Archive for July, 2013

Who is your hero?

Bob Owens is asking: A Perfect Neighbor? Considering George Zimmerman, Post-Circus – “How many of you have numerous acts of decency and bravery in your past?”

In this jaded, isolated age when people simply don’t care about their communities and refuse to get involved, George Zimmerman chose to try to be the perfect neighbor. He cared, and dared to stand up against the injustices he perceived, even when it seemed few else did.

How many of us can claim the same?

And still an ad for Dan Mason radio talk show mentions the ‘Zimmerman out of the car myth’ while claiming people should be better informed.

At least there is some discussion about the fact that Martin was not the young innocent child but rather a young adult who held fights and drugs and gangs as his role models and behavior standards. There is some notice of the plague of fatherless young men whose ideal isn’t public service, heroism, or family. The sad part is that these hoodlums are held in high esteem while those with Zimmerman’s service to community and actively caring for others is condemned and ridiculed and persecuted.

Neighborhood watch? Intrusive stalking. Self defense? How dare anyone? — just what is it that drives this bent of insanity?

Leave a Comment

The “Left Wing Ghetto”

In terms of behavior patterns, it fits the Limbaugh observation that the Left tends to favor ideology and emotion while the right tends to favor evidence and reason. Trying to engage in a productive conversation between these two approaches to governance and life can be difficult in the best of times and these are not the best of times for that sort of effort. The differences in patterns of behaviors are gaining some notice.

William Teach has advice about How To Talk To A Liberal About “Climate Change”. In a word: Don’t. “They are all rigid, myopic ideologues bound by talking points without critical adult thinking.” His stimulus was a “How to talk to a conservative” colum at Salon.

On a few occasions there can be debate, as witnessed here recently. But, ask a Warmist why they don’t walk the talk and it goes goofy.

Anyhow, this can all be summed up by the saying “don’t try to teach a pig to dance. You waste your time and annoy the pig.”

Where did all this come from? Well, Geoff Dembicki at Salon tries the old how to talk to a conservative about Hotcoldwetdry

One thing to note. In order to stick with ideology and emotion you have to be wealthy enough to avoid having reality and reason slap you upside the head, which it will do eventually. Detroit is a case in point.

Leave a Comment

Tergiversations: the media on climate change

Steven Hayward came up with that one in Media Notes: Climate Campaign in a Snit

“The climate campaign has gone to DefCon1 over the tergiversations of Reuters, where alarmist news stories about climate change have fallen by nearly 50 percent following the hiring of an editor (Paul Ingrassia, formerly of the Wall Street Journal) who harbors some skeptical views.”

“There’s a full-scale media outrage under way to purge the heretic. “

It is getting harder to promote anthropogenic caused climate catastrophy so the coverage in that area is dissipating. Taxing Air by Spooner and Carter reviews the science and politics on the issue that also provides a good over-view of climatology. No tergiversations there!

Leave a Comment

Evidence based law?

The Lambro opinion described below brings up the idea that perhaps the ‘evidence based’ concept needs to be considered in regards to law as it is in medicine. In might also become useful in other fields, such as climatology, as well.

In medicine, practitioners who use therapies that have not been objectively shown to be effective have adopted terms such as “alternative” and “complementary and alternative medicine” (CAM) and “integrative” to lend credibility to their activities. The created the term “allopathic medicine” to impugn evidence based medicine.

Law is also supposed to be evidence based. A lot of care is invested in procedures and practices to attempt to make sure that bias and ideology is reduced and evidence and fact surface as the primary factors in decisions. The Zimmerman trial was clear enough, based on facts and evidence, that many in the legal profession including the police and prosecuting attorneys directly involved, did not think a prosecution was warranted.

Lambro and others, however, appear not to favor the idea of evidence based law. They have an outcome they desire and will construct an ‘evidence free’ reality to rationalize their desires. In days past, acting on that sort of ‘alternative’ or ‘complementary’ or ‘integrative’ law was called a lynching.

Then there is the lawyer Greta Van Susterin interviewed (see ward world) who claimed that her greater duty as a lawyer was “social engineering.” Evidence based law was dismissed as inferior to doing whatever need be done to engineer society to desired ends.

