07/12/16

WATCH: Obama called Philando Castile’s mother (video)

By: Renee Nal | New Zeal

Valerie Castile

Philando Castile’s mother Valerie

President Obama reached out to Philando Castile’s mother in the wake of his untimely death in Falcon Heights, Minnesota on 5 July 2016 at the hand of a law enforcement officer who was seeking to identify two robbery suspects.

Unsurprisingly, Philando Castile has been painted as a martyr for the Black Lives Matter movement before the circumstances of the shooting have been revealed, continuing an ongoing trend for the communist terror organization. The case was thrust into the social media spotlight when Philando Castile’s girlfriend Diamond Reynolds posted a video of Castile after he had been shot.

On Monday, Diamond Reynolds made the talk show circuit, claiming that she and her boyfriend were profiled by Officer Jeronimo Yanez.

“I would like for people to understand that we don’t bring these types of situations upon ourselves,” Reynolds said, “and even still we can’t result to violence and outrage… if we were Caucasian or not minority we would have not been stopped.”

If character matters, one should consider that another video posted by Diamond Reynolds shows her bragging about smoking weed, with a painfully unhappy little girl in the back seat:

Read more here…

06/8/16

Viral Arrest Video Exposes Title IX Systemic Flaws In Brevard Public School System

By: CairoGrady

Dean

Many of us have seen a video of the man, albeit a candidate for the Brevard School Board, use the words “erect penis” in a Brevard school board meeting about LGBT issues and what is occurring inside the Brevard County School System. Considering the subject matter, it would seem that an appropriate medical term would be the least of issues causing a disturbance, … that is unless they have reason to be ultra-sensitive and defensive.

The media has since, in many cases, made Dean Paterakis seem “inappropriate” and categorically overlooked the actual issues he was bringing to the surface and the shock value of his language, (which should be protected by free speech), has indeed now drawn attention to the systemic issues afflicting the Brevard Public School system. Public support seems to exist, as well, as it was seen and emphasized by the chant of the crowd telling the school board to, “let him speak”. Mr. Paterakis seems to have hit the nail on the head, to the displeasure of the school board, and his viral arrest video has begun to now unravel and expose the systemic issues plaguing the Brevard Public School system, which are numerous and appalling.

In the past year, teacher morale in Brevard has dropped to a dark low. A FLORIDA TODAY article published August 10th, 2015, for example, is titled, Brevard teachers leave in droves for other jobs. Teachers cited low morale as their main concern about teaching there. It goes on to state that four pages worth of resignations, consisting of 73 teacher resignations and 80 retirements, was on just one school board agenda. 368 other teachers voluntarily resigned that year and 365 resigned or retired in the 2014-2015 school year at the time of the article. Furthermore, the article exposes that 1,196 teachers have resigned over the past six years and 839 more retired. That is approximately 42% of the entire Brevard Public School system teacher population total number that has turned over in the past six years. What is even more appalling is what is occurring within the school system. Prepare yourself.

Continue reading

12/18/15

SCAMMING ALZHEIMER’S

By Sharon Sebastian

Swindlers, scammers, and quacks fill the Internet. During times of desperation cons are quick to manipulate the vulnerable with fraudulent promises. Normally one dismisses them by thinking buyer beware and hoping that the gullible will not succumb to the hokum being plied to seduce the unwary.

The worst of the worst are the vermin that prey on families whose loved ones suffer from dementia or Alzheimer’s disease. Alzheimer’s and the many varied forms of dementia are today claiming more people than at any time in the history of the disease. Studies show that the disease increased 68% over ten years when, according to the U.S. Census, the elder population only increased by 15.1%. Families are desperate for a cure. Victims are desperate for relief. Increasing in alarming numbers across the Internet are societal vultures aiming at the hearts of the vulnerable. They are predatory parasites out to pick the pockets of desperate people while blinding them with false promises that they have a cure for the deadly disease.

Having spent several years embedded in both hospitals and nursing homes, and coming face-to-face on a daily basis with patients stricken with the long-term, but always fatal disease, it is with certainty that it can be stated that there is no cure.

Dementia has become so prevalent that everybody knows somebody who knows somebody who has it. The numbers are so great that an ill-prepared health system is not equipped to render the proper “care” that is needed for the overwhelming numbers of dementia patients that are streaming through its doors. From nurses’ aides to whistleblowers, staff complain that they are not being trained to deal with the ever increasing number of people that are incapacitated with brain diseases.

