Tag Archives: free speech

Obama Gets One Right

Posted on by
Reply

Edward Snowden will likely remain hiding in Russia for some time, with Washington officials and most Americans offering no leniency or forgiveness for him notoriously stealing classified information and jeopardizing U.S. national security.

President Barack Obama, through his Homeland Security Advisor Lisa Monaco, said this about that:

Mr Snowden’s dangerous decision to steal and disclose classified information had severe consequences for the security of our country and the people who work…to protect it[.]

And then he tossed a petition to pardon this…scofflaw, the petition a product of a two year effort to let Snowden skate, into the round file.

Hear, hear.

A Corrupt IRS

Posted on by
Reply

Two Congressmen have some concerns, and they want IRS Commissioner John Koskinen removed. Ron DeSantis (R, FL), House Oversight and Government Reform Subcommittee on National Security Chairman, and Jim Jordan (R, OH), Subcommittee on Health Care, Benefits and Administrative Rules Chairman, laid out their case in Monday’s Wall Street Journal. RTWT, but here are the highlights.

  • Failure to inform Congress. Koskinen concealed—during repeated sworn testimony—from Congress for four months his knowledge that the IRS that it had “lost” vast amounts of Lois Lerner’s (of “I didn’t do it” infamy) emails.
  • False testimony before Congress. One example: of the more than 1,000 computer backup tapes discovered by the IRS Inspector General, approximately 700 were available with their contents intact. Koskinen testified he had “confirmed” that all of the tapes were unrecoverable. Worse, those 700 intact backup tapes were found within 15 days of Koskinen’s informing Congress that they were not recoverable.
  • Failure to correct the record. After his false statements to Congress under oath, Koskinen refused to amend them when given the opportunity at a public hearing earlier this year.
  • Failure to reform the IRS to protect First Amendment rights. Koskinen still hasn’t acted on President Barack Obama’s May 2013 promise to “put in place new safeguards to make sure this kind of behavior cannot happen again.”

It’s not just Koskinen who needs to be fired—not allowed to retire, not allowed to resign, fired—though. IRS personnel cannot be trusted down to the worker bee accountants who do the actual work of checking tax returns. The breadth of IRS crimes—worthy of a RICO case, were it a private enterprise—renders the entire agency worthless. And that’s to the detriment of those worker bees.

Freedom to Dissent

Posted on by
Reply

Four men already had been convicted of murder in southeastern China when a fifth person confessed to the crime. But when lawyers demanded to review case documents to clear the men’s names, the court stonewalled. So the lawyers unfurled banners outside the venue.

They protested for days, alongside social activists who insulted the top judge, and uploaded pictures online.
…
Authorities say these lawyers have strayed far beyond their professional role into illegal activism aimed at sabotaging the country’s legal system. …

Since late May, police across China have detained and called in at least 215 rights lawyers and social activists, most of them during the past week or so. State propaganda has kicked into high gear to denounce them as rabble-rousers, criminal gangs, profit-seeking opportunists.

Wisconsin’s John Doe persecutions have been struck by that state’s Supreme Court. We’ll see how long that lasts before our own Left starts up again.

In the meantime, our own national Left’s loudly protected IRS continues to persecute Americans: those who dare to speak contrary to the Left’s approved speech—all those exposures of personal and personal tax information, all those stonewalls of tax status applications for particular groups who would dare speak contrary to the Left’s approvals. The same IRS continues to refuse to return seized funds to those from whom the money was…confiscated…under patently false pretenses, even after this IRS said they would stop the confiscations.

A Court Gets it Right

Posted on by
1

This time a State Supreme Court, in particular, Wisconsin’s. Recall that some rogue Democratic Party prosecutors in Wisconsin have been persecuting a number of Wisconsin citizens for the dastardly crime of supporting Scott Walker. Recall further, that the law under which this victims were being persecuted was claimed by those prosecutors as allowing them to silence their victims, even to the point of preventing those victims from speaking publicly about their persecution. Hence the term “John Doe statute.”

The Wisconsin Supreme Court took a dim view of such…shenanigans. Last part first: the Court ruled that the prosecutors must

cease all activities related to the investigation, return all property seized in the investigation from any individual or organization and permanently destroy all copies of information and other materials obtained through the investigation.

If it had been me, I’d have required the prosecutors to post a substantial all cash bond against their performance of this requirement, and for 10 years thereafter against their continued performance, but I’ll take this. Still, I’d like the bond in light of the Court’s evident disdain for the prosecutor’s behavior:

…the special prosecutor relies upon, leads us to the unsettling conclusion that it is left to government bureaucrats and/or individual prosecutors to determine how much coordination between campaign committees and independent groups is “too much” coordination. In essence, under his theory, every candidate, in every campaign in which an issue advocacy group participates, would get their own John Doe proceeding and their own special prosecutor to determine the extent of any coordination. This is not, and cannot, be the law in a democracy…

The special prosecutor has disregarded the vital principle that in our nation and our state political speech is a fundamental right and is afforded the highest level of protection. The special prosecutor’s theories…would assure that such political speech will be investigated with paramilitary-style home invasions conducted in the pre-dawn hours and then prosecuted and punished. In short, the special prosecutor completely ignores the command that, when seeking to regulate issue advocacy groups, such regulation must be done with “narrow specificity.”

And

It is utterly clear that the special prosecutor has employed theories of law that do not exist in order to investigate citizens who were wholly innocent of any wrongdoing. In other words, the special prosecutor was the instigator of a “perfect storm” of wrongs that was visited upon the innocent Unnamed Movants and those who dared to associate with them.

Another problem, though, is that this disregard for the law and for the speech of others isn’t limited to the Wisconsin branch of the Democratic Party.

The Court’s decision can be seen here.

Murder Free Zones?

Posted on by
Reply

Does Portland State University disagree with the concept of murder free zones?

It seems that a couple of students at PSU wanted to “set up a table on campus” to advocate for the school becoming a Murder Free Zone. The school said, “No, probably not.”

The school insisted that the students hosting the table would themselves become targets of violence: their advocacy of murder free-ness would be “triggering,” it would incite overt violence; the school even suggested that if the thing went forward, the students should have campus security be present to quell any violence that might be triggered.

No, PSU doesn’t disagree with being murder free. That school’s administration was simply satirizing the whole question of gun/murder/anything “free zones.”

Weren’t they?