How long will it be before you see legal businesses bragging about their practice of ‘complementary and alternative law’ (CAL) and coin derogatory nomenclature for those who practice evidence based law like they did for those who practice evidence based medicine?

Leave a Comment

Where you have to go to rationalize the irrational

LAMBRO: Making a case for Trayvon Martin illustrates how bias creeps out from under cover in trying to rationalize a belief that doesn’t really mesh with reality. First up is an attempt to don a cloak of credibility to present a sympathetic basis not founded in reality:

“I’ve been one of Mr. Obama’s persistent policy critics from the beginning of his presidency. However, I have to say I found his measured, sensitive remarks very moving as he talked about our nation’s racial history and the troubling, personal experiences he endured as a young black man making his way through life.”

Next up is the ad hominem. Note the “self appointed” as opposed to the reality of volunteer and the implicit denigration of neighborhood watch organizations. The “wannabe policeman” is another common canard and there is a convenient disregard of just what this “history” of trouble with law enforcement really is all about.

“In the end, a jury of six women concluded that this gun-carrying, self-appointed neighborhood-watch volunteer’s act didn’t merit conviction for either second-degree murder or the lesser manslaughter charge.”

“This wannabe policeman — who has a history of getting into trouble with the law — was sitting in his car when he spotted Trayvon, then called the 911 police dispatcher to tell her, “He looks suspicious.””

Then there is the unspecified “awash in troubling facts” that can’t be clearly identified else both the “awash” and the “troubling” both become rather ridiculous.

“the story that unfolded on the night Trayvon was walking to the home of his father’s girlfriend in a gated community in Sanford, Fla., is awash with troubling facts that made this killing so senseless.”

Then it gets into an effort to gain credibility via others and a misrepresentation of the facts.

“Is this racial profiling? The prosecution thought so. What was suspicious about him? He wore a hooded sweat shirt as he walked home after getting a soft drink and some candy at a convenience store. He hadn’t done anything wrong, and not an iota of evidence was offered in court to the contrary.”

The facts are that it was a stranger to the neighborhood wandering around looking at houses in the dark with identity obscurred that aroused proper neighborhood watch suspicion and resulted in proper action – calling 911. As for what was not “offered in court” one needs to consider the defense problems with discovery and the firing of the IT guy which are issues yet to be resolved. The “getting a soft drink and some candy” conveniently bypasses what Martin usually did with those items and the timeline of his store visit.

Another indicative conclusion – “Certainly, Mr. Zimmerman was stalking Trayvon” – shows where a proper ‘keeping an eye on people showing suspicious behavior in the neighborhood’ has been turned on its head. The evidence is quite clear that it was Martin stalking Zimmerman if stalking is to mean anything. The four minute gap highlighted by the defense illustrates this.

The ‘stand your ground’ thing shows up here as well. That one was irrelevant to the case and is an attempt to divert the issue from what happened to some fantasy. That gets to the minimization of Zimmerman’s wounds as if that has anything to do with the fear of imminent danger idea in matters of self defense.

“He could have pulled out his gun during the wrestling match, stopped the fight, and called 911 for the police. But what would he have said? “I was following Trayvon, and he jumped me”?

With his gun trained on Trayvon, he could have left the scene and gone to the police to report what happened. He could have …”

When you are pinned to the ground and being subject to an MMA style ‘ass whuppin’ it seems rather far fetched to assume the attacker is going to be polite and civil. The woulda’ coulda’ shoulda’ ideas are also completely in disregard of standard self defense and use of weapons advice gleaned from actual experience in such situations.

Finally is a falsehood that was clarified in forensic evidence and the project of the prosectutions desires as fact:

“Mr. Zimmerman pressed the barrel of his gun into Trayvon’s chest just over his heart, pulled the trigger and killed him, because, as the prosecution said, he wanted to.”

The evidence indicates that the gun may have been in contact with clothing but was a couple of inches away from skin. The only way for that to happen was in a close quarters shooting where the victim was above the shooter with his clothes hanging away from his body.

Lambro bought the prosecution claims as Truth. The jury went with the evidence. The fact that these two points of view is so severe the prosecution is suffering blowback. At this time, it is delusional to try to make a case for Martin if one wants to stay in the world of reality, especially if the context not brought in court is considered.