To understand the severity of the cruelty of the swindlers, it is important to understand the heartache and real-time bereavement of families confronted with most forms of dementia and Alzheimer’s.

In my latest book, “AGING: WARNING – Navigating Life’s Medical, Mental & Financial Minefields,” few have captured the devastation more succinctly than a well-knit crew of Hollywood creatives. The group is raising both money and awareness about this disease that decimates both mind and body. In as straightforward a way as they can put it, the team at Hilarity for Charity posts this warning on their fundraising website:

“There’s a thief out there. And it’s robbing people’s memories. It’s robbing their ability to talk. It’s robbing their ability to eat, walk, get dressed, shower, or recognize their loved ones. It’s robbing people of their ability to be humans. It’s called Alzheimer’s…” – Hilarity for Charity

Dr. Neal Barnard, President of the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine talks openly that debilitating memory loss plagues his family.   Though advocating a healthy diet and striving for a cure, he does not claim one. Dr. Barnard states that: “There is nothing more [important] than the connections with your loved ones. If your heart is beating, but your brain cells have been destroyed and you lose your connection with your children, grandchildren, and everyone else around you, you have lost everything and they have lost you. My hope is that we can change that and it starts with information…”

People across the nation who are both emotionally and financially devastated scour the Internet for a ray of light that there is a way out of the darkness that is Alzheimer’s. That is why families must be warned about the shocking number of advertisements that herald that Betty or Bob have gotten their memory back from a simple pill that cures Alzheimer’s. That all that people need to do is just buy and apply a special hand cream that makes those stricken with dementia mentally resilient again.

Few things are more galling than charlatans preying on families by scamming them with a false hope that they have a cure for Alzheimer’s. No cure exists. Serious research is underway searching for a cure. As yet, there is none.

As detailed in the book, “AGING: WARNING,” what patients and their families need to know is that “… sticky proteins, now scientifically linked to the consumption of processed foods, become clumped together and irretrievably shred nerve cell endings and eventually disintegrate brain cells. There is no recovery. When brain cells are attacked, the brain eventually clogs, shrinks and dies. The destruction of brain cells is permanent. The damage is not reversible. There is no restorative cure.”

Truth can be harsh. False hope is far harsher. Avoid the “miracle cure” scams posted on what appear to be legitimate and often respected websites. Do not let your heart succumb to the ploys of Internet con artists who prey on your deepest hopes and prayers. Keep your money in your pocket for those rainy days or expenditures to secure comforting care. Consider diverting your dollars to research with organizations such as the Cure Alzheimer’s Fund that reports that a 100% of all donations go towards research for a real, but as yet illusive cure.

Top research scientist Dr. Rudolph Tanzi, Professor of Neurology at Harvard University, heads up Genetics and Aging Research at Massachusetts General Hospital. Dr. Tanzi warns that you should not assume you’re immune just because you have no family history of Alzheimer’s. When asked if a cure for Alzheimer’s exists as 2016 begins, his answer is, “Absolutely not — unfortunately.” Trust that the world will know if and when there is a cure for Alzheimer’s and dementia. Meantime, protect your wallet and emotions. Ignore the scammers and the quacks. False hope is no hope at all.

Sharon Sebastian, author of the book, “AGING: WARNING Navigating Life’s Medical, Mental & Financial Minefields,” is a columnist, commentator, and contributor in print and on nationwide broadcasts on topics ranging from healthcare, culture, religion, and politics to domestic and global policy. Sebastian’s political and cultural analyses are published nationally and internationally. Website:   www.AgingWarning.com

11/14/15

Cop Body Camera Policy Can’t Wait

By: T.F. Stern
The Moral Liberal

police-body-camera

Police departments across the country are being pressured into having officers wear body cameras as a means of making their actions more ‘transparent’.  With the advent of Smart Phone technology the general public has a means of recording events, millions of ‘independent journalists’ available at a moments notice to capture an ongoing event or stage an incident worthy of the Six O’clock News.

Images gathered by Smart Phone cameras have shown police officers…; perhaps this would be a good time to use the word ‘allegedly’…, police officers have allegedly been shown using excessive force, violating an arrested suspect’s rights or using deadly force when such force did not appear justified.   These short videos become instant fodder for a more than willing news media intent on destroying the public’s confidence in their local police department’s ability to uphold the law fairly and without prejudice.

