PayPal

Saturday, October 21, 2017

Update on Nikola Mirotic and Bobby Portis

By Grand Rapids Anonymous
Saturday, October 21, 2017 at 1:52:00 AM EDT

Here's more:

(SBNation) Chicago Bulls forward Nikola Mirotic has been hospitalized and is out indefinitely after a fight with teammate Bobby Portis at Tuesday’s practice, according to Shams Charania of Yahoo! Sports.

Portis has been suspended for eight games for his role in the incident, the team announced. Mirotic will miss 4-6 weeks with the injury, according to team president John Paxson.

Portis reportedly struck Mirotic in the face with an alleged “cheap shot” following a shoving match during practice. However, ESPN’s Adrian Wojnarowski reports that Portis threw a punch after Mirotic charged at him following an escalating conflict.

The players had been talking trash to one another in practice, going back and forth before those exchanges escalated into a physical encounter, league sources told ESPN's Adrian Wojnarowski. Mirotic charged at Portis twice before Portis threw a punch and connected with Mirotic's face, league sources said. Mirotic dropped to the floor and lay there for several minutes before getting up, league sources said.

Mirotic suffered a fractured bone in his face and sustained a concussion, according to the team. He could need surgery. The two veterans had been vying for minutes in Chicago’s rotation.

The TCM Film Noir of the Week for Sunday, October 22 at 10 am ET, is Raw Deal (1948)

 

 


By David in TN
Friday, October 20, 2017 at 9:36:00 P.M. EDT

 

 

The TCM Film Noir of the Week for Sunday, October 22 at 10 am ET, is Raw Deal (1948).
 

John Ireland and Marsha Hunt
 

Claire Trevor
 

Dennis O’Keefe plays an escaped convict on the run with his woman, Claire Trevor.
 

Raymond Burr, center; John Ireland, right; and a third bad guy
 

 

Raymond Burr, in one of his noir “heavy” roles, does something bad to a woman, but gets his just deserts in the end.
 

John Ireland and Marsha Hunt
 

Anthony Mann directs.

 

 

John Alton provides his justly famous cinematography.

 

 

 

Another Racist NBA Attack, Another Cover-Up!

 

Vic Nikola Mirotic
 

By Grand Rapids Anonymous
Saturday, October 21, 2017 at 1:43:00 A.M. EDT

Black Chicago Player Assaults White Teammate--No Publicity, No Major Repercussions, Either, as Nickoli Mirotic is Significantly Injured by Black Teammate, Bobby Portis

(ESPN) CHICAGO -- Bobby Portis has apologized to his Bulls teammates for getting into a fight that left Nikola Mirotic with facial fractures and a concussion.

"He didn't address us today, but he did address the team before so that was taken care of," Bulls swingman Justin Holiday said after Friday's practice.

Bulls coach Fred Hoiberg acknowledged that Portis' apology took place during a team meeting but did not want to go into specific details about his message.

"I'll keep that between the team," Hoiberg said, "as far as exactly what was said in that meeting."

Portis, who has declined to speak to the media for now, practiced Friday for the first time since Tuesday's incident. He was suspended eight games for punching Mirotic.

"It was good to have him back in here," Hoiberg said of Portis. "Obviously everybody's looking forward to getting Niko back in here as well, hopefully soon."

Mirotic, who was not in the building, is expected to miss at least four weeks because of his injuries.

GRA: This is hardly being mentioned anywhere. I accidently ran into it and the first question is: How is Bobby Portis not in jail for assault and battery? The incident is being kept quiet by the Bulls—as it's an obvious racial blow-up. How can Mirotic—an excellent white shooter—imported from Europe, play on the same team as Portis? One of them has got to go, before Mirotic comes back from his injuries. I'll keep you posted when that occurs.

 


Perp Bobby Portis. TMZ: “Bobby Portis is paying the price for his brutal punch on Bulls teammate Nikola Mirotic ... as the team has slapped him with an 8-game ban.” Price? What price?

Friday, October 20, 2017

Maloney, Baloney! Three at CBS Sports Win Duranty-Blair Awards for Journalistic Infamy, for Cover-Up of Racist Maiming of White Boston Celtics Star Gordon Hayward by Cleveland Cavaliers Jae Crowder and LeBron James

By Nicholas Stix

“The NBA's hyped season-opening game between the Cleveland Cavaliers and Boston Celtics was derailed within a few minutes. New Celtics star Gordon Hayward went up for a lob, bumped into LeBron James in mid-air and landed awkwardly. The result was a gruesome lower leg injury that the Celtics are calling a dislocated ankle and fractured tibia.” [Gordon Hayward's ankle injury and road to recovery, as explained by a medical expert, by Jack Maloney @jackmaloneycbs, at CBS Sports,
Oct 18, 2017.]

That was the first paragraph of a thing by CBS Sports operative Jack Maloney. “Thing” is the term I use in place of an obscenity, for an obscene propaganda exercise on behalf of evil by media, academic, and political operatives.

The first paragraph tells a lie of omission, which makes the rest a wordy smoke screen. Blah, blah, blah. For 1,690 words, but it seems like 3,000.

Maloney interviewed a certified athletic trainer Jeff Stotts, on the extent of Hayward’s injury, and what his rehabilitation will likely entail. Normally, such an article would be enlightening, but in this case, it’s deceptive. The real story is what was done to one of the game’s biggest white stars by two black players, one of whom is an open racist and the game’s biggest star.

Gordon Hayward was sandwiched. LeBron James bumped him from in front, while Jae Crowder knocked him down from behind. And yet, nowhere in the above thing, does Jack Maloney so much as mention Jae Crowder.

(I call media items “things” that otherwise could only be described with obscenities.)

If Maloney thought the sandwich was innocent, why did he withhold all mention of Crowder?

LeBron James is a notorious racist, and supporter of blacks who assassinate or attempt to assassinate white policemen, while telling blood libels about the “racial profiling” of people who are, in fact, murderous black felons of all ages.

I don’t know about Rae Crowder, but non-racist blacks in the NBA are a rare breed. In any event, Crowder’s act speaks for itself.

Crowder and James put a hit on Gordon Hayward, and deliberately destroyed his career. Whites who support the black supremacist NBA are pathetic quislings.

I am also bestowing on Maloney’s bosses at CBS Sports, Sean McManus, Chairman, and David Berson, President, Duranty-Blair awards.






The Duranty-Blair Award recognizes those journalists whose work embodies the spirit of Walter Duranty and Jayson Blair, two of the most notorious journalists in the history of the Fourth Estate. It is no accident that both men worked for the New York Times.

Walter Duranty wrote a series of early 1930s dispatches from the Soviet Union, where he was Times Moscow bureau chief, in which he lied about the Ukrainian Holocaust, in which Stalin deliberately starved millions of Kulaks (farmers) to death, through a man-made famine. Instead of reporting the truth, Duranty reported that the peasants were happy and well-fed, and was rewarded for his lies with a Pulitzer Prize.

Jayson Blair (here, here, and here) was an early 2000s black affirmative action hire, who alternately plagiarized reporters at other newspapers, and fabricated articles out of whole cloth, all for stories set hundreds and even thousands of miles away, while he sat in New York City cafés.
 

Previous Duranty-Blair winners are:

CBS News producer Mary Mapes in 2004;

Seven reporters and editors at the New Orleans Times-Picayune in 2006;

ABC News reporter Brian Ross in 2012;

Peter Berger (not the brilliant sociologist), of The American Interest, in 2013;

Associated Press operative Tom Hays, in 2014;

New York Times operative Farhad Manjoo in September, 2016;

CNN’s Symone Sanders (2), Don Lemon, and Kate Bolduan (2), in November 2016;

New York Times Propaganda Officer Francis X. Clines in March 2017;

CNN Activist Jim Sciutto, in May 2017; and

Associated Press “Reporter” Duncan Mansfield Wins Posthumous Duranty-Blair Award for Journalistic Infamy for Taking Story of Racist, Black-on-White Atrocity, and Turning It Upside Down, into a Story of White “Racism.”

