Trump Says It’s Possible He Could Pick FBI Head by Next Week

/0 Comments/in , /by

President Donald Trump said Saturday that “we can make a fast decision” on a new FBI director, possibly by late next week, before he leaves on his first foreign trip since taking office.

“Even that is possible,” he told reporters when asked whether he could announce his nominee by Friday, when he is scheduled to leave for the Mideast and Europe.

Four candidates to be the bureau’s director were in line Saturday for the first interviews with Attorney General Jeff Sessions and his deputy, Rod Rosenstein, at Justice Department headquarters. They are among nearly a dozen candidates Trump is considering, a group that includes several lawmakers, attorneys and law enforcement officials. (Read more from “Trump Says It’s Possible He Could Pick FBI Head by Next Week” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

How Jeff Sessions Is Getting Tough on Drug Crime

/0 Comments/in , /by

Being a drug dealer in the United States just got more risky.

Last Friday, Attorney General Jeff Sessions issued a memorandum directing all federal prosecutors to “charge and pursue the most serious, readily provable offense.”

This means that absent extenuating circumstances, prosecutors must pursue offenses that carry the highest penalties under federal guidelines, including mandatory minimum sentences.

Mandatory minimum sentences provide that if someone is convicted of selling over a certain quantity of a particular drug, a judge must sentence the offender to a certain minimum sentence, which can, depending on the offense, range from five years up to life imprisonment.

For example, if someone sells 1 gram of LSD, 5 grams of pure methamphetamine, 28 grams of crack cocaine, or 100 grams of heroin, that triggers a mandatory minimum of five years for a first offense and 10 years for a second offense.

If someone sells 10 times that amount, that triggers a mandatory minimum sentence of 10 years for a first offense and 20 years for a second offense.

This policy, which will most assuredly have its greatest impact in the area of drug enforcement, is not groundbreaking. It has roots going back to a 1989 memorandum by Attorney General Richard Thornburgh.

That memorandum had been relaxed by Attorney General Janet Reno during the Clinton administration.

Then, during the George W. Bush administration, Attorney General John Ashcroft reinstated the policy—only for it to be relaxed again by the Obama administration through a memorandum issued by Attorney General Eric Holder.

Now, President Donald Trump’s attorney general, Sessions—who has long-touted the virtues of mandatory minimum sentences to deter major drug trafficking organizations—has effectively rescinded the Holder memo and reinstated the Ashcroft memo.

Predictably, Holder criticized this shift in policy as being “dumb on crime.”

Sessions announced this significant policy change after receiving honorary membership in the New York City-based Sergeants Benevolent Association, where he reiterated that mandatory minimum sentences are reserved only for those who traffic in large quantities of drugs.

He stated:

We’re seeing an increase in violent crime in our cities—in Baltimore, Chicago, Memphis, Milwaukee, St. Louis, and many others. The murder rate has surged 10 percent nationwide—the largest increase since 1968. And we know that drugs and crime go hand-in-hand.

Drug trafficking is an inherently violent business. If you want to collect a drug debt, you can’t file a lawsuit in court. You collect it by the barrel of a gun.

Sessions continued:

In 2015, more than 52,000 Americans died from a drug overdose. According to a report by the New England Journal of Medicine, the price of heroin is down, the availability is up, and the purity is up.

We intend to reverse that trend. So we are returning to the enforcement of the law as passed by Congress—plain and simple.

If you are a drug trafficker, we will not look the other way. We will not be willfully blind to your conduct. We are talking about a kilogram of heroin—that is 10,000 doses, 5 kilograms of cocaine and 1,000 kilograms of marijuana.

These are not low-level offenders. These are drug dealers. And you’re going to prison.

Cartel leaders, drug kingpins, and gang leaders who run drug rings should be taken off the streets for long periods of time. Doing so protects public safety and sends a signal to would-be drug dealers that they can expect a similar fate if they engage in such activity.

It is undeniable that drug dealing, which is often carried out by gangs, and almost invariably involves the actual or threatened use of violence and the inherent risk of overdose, is a dangerous and harmful activity.

