By: Cliff Kincaid
The Soros-Koch Brothers Criminals Lobby
At a time of rising crime across the nation, Dr. Tina Trent exposes how George Soros and the Koch Brothers have joined forces to empty the prisons of illegal aliens and other criminals. Trent says the Koch Brothers are libertarians, not conservatives, and that “They’re more like George Soros than not.” The bills they are pushing are S. 2123 and H.R. 3713. Trent, an advocate for victims of crime, says the “criminal justice reform” legislation will modify the mandatory minimum sentences that have been put hardened criminals in jail and reduced crime. But many conservatives are silent about this because they take Koch Brothers money.
By: T F Stern
T F Stern’s Rantings
To Check or Not to Check, that is the question… when criminals fill out applications seeking employment with the Federal Government. Before I go any further, my apologies to William Shakespeare (I have a copy of his voice mail granting permission and can prove it as soon as the State Department retrieves it from Hillary’s email server). To Check or Not to Check, that is the question when criminals fill out applications for employment with the Federal Government. Do we really need to know who it is reading sensitive files, conducting Federal business or spending tax dollars?
On Monday, according to a Fox News article, Obama reportedly signed yet another Executive Order, skirting the constitutional process of enacting legislation; this one, “prevents federal agencies from making job-applicants reveal they have a criminal record as part of his overall criminal justice reform effort”.
“The so-called “drop the box” initiative would allow prospective employees not to check a box on some federal applications that acknowledges a criminal record.”
Prospective employees who have been tried, convicted and spent time in prison wouldn’t have that ugly check mark in their file indicating prior misdeeds. Professional criminals would be working for the Federal Government along side amateurs just learning the ropes making it more difficult for the good citizens of this nation to identify them.
Doesn’t this fly in the face of common sense? I mean…. (in my best Arlo Guthri voice impression), I mean…. (Arlo always asked a second time with even more emphasis), isn’t the purpose of these forms to ascertain basic information that would be helpful in determining the character of individuals upon whom We The People are asked to place our trust?
Someone in the Obama administration just flagged me as a right-wing conservative nut-job and potential domestic terrorist for doubting the sanity of our all knowing and all powerful Divider in Chief.
Okay, I’ve mentioned Obama’s latest Executive Order; but that’s not what I wanted to highlight. No, Obama wants us to blindly follow, to let known criminals get past the door that normally would be permanently shut so they can obtain employment.
What about folks who want a brand new Assault Rifle or Semi-Automatic Pistol but don’t want to ‘Check the Box’, the Box indicating they’ve been convicted of a felony and spent time in prison when filling out a Federal background form?
Double Standard Alert!
By Obama’s thinking, ANY citizen seeking to obtain a weapon is considered a suspected domestic terrorist and requires a complete and thorough background check. Returning military veterans are subjected to psychological testing intended to deny thousands of them 2ndAmendment rights as part of their reward for having served. It’s only a matter of time before psychological tests are mandated for all citizens under Obamacare for the same end result; end private ownership of weapons and destroy the 2nd Amendment.
If you voice an opinion which runs contrary to Obama the full weight of government can and will be brought to bear. You will be crushed! The IRS, EPA, DOE or any number of Federal agencies which you thought were there to serve the public; but which are now used as tools and/or weapons at the disposal of Obama, will be used against you until you are crushed into silence.
John Nolte wrote an article some time back explaining how Obama used agencies of the Federal government during the ‘shut down’ following a vote by Congress that didn’t go the way Obama mandated Congress to vote. 47 times Obama used these agencies to ‘remind’ Congress, and by extension, We The People, that Obama runs this nation and only Obama’s opinion is important.
Maybe Shakespeare had Obama’s latest Executive Order in mind when he penned Hamlet’s ramblings regarding death, “To be or not to be…” if, by placing a check mark on a Federal employment form indicating former convictions…wait for it….
“… Be all my sins remembered”.
In the slang of today, my ‘bard’.
This article has been cross posted to The Moral Liberal, a publication whose banner reads, “Defending The Judeo-Christian Ethic, Limited Government, & The American Constitution”.