After a day or two of bombarding the public with the same images, a short ‘trial by media’ followed by a knee jerk reaction from elected and appointed officials finds the offending officer guilty, often times destroying a promising career in law enforcement or even placing the officer’s family in grave danger as death threats surface from the more radical sections of society.

Not that it matters much; but a week or so later more images are made public, images taken by other citizens on their Smart Phones which tend to support the police officer’s explanation of what really happened; not a biased version which only showed what some cop hating malcontent thought would further advance his/her agenda.

That brings us to the so called grassroots movement to have all police officers wear body cameras.

In an article appearing on the internet at Conservative Tribune:

“In Washington, the Justice Department is publicly telling the local police departments that by adopting body cameras, they will be improving transparency and trust between citizens and officers. However, behind closed doors … it is a completely different story.

{…}

Well, the federal government has yet to adopt guidelines on how and when to use such cameras. These rules would be an important factor in determining how any footage obtained could be used in court, released publicly, or stored by law enforcement agencies.”

The Federal government is demanding local police departments implement a wide sweeping program which has yet to be thought out regarding legal issues which would affect the courts, the release of sensitive information publicly, the storage of vast amounts of information and this doesn’t even mention the cost of such programs to taxpayers or municipalities already operating beyond fiscally sound measures.

I’ve no idea how other cities are addressing the issue of police officer body camera policy; but here in Houston they’ve opened a can of worms worth investigating.

Houston Police Officers Union logoAccording to Ray Hunt, President of the Houston Police Officers’ Union (HPOU), in the November issue of Badge & Gun there are several issues, foremost on that list would be that the officers who would be wearing body cameras were not part of the input process when generating policies which would greatly affect their lives on a daily basis.

“As for the body camera policy, the HPOU nor our representative had ANY input in the policy and we have major concerns with several sections of the policy.”

The article goes on to point out the secretive process by which the City of Houston decided which camera vendor company to use, making it clear to members of the Houston Police Department that they could not meet with ANY vendors offering body camera equipment/services or those companies would automatically be deleted from the bidding process.  Then, upon reading the requirements it appeared as if only one company matched those requirements.  The term ‘Brother in Law Deal’ comes to mind; but isn’t that how big government rewards those who previously showed monetary support during the election process?  (Cronyism?)

“It was clear that the policy was written for a specific camera, even though the Public Safety Committee was advised no selection had been made. The draft policy states that the cameras will protect the constitutional rights of citizens, but mentions nothing about protecting the officers, who our chief has said are the most important part of the organization.

The draft policy requires an officer within seconds of clearing a call to categorize each recording as evidence, non-evidence or traffic stop. We can only imagine the discipline that will come from this when an officer makes a mistake or fails to make a choice. The policy does not provide for officers to immediately view the video from the vehicle and will require officers to drive to the station and get a supervisor to assist in downloading the video.”

Never mind protecting police officer’s rights; these new body camera policies were designed to catch corrupt cops who don’t deserve constitutional protections.  Constitutional protection is reserved for alleged criminals like the ones rotten cops are persecuting needlessly with extreme prejudice.  Did I capture the perspective of those members of our society who have no respect for police?

Sorry, Folks; but from the arm chair of this retired police officer, the implementation of policies which place body cameras on police officers but fail to address legal admission of information obtained by these devices, fail to address internal policies intended to protect the public as well as police officers using these recording devices, fail to address reasonable questions as to how massive amounts of taxpayer money is to be spent while the stench of Cronyism hangs over the procurement process…No, this change in police public relations needs to be addressed before the City can claim it’s acting in Everyone’s best interests.


T.F. SternThe Moral Lib­eral’s Senior Edi­tor, T.F. Stern,is a retired City of Hous­ton police offi­cer, self-employed lock­smith, and gifted polit­i­cal and social com­men­ta­tor. His pop­u­lar and insight­ful blog, T.F. Sterns Rant­i­ngs, has been up and at it since Jan­u­ary of 2005.

11/4/15

Empty the Prisons Bill Now on Fast Track

By: Cliff Kincaid
Accuracy in Media

We are witnessing a carefully orchestrated political and media campaign to pass the George Soros-backed Sentencing Reform and Corrections Act of 2015 (S.2123) on the grounds that it is “bipartisan.” But critics are calling it a soft-on-crime bill that will backfire on the Republicans who help pass it.

