference between an isolation and quarantine situation is important. Isolation separates people known to be ill from those who people who are not sick, says the CDC. Quarantine separates and also restricts the movement of people exposed to a contagious disease, but not yet ill, to see if they become sick.

In 2014, the Congressional Research Service wrote about quarantines and the federal Constitution when there were concerns about the Ebola virus. In general, the Research Service said the power to take quarantine measures is reserved to the states under the 10th Amendment. In 1824, Supreme Court Chief Justice John Marshall’s opinion in Gibbons v. Ogden drew a clear line between the federal government and the state governments when it came to regulating activities within and between states.

Marshall’s reasoning set the precedent that police powers are reserved to states for activities within their borders (with some exceptions). Those police powers include the ability to impose isolation and quarantine conditions. Marshall wrote that quarantine laws “form a portion of that immense mass of legislation which embraces everything within the territory of a State not surrendered to the General Government.”

The Research Service also noted that one trend in common today among the states is the “antiquity” of their quarantine laws, with many statutes between 40 and 100 years old.

To be sure, the federal government has important quarantine powers. Under section 361 of the Public Health Service Act, the U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services has the power to take measures to contain communicable diseases from foreign countries into the United States and between states. The CDC acts on behalf of the Secretary in these matters.

Federal public health and welfare statutes also give the federal government authority to isolate and quarantine persons with certain diseases, based on an executive order issued by President George W. Bush in 2003. The federal government also has a seldom-used power to impose large-scale quarantines. For example, the federal government issued isolation and quarantine orders during the Spanish Influenza pandemic in 1918 and 1919.

But under the Constitution, individuals have rights in quarantine and isolation conditions. Under the 5th and 14th Amendment’s rights of Due Process and Equal Protection, public health regulations used to impose such conditions can’t be “arbitrary, oppressive and unreasonable.”

There are precedents where courts have ruled that states or local governments didn’t meet a burden of proof to justify a quarantine. For example, in 1900 courts ruled against the city of San Francisco when it tried to inoculate and then quarantine Chinese residents against the bubonic plague when the courts had doubts that plague conditions existed.

And there also precedents that authorities should provide confined people with an explanation about why they are confined and notify them they have a right to counsel and other constitutional provisions.

A current example of a federal quarantine order related to the COVID-19 virus on the CDC website outlines many of these principles for people arriving in the United States and “reasonably” suspected by the CDC of exposure to or infection with the coronavirus. Those quarantined have the right to a medical review and “to ask a federal court to review your federal quarantine, including any rights to habeas review.”

Also, the federal government does have an updated plan to cope with a national influenza pandemic. First developed in 2005 and last updated in 2017, the National Pandemic Influenza Plans deal with isolation and quarantine options if needed.

Of course, one final question is how can the government enforce isolation and quarantine conditions?

On Friday, The Wall Street Journal reported that people in Missouri and New Hampshire recently violated self-quarantine orders to attend events. Enforcing those orders is problematic, said one expert. “It really is pretty much the honor system,” said Polly Price, a professor of law and global health at Emory University, told the Journal. “Public-health people themselves can’t arrest someone or force them to stay somewhere, and they try to use that as an absolute last resort.”

Government agencies do have the power to take action if needed. For example, in Pennsylvania, violators of its Communicable and Noncommunicable Diseases code (Chapter 27 of Health and Safety Act 28) may face fines and imprisonment in county jail.

The National Conference of State Legislatures maintains a comprehensive list of state quarantine and isolation statutes, including penalties. Likewise, violation of federal quarantine orders can result in fines and imprisonment under Title 42 of the U.S. Code.

DOJ abruptly drops once-heralded prosecution of Russian troll farm initiated by Mueller

{“The Democrats were bigger meddlers in the 2016 election than the Russians were.
The DNC and Hillary Clinton tampered with a Presidential election when the debate questions were provided to Hillary in advance of the National Presidential Debate, by CNN employee and former chair of the DNC, Donna Brazile. Trump still won the debate.

Conspiring to produce a hoax dossier with the deliberate intention of smearing Donald Trump by linking him with Russia to imply collusion.

The Obama administration used the Secret Service to arrange a meeting between former President Bill Clinton (his plane) and AG Loretta Lynch (her plane) on a isolated part of the tarmac at the airport in Phoenix, Arizona.
Just nine days later, after a year-long investigation, FBI Director James Comey suddenly announced that Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton would not be facing any charges for illegally sending classified information over an illegal and unauthorized server.

The DNC was caught red-handed running a smear campaign against Bernie Sanders, and withheld badly needed campaign funding for Sanders campaign. DNC Chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz was force to resign in shame.”}

In a striking and unexpected abandonment of a once-heralded prosecution initiated by Special Counsel Robert Mueller, the Justice Department moved Monday to drop charges against two Russian companies that were accused of funding a social media meme campaign to further their “strategic goal to sow discord in the U.S. political system, including the 2016 presidential election.”