Leave a Comment


The IRS scandal may be on the MSM’s back burner but the investigation continues to cook.

“the assault on George is the latest chapter in a scandal whose investigation has become a bitter political battleground. When IRS officials fingered a couple of rogue agents as the culprits of the political discrimination, Democrats and Republicans alike issued their condemnations. But as congressional investigators have traced culpability to senior levels of the agency — last week, to the former head of the IRS’s Exempt Organizations Unit, Lois Lerner, one of her senior advisers, and lawyers in the chief counsel’s office — Democrats have increasingly turned their ire away from the tax-collection agency and toward the IG.”

Eliana Johnson describes The Smearing of J. Russell George and how “House Democrats have turned their ire toward the IRS inspector general.” It is another example of differences in tactics between the parties. Democrats tend to create solid blocks displaying rather creative defense and denial when one of their own is under inspection. Republicans tend to join the search for truth when it is one of theirs.

Leave a Comment

Both sides do it?

One common refrain in many opinions about hot issues is that ‘both sides do it’ or making a false equivalency to portray both sides of the issue as equally culpable and demote the issue to just a minor difference of opinion. Paul Green says Enough of the tut-tutting on Zimmerman

“One annoying thing that keeps popping up in the conservative commentary is the “now, to be sure Zimmerman is no angel” meme. … Knocking Zimmerman for his supposed “overzealousness” ignores the fact that he was doing a job he had volunteered to do: supporting law enforcement by serving as a neighborhood watch captain. His community had experienced a rash of property crime that prompted, according to a report in The Daily Beast, his neighbors’ “decision last September to start a neighborhood-watch organization, which was initiated by Zimmerman himself. The burglary of Olivia Bertalan’s home was just one of at least eight reported over the previous 14 months-several of which, neighbors said, involved young black men.”Slagging his efforts as “amateur sleuthing” is like calling an attempt to extinguish a home fire with a garden hose “amateur firefighting.”

As to the “series of reactions” it “set in train,” at whose door may most of those reactions be laid — principally, the decision to initiate physical violence in the first place? On no one other than Trayvon Martin.”

The Zimmerman case is providing dividends for comparing and contrasting reality to ideologically based fantasy.

Another example is by Ilya Somin on the troubling implications of unanimous SCOTUS decisions. “Such overreach, though, has become a part of our political culture. Administrations of both parties are often unwilling to accept constitutional limits on their authority…” — this is a measureable thing and it would be interesting to see if the measures actually showed the equivalence asserted.

Leave a Comment

Intellectual Integrity? What’s that

Richard Fernandez: Lying as a Way of Life

Start with Chicago’s new crime fighting strategy – “a triumph of PR over policy, fiction over reality and madness over sanity”, move on to public education in Washington D.C. and Detroit, the denial of bankruptcy in Detroit, and then to the Martin v Zimmerman fiasco.

“The facts never mattered; reality is unconstitutional. All the system cared about was Trayvon Martin the fiction; the meal ticket, the product, the Narrative. Nobody gave a damn about the actual man. In this respect he was exactly what all those illiterate multitudes in the crashing cities are: just meal tickets for a system that uses them as window-dressing to justify scams and job programs meant to benefit only political hacks.

Maybe one day people will wake up to the fact, if they can still count to one.”

“Maybe one day” ?? some would think Fernandez is an optimist.

Leave a Comment

Black homophobia?

Jeffrey Lord wonders: Trayvon, Sharpton, and Homophobia, Did anti-gay prejudice lead Trayvon Martin to attack George Zimmerman?

“The unmentionable in this case is the question as to whether Trayvon Martin thought that he was about to be sexually assaulted by George Zimmerman, whom Trayvon may have perceived to be gay. Did this cause Martin to attack Zimmerman? That is exactly what Trayvon’s friend and the prosecution star witness Rachel Jeantel stunningly suggested the other night to CNN’s Piers Morgan.”

The question being raised is whether the hate crime isn’t Zimmerman and racism but rather Martin and homophobia. Jeantel raises the implication that Zimmerman was being attacked because Martin saw him as a potential rapist. That turns the ‘civil rights’ thing on its head. Lord points out that the anti-gay thing is common in the black community to note that the issue is not pure fantastical speculation.