To many, the phrase “nonviolent drug offender” is an oxymoron.

When properly deployed against drug kingpins and organizers and leaders of large-scale drug conspiracies, mandatory minimum sentencing can be an effective deterrent and an efficient use of scarce federal resources.

The trick will be making sure that the new policy is indeed targeted to such individuals and not against minor players who are only peripherally involved in large-scale drug conspiracies.

Mandatory minimum charges and penalties are usually determined by the type and quantity of the drug involved, not the criminal record of the person involved in their sale.

Moreover, if a minor street dealer or courier (who may be engaging in such activities to support a personal drug habit or at the behest of an abusive boyfriend) is charged as part of a conspiracy, that individual may be held responsible not only for the drugs she sold, but also for the drugs sold by any and all of her co-conspirators—even if she had no idea who those co-conspirators were or what they were selling.

In a speech at Georgetown Law School in 2014, Patti Saris, chief judge of the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts and then-chair of the United States Sentencing Commission, stated:

[M]andatory minimum penalties sweep more broadly than Congress likely intended. Many in Congress emphasized the importance of these penalties for targeting kingpins and high-level members of drug organizations.

Yet the commission found that 23 percent of federal drug offenders were low-level couriers who transported drugs, and nearly half of these were charged with offenses carrying mandatory minimum penalties. The category of offenders most often subject to mandatory minimum penalties were street-level dealers—many levels down from kingpins and organizers.

Under existing federal law, there are two ways that an offender who has been convicted of a mandatory minimum offense can escape receiving a mandatory sentence: He can provide “substantial assistance” to government officials, enabling them to prosecute others who are engaging in serious criminal conduct, or he can qualify under the “safety valve” designed to provide relief to those who are bit players with only a modest prior criminal record.

One problem, however, is that the current safety valve is quite narrow, affording relief to very few individuals. Bit players are rarely in a position to render substantial assistance to the government because they are too low on the totem pole to have any useful information.

Moreover, under existing law, if the individual was convicted of any crime and received a sentence of 60 days or more, he no longer qualifies for the safety valve.

In essence, mandatory minimum penalties are a blunt instrument that can be very effective if utilized against the right category of offenders.

Let’s hope that the Sessions Department of Justice implements this revised policy to target those who truly pose the greatest threat to public safety, and not against minor players who simply made poor life choices and do not deserve such harsh sentences.

If not, Congress may need to explore at least a modest expansion of the scope of the existing safety valve in order to ensure that mandatory minimum penalties are reserved for leaders and organizers of the gangs who spread misery and peddle poison on the streets of this country. (For more from the author of “How Jeff Sessions Is Getting Tough on Drug Crime” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Chuck Norris for New FBI Director?

/0 Comments/in , , /by

Superstar Chuck Norris wants everyone to know he’s not looking for a job, but …

If President Trump, whom he supported for president in 2016, wants him to replace James Comey as FBI director, he’s ready, willing and available.

While promoting his new bottled water in Utah this weekend, Norris said: “If someone has to clean it up, and it has to be me, I’ll take the job.”

Fans were keen on the idea of Norris taking over the FBI. One said, “We need to get him in to Washington! I think he would clean it up. I think he’s the man for the job.” (Read more from “Chuck Norris for New FBI Director?” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Expert: Scientific Studies No Longer Trustworthy

/0 Comments/in , /by

Don’t eat that! It will cause cancer. Wait, eat more of it! It will actually cure cancer.

A high-fat diet will make you obese! No wait, actually, a high-fat diet is the best way to get in shape!

It seems every day Americans are bombarded with breathless, contradictory headlines about their health. For Americans hoping to lose weight and avoid chronic illness, even reading the morning paper can be a baffling or infuriating process, as millions are told last week’s fad diet is now this week’s dangerous health risk.

But the phenomenon isn’t just a minor frustration. Science as a whole is suffering a “reproducibility crisis.”