Late Monday, with jury selection in the case set to begin in just two weeks, a federal judge granted the DOJ’s motion to kill the prosecution. The government acknowledged the Russian companies were never likely to actually face punishment anyway and cited possible national security risks with going forward to trial.

Concord Management and Consulting LLC and Concord Catering were among three companies and 13 individuals charged in February 2018 by Mueller. Their alleged criminal effort included social media postings and campaigns aimed at dividing American public opinion and sowing discord in the electorate, officials said, although no actual impact on voters was ever proven.

Of the 13 Russians and three Russian companies charged by Mueller in the social media disinformation effort, Concord was the sole defendant to enter an appearance in Washington’s federal court and contest and the allegations. Mueller’s 37-page indictment said the actions detailed by prosecutors dated back to 2014. (Mueller later brought separate charges against other entities related to a hack of Democrats’ emails in the summer of 2018.)

READ THE DOJ’S MOTION TO DROP CHARGES

President Trump noted that no Russian collusion with his campaign was ever proven, and Republicans and even left-of-center commenators argued that Russian disinformation was mostly irrelevant, given that social media and other platforms are already rife with inaccuracies.

“Before a pandemic, there was a time when we were relentlessly told to fear Russian social media accounts,” mused journalist Aaron Mate on Monday. “Their juvenile memes not only elected Trump, but also ‘sowed chaos.’ When Mueller indicted 13 Russians over it, he was hailed as a hero. Well, DOJ just dropped the case.”

4 murdered including 1 police officer, 2 wounded, including another police officer, shooter dead in Springfield Mo.

SPRINGFIELD, Mo. (KY3) – Police say a gunman shot three civilians, a Springfield police officer and then himself after an overnight attack inside a Springfield convenience store.

It happened late Sunday night at the Kum and Go on east Chestnut Expressway. Police say Joaquin S. Roman, 31, burst into the store and opened fire killing Troy Rapp, Shannon Perkins, and Matthew Hicks-Morris.

Troy Rapp, 57-year-old man, worked at the Kum and Go. Shannon Perkins, a 46-year-old man, worked for WCA Waste Corporation. Matthew Hicks-Morris, a 22-year-old man, who was a customer in the store.

One other still unidentified civilian is in critical condition.

Springfield police officer Christopher Walsh was shot when he got to the store, before Roman shot and killed himself. Officer Walsh later died at a Springfield hospital.

Police Chief Paul Williams only spoke to reporters for a few minutes Monday morning, but that was more than enough time to see and feel the pain his department is experiencing over Officer Walsh’s death.

The words were difficult for Chief Paul Williams to deliver for the first time in his 10-year career in Springfield.

“Officer Christopher Walsh suffered a fatal gunshot wound and passed away at the hospital,” Williams said.

Speaking to reporters just hours after one of his officers died in a gas station shooting, Williams took the podium and didn’t want to go beyond just the terrible facts.

“It’s way too early,” Williams said.

A string of reported shootings across southeast Springfield late Sunday night led up to Walsh’s death, ultimately leading to the Kum & Go near E. Chestnut and Highway 65.

“Officer Josiah Overton and Officer Christopher Walsh were first to arrive and were immediately fired upon by the suspect,” Williams said.

Both officers were hit.

“Officer Josiah Overton sustained non-life threatening injuries and is being treated at a local hospital,” Williams said.

Officer Overton has been with SPD for two years.

Officer Walsh joined the force in 2016. He was from Springfield. He went to Glendale High School before going through an EMT program at Ozarks Technical Community College.

“Officer Walsh was with SPD for three and a half years and was a U.S. Army veteran who remained active in the Army Reserves,” Williams said.

Officer Walsh’s Army supervisor said this is an emotional time and sent KY3 News a statement.

1st Sgt. Jason Vazquez wrote: “The 428th Transportation Company family is completely heartbroken by the loss of one of its members. Sgt. Christopher Walsh was not only a great husband and father, but an outstanding leader and Soldier.”

Officer Walsh was 32 years old. He leaves behind a wife and daughter, and a chief now leading a department that is faced with the kind of tragedy it hasn’t seen in decades.

“Both of these officers showed significant bravery and were heroic in their actions,” Williams said.

 

 

 

Missouri case that toppled GOP governor boomerangs on Soros-backed prosecutor
St. Louis circuit attorney faces grand jury probe, chief investigator indicted in echoes of Trump-Russia collusion reversal in Washington.