Leave a Comment

double jepardy: the case of Mr. Bruno

NAPOLITANO: Zimmerman’s double jeopardy dilemma — There’s a similar judicial miscarriage now underway in New York City.  The SCOTUS tosses one conviction on an “inane” law so the prosecution has to figure out another way to ‘get their man.’ no matter what.

“As a result of that ruling, a Manhattan federal appeals court threw out Mr. Bruno’s conviction. In a fair world, that would be the end of his ordeal. However, the Obama Department of (political) Justice obtained an indictment against Mr. Bruno based upon the same set of facts that had formed the allegations of a violation of the honest services statute, but which it now claims constitutes bribery. The feds did this even though they had told the federal judge in the first trial nearly a dozen times that the state senator had not committed bribery and even though the witnesses who testified for the government in the first trial uniformly stated when asked that Mr. Bruno had not been bribed.”

Hoping you won’t become a target and can keep your distance often isn’t enough. Accountability is needed to keep the government in check. That can be difficult to do if one party is in lockstep defense of such over-reach and abuse of power as is evidenced in current legislative committee hearings.

Leave a Comment

The expendable misdirection

Althouse reacts: “Why are black boys expendable?” is the heartwrenching question on the front page at the Washington Post.

“I think our society demonstrated great care toward Trayvon Martin, even to the point of putting Zimmerman through a trial that should not have happened. That is, it was an excess of care for Martin, a bending-over-backwards to show that we care about Martin and all the young men he was seen to represent. And now, after an extensive, careful trial, and a jury verdict that clearly hewed to well-honed instructions about evidence and burden of proof, you still want to use it to assert that we don’t care. If that’s the kind of conversation we get when we try to respond to the invitation to have a conversation, can you see why it’s something we avoid?”

The lack of intellectual integrity in the prosecution was bad enough. The rationalizing is something else. Then there’s the DoJ effort to find something, anything, to invoke double jepardy. It is ugly. Very ugly.

Leave a Comment

Pursuit vs Watch

As one pundit noted, you can tell where on the political spectrum a person is by whether they say Zimmerman was in pursuit of Martin or whether he was just watching Martin. This also shows up in stories that assert that Zimmerman was wrong to get out of his truck to ‘pursue’ or ‘watch’ because that is what lead to the tragedy.

What has been missing in the public discussion is Martin’s role in what he did wrong and what he should not have done. Some of these would be: he should have just gone directly home from the convenience store rather than wander around looking at houses in the dark; he should have spent the four minutes getting inside rather than waiting to jump Zimmerman; he should have simply asked Zimmerman what he was doing and then gone home; he should not have jumped Zimmerman (in the manner he bragged about in his telephone messages).

Another behavior to look for is the ‘both sides at fault’ rationalization. That requires equating the Zimmerman watch or pursuit with the Martin house browsing and assault as equivalent in moral and ethical terms.

Extrapolation, especially for minimization, is another behavior to observe. Bob Beckel provides a case study in extrapolation a self defense during an assault with a bar fight and another ‘expert’ who suggested the brawl was like a schoolyard fight. The ideas here boil down to dismissing any basis that self defense might be required, especially self defense with a gun. People being mugged should just accept it? Being mugged is the same as a bar fight or the fight between a couple of kids on the school yard? You are supposed to take careful inventory of your injuries and forecast potential future behavior of the guy beating you up before you decide how to respond?

The implications are also worth considering. A neighborhood watch is an organized adjuct to the police efforts. The idea is that the members of a neighborhood will watch out for each other so burglars, vandals, and other criminals will know they have a higher risk of being caught. That means that suspicious behavior is noted and that those expressing that behavior will not disappear before the police can check it out.

The implications for self defense are also significant. Does the girl crossing campus after a late class need to just submit to assault? Or can she carry a weapon to defend herself? Should gangs be able to attack without any concern that they might be met with deadly force?

It is the neighborhoods where the citizens cower, where the don’t get out of the truck to let potential criminals know they are being watched, that have the biggest crime problem. It is the people who are not able to exercise self defense that end up being killed or beaten to a pulp. Those uncomfortable with Zimmerman’s efforts for his neighborhood should consider the alternative.

