The people the current President has around him, and the advice they give, are rather suspect. Take AG Sessions and the issue of illegal aliens in California. Various state and local authorities in the Golden Land O’ The Bear are engaged in aiding and abetting known illegals under color of CA law. Sessions decided to sue them in federal court:
So far, though, his arguments have made little headway in federal court, where judges in San Francisco and elsewhere have rejected efforts to strip federal funds from sanctuary jurisdictions that refuse to comply with Justice Department edicts.
The suits by California, San Francisco and other sanctuary jurisdictions challenge conditions the department has sought to attach to federal funding, while the Justice Department’s suit directly challenges the California laws. But the central issue in all of them appears to be whether sanctuary laws are a proper exercise of state and local government’s authority over law enforcement or an unconstitutional intrusion by those governments into federal immigration law.
There’s been no luck whatsoever on the civil side of the federal courts so … let’s try it again. Something about the definition of insanity.
18. U. S. C. 1324. Felonies. Crime. Indictments. This is how the FedGov usually seeks to manipulate behavior. Whether it’s home boys with drugs, good ol’ boys with guns, or political types with beach houses, the formula is the same. They pile on the criminal charges, the suspects enter pleas, then the courts just hand down recommended sentences. Works 97% of the time.
Or there’s the Enemy Combatant route, which I long ago heard John Yoo promote and extol as perfectly Constitutional. Seems everyone who counts – the courts, Congress, two prior administrations, etc. – are A-okay with that approach. And that system has already been used “successfully” on both foreign nationals and US citizens.
But, here and now, Sessions goes the same old civil route. Hmmm?
Maybe the man should return to Alabama and resume baking cookies in the tree.
“Normally the federal government takes the lead and the state authorities follow in these sorts of things,” he said. Now, “you have essentially an almost guerrilla movement by local authorities to try and undo federal law enforcement efforts.”
Asked whether it would be possible for charges to be brought against the mayor, Litman said he thought it was not likely.
“That would be extraordinary,” he said.
[Mayor] Schaaf and her supporters say she did the right thing.
“My statement on Saturday was meant to give all residents time to learn their rights and know their legal options,” Schaaf said Tuesday in a statement. “It was my intention that one mother, or one father, would use the information to help keep their family together.
“I do not regret sharing this information. It is Oakland’s legal right to be a sanctuary city and we have not broken any laws. We believe our community is safer when families stay together,” she stated.
She may regret the decisions when she’s indicted for violating 8 U.S.C. § 1324. If so, then I’d expect to see associated conspiracy, obstruction, and public corruption charges too. Or maybe not. It would be, as Professor Litman says, “extraordinary.” But it is technically possible.
Also possible is Trump pulling ICE out of California and leaving the State to enjoy the company of the illegals, 81% of whom appear to be convicted criminals. Also possible, if unlikely, would be the declaration that all of these people are engaged in enemy activities against the United States and dealt with, militarily, as enemy combatants. There’s actually more precedent for the latter possibility.
President Trump will face an obstruction of justice charge from special counsel Robert Mueller, former Attorney General Eric Holder predicted.
“You technically have an obstruction of justice case that already exists,” Holder, who served under then-President Obama, said on HBO’s “Real Time with Bill Maher.” “I’ve known Bob Mueller for 20, 30 years; my guess is he’s just trying to make the case as good as he possibly can. So, I think that we have to be patient in that regard.”
Trump’s critics have speculated about an obstruction charge ever since he fired FBI Director James Comey in the midst of an investigation into potential ties between the Trump campaign and Russia. The president said he was frustrated that Russia-related allegations had become “an excuse for having lost an election,” and he was also apparently annoyed that Comey refused to say publicly that Trump himself was not under investigation, although Comey had made such comments in private.
“I have absolute right to do what I want to do with the Justice Department,” Trump told the New York Times in December 2017.
Selling, and then giving, illegal arms to known terrorists, actions which led to the murder of at least one American citizen, would seem to also qualify for E.C. treatment. On the fantasy front, an absolute defense against obstruction exists in the President’s absolute authority to terminate any executive official, at any time, for any reason or for no reason. That’s settled precedent, as is black-siting American citizens engaged in hostilities against America – that or just droning them away.
