Dog Brothers Public Forum

HOME | PUBLIC FORUM | MEMBERS FORUM | INSTRUCTORS FORUM | TRIBE FORUM

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
May 06, 2016, 07:32:35 PM

Login with username, password and session length
Search:     Advanced search
Welcome to the Dog Brothers Public Forum.
94404 Posts in 2307 Topics by 1081 Members
Latest Member: Martel
* Home Help Search Login Register
+  Dog Brothers Public Forum
|-+  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities
| |-+  Politics & Religion
| | |-+  The war on the rule of law
« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 8 9 [10] Print
Author Topic: The war on the rule of law  (Read 74407 times)
G M
Power User
***
Posts: 13479


« Reply #450 on: February 08, 2016, 07:55:11 PM »

http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2016/02/08/irs-tea-party-targeting-lois-lerner-corruption--obama-glenn-reynolds-column/79967098/

Culture of corruption.
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 36653


« Reply #451 on: February 26, 2016, 12:10:31 PM »

http://www.wsj.com/articles/justice-and-clintons-email-probe-1456448102
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 36653


« Reply #452 on: February 26, 2016, 09:28:05 PM »

http://freebeacon.com/issues/top-dems-outraged-over-obama-efforts-to-ignore-pro-israel-provisions/
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 36653


« Reply #453 on: February 27, 2016, 10:52:37 PM »

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2014/12/11/report-lois-lerner-emails-show-obama-s-justice-department-assisted-irs-to-target-conservative-groups/
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 36653


« Reply #454 on: March 01, 2016, 12:55:42 PM »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dkwDy8fA7ZE
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 36653


« Reply #455 on: March 09, 2016, 12:16:23 AM »

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/03/07/judicial-watch-presses-ahead-with-fight-over-irs-criminal-investigation-facts/
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 36653


« Reply #456 on: March 18, 2016, 11:26:34 AM »

How we now know that Hillary Clinton will not be prosecuted for anything
POSTED AT 8:01 AM ON MARCH 18, 2016 BY JAZZ SHAW

John wrote yesterday about how Barack Obama has been working behind the scenes to move large dollar Democratic donors away from Bernie Sanders and towards Hillary Clinton. This, combined with various attacks from his bully pulpit on Donald Trump, have led to the correct conclusion that Obama will wind up being one of the most active presidents in modern history in terms of the election of his successor. This was a point made this week by Juliet Eilperin at the Washington Post. Traditionally, Presidents have bent over backward to at least lend the patina of non-involvement in such an election, allowing the voters to make their own choice, but not so in this case.

But we learned something else from this episode if you’re willing to look into the tea leaves closely enough. Michelle Jesse came to the same conclusion I did yesterday.

But the bigger point is, why would President Obama tell his party to unite around a candidate at serious risk of criminal indictment — when all signs from the FBI would indicate a very good chance, if not a certainty, that indictment will be recommended based on the investigation? Of course, he would only do such a thing if he knew — was determined — that, no matter what, the chosen candidate would not be charged.

Hillary Clinton herself has appeared to think she’s untouchable — even declaring with certainty that she will not be indicted. “Oh, for goodness, it’s not going to happen. I’m not even answering that question,” Clinton said recently in Miami.

There’s a reason that these two stories are so closely interwoven. If Barack Obama were taking the usual stance of presidents past he would simply express his support for whichever Democrat the voters chose in the primary and get on with his life, but this cycle has a number of wildcards mixed into the deck. You’d be hard pressed to find a parallel in the history of American politics where a major party presidential candidate was on the verge of winning the nomination while simultaneously facing the threat of indictment on serious criminal charges. (We won’t count Nixon in 72 because the break-in at the Watergate hotel didn’t happen until June of that year and there wasn’t a conviction until after Nixon was reelected and sworn in the following January.)
With the President being so clearly invested in electing a Democrat in general and Hillary Clinton in particular to continue his legacy, there’s simply no way he would risk putting his thumb on the scale for a candidate who might be essentially disqualified if she had to run the last stage of her campaign from a jail cell. With all that in mind, it’s difficult to conclude anything other than a presumption that Obama knows that Clinton will face no such peril. But how could he know that if the investigation isn’t even finished yet?

It’s a question which is answered rather easily, and it all comes down to Huma Abedin. It’s true that we’ve previously speculated that Huma might be the undoing of Clinton once all of her records are examined, but she also serves as an example of just how far the Obama administration is willing to go to block any damage to Clinton’s historic candidacy. When the Inspectors General turned over an embezzlement case against Abedin for prosecution, the Justice Department promptly dropped it in the circular file as an act of prosecutorial discretionand that was the end of it.

