Just likethe McCloskey’s, the white couple in St. Louis, it seems that black people want to protect their homes and lives too from aggressive and frightening anarchists.
You’ve probably seen the news, but just in case. Hat tip: Cristina
Husband of L.A. County DA Jackie Lacey charged with assault after waving gun at protesters
The husband of Los Angeles District Attorney Jackie Lacey has been charged with pointing a gun at Black Lives Matter members who demonstrated outside the couple’s home the day before she faced a primary election in March.
The ballot box is not enough for the anarchists. Imagine this going on outside your home day or night.
The state attorney general filed three misdemeanor charges Monday in Los Angeles Superior Court against David Lacey for assault with a firearm for the March 2 incident.
Lacey, 66, pointed a gun at demonstrators who protested outside the couple’s home before dawn on March 2 and said “I will shoot you,” according to video of the incident.
Dishonest media doesn’t mention until later that he was shouting “Get off my porch!” They were on his porch!
Jackie Lacey offered an emotional apology at the time, saying her husband told her he pulled the gun and told protesters to leave.
Lacey’s campaign issued a statement Tuesday saying her husband thought they were in danger and was trying to protect them.
“The events that took place earlier this year have caused my family immense pain,” Lacey said in the statement. “My husband acted in fear for my safety after we were subjected to months of harassment that included a death threat no less than a week earlier.”
Lacey, the first Black person and first woman to run what is the nation’s largest local prosecutor’s office, has been targeted for nearly three years by Black Lives Matter protesters, who have held weekly demonstrations outside her office calling for her ouster.
This is a Tweet posted at the time of the incident. I wanted to see a youtube clip of the confrontation, but the only ones available today have shortened the exchange. There is a bit more here with drums banging in the background.
#BREAKING This morning Los Angeles District Attorney Jackie Lacey’s husband pulled a gun out on Black Lives Matter activists who protested his wife in front of their house. @BLMLApic.twitter.com/wnCFMMvaWV
Not surprisingly a whole bunch of Islamic groups are crying foul with the federal government’s decision to go for the maximum punishment for the pair of alleged bombers we told you about hereandhere recently.
Muslim groups decry ‘excessive’ prosecution of lawyers charged with torching police car
Lawyers Urooj Rahman and Colinford Mattis
(RNS) — Dozens of Muslim rights groups have joined a chorus of support for two Brooklyn human rights attorneys facing possible life sentences over charges of torching an empty police vehicle.
Lawyers Urooj Rahman and Colinford Mattis stand accused of throwing a Molotov cocktail through the broken window of an abandoned police cruiser during Brooklyn racial justice protests on May 30. The device burned part of the empty cruiser’s dashboard, prosecutors allege. Nobody was injured during the incident.
“No rational human being can ever believe that hurling firebombs at police officers and vehicles is justified,” Brooklyn U.S. Attorney Richard Donoghue said.
The two have both pleaded not guilty to several arson and federal explosives charges. If convicted, they face a 45-year mandatory minimum sentence, with the possibility of life in prison. The attorneys are being held without bail at the Brooklyn Metropolitan Detention Center.
In a statement, a coalition of 35 Muslim, South Asian and Arab civil rights and advocacy groups*** argue the treatment is disproportionately harsh and likely linked in part to the lawyers’ racial and ethnic backgrounds. Rahman, 31, is a Pakistani American Muslim woman. Mattis, 32, is the son of Jamaican immigrants.
“These excessive charges targeting Colin and Urooj set a dangerous precedent, and function to instill fear and stifle protest by Black, South Asian, and Muslim protestors at a moment where millions take to the streets worldwide to demand justice,” the statement reads.
“This prosecution is also rooted in a longstanding history of anti-Black racism and structural Islamophobia in the United States.”
The coalition, led by the American Muslim Bar Association, Believers Bail Out and Justice For Muslims Collective, claims the pair is being targeted “for their solidarity with those murdered by state violence.”
***I wanted to see the whole list of 35 groups coming to their defense, but couldn’t find it (I was too lazy to look for too long), buthereis the American Muslim Bar Association’s statement.
Jihad Watch has more, but I’m still not seeing the whole list!
Paul Bedard writing a few days ago at the Washington Examiner reported that the Trump Administration’s policy known as Migrant Protection Protocols (MPP)has allowed the DHS to force foreign nationals claiming they want asylum to wait on the Mexican side of the border, but that won’t last if the ACLU gets its way.