We need to make graphic examples of these political prosecutions persecutions, but public execution just isn’t done these days. The more interesting thing is that the current Governor, the former Sheriff of Polk County, is even more conservative than Greitens -limited- political record showed him to be.
All that political crap-for-brains grandstanding for less than nothing.

Kimberly Gardner made history in 2016, roaring to an election victory as St. Louis city’s first African-American chief prosecutor on a campaign funded heavily by the liberal mega-donor George Soros. Four years later, she finds herself under investigation and her chief investigator already indicted for a prosecution gone bad, one that forced Missouri’s Republican governor to resign in what some now believe may have been a political attack.

Gardner, a Democrat and the city’s circuit attorney, was forced in 2018 to withdraw her indictment accusing Gov. Eric Greitens of felony invasion of privacy for allegedly taking a picture of his scantily clad girlfriend and threatening to release it if she talked about their affair. Gardner’s office dropped the charge after admitting she did not have proof of the photo or its transmission.

Investigators now allege the Greitens prosecution, which forced the governor to resign less than two years into his tenure, was built on lies that included perjury and hiding exculpatory evidence that would have helped demonstrate Greitens’ innocence, court documents show.

Most significantly, testimony transcripts and court records obtained by Just the News show the woman Gardner built her case around, beautician Katrina Sneed, testified she was asked unsolicited by Gardner’s office to come forward as a witness and that she was actually reluctant to accuse Greitens because the entire story of a photo on his mobile phone may have been a dream………..

Homeowner Shoots, Kills Intruder

MILTON, GA — A homeowner shot and killed an intruder Saturday in Milton, police said.

At 8:40 p.m. on Saturday, Milton Police received a 911 call regarding burglary at a home in the 12000 block of New Providence Road.

Prior to police arrival, the suspect reportedly forcibly broke into the home through a locked front door and confronted the homeowner. The homeowner shot the intruder with a handgun, striking him multiple times in the torso.

The suspect was treated at the scene by Milton Fire-Rescue personnel for gunshot wounds, and transported to WellStar North Fulton Hospital. The suspect was later pronounced dead at the hospital.

The deceased suspect was identified as Corey Patton II, 23, from Charlotte, North Carolina. Milton Police said they do not believe there are any other suspects in this case.

Man shot by law enforcement after reportedly trying to carjack off-duty Pueblo County deputy

Definite mistake in the victim selection process. And the copy writer for KKTV need some more schooling because I did a ‘whut?’ the first time I read that headline.

PUEBLO, Colo (KKTV) – A man is dead after first leading police on a chase and then trying to carjack an off-duty Pueblo County sheriff’s deputy late Sunday night.

Pueblo police said officers were investigating a carjacking that happened around 10 p.m. at a 7-Eleven off Elizabeth Street and Highway 50. During that carjacking, officers said the suspect hit the victim in the head with a handgun and stole a 2004 Dodge truck.

The suspect was identified on Tuesday by the Pueblo County Coroner as Joshua Russell of Pueblo.

While police were at the gas station investigating the carjacking, officers said they were talking to a man and woman in an Escalade. During the conversation, the 35-year-old man abruptly took off. At some point during his attempt to flee, police said his car became immobile.

“The speculation is that he hit the curb over here, full head-on, and that’s what damaged the vehicle,” said Sgt. Frank Ortega with the Pueblo Police Department.

Officers sped after the suspect, who didn’t even make it a quarter-mile on Highway 50.

“That individual exited the vehicle with an AR-style rifle and attempted to carjack two vehicles. The first vehicle continued westbound; the second vehicle was an off-duty sheriff’s deputy,” Ortega said.

The deputy fired at the suspect.

“At the same time, or roughly the same time, an on-duty Pueblo police officer engaged the suspect. Several rounds were fired, and the suspect is deceased on scene,” Ortega said.

The shooting happened just before midnight. Ortega said there is no indication that the suspect fired his weapon, but the Colorado Bureau of Investigation is processing the scene for any evidence otherwise. Both the deputy and the officer are on paid administrative leave.

Police said the woman who was with the suspect in the car was interviewed and is cooperating.

Detectives are also investigating whether the suspect is the same person involved in the 7-Eleven carjacking.

“The male that is deceased here on the highway, he doesn’t match the suspect description from the original carjacking exactly,” Ortega said. “But they’re reviewing video from that original incident to see if he’s involved or not.”

Shortly after the shooting, Ortega said police found the Dodge truck that was originally stolen from the 7-Eleven not too far from the scene.

Internal documents, whistleblowers point to alleged underreporting of crime by DC Police
Whistleblowers claim assault, theft cases being downgraded to improve department’s crime stats.

WASHINGTON — Two D.C. police officers have accused their MPD superiors of rigging crime stats to make them look better. Now, WUSA9 has obtained internal documents the whistleblowers say proves their case.