Michael Slager News: Trump DOJ Refuses Request by White Cop-Hating Newspaper for Investigation by Obama DOJ Designed to Vilify, Dismantle North Charleston PD

Re-posted by Nicholas Stix

What I think is going on here is that the Obama DOJ, as run by racist criminal generals Eric Holder and Loretta Lynch, were using “reviews” on local, white-run police departments, as a tool for destroying them (e.g., Ferguson). Note the language from the white cop-hating Post and Courier, which assumes that the feds will recommend of any PD they are investigating that it be taken over by the feds (“consent decree”) and dismantled.

White North Charleston Mayor Keith Summey and Police Chief Eddie Driggers thought they’d outsmart Obama’s racist feds, by asking for such an investigation up front, as if the black supremacists would then go easy on them. Fat chance.

The investigation was carried out by the DOJ’s Office of Community Oriented Policing Service (COPS), which under Obama performed a kinder, gentler form of evisceration of law enforcement than the old-fashioned consent decree.

The demands by black supremacists that the DOJ COPS review of the North Charleston PD be released, are in order to be able to attack the department, Trump, and Sessions with Obama’s racist propaganda.



Feds deny request for report on North Charleston police, but senator joins growing calls for release
• By Andrew Knapp aknapp@postandcourier.com
• Oct 20, 2017 Updated 3 hrs ago
Post & Courier

The Justice Department has denied an open-records request for a report about North Charleston police despite an intensifying chorus of voices from South Carolina and Washington calling for its release.

In rejecting The Post and Courier's inquiry, the federal government said it was sticking to its "commitment to respecting local law enforcement," even though local law enforcement had asked for the report in the first place. The agency plans to hold on to 601 pages that memorialize work by the Office of Community Oriented Policing Services, a decision that rankled those who sought the reform measure after a police officer shot Walter Scott to death.

The newspaper has appealed, but some locals said the response is a “slap in the face” and raises public suspicion of what the records contain.

Though some leaders are still pushing for the report, Mayor Keith Summey was silent about whether he would seek from the Department of Justice what he and his police chief had first asked for. But Sen. Tim Scott, R-S.C., this week penned a letter to Attorney General Jeff Sessions, who had essentially disbanded the COPS Collaborative Reform Initiative last month.

"North Charleston residents and elected officials continue to be very interested in receiving the results of the COPS Office's already conducted assessment ... regardless of your recent announcement," the senator told Sessions in the Wednesday letter. "I ... urge you to release any final or near final findings and recommendations."

City Councilman Bob King said North Charleston has invested too much time in the effort to walk away now.

"They ought to release it," King said. "The Department of Justice did the city of North Charleston an injustice by cutting us off."
Many neighborhood leaders also have joined forces to demand the taxpayer-funded report.

"It's not being respectful to law enforcement. It's being disrespectful to the community as a whole," said the Rev. Clinton Brantley, pastor of St. Matthew Baptist Church. "It makes me think they have something to hide."

Before Sessions ended the program, federal officials said the assessment was being finalized. Its near-completion buoyed hopes that the documents would still be made public under the federal Freedom of Information Act, potentially handing advocates and a police advisory commission a helpful blueprint for change.

But that won't happen — at least not yet.

The COPS unit won't willingly divulge the information, FOIA officer Chaun Eason said, because of a legal exception allowing it to withhold certain communications used in a "deliberative process." The agency's refocused mission under Sessions also prevents a discretionary release, Eason said.

"Consistent with the attorney general’s commitment to respecting local law enforcement control and accountability," Eason said in an email, "the COPS Office will no longer be issuing Collaborative Reform assessment reports."



Sen. Tim Scott and President Donald Trump discuss race relations in an Oval Office meeting last month. Scott wants Trump's administration to release a review of North Charleston police.
 

'Pressure' on city officials

Walter Scott, a black man, was pulled over by patrolman Michael Slager in April 2015, one in a long line of minor traffic stops thought to target minority communities. After a struggle, the officer said he fired in self-defense when Scott grabbed his Taser.

But an eyewitness video showed Slager shooting eight times as Scott ran away. Slager pleaded guilty earlier this year to a federal crime and is awaiting sentencing.

Amid calls for a sweeping civil rights investigation of the whole North Charleston Police Department, Summey and Police Chief Eddie Driggers asked the Justice Department a year after the shooting for a less confrontational agreement. The COPS program agreed to review police policies and procedures and suggest changes.

But in keeping with President Donald Trump's own principles, Sessions abandoned such reform measures in mid-September, and agency officials said they no longer expected to do "wide-ranging assessments" of local police or complete ones they had already started.

The Post and Courier's request for documents already created by the Justice Department turned up 606 pages, the agency said. The department, though, handed over only five: the letter from Summey and Driggers asking for the COPS probe; it already was public.

First Amendment expert Jay Bender of Columbia, a lawyer for the newspaper, said it's unlikely that the agency would seriously rethink its decision now.

"We have an attorney general that believes cops can do no wrong and a president who encourages cops to beat up people in custody," Bender said. "There's not going to be any evaluation by the DOJ that suggests impropriety at a police department."

The agency also denied a similar FOIA request from the NAACP Legal Defense Fund, said Monique Dixon, deputy director of policy at the New York-based civil rights organization.

"We’re encouraging folks in North Charleston to pressure city officials to ask for the report," she said. "If they really want that document, the officials can push for it."

 

North Charleston Mayor Keith Summey (left) and Police Chief Eddie Driggers attend a 2015 vigil for Walter Scott, who was fatally shot by a police officer. A year later, they asked the federal government to review the city's police policies and procedures. File/Staff
 

'Slap in the face'

Summey has expressed disappointment that the federal authorities were "backing away from their commitment," but he has not strongly pressed for the report's release.

A new written agreement with the COPS office, which the council's Public Safety Committee approved Thursday, allows the city to draw "technical assistance" from the federal agency, but it provides no details about the effort expected to run through August. Driggers said at the committee meeting that he will visit with COPS officials in Washington, D.C., on Oct. 30 "to affirm our commitment ... and to set the steps to move forward."

The mayor and his spokesman refused to answer questions asked by The Post and Courier in multiple phone calls and emails. A police representative also did not respond to requests.

Meanwhile, the North Charleston Citizens’ Advisory Commission on Community-Police Relations is developing its own recommendations for the police force, but it had viewed the COPS report as an important step toward that end. Its chairman, Keon Rhodan, said the group is disappointed now but optimistic for an eventual release.

"The report definitely would help," he said, "but there are other tools that we can use to help bring about change we need."

Vice Chairman Daniel O'Neal said he thought the Justice Department had contradicted its own vow to promote local accountability for police.

"I feel like this decision is a slap in the face," he said. "It makes me wonder what exactly is in the report that they don't want the citizens of North Charleston to know."

Reach Andrew Knapp at 843-937-5414. Follow him on Twitter @offlede.

Libs Line Up with Black Racist, “Empty Barrel” Wilson

By Grand Rapids Anonymous
Friday, October 20, 2017 at 12:45:00 P.M. EDT

After White House Chief of Staff John Kelly Called Cong. Frederica Wilson an “Empty Barrel,” Following Her Racist Attack on President Trump

“MSNBC host Lawrence O’Donnell said he was “stunned” by White House chief of staff John Kelly’s remarks about Democratic Rep. Frederica Wilson of Florida, suggesting that the former general was a product of a racist upbringing.