A big hole in the congressional process to rush the bill through to full approval in the Senate has been exposed by a former prosecutor who says victims of crime were not given a chance to be heard.

The former prosecutor, Mary Leary, is a professor at Catholic University of America Columbus School of Law in Washington, D.C. She has written a scathing review of the bill and the process underway to pass it, saying, “The president and Congress need to reach out to victims. The president has gone all the way to Oklahoma to meet with prisoners. Perhaps he should take a walk in Washington and meet with one of the victims of the over 40,000 crimes that occurred there in 2014 or speak to the families affected by a homicide rate that has increased over 47 percent since last year.”

The same criticism applies to the senators who passed the bill.

Despite the flaws, the following papers have weighed in with editorials in favor of the legislation:

  • Pittsburgh Post-Gazette
  • Los Angeles Times
  • Cedar Rapids Gazette (IA)
  • Waco Herald Tribune (TX)
  • Kansas City Star
  • Santa Rosa Press Democrat (CA)
  • Indianapolis Star

The Waco Herald Tribune made a correct point, however, in noting that “the reforms were pressed hard by both the politically powerful Koch brothers as well as the American Civil Liberties Union.”

But while the Koch brothers did give $5 million to the Coalition for Public Safety, a group that met with former Attorney General Eric Holder to push “criminal justice reform,” it is the left-wing billionaire, George Soros, who has really been behind the campaign. He gave the ACLU $50 million in 2014 “to end mass incarceration.”

We noted in a previous article that one Soros-funded group, Critical Resistance, was founded by communist Angela Davis and says it seeks “to end the prison industrial complex” by “challenging the belief that caging and controlling people makes us safe.”

We thought the group had only received $100,000 from Soros. It turns out the organization got $200,000 from the Soros-funded Open Society Foundations in the year 2000, $200,000 in 2002, and another $100,000 in 2009.

Dr. Tina Trent, an advocate for victims of crime, was writing about the campaign for “criminal justice reform” when it was primarily underwritten by Soros and before the Koch brothers started pouring millions of dollars into it. She discovered that the group Critical Resistance had invented the “cop-watch concept” that would be popularized by Van Jones in Oakland, California, through a group called Bay Area Police Watch. Angela Davis wrote, Are Prisons Obsolete?, a book arguing that criminals are victims of capitalist society.

Van Jones would later become Obama’s so-called Green Jobs Czar, only to resign when his communist background came to light. He is now working with Koch Industries to promote the Sentencing Reform and Corrections Act of 2015.

As a commentator on CNN, Jones has also been promoting the bill, calling it a “smart” way to deal with crime. “By year’s end,” he writes, “President Barack Obama could sign into law major criminal justice reforms—passed because of the leadership and full engagement of the congressional GOP.”

If so, it would be a major victory for George Soros and the Democratic Party.

In total, according to “prisoner rights advocate” Christopher Zoukis, George Soros and his Open Society Foundations have “invested” more than $200 million in the past decade toward “reform of criminal justice policies.”

The evidence is mounting that Senate Republicans voting for the bill have walked into a trap set by the leftists. Jonathan Keim, Counsel for the Judicial Crisis Network, advises Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell not to bring the bill up for a vote. He writes, “…why would Senate leaders bother bringing it to a vote when the fault-lines established by the opposing Senators would expose Republicans to charges of being ‘soft on crime’ in the upcoming election?”

Those opposing senators, as we reported, include Republicans Ted Cruz (TX), Orrin Hatch (UT), David Perdue (GA), Jeff Sessions (AL) and David Vitter (LA).

But other conservatives are making their voices known, such as Dan Cadman of the Center for Immigration Studies, who says the bill could result in illegal aliens being released from prison to prey on innocent Americans.

He writes about S.2123, “…there is nothing in the bill to ensure that released alien prisoners will be detained during the entire pendency of deportation proceedings. In fact, it is entirely possible that in some instances alien prisoners whose actual time served is substantially lessened by the provisions of S.2123 may find themselves in a position to go before the immigration court and ask for relief from removal because they will no longer face statutory debarment under various provisions of the immigration laws, as would have happened had they been obliged to serve the original sentence.”

If Congressional Republicans pass the bill, it would not only be a major victory for President Obama but likely also for Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton.