On a hot summer afternoon in August 2019, a woman standing outside a liquor store in Petworth asked a man to buy her some water, according to one of the police reports reviewed by investigative reporter Eric Flack.

What happened next, according to that police report, was unimaginable. The man allegedly slashed the woman’s face and neck with an unknown object, sending her to the hospital.

That might sound like an “assault with a dangerous weapon,” a felony charge that can get you 10 years in prison.

But that’s not the way D.C. Police reported it; instead classifying the alleged crime as a “simple assault” – a misdemeanor that only carries a maximum of 6-months in jail.

In a second case, in the early morning hours on December 25, a night of drinking between a man and his boyfriend ended in an alleged case of domestic violence inside a Columbia Heights apartment.

According to that police report, the suspect grabbed his partner and held a knife to his neck while screaming profanities. But once again the police report says officers did not record the incident as an assault with a dangerous weapon, or even an aggravated assault, which is also a felony.

Instead, the police report shows investigators once again opted to classify the alleged attack as a misdemeanor “simple assault.” In the end, those police reports show neither case ended up being prosecuted.

So why would MPD seemingly downplay crimes in the District by labeling them less serious than they actually were?

Two veteran officers say it is all by design. And they have the documents they say prove it.

“I’m a sergeant for the Metropolitan Police Department, and I’m a whistleblower,” D.C. Police Sgt. Charlotte Djossou said in public testimony January 16 before DC Council’s Committee on the Judiciary and Public Safety.

WUSA9 has now obtained the internal police reports and emails Sgt. Djossou and Officer Knight handed over to Councilmember Charles Allen, the committee chairman, as evidence of their claims that some D.C. Police supervisors are ordering investigators to downgrade crime classifications from more serious crimes to less serious ones.

The goal, the officers say, is to make the city’s crime stats look better.

In addition to those two assault cases, the paperwork obtained by WUSA9 includes evidence that non-violent crimes are being downplayed as well.

An email from an MPD captain in the Fourth District dated March 12 instructs officers to stop using the classification of theft in the second degree where the value of the property stolen is under $25.

Instead, the captain writes that officers should use a charge most people have never heard of: “taking property without right.” It’s an obscure crime designation that carries a maximum of three months in jail rather than the six-month sentence that could come with a theft charge.

Subsequent emails show three separate cases where officers followed that captain’s directive reclassifying theft charges to that lesser known “taking property without right” charge. In two of the cases, those emails cited a lack of “solvability factors” as the reason.

That didn’t sit well with Sgt. Djossou and Officer Knight, and apparently it didn’t sit well with the district commander either. Months later, he stepped in to reverse that captain’s order in another email discontinuing use of classification “taking property without right” altogether.

So why does how a crime is classified matter?

“It sends the message that this is insignificant,” said Sandra Jackson, executive director of the House of Ruth, which shelters and advises victims of domestic violence……..

 

Gov. Andy Beshear signs bill requiring school resource officers to carry guns

Despite calls from civil rights groups to veto the legislation, Gov. Andy Beshear on Friday signed a bill requiring school police to carry guns.

All Kentucky schools are now required to have at least one armed police officer under state law, effective immediately.

While understanding opposition to the measure, Beshear said at a press conference Friday he could not allow officers to not have the weapons they may need in confronting a school shooting.

“I simply cannot ask a school resource officer to stop an armed gunman entering a school without them having the ability to not only achieve this mission, but also to protect themselves,” Beshear said. “We must be able to stop the worst of the worst.”

Signing Senate Bill 8 is best for the state as a whole, he continued.

Moving forward, Beshear said his administration will work on training officers to “start addressing the reason some kids might not feel safe because of a police officer.”

Beshear’s decision comes after the bill passed the Senate and House with large bipartisan margins, making a veto almost guaranteed to be overridden.

President Trump Starts to Drain the Swamp, Yanks Jessie Liu Treasury Dept. Nomination

This was the week that President Trump really started to drain the swamp. It came when he yanked the nomination of Jessie Liu to a Treasury Department post. The decision was all Trump’s and occurred after Trump learned details about what was going on when she was United States Attorney for the District of Columbia.

Though Trump was most aggravated with Liu not clamping down on the outrageous sentencing recommendations of her staff in the Roger Stone case, there was a long list of other concerns that made it clear to the president the extent of ideological weaponization across the Justice Department.

Let’s start with Roger Stone for now.

Liu’s so-called “career prosecutors” devised a sentencing recommendation of nine years in prison for behavior that became commonplace anytime former Attorney General Eric Holder appeared before Congress under oath.

Lest we forget, Holder was found in criminal contempt of Congress in a bipartisan 255-67 vote. Back then, most House Democrats didn’t find contempt of Congress to be an impeachable offense. Don’t forget, House Democrats marched off the floor during the Holder contempt vote.