“‘John Kelly never sat next to Frederica Wilson in his elementary school,’ he added….” [At The Daily Caller.]

“Joy-Ann Reid lauded fellow MSNBC host Lawrence O’Donnell’s Thursday night segment in which he characterized White House Chief of Staff Gen. John Kelly’s attack on Democratic Rep. Frederica Wilson as the product of his “segregated” Irish Catholic upbringing. [Also at The Daily Caller].
GRA: So it’s OUR fault for not understanding what 13% of the population thinks like. We're so [frigging] fortunate to have libs and blacks—in droves on the airwaves—to interpret how the black race looks at things (mirror image of sensible whites).

Let's see: Whites work, they don't.

Blacks kill each other, we don't.

Blacks kill whites, we don't.

Whites are basically honest, blacks lie all the time (part of their DNA?).

Whites are family oriented, looking to benefit their country, blacks are not—do not.

Many more examples. Lawrence O'Donnell thinks because he was having sex with Tamron Hall, he understands blacks. Millionaire blacks, yes, but not the rest of the 99.9% that are destroying this country.

Thursday, October 19, 2017

Notoriously Bigoted Politician Speaks Out!

 


 

By A Texas Reader
Pres. Bush warns against politics of “bigotry or white supremacy”
Thu, Oct 19, 2017 3:42 p.m.

Former president George W. Bush on Thursday called on Americans to reject bigotry and white supremacy.


ATR: He is an anti-white bigot with a fetish for Mexicans.

“Pres. Bush warns against politics of “bigotry or white supremacy.”

Spree Shooter Radee Labeeb Prince was a One-Man Crime Wave Who Got a Free Ride from the Delaware Criminal Justice System

 


 

By An Anonymous Reader

As stated, this animal enjoyed almost 20 years of “affirmative action justice” for innumerable felonious assaults that would have guaranteed prison time virtually anywhere else: from a reading of this article, it appears that he was never convicted of anything that resulted in a jail sentence: astonishing.

Looks like the district attorney's office in Wilmington, along with the State AG, have some type of disability preventing them from performing the duties of their office and properly prosecuting violent, recidivist criminals like this.

N.S.: He repeatedly skipped out on court dates, but instead of hunting him down, and charging him additionally, prosecutors would reward him by dropping the previous charges, and declining to charge him for being a fugitive. In other words, the more crimes he committed, the more prosecutors rewarded him.

This is not unusual today. In Baltimore, Freddie Gray’s arrest record contained all sorts of charges without dispositions. In Atlanta, Shamal Thompson committed one felony after another, without ever being punished, as judges and prosecutors kept issuing him black-man-gets-out-of-jail-free cards, until he murdered Eugenia Jeanne Calle. Meanwhile, in New York, Daryl Thomas committed one First-Degree Rape after another, but the NYPD kept giving him freebies, writing up his forcible rapes as “trespassing.”


Reno Hightower ·
Wilmington, Delaware
Another ghetto turd who shouldn't of even been walking the streets plus 42 times arrested is a joke....smh


Matt Riemann ·
University of Delaware
What about all the articles your rag paper has written about “criminal justice reform?” This is it. It’s been reformed. The AG’s office and courts hardly ever put people away for long periods of time after multiple felony convictions. This guy proves it. So can we stop with the vote pandering criminal justice reform talk?


Rick Schumacher
Maybe someone from Delaware's lenient judicial system would like to explain to the victims loved ones why this FN POS was allowed on the streets to continue his felonious lifestyle. Maybe judges and prosecutors should start being held responsible for their poor decisions.


“Mass shooting suspect: many prior arrests, few convictions” (Wilmington News Journal, Oct 18, '17)

Wednesday, October 18, 2017

They Got Him! Feds Have Alleged Spree Shooter Radee Labeeb Prince in Custody

By Nicholas Stix

“We spoke to a woman, Karen Flowers, who says she knows both Prince and the victim.

"Prince is a good guy. He did a bad thing, don't get it twisted. He did a bad thing, terrible thing."

He’s now been arrested 48 times and convicted of 15 felonies so far in the state of Delaware alone, and committed mass murder in Maryland.

Good guy.

At ABC6.

Dead Reckoning: Radee Labeeb Prince, Suspect in Maryland Workplace Mass Murder AND Delaware Shooting Today, Had been Arrested 42 Times and Convicted 15 Times of Felonies in Delaware Alone, but Enjoyed a Steady Diet of Criminal Justice Affirmative Action

 


Suspected war criminal, Radee Labeeb Prince—see how proud he is?
 

By Reader-Researcher A.L.

Developing: looks like another black “employee” decided to use a gun to resolve a human resources issue.

There’s been no report that he was fired, and he’d only “worked” there for four months before shooting five, killing three, and then fleeing.

Looking at his photo, one can only imagine the incredible government pressure applied to the employer to hire this time bomb, when every cell in his body was likely sending out alarms.

Are employment background checks already forbidden in Maryland?

At the New York Daily News.

Do Black NBA Players Deliberately Try to Hurt White Ones?

By Jerry PDX
Wednesday, October 18, 2017 at 4:27:00 P.M. EDT

When I watch this video I have to wonder.

Gordon Hayward of the Celtics goes up for an alley-oop, and LeBron James bumps him from the front. That might not have been so bad, because he at least saw that coming, but Jae Crowder body slams him from behind while he was high in the air, causing him to land awkwardly and break his foot. He's likely out for the season.

It's a gruesome injury; don't watch unless you have a strong stomach.

When you undercut somebody from behind like that when they are leaping for a high lob, there will almost certainly be a high-impact slam to the floor.

There's an unspoken rule about hitting someone like that when they are skying high for a lob, but apparently the rule was suspended due to reasons having to do with race.

I've written about this before, but it bears repeating. I've played plenty of rat ball in my life, and sometimes been the only white guy on the court. I know from experience black players will deliberately try to hurt white ones. My nose was broken from a deliberately swung elbow toward my head and seen other similar injuries from the same and the usual suspects.

LeBron James is a noted racist, and I don't doubt his homey Crowder shares his bigotry, so they have to remind one of the few legit white stars in the NBA not to get too uppity and play too well, or there will be consequences. After all, they got whitey outnumbered.



Today in History for October 18th (Associated Press Video)

Re-posted by Nicholas Stix


Associated Press
Published on Oct 17, 2016

Highlights of this day in history: Inventor Thomas Edison dies; Three scientists share Nobel prize for DNA work; Anthrax scare hits CBS in New York; Two U.S. athletes suspended for Mexico City Olympics protest; Rock star Chuck Berry born. (Oct. 18)

[Actually, the video narrator says that Tommie Smith and John Carlos, the black supremacist sprinters, were banned for life.]



Manhunt! Obama Hire, Black Machinist Radee Labeeb Prince Working at Maryland Business Park for Only Four Months Commits Mass Murder, Shooting 5, Killing 3, and Leaving 3 in Critical Condition

 


Suspected war criminal, Radee Labeeb Prince--see how proud he is?
 

By Prince George’s County Ex-Pat


3 Killed, 2 Critically Wounded in Shooting at Business Park in Edgewood
WBAL Radio 1090 AM

A manhunt is on for Radee Labeeb Prince, who authorities say has a criminal history.

[Make that a very lengthy criminal history. This is one of the violent, black, career criminals whom the John Doe calling himself himself “Barack Obama” forced white employers to hire.]

Tuesday, October 17, 2017

White Juror Averts Another Emmett Till Jury in Mississippi; Crooked Jury Foreman Ignored Jury Vote, and Tried to Acquit Monster in Jessica Chambers Murder Trial

By Nicholas Stix

Sixty-two years after the fact, we constantly hear about Emmett Till, the 14-year-old black angel who was murdered in Money, Mississippi by Roy Bryant and his half-brother, J.W. Milam, after he had sought to get a married white woman, Carolyn Bryant, to sleep with him. (Yes, I know, the whole thing has since been revised into a racial fairy tale, in which Till was murdered for breathing while black. I’ll deal with that another time.)