Hillary Clinton “made it [incarceration] the centerpiece of her first major policy address since officially declaring her candidacy in a speech Wednesday at Columbia University in New York City,” gushed Leonard Noisette at the website of the Soros-funded Open Society Foundations back in April.

Noisette went on: “Clinton’s speech followed a front-page story in the New York Times noting an unusual consensus among Democrats and Republicans in the 2016 presidential race on the need for criminal justice reform. New alliances are being formed between such politically disparate groups as the Center for American Progress and the Koch Brothers. Indeed, these issues are fostering a spirit of bipartisan cooperation seldom seen in our ideologically polarized politics of late.”

Isn’t it interesting that Clinton chose that theme after The New York Times pumped it up as a major issue?

While the Koch brothers may have funded some good free-market causes over the years, the issue of “criminal justice reform” has clearly been hijacked by the left.

The Committee on Domestic Justice and Human Development of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops and Catholic Charities USA are among the groups endorsing the bill. They cited the comments of Pope Francis, made in a talk with prisoners at the Curran-Fromhold Correctional Facility outside Philadelphia. Pope Francis said, “This time in your life can only have one purpose: to give you a hand in getting back on the right road, to give you a hand to help you rejoin society. All of us are a part of that effort, all of us are invited to encourage, help and enable your rehabilitation.”

They added, “We join the Holy Father by advocating for reforms to our nation’s criminal justice policies that lead to mercy, healing and restoration.”

The only reference to crime victims comes in this part of the letter: “Our Catholic tradition supports the community’s right to establish and enforce laws that protect people and advance the common good. But our faith also teaches us that both victims and offenders have a God-given dignity that calls for justice and restoration, not vengeance.”

Hence, offenders are, in effect, being treated as victims by these liberal Catholic groups.

Leary, the professor at Catholic University, spoke for many Catholics when she voiced concerns that the victims of crime have not been heard, as S.2123 has been marked up and passed by the Senate Judiciary Committee.

She wrote that “…apparently no one in the Senate thought it appropriate to hear what victims have to say about criminal justice reform. Last year, about 1.17 million violent crimes and nearly 8.3 million property crimes were reported to law enforcement. The victims of that criminal activity are the people who bear the direct and secondary harm. That is not all. It is not just that victims were not included as witnesses; they were barely even mentioned. A review of the written testimony of all nine witnesses indicates that the word ‘victim’ or any derivative thereof was used a mere nine times.”

But no advocate for victims of crimes testified.

She added, “Although the Judiciary Committee saw it appropriate to include representatives from Families Against Mandatory Minimums, prison ministers and lawyers, it did not apparently see it necessary to include the people most affected by crime through no fault of their own—victims.”

Families Against Mandatory Minimums is another Soros-funded group, having received $600,000 from his Open Society Foundations in 2012, $200,000 in 2008, and $400,000 in 2007.

Leary is a former prosecutor and attorney who has focused on crimes against women and children, including the exploitation of children and women, child pornography, child prostitution, computer facilitated crimes against children, and family violence cases.

In her National Law Journal article about the flaws in the bill, she noted that Congress passed the Crime Victims Rights Act in 2004, giving victims the right to be “reasonably heard” at public court proceedings.

“This same Congress should recognize that right in this context and allow victims to be ‘reasonably heard’ regarding” the Sentencing Reform and Corrections Act of 2015, she said. “Not only is it reasonable to listen to crime victims, but it is necessary for any criminal justice reform to be legitimate.”

11/2/15

Ted Cruz Breaks With Koch Brothers on Crime Bill

By: Cliff Kincaid
Accuracy in Media

Before Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) electrified conservatives with his denunciation of liberal media bias at the GOP presidential debate last week, he took a little-noticed position on a major crime bill before the Senate that set him apart from the politically powerful Koch brothers. Taking the side of law-and-order conservatives on an issue that could emerge as a major focus of the 2016 presidential campaign, Cruz came out against the Sentencing Reform and Corrections Act (S. 2123) on the grounds that the legislation, which will retroactively reduce the sentences of thousands of federal prison inmates, could lead to the release of violent criminals, some convicted of using weapons while engaged in other crimes. He said the Senate bill would release “illegal aliens with criminal convictions” when a “major crime wave” is already sweeping the nation.

