0 comment Tuesday, June 3, 2014 | admin
Some more (rare) good news: Ignacio Ramos and Jose Compean are now out of prison after having had their sentences commuted in January. They are back at home with their families, though still under 'home confinement', and barred from talking to the press until their sentence officially ends on March 20.
Ramos, Compean freed from prison
By Jerome R. Corsi
� 2009 WorldNetDaily
Convicted former Border Patrol agents Ignacio Ramos and Jose Compean were released from federal prison this morning and are en route to join their families in El Paso, Texas.
Characterizing Ramos and Compean's incarceration as a "political prosecution," Rep. Ted Poe, R-Texas, called for a congressional investigation into alleged prosecutorial misconduct by El Paso U.S. Attorney Johnny Sutton under the direction of Bush administration Attorney General Alberto Gonzales.
Poe also called for an investigation into the alleged role of the Mexican government in demanding that Ramos and Compean be prosecuted.
"As soon as President Bush commuted Ramos and Compean's sentences, the Mexican government registered a large protest," Poe noted.''
I am not hopeful that there will be any investigation into the Mexican government's role in this travesty, given the present political regime. I think these men should be completely exonerated. Ramos's lawyer said on Lou Dobbs Tonight that Ramos was treated more harshly than the accused terrorists who are held at Guantanamo:
BOTSFORD: Well, Lou, Ignacio's situation was that he was assaulted when he was at the Mississippi unit, the first unit he went to. Because of that, he was put into protective custody, it was called a shoe unit. So he was locked down 23 hours a day. He's in solitary confinement.
The conditions that he suffered, suffered from during that period of time basically, you know, 22 1/2 months, are more onerous than those imposed on the detainees in Gitmo. That was instrumental, I believe, in getting the president to commute this sentence. DOBBS: David, what are the next legal steps here for Ignacio and for Jose Compean? Do they have recourse? Is there a way to set this obvious, obvious miscarriage of justice right?
BOTSFORD: Lou, I believe so. I'm not going to stop fighting until we get to the bitter end. Currently we have a petition before the Supreme Court of the United States asking the Supreme Court to review the remaining convictions that are still there after the Fifth Circuit vacated or threw out all the convictions on the obstruction of justice. I can't tell you what the Supreme Court's going to do obviously that's an uphill battle. But there are a number of legal issues that will remain after the Supreme Court has resolved the issues that are in front of that, and we will proceed back into federal district court to resolve those remaining issues, as is his right.
In another border-related story, the news is decidedly mixed. The good part is that Roger Barnett, the Arizona rancher who was being sued by a number of illegal aliens, was declared in the clear on some charges:
Jury rules rancher didn't violate migrants' rights
But the jury did find him liable on four claims of assault and four claims of infliction of emotional distress and ordered Barnett to pay $77,804 in damages � $60,000 of which were punitive.''
I would be interested to know the composition of the jury. I think it's unjust in the extreme that he is declared liable for 'inflicting emotional distress' on these brazen trespassers. I think he should countersue them; surely having hordes of criminal illegals traipsing across his property over a period of years, while the government refuses to enforce our laws, constitutes real 'emotional distress.'
Who is footing the bill for these subversive lawsuits? The legal ambulance-chasers who aggressively bring suits like this against American citizens who are exercising their right to bear arms and to defend their property and lives are enemies of the American people just as much as the illegal intruders. But the government at whatever level, federal or state, which refuses to protect citizens against these predators is just as much the enemy; they have abdicated their primary responsibility and have betrayed the people they purport to represent and serve.
Shame on all of them.
Ramos, Compean freed from prison
By Jerome R. Corsi
� 2009 WorldNetDaily
Convicted former Border Patrol agents Ignacio Ramos and Jose Compean were released from federal prison this morning and are en route to join their families in El Paso, Texas.