And, so far, they are making legal headway in thwarting the President’s efforts to keep Americans safe.
328 Chinese nationals caught entering US illegally
At least 328 Chinese nationals trying to enter the United States illegally since January have been intercepted by U.S. Customs and Border Protection officials as part of heightened awareness on the borders to block the coronavirus from slipping into the nation.
Officials told Secrets Wednesday that since January, 328 Chinese were “apprehended” and sent back across the border or repatriated consistent with existing policy and procedure. Another three from South Korea, where the virus is also spreading, were also caught.
Some 227 foreign nationals from other nations who tried to enter through legal border points from Feb. 2 through March 3 have been turned away due to the travel restriction ordered by the president and implemented by the Department of Homeland Security, officials said.
[….]
Senior administration officials said that the president’s three-year focus on the border, the new wall, and the policy of keeping illegal immigrants in Mexico while awaiting permission to enter the U.S., have gone a long way to keep the virus away, especially at the southern border.
But acting Homeland Security Secretary Chad Wolf on Tuesday raised concerns about a court challenge to the Migrant Protection Protocols policy of keeping migrants in Mexico, where the coronavirus has also landed.
“MPP has an uncertain future. We know from experience that the journey to the U.S. border puts migrants in poor conditions — and they often arrive with no passports, medical histories, or travel manifests. The administration will continue to closely monitor the virus globally, as well as in our hemisphere, and will adjust our proactive measures as necessary,” he said.
Added a senior administration official:
“We have a unique public health threat posed by individuals arriving unlawfully at the border. Any halting of MPP would exacerbate that threat.”
Who cares says the ACLU!
[Court:] “the MPP is causing extreme and irreversible harm to plaintiffs” (to the Chinese trying to get into the US).
Court Blocks Trump’s ‘Remain In Mexico’ Policy Along Part Of The Border
A federal appeals court has decided to block the Trump administration’s “Remain in Mexico” plan in two states along the U.S. border, following back-and-forth rulings over the program.
In its order late Wednesday, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco said that next week the administration will have to stop making asylum-seekers wait in Mexico for the U.S. to process their claims, but that the court ban applies only to areas in its jurisdiction, Arizona and California.
The decision comes less than a week after the appeals court briefly blocked the program, then quickly suspended that order.
On Wednesday, the court said it remains “very clear” that a lower court was correct in ruling that the Trump administration program — technically called the Migrant Protection Protocols, or MPP — may violate the law. “It is equally clear,” the court added, “that the MPP is causing extreme and irreversible harm to plaintiffs,” many of whom are asylum-seekers themselves.
Read about the twists and turns of the case in the court system. Then see here what the ACLU says.
“If the administration had any respect for the law or any sense of decency, it would end this program immediately,”Judy Rabinovitz,special counsel in the ACLU’s Immigrants’ Rights Project, which has challenged the program, said in a statement released after the court order.
“We will continue working to permanently end this illegal and inhumane policy.”
The Tahirih Justice Center, another nonprofit group fighting the policy, expressed frustration at the limited scope of the court’s injunction.
Note to PayPal donors! I want to thank all of you who send me donations for my work via PayPal. I very much appreciate your thoughtfulness. However, PayPal is making changes to their terms of service and I’ve decided to opt-out beginning on March 10, 2020.
***Update***The plot thickens as Imran Awan, Debbie Wasserman-Schultz’s IT guy is suing the Daily Caller. Thanks to reader Ann for alerting me to the news.
I thought “complicated history” was a nice way of describing the Obama judge who recently ruled that Trump isn’t moving fast enough to admit MORE Afghan and Iraqi Special Immigrant Visa holders to your towns and cities.
We have already admitted over 80,000 but Judge Chutkan says MORE needed and faster!
I posted that story4 days ago at RRW and the post went viral. I don’t know how or why, but it garnered nearly 10,000 hits at RRW since then.
Although I knew nothing about the judge, many of you did, and Judge Tanya Chutkan has a claim to fame.
She is the judge who presided over the case of the Pakistani brothers who had for years been doing IT work for influential Democrats on the Hill and were arrested on some funny business regarding mortgages. However, many questioned, and still do question, whether they compromised the US in their role in Congress as information gatherers and keepers.
