For lying to and obstructing the most lying, obstructing band of criminals assembled since the days of Babel.
Just simply overrun with Russian collusion evidence…
The government admits gun control doesn’t work.
It took the United States government’s Department of Justice an entire study dedicated to gun use and criminals to figure out what logical human beings have already understood for decades. The result of their own study found that gun control laws will never work because criminals will never use legal channels to obtain guns.
According to Fox 5, the findings based on the 2016 Survey of Prison Inmates (SPI), discovered that about 1 in 5 or 21% of all state and federal prisoners reported they had “possessed or carried a firearm when they committed the offense for which they were serving time in prison.” The survey released by the DOJ this month declared that criminals unsurprisingly rely on the black market for their guns.
Now, if they’ll just admit they don’t work either and go away…
568 pages of it. Here’s your reward for waking up this fine Monday:
In a nutshell, it says, “blah, blah, need more money, blah.”
Seriously, of interest (to someone) may be the “notes” from page 294:
If that’s too much reading, then, here:
Thank you, Legs Network.
Everyone I know, with maybe one exception, that has journeyed to Cuban has been disappointed. Still, I foresee the cruise liner set will still keep going, still keep eating, drinking, “playing,” showing off the tats, gracing the rest with that not-so-unique American obesity. And, yeah, those Cubans from the man on the dock, wrapped in cellophane, in the plexiglass-topped box, are real – real in that they physically exist…
The US Department of Justice [SIC] and some guy in England see the new travel ventures differently.
The United States government knows him as certified foreign claim number CU-2492. But he wants to make a more personal introduction to Tampa Bay.
He is Mickael Behn, a 43-year-old U.S. citizen residing in England, where he works in television production.
And, according to the U.S. Department of Justice’s Foreign Claims Settlement Commission, Behn is the rightful owner of Havana Harbor, the cruise ship terminal for Cuba’s capital city.
The harbor was taken from Behn’s family when the socialist government nationalized property without compensation.
So, Behn said, those who book a cruise from Port Tampa Bay to Havana support illegal activity. “This is an American crime on an American corporation,” he said. “Don’t go to Havana.”
The nonprofit Cuban Democratic Directorate recently put up billboards near Port Miami and is running radio ads that say those booking cruises to Cuba support the trafficking of stolen property.
How many damned offices, agencies, and programs can one government have?! Geeze.
Family from Cuba. Theft in Cuba. “American” living in England… I fail to see how this… Nevermind.
This case is especially interesting to a man whose family’s land was similarly confiscated by soldiers, at gunpoint, and without compensation. Do we get a claim? I think I already know the answer there. America and its laws are now for Cubans living in England. Got it.
It used to be a place for Englanders living in America. They’re, we’re completely out of fashion now. Even Laura Ingalls Wilder. She was an author. That is, for the new “Americans” and the tubby, tatted cruisers, someone who produces books. Books are the things they are tossing from libraries. Libraries are buildings taking up real estate needed for more sports watching venues, women’s African diversity centers, buffets, and tattoo shops.
Wall-e. Diet Files.
In Grutter v. Bolliger, 539 U.S. 306 (2003), the Supreme Court somehow upheld the continuing discrimination of affirmative action in higher education. In that particular case, it directly regarded law school admission at the University of Michigan. White students, like Barbara Grutter, were (are) systematically denied opportunities based on the color of their skin despite having superior test scores, grades, and IQs.
Sandra Day O’Connor, in delivering the majority opinion, wrote: “The Court expects that 25 years from now, the use of racial preferences will no longer be necessary to further the interest approved today.” Grutter, at 310.
It’s only been 14 years but that is close enough, long enough (too long really). The Trump Administration is ready to direct the DOJ to uphold the honest principles that Justice Thomas urged in his Grutter dissent:
I therefore can understand the imposition of a 25-year time limit only as a holding that the deference the Court pays to the Law School’s educational judgments and refusal to change its admissions policies will itself expire. At that point these policies will clearly have failed to “‘eliminate the [perceived] need for any racial or ethnic'” discrimination because the academic credentials gap will still be there. [citation omitted] The Court defines this time limit in terms of narrow tailoring, [internal citation omitted] but I believe this arises from its refusal to define rigorously the broad state interest vindicated today. [internal citation omitted]. With these observations, I join the last sentence of Part III of the opinion of the Court.
For the immediate future, however, the majority has placed its imprimatur on a practice that can only weaken the principle of equality embodied in the Declaration of Independence and the Equal Protection Clause. “Our Constitution is color-blind, and neither knows nor tolerates classes among citizens.” Plessy v. Ferguson, 163 U.S. 527, 559, […] (1896) (Harlan, J., dissenting). It has been nearly 140 years since Frederick Douglass asked the intellectual ancestors of the Law School to “[d]o nothing with us!” and the Nation adopted the Fourteenth Amendment. Now we must wait another 25 years to see this principle of equality vindicated. I therefore respectfully dissent from the remainder of the Court’s opinion and the judgment.