Characterizing Ramos and Compean's incarceration as a "political prosecution," Rep. Ted Poe, R-Texas, called for a congressional investigation into alleged prosecutorial misconduct by El Paso U.S. Attorney Johnny Sutton under the direction of Bush administration Attorney General Alberto Gonzales.
Poe also called for an investigation into the alleged role of the Mexican government in demanding that Ramos and Compean be prosecuted.
"As soon as President Bush commuted Ramos and Compean's sentences, the Mexican government registered a large protest," Poe noted.''
I am not hopeful that there will be any investigation into the Mexican government's role in this travesty, given the present political regime. I think these men should be completely exonerated. Ramos's lawyer said on Lou Dobbs Tonight that Ramos was treated more harshly than the accused terrorists who are held at Guantanamo:
BOTSFORD: Well, Lou, Ignacio's situation was that he was assaulted when he was at the Mississippi unit, the first unit he went to. Because of that, he was put into protective custody, it was called a shoe unit. So he was locked down 23 hours a day. He's in solitary confinement.
The conditions that he suffered, suffered from during that period of time basically, you know, 22 1/2 months, are more onerous than those imposed on the detainees in Gitmo. That was instrumental, I believe, in getting the president to commute this sentence. DOBBS: David, what are the next legal steps here for Ignacio and for Jose Compean? Do they have recourse? Is there a way to set this obvious, obvious miscarriage of justice right?
BOTSFORD: Lou, I believe so. I'm not going to stop fighting until we get to the bitter end. Currently we have a petition before the Supreme Court of the United States asking the Supreme Court to review the remaining convictions that are still there after the Fifth Circuit vacated or threw out all the convictions on the obstruction of justice. I can't tell you what the Supreme Court's going to do obviously that's an uphill battle. But there are a number of legal issues that will remain after the Supreme Court has resolved the issues that are in front of that, and we will proceed back into federal district court to resolve those remaining issues, as is his right.
In another border-related story, the news is decidedly mixed. The good part is that Roger Barnett, the Arizona rancher who was being sued by a number of illegal aliens, was declared in the clear on some charges:
Jury rules rancher didn't violate migrants' rights
But the jury did find him liable on four claims of assault and four claims of infliction of emotional distress and ordered Barnett to pay $77,804 in damages � $60,000 of which were punitive.''
I would be interested to know the composition of the jury. I think it's unjust in the extreme that he is declared liable for 'inflicting emotional distress' on these brazen trespassers. I think he should countersue them; surely having hordes of criminal illegals traipsing across his property over a period of years, while the government refuses to enforce our laws, constitutes real 'emotional distress.'
Who is footing the bill for these subversive lawsuits? The legal ambulance-chasers who aggressively bring suits like this against American citizens who are exercising their right to bear arms and to defend their property and lives are enemies of the American people just as much as the illegal intruders. But the government at whatever level, federal or state, which refuses to protect citizens against these predators is just as much the enemy; they have abdicated their primary responsibility and have betrayed the people they purport to represent and serve.
Shame on all of them.
Labels: Anarcho-Tyranny, Border Patrol, Illegal Immigration, Judicial System, Legal System, Open Borders, Political Correctness
0 comment Sunday, April 27, 2014 | admin
The question was raised in a comment the other day about why there was no searching and body scanning involved in traveling by train or bus or boat.
We all expected this, sooner or later:
''The next step in tightened security could be on U.S. public transportation, trains and boats.
Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano says terrorists will continue to look for U.S. vulnerabilities, making tighter security standards necessary.
"[Terrorists] are going to continue to probe the system and try to find a way through," Napolitano said in an interview that aired Monday night on "Charlie Rose."
"I think the tighter we get on aviation, we have to also be thinking now about going on to mass transit or to trains or maritime. So, what do we need to be doing to strengthen our protections there?"
The writer of the article, Jordy Yager, mentions that others, like Joe Lieberman, have already suggested similar measures for those entering federal buildings.