In that case, the jury hearing the murder charge against Bryant and Milam took just enough time to order cokes, for appearance’s sake, before returning to the courtroom, and declaring the killers “not guilty.”

This time, instead of an all-white jury, it was a racially split one—six blacks and six whites, at first. Then, after one white man got himself kicked off for complaining on Facebook, it became seven blacks and five whites.

Panola County DA John Champion watered down justice, to the point of taking the death penalty (i.e., justice) off the table, but it didn’t help one bit.

This case was not a close call. One expert from the Mississippi Bureau of Investigation, investigator Tim Douglas, had testified that through triangulating the cell phones, he had been able to determine that defendant Quinton Tellis had been with victim Jessica Chambers up until at most four minutes before her murder. A forensic investigator testified that Chambers’ car keys, which her murderer had thrown away, after setting her and her car on fire, had Tellis’ DNA on them.



The jury foreman, Mr. Lamkin, passed a piece of paper to the clerk. Either the clerk or Judge Gerald Chatham read aloud, “Not guilty.”

A white juror piped up that the jury was not unanimous.

The black jurors who voted to acquit had never deliberated. They had decided, from the get-go, that they were going to help out a brother, no matter how monstrous he was. After all, the victim was only a white girl.

The mainstream media spun the verdict that the jury was “confused.” That’s a bald-faced lie. Judge Gerald Chatham had instructed the jury that the verdict had to be unanimous. The black jurors voting to acquit simply decided that the white jurors’ votes didn’t matter. Mr. Lamkin (Lampkin?), the jury foreman, simply acted as if the whites were invisible, and handed the clerk a verdict of “Not guilty.” [Judge declares mistrial in Jessica Chambers case after confused jury comes up with split not guilty verdict by David Boroff, New York Daily News, Tuesday, October 17, 2017, 9:27 A.M.]

CNN claimed that “most jurors” had voted guilty. That would have to mean at least what, nine?

There appeared to be confusion among jurors before the judge declared the mistrial. The jury said it had reached a verdict and the court clerk read the not-guilty verdict recorded on a piece of paper. But at the prosecution's request, the judge polled the jury, and most jurors said their vote was guilty. [Mistrial declared in burning death of Mississippi teen by Jamiel Lynch and Darran Simon, CNN, Updated 11:19 P.M. ET, Mon October 16, 2017.]
However, CNN also suggested that the final jury had six blacks, rather than seven.

The judge should have thrown Lamkin off the jury, after the latter sought to subvert justice, and had him charged with obstruction of justice, but he let him remain. (I know, such charges are never lain against criminal black jurors.) However, the judge no longer trusted Lamkin, and would later repeatedly emphasize the requirement of jury unanimity, and carefully go through pages of documents.

The AP/NBC News reported today (sotto voce) that the foreman tried a second time to ram through an illegal acquittal, but that doesn’t sound right to me.
BATESVILLE, Miss. — The jury in the tense murder trial of a Mississippi man charged with setting a 19-year-old friend on fire and leaving her to die handed a bailiff a note: They have reached a verdict.

What followed was confusion.

Before the decision was read, Judge Gerald Chatham asked if the 12-person panel had unanimously agreed on a verdict. A male juror spoke the shocking words: “We didn’t all agree.”…

After the verdict disagreement, the judge asked the panel to continue deliberating. Shortly afterward, a court clerk read what was believed to be the final verdict: Not guilty.

Tellis’ relatives smiled. Chambers’ family cried.

Then, the judge polled the jury. Seven for guilty, five for not guilty. [Jessica Chambers Case: Mistrial Declared in Death of Teenager Burned Alive by Associated Press, Oct 17 2017, 10:53 a.m. ET]
If the foregoing AP/NBC News report is correct, and I’m wrong, it is even more incriminating of Lamkin, the jury foreman. It would mean that Lamkin repeatedly disobeyed the Judge’s orders. It would also mean that likely two blacks voted to convict.

DA Champion said there will be a re-trial.

The courts have invented a constitutional right for blacks to subvert the criminal justice system, and blacks are running with it.

Blacks, who constitute 13.3% of America’s “residents,” commit the majority of the murders in this country.

The American jury system is dead, which means the American criminal justice system is dead. Can a diverse America, in which colored criminals run amok, endure without a criminal justice system?

Monday, October 16, 2017

Too Black to Prosecute: Sadistic Black Coach Assaults and Abuses White Girls with Impunity—and He’d Struck Before!

By Jesse Mossman
Mon, Oct 16, 2017 1:48 p.m.

Sadistic black coach will not be prosecuted for injuring girl by forcing her to do splits. I suspect he enjoyed hurting a white girl, but
apparently he is too black to prosecute. Now if a white man did this to a black girl the media would blast this nonstop until they threw away
the key.

At Buzzfeed, of all places!

Hate Hoax Alert! Yet Another Fake Campus “Hate Crime”; Individual Arrested for Graffiti Swastika at University of Maryland is Black

Mon, Oct 16, 2017 5:09 p.m.
By “W”

At PJ Media.

HUNG JURY

By David in TN
Mon, Oct 16, 2017 5:13 p.m.

It's official. Hung Jury. Don't know the split yet.

Seinfeld’s John O'Hurley Praises Mike Pence, “Bravo” for Leaving Colts Game, Puts Down Political Theater!

Re-posted by Nicholas Stix


TMZSports
Published on Oct 9, 2017

"I go to a football game as I go to a movie or anything else ... for escapism. Not to hear somebody's political views." -- John O'Hurley on Mike Pence's decision to leave Colts game.



Lawrence Auster and Jessica Chambers

By Nicholas Stix

When putting together David in TN’s work on the Jessica Chambers trial last night, I forgot an observation of the late Lawrence Auster: “Liberalism is a factory for the production of dead white females.”

Larry had once written the same statement, without the word “white.” I followed up, and asked him if that was what he meant. He responded in the affirmative.

To add to Larry’s observation, the liberal criminal justice system is increasingly a factory for the protection of white females’ killers.

“Not Guilty”; Chaos in the Courtroom! Foreman in Jessica Chambers Murder Trial Tried to Slip in an Acquittal of Defendant Quinton Tellis, Even Though Several Jurors Voted Guilty! Another Juror Had to Pipe Up in Open Court, to Stop Travesty of Justice

By David in TN


JESSICA CHAMBERS VERDICT WATCH: Jury sent back for more deliberations
By Eryn Taylor

Prosecutors said Tellis doused the women [sic] in gasoline then set her on fire and left her to die on a country road near Courtland.

N.S.: There’s a video and tweets from reporter Bridget Chapman at WREG.

The judge is now being very careful, and no longer trusting the jury foreman. He keeps repeating to the jury the instructions he had given it before deliberations began, but which the foreman, Mr. Lamkin, had ignored, that the verdict must be unanimous.

I wonder what Mr. Lamkin’s background could possibly be.

New York Daily News Provides Phony Cover Story for Arab Moslem Who Murdered Young Woman, Ted Kennedy-Style, While He was Getting Her to Cheat on Her Boyfriend

 

Murder victim Harleen Grewal
 

By An Anonymous Reader


Ahmad, Grewal, Singh, Azam - SHAZAM! Another fine NYC morning rush...
Mon, Oct 16, 2017 1:40 a.m.

Another one for the “minority intersectionality” wreckage files - in this case actual and flaming - of the 3rd-World mess that NYC has become.