By: James Simpson
DC Independent Examiner
And should be charged as criminal accomplices and dealt with accordingly. Does that sound outrageous? Sure it does, but withhold judgment until you read this post.
It is absolutely indisputable that San Francisco’s sanctuary policies contributed to the horrific, senseless, shooting death of 32-year-old Kate Steinle on July 2. Francisco Sanchez, the illegal alien who admitted killing her, has said that it was the city’s sanctuary policies that attracted him to it. City leaders have Kate’s blood on their hands. But that blood is a drop in the bucket compared to the outrages regularly being committed by the illegals among us, while politicians of both parties sing their praises.
Donald trump has been roundly criticized by both Democrats and Republicans for saying that 80 percent of women crossing the border are being raped. NBC decided to drop his popular show, The Apprentice, and the Miss Universe pageant he produces. Mexico says it will withdraw its entrant to the pageant based on Trump’s offensive statements. ESPN, NASCAR and others have piled on. But Trump was just quoting an article from Fusion magazine. The piece, “Is rape the price to pay for migrant women chasing the American Dream?” leads off by saying:
Before they can reach the American Dream, many migrant women have to survive a Mexican nightmare. A staggering 80 percent of Central American girls and women crossing Mexico en route to the United States are raped along the way, according to directors of migrant shelters interviewed by Fusion.
Could it be any clearer than that? Democrats have long since abandoned even a shred of honesty, but are Republicans again rebranding themselves as “The Party of Stupid?” How about “The Party of Insufferably Mindless Idiots?” Is that what they should be called, or maybe just the cowards, frauds and hypocrites they are?
In fact, the problem is infinitely worse than the article reveals. For example, almost half of all federal crimes committed in the United States in fiscal year 2013 were committed in a few districts along the Southwest Border with Mexico. Of 61,529 criminal cases initiated by federal prosecutors, 24,746 – fully 40 percent of the total – originated in five border jurisdictions in Arizona, New Mexico, Southern California, Western Texas and Southern Texas. Almost all were committed by illegals.
Following are some statistics on illegal alien crime that were compiled by the Government Accountability Office (GAO) for its 2011 report, Criminal Alien Statistics. The GAO study included a review of 249,000 criminal aliens. They were arrested a total of 1.7 million times, an average of about 7 arrests per alien. Between them they committed 2.9 million crimes. About 50 percent were arrested at least once for either assault, homicide, robbery, sex crimes or kidnapping. Here are the eye-popping stats:
Homicide, 25,064 (8% of total), Sex Offenses 69,929 (12%), Assault 213,047, (35%), and Kidnapping, 14,788 (4%).
But this doesn’t give context. These crimes were committed over multiple years. It is obviously not insignificant, but is difficult to tell how it stacks up to the total without reviewing all crimes during the period. The following stats will put it in proper perspective.
GAO also studied a subset of five states with large illegal alien populations, New York, Florida, Arizona, Texas and California. At the time of the study, 2011, the latest data available were for 2008. In New York, 28 percent of illegal aliens convictions in 2008 were for murder. Another 11 percent was for sex offenses. Those sounded like a lot but GAO did not provide the numbers that generated those percentages, so a FOIA request was submitted. Following are the unpublished numbers provided by the GAO, placed side-by-side against the total of each type of crime committed in each state in 2008:
Total Murders: 835. Illegal Alien Murder Convictions: 1,168 (140% of total)
Total Sex Crimes: 2,775; Illegal Alien Sex Crimes: 459 (17% of total).
Total Murders: 2,143. Illegal Alien Murder Convictions: 2,859 (135% of total)
Total Sex Crimes: 8,906; Illegal Alien Sex Crimes: 3,325 (37% of total)
Total Murders: 1,373. Illegal Alien Murder Convictions: 934 (68% of total)
Total Sex Crimes: 8,004; Illegal Alien Sex Crimes: 1,825 (23% of total)
Total Murders: 404. Illegal Alien Murder Convictions: 326 (81% of total)
Total Sex Crimes: 1,654; Illegal Alien Sex Crimes: 391 (24% of total)
Total Murders: 1,169. Illegal Alien Murder Convictions: 1,762 (151% of total)
Total Sex Crimes: 5,972; Illegal Alien Sex Crimes: 2,971 (50% of total)
The reason convictions exceed state total crimes for the year in some cases is because convictions are for crimes that may not have been committed that year but went to trial in 2008. However if total murders for the previous three years 2005 – 2007 are added up, the 2008 illegal alien convictions are still astronomical:
New York, 45%; California, 40%; Texas, 22%; Arizona, 24%; Florida, 55%.