The time is now. The DOJ’s Civil Rights Division will begin pursuing schools engaging in this hideous practice.
WASHINGTON — The Trump administration is preparing to redirect resources of the Justice Department’s civil rights division toward investigating and suing universities over affirmative action admissions policies deemed to discriminate against white applicants, according to a document obtained by The New York Times.
The document, an internal announcement to the civil rights division, seeks current lawyers interested in working for a new project on “investigations and possible litigation related to intentional race-based discrimination in college and university admissions.”
The announcement suggests that the project will be run out of the division’s front office, where the Trump administration’s political appointees work, rather than its Educational Opportunities Section, which is run by career civil servants and normally handles work involving schools and universities.
The document does not explicitly identify whom the Justice Department considers at risk of discrimination because of affirmative action admissions policies. But the phrasing it uses, “intentional race-based discrimination,” cuts to the heart of programs designed to bring more minority students to university campuses.
Supporters and critics of the project said it was clearly targeting admissions programs that can give members of generally disadvantaged groups, like black and Latino students, an edge over other applicants with comparable or higher test scores.
The project is another sign that the civil rights division is taking on a conservative tilt under President Trump and Attorney General Jeff Sessions. It follows other changes in Justice Department policy on voting rights, gay rights and police reforms.
Roger Clegg, a former top official in the civil rights division during the Reagan administration and the first Bush administration who is now the president of the conservative Center for Equal Opportunity, called the project a “welcome” and “long overdue” development as the United States becomes increasingly multiracial.
“The civil rights laws were deliberately written to protect everyone from discrimination, and it is frequently the case that not only are whites discriminated against now, but frequently Asian-Americans are as well,” he said.
I once brushed off the possible chance to work for the DOJ. This is one of the few times I wish I had gone through and was still there. I’d volunteer in a heartbeat.
The U.S. government is known by two hallmarks: absolute power over everything on Earth, and; a complete aversion to the truth. Naturally, it wants to prosecute Julian Assange of Wikileaks.
US authorities have prepared charges to seek the arrest of WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, US officials familiar with the matter tell CNN.
The Justice Department investigation of Assange and WikiLeaks dates to at least 2010, when the site first gained wide attention for posting thousands of files stolen by the former US Army intelligence analyst now known as Chelsea Manning.
Prosecutors have struggled with whether the First Amendment precluded the prosecution of Assange, but now believe they have found a way to move forward.
During President Barack Obama’s administration, Attorney General Eric Holder and officials at the Justice Department determined it would be difficult to bring charges against Assange because WikiLeaks wasn’t alone in publishing documents stolen by Manning. Several newspapers, including The New York Times, did as well. The investigation continued, but any possible charges were put on hold, according to US officials involved in the process then.
But Ben Wizner, director of the American Civil Liberties Union’s Speech, Privacy and Technology Project, argued that US prosecution of Assange sets a dangerous precedent.
“Never in the history of this country has a publisher been prosecuted for presenting truthful information to the public,” Wizner told CNN. “Any prosecution of WikiLeaks for publishing government secrets would set a dangerous precedent that the Trump administration would surely use to target other news organizations.”
There’s a pattern, here, as old as government corruption itself: government commits evil; someone exposes the evil; the evil-doers visit upon the exposing party.
A great opportunity for the advancement of human freedom is missed. Washington could acknowledge it’s many faults, as exposed by Wikileaks, and vow to fix them. It could stop spying on everyone, wasting money, bombing without cause, and generally mind its own damned business. They might actually thank Assange and Co. for their work.
That’s not going to happen. Dangerous precedents from dangerous people.
PizzaGate returns to the news in most bizarre fashion. One really can’t make this stuff up. Were one to write a novel about an international child sex ring, political machinations, and American apathy, the script couldn’t get much better than what we’ve seen in the news the past 6 months. Now this: someone, a likely Democrat, is making hay out of Alex Acosta’s lenient treatment of Jeffery “Sex Criminal” Epstein:
“That wasn’t an appropriate resolution of this matter,” Reiter said, arguing that the charges leveled against Epstein were “very minor,” compared with what the facts called for. In a letter to parents of Epstein’s victims, Reiter said justice had not been served.
Prosecutors in Acosta’s Miami office who had joined the FBI in the investigation concluded, according to documents produced by the U.S. attorney’s office, that Epstein, working through several female assistants, “would recruit underage females to travel to his home in Palm Beach to engage in lewd conduct in exchange for money. . . . Some went there as much as 100 times or more. Some of the women’s conduct was limited to performing a topless or nude massage while Mr. Epstein masturbated himself. For other women, the conduct escalated to full sexual intercourse.”
Epstein has a near-legendary reputation in New York financial circles as a money manager who made many millions for his clients. Although he never graduated from college, he taught advanced math at the Dalton School, one of the city’s top private schools, and went on to be a successful trader at Bear Stearns before starting his own firm, J. Epstein & Co., which managed the finances of clients who had a minimum of $1 billion in assets.