''Napolitano said she hoped the U.S. could get to a place in the future where Americans would not have to be as guarded against terrorist attacks as they are and that she was actively promoting research into the psychology of how a terrorist becomes radicalized.''
'Guarded against terrorist attacks?' Who? Where? How? By leaving our southern border wide open to narco-traffickers and gangs and basically anyone who strays across the erstwhile border? Or by purposely admitting people from lawless countries like Somalia, and planting them in small towns across the U.S.? Who does she think she is fooling?
She mentions promoting research to try to understand the psychology of how terrorists develop. Typical blather about ''root causes'' and 'understanding.'
Even if we can psychoanalyze those who mean us harm, that would be a long term strategy, not a way of protecting American citizens here and now. The cliche about 'understanding' malefactors is a longstanding obsession with leftists and silly females. We used to hear the bleeding-hearts talking about how we should not execute murderers, but try to get at why they do what they do, so that we can prevent such acts in the future. Well, suppose we could see into the minds of violent people of whatever kind, and suppose we spot these theoretical telltale signs of a budding maniac. Do we then lock him up just in case? Medicate him? Put him in an institution for re-education? Drug him into harmlessness? The whole notion would not be allowable in a free country, and thus it is probably exactly what these lefties would like to do. I suspect they would not be as interested in the real threats, but in what they are now casually calling 'domestic extremists', formerly known as 'normal Americans', or perhaps just Americans who are being goaded to do something 'extreme' so as to justify abridging our rights even further.
So what's next? Internal passports? Searches at state borders, or other random places?
Whatever is next, it will not be to ensure our security, but to extend the government's power.
We all expected this, sooner or later:
''The next step in tightened security could be on U.S. public transportation, trains and boats.
Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano says terrorists will continue to look for U.S. vulnerabilities, making tighter security standards necessary.
"[Terrorists] are going to continue to probe the system and try to find a way through," Napolitano said in an interview that aired Monday night on "Charlie Rose."
"I think the tighter we get on aviation, we have to also be thinking now about going on to mass transit or to trains or maritime. So, what do we need to be doing to strengthen our protections there?"
The writer of the article, Jordy Yager, mentions that others, like Joe Lieberman, have already suggested similar measures for those entering federal buildings.
''Napolitano said she hoped the U.S. could get to a place in the future where Americans would not have to be as guarded against terrorist attacks as they are and that she was actively promoting research into the psychology of how a terrorist becomes radicalized.''
'Guarded against terrorist attacks?' Who? Where? How? By leaving our southern border wide open to narco-traffickers and gangs and basically anyone who strays across the erstwhile border? Or by purposely admitting people from lawless countries like Somalia, and planting them in small towns across the U.S.? Who does she think she is fooling?
She mentions promoting research to try to understand the psychology of how terrorists develop. Typical blather about ''root causes'' and 'understanding.'
Even if we can psychoanalyze those who mean us harm, that would be a long term strategy, not a way of protecting American citizens here and now. The cliche about 'understanding' malefactors is a longstanding obsession with leftists and silly females. We used to hear the bleeding-hearts talking about how we should not execute murderers, but try to get at why they do what they do, so that we can prevent such acts in the future. Well, suppose we could see into the minds of violent people of whatever kind, and suppose we spot these theoretical telltale signs of a budding maniac. Do we then lock him up just in case? Medicate him? Put him in an institution for re-education? Drug him into harmlessness? The whole notion would not be allowable in a free country, and thus it is probably exactly what these lefties would like to do. I suspect they would not be as interested in the real threats, but in what they are now casually calling 'domestic extremists', formerly known as 'normal Americans', or perhaps just Americans who are being goaded to do something 'extreme' so as to justify abridging our rights even further.
So what's next? Internal passports? Searches at state borders, or other random places?
Whatever is next, it will not be to ensure our security, but to extend the government's power.
Labels: 4Th Amerndment, Anarcho-Tyranny, Freedom Of Movement, Terrorism, Totalitarianism