Archive for category Justice
WaPo 17 Months Late in Reporting Holder’s DOJ Bias
Posted by Tom in Justice, Law, Morality & Religion in the Public Square, Legal on October 23, 2010
It’s old news for most of us that Attorney General Holder’s Justice Department dismissed a default judgement against proven Black Panther voter intimidation. But now it’s been confirmed by that liberal bastion, The Washington Post. Now WaPo churlishly reports that the initial reporters were conservatives, as if that were an excuse to dismiss the story. But the paper, to its credit, did dig deeper to turn up additional, confirmatory DOJ evidence of Holder’s discrimination against whites in enforcing voter intimidation cases. Andy Breitbart one of the first to break the initial story gives a magnanimous tip of the hat to the Post:
“This is a devastating piece of work by the Washington Post. This is a rare moment where the old print media has returned to the higher standards of years past, and reported facts. A week from an election, it couldn’t have come at a worse time for Eric Holder.”
That said, it is clear that from the very top the Department of Justice is tainted, and well, unjust. There is nothing more dangerous in a free society than to have the chief law enforcement officer corrupt the law.
Secret Selection of Judges?
I’m from the “show me” state, the state that led the nation in so called “reform” of judicial selection. The “Missouri Plan” became the model for many states. That type plan is now being put to the Nevada voters. You’ve probably seen the commercials in favor of this plan with Sandra Day O’Cconner.
Did you know that those commercials were funded by the rent-seeking leftist, George Soros. This billionaire who counts Obama as his employee is left of Stalin. But because of his leftist political connections in power, Obama being one, is a multi-billionaire. (Study his Brazil oil intersts!) So he can afford to give a measly two million to NPR with strings attached to cover state progressive issues. You see, the progressives have decided that they don’t quite own the judiciary in this country. They are free to make political deals, money deals, with the legislative and executive branches, but they don’t quite have the judges, yet!
How could they better do that but by making the process secret? How better than to sell secrecy to the public but by letting knowledgeable TRIAL LAWYERS recommend those to be selected?
In my earlier days I practiced trial and appellate law in Missouri, was legally licensed in California, and as a layman was chairman of Nevadians Judicial Information Committee. In that latter role I was often asked about judicial selection processes. My answer was that the public election process while not perfect was at least public. That is, it is not secret.
Contrary to their opinions of themselves, lawyers are not smarter than everyone else. They are not above the law. What they know about judicial selection they should inform the public of. In fact, they do, there are public judicial evaluation studies which bar associations publish at election time.
Today’s WSJ post on the Soros role on the issue, Soros Bets on Nevada, is worth the read. Its concluding line: “Nevada voters should send a message that their judiciary can’t be bought.”
Now, I don’t want anyone to think that George Soros is not smart. His media voice, NPR, fired Juan Williams today for no apparent reasonable reason, but for getting out of line with the liberal agenda. Soros knows where the power is. Who can fault him for his rent-seeking behavior. He, even better than Al Gore and his environmentalists, has profited from his knowledge. And, he has made billions by investing wisely, IN POLITICIANS!
October Reno Hayek Dinner
Posted by Tom in Economics, Government Regulation, Justice, Legal on October 20, 2010
What a great evening with Scott Bullock proving that there are champions fighting for freedom of our economic system: property rights, freedom of contract, and freedom against oppressive government interference. Scott argued Kelo v. City of New London in the U.S. Supreme Court. That 5-4 decision upheld the city’s taking of Susette Kelo’s home in an eminent domain action to transfer it to private developers who would hopefully generate more tax revenue for the politicians. As Scott said, “we lost the battle but won the war.” This because of the groundswell of public reaction against the decision which resulted in many states strengthening their laws or constitutions to preclude such results. Nevada was one of those states that amended its constitution.
Scott is one of the merry band of libertarian litigators in the Institute for Justice in Washington D.C. That organization takes up pro bono causes on serious economic challenges to small businesses, individuals and entrepreneurs. It is supported by public donations as a lot of its clients could not afford such legal representation. It chooses cases that are economically significant and have strong precedent creating potential. It is a truly worthy cause and I have added its website to our blogroll on the right which is recommended for your consideration. We thank Scott for an excellent presentation; he has a standing invitation to join our dinners anytime he finds himself out here in the hinterlands! Our thanks also go to Jerry O’Driscoll for arranging his presentation.