Federal prosecutors detailed their findings in an 82-page prosecution memo and a 53-page indictment, but Epstein was never indicted. In 2007, Acosta signed a non-prosecution deal in which he agreed not to pursue federal charges against Epstein or four women who the government said procured girls for him. In exchange, Epstein agreed to plead guilty to a solicitation charge in state court, accept a 13-month sentence, register as a sex offender and pay restitution to the victims identified in the federal investigation.
“This agreement will not be made part of any public record,” the deal between Epstein and Acosta says. The document was unsealed by a federal judge in a civil lawsuit in 2015.
Reiter said in the 2009 deposition that federal prosecutors in Miami told him “that typically these kinds of cases with one victim would end up in a ten-year sentence.” Reiter said he was surprised not only by the decision to pull back from prosecuting the case, but also by the light sentence and liberal privileges granted to Epstein during his jail term.
Money and power buy “justice” in Amerika. Epstein had (has) both. The following is a short list of people he jetted to and from his private “Lolita” island: Donald Trump, Bill Clinton, Ehud Barak, Tony Blair, Mick Jagger, Michael Jackson, and Jimmy Buffett. That’s a very short list. It seems none wish to be associated with him now and with good reason. Epstein’s case touched on an international racket which has seen hundreds if not thousands arrested in the past decade (and that is probably the tip of the iceberg).
Wikileaks attempted to shed light on this and related matters late last year. America’s supposed affections for children aside, no one seemed to care.
They likely won’t care now, with squeaky shoe ball in full swing and all.
More interestingly, given the far-reaching implications of this case and all “pizza” related business in D.C., NYC, the Seaboard, and allied Europe, who in their right minds would bring up this as a charge against Acosta?! We’re taking about the Wa-Po and Congress, but still… One would think they would leave this as quiet as possible.
How’s that hearing going to go?
Senator X: “Mr. Acosta, why didn’t you fully prosecute Epstein and protect our vulnerable children?”
Acosta: “Well, Senator, we had constraints. We didn’t go after a lot of leads in that case. You, for instance…”
Senator “red-face” X: “Um. Uh… Russian hackers?”
All this to the Wa-Po, Carlos Slim’s blog, etc. was just “fake news” a few months ago. Now, with the ability to derail Team Trump, it suddenly matters. Huh?
An aside: anyone seen or heard from John Podesta lately???
There’s no doubt justice was not served in Florida. The fact Epstein is still alive testifies to that. He’s still free and so are 10,000 other perverts. I have no idea how this will affect Acosta’s nomination. I honestly don’t care. Maybe, just maybe, this pitiful political theater will shed a little more light on a few of those other cockroaches. Play fool games with fire, get burned.
Let justice be done, though the millstone falls.
The agency which either allowed hacking of the U.S. State of Georgia or did the hacking (DHS) and the agency that stood by while the ATF sold or gifted 30,000 military weapons to Mexican drug cartels (FBI/DOJ [SIC]) have released a joint report on Russian hacking into the 2016 U.S. election.
Make of this what you will. A truly exciting holiday read.
I get the FBI part. No justice should ever be expected from the department named after it.
DOJ [SIC] / Daily Mail.
But I feel a little betrayed by Anonymous. The 5th to Remember came and went. The FBI made its decision and Anon did nothing. Even as they suggest (convincingly) a link between Hillary, Huma, and radical Islamic terrorism, they do nothing. Maybe tonight or tomorrow. But one begins to wonder. They have pictures and video, they say, in addition to emails. Why hold them?
The case is now left in the hands of Julian Assange and Wikileaks. Hillary must still fear something as she is warning about “fake” emails forthcoming.
Julian did point to Hillary’s roll in the Goldman Sachs criminal syndicate and its (her) ties to Saudi Arabia. This dovetails with Anonymous’s video hints. The actions of the State Department, the banksters, the MIC, and ISIS/al-Queda should have been enough for an investigation. Unless it was all “official” policy. Policy to spread terrorism, wreck a nation and destabilize a region, and loot a few $100 Billion for the elites.
That, I thought, was the major crime. The political corruption I would have let go as standard operating procedure (even involving people not named Clinton). The Satanism fits too, considering this crowd. But I had no idea about the sex trafficking. How on Earth can that go investigated if not unpunished.
It all makes sense in a way. I’ve pointed out again and again that the government only cares about power and protecting the money (even if that means stealing it and killing people to do so); they care nothing about people, especially children. See the Denny Hastert fiasco for proof of that.
If there is to be justice, it is up to: Assange; the NYPD, or; the voters. One hopes there is a real life Stabler and Benson team gearing up for a press conference tomorrow.
President Trump will need to clean the house – burn it down, rather. Hopefully he will make good on his promise for a special prosecutor for this case.