North Carolina is a haven for illegals for some reason. Sex crimes committed by illegals against children in NC are off the charts. For example:
In North Carolina there were 752 arrests of illegals for sex crimes against children in 2014. Each illegal was arrested on an average of five charges, for a total of 3,695! Statistics were not available for November 2014, so the actual number is doubtless higher.
Despite this glaring issue, and the serious vote fraud problems in NC, the newly elected GOP majority in the state just passed a law providing driver licenses to illegals. One must scratch deep to uncover something more idiotic and irresponsible. Such stupidity will insure NC’s GOP majority is short-lived. Does the GOP have a death wish?
People are being killed, and raped in epidemic numbers. Illegals are praying on our children! President Obama’s catch and release program for illegal aliens, including violent criminals, is directly responsible for 121 murders committed by illegal alien criminals released from jail under Obama.
What kind of insanity allows this to continue? By coddling illegals at the expense of Americans, President Obama, Eric Holder, Jeh Johnson and all the other self-serving parasites in this unbearable, destructive cabal, as well as leaders of both parties in the U.S. House and Senate, and countless state and local politicians (Martin O’Malley can you hear me?) are personally responsible for this violent crime wave. They have blood on their hands and should be criminally charged as accessories to rape and murder.
By: Denise Simon
Marilyn Mosby has made it widely known that she comes from a long line of police officers, five generations of law enforcement to be exact. The 35-year-old Baltimore city state’s attorney’s father, mother, grandfather, and uncles have all at some point worked as cops — a history which Mosby cites to push back against the claim — as Fox News’ Griff Jenkins put it during a recent interview — that Baltimore’s finest believe the rookie prosecutor does not have their backs because of how she’s handled the Freddie Gray case.
“I come from five generations of police officers,” Mosby responded to Jenkins. “That’s absurd.”
But while it’s true that numerous Mosby family members have worn the badge, a thorough look reveals a more complicated picture of that law enforcement background than she has let on in public.
Start with Mosby’s father, a former Boston police officer named Alan James. In 1989, James and a fellow officer named Dwight Allen were arrested and charged with assault and battery for their role in several armed robberies in a high-crime area of Boston.
According to a Boston Globe article at the time, James, Allen and another suspect flashed badges and brandished guns while shaking down drug dealers. The officers identified themselves as “renegade police” and were reportedly drunk. During one robbery, one of the men fired his gun, though nobody was hurt.
James was arrested while on duty at a police station in Dorcester but was acquitted of charges in the case in 1991. After acquittal he was immediately fired for conduct unbecoming an officer, according to the Baltimore Brew, an independent newspaper.
Mosby has not publicly acknowledged this mark on her family’s policing legacy. Though, according to the Brew, she acknowledged her father’s troubled past in a biography written for her campaign for state’s attorney.
“My dad was a crooked cop,” Mosby said, according to the document, which was not released to the public. “He confiscated drugs and money from the dealers on a regular basis.”
Then there is Mosby’s maternal grandfather, Prescott Thompson. Thompson, who went by Rick, sued the Boston police department in 1986, claiming that he was the target of racial discrimination after he was denied a job.
According to a 1994 Boston Globe profile, Thompson began working as a Boston cop in 1964. But in 1971, he suffered what seemed like a career-ending injury when a car battery exploded in his face, causing him to lose his right eye. With a glass eye replacement, Thompson remained on the force — but did not work — until 1976 when he reluctantly accepted a retirement offer.
Thompson was not content to stay off the force, however. As the Globe put it policing was in Thompson’s blood. But his dreams were dashed when his application was denied because of his glass eye.
“Sight in two eyes is a bonafide occupation qualification for the position sought,” Francis Roache, Boston’s police commissioner at the time, wrote in a letter to Thompson.