Here is what reader Deidra alerted me to regarding Judge Chutkan.
The federal judge in the Awan case has President Barack Obama’s back. His cohorts Eric Holder and Loretta Lynch are likely covered too. No worries in The Swamp.
The players: Judge Tanya Chutkan, Rep. Debbie Wasserman-Schultz, and Pakistani Imran Awan.
U.S. District Court Judge Tanya Chutkan, who is presiding over the Imran Awan and Hina Alvi fraud case, was appointed to the federal bench by Obama after she kicked thousands in campaign donations to his presidential campaign when he was a U.S. Senator in Illinois, records confirm.
Obama also appointed Chutkan’s husband, Peter Krauthamer, a judge to the bench in the District of Columbia Superior Court in 2011.
Krauthamer’s mother, and Chutkan’s mother-in-law, also contributed campaign cash to Obama, records confirm.
And Chutkan’s former law firm, where she worked until her appointment to the federal bench in 2014, currently represents Huma Abedin, the wife of disgraced former Congressman Anthony Weiner. The firm also is stacked with Democratic lawyers who worked for Hillary Clinton, John Podesta, and Barack Obama’s White House, just to name a few D.C. insiders.
If Obama or his administration is implicated in the expanding Awan Congressional probe they likely have little to worry about.
These revelations damper rank-and-file FBI agents who are pressing to expand the case to encompass Awan’s two brothers and press an indictment for selling intelligence gleaned and possibly stolen from Congressional IT network the Awams were charged with safeguarding.
“It’s rigged from almost every angle,” a frustrated FBI insider said.
[….]
FBI agents fear [US Attorney] Phillips — now backed by the federal case judge Chutkan — has cleverly rigged the Awan case to protect Obama, Lynch, Holder and Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz. This likely includes the dozens of Congressional Democrats the Awans served as IT specialists.
[….]
Chutkan, the federal judge on the Awan case, was born in Jamaica. She lived in Jamaica, the Bahamas, France and Spain before coming to the United States, federal law enforcement sources said.
Many more twists and turns, go here to learn more.
US fines Delta $50,000 for booting off 3 Muslim passengers
Delta Air Lines is being fined $50,000 for ordering three Muslim passengers off planes even after the airline’s own security officials cleared them to travel.
Elaine Chow, Senator Mitch McConnell’s wife runs the DOT (in case you didn’t know)!
Delta denied that it discriminated against the passengers in two separate incidents but agreed it could have handled the situations differently, according to a consent order released Friday by the U.S. Transportation Department.
The department alleged that Delta violated anti-bias laws by removing the passengers, and ordered the airline to provide cultural-sensitivity training to pilots, flight attendants and customer-service agents involved in the incidents.
Be sure to read the descriptions of the incidents. And see that CAIR is not completely happy, they wanted the fine to be bigger.
Were these incidents probes, test runs? They could be!
The Council on American-Islamic Relations, which represented the Alis, questioned the size of the penalty.
Delta earned nearly $4.8 billion last year, and for a company that profitable, “$50,000 is basically a slap on the wrist,” said Karen Dabdoub, executive director of CAIR’s Cincinnati chapter.
It’s only a slap on the wrist says CAIR spox Dabdoub.
“But it’s a good sign that DOT is taking this seriously,” she added. “I’m glad to see that Delta received some sort of a sanction.”
The government did not explain how the size of the fine was determined but said that it “establishes a strong deterrent against future similar unlawful practices by Delta and other carriers.”
[….]
Delta said that in both cases, it acted based on the passengers’ behavior, not their identity, and its employees acted reasonably. In the case of the Alis, one of the complaining customers identified herself as a retired safety inspector for the Federal Aviation Administration, the airline said.
The Atlanta-based airline said that after the 2016 incidents it improved its procedures for investigating suspicious behavior to make it “more collaborative and objective.”
The moral of the story is that if you see something, you have to be very very nervous about saying something!
Are you steamed enough to speak up?
Then contact the White House and tell President Trump that he needs to look into this, if airlines are being hamstrung like this we aren’t safe!
Tell him this DOT-ordered sensitivity training is B*** S***!
Note to PayPal donors! I want to thank all of you who send me donations for my work via PayPal. I very much appreciate your thoughtfulness. However, PayPal is making changes to their terms of service and I’ve decided to opt-out beginning on March 10, 2020.