For a discovery to have any value, different scientists repeating the same experiment under the same conditions need to get the same results. Yet research shows half of the medical studies trumpeted by the establishment media are found to be worthless after follow-up scrutiny. (Read more from “Expert: Scientific Studies No Longer Trustworthy” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Snowden Tweets: Microsoft Confirms Cyberattack Spawned From NSA

/0 Comments/in , , /by

National Security Agency (NSA) leaker Edward Snowden, currently living in exile in Russia, issued a tweet on Sunday explaining computer giant Microsoft “officially confirms” Friday’s cyberattack was spawned from exploits originally created by the NSA.

The alleged theft of the NSA hacking tools was originally published in April. An article by CNN last month said the NSA’s press office did not respond to an email at that time to confirm the information originated at the agency.

Snowden provided a link to an article on Microsoft’s blog written by the company’s President and Chief Legal Officer Brad Smith where he detailed information about the cyberattack that spread through malicious “Wannacrypt” software on Friday affecting computer users worldwide. . . . The software blocked users from their data unless they paid a ransom thin bitcoin. (Read more from “Snowden Tweets: Microsoft Confirms Cyberattack Spawned From NSA” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

US Prepares to Ban Something You’d Never Expect on Flights to Europe

/0 Comments/in , , /by

The U.S. is expected to broaden its ban on in-flight laptops and tablets to include planes from the European Union, a move that would create logistical chaos on the world’s busiest corridor of air travel.

Alarmed at the proposal, which airline officials say is merely a matter of timing, European governments held urgent talks on Friday with the U.S. Department of Homeland Security.

The ban would affect trans-Atlantic routes that carry as many as 65 million people a year on over 400 daily flights, many of them business travelers who rely on their electronics to work during the flight. (Read more from “US Prepares to Ban Something You’d Never Expect on Flights to Europe” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Here’s How Far Behind Trump Is on Political Appointments Compared to Obama, Bush

/0 Comments/in , /by

President Donald Trump has begun to move on naming federal judges and will eventually be naming a new FBI director, but more broadly, he remains slow in filling political appointments compared to his predecessors.

Trump has made 85 nominations to the Senate at this point in his presidency as of Friday, according to the Center for Presidential Transition, which tracks presidential appointees. In that same period of his first term, President Barack Obama made 212 nominations, President George W. Bush made 161 nominations, President Bill Clinton made 182 nominations, and President George H. W. Bush made 135 nominees by this point.

Trump, so far, is leaving key management positions unfilled, said Mallory Barg Bulman, vice president of research and evaluation at the Partnership for Public Service, the parent organization to the Center for Presidential Transition.

“Leadership matters a lot, as does having the right people in place,” Bulman told The Daily Signal. “You can’t start the game until the whole team is on the field.”

Trump has no nominee for 460 of the 557 key leadership positions, as of Friday, according to Partnership for Public Service. Trump has nominated 49, announced the nomination of 19, and 29 people have been confirmed.

Earlier this week, White House press secretary Sean Spicer said the administration is taking time to vet employees.

“We’re actually going through the Office of Government Ethics and FBI clearances before announcing most of these individuals,” Spicer said at the Monday press briefing. “And so, there’s a little bit of a difference in how we’re doing this. But we are well on pace with respect to many of these [appointments] to get the government up and running.”

Trump has not yet even named a director to run the Office of Personnel Management, which manages the federal workforce, noted Robert Moffit, a former assistant OPM director under President Ronald Reagan.

“The bottom line is that the president can’t run the federal government out of the White House and secretaries can’t run giant agencies huddled in an executive suite,” Moffit, now a senior fellow for health policy at The Heritage Foundation, told The Daily Signal. “Unilateral disarmament is a victory for the swamp. The swamp creatures have won the fight. Unless you control the bureaucracy, the bureaucracy controls you.”

Moffit, who also worked in the Reagan administration’s Department of Health and Human Services, said Reagan took control of the federal bureaucracy shortly into his presidency.

He said congressional relations is a key area where political appointees should be working, instead of leaving it to career civil service employees in some cases. That’s because, Moffit stressed, it’s the job of the career civil service employees to execute administration policy but the job of political appointees to advocate and explain those policies to Congress.