But Thompson saw something else at play, so he filed a lawsuit claiming he was not hired because he was black. In his lawsuit, Thompson argued that four white Boston police officers with sight in only one eye worked for the Boston police department. But the department’s personnel director responded by pointing out that those four officers worked in non-traditional police jobs. One was a clerk, and another was a hazardous materials inspector.
Thompson had a traumatic experience with police well before he became a cop himself. In the Globe profile, Thompson said that he was inspired to become a cop after an incident when he was 12 or 13 involving four plain-clothes officers. Thompson said he was running an errand for his family when the officers slammed him up against a brick wall. They said he matched the description of a purse snatcher. When the officers realized their error, they let him go. The incident stuck with Thompson. As the Globe reported, “he swore that he would become a police officer, and that he would prevent that sort of treatment from happening to another black child.”
During her many public statements about her family’s law enforcement history, Mosby has not mentioned either her father’s troubles or her grandfather’s grievances with Boston police.
She has also not acknowledged that Richard Miller, her uncle and Thompson’s son, filed his own discrimination suit against the Massachusetts state police.
According to the Globe, Miller filed a lawsuit in 1981 claiming that he was the target of discrimination. That case was settled in Miller’s favor, and he was awarded a $211,587 judgment.
Asked whether those many negative experiences have shaped how she thinks about policing and police departments, Mosby indicated that they have not.
“As a young child, what I saw was how hard my family worked,” Mosby said in a statement to The Daily Caller. “I have nothing but respect and admiration for all law enforcement officers who make tremendous sacrifices every day to keep our communities safe.”
There is much more. Marilyn Mosby is connected to both Johnetta Elzie and DeRay McKesson. These 2 people were at the core of the Ferguson protests and they are connected to the White House and the Department of Justice in a most favorable standard.
Late last year, in December, the White House held a series of sessions with hand chosen guests to map out the Presidential Task Force for 21st Century Policing. Additionally the White House has endorsed and fully supported a Non-Governmental Organization called Teach For America of which both Elzie and McKesson are former alumni.
Just for proof, the series of links below describe the fact that the protests beginning with Ferguson and later Baltimore, New York and McKinny, Texas are headed by groups that are supported and deployed by the Department of Justice and the White House.
DeRay McKesson Bio offered for the WH task force.
Johnetta Elzie and DeRay McKesson took a medic class for tear gas.
The White House Task Force, note McKesson’s committee assignment.
Teach for America not only provides teaching jobs in designated towns but provides government grants to pay tuition and then offers to waive student debt.
Trayvon’s mother is part of the movement. “Know Justice Know Peace”
Then there is Amnesty International, funded by the U.S. government and by George Soros, both Elzie and McKesson are on the payroll.
DeRay McKesson testimony at the White House.
DeRay McKesson teaching resume in the Baltimore school system.
University of Miami session Know Justice Know Peace
There is much more, but you by now understand, this is a scripted operation designed, deployed and managed by the White House and the Holder Justice Department. And so it goes.
By: Denise Simon
The House is taking some positive steps this year as they did last by taking away Obama’s money defending the illegals.
House votes to block Obama legal defense on immigration actions yet Jeh Johnson is acting quietly on his own. Just consider what Jeh Johnson did in 2013 releasing thousands of prisoners.
The Department of Homeland Security has a National Terrorism Advisory System that states on the website they effectively communicate information about terrorists threats to the public. The website even asks for your help. Then they have the nerve to have a fact sheet on the ‘broken’ immigration system where suggestions are noted that through Executive Orders, the ‘brokenness’ can be fixed.
So, releasing almost 4000 level 1 foreign national criminals from prison to roam our streets is the answer? Would this include those that are domestic ISIS terrorists?
Most of the illegal immigrant criminals Homeland Security officials released from custody last year were discretionary, meaning the department could have kept them in detention but chose instead to let them onto the streets as their deportation cases moved through the system, according to new numbers from Congress.
Some of those released were the worst of the worst — more than 3,700 “Threat Level 1” criminals, who are deemed the top priority for deportation, were still released out into the community even as they waited for their immigration cases to be heard.
