In the history of mankind, many republics have risen, have flourished for a less or greater time, and then have fallen because their citizens lost the power of governing themselves and thereby of governing their state. TR


The Obama Morning News || July 15, 2013

27 thoughts on “The Obama Morning News || July 15, 2013”

  1. “Feds weigh charging Zimmerman . . . Wall Street Journal”

    Hm, will Obama’s FBI do the President’s bidding on a purely political matter? Derp!

    Zimmerman will be granted a “fair” Federal trial, followed by a first-class hanging, al la Judge Roy Bean. There are Constitutional limits on double jeapordy, but those went by the wayside on “racial” matters back with Rodney King, so I wouldn’t look for an Adminsitration with nothing but contempt for the Constitution anyway to worry about little things like that…

    Anyone know if Federal charges are contemplated for the two folks who beat someone for his race near Sanford?
    Oh, that’s right, doesn’t count the other way, Just like they don’t worry about mob racial violence in Chicago and elsewhere when it’s the other way…

    Here in Cincinnati, a White man recently died who was the subject of a severe beating by several Black “youths”, for the stated reason that they “were bored”. The local – Black – Juvenile Court judge closed the proceedings and threw the media out in such an obvously illegal application of Prior Restraint that even a Gannett newspaper noticed enough to bring a lawsuit.

    What did THESE folks get? Probation until age 21 and some community service. No talk of Federal investigations pending.

    Ain’t double standards grand?

    1. The only racial profiling and hate speech/crimes that we saw yesterday came from people who want to persecute an innocent man, or kill him, his family, and the six jurors who decided this trial.
      People who know better and media that should know better are trying their best to inflame riots over what never was a White on Black crime, nor was it ever a gun-control issue.

      On related news; the LAPD is to be commended for their restraint, and the professional way they kept a group of a hundred or so people from shutting down a Federal highway, even while they were surrounded and under attack.

      1. Alan Dershowitz (not sure about my spelling) who I usually associate with a liberal point of view thinks the prosecution in this case was doing the profiling–on Zimmerman.

        BTW, I’m more than a little disappointed that the Daily Mail/Telegraph which we usually admire has a huge spread on the rioting and demonstrations here as if the entire country is upset about the verdict. I guess that in a country of 310 million people we who agree with the verdict (74% in WaPo informal poll) are still very much “the silent majority”, peaceful, law-abiding citizens who are shouted down by the others and therefore seem to have no voice or presence.

        1. The so-called rioting here in L.A. was sooo over-hyped. Except for a short, isolated incident of protesters throwing stuff at police on one of the freeways and a return volley of rubber bullets, everything was extremely laid-back and peaceful. The ‘crowds’ were relatively small – 200 at most. I would call it a non-event here in L.A.

          1. Thanks for the on-site update. All we see are the MSM’s tight shots and hear their breathless accounting of what they believe is happening.

          2. I just watched a few mins of record MORNING JOE during lunch–they had the unrest “all across the country.” It’s all pretty much lies, straw men, faux outrage, misinterpretation, generalization to all of this or that, etc now. Not safe to walk home, go to a store, eat candy (or make it into a potion), wear a hoodie—well, surprise, it is not so safe in this country now. For anyone.

    2. This would not be a case of double jeapordy because the dual-sovereignity doctrine allows the federal government to prosecute for actions defined as crimes under federal law.

      The reporter notes that this might be a hard case to make.

      “I think you could make out the case that unconscious racism caused Mr. Zimmerman to profile” Mr. Martin, said Kenneth Nunn, assistant director of the Criminal Justice Center at the University of Florida’s Levin College of Law. “But there doesn’t seem to be enough there to justify a claim that racial animus was the predicate behind Trayvon Martin’s death.”

      1. “Unconscious racism”. Boy, we are lost if something like that is allowed under the law. They not only know everything about our real time actions and expressed thoughts, they now know our unconscious thought as well.

        1. Nelson refused to allow the state to claim Zimmerman profiled Martin, but I don’t know if a federal court would do the same.

        2. “Unconscious racism”. Boy, we are lost if something like that is allowed under the law.” – Julie Brueckheimer

          It already is. They call it “Disparate Impact”.

          “Disparate Impact”

          “A theory of liability that prohibits an employer from using a facially neutral employment practice that has an unjustified adverse impact on members of a protected class. A facially neutral employment practice is one that does not appear to be discriminatory on its face; rather it is one that is discriminatory in its application or effect.”

          Note that you don’t have to WANT to discrimate. THEY say you did, so you did. Pay up.

          Never minding for the moment that the very concept of “protected class” flies in the face of equality under the law, this is a test that’s used constantly in every type of case even though it has no legal justification. This is why Obama fights so hard to keep the concept from going to the Supreme Court, even though he owns it;

          “Mr. Perez is a champion of disparate-impact theory, which purports to prove racial discrimination by examining statistics rather than intent or specific cases. Soon after Mr. Perez assumed his job in October 2009, Attorney General Eric Holder established a unit under Mr. Perez to examine loans to minorities. The unit proceeded to threaten a series of lawsuits against banks under the 1968 Fair Housing Act.

          The lenders quickly settled these cases rather than run the reputational risk of being called racist in court. But on November 7, 2011 the Supreme Court agreed to hear the City of St. Paul’s appeal in Magner v. Gallagher, which concerned the legality of disparate-impact theory in housing. St. Paul believed it had an excellent chance to prevail because the text of the Fair Housing Act doesn’t explicitly allow for disparate impact.