The president can name about 4,000 political appointees.

Out of that, 1,242 are key leadership positions that need Senate confirmation, according to the Partnership for Public Service. Another 472 political appointees—largely White House staff—don’t require Senate confirmation, according to the partnership. Further, 761 non-career senior executive positions can be filled throughout the executive branch—though not all are presidential appointees. Finally, 1,538 non-career federal employees report directly to a presidential appointee.

The partnership did not have a final number on how many of these positions are filled or unfilled, because it only tracks key leadership positions—most of which require Senate confirmation.

The White House Transition Project measures a different metric, but still finds Trump well behind other presidents going back through Reagan. Trump officially fell behind in March, said Terry Sullivan, a political science professor at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, and the executive director of the project.

Rather than measuring 4,000 jobs, which includes all U.S. marshals, U.S. attorneys, and every inconsequential U.S. ambassador, the White House Transition Project looks primarily at 221 government appointments that are required for the essential function of government, have policy roles, and have the potential to be controversial, Sullivan said.

“This is not a result of a policy predisposition to shrinking government,” Sullivan told The Daily Signal. “He wants a tax cut but he isn’t staffing up the Treasury Department. He doesn’t want more EPA regulations, but he isn’t moving slower or faster with that agency than Veterans Affairs or Health and Human Services, things he cares about.” (For more from the author of “Here’s How Far Behind Trump Is on Political Appointments Compared to Obama, Bush” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

How This Maryland Police Department Is Combating the MS-13 Gang

/0 Comments/in , /by

Two years ago, a suburban Maryland county began to see a dramatic rise in killings attributed to MS-13, an international gang with ties to Central America.

In response, the Montgomery County Police Department assigned Capt. Paul Liquorie, a 23-year veteran of the police force, to lead a centralized street gang unit dedicated to stomping out the violence.

In an interview with The Daily Signal, Liquorie, 49, director of the department’s Special Investigations Division, described law enforcement’s approach to combating MS-13 in this affluent county just outside Washington, D.C.

Since August 2015, Liquorie said, the county has suffered seven MS-13-related homicides.

“The Latino community where MS-13 has a presence is terrified,” Liquorie said.

The Trump administration repeatedly has invoked the threat of MS-13, making the gang a central focus of its effort to enforce immigration laws aggressively.

Liquorie, in a Q&A below, describes MS-13’s increasing “brutality and callousness” and how Montgomery County works with federal law enforcement to find and prosecute the gang’s members.

“Law enforcement won’t tolerate this,” Liquorie said of the violence and other crimes associated with MS-13.

The Daily Signal: How long has MS-13 been present in Montgomery County, and what’s different about their activity in the county now?

Liquorie: It always has been a priority because MS-13 has such a presence here in the county.

What we attribute to MS-13 is that since August of 2015, we’ve had seven MS-13-related homicides where we believe the perpetrators are MS-13 and two victims we believe were MS-13.

One of the things most alarming recently is the number of homicides, and the brutality and callousness by which they occur.

What I mean by that is the reasoning behind the violence may just be someone flashing a gang sign on the internet, or someone who may be believed to be a rival gang member.

The murders are not done in the sense of to gain greater territory or monetary benefits for the gang itself.

Another alarming thing is how [MS-13 leaders] try to get junior members to rise in status. To prove your loyalty in the gang, you will have to commit a homicide to get the full confidence of the gang in your abilities.

What we have seen regularly in recent years is just the brutality of the violence. People are lured into wooded areas, [and] usually stabbed with some sort of edged weapon multiple times.

The other thing we have seen change in recent years is they want anyone who is present to be actively involved in the violence.

Rather than one person stabbing the victim, and two others being there on the periphery, they want everybody to stab the body multiple times to say now we are all equally culpable and you will be less likely to snitch or make a deal with prosecutors because you were also involved.

You are just as culpable.

When someone is shot, there is a level of distance. To stab someone is a very personal act. You have to be up close to that person and be right with them as they are dying.