All of this is rancorous, depressing, and more than a little ridiculous and speculative. So … here’s a happy balance piece:
“It’s quite possible that the Bush political dynasty, at least for this generation, could end in the spring of 2018 because if George P Bush fails to win the GOP nomination for land commissioner it’s tough to see him coming back from that any time soon,” said Mark Jones, a political scientist at Rice University. The dynasty began with Prescott Bush – George P’s great-grandfather – becoming senator for Connecticut in 1952.
Though Democratic turnout for early voting has soared this year compared with last time, no Democrat has won a statewide race in Texas since 1994, making the primaries all-important.
The last stand of Bush’s political career could be the Alamo. His predecessor and main rival, Jerry Patterson – a history buff who used to carry guns in his cowboy boots and cultivated a relationship with the pop star and leading Alamo artefact collector, Phil Collins –has made Bush’s supposed failure as a steward of the historical battlefield site into a key campaign issue. Bush has also drawn criticism for the slow pace of disaster recovery efforts following Hurricane Harvey.
Praise be to God Almighty! Now, after G.P.B. loses, maybe there’s some way to justify deporting the whole Bush Clan back to wherever the hell they came from. Or anywhere else. Germany! I think the Reich still owe Prescott’s descendant’s a little favor for the Union Banking gold deals, no?
This may be all for the weekend. Tomorrow starts a new week. Maybe with some cigars or music or something.
En 2015, l’Etat islamique a brutalement assassiné l’Américain James Foley, en Syrie je crois. En novembre 2015, les agents de l’ISIS à Paris ont mené des attaques encore plus brutales contre les parisiens. Les attaques du Bataclan, et al, 130 personnes assassiner, des centaines d’autres blessés. La diversité avec l’accent de la partie DIE.
En réponse aux attentats de Paris, Marne Le Pen, réellement française et fière, a posté des photos du meurtre de Foley sur Twitter. Elle assimilait les deux attaques et critiquait la politique française en matière de réfugiés et d’immigration.
Les procureurs français ont déposé jeudi des accusations préliminaires contre Marine Le Pen pour avoir tweeté des images brutales de la violence de l’État islamique.
Le procureur de la banlieue parisienne de Nanterre a déclaré que des accusations avaient été portées pour «distribution d’images violentes». Si l’affaire est finalement jugée et condamnée, Le Pen pourrait être condamné à trois ans de prison et 75 000 euros (90 000 dollars) bien.
Les tweets de Le Pen de décembre 2015 ont montré des exécutions par des extrémistes de l’EI, y compris le meurtre du reporter américain James Foley. Elle les a postés à la suite des attentats de novembre 2015 contre Paris, accusant le gouvernement de ne pas en faire assez pour protéger la France.
Le Pen a déclaré jeudi à la chaîne de télévision BFM “que cela visait clairement à me faire taire. Pourtant je ne serai pas réduit au silence “. Le Pen a déclaré qu’elle considérerait une éventuelle condamnation comme une “médaille de patriotisme et de défense du peuple français”.
Je l’aime, ne serait-ce que pour son héroïsme. Mais peut-être, juste peut-être, c’est déplacé.
N’importe quel pays qui voudrait importer la sauvagerie subira les conséquences, refusera d’élire quelqu’un qui combattra et renversera les tragédies, et poursuivra alors cette femme héroïque pour avoir osé tirer directement la vérité analogue … pourrait ne pas mériter d’exister plus .
Maintenant, il est tout à fait probable que Mme Le Pen, un autre Le Pen, ou un autre moderne Charles Martel se lèvera dans le prochain cycle électoral ou deux et sauver la France. Mais cela instaure un précédent horrible.
Et, en faisant abstraction des lois, cela ne se limite pas à la France. Quelque chose à quoi penser. Peut-être sans Tweets.
Americans, English, et al, take note:
In 2015 ISIS brutally murdered American James Foley, in Syria I believe. In November of 2015 ISIS agents in Paris carried out even more brutal attacks against the people of Paris. The Bataclan attacks, et al, 130 people murdered, hundreds more injured. Diversity with the emphasis of the DIE part.
In response to the Paris attacks Marine Le Pen, actually French and proud, posted pictures of the Foley murder on Twitter. She was equating the two attacks and criticizing French refugee and immigration policy.
Now, she faces charges:
French prosecutors filed preliminary charges Thursday against Marine Le Pen for tweeting brutal images of Islamic State violence.
The prosecutor’s office in the Paris suburb of Nanterre said the charges were issued for “distribution of violent images.” If the case eventually reaches trial and she’s convicted, Le Pen could face up to three years in prison and a 75,000-euro ($90,000) fine.