This nicely illustrates the central theme that has animated Trump’s impeachment, Justice Department investigations of Trump, Liu’s yank, and the entire political saga of the last three years.

Justice is no longer blind. Investigations, charges, and even prison terms depend on the ideological views of the targets.

If you are a friend of the president, the Justice Department “career lawyers” will do all they can to find a venue in the District of Columbia where they know a rabid population of Democrat jurors will do all they can to send you to Big Sandy.

If you doubt me, you haven’t heard of Tomeka Hart, the nasty partisan jury foreman in Stone’s trial who should have never been on the jury in the first place.

The Scales of Justice come in two versions, one for Democrats and one for Trump.

Let’s examine those Justice Department “career lawyers.”

It is now plain that “career lawyer” isn’t a euphemism for unbiased and impartial. It’s exactly the opposite. It usually means Democrat, leftist, elitist, culturally hostile to middle America and feverishly anti-Trump.

On Point: Fix the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, and Punish the Crooks Who Abused It

Two months have passed since Dec. 9, 2019, the day Justice Department inspector general Michael Horowitz exposed the profound damage done to a judicial institution vital to successfully defending America in a world of complex threats: the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, or FISC.

The damage done to American public trust in the court is not incidental. Trust is a source of strength, among friends or in the world’s most powerful nation. Trust promotes cooperation, which enhances systemic strength. When trust disappears, expect discord seeding division and weakness.

The FISC was created to protect a citizen’s constitutional rights while permitting intelligence community surveillance of legitimate suspects. To protect necessary cloak-and-dagger secrets, the FISC meets in secret. A secret court in a free society requires two things: (1) legitimate existential threats to citizens and assets: (2) trust in security agency professionalism and integrity, and trust in the judgment of the court judges.

Unfortunately, the abuse of the FISC by corrupt members of U.S. security and legal agencies — specifically within the FBI and DOJ — may have squandered that trust forever. Evidence is emerging that other corrupt actors, perhaps in the CIA, conducted illegal surveillance.

With the documented abuse acknowledged, America needs an FISC-type legal tool to combat covert threats like terrorism, transnational crime and enemy espionage. Twenty-first-century digital and financial connectivity, and commercial jet transportation, reduce police and Pentagon response time.

A FISC with integrity must also protect an American citizen’s constitutional rights from crooks and crony government. Horowitz discovered premeditated fraud on the FISC by a DOJ attorney. In 2016, the attorney “altered” email from “the other U.S. government agency” (CIA) and submitted a fraudulent application for a warrant to the court. So the FISC approved the warrant.

The target: Carter Page, a Naval Academy graduate and a former Trump presidential campaign associate. Spying on Page — an innocent man — opened a door to spying on President Donald Trump.

Following Horowitz’s report, the FISC’s then-presiding judge, Rosemary Collyer, issued a public order regarding the Page application and the FBI’s lack of “candor”: “The frequency with which representations made by FBI personnel turned out to be unsupported or contradicted by information in their possession, and with which they withheld information detrimental to their case, calls into question whether information contained in other FBI applications is reliable. The FISC expects the government to provide complete and accurate information in every filing with the Court.”

Collyer should chastise herself as well. She and her colleagues failed to responsibly question the application. The FBI alleges a Naval Academy grad associated with a presidential campaign in an election year is a Russian asset? Judge, wake the hell up. Page was actually a CIA asset.

Trump administration Attorney General William Barr knows the court is a national security asset and wants to save it. On Feb. 6, he put his personal reputation on the line and issued a memo requiring the FBI to have him sign off on FISC applications. Harvard Law School professor Alan Dershowitz pegs the FISC’s structural weakness: Alleged perpetrators have no defender. So assign a lawyer to question government evidence.

To restore public trust, the individuals who abused the court must be investigated, arrested, tried, convicted and sent to prison. They committed an array of crimes — including criminal mishandling of classified material. The FISC is a classified court.

In the past, the public expected responsible reporters to scrutinize government operations. In the FISC saga, contemporary mainstream media served as a PR tool for crooked cops and spies. So-called elite press outfits like The New York Times and The Washington Post unquestioningly touted intelligence leaks that have proven to be false.

Though mainstream media outlets take scant notice, angry calls to disband the court have not faded. The decibels will increase when federal prosecutor John Durham’s investigation into the origins of the Russia collusion hoax becomes headline news.

I wager Durham will expose crony government at its worst — dirty government officials, bureaucrats and agents who are politically exploiting and criminally manipulating the U.S. national security structure to harm their political opponents.

We shall see.