Last evening also brought some new faces, guests whom we hope will become part of our little symposium.
Randy York presented the great results of our three Nevada “Meet and Greet” fundraisers. By all accounts we did an excellent job for 11 key Assembly and Senate races in the state.
He also presented an update on NV4CFE, the intelligent expansion of Yucca Mountain nuclear development efforts. There is growing public and political acceptance of this research, storage, reprocessing and generation concept which will bring jobs and money into the state.
Jerry O’Driscoll delivered an interesting perspective on our foreign trade imbalance as our economic point of interest for the evening.
Our next Reno Hayek dinner will be on Tuesday, November 16th.
Hussein’s Manipulation of Justice
The Department of Justice is supposed to be the most independent of all cabinet offices. Rightly so, since it has the power to investigate, to indict, and to prosecute. It is an awesome power, a power of trust, discretion and justice. It alone is the power not to prosecute after investigation, to nol pros. It is as close to the judicial power as power can get. It has traditionally been independent.
Enter Hussein and Eric Holder, gofer to Hussein. In the face of uncontroverted evidence of voter intimidation and against the advice of local, career Justice Department attorneys, Holder refuses to take a default, that’s uncontested, judgement against the Black Panthers. Why? Political motivation in Justice? Oh, are the Black Panthers black?
As bad, Hussein Obama ordered Holder to file a lawsuit against Arizona for its law enforcing federal law. Legally most experts agree that the lawsuit has no merit. No matter, it’s politics. Hussein while not having read the Arizona law, and refusing to enforce the federal law, is currying favor with the illegals who he hopes will vote, yes vote, for his leftists Democrats, excuse me, progressive Democrats!
Kris Kobach in his NY Post piece today, Behind US v. Arizona: pure politics, tells it like it is.
What a horrible degradation of justice in this country. It is easy to forecast trials like those in Cuba, North Korea, Iran, Venezuela, and Nazi Germany coming here soon. Speak against Hussein at your own risk! His misuse of justice for political purposes knows no bounds.
Pray that we will be rid of this ilk in the next election.
Prosecutorial Abuse At the Highest Level
With sinking numbers in the polls and his $2 Trillion Obamacare treading a slippery slope, our young president was getting flack from his socialist left; this, for his waffling on the “public option.” So he needed to throw them a bone. William Murchison’s August 25th post in Real Clear Politics relates the political use of the DOJ, a sorry tale indeed.
The power of the prosecutor is absolute in Anglo-American jurisprudence. It is a power to decide whether or not to prosecute. It holds the values of life, liberty, wealth, and reputation in its hands. It should be sacrosanct.
Here we have a case of much scrutinized actions by CIA professionals defending us against our enemies that was held at several levels to be within the bounds of legitimate interrogation. AG Holder initially declined to prosecute these people. He now has reversed himself for no apparent reason.
Attorney General Eric Holders decision to go after the CIA has all the earmarks of policy designed to make left-wing hearts palpitate.What other purpose could it possibly serve? Not that of national security or common sense……
You find on that peculiar quarter of the political spectrum a lust to punish former Vice President Cheney himself if not the president he served. Why rule out a battalion of CIA agents who imagined themselves to be preserving American lives?
Indeed, the Inspector Generals Report, which Holder cites as evidence of doing, says various interrogations gleaned “intelligence that has enabled the identification and apprehension of other terrorists and warned of terrorist plots planned for the United States and around the world.” How dare they warn us? Clap em in irons.
Really, is there a brain cell functioning properly in the Obama White House? What are these people thinking? Are they thinking? Yes, maybe. Heres what they might be thinking: The left of the left of the left got us here. Theyre mad enough at us now. Well throw them a little investigation, trying to explain it to moderates and conservatives — and well pray it works. Nothing else seems to these days, with the health care semi-debacle as Exhibit A.
This is just nuts. These White Housers, possibly including the president whose consent to this operation was required, dont have a clue. The game isnt worth the candle.
This is a sad day for the United States; we now know that the top prosecutor will abuse justice for political ends.
Tom Motherway, tom@renohayek.com