Q: How has the escalation in violence that you are describing been impacted by the flood of unaccompanied Central American youth who have settled in the area in recent years? Are those recent arrivals targeted for gang recruitment?

A: Even outside the gang, there is a different status [perceived] between these new arrivals, these unaccompanied minors, and established immigrants. That means these kids further become alienated.

They don’t fit in at school. Some of them might not fit in at home. They come here hopefully trying to flee violence in their country, so whoever is their sponsor here, those people, many may be struggling economically already and are taking on this additional economic burden of sponsoring someone else.

The gang can come to you and can fill these voids, and that makes [the new arrivals] very susceptible to be gang members.

We see a grooming process very similar to what you would see with pedofiles to gain people’s trust.

A lot of these kids are in over their heads before they know it.

Q: Are the victims of MS-13 violence randomly targeted? What traits characterize the victims?

A: In the vast majority of them, we have been very successful in prosecuting the perpetrator of these crimes, and we have some [cases] that still remain open, where we hear through our investigation that the victims may have had ties to MS-13.

There is usually some affiliation with the gang. They may not be full-fledged members, but there may be some kind of action by the victim that leads [MS-13] to believe they are a rival gang member.

Q: What kind of crime does MS-13 involve itself with? What drives them to violence?

A: Mexican and Columbian cartels—in the amount of power they hold and the financial holdings they have—have a lock on the drug market. So it’s hard for MS-13 to really get a foothold in the drug market. So they really get whatever local markets are left over—whatever those organizations are willing to allow MS-13 to do.

What you see locally is their main form of revenue is extortion. Originally we would see that limited to underground economies, bordellos—or houses of prostitution—[and] cantinas—or unlicensed bars and restaurants that might serve ethnic food as well as beer and wine.

People without status here usually don’t have IDs to get alcohol, so you have this underground economy that serves this clientele. The gang is not running those businesses, but extorting them, providing quote-unquote “protection.”

What we are starting to see and [are] working on is that MS-13 is extorting from legitimate businesses within the Hispanic community. Anecdotally, you are seeing that with apartment complexes where there are a large amount of Hispanic residents.

[MS-13] are consistently looking for people and saying, “We will provide you protection to live in this community.”

The other case you hear anecdotally is where there are legitimate businesses, beer and wine stores for example, of El Salvadorian descent whose proprietors are being threatened by the gang to provide liquor to them and sell to these illicit cantinas. They use social media to realize who the proprietor of the business is, to figure out who their family members are in El Salvador, and they then threaten to do harm to them.

That is outside the reach of American law enforcement. That’s a very difficult problem to work on.

Q: How do you work with federal law enforcement to combat MS-13?

A: We are working closely with the U.S. Attorney’s Office in recent months. We have a large RICO [Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act] case where we have 15 gang members who have been federally indicted and are being prosecuted.

Just like we do with other federal task forces, we have our [Montgomery County Police Department] members on the joint terrorism task force and DEA [Drug Enforcement Agency] task force. Similarly, we have task forces looking at gang activity as well.

We work with the Department of Homeland Security’s investigations arm to try to look at the gang holistically and target the organization as a whole to include its hierarchy.

Q: What is the Montgomery County Police Department’s approach to combating MS-13?

A: We take a holistic or “whole of government” approach.

We have three pillars: prevention, intervention, and suppression, based on best practices from gang programs throughout the country. What you see in Montgomery County on the preventative side is the Recreation Department of the county government going into neighborhoods where there are at-risk youth, to provide positive alternatives so they don’t fall under the lure of the gang.

Montgomery County [Public] Schools is doing similar things.

Intervention falls under the county’s Health and Human Services Department with street outreach, doing outreach in neighborhoods providing the full gamut of services: social, mental health, and other ways that may strengthen the family network and trying to find what’s best to help the child and family divert from gang activity.

Last is the suppression, that falls on the police. All police officers are tasked with [fighting] criminal activity.

Q: Why is Montgomery County vulnerable to MS-13? In other words, why is MS-13 so active in the county?