 

EXCLUSIVE: What Happened In the Roger Stone Case? ‘Prosecutorial Misconduct’ Says Defense Lawyer

Prosecutorial Misconduct?

A day after a nine-year sentencing recommendation for the elderly Roger Stone was filed, Senior DOJ officials immediately distanced themselves from the recommendation. They told CBS News that the prison time recommendation was “extreme, excessive, grossly disproportionate to offenses,” and that this is not what was briefed to the DOJ by the assigned prosecutors. Hours later, all four lawyers assigned to the case withdrew, with one, Jonathan Kravis, resigning from the DOJ entirely.

This is unusual, to say the least. Top to bottom, from the start of the case to this shocking end, has been unprecedented. What is going on?

President Trump asked: “Who are the four prosecutors (Mueller people?) who cut and ran after being exposed for recommending a ridiculous nine-year prison sentence to a man that got caught up in an investigation that was illegal, the Mueller Scam, and shouldn’t ever even have started?”

I went to federal trial attorney Jesse Binnall for some answers. Binnall defends high-profile clients against political witch-hunts and has defended cases brought by Jonathan Kravis in the past. Currently, Binnall is defending Michael Flynn alongside Sidney Powell.

In your professional opinion, was anything unusual about the Roger Stone case?

“Roger Stone wouldn’t ever have been a target of prosecution had he not been a Trump supporter. The President was absolutely right; the political underpinnings of this case are very disturbing. The events of the past few days show just how unusual this case really is.”

Can you explain what exactly was unusual in recent days, and why?

“These four prosecutors filed a brief making a sentencing recommendation without getting approval from the chain of command. That is extraordinarily unusual in the DOJ. In fact, I can say it’s unheard of at the DOJ; certainly, I’ve never heard of it. In practice, DOJ lawyers almost always get approval for everything they do.”

Then, all four prosecutors on this case withdrew in succession, with one, Kravis, resigning from the DOJ entirely. This is unheard of. Why do you think they did it? Do you believe they planned and colluded?

“I think they knew exactly what was going to happen when they filed that sentencing recommendation, expecting they will be reined in for doing so. They could then play the role of martyrs by resigning from the case, with one of them resigning entirely from his job. 

One of the most serious powers of a prosecutor is asking to deprive a defendant of freedom, requesting jail time. I think this [nine-year sentence] was an abuse of their power as prosecutors, to make a recommendation like this without making a departmental approval.

They knew leftist media would celebrate their disobedience and abuse of power. Leftist media has a history of fawning over people who martyr themselves for left-wing causes, just like Sally Yates. I think they wanted to leave the Roger Stone case with a bang. 

Or, they did it because they were going rogue, and they didn’t care what their supervisors thought. Perhaps because they don’t like U.S. Attorney Shea. To them, this case is political, and it’s personal. I think they suffer from Trump Derangement Syndrome. TDS is a very serious condition!”

All Four Roger Stone Prosecutors Resign From Case After DOJ Backpedals on Sentencing Recommendation

I’d like to think there’s some deep thinking going on in the DOJ tonight about the words ‘prosecutorial misconduct’.

The entire team prosecuting Roger Stone abruptly resigned from the criminal case on Tuesday after the Justice Department said it planned to reduce the recommended sentence for Stone, a longtime Trump associate.

The Justice Department on Tuesday said it was pulling back on its request to sentence Stone to seven to nine years in prison after President Donald Trump blasted the sentencing proposal as “a miscarriage of justice.”

Mueller ‘pitbull’ Weissmann appears to let slip they were trying to oust Trump by setting a perjury trap

Weissmann is the one who also did the work to get General Flynn indicted for perjury. Seems to be his usual tactic is to use a perjury charge because doing real investigative work is just too hard for him.
Just the kind of “Law Enforcement Officer” that you need when you want a tyrannical police state.

Andrew Weissmann, one of the most prominent members of special counsel Robert Mueller’s team investigating Russia, let slip on Thursday that they were “trying to get rid of” President Trump, in part by laying a perjury trap to get him on record under oath.

Known as Mueller’s “pitbull,” Weissmann was heavily involved in the criminal case against Trump’s former campaign manager Paul Manafort. He stepped down before Mueller released his final report and struck a deal with a publisher for a book about his experiences on the special counsel.

He would also sign with NBC and MSNBC as a legal analyst, and appeared Thursday afternoon on MSNBC to comment on President Trump’s remarks earlier in the day on his acquittal by the U.S. Senate, where the president denounced the effort by political enemies to take him out.

Republican National Committee spokeswoman shared a video clip of the segment on Twitter, saying that “Weissmann just admitted what we always knew.”

Taking a shot at Trump for “mouthing off” earlier in the day, Weissmann said, “He never submitted to an interview, he never testified under oath — it’s true, the same happened in the Mueller case.”

