Jessica Tarlov, a political strategist at Douglas E. Schoen, LLC, had a couple of thoughts on the significance of Democratic Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton’s primary victories Tuesday and their aggregation into the likely Democratic Party’s nomination.
[W]hat really matters here is that the United States has now joined just a few nations across the globe in offering the opportunity to pick a woman to be president.
I couldn’t be prouder.
And I also couldn’t be more astounded at how little the magnitude of this feat has seemed to matter.
The IRS, after three years of stonewalling and after a Federal judge’s explicit order to stand and deliver, has at last released the list of the organizations it claims to have targeted for blocking from tax exempt status. “Claims” because the list has grown, from the 298 avowedly conservative organizations originally identified by the Treasury Department’s IG to a total of 426 that the IRS finally listed for the judge.
Edward Greim, a lawyer for NorCal Tea Party Patriots, a party to the suit demanding the IRS give up its list, had this about the difference in size between the list Treasury released three years ago and the list the IRS released:
But not terminated. She’ll complete her 20 years and get her pension, just as if she’s done nothing wrong.
Irene Martin, who has been with the US Citizenship and Immigration Services for 16 years, was the CIS field supervisor in San Bernardino who delayed for an hour and a half DHS agents (assigned to Homeland Security Investigations, a DHS sister agency of the CIS) attempting to interview and arrest Enrique Marquez, one of the terrorists involved and who was in her custody; from getting access to related records held by her office, and then requiring they make only hand-written copies; and who disdained even meeting with the agents for a half hour.
The Wisconsin Supreme Court is considering exactly that.
The state’s highest court is set to rule on whether such algorithms, known as risk assessments, violate due process and discriminate against men when judges rely on them in sentencing.
No. Even when sentencing a criminal, where his crime is substantially similar to other criminals’ crimes, the key is that substantial part. No two crimes really are alike, no two criminals really are identical, even the criminal convicted today is not the same man he was when he was convicted—even of a substantially similar crime yesterday—history has happened. One size cannot fit all, even here; sentencing must be unique.
San Jose Mayor Sam Liccardo had a thought.
The mayor, a Democrat and Hillary Clinton supporter, criticized Trump for coming to cities and igniting problems that local police departments had to deal with.
“At some point Donald Trump needs to take responsibility for the irresponsible behavior of his campaign,” Liccardo said.
A typical Democrat attitude: it’s always someone else’s fault.
No, Liccardo, it was your city’s residents’ conscious decision to protest Trump’s rally—an entirely appropriate thing to do—and it was your city’s residents’ conscious decision to then turn violent and physically attack Trump supporters as they left the rally, and it was your city’s residents’ conscious decision to steal those supporters’ property and destroy it.
Recall the blatant dishonesty of Department of Justice lawyers.
Now Attorney General Loretta Lynch has chosen to fight District Judge Andrew Hanen’s order that her lawyers actually undergo documented ethics training—training that any pre-law pupil might undergo.
In filings Tuesday, the department said the order would “far exceed the bounds of appropriate remedies” and would cost the department millions.
Because requiring lawyers to understand the ethics of their profession is unreasonable for a DoJ lawyer. Sure.
The Department of Justice responded in the court filing Tuesday, saying that it “emphatically” disagrees with the judge’s ruling, claiming that none of its lawyers intended to deceive.
Democratic Party Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton’s Campaign Chairman John Podesta:
What she thought would be a convenient way to communicate with family, friends and colleagues—by using one email account for both her work related and personal emails….
Which we know to be a lie, and that was confirmed in testimony by Clinton’s senior aid Cheryl Mills was compelled to provide (compelled because she didn’t have the integrity to testify voluntarily, as Clinton’s “promise” of full disclosure and transparency pressed her to do) to Judicial Watch:
Mills also testified under oath that the server existed before Clinton became secretary of state in 2009.
This is how New York City Mayor, and proud Democrat, Bill de Blasio handles crime victims.
The enraged husband who beat a man to death with a tire iron for trying to rape his wife inside their Bronx apartment has been arrested and charged with manslaughter, police said.
“He threatened my wife,” explained Mamadou Diallo, as he was led out of the 42nd Precinct in handcuffs on Tuesday.
“He threatened my wife,” he said again, stone-faced.
More than threatened: he had stuck the poor woman several times, including with a chair, and had her clothes ripped off; it was only her blind luck that she was able to call her husband.
Here are the comments of a number of those pushing climate change/global warming/global cooling without regard to whether humans play any sort of significant role in…whatever it is.
On the one hand we are ethically bound to the scientific method, in effect promising to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but, which means that we must include all the doubts, caveats, ifs and buts. On the other hand, we are not just scientists, but human beings as well. … So we have to offer up scary scenarios, make simplified, dramatic statements, and make little mention of any doubts we might have.
Louisiana is poised to enact a law that would make it a hate crime to target police officers and other first responders.
Dubbed the “Blue Lives Matter” bill, HB 953 would expand the state’s hate-crime law to include police officers as a protected class, as well as a broad swath of uniformed employees and emergency volunteers.
Bigotry as a factor to be applied in sentencing? Maybe. But that, like all sentencing, should be for a jury to decide, not a government with a one-size-fits-all sentencing “guideline,” the (limited) feasibility of which, anyway, stems only from overparsing crimes.