Leave a Comment

Another Martin victim uncovered

If the school had not been trying to manipulate statistics about crime, Trayvon Martin might have been in jail rather than on top of George Zimmerman. McCain describes How a Miami School Crime Cover-Up Policy Led to Trayvon Martin’s Death

“As for Chief Hurley’s policy, it was the controvery over Martin’s death that accidentally exposed it. In March 2012, the Miami Herald reported on Martin’s troubled history of disciplinary incidents at Krop High. Chief Hurley then launched the internal affairs investigation in an attempt to find out who had provided information to the reporter. During the course of that investigation, MDSPD officers and supervisors described Chief Hurley’s policy of not reporting crimes by students. Chief Hurley was subsequently accused of sexually harassing two female subordinates. He resigned in February, about a year after Trayvon Martin’s death.”

A shooter, a police detective, two police chiefs, an IT guy, … quite an impressive list of casualties from the affair.

Note: another common false meme that shows up often is that Zimmerman pursued Martin, often cited as being contradictory to police request. The closest thing to a police request was the 911 operator saying Zimmerman did not need to keep an eye on the suspicious character in his neighborhood after Zimmerman had got out of his truck. Zimmerman replied “OK” and started back to his vehicle. That was when he was attacked. It should also be noted that keeping an eye on someone wandering around the neighborhood is not the same as pursuing or tracking or following them. Even some of the more reasonable pundits and reporters fall into the trap of confusing ‘watching’ with ‘pursuit’ which may be because pursuit was invented in order to rationalize the race baiting — and it stuck. One needs to be careful in presumptions, especially those that come from others with an agenda.

Also Trayvon’s Tragedy: Exploited in Death by M. Catharine Evans: “Profiting from the death of a child is sick and disgusting. Unfortunately, this describes the circle of exploiters promoting the Trayvon Martin traveling show after his death in February 2012.” The tragic story of Tyler Binstead of Virginia is used for comparison and contrast.

Reuters George Zimmerman: Prelude to a shooting provides background on the shooter for a comparison and contrast to that of the victim described by Evans.

Leave a Comment

The Kruidbos affair

IT guy finds evidence; asks his lawyer because he might have legal liability for his boss withholding that evidence from the defense; lawyer turns over the evidence; the IT guy is fired. Juston Phillips thinks It is time to disbar the Zimmerman Prosecutor.

“The Supreme Court in the case of Brady v. Maryland made it explicit that a prosecutor must turn over any evidence that might exculpate or mitigate the defendant’s guilt. Many prosecutors’ offices and many individual prosecutors offer what is called “open file” discovery where the defense can come in, examine everything in the file and copy anything and everything.”

Phillips is not alone. See SHAPIRO: The Zimmerman prosecutors’ overreach and Dershowitz to Newsmax: ‘Prosecutorial Tyrant’ Violated Zimmerman’s Rights. The reason is described by Phillips:

“Every state has ethical rules for lawyers, and there is always a special section for prosecutors. Why? Because the prosecutor has so much power, and in our system of justice has almost totally unfettered discretion. … It is painfully obvious to any fair observer that Angela Corey played to the mob and forgot her duties as a prosecutor.”

Meanwhile, the case against NBS for maliciously editing 911 recordings is likely to pick up again. The media race baiting and expecting summer race riots is being exposed. And the denial of evidence is on parade in the revenge crowd. So when you fail to see self defense as the primary issue on the tragedy of a killing, you know that skepticism is warranted and a careful checking of assertions against facts is in order. The prosecution was part and parcel of this misdirection and deceit and that is why there is a call for consequenses for prosecutorial over-reach.

Leave a Comment

It’s about those evil guns, not race (as the dust settles issues clarify)

The real issue involves whether you can defend yourself if you are on the receiving end of a ‘ground and pound’ and what limits are placed on how you can defend yourself. A part of this issue is how a neighborhood can defend itself against burglars and home invaders. it appears that some think one should let those wandering around a neighborhood casing houses alone and that deadly force, like with a gun, should never be used much less available for any sort of defense.