A: You see that we have a large enclave in the greater D.C. area of Central Americans and a certain percent, a small percentage, are going to be gang members or targeted by gang members.

I can tell you stories anecdotally where somebody starts into the gang and acquiesces and hopes they can limit their activity in the gang and says, “I will just do enough to be a part of the gang and not be targeted by them anymore.” But that starts the grooming process that goes on. There are others in MS-13 that are attached to the power and influence, but there are some who join the gang reluctantly.

MS-13 has become more prominent locally. We have seen the acts are becoming more isolated in the Hispanic community and that’s the double-edged sword for us. You hear from nonprofit organizations that work in these communities, and from school resource officers, that the Latino community where MS-13 has a presence is terrified. At the same time, that also makes them fearful to come forward to report.

One of the things I have been trying to emphasize is that the community’s silence is the gang’s strength.

Q: The Trump administration has pledged to aggressively target MS-13 and to deport its members. Can tougher immigration enforcement help combat MS-13 in Montgomery County?

A: I don’t really want to go there. But I will say, clearly, if you look not only at Montgomery County, but other law enforcement agencies across the U.S. that have large immigrant populations, they have all taken the same stance that it’s hard enough for the community to come forward to tell us activities that are going on with the gang.

If that same community also fears they will be deported if they come forward, that is just one other factor that prevents us from getting an understanding of what is going on in those communities, and it’s one more reason for the community not to go forward.

Q: How would you assess the progress you have made in combating MS-13? Do you think MS-13 will always have a presence in Montgomery County?

A: I think we are in a good place right now. Some of the things the [Trump] administration has been talking about have been ongoing in Montgomery County and the greater D.C. area.

We are using all our resources at the local and federal level to go after MS-13. The violence, it’s clear to us that it is something that can’t be tolerated in the community.

I don’t know if we can totally eliminate MS-13, but you can target the gang and its hierarchy and put pressure on them.

With every successful prosecution and case we bring that tells [MS-13] that they can’t continue to operate the way they have, we are sending the message that law enforcement won’t tolerate this.

The more successful we have community participation in some of these prosecutions, the more that will help us as well. When the greater community comes forward and says, “Look, we have had enough and we will come to the police to help,” that is a positive sign as well. (For more from the author of “How This Maryland Police Department Is Combating the MS-13 Gang” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

The Chilling Reason Why the ACLU Is Warning Against Traveling to Texas

/0 Comments/in , , /by

The ACLU issued a “travel alert” in the state of Texas Wednesday, warning “anyone planning to travel to Texas in the near future to anticipate the possible violation of their constitutional rights when stopped by law enforcement.”

The alert was announced in response to the passage of Senate Bill 4, otherwise known as the “papers please” provision. Texas Governor Greg Abbott unexpectedly broadcast himself signing the bill banning sanctuary cities in a Facebook live stream, during which he specifically targeted Travis County Sheriff Sally Hernandez for pushing back against the ban, warning, “This will not be tolerated. There will be consequences.”

The “papers please” law encourages police to demand proof of citizenship during routine traffic stops and “requires Texas law enforcement to comply with the federal government’s constitutionally flawed use of detainer requests, which ask local law enforcement to hold people for U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), even when they lack the legal authority to do so,” the ACLU notes.

The executive director of Texas’ ACLU made it clear the organization will be challenging the new legislature, saying:

We plan to fight this racist and wrongheaded law in the courts and in the streets. Until we defeat it, everyone traveling in or to Texas needs to be aware of what’s in store for them. The Lone Star State will become a ‘show me your papers’ state, where every interaction with law enforcement can become a citizenship interrogation and potentially an illegal arrest.

According to a press release from the governor’s office, any elected official who does not comply with the draconian measures faces heavy penalties, including jail time, removal from office, and a fine of up to $25,500 for each day of the violation. “Elected officials and law enforcement agencies, they don’t get to pick and choose with laws they obey,” Gov. Abbott claims. Conversely, a competitive grant program will be established by the Governor’s Criminal Justice Division to reward counties and municipalities with financial assistance “to offset the costs” of enforcing immigration laws and honoring or fulfilling immigration detainer requests. In other words, the state of Texas is incentivizing local law enforcement agencies to hunt immigrants.