Homeland Security officials have implied their hands are tied by court rulings in many cases, but the numbers, obtained by House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte, showed 57 percent of the criminals released were by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s own choice, and they could have been kept instead.
“Put aside the spin, and the fact is that over 17,000 of the criminal aliens released last year were released due to ICE discretion, representing 57 percent of the releases,” said Mr. Goodlatte. “The Obama administration’s lax enforcement policies are reckless and needlessly endanger our communities.”
In a statement to The Washington Times, ICE said it takes release decisions seriously and makes a judgment in each case. That holds true even for Threat Level 1 criminals.
“Not all Level 1 criminal aliens are subject to mandatory detention and thus may be eligible for bond,” the agency said, pointing to mitigating circumstances that can convince agents to release the most serious criminals.
“ICE personnel making custody determinations also take into consideration humanitarian factors such as deteriorated health, advanced age, and caretaking responsibilities. All custody determinations are made on a case-by-case basis taking into consideration the totality of circumstances in each case,” the agency said.
ICE officials insist that those who are released are still monitored, often by electronic ankle bracelets but also through a system of phone checks or by paying a bond.
However, nearly all of those released under electronic monitoring broke the terms of their release, according to ICE numbers.
In fiscal year 2014, ICE put about 41,000 immigrants through electronic monitoring, and more than 30,000 of them broke the terms of their release — many of them racking up multiple violations. All told, they notched nearly 300,000 violations in one year alone, or an average of 10 instances per violator.
The rate has gone down slightly so far in fiscal year 2015. Of the 34,002 immigrants put into electronic monitoring, 27,317 have broken the rules a combined 162,322 times.
ICE said violations can include what they deem minor problems, such as someone lacking a strong enough cell signal for voice verification by phone or someone calling in too early or a few minutes late. Low batteries or jostling an electronic bracelet during sports can also cause a monitoring alarm to go off incorrectly, ICE said.
Of the more than 30,000 detainees who broke the conditional terms of their release and monitoring in 2014, only 2,420 were deemed to have been serious enough breaches to rearrest them.
Part of ICE’s problem is that it doesn’t have enough beds to go out and pick up violators, according to an inspector general’s report released earlier this year.
Agency officials said they would like to be able to hold those who willfully break the rules, but they haven’t requested more beds. Indeed, Mr. Obama’s 2016 budget request actually asked for fewer beds to hold detainees next year, arguing that he wants to put more emphasis on the very alternatives that are being violated.
ICE’s treatment of those awaiting their deportation proceedings has been controversial for several years.
In 2013, the agency released 36,007 convicted criminals who were awaiting the outcome of their deportation cases. Those released had amassed 116 homicide convictions, 15,635 drunken driving convictions and 9,187 convictions stemming from what ICE labeled involvement with “dangerous drugs.”
The total dropped to about 30,000 in 2014 — but the seriousness of the offenses increased, with 193 homicide convictions among the detainees and 16,070 drunken driving convictions. There were also 426 sexual assaults and 303 kidnapping convictions, ICE said.
Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson and ICE Director Sarah Saldana said the numbers were unacceptable and imposed new rules requiring releases to be vetted by senior agency officials to make sure they were correct.
Both Mr. Johnson and Ms. Saldana also said many of the releases are required and give them little discretion — particularly those made under a 2001 Supreme Court decision known as the Zadvydas case, when the justices ruled that immigrants couldn’t generally be detained indefinitely.
That means that if a home country won’t take someone back, ICE must release them after about six months.
But the new numbers obtained by Mr. Goodlatte suggest Zadvydas-related releases were fewer than 2,500 in 2014, or only about 8 percent of the total — compared to the 57 percent that ICE admits were completely discretionary.
The rest of the releases were divided between cases where an immigration judge ordered bond or where ICE was unable to obtain travel documents but it wasn’t considered a mandatory release under the Zadvydas ruling.
By: Andrew Kopas – Guest Columnist
Stand Up America
With the recent shooting in Ferguson and deaths in New York City and Baltimore of residents there involved in criminal activity at the time of their arrests, there is an outcry from the likes of civil rights activist Al Sharpton and others for nullification of state’s rights and the takeover of local and state police forces nationwide by the Federal Government, specifically by the Executive Branch.