Le Pen’s December 2015 tweets showed executions by IS extremists, including the killing of American reporter James Foley. She posted them in the wake of the November 2015 IS attacks on Paris, accusing the government of not doing enough to protect France.
Le Pen told BFM television Thursday “it’s clearly aimed at silencing me. Yet I will not be silenced”. Le Pen said she would consider a potential conviction as a “medal of patriotism and defense of the French people.”
I love her, if only for her heroism. But maybe, just maybe, it’s misplaced.
Any country that would willingly import savagery, suffer the consequences, refuse to elect someone who would fight and reverse the tragedies, and then prosecute said heroic woman for daring to draw direct analogous truth from the matter… might not deserve to exist any more.
Now it’s entirely likely that Mrs. Le Pen, another Le Pen, or some other modern day Charles Martel will rise up in the next electoral cycle or two and save France. But this institutes a horrible precedent.
And, varying laws aside, it’s not limited to France. Something to think about. Maybe without Tweets.
La diversité. Criminel. Obtenez-le directement. / Diversity. Criminal. Get it straight.
With the highest gun ownership per capita in the world – by far – the US is only number 111 (of around 200 nations) in per capita murders. The left’s assertion that over-armed America is the murder capital of the world is a ridiculous lie. And, dear God, let’s NOT get into the statistics of who commits the largest measurable percentage of murders in America (hint: it’s not the Amish).
Gun murders and deaths, including those related to rifles (including “assault-style” rifles) are but a near microscopic fraction of total “unnatural” or “preventable” deaths in the US. From 2014:
248 people killed with rifles (all types including … assault rifles);
435 people killed with baseball bats and hammers;
660 people killed with punches and kicks;
8,124 people killed with guns of all kinds (offset by 1,000,000+ lives saved by all guns);
14,249 murders of/by all weapons sources (and unarmed murders);
32,744 killed by automobiles;
Approximately 200,000 killed by doctors and medical professionals;
Approximately 365,000 killed by obesity and fat-related causes;
652,639 killed by “legal” abortions.
One, if one is blind, deluded, and perhaps mentally deficient, or possibly evil, can easily see the way to best save lives in America is to ban the scary AR-15. (Better raise taxes while we’re at it).
And no one ever uses an assault rifle to prevent crime or save lives … except that they do.
Yesterday I ran a rather incomplete, but illustrative, list of current and historic gun control proponents. Show me a tyrant, a dictator, a mass murderer, a genocidal maniac, or an active war-monger, and I’ll show you a loud and proud supporter of disarming the locals.
All of this figures largely into today’s Prepper News Weekly, which you should watch on a regular basis:
Perrin Lovett/FPTV/YouTube.
Yet and still, otherwise decent people, whether they be “average”or “ordinary” or powerful celebrities, continue to mindlessly (no thought, just emotions) clamor to be disarmed. To disarm you. It’s as infuriating as it is embarrassing.
The impressionable youth, students who will walk out of classes to support gun control, are almost understandable. Some (very few) of them are subject to being killed, in schools or without, by bad people armed with guns. Sure, they’re more likely to be killed by bees, lightning, and swimming pools, but those facts are … facts and not really governed by easily manipulated feelings. (Ever hear someone decry “assault-style” ionized plasmatic electricity from the sky?) No.
The kids are far more likely to be killed by incompetent doctors, sugary drinks and starchy carbs, and autos. And many millions of their cohorts never even made it to the schools thanks to Planned Parenthood (aka, Rehashed Nazi Eugenics, Inc.). On that last note, an interesting, telling political cartoon:
Andy Marlette, Pensacola News Journal (via the Tampa Bay Times).
That’s good and bad rhetoric all in one, Mr. Marlette. There’s a vague truth behind it: “conservative” Republicans types, like Rick “Make it 21!” Scott, will claim to be anti-abortion. They’re not. For all the claims, there’s been remarkably little (read: NO) action since 1973 to curtail abortions. The slight numerical decline is more attributable to contraception, lifestyle changes, and the antics of the … um … Junior Anti-Sex League.
The young cartoon lady is well-instructed that the well-dressed, well-fed elephant does not care about her in or out of the womb. His only concerns are: appeasing his corporate overlords, and; getting reelected. (Yes, these are most similar to the real desires of his goofy-looking jackass “opponent”). The rhetorical truth evaporates. Then, mathematically considering the 80:1 and 2,600:1 ratios from 2014, above, the real truth interrupts with force.