The Daily News deserves an award for “most unintentionally comical article headline”:

“Father can’t understand why son fled burning car with passenger trapped inside after Brooklyn crash”

The answer can be summed up conclusively and simply: the father's name is Mohammad Azam, and his son's name is Saeed Azam - fine, honorable, brave Muslims both.

The father's duty is to lie and obfuscate for his son, his son's duty was to leave the dhimmi (“non-believer”), and save his own [butt], leaving her to burn to death in the wreck that resulted from his reckless driving.

“The 23-year-old smashed the luxury Infiniti 35G into a concrete barrier on the Gowanus Expressway.”

 

The victim's boyfriend, Karan Singh Dhillon
 

How does a 23-year-old Brooklyn punk afford a “luxury Infinity”?

Back in the day, the best anyone of us could muster at that age was a 10, 15-year-old beater.

“Ahmad was caught on camera hailing a yellow cab early Friday after escaping the roaring flames that killed passenger Harleen Grewal, 25.”

(When was “early”? 2 A.M., 4 A.M., 6 A.M.?)

“Ahmad told police he was dating Grewal, but friends said he was just giving her a ride home.”

[N.S.: “Dating” is prostitute talk for “sleeping with.”]

Didja catch the neat new “journalism” here? Ahmad - the perp - admitted to the police that he was “dating” the victim, but somehow the crack Daily News is saying otherwise, very quickly hunting down and interrogating “friends” (of whom?) who said “he was just giving her a ride home.”

In other words, they feel that this spineless worm of a man should be cut some slack, as the woman in his “luxury” ride was just a “friend” he happened to be taking home, “early Friday.”

But wait - her REAL boyfriend - a man by the name of Karan Singh Dhillon - told the News that “She would do anything for people.” Apparently that included getting into the car of a [dirtbag] with a suspended license, incapable of handling this “luxury” car that he somehow had in his possession.

This [crap] seems to be happening on a daily basis in this city, and who the hell knows how many other places in this nation now. Welcome to the new “normal.”

N.S.: It turns out the 25-year-old victim was from India. Her boyfriend was a Sikh, so she was probably one, too.

This is significant, because had Saeed Azam cuckolded a Moslem, there would have been hell to pay, including the life of the woman involved. (Unlike whites and Hispanics who, if they killed anyone for cheating, would have killed the other man, Moslem men always kill their own woman/relative/whatever, even when she was raped.)

The fact that Azam considered his victim his inferior—to him, she was no better than a prostitute—made it that much easier to let her be burned alive.

There are other perps in this incident: New York Daily News alleged reporters, Aaron Showalter and Denis Slattery, Head of Content Zach Haberman and Arthur Browne, editor-in-chief and publisher of the New York Daily News.

At the New York Daily News.

 


Murder suspect Saeed Azam

Summary of First Week of the Mississippi Burning, Jessica Chambers Murder Trial of Quinton Tellis: Jurors Finished First Day of Deliberations; Deliberations Resume Today (Monday)


[See earlier “Was Jessica Chambers a Hate Crime Victim?” (VDARE Report); and “The Jessica Chambers Murder: Mississippi Authorities Have a Suspect!” (VDARE Report).]


By Nicholas Stix

The following is largely a summary/copy of daily blogging by my friend and partner-in-crime, David in TN, beginning last Monday, and of a long telephone conversation we had on the case a couple of days ago.

CNN produced a documentary on the murder of Jessica Chambers, which it scheduled for broadcast on the Saturday (on CNN) and Sunday (on its subsidiary, HLN) before the trial began.

CNN “pre-empted” the show on Saturday for the tornado and attacks on Trump.

The theory of the lead investigator is Tellis had done something to her and thought Jessica Chambers was already dead when he set the car on fire.

The doc ran on Sunday night on HLN, as planned, thus ensuring that only a fraction as many people would see it.

The film crew spent a great deal of time with the DA, the chief police investigator, and Jessica Chambers’ best friends, a black woman, as well as Clarion-Ledger reporter Therese Apel, Chambers’ parents, and other people from the hamlet of Courtland.

While on the surface, the film seemed to be in “Just the facts, ma’am” mode, it was actually working from the usual racist script.

The bad guy of the piece was not the defendant but the victim’s father, Ben Chambers Sr., because he said that he opposes interracial dating.

Jessica’s mom (who had long ago split from her dad) was o.k., because she emphasized that she had nothing against her daughter dating black guys.

Keep in mind that Jessica Chambers was a very discriminating young woman. Not only did she only sleep with blacks, but only with black criminals.

Her first boyfriend, abusive gang member Bryan Rudd, had moved away to Colorado. The second, drug dealer Travis “Travo” Sanford, was in prison at the time of her murder. Panola County DA John Champion rejected Internet speculation that the jailbird might have ordered Chambers’ murder from inside.

No mention was made of the People magazine report that largely introduced this atrocity to the nation, or of the reporting done by the local paper, The Panolian, whose editor/publisher, John H. Howell Sr., was very helpful to this reporter, graciously giving me an extended interview.

The documentary denied that Jessica and Tellis, who had only met two weeks earlier, had slept together, but reports I’ve read said they had.

On the one hand, the audience was told that Chambers had been running with “a bad crowd,” but on the other hand, we were supposed to ignore the fact that all of the men in that bad crowd were black.

The script also turned black murder defendant Quinton Tellis (whom authorities also believe committed the torture-robbery-murder of a Chinese graduate student in Louisiana eight months after the Chambers murder) into a victim. Tellis was supposedly as gentle as a lamb, before spending a four year bid in prison on a ten-year sentence for burglary.

Tellis, who has repeatedly benefited from criminal justice affirmative action, likely attended master classes in prison with other bright lights, who would have taught him how to commit the “perfect crime,” by burning his victims, in order to destroy DNA evidence.

Monday saw voir dire, and the choosing of a jury. The trial proper began on Monday, and ran through the weekend. The jury began deliberations on Sunday, and will pick up where they left off at 9 a.m. Monday.


Monday, Day 0: Prospective jurors underwent voir dire, and the jury was empaneled. Since the justice, er, the death penalty, is off the table, the black prospective jurors didn’t need to lie during voir dire, by claiming that they were ready, under appropriate circumstances, to vote for execution. (The prosecution argued that it would be easier to get a conviction without the death penalty being in play. You can say that again.)

The jury consisted of six blacks and six whites; five women and seven men.

Tuesday, Day 1: Quinton Tellis is sporting a pair of eyeglasses, just like Lemaricus Davidson at his trial for the Knoxville Horror.

Jessica Chambers managed to say something like "Eric" or Deric." In her condition (throat literally on fire) she might have been trying to say "Tellis," and it came out "Deric."

Tellis' DNA was found on the car keys that had been tossed to the side of the burned out car.

Wednesday, Day 2: One white man gets himself kicked off the jury, after he is caught posting to Facebook, “It Sucks.”

That makes the jury 7-5 black over white.

Several people at the scene said Jessica Chambers said “Eric.” Most observers see this as a major sticking point regarding a conviction in the case. On the other hand, the victim called herself “Katrina” and other names. It's difficult to imagine the state she was in. (She had First and Second-Degree burns on 98 percent of her body.) One witness testified to asking Chambers if her killer was white or black and she answered “Black.”

Thursday, Day 3: The jury was taken to the scene of the crime, the store where Jessica Chambers was last seen alive, and the suspect’s home.

Friday, Day 4: First Responders Testify to Hearing Jessica Chambers Say “Eric” Burned Her

The live stream I saw allowed you to see the autopsy photos, very horrific.

Jessica Chambers’ body had been turned brown by the fire, with red splotches all over. Her hair was singed, with some burned off. The eyes were shut with mouth open, burns and soot showed inside the mouth. It's difficult to see how she could have spoken very clearly.