“Why do you think that is?” MSNBC anchor Nicolle Wallace asked.

“There’s a classic reason,” Weissman replied. “There is legal jeopardy that attaches if you sit for an interview or if you say something under oath to federal prosecutors, to federal prosecutors, to the House, to the Senate — so if you notice, the president is happy to talk today about ‘oh, this is evil and these people are corrupt,’ but when it came time for him to put up or shut up, which is are you willing to actually say this under oath or even in an interview, he’s completely silent.”

This being, of course, Trump’s Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination.

Speaking from the East Room on Thursday, the president said the Russian collusion probe was “all bullshit,” insisting that he was “treated unbelievably unfairly.”

Trump called former FBI director James Comey a “sleazebag,” and slammed the “top scum” at the bureau, to include disgraced former bureau agent Peter Strzok.

“We’ve been going through this now for three years. It was evil, it was corrupt, it was dirty cops, it was leakers. It was a disgrace. Had I not fired James Comey, who was a disaster, by the way, it’s possible I wouldn’t even be standing here right now,” he said. “We caught him in the act. Dirty cops. Bad people.”

“These are the crookedest, most dishonest, dirtiest people I’ve ever seen,” he added.

Weissmann was the epitome of the “13 angry Democrats” Trump often referred to when speaking of the special counsel……

As for bias, while there are many signs, the fact Weissmann attended Clinton’s 2016 election night party in New York City, according to The Wall Street Journal, may say all that needs to be said.

Wray says FBI conduct surrounding Carter Page FISA warrant ‘unacceptable’ and ‘cannot be repeated’

Until the FBI agents who did this are held accountable, and that means in a court of law facing charges, Directors Wray’s words are so much hot air.

FBI Director Christopher Wray testified Wednesday that the actions taken by the bureau to obtain a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act warrant against former Trump campaign aide Carter Page were “unacceptable” and “cannot be repeated.”

During his first congressional appearance following the release of Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz’s FISA review last year, Wray vowed to reform the FISA system by implementing “specific procedures and safeguards.”

“The failures highlighted in the inspector general report are unacceptable, period. And they cannot be repeated,” Wray testified before the House Judiciary Committee.

“I have already ordered more than 40 corrective actions to our FISA policies and procedures,” Wray continued, adding that he has “gone above and beyond” in outlining what “should be changed” and “can be changed” and can provide “accountability,” “rigor” and “discipline.”

“I do not think anyone has carte blanche to bypass rules, and I intend to make it painfully clear that is unacceptable at the FBI today,” he added.

Meanwhile, Republicans on the committee used Wednesday’s hearing as an opportunity to further grill Wray and the FBI.

“I don’t trust your agency anymore,” Rep. Tom McClintock, R-Calif., told Wray, adding that the FBI has “lost the trust of an awful lot of Americans.”

And Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, suggested that Wray was not taking the misconduct outlined in the inspector general’s report “seriously.”

“I’m concerned you’re not taking this seriously enough,” Jordan said. “Are you taking this seriously enough, Director Wray?”

The FBI director underscored that activities surrounding FISA during the 2016 presidential election were unacceptable and “unrepresentative of who we are as an institution.”

“Political bias has no place in today’s FBI,” Wray said.

 

 

Perjury charge filed against woman who tried to have CSU officer’s weapons confiscated

FORT COLLINS, Colo. — A perjury charge has been filed against Susan Holmes, the woman who recently tried to use Colorado’s new “red flag” law to have a Colorado State University officer’s weapons confiscated.

Earlier this month, Holmes filed an extreme risk protection order against Cpl. Phillip Morris. It was denied.

Morris shot and killed Holmes’ son in 2017. The district attorney found the shooting to be “clearly justified.”

A petition for an extreme risk protection order requires the petitioner to have a connection to the respondent, such as being a blood relative, a marriage or domestic partner, or having a child in common with the respondent.

Under penalty of perjury, Holmes claimed she had a child in common with Morris when in fact, she does not.

On Thursday, Colorado court records showed Holmes is charged with one count of perjury and one count of attempt to influence a public servant. The latter charge is for allegedly lying to a judge.

The Larimer County Sheriff’s Office said a warrant is out for Holmes and she is not in custody. The sheriff’s office confirmed the warrant is in relation to the ERPO case.

The warrant has been active for about one week.

Holmes’ bond is currently set at $5,000.

Supreme Court Allows Trump Admin to Implement ‘Public Charge’ Test for Immigrants

In other words, if you’re coming to this country and immigration can tell you’re going to instantly go on welfare because you don’t even have a job lined up, you don’t come in.

The Supreme Court ruled on Monday to approve the Trump administration’s “public charge” rule for new immigrants.