Is there any reason that they won’t do the same with Hillary Clinton herself? There are only two people who can know the answer to that question with certainty and they are Barack Obama himself and Attorney General Loretta Lynch. If the fix is in and Lynch has been told to flush any recommendation she receives from the FBI or other law enforcement officials, Clinton is in the clear and the campaign can continue without losing any sleep. But if there was even a chance that an indictment was coming, you’d see Barack Obama sidestepping away from Hillary as fast as his feet could carry him.

The game is rigged, folks. At this point even the FBI must be wondering why they’re even bothering with all this work.
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 36653


« Reply #457 on: March 24, 2016, 11:15:42 AM »

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2016/03/23/obama-administrations-continuous-resistance-in-irs-targeting-case-slammed-by-federal-appeals-court/
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 36653


« Reply #458 on: March 30, 2016, 08:29:01 PM »

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/what-if-clinton-isnt-indicted/2016/03/29/81a1033e-f5d7-11e5-8b23-538270a1ca31_story.html
Logged
G M
Power User
***
Posts: 13479


« Reply #459 on: April 09, 2016, 07:14:49 PM »

http://nypost.com/2016/03/27/ag-loretta-lynch-wants-to-let-nation-break-law-without-consequences/

AG Loretta Lynch wants to let nation break law without consequences
By Paul Sperry March 27, 2016 | 6:00am
Modal Trigger AG Loretta Lynch wants to let nation break law without consequences


Black Democrats pitch Loretta Lynch for Supreme Court
As New York moves to decriminalize low-level offenses, arguing enforcement is “rigged against communities of color,” other large cities are coming under pressure from the Justice Department to do the same thing.

Attorney General Loretta Lynch has issued a warning to municipal and state judges across the country that their courts could lose federal funding if they don’t ease up on fines and arrest warrants for minor crimes involving poor offenders, indigent minorities in particular.

In lieu of fines and jail time, Lynch urges the nation’s 6,500 municipal courts to provide an avenue for offenders to perform “community service” or take advantage of “amnesty days,” whereby outstanding arrest warrants are cleared for nominal fees.

Failure to comply with these policies could trigger a Ferguson-style discrimination investigation. Already, Lynch says she’s “evaluating discrimination complaints against several court systems.”

A strongly worded “guidance” letter, written by her civil rights team, warns that a local court policy of enforcing warrants for failure to pay court fines and fees can have an adverse “disparate impact” on African-Americans, who are fined and/or arrested for outstanding warrants at “disproportionate” rates versus whites.

Federal data also show that blacks tend to break both felony and misdemeanor laws at a disproportionate rate. Even if applied evenly across all races and in neutral, color-blind fashion, such policies could be found by Justice to be discriminatory.

“In court systems receiving federal funds, these practices may also violate Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, when they unnecessarily impose disparate harm on the basis of race,” the nine-page letters states.

It’s a slippery slope to clemency for criminals, large and small.
This is the same dubious legal threat the administration is using to force the nation’s public schools to back off suspending unruly — even violent — black students, and to force cops to avoid stopping, frisking and arresting minority offenders.

The Supreme Court has ruled that disparate impact doesn’t violate Title VI, only “intentional” discrimination does. “The administration is quite wrong to say that Title VI incorporates a ‘disparate impact’ standard,” Roger Clegg of the Center for Equal Opportunity points out. “The Supreme Court has ruled repeatedly that it does not.”

This new court “reform” will only exacerbate the crime problem. Studies show ignoring low-level crimes like warrant violations only leads to bigger crimes.

Under Mayor Bill de Blasio, the NYPD has scaled back its aggressive enforcement of low-level offenses only to see both minor and serious crime rebound. Already cops have backed off public urination and other public nuisance violations, while overlooking outstanding warrants for many other misdemeanor crimes.

Even a senior Justice Department official predicts the decriminalization-cum-deincarceration movement will backfire in higher crime nationwide. “In five years the crime rate is going to be crazy again,” he said.

The official, who oversees probation of felons paroled from federal prisons and who requested anonymity, worries the new department policy will be abused.

“I don’t see liberal judges even attempting to make people pay or spending the time making an accurate determination of a person being ‘indigent,’ ” he said. “It’s another way of not holding people accountable for their actions.”

Modal Trigger
The Justice guidance defines “indigent” as anybody who might be “eligible for public benefits,” but not actually receiving them. “Jurisdictions may benefit from creating statutory presumptions of indigency for certain classes of defendants,” the source said.