For the politicians, especially the currently-in-charge GOPers, there can be no understanding, no sympathy. “Mindless shits” comes descriptively to mind.
“The schools are terrible because the teachers are incompetent, but arm the teachers.”
“No, don’t arm the teachers. Raise the gun-buying age and put a SWAT team in every school. Metal detectors! More drugs!”
“Okay. Let’s ban bump stocks (unnecessary to bump fire anyway)”.
“Take the guns first, due process second.”
Gibber. Gibber. Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. Stupidity to make Democrats look sane by comparison. (One notices that, largely, the Dems are silently hanging back now, allowing the fat, stupid elephants, the kids, and the corporations to fight this one – a wise strategy).
The due process thing is really alarming. Not many of ye old Rights of Englishmen still exist in dying America. DP is kind of important. And it’s kind of under siege. And not just from The Trump. He says a lot of things, many of them unwise sounding:
President Trump on Wednesday voiced support for confiscating guns from certain individuals deemed to be dangerous, even if it violates due process rights.
“I like taking the guns early, like in this crazy man’s case that just took place in Florida … to go to court would have taken a long time,” Trump said at a meeting with lawmakers on school safety and gun violence.
“Take the guns first, go through due process second,” Trump said.
Trump was responding to comments from Vice President Pence that families and local law enforcement should have more tools to report potentially dangerous individuals with weapons.
Giving the orange man the benefit of the doubt, which I tire of doing, I’m sure he means what he says in limited, emergency circumstances. There are actually times when a situation sort of dictates dispensing with the technicalities of formal due process.
For instance, if a police officer sees someone committing (or about to start committing) what the officer reasonably believes to be a crime or dangerous activity, then the officer is lawfully authorized to use force, up to and including lethal force, to stop said crime or activity. No need to trouble a judge up-front. It happens all the time. And it many times doesn’t even involve the police; see the linked example of the armed citizen of Illinois, above.
And there is, in such emergency situations, a built-in due process anyway: people know or should know not to commit or attempt to commit crimes! At least not where others might see them. And with the expectation that they might be resisted if they proceed. It’s as much common sense as it used to be common law.
You know, the common law with the due process specter floating around?
“No person shall … be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law …” (5th Amend., U.S. Const., as amended, 1791)(See also: Amend. 14).
If there is to be formal legal action, then it needs to take place before any subsequent state taking action. Before, first, Donald, not second. And a gun would seem to fit the description of “property.” Of course, explaining this to a man who will use executive, administrative action, in defiance of Articles I and II, to ban superfluous rifle accessories, seems tenuous. Then again, the man says a lot of things; sometimes he rationally clarifies afterwards. Time will tell, time permitting.
It’s odd, given The Trump’s hasty pronouncements and the quasi-legal developments of the past 20 years, that he does not (yet) take a similar approach to the deep state, the treasonous lukers, the pizza-lovers, the banksters, and the Dreamers. Would not a delayed due process, say via Enemy Combatant proceedings, benefit the stabilization of whatever remains of this political mess? Dunno but, the fact that I, a anarcho-libertarian type, would even ask such a question speaks to where we really are in the here and now…
This article runs a little long but it is worth considering the whole of the fallen government and how it reacts to the law. Joe Bob Briggs considers the TeeVee-ification of the Third Branch:
The genius element of the English justice system is the invention in the Middle Ages of the state prosecutor, or, in its original incarnation, the king’s prosecutor. His purpose was to keep vengeance out of the courtroom. Before that you had the aggrieved-kinsman system. The suffering family brought charges against the alleged offender, so that if a Hatfield killed a McCoy, it was up to the McCoys to file charges, and if the Hatfield was found guilty, the McCoys were allowed to take vengeance in the form of executing the offender themselves. Eye for an eye, family member for family member, murder for murder, rape for rape. This is the system that, in various forms, still exists today in many Muslim cultures, and it’s the system that we supposedly got rid of 800 years ago after agreeing that eye-for-an-eye is not what we wanted. Henceforth the only person allowed to bring criminal charges was an unbiased public official representing the state and the people, and that person had to be emotionally uninvolved with either side of the case.
Then, as the court system developed in England and America, we became strict about excluding from trials anyone who had any kind of bias, even if he otherwise qualified as a witness. In fact, bias caused by friendship or blood relation is one of the principal ways that witnesses are impeached.