The justices approved the rule by a vote of 5-4 along ideological lines.
[so what else is new?]

“Public charge” has in recent years been defined as a person dependent on cash assistance programs. The Trump administration updated the definition in August 2019 to include people likely to require non-cash government benefits, and sought to implement a policy limiting the number of new immigrants who would require government assistance such as food stamps or Medicaid.

Lower courts have repeatedly blocked the new policy from going into effect. In early January the Second Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals implemented a nationwide injunction against the policy, which Monday’s Supreme Court decision overrules.

“Throughout our history, self-reliance has been a core principle in America,” then-acting director of U.S. Customs and Immigration Services Ken Cuccinelli said at a 2019 press conference regarding the new policy. “The virtues of perseverance, hard work, and self-sufficiency laid the foundation of our nation and have defined generations of immigrants seeking opportunity in the United States.”

Headline: Untraceable ‘ghost guns,’ like one used in Waterloo shooting, draw attention of ATF

From the article!- ATF: “We’ve had very few of these recovered in our four-and-a-half states that have been associated with a criminal act,” said John Ham, spokesman for the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives’ Kansas City field division, which covers Iowa, Missouri, Kansas, Nebraska and southern of Illinois.

So, who’s making a big deal out of a minor problem? The MSM, that’s who.

Authorities say more homemade guns — sometimes called “ghost guns” because they can’t be traced — have shown up at crime scenes in recent years. The West Coast has the lion’s share of ghost gun crime.

“We’ve had very few of these recovered in our four-and-a-half states that have been associated with a criminal act,” said John Ham, spokesman for the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives’ Kansas City field division, which covers Iowa, Missouri, Kansas, Nebraska and southern of Illinois.

He said ATF officials are tracking the issue, even if they can’t track the history of the individual guns.

The FBI Wants To Treat Carter Page Warrant Mistakes Like Training Problems. A Court Adviser Says That’s Not Enough.
After seriously messing up its warrant applications with the FISA Court, can the FBI be trusted?

The FBI could and can be trusted to always be a player in national politics.

The FBI’s newly released plans to avoid mistakes when seeking permission to wiretap and surveil American citizens is insufficient, according to an expert brought in to advise the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC).

In December, the Office of the Inspector General (OIG) for the Department of Justice released a report showing significant problems with the warrants that the FBI submitted to FISC in order to secretly wiretap Carter Page, a former foreign policy adviser to Donald Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign. While the OIG’s report concluded that the agency was justified in investigating whether Page was unduly influenced by his connections with the Russian government, it also determined that the FBI withheld important details from the FISC that might have influenced its decision to grant these warrants. These omissions were not in Page’s favor, and ultimately the OIG found 17 different errors or omissions in the warrant requests, some of which were not corrected in subsequent applications.

The FISC’s judges were extremely unhappy to discover information had been withheld from them, and then-presiding Judge Rosemary M. Collyer (who has since retired) ordered FBI Director Christopher Wray to send a plan to the court by January 10 explaining how the FBI would avoid making similar mistakes in the future.

Wray submitted his plan last week. It’s a dense and technical response that is mostly inscrutable to anybody who does not have a history of involvement with the court’s surveillance processes. Wray provides a list of 12 actions the FBI has taken or will take to make sure future applications for Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) warrants include all the information judges should’ve had when the FBI sought permission to surveil Page. Wray’s plans revolve primarily around adding most steps to verify and re-verify information contained in the warrant requests to make sure that FBI agents and supervisors are not omitting information that might undermine or compromise their case for a surveillance warrant. Wray also says the agency will improve training by creating a case study program to teach FBI agents about historical precedents (I’m guessing the Page warrants will play a starring role).

While the FBI was hammering out this plan, the FISC appointed David Kris, a former Justice Department attorney during President Barack Obama’s administration, to advise the court. His appointment caused some partisan-tinged outrage. Kris had previously defended the FBI’s surveillance of Page and had been critical of claims by Rep. Devin Nunes (R–Calif.) that the warrants against Page had problems. Trump even attacked Kris in a tweet.

But Kris has also been skeptical of how the federal government uses surveillance against American citizens and has criticized the National Security Agency’s position that laws passed to fight the war on terror and to investigate Al Qaeda permitted the agency to secretly snoop on American citizens. And he voiced these criticisms while working on national security issues at the Justice Department under President George W. Bush.

It appears that version of Kris analyzed the FBI’s plans. On Wednesday, he responded that Wray’s proposals were ultimately insufficient. Part of the larger problem, which Wray has acknowledged, is that it’s hard to check the accuracy of information that’s not included or deliberately omitted. In the Page case, much of the erroneous intel that might have dissuaded the judges from granting a warrant was not included in the warrant application, and therefore its accuracy was not assessed.