In an extraordinary development, the Koch brothers decided to publicly go after Cruz. Echoing the views of the libertarian billionaires, whose network of conservative advocacy groups was planning to spend $889 million on the 2016 campaign, Mark Holden, Senior Vice President & General Counsel of Koch Industries, Inc., issued a statement denouncing the Texas senator by name. He said, “We are disappointed that some members, including Senator Cruz, who have supported the need for reform and been strong supporters of the Bill of Rights, did not support this bill.”

While Cruz had indicated support back in February for a Senate bill on “sentencing reform,” he voted against the latest version because he said it would lead to more criminals being released from prison and committing crimes against law-abiding citizens and police.

In dramatic testimony, Cruz said that while he had supported the Smarter Sentencing Act, a previous version of the bill, the final version had been changed and had “gone in a direction that is not helpful.” He said it provides “leniency” for “violent criminals who use guns” and gives lighter sentences to criminals already serving time. Cruz said that letting thousands of criminals out of prison at this time makes no sense “when police officers are under assault right now, are being vilified right now, and when we’re seeing violent crime spiking in our major cities across the country…”

Political observers say that the public attack on Cruz from the Koch brothers, who are seeking to influence the selection of a GOP 2016 presidential nominee, could easily backfire and expose the nefarious influence of the libertarian billionaires’ attempt to affect the outcome of the race for president on the Republican side. In addition to the Kochs, libertarian hedge fund operator Paul Singer has entered the Republican contest, endorsing Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL) and promising him millions of dollars in campaign contributions through his own network of conservative organizations and allies. Singer, whose son is homosexual, wants the GOP to embrace gay rights and gay marriage.

There are very few organizations active in conservative politics that are not financed by either Koch or Singer. Donald Trump, a billionaire in his own right, doesn’t need their support.

Blogger Tina Trent, who writes and lectures about criminal justice issues, hailed Cruz’s decision to come out against the Koch-backed bill, saying the legislation was “a 100 percent giveaway to some of the most radical anti-incarceration activist groups funded by George Soros,” the billionaire hedge fund operator and backer of the Democratic Party. She said, “I’m happy to see Cruz refuse to obey the Kochs on this one vote, but the fact that they came out and chastised him publicly when he did cross them even slightly points to bigger questions—and bigger problems.  Will Cruz go further and completely sever ties with the Kochs?”

Libertarians and their Leftist Allies Push Criminal Justice Reform

Though branded by the media as free market conservatives, the Koch brothers are libertarians on social and foreign policy issues and do business with China and Russia. They chose “criminal justice reform” as their latest high-profile cause, even though this has meant collusion with the Soros-funded Open Society Foundations and his grantees.

We noted in a story last March that the Coalition for Public Safety was playing a leading role in this new “bipartisan” campaign for “criminal justice reform,” and has been financed by $5 million from the Koch brothers and other “core supporters,” such as the liberal Ford Foundation.  Soros money for this effort has been mostly funneled through the ACLU, a major “partner” in the group, which received $50 million to cut national incarceration rates and release criminals.

The Coalition for Public Safety is run by Christine Leonard, a former Ted Kennedy Senate staffer once affiliated with the left-wing Vera Institute for Justice. We pointed out that the Vera Institute is so extreme that its Project Concern had a National Advisory Board on Adolescent Development, Safety and Justice that included the former communist terrorist Bernardine Dohrn as an adviser from 1998 to 2003.

One Soros-funded group, Critical Resistance, was founded by communist Angela Davis and says it seeks “to end the prison industrial complex (PIC) by challenging the belief that caging and controlling people makes us safe. We believe that basic necessities such as food, shelter, and freedom are what really make our communities secure.” It got $100,000 from the Soros-funded Open Society Foundations.

An all-day “Bipartisan Summit on Criminal Justice Reform” that was sponsored in part by the Coalition for Public Safety featured former Obama official and Marxist Van Jones as a major speaker. Jones appeared at a podium emblazoned with the company name “Koch Industries.”  Obama’s then-Attorney General Eric Holder also spoke to the event.

Cruz was joined in his opposition to the Sentencing Reform and Corrections Act by Republican Senators Orrin Hatch (UT), David Perdue (GA), Jeff Sessions (AL), and David Vitter (LA). Nevertheless, Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley and Assistant Democratic Leader Dick Durbin pushed the Sentencing Reform and Corrections Act through the Senate Judiciary Committee in a 15-5 vote. A Cruz amendment to fix the bill was voted down.