…
*Please read the whole original at Taki’s, via the above hyperlink.*
Our courts, judges, and prosecutors are every bit as out of control as their legislative and executive counterparts. It’s a very good article as are most that pass through that source. Still, I will note that there was a time and place for private prosecutions, ones involving really process and decorum. The Romans, for example, ran a system of private felony proceedings similar to those used in their major civil cases. The aggrieved party, usually of Patrician class, brought charges and prosecuted them before the whole Senate or before a large jury of the accused’s actual friends, his peers.
We don’t do that anymore … to our detriment. We still, to a degree, use the Roman system of magistrates to quickly resolve minor cases. But the felonies are now handled by self-serving government agents, before government judges, with government witnesses, all before a jury carefully selected so as to favor the government. In short: you are screwed.
Maybe the Romans, like the ancient English, were a little more civilized. More honest. More intelligent. “We” certainly tend to be none of those things.
Also, to partly answer Joe Bob, the changes (to due process, equal protection, etc.) may have started prior to the 1980’s. It might have come through the example of 1945-46 and the Nuremberg Trials, which essentially threw out hundreds, thousands even, of years of legal refinement. Threw them out for temporary expedience and feel-good-isms. And with ramifications for the future.
And so we are left with a system based on: ignoring facts, ignoring history, emotionally driven nonsense, collectivist actions, always geared towards taking the maximum amount of freedoms away from the maximum numbers of innocent or disconnected persons.
248 bad actors (calm down CNN, Google – not those actors) kill people with rifles, some of them surely “assault-ish,” while 100 Million good actors remain armed, responsible, peaceful, and vigilant. The solution is to disarm the many over the actions of the few?
That’s the “thought.” The thought of today’ do-good grabbers and of Hitler, Himmler, Mao, Stalin, Amin, Hussein, and Pot. A somewhat disconcerting truth and conundrum.
The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday declined to hear the Trump administration’s appeal of a federal judge’s ruling that requires the government to keep the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program going.
Under a lower court order that remains in effect, the Department of Homeland Security must continue to accept renewal applications from the roughly 700,000 young people who are currently enrolled in the program, known as DACA. The administration had intended to shut the program down by March 5, but that deadline is now largely meaningless.
In a brief order, the court said simply, “It is assumed the court of appeals will act expeditiously to decide this case.”
Someone once said that when you assume something, you make an ass out of “u” and me. In this case, it’s you, me, immigration law, the rule of law, separation of powers, and the rest of the America.
Not to worry, the wise Trump proposes to administratively ban bump stocks!
The Complaint is HERE. I didn’t follow the case and won’t. Originally I figured it would go nowhere; now it’s a moot point. The suit was filed immediately in a case that still consists of nothing but unanswered questions. No investigative report. Multiple narrative changes. Adamant ISIS declarations. And admonishment from the FBI that it may be a year before anything is known factually (if ever).
President Donald Trump called on politicians on both sides of the aisle to back stronger background checks for prospective gun owners on Tuesday.
‘Whether we are Republican or Democrat, we must now focus on strengthening Background Checks!’ the president tweeted.
Hours earlier, Trump took action to outlaw bump stocks like the one used in the Las Vegas massacre last fall.
‘I signed a memorandum directing the Attorney General to propose regulations to ban all devices that turn legal weapons into machine guns,’ Trump said in the wake of a Florida massacre in which the killer did not use such a device.
His push for stricter gun controls comes after thousands of students and parents have called on his administration to implement changes to prevent future mass shootings.
Sell. Out.
This isn’t merely an affront to the Second Amendment, it’s an APA-driven assault on the Article One legislative authority of Congress. I suppose none of this matters at this rather late hour.
Nothing to address the rapidly declining culture. Nothing about the schools themselves. Nothing about the constant link between the shootings and psychotropic medication. Nothing about the massive failure of existing laws and law enforcement. Nothing about the illegality of most of those existing laws. Nothing. A feel good measure that doesn’t even feel good. And won’t help anyone.
Since he took office last year I’ve been trying to give Trump the benefit of the doubt. That ends now.
This one might be actionable or subject to extradition.
An attorney who worked for a prominent law firm was charged with making false statements to federal authorities as part of Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s probe of Russian collusion in the 2016 presidential election.
Alex Van Der Zwaan was charged Feb. 16 with lying to the FBI and Mueller’s office about conversations related to his work on a report prepared by his law firm on the legitimacy of the criminal prosecution of a former Ukrainian prime minister, Yulia Tymoshenko.