In all of this, keep in mind that Obama has very successfully used “straw man” arguments to advance his objectives. In this particular case, the “straw man” argument being put forward is that all law enforcement agencies across America are inherently racist and that only his takeover of them will fix these racist organizations.
He has essentially painted a bull’s eye on the backs of our local and state law enforcement personnel and endorsed instead the criminal element in America that has responded by assassination style shootings of law enforcement personnel in NYC and most recently in Mississippi as well.
The nationalization of our local and state police forces is indeed a very bad idea and should be adamantly opposed by both the states and the general populace for several reasons.
First and foremost, it would bring ALL organized armed personnel, namely the American Military, Homeland Security, and all local and state police under the direct control of one man, namely Obama and any future Presidents of the United States.
That would in turn allow for tremendous abuses of that power that we have already seen in this Administration, such as use of the IRS and DHS against what he perceives to be his domestic enemies, namely anyone who opposes him and his policies.
Secondly, if he decided to fully seize power and set aside the limitations of the Office of President imposed on him by the Constitution of the United States, which he has already done in a number of particulars such as with illegal immigration, failure to enforce DOMA, bypassing Congress unilaterally in matters of treaty negotiations, etc., there would be no armed force except the American people directly to stop him.
But without organization and leadership, the probability of that successfully happening on a national scale is remote.
In fact, he could use all of the organized armed forces at his disposal, including local and state police who would be under his direct control, to put down any such opposition that the people might undertake.
As reported in The Daily Bell on December 7, 2011, as early as 2009 Obama advocated “a civilian police force to match the size and power of our armed forces.” One has to ask the question “Why” such national control is required vs. local law enforcement properly trained and equipped to deal with any domestic terrorist threats?
His expansion of the Homeland Security Department has followed that pronouncement, as has his use of the NSA to go far beyond its mandate and monitor the communications of every man, woman and child in America.
And the fact that he is actively promoting and funding illegal immigration on a massive scale in America today without screening for terrorists crossing our borders begs the question of if he indeed wants to see an increase in domestic terrorist attacks like we have seen in many places across the USA such as at Ft. Hood, Oklahoma, Boston and most recently in Garland, Texas with the expressed purpose of forcing the need for such a national police force under his direct control to put down such attacks?
Obama has gone on record on more than one occasion to praise the Chinese Communist form of government and other authoritarian regimes that are essentially dictatorships based on central government control over all aspects of their citizens’ lives including how many children they can have, how they worship, how they communicate with each other over the Internet, and even how they assemble.
Do we want a man with the belief that an authoritarian form of government is preferable to a democratically elected government with clear separation of powers between the Executive, Legislative and Judicial branches as set for in our Constitution to have the kind of unlimited power that nationalization of our local and state law enforcement agencies would give him?
By: Cliff Kincaid
Accuracy in Media
The reaction among responsible black and white law-abiding citizens to the black thugs rioting in Baltimore was captured by Toya Graham, the black mother who smacked her son around when she found him on the streets joining the attacks on police. Even liberals in the major media applauded her efforts.
“I don’t want him to be a Freddie Gray,” she told CBS News, referring to her son and the black youth who died under mysterious circumstances while in police custody.
CBS reported, “Graham, a single mom with six children, denounced the vandalism and violence against police officers. She said rioting in Baltimore is no way to go about getting justice for Freddie Gray and that she doesn’t want that life for her son.”
Graham then appeared on the CBS This Morning Show to discuss the incident and the struggle to raise her children.
The important teaching moment represented by this dramatic incident, a brief moment of sanity in the media, undercut the left-wing effort to somehow blame the police for the riots. As a result, the “progressives” had to go on the attack against the black mother.
Over at Think Progress, the blog of the pro-Obama Center for American Progress, Graham was attacked as a “misguided” mother who exercised bad judgment in holding her son accountable. Writer Kira Lerner said the issue was alleged police violence, not rioting in the streets by black youth.
She quoted a woman with a group opposed to “police brutality” as saying that “While she doesn’t condone the looting that was highlighted by the media in Baltimore Monday night, she said she understands where the violent protesters are coming from.”