“Prosecutors in the case said Zimmerman had evil in his heart and that he crossed legal boundaries when deciding to follow an innocent Trayvon before shooting him on a rainy February night last year. Zimmerman supporters, though, say he was providing a civic duty in a post-9/11 America, where safety and crime concerns have become paramount even as overall crime rates have dropped to historic lows. … “A Zimmerman acquittal will be bad news politically to the gun prohibition lobby, which is also anti-self-defense,” writes Dave Workman for”

Zimmerman not guilty: Victory for new kind of civil rights era? “Persecution of lawful gun owners is the new civil rights battle, many Americans claim. George Zimmerman just became their icon.”

The related phenomena is that of basic honesty: “innocent Trayvon” ?? a “child” ?? profiled because of skin color ?? by a person with “evil in his heart” ?? – in part this is why the discovery problems (and the firing of one employee who brought some unpleasant data about Martin) was subject to much contention. Some are claiming they seek justice when what they really seek is revenge or a tool to use for their desires to control what others can do to defend themselves and the tools they can use in the process.

Leave a Comment

Hall of shame (but will they have any?)

John Lott: We never should have witnessed a Zimmerman trial – prosecutors, pundits – even named conservative pundits – and others thought they knew better than the local authorities. They didn’t. They should be ashamed.

Shapiro: Zimmerman’s not guilty verdict shines troubling light on prosecutor’s decision-making

“A prosecutor’s job is to do justice for everyone—and that includes protecting the defendant’s constitutional rights and ensuring he is not wrongly prosecuted without probable cause.” [emphasis added]

Daniel Greenfield: The Zimmerman Verdict is Still a Win for the Race-Baiting Left

“As I wrote a number of times, this was never about the real George Zimmerman and the real Trayvon Martin. This was about the race-baiting left’s use of race for political power. They don’t have Zimmerman in jail, but they weren’t out to just put him in jail. They were out to put all of us in jail.

The jury’s verdict reminded them of the limits of their power and the power of the media, but such humbling moments never last. They just redouble their efforts.”

Joel Siegel: George Zimmerman verdict: New York City mayoral candidates berate not guilty verdict is a catalog of ignorant statements.

Walter Russell Mead: The End of the Zimmerman Trial illustrates the confusion. On the one hand is the “boy” and the minimization of the event and claims that “People will take whatever meaning they want from this case.”

“Nobody really knows or can know if the verdict in the trial is justice for either Trayvon Martin or George Zimmerman. Procedurally the trial seemed fair, and enough unbiased observers predicted this outcome that it is hard to call it a surprise. Law and justice don’t always point in the same direction; the state had to meet a tough standard and in the view of the jury, it failed.”

Those who paid attention to evidence and law called a clear case. That clearly indicate some can see justice. Those who ‘will take whatever they want’ are not looking for justice for all.

Also see Jacobson: Guardian removes column: “Open season on black boys after a verdict like this”The Guardian had to remove an over the top premature post. Jacobson illustrates and highlights the misconceptions in the Guardian article about the evidence prevelent in the case. Key items are the reduction in age of Martin, the ‘iced tea and skittles’ as just a boy’s snack, the confusion about the agressor, and the racism.The article has been re-posted with minor adjustments and illustrates just how far into intellectual dishonesty the issue can get.

It is a marker for social norms. On the one hand we have the contingent who put a teen that revelled in fights, engaged in illegal drug use, and consorted with gang members and similar ilk hailed as a hero while a young adult who stepped forward to participate in neighborhood security and assisted others in his neighborhood in many ways is considered a villain. It seems the most vocal and outspoken in the society have declared their hero and it really does not speak well of them – as does the anticipation of their violent and illegal behavior in their expression of their hero worship.

No shame? One can wonder if these folks have any idea of the concept.

Leave a Comment

Speaking truth to power – and suffering the consequences

On the one hand is the Snowdon type. Lots of hype, lots of press, lots of high falutin’ words trying to rationalize espionage.

On the other is Ben Kruidbos. Who dat?

“State Attorney Angela Corey fired her office’s information technology director Friday after he testified last month about being concerned prosecutors did not turn over information to George Zimmerman’s defense team in the shooting death of Trayvon Martin.