Prosecutors charged Van Der Zwaan by criminal information, which typically precedes a guilty plea. He is scheduled to appear Tuesday afternoon in federal court in Washington. He didn’t immediately respond to calls and emails seeking comment.
Van Der Zwaan was an associate in the London office of Skadden, Arps, Slate Meagher & Flom. “The firm terminated its employment of Alex Van Der Zwaan in 2017 and has been cooperating with authorities in connection with this matter,” the firm said in a statement.
Last year, Van Der Zwaan married the daughter of Russian oligarch German Khan, according to the London Tatler. Khan is a shareholder of Alfa Group, a Russian banking and investment concern, and a board member at LetterOne Holdings, the investment vehicle set up by the founders of Alfa Group.
The unsealing of Van Der Zwaan’s case came four days after Mueller accused 13 Russians of a sophisticated disinformation campaign using a troll army that targeted the 2016 campaign and sought to sow discord in the U.S.
I still don’t see anything resembling collusion between Trump and the Ruskies. I do see a pattern of people getting charged with lying to the FBI. And this guy was an attorney at a mega firm, one of the most monied on Earth. It just goes to show the old adage: if you’re not talking, you’re not lying. The FBI is the police.
Do not talk to the police. Really.
There really is no good reason. If they suspect you or your associates of a crime – any crime – they can generally find something to charge you with. Don’t help them. Don’t make it easy.
On the other hand, if you know of someone who is venturing into the world of “professional school shooting,” and you tell the FBI, they do nothing. Nothing, except for a little CYA after the shooting career starts. Again, no point in the communication.
It seems to me there were two purposes behind the Special Counsel’s investigation from the beginning: 1) actually investigate election tampering, etc., and; 2) find or manufacture evidence of collusion between Russia and Trump. The latter part was the heart and soul of the “Russia, Russia, Russia” mania gripping the media, the Democrats, etc.
The indictment finds and alleges no collusion whatsoever between the President and any Russian malfeasors. In fact, it finds no impropriety by any American.
With the recent developments in the FBI/FISA debacle and with no evidence of collusion anywhere, it may be that Mueller decided to wrap this one up. It could also be that he did a proper investigation and that this is the result.
The issue is, of course, developing. More later, likely.
Following the school shooting in Florida, the media, the idiot pols, and the hysterical mass media repeat the clamor to “Do something! Anything!” As with any any problem on Earth, the solution has to be another law, right?
In this particular case, let’s consider that:
The alleged shooter was on psych meds, like all school shooters;
He was expelled from the school for threats and violent behavior;
The police were called to his house 39 times! in a year;
The FBI received a tip he might be a potential school shooter and did nothing;
The subject school, like nearly all government schools, was a “gun free” zone;
A law to legalized lawful arms carry in “gun free” zones was shot down in FL last year;
In Florida, Wednesday, it was illegal to: bring a gun to a school; point a gun at any person; disrupt educational process; shoot people; commit murder … ;
As with all terrorist and most American felons, the shooter was previously know to authorities – this one was known to everyone from the teachers to the FBI.
What new law could have made any difference here? The even the odds Bill I mentioned the other day might have. About the only intelligent thing I’m hearing from any politician is the Broward County Sheriff, Scott Israel, calling for expanded Florida Baker Act provisions to temporarily detain potentially mentally ill criminals – before they act.
This case looks like the complete and utter failure of law and law enforcement.
Maybe it’s not the law. Maybe it’s the people. Something to think about.
“I want to thank every sheriff in America. Since our founding, the independently elected sheriff has been the people’s protector, who keeps law enforcement close to and accountable to people through the elected process,” Sessions said in remarks at the National Sheriffs Association winter meeting, adding, “The office of sheriff is a critical part of the Anglo-American heritage of law enforcement.”
Interesting that he’s not going after the weed or re-explaining something to Congress.
Very interesting that such an innocuous phrase might generate fear of “nefarious meaning.”
Most interesting that a 1970’s television show theme had it right:
He has no fear, he’s always here, his morale stands alone. A man of dreams, who guards our things as if they were his own. He walks the streets from early dawn, he stands behind our laws. Both big and small, he bends them all, who dares to fight his cause.
-Sheriff Lobo, Frankie Lane.
That was the way it was, the way it was supposed to be…
PERRIN LOVETT 
You must be logged in to post a comment.