Americans for Limited Government President Rick Manning said that Senate Republicans, “in a quest for bipartisanship,” have passed a bill that will “retroactively reduce more federal prison sentences, resulting in an additional flooding of our cities with thousands more convicted criminals out of penitentiaries.” He asked, “Given the volatile mix of massive increases of Muslim refugees, the influx of Central American gangs and Mexican drug cartel members, and the disarming of our police, what could go wrong with releasing tens of thousands of convicted criminals early into the already violent cities? Why would Republicans vote for that?”

Law Enforcement Groups Weigh in on Pending Crime Legislation

Unwilling to let the Koch brothers and George Soros have their way on the crime legislation, organizations representing law enforcement are making their views known. Groups opposing the bill include the National Association of Assistant United States Attorneys, National Sheriffs’ Association, National Immigration & Customs Enforcement Council, Federal Law Enforcement Officers Association, National Narcotic Officers’ Associations’ Coalition, National District Attorneys Association, Major County Sheriffs’ Association, and the Federal Bureau of Investigation Agents Association.

Major figures opposing the bill include Ed Meese, Former Attorney General of the United States; Ron Hosko, Former Assistant Director of the FBI; and Phyllis Schlafly of Eagle Forum.

Senator Sessions, a senior member of the Judiciary Committee and former federal prosecutor, quoted Steven Cook, the President of the National Association of Assistant United States Attorneys, as saying that the bill “threatens to reverse many of the gains we have made by making thousands of convicted and imprisoned armed career criminals, serial violent criminals, and high-level drug traffickers eligible for early release.” Cook added that “it would seriously weaken the very tools that federal prosecutors, working with our federal, state, and local law enforcement partners, have used to keep our communities safe.”

“In reality,” Tina Trent told Accuracy in Media, “there is no big public groundswell of support for releasing recidivist criminals back onto the streets. The urgency around this issue has been almost entirely manufactured by paid activists in the leftist and libertarian camps—aided by the media, of course. This is why they’re being so intentionally secretive about the process and the people who would be released and how the releases would be implemented. It’s also why they’re not making it easy, or even possible, to see state-by-state information about the specific inmates who would be released, nor can the public view the full criminal arrest and conviction records for these inmates.”

Taking on libertarian rhetoric about alleged “nonviolent” drug offenders supposedly populating the prisons, she noted there are several ways an offender can be classified as “non-violent” even when he or she has a long rap sheet of arrests for violent crimes and even convictions for violent crimes. In such cases, defense lawyers will have their clients plead to a drug charge in exchange for charges of violent crimes being dropped.

The “Ferguson” Effect?

Despite the serious flaws in the bill and questions about the radicals backing it, aCongressional Criminal Justice and Public Safety Caucus has been created to make similar legislation a reality on the House side. Representatives Jason Chaffetz (R-UT), Raul Labrador (R-ID), Cedric Richmond (D-LA) and Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) will serve as co-chairs of this newly-formed body.

Jessica Berry, Deputy Director of the Coalition for Public Safety, thanked Chaffetz and the other Republicans for partnering with Democrats as well as President Obama, for the purpose of “getting criminal justice reform done.”

Berry’s praise for Republicans should give them concern. She is a former top Democratic Party staffer on Capitol Hill, having served as the principal law enforcement and criminal justice advisor to Senator Barbara Mikulski (D-MD) and an adviser to Senator Patrick Leahy (D-VT), the top Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee.

If the “bipartisan” bill passes Congress, Republicans may eventually be blamed for helping to put more criminals back on the streets, producing more of the “Ferguson effect” that Obama’s FBI director James Comey says has put the lives of police officers and innocent members of the community in greater danger.

The controversy over Comey’s remarks could complicate the President’s push “to loosen the nation’s sentencing laws,” the Hill newspaper reported. Another potential complication is that the outspoken Cruz and others may put pressure on Republican Senate Leader Mitch McConnell (KY) to stop the bill from coming up for a vote so that Republicans don’t further embarrass themselves by partnering with soft-on-crime Democrats in hock to Soros-funded activist groups.

Leftist groups are hoping McConnell will bring the bill to a full Senate vote, in order to demonstrate how Republicans can work with Democrats on an issue dear to the Obama administration.