The hospital gave Jessica Chambers “comfort care,” what they give to a patient who won’t survive. She looked to be in terrible pain when she died, her face twisted in agony.

Friday, Day 4: Quinton Tellis admits to being with Chambers the evening she died.

Investigator testifies how phone records and interrogation began to swing case against Quinton Tellis. (Tellis deleted his telephone messages, as soon as he heard Chamber had died.)

Interviewed by police, Quinton Tellis admits to being with Chambers most of the day. He had lied when questioned a year earlier that he was with her only in the morning.

This filled in the timeline right up to Chamber’s horrific death.


Saturday, Day 5

Closing arguments. The defense rested without calling any witnesses, Tellis in particular. His original supposed alibi witnesses couldn't support him.


Sunday, Day 6

In closing argument, a defense attorney referred to Jessica Chambers as "Erica Chambers" THREE times.

You wish Knoxville Horror prosecutors Takeesha Fitzgerald and Leland Price were on this case. Or former LA prosecutors Walt Lewis or Paul Turley.

Another time, they said "circumstantial evidence = acquittal."

A top-flight prosecutor would have a field day in the rebuttal.

I think the prosecutor did well in his rebuttal. He started by pointing out "Her name was Jessica Chambers, not Erica Chambers." The defense attorney called her "Erica Chambers" in his closing.

He pointed out Tellis was proven by cell phone and texting to be with Chambers up to four minutes of when she would have been murdered.

The jury finished deliberations Sunday night, and will resume deliberations at 9 a.m. CT tomorrow (Monday) morning.

The Jury in the Jessica Chambers Murder Trial Has Finished for the Night

By David in TN
Sunday, October 15, 2017 at 9:45:00 P.M. EDT

They will resume deliberations at 9 a.m. CT tomorrow (Monday) morning.

Sunday, October 15, 2017

Alleged Comedian George Lopez—El Busboy—Gets Booed Off Stage at Juvenile Diabetes Gala, after Making Racist Cracks

By Reader-Researcher RC
________________________________________


Why would any sensible person pay George Lopez to emcee an event?

Page Six
New York Post

Comic George Lopez was booed off stage at a gala for juvenile diabetes in Denver last week, over an anti-Donald Trump routine that fell flat with the crowd.

We’re told the flap began when Trump backer and Liberty Media CEO Greg Maffei donated $250,000 but requested that Lopez cool it with the anti-Trump jokes at the Carousel Ball.

An attendee at the event — where tables sold from $5,000 to $100,000 to benefit the Barbara Davis Center for Diabetes — commented on a YouTube video that “George was asked nicely to stop making Trump jokes by a man in front row [Maffei] who just donated $250K.” But “George doesn’t, continues. Gets booed.”

We’re told that Lopez responded to Maffei, “Thank you for changing my opinion on old white men, but it doesn’t change the way I feel about orange men.”

Trying to recover and sensing the audience turn, Lopez said, “Listen, it’s about the kids. . . I apologize for bringing politics to an event.
This is America — it still is. So I apologize to your white privilege.”

We’re told Lopez also told a joke about Trump’s proposed border wall with Mexico, saying, “I guess you can get some Mexicans to do it cheaper and they wouldn’t crush the tunnels ¬underneath.”

When the audience did not respond well, he quipped, “Are you El Chapo people?” in reference to the drug kingpin who has used tunnels to evade authorities.

Lopez then announced a video segment — but he did not return to the stage, and a local newscaster took over the hosting duties.

TV host Chris Parente posted on Twitter, “big controversy: host of HUGE charity #CarouselBall, @georgelopez, makes political comments about Trump, drops f-bomb and is escorted out.” But a source close to the comedian insisted to Page Six that Lopez’s segment was “only supposed to be four minutes,” even though he was listed as the night’s emcee.

Lenny Kravitz performed at the gala, which raised $1.65 million.

Reps had no comment.

Closing Arguments Begin in Jessica Chambers Murder Trial

Sun, Oct 15, 2017 3:41 p.m.
By David in TN

The closing arguments are going on now. The defense rested without calling any witnesses, Tellis in particular. His original supposed alibi witnesses couldn't support him.


Sunday, October 15, 2017 at 4:33:00 P.M. EDT

In closing argument, a defense attorney referred to Jessica Chambers as "Erica Chambers" THREE times.

You wish Knoxville Horror prosecutors Takeesha Fitzgerald and Leland Price were on this case. Or former LA prosecutors Walt Lewis or Paul Turley.

Another time, they said "circumstantial evidence = acquittal."

A top-flight prosecutor would have a field day in the rebuttal.


Sun, Oct 15, 2017 5:18 p.m.

I think the prosecutor did well in his rebuttal. He started by pointing out "Her name was Jessica Chambers, not Erica Chambers." The defense attorney called her "Erica Chambers" in his closing.

He pointed out Tellis was proven by cell phone and texting to be with Chambers up to four minutes of when she would have been murdered.

[At WMCA Action News5.]

On Friday, Oct. 6, after Her Little Boys Got Off the School Bus and Walked into Their House, She Shot Them Both in the Head; then She Turned the Gun on Herself

By A Texas Reader

At KVUE.

Jessica Chambers Murder Defendant Tied to Louisiana Torture-Murder

By David in TN
Sun, Oct 15, 2017 8:47 a.m.

Detective Chris Bates said, “He’s the reason prisons were built. He’s as evil as they come. He’s not going to get out of jail, ever.”

[When have we heard that before?]

Check out this story on clarionledger.com:

This is over a year and a half old. Most I could find.

Here.

Mississippi Burning Trial: Intelligence Analyst Draws Timeline of Jessica Chambers,’ Quinton Tellis’ Whereabouts, Based on Phones

By David in TN
Sat, Oct 14, 2017 7:31 p.m.

Intelligence analyst draws timeline of Chambers, Tellis whereabouts based on phones

Quinton Tellis’ defense attorney Alton Peterson hammering on the question of the name “Eric,” in cross examination of MBI investigator Tim Douglas.

Article by the reporter who has covered it.

The Clarion Ledger.


Must We Shoot Judicial Tyrants, or is There a Non-Violent Alternative? Part I

Re-posted by Nicholas Stix

The initial problem with which Daniel Horowitz and my colleague Fred Elbel eloquently wrestle has, unfortunately spawned multiple additional problems. How does one hew to the original conception of the Supreme Court and the people it was founded to serve, and solve those problems?

It can’t be done.

Either an activist, restorative court must turn back the court, or a dictator must do so, or the present-day United States must be broken up, with one section representing a close demographic approximation of the original nation.

The Judicial Transformation of America - Two views on a timely, scathing critique of judicial tyranny

By Fred Elbel (I)

Volume 27, Number 5 (Summer 2017)
Issue theme: "Malthus Revisited - The Perils of Overpopulation and Globalism"


Printer friendly page
Articles by this author
View original PDF format

Book review:
STOLEN SOVEREIGNTY
How to Stop Unelected Judges from Transforming America
By Daniel Horowitz
WND Books (July, 2016)
288 pp., $25.95


Americans neither want nor deserve societal transformation without representation.

America is at a breaking point. If nothing is done to strip the judiciary of its presumed authority over foundational issues, our representative democracy will disappear. Our ability to restore America from judicial overreach — which includes deleterious immigration policies — will be lost.

Daniel Horowitz, in his book Stolen Sovereignty: How to Stop Unelected Judges from Transforming America, observes that bureaucrats, political elites, and unelected judges are transforming our society, sovereignty, and system of governance without consent. Horowitz observes that:

… even many of the conservatives within the legal community have become brainwashed into the notion of one-directional stare decisis — upholding unconstitutional decisions of past liberal judges as precedent — even if those decisions themselves were reversals of long-standing settled law…

A government that was once committed to shielding its citizens from any undesirable immigration — from public charge to security and cultural threats — is now committed to bringing in anyone and everyone unless they are proven terrorists up front.