However, Texas’ top police chiefs have railed against the bill for months, saying the new legislation will endanger public safety. The police chiefs of Austin, Arlington, Dallas, Fort Worth, Houston, San Antonio, and the Texas Police Chiefs Association voiced their opposition in an open letter to the House of Representatives in April, calling SB4 “political pandering that will make our communities more dangerous.”

The letter explains how the law will further damage relations between law enforcement and their communities and leave more violent criminals on the street:Legal immigrants are beginning to avoid contact with the police for fear that they themselves or undocumented family members or friends may become subject to immigration enforcement. Such a divide between the local police and immigrant groups will result in increased crime against immigrants and in the broader community, create a class of silent victims, and eliminate the potential for assistance from immigrants in solving crimes or preventing crime. It should not be forgotten that by not arresting criminals that victimize our immigrant communities, we are also allowing them to remain free to victimize every one of us. When it comes to criminals, we are in this together, regardless of race, sex, religion or nation of origin.

San Antonio Police Chief William McManus expressed his displeasure in a press conference Monday, stating “There’s nothing positive that this bill does in the community or in law enforcement. Austin didn’t seem to want to listen to its law enforcement leaders across the state. And that, to me, is troubling.”

McManus, just one of many law enforcement officials ardently opposed to S.B.4, has been very straightforward about exactly what this new law requires him and his officers to do — and who to target:

We’re talking about folks south of the border. We’re not talking about people we think might be here from Russia or from somewhere else. We’re talking about out people south of the border,” he said. “In order for me to identify someone who I don’t think is from here, it’s either skin color, language or accent. And in order to do, that I’m profiling. So that’s another part of the bill that’s distasteful, to say the least.

However, none of the police chiefs were staunchly opposed to the bill enough to give any indication they would refuse to comply with the “papers please” provision, despite the fact that they believe it to be dangerous. Sheriff Hernandez clearly stated she will comply with the sanctuaries ban if it becomes law— and she believes it will. Well, it has become law, and it officially goes into effect on September 1st, 2017, giving Texas law enforcement some time to remember the Oath of Honor they took, review their code of ethics, and decide whether to follow their consciences or their marching orders. (For more from the author of “The Chilling Reason Why the ACLU Is Warning Against Traveling to Texas” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

IT’s Over: Wikileaks Nukes the Trump-Russia Story From Orbit, Leaves Only Planetary Debris

/0 Comments/in , , /by

#FakeNews media, quarterbacked by CNN, continue to market the “Russia hacked the election” meme, 24×7.

If I’m in an airport, it’s certain that CNN is droning on, using the same comedians lightweights that completely missed the Trump phenomenon.

And all of this despite more than a dozen officials (of both party affiliations) who have publicly stated there was no Russia-Trump collusion.

Well, Wikileaks has just published an excerpt of the book Shattered: Inside Hillary Clinton’s Doomed Campaign. It’s by a bunch of Democrat insiders. And it’s stunning.

I’ll cut to the chase: within 24 hours of their crushing election defeat, Hillary Clinton and her campaign aides created the “Russia hacked the election” meme from whole cloth. Yes, it’s true:

So… the clownish dolt John (“What’s your password?”) Podesta and, presumably, the rocket scientist Chelsea Clinton concocted the entire myth from thin air.

The real story is not the sci-fi thriller these crapweasels invented. It’s that they coordinated with their legacy media counterparts to sell it like a long-running infomercial.

And that Democrats were willing to risk an international conflict with Russia to paper over their political loss.

Fortunately, this bogus crap has overcooked so long, normal Americans have tuned completely out.

And, at this point, CNN’s slogan shouldn’t be “Fake News”, it should be “Political Sci-Fi Done Right”. (For more from the author of “IT’s Over: Wikileaks Nukes the Trump-Russia Story From Orbit, Leaves Only Planetary Debris” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.