The administration claims cops and courts conspire to exploit poor blacks to generate city revenue in some kind of shakedown. But data show blacks fail to pay their fines at far greater rates than whites, so why not target whites if cash extortion is the objective?

Many of the cities with the highest fines, such as Philadelphia, are run by Democrats; and the Justice Department is no piker when it comes to levying fines.

“US attorneys always want fines and restitution amounts in the millions from people who have little chance of ever paying it back,” the department official said.

Liberals are actually to blame for the trend they’re trying to reform. Court fines and fees help pay for all the new costs liberals have added to the system, such as drug counseling and home electronic monitoring. They’ve also pushed judges to assess more fines in lieu of incarceration, especially for drug offenders.

Yet now they claim the whole court fine and bail system is racist.

Former federal civil rights attorney Hans Bader, now with the Competitive Enterprise Institute, describes the latest reforms as a “massive assault on the criminal justice system.”

It’s a slippery slope to clemency for criminals, large and small.

Paul Sperry is a former Hoover Institution media fellow and author of “Infiltration.”
Logged
ccp
Power User
***
Posts: 5352


« Reply #460 on: April 09, 2016, 07:32:30 PM »

Just another example of the war on white people.
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 36653


« Reply #461 on: April 18, 2016, 05:48:00 PM »

While I was gone I saw something about how Baraq said there would be no White House interference with the FBI/DOJ investigation of the Empress Dowager and then later in the same comments he interfered.  Anyone have a good citation for this?
Logged
ccp
Power User
***
Posts: 5352


« Reply #462 on: April 18, 2016, 09:30:05 PM »

 'Anyone have a good citation for this?':
http://mediamatters.org/research/2016/04/11/after-obama-says-he-not-influencing-email-investigation-conservative-media-claim-president-%E2%80%9Ctipping/209859
« Last Edit: April 18, 2016, 10:02:51 PM by Crafty_Dog » Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 36653


« Reply #463 on: April 18, 2016, 10:03:01 PM »

Thank you.
Logged
DougMacG
Power User
***
Posts: 7816


« Reply #464 on: April 19, 2016, 01:16:35 PM »

He has been meddling from the beginning, like he did with Supreme Court cases, Fast and Furious and IRS Targeting.  Just the fact that he guarantees no political influence tells us there is. 

What else would be holding up the investigation?  Why didn't he start the investigation when he found out about her personal server long before we did?
Logged
DougMacG
Power User
***
Posts: 7816


« Reply #465 on: April 27, 2016, 11:13:13 AM »

(Moving this over by request)  I'm sure everyone has already seen this case plastered all over the news...

Serious misconduct and cover up by the New Orleans police followed by misconduct of the Justice Department lawyers in the case. The judge excoriates in very strong language the conduct of gov’t prosecutors and their supervisors in Washington. The judge puts the blame on the supervisors of the civil rights division of the Justice Dept. and Thomas Perez, the current Secretary of Labor and head of the Civil Rights Division at the time, is specifically mentioned.

Perez is a possible Hillary VP choice and Loretta Lynch runs a Justice Department that still hasn't acted on Fast and Furious, IRS targeting, black Panthers voter interference or Hillary Clinton's security breaches.  Also note the lack of coverage outside of that region.  Does anyone here know more on this?

More here:
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2016/04/across-the-danziger-bridge.php
and here:
http://theadvocate.com/news/neworleans/neworleansnews/15568565-123/with-danziger-bridge-pleas-federal-judge-unloads-on-top-government-officials
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 36653


« Reply #466 on: April 27, 2016, 02:04:13 PM »

Lets keep an eye out for those names should they become part of the Empress Dowager's campaign.
Logged
G M
Power User
***
Posts: 13479


« Reply #467 on: April 27, 2016, 09:41:19 PM »

http://chicagoboyz.net/archives/52457.html


Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 36653


« Reply #468 on: Today at 11:06:13 AM »

https://www.judicialwatch.org/press-room/press-releases/judicial-watch-lawsuit-uncovers-more-hillary-clinton-emails-withheld-from-state-department/

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/05/trey-gowdy-benghazi-probe-222867#ixzz47saswgTB
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 36653


« Reply #469 on: Today at 12:46:42 PM »

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/federal-prosecutors-in-virginia-assisting-in-clinton-email-probe/2016/05/05/f0277faa-12f0-11e6-81b4-581a5c4c42df_story.html
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 8 9 [10] Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!