Stolen Sovereignty is an important, readable, and well-researched book. It’s an engaging read, which includes a moderate discussion of relevant case law, oriented toward the lay reader. Horowitz emphasizes that with the election of conservatives to Congress and the Presidency, it is imperative to address judicial overreach before it is
too late.


Historical limitations

Horowitz writes that historically:

… [federal] courts were never vested with the power to decide broadly consequential societal and political questions not explicitly addressed in the Constitution, such as gay marriage, abortion, and immigration policy. They were primarily created for the purpose of interpreting and plying the meaning of statutes, mediating disputes between individuals and between states, deciding complex separation of powers disputes between the legislature and executive, and several esoteric jurisdictions for which the Constitution granted the Supreme Court original jurisdiction…
They were to have “neither force nor will” with regard to political issues. Consequently, there was no reason to overrule them because they never had jurisdiction over governing the nation; they had the power to offer opinions in individual “cases and controversies.”
President Calvin Coolidge reaffirmed this view in his July 4, 1926 speech commemorating the 150th anniversary of the Declaration, that the ideals expressed in the Constitution were immutable:
If all men are created equal, that is final. If they are endowed with inalienable rights, that is final. If governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed, that is final.
Horowitz clarifies that:
What Coolidge was noting is that, unlike the shallow-minded bleeding-heartedness of the Left, the spectrum of liberty is not an infinite straight line; it’s a bell curve. You have to get it just right and freeze it at the peak. That peak was established by the Declaration of Independence, ratified by the Constitution despite the gaping hole of slavery, and repaired by the Fourteenth Amendment in 1868.
What a marked contrast to the modern liberal tenet of a “living and breathing” Constitution!

The principle of judicial limitation was first challenged in 1803 by Chief Justice John Marshall in Marbury v. Madison, where the power of judicial review originated. Horowitz notes that:
Marshall opened the door for the view of the court as the final arbiter of every important ideological debate in this country, although Marshall himself never envisioned the Court as the final arbiter, but merely as an arbiter of constitutional disputes.
In 1907, leading progressive Charles Evans Hughes, who served as Chief Justice during the bulk of FDR’s tenure, made the more radical statement: “We are under a Constitution, but the Constitution is what the judges say it is.” Horowitz remarks how this paradigm has become entrenched in the modern judiciary:
Starting in the FDR era, accelerating during the Warren court of the ’60s, and now crystallizing during the modern era of Obama, the courts — aided by the left-wing takeover of the legal profession — have gradually yet relentlessly turned the governing arrangement on its head by completely reinterpreting the most foundational aspects of our Constitution.

Judges who were supposed to be immune to politics have enshrined their political and social preferences into the Constitution itself. What is in the Constitution, they refuse to recognize as a fundamental right and defend from the encroachment of the other branches of government. Yet, what is not in the Constitution they have installed as new and evolving fundamental rights.


Our unconstitutional Constitution

During the 1970s and 1980s, Thurgood Marshall, on the Supreme Court with William Brennan and Earl Warren, exemplified the paradoxical approach that “the Constitution is unconstitutional,” stating:

While the Union survived the civil war, the Constitution did not. In its place arose a new, more promising basis for justice and equality, the Fourteenth Amendment, ensuring protection of the life, liberty, and property of all persons against deprivations without due process, and guaranteeing equal protection of the laws.
In other words, Marshall professed that the Fourteenth Amendment completely rewrote the Constitution, maintaining that it is a “living and breathing document.”

Yet section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment explicitly grants Congress enforcement purview, not the judiciary, stating “The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.” Identical provisions are contained in both the Thirteenth and Fifteenth amendments.

One might ask: how then could the courts claim absolute power via the Fourteenth Amendment?

The answer was provided by Justice William Brennan’s “ratchet theory.” He authored an opinion upholding the power of Congress through section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment to expand upon the scope of rights expressed in that amendment. As with a ratchet, Congress could move forward in creating new rights, but could not revoke preexisting rights — even if they were established under liberal judicial interpretation of the Fourteenth Amendment. Thus the “guarantees” of the Fourteenth Amendment are to be defined by the courts, not Congress, even if those guarantees infringe on state powers provided under the Tenth Amendment.

As a consequence of this theory, the concept of stare decisis — that is, legal precedent — is one-directional, leading to
inevitable judicial tyranny. Horowitz clarifies:
There is no greater tyranny than the retroactive creation of an ever-elastic set of laws that is anchored to nothing more than the political judgment of unelected judges at the time they woke up that day.


Ratcheting case law

Horowitz investigates a number of high profile cases that reveal how liberal judicial activism has ratcheted up. He points out that the Commerce Clause was never intended to establish federal regulatory activity, yet even in 1829, Madison wrote that it had already been abused. The purpose of the original clause was to break down trade barriers between the states, not to create mandates on the American public. Today it is used in a myriad of regulatory manners, including banning of firearms.

Recently, Chief Justice Roberts interpreted the Commerce Clause as having the power to regulate inactivity in order to preserve Obamacare at all costs. He rewrote legislation from the bench which upheld the Obamacare individual mandate under auspices of the power of Congress to levy taxes, thus compelling an individual to engage in commerce.

Horowitz points out that the Supreme Court’s decision to uphold federal subsidies to states with federal health insurance exchanges was an “even more egregious and nakedly political” decision:

What Roberts was essentially saying is that anytime the policy of a bill goes off the rails and is in need of a political fix, the courts have the power and desire to help fix the law in the event of litigation against executive overreach in defying the plain meaning of the law.
Roberts’ legislative decision has further enabled the courts to serve as an unelected super-legislature.

Horowitz examines how in the same-sex marriage case of 2015, Justice Anthony Kennedy redefined marriage from the bench and in doing so trampled on the Constitution and our entire system of governance, writing “and so they [the framers of the Fourteenth Amendment] entrusted to future generations a charter protecting the right of all persons to enjoy liberty as we learn its meaning.” Here the “we” refers to the courts. Future courts can use this ruling to “discover” new rights supposedly granted by a presumably prescient Fourteenth Amendment. Left-wing social policy, from amnesty for illegal aliens to transgender bathrooms, has now become the domain of the courts.

Horowitz notes that when our founding documents mentioned “rights,” they referred to protection from a negative action—that is, imprisonment, fine, or capital punishment without due process. This contrasts with the positive mandate of the 2015 Obergefell v. Hodges ruling on same-sex marriage. Justice Scalia commented in strong dissent that the activist courts have taken this decision away from the people. Horowitz explains that:
This court opinion was not about homosexual rights, equality, or marriage. It was about permanently remaking the Constitution in a way that will allow all subsequent justices to create new rights and laws from the bench without any limitations. And yes, that will include expanding rights to illegal aliens.
Horowitz points out that in legal and prosecutorial terms, homosexuality has been elevated to the status of a national religion. James Madison referred to religious conscience as the most sacred of property rights. Yet bakeries and private farm owners have now been prosecuted — and one might say persecuted — in the name of gay rights. Unelected judges have concocted super rights for special classes that now supersede our most inalienable rights of religious conscience and private property.



Immigration and citizenship

Illegal immigration drastically undermines the sovereignty of a nation-state. Horowitz predicts that we will soon see courts issue judicial amnesty for illegal aliens, even if the political branches of government regain rational commitment to enforcing immigration law.