Meanwhile, over at Hot Air, a piece by Noah Rothman ran under the headline, “Don’t let urban unrest derail conservative criminal justice reform.” While the riots were underway, he insisted that “a consensus opinion” had emerged on both the left and the right in favor of getting soft on criminals and letting more of them out of prison.
In the wake of what has happened in Baltimore and Ferguson, the Republican primary electorate might be tempted to embrace a “tough on crime” candidate, but “That would be a mistake,” Rothman informed Hot Air readers.
What’s more, he lectured them, the war on drugs has “failed” and there is no alternative to letting “non-violent offenders” out of prison.
In fact, the war on drugs did not fail. David Evans, a special advisor to the Drug Free America Foundation, notes that marijuana use went down among young people by 25 percent from the advent of the Reagan administration’s “Just Say No” campaign to the inauguration of President Obama. “If we had had a reduction in any other health problem in the U.S. of 25 percent, we would consider it an outstanding success,” he said.
Being “tough on crime” is precisely what many observers, including that courageous Baltimore mom, have concluded needs to be done in the inner cities.
Going soft was precisely what the Baltimore mayor, Stephanie Rawlings-Blake, had done, accounting for the weak police response to the riots. Former police officer Michael Tremoglie points out that the Baltimore police knew that the mayor had said she wanted “protesters” protected and room furnished for them to “destroy,” and that “They knew that the DOJ [Department of Justice] was ‘monitoring’ what was occurring during the riots.”
Before he came to Hot Air, a site owned by Salem Communications, a Christian firm, Rothman had sung the praises of the pro-marijuana voices in the media such as MSNBC’s Touré. On another occasion, he had highlighted how comedian Kevin Hart and rapper Ice Cube had attacked commentator Nancy Grace’s anti-marijuana comments.
Hot Air, which claims to be the most heavily-trafficked conservative blog on the Internet, has emerged as a forum for pro-marijuana and soft-on-crime viewpoints, most of them articulated by Rothman, a former libertarian writer for Mediaite.
It is certainly true that the Rothman perspective on “criminal justice reform” has been embraced on the left.
As Accuracy in Media noted recently, in an article about a “criminal justice reform” conference held in Washington, D.C., there is a White House-directed effort to enlist conservatives to join with various progressive organizations to weaken laws against a series of violent and non-violent crimes.
Hillary Clinton joined the campaign on Wednesday, saying that “It’s time to end the era of mass incarceration.”
Some readers at Hot Air were astounded by the advice given by Rothman, who cited the Obama Justice Department as a reliable source of information on criminal justice issues, including alleged police violence.
One said, “Isn’t it great when we can come to Hot Air to read some halfwit ‘conservative’ columnist agree with Eric Holder about root causes?”
Another said, “I don’t think this is a very timely post. At least not whilst the animals are burning, looting, robbing, raping, killing each other and forming alliances with opposing gang bangers to destabilize the structure of society.”
Still another called attention to Heather MacDonald’s piece in the New York Post, “The Perilous New Push to Excuse Lawlessness,” as being “a hundred times better than Noah’s.” The writer said, “She’s an actual conservative who lived through the times when ‘law and order’ were questionable values, and conservatives had to fight hard to implement them.”
MacDonald had referred to “a wide-ranging movement [which] is already under way to transform the criminal justice system in order to avoid a disparate impact on blacks.” But since blacks commit a disproportionate amount of the crime, she said that fulfilling this promise “would require gutting murder statutes, and most other criminal laws,” and that the country’s two-decade-long crime drop would be in jeopardy.
Despite cities like Ferguson and Baltimore going up in flames and the rare story of a mother like Toya Graham making a plea for law-and-order, the liberal media are going to make sure that the movement for criminals’ rights that now operates under the goal of achieving “criminal justice reform” will get the lion’s share of the publicity.
Indeed, Jon Stewart’s “The Daily Show” just ran a favorable story about the “Coalition for Public Safety,” which is trying to make the ACLU sound like a reasonable organization conservatives can work with. Based on what was reported, it looks like some conservative groups are taking the bait.