          That’s when the Obama Administration kicked into gear. On November 17, Mr. Perez emailed a former colleague, Thomas Fraser at the Fredrikson & Byron law firm in Minnesota, to probe if city officials might be convinced to withdraw Magner, according to documents that the Justice Department sent to Congressional investigators. Mr. Fraser referred Mr. Perez to his colleague, David Lillehaug, who was advising St. Paul on a pending False Claims Act case against the city filed by a private citizen.

          Mr. Perez had stumbled onto a potential quid pro quo: The feds could decline to intervene in the false claims case (known as Newell) in exchange for the city withdrawing Magner from the Supreme Court. But that was no sure thing. The Department of Housing and Urban Development had already recommended that Justice join the Newell lawsuit against St. Paul. On November 22, Justice’s career staff in the Civil Division’s civil fraud section conveyed that recommendation in a memo to Civil Division chief Tony West for his approval.”

          Could thought police be far behind? Or already here? What, after all, is a “hate crime” other than a thought crime? To wit; you murdered a person, and that’s bad; but you must be punished for what you were THINKING as well, if you were THINKING wrong. THEY will decide what you were thinking, and mete out a different punishment accordingly.

          More “equality under the law” for ya….

          Now get your mind right. The NSA is listening, and your thoughts are permanantly recorded for later use, if you keep acting up…

      2. “The reporter notes that this might be a hard case to make.”

        Abosolutely, but there was never a case for THIS trial either. Were it not for political pressure and grandstanding, it would NEVER have been brought on its merits – because it had none.

        You are absolutely right about the double jeapordy, but the Feds wouldn’t even be interested were the races reversed or the White House less keenly interested in a divisive, distractive issue. It seems they only worry about their “jurisdiction” when the politics are “right”…

    3. Justice Sandra O’Connor offers a useful explanation. Although the case is about two states trying a man for the same act, the same rationale applies to the federal government’s acting under its own jurisdiction.

      “In applying the dual sovereignty doctrine, then, the crucial determination is whether the two entities that seek successively to prosecute a defendant for the same course of conduct can be termed separate sovereigns. This determination turns on whether the two entities draw their authority to punish the offender from distinct sources of power.

      “Thus, the Court has uniformly held that the States are separate sovereigns with respect to the Federal Government because each State’s power to prosecute is derived from its own inherent sovereignty, not from the Federal Government

      “Each government in determining what shall be an offense against its peace and dignity is exercising its own sovereignty, not that of the other.

      “It follows that an act denounced as a crime by both national and state sovereignties is an offense against the peace and dignity of both and may be punished by each.”

  2. Harry Reid encouraging DOJ to investigate Zimmerman.
    “I think the Justice Dept. is going to look at this. This isn’t over with and I think that’s good.”

    Bring it on, Harry! Attorney Mark O’Mara will make mince meat out of you, Eric Holder, and your spineless boss. One of the Martin’s own attorneys. Darryl Parks, stated there were no grounds supporting racial motivation. Angela Corey stated that this case was not about race! Huh??? Really???

      1. It was always about race – inferred or otherwise. Prosecutor John Guy began his Opening Statement with the words from GZ;s statement to 911 dispatcher after spotting TM:: “F—— punks. These a——-. They always get away.”

          1. While there are many white punks and assholes around, I suspect if we could go over the prosecution’s presentation line by line, we would find many innuendos implying race. The prosecution was implying that Z thought TM, a black, was a f—— punk, “they” always get away.

          2. This just in…


            WASHINGTON (AP) – Attorney General Eric Holder says the killing of Trayvon Martin was a tragic, unnecessary shooting and that the 17-year-old’s death provides an opportunity for the nation to speak honestly about complicated and emotionally charged issues.

            In prepared remarks – Holder’s first public comments since the acquittal of George Zimmerman in the case – the attorney general says Monday that Martin’s parents have suffered a pain that no parent should have to endure. He said the nation must not forgo an opportunity toward better understanding of one another.


            They’re digging in, so get ready for the onslaught.

          3. I would like to say this to Mr. Holder:
            There is nothing ‘complicated’ about this so-called ’emotionally charged issue”! The problem lies entirely in the lap of the DOJ, the Oval Office, (un)civil rights leaders and the Black communities. Get rid of the chip on your shoulders, start parenting your children by teaching them to use their brains instead of their fists, and stop blaming ‘whitey’ for criminal profiling when Blacks statistically commit 50x the number of crimes on Whites than vice-versa.

            Stop putting the Nation through this ‘race’ charade. Hold yourselves accountable and start acting like adults.


          4. If this is going to be proved a “hate crime,” won’t they need more than the NBC-fabricated epithets and “effing punks” etc. This is just Holder job insurance–a return to relevance.

  3. George Zimmerman is a man who has a history of arrests for assault of a policeman and a domestic violence arrrest and also an FBI investigation when Zimmerman’s counsin made a complaint of sexual assaults over a ten year period.

    George Zimmerman stalked Trayvon Martin because he was black and wearing a hoodie — there is no other reason that Zimmerman would pick out Trayvon Martin to follow and then murder him. And yet the jury chose not to believe his best friend who was on the phone with Trayvon when he was stalked and then provoked by Zimmerman . They didn’t believe her because she also is black, even though she was under oath when she testified just like the other witnesses?
    The juror that spoke the other night on CNN has to be the dumbest woman on earth, all she did was talk about Zimmerman and sympathize with him when Trayvon was the one murdered.

Comments are closed.