“I don’t have any regrets,” he said, “but I am terrified about the future and what that will end up being.”

His attorney Wesley White — who resigned from the State Attorney’s Office in December and is a critic of Corey — said the firing was aimed at sending a message to office employees “that if they feel like there is wrongdoing,” they should not disclose it or seek legal guidance from a private attorney.

“If they do speak to an attorney, then they are dead,” he said. “The State Attorney’s Office will do whatever is necessary to not only terminate them, but destroy their reputations in the process.” [State Attorney Angela Corey fires information techonology director who raised concerns in Trayvon Martin case]”

The fallout from the Zimmerman political persecution is mounting. Police chief: sacked. Lead investigator: demoted. IT guy: sacked. Politicians are thrashing and it can be dangerous to be anywhere near them in that state.

Leave a Comment

Shut Up! (unless you register and pay the appropriate people)

A chilling story told by Daniel Shuchman at Forbes: In Today’s America, Consult Your Attorney Before Speaking Freely

“A few wrong moves and one of the townspeople wearing ties might report him to the local election commission. He might be required to register as a Political Action Committee and make filings with the state. He could face significant administrative expenses, and need to hire a financial staff. Indeed, it would probably be best if he brought an attorney with him to the meeting, lest he run afoul of the rules regarding political speech and advocacy.

While this may sound hyperbolic if not downright absurd in America, it is the inescapable conclusion one reaches in reading the petition papers filed recently with the U.S. Supreme Court in the case of Edmund Corsi & Geauga Constitutional Council v. Ohio Elections Commission.”

It is a death by a thousand cuts. In this case, the ‘cuts’ are efforts to stem undue influence by people who gather together to increase their voice by creating a Political Action Committee. In this case, it is a PAC of one but that doesn’t matter. What does is that a citizen is trying to speak out and irritating the PTB (powers that be) by acting like an organized group. He must be shut up.

Leave a Comment

They cry for justice

The sympathy for appeasement has many saying that Zimmerman should suffer some sort of adverse judgment for his actions. That begs the question at hand and it has severe implications for anyone who invokes deadly force in self defence and for programs such as neighborhood watch.

Patrick J. Buchanan lines up questions that need to be answered by those who think Zimmerman needs additional judgment and suffering in order to have justice. Not guilty beyond reasonable doubt concludes that “For George Zimmerman’s defense has proven, beyond a reasonable doubt, that he shot Trayvon Martin not out of malice, rage or hate — but in a desperate act of self-defense” and explains why.

The investigation of the incident and the normal considerations in the following days concluded that there was no evidence to support anything other than self defense. That alone should raise doubt about allegations of criminal intent. The jury has asked for an inventory of evidence. Of all of the evidence presented by both sides of the case at trial it is only the Zimmerman comments about punks always getting away that supports the alleged crimes. That is what Buchanan lists and describes.

The focus on the mob has become more evident. The watch is on. The press is looking for blood. The tragedy of one death and another dragged through a public lynching seems to be of little concern except as it feeds fanning racism and violent mob behavior.

Leave a Comment

Prosecutorial misconduct

The Zimmerman case brings up the issue. Again.

“Martin’s younger half-brother, Demetrius Martin, sent one of the more indicative messages. Last seen in the media crying as he remembered his brother during a “March for Peace,” Demetrius asked Martin when he was “going to teach me to fight.”

“This defendant didn’t give Trayvon Martin a chance,” said de la Rionda. No, it was the State of Florida, the Department of Justice, and even the president that didn’t give Zimmerman a chance. Someone should pay.”

Jack Cashill explains Why [he thinks] the Zimmerman Prosecutors Should Be Disbarred.

“The State’s job is to make the case for the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Fifty years ago, in Brady v. Maryland, the U.S. Supreme Court established that a prosecutor’s responsibility was “to seek justice fairly, not merely win convictions by any means.” In the case at hand, this meant that the State of Florida had the responsibility to share promptly all exculpatory evidence with the defense. It did not.”

The former police chief made it clear that justice and law was not the goal in the efforts that drove the prosecution. There is significant other evidence, including the behaviors of the prosecution both in and out of court, that supports the idea of prosecutorial misconduct.

Leave a Comment