As explained by John Quincy Adams in 1819, our Founders did not regulate immigration because they did not want to encourage it with fixed policy. Congress began significantly regulating immigration in 1875. In 1882, Congress barred immigrants from China, as well as undesirables who would be a burden or danger to society. The Supreme Court affirmed this right of Congress in 1889. In 1896, the court reaffirmed the legislative authority of Congress to deport legal permanent residents without judicial review. Horowitz notes that this authority remains today regarding deportation of non-citizen Islamists.

During the Great Wave from 1880 through the 1920s, courts humbly recognized that they had no role in immigration policy. Yet within a generation, we have gone from deporting legal immigrants without judicial review to mandating full constitutional rights for illegal aliens, resulting in dangerous criminal aliens being released into the general population without public consent.

Children of illegal aliens are currently granted citizenship via a masterful misinterpretation of the Fourteenth Amendment. Congress has plenary power over immigration, and the amendment itself grants Congress power to enforce the amendment. Horowitz discusses the amendment’s infamous “subject to the jurisdiction” clause. He notes that opponents of U.S. sovereignty hang their hats on the 1898 Wong Kim ArkPlyler v. Doe


There you have it; American citizens — through their elected representatives — have no recourse to prevent future illegal immigrants from obtaining citizenship against their will — all because of the nonbinding footnote of one of the most radical justices of the twentieth century, from a case reversing precedent and relying on the English feudal system that was twice repudiated. This is what passes for constitutional scholarship among our political elites.Horowitz asks us to consider:

When was the last time Congress passed a bad immigration bill? It’s been about thirty years. Every time they try to pass an open borders bill through both houses of Congress, the public weighs in swiftly and decisively against it. This is why liberals resort to using the administrative offices and the judiciary to enact their transformative agenda…
It could truly be said that the lawlessness of the modern courts could not possibly drift further from the intent of the Founders than it already has in respect to immigration.


Sinking sovereignty

Immigration without assimilation is an invasion. Massive immigration ultimately threatens our sovereignty. It brings with it foreign concepts of government and values antithetical to America’s form of government. Our founders never imagined that immigration could be used as a powerful tool to transform society from within.

Horowitz delineates five immigration practices that undermine our sovereignty and dilute our ability to self-govern:

• birthright
citizenship

• chain
migration

• refugee
resettlement

• counting
illegal aliens in the census,
and reapportionment

• non-citizens
voting in our elections.

For example, under chain migration, a single immigrant can trigger an automatic chain of 273 additional immigrants. Horowitz points out that ending chain migration is the single most effective policy step our government could take.

He also recommends immediately suspending refugee resettlement, and forcing Congress to reauthorize refugee programs yearly.

Horowitz notes that counting illegal aliens in the census is doubly detrimental, disenfranchising voting constituents via reapportionment. For example, counting illegal aliens has given California an extra five seats in the House, and has provided Washington and New York each with one extra seat. No one sought approval from the American public before doing this.


Reining in the courts

Horowitz asks: why are judges who have invested themselves with the power to concoct law and change the Constitution not elected? After all, their power now exceeds the power of the entire legislature.

After 240 years of serving as that asylum for religious liberty, have we regressed as a people so deeply that we will obsequiously accept the judicial tyranny of a few flawed individuals in robes who overturn the preamble of the very document that spawned our independence and affirmed the very rights they seek to expand? If the spirit of liberty runs through your veins, you must shout from the rooftops, “Hell no!” and start rejecting the illegitimate coup d’état of the unelected oligarchy.
The courts were never intended to have jurisdiction over sovereignty or political questions. The Judiciary Act of 1789 did not grant the Supreme and inferior courts appellate jurisdiction on important issues. It wasn’t until 1875 that Congress transferred that authority from state courts. Then in 1914, Congress granted the Supreme Court appellate jurisdiction over cases heard by state supreme courts. Note that Congress has the authority to grant judicial purview, as well as negate it.

As Horowitz notes, we have been brainwashed into thinking the courts are the last word on legislative issues. Yet Congress ultimately does have the final say. Congress has complete power to regulate district and appellate courts. Indeed, the Constitution in Article III, Section 2, Clause 2 specifically grants Congress the authority to regulate and limit appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court, stating:
In all the other Cases before mentioned, the Supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make.


Final observations

As Benjamin Franklin left the Constitutional Convention, he was reportedly asked, “Well doctor, what have we got, a republic or a monarchy?” He famously replied, “A republic, if you can keep it.”

A core principle of a republican form of government is that political and societal questions must be addressed by the political branches of government, which are directly accountable to the people.

Today we are confronted with stolen sovereignty, thanks to dogmatic judicial activism. We are quickly moving toward irremediable, non-representational despotism. We are being ruled, not governed, by an activist judiciary. As Horowitz so aptly asks:

If judges serve life tenures, can decide political issues, and are inoculated from congressional checks on their authority, then what was the purpose of the revolution? ■


About the author

Fred Elbel is an IT consultant and Director of Colorado Alliance for Immigration Reform (CAIRCO). He has been active on immigration issues for several decades.

Quinton Tellis Erased Text Message History with Jessica Chambers after Learning She’d Died

By David in TN
Sat, Oct 14, 2017 7:27 p.m.

Tellis erased text message history with Jessica after finding out she'd been killed

Day 5 of Jessica Chambers trial. The cell phone data cornered Tellis with a timeline up to the last moment. Setting Jessica Chambers on fire killed the DNA from her skin. This is likely one of the reasons it was done.

At WMC Actionnews5.

“That’s Why Hillary Clinton’s Not the President”: Sarah Sanders vs. Leftist, White House Press Corps Activist (Video)

Re-posted by Nicholas Stix




Published on September 13, 2017

Jessica Chambers Trial: No More Gaps; Quinton Tellis Admits to being with Chambers the Evening She Died

By David in TN

Investigator testifies how phone records and interrogation began to swing case against Quinton Tellis.

Day 4 of the Jessica Chambers trial and a strong day for the prosecution.

Interviewed by police, Quinton Tellis admits to being with Chambers most of the day. He had lied when questioned a year earlier that he was with her only in the morning.

This filled in the timeline right up to Chamber’s horrific death.

David and I discussed this case at length over the phone the other night. It seems that Quinton Tellis, like so many other violent, black, career criminals, thinks that he’s a criminal mastermind. Thus, Tellis decided to use the lessons he had received in the master classes in the prison yard from other criminal masterminds during the four-year bit he did on a ten-year sentence, from which he was paroled just two months before allegedly murdering Jessica Chambers.

Apparently, black geniuses are convinced that if you set a victim’s corpse on fire, you destroy all DNA evidence.

They also fail to understand that the smartest “ploy” to take with detectives is to lawyer up. Instead, they start talking, i.e., lying, and the coppers take mental notes of each lie, and return to them. When they do, they get either new information or new lies, each of which will incriminate the “suspect” at trial.

(Even dumb coppers use a similar tactic of constantly repeating the same questions, even when talking to a crime victim from a group they hate—e.g., a normal white man—who was victimized by a member of a group they love (the usual suspects). A vic in such a situation must go on the offensive, asking, say, “Why do you keep repeating the same question? I already answered that.”)

However, the recent CNN documentary (which CNN scheduled on both its flagship network, and its HLN division,
only to cancel from broadcasting it on the former) on this case didn’t take that angle at all. It snuck in the notions that Tellis was a victim of the criminal justice system, having been a gentle soul who wouldn’t hurt a fly, until he was swept up in the system of mass incarceration, and that the real heavy in the piece was Jessica Chambers’ father, Ben Chambers Sr., because he disapproved of interracial dating.

Note too that at the time of the crime, Quinton Tellis was not an “ex-con,” but a convict. When someone is convicted of a felony, he remains a convict until he has completed serving his sentence, whether “inside” jail or prison, or “outside” on probation or parole.

Check out this story on commercialappeal.com.