Category Archives: Justice

Alexander Acosta Did Not Need To Fall On His Sword

Constitution, Justice, Law, Sex, The West

The lynch mob against Alex Acosta, Trump’s former labor secretary, is just that: a lynch mob. Jeffrey Epstein is the slimy sleazebag here, not Mr. Acosta.

I don’t usually agree with broadcaster Michael Medved, who leans heavily left. However, today, Mr. Medved did a bang-up job defending the rules of evidence. Or, what Joe Biden once denounced as Western jurisprudence.

The girls involved with Epstein did not wish to testify. And who can blame them?

And while “[t]he evidence in the original case appears overwhelming—in an interview with the Miami Herald the lead detective recounted phone records, flight logs and instructions for delivering flowers to one of Mr Epstein’s young fixations, alongside her high-school report card”—Epstein’s “original defense team included Alan Dershowitz and Kenn Starr, two lawyers skilled in defending the indefensible.” (The Economist.)

Epstein hired the best lawyers who were unmatched by the prosecution and the limits of the law.

“… his star-studded lawyers,” reports the Daily Beast, “threatened to go to trial in a case prosecutors feared was unwinnable, in part because Epstein’s team dredged up dirt on the victims, including social media posts indicating drug use.”

Dershowitz (who has defended President Trump with his usual legal élan), “told The Daily Beast that his accuser, Virginia Roberts, “has committed perjury and will continue to commit perjury in federal court.”

“I am asking the FBI to come to this trial because perjury will be committed in front of a federal judge and in a federal courtroom,” Dershowitz added. “And I will prove it is she who is committing perjury.”

Even the Economist concedes that it was not at all “obvious that the top federal prosecutor who negotiated the deal, Alexander Acosta, had better options available.”

“… [T]he difficulties of securing convictions in cases of rape or sexual abuse are well known.”

Alex Acosta, whose address to the public I found credible, had to ultimately defer to police and prosecutors in Palm Beach, Florida.

NEW COLUMN: Trump Barters For Borders — And Wins, Big Time

Democrats, Free Markets, IMMIGRATION, Justice, Nationhood, Natural Law, Republicans

NEW COLUMN IS “Trump Barters For Borders — And Wins, Big Time.” It’s currently on the Unz Review and WND.COM.

RELATED at Townhall.com: “Why The Mighty USA Must Beg Mexico To Police Its Border.”

Excerpt:

If President Trump doesn’t waver, his border deal with Mexico will be a victory. The Mexicans have agreed to quit serving as conduits to hundreds of thousands of central Americans headed for the U.S.A.

Despite protests from Democrats, stateside—Mexico has agreed to significantly increase enforcement on its borders.

At first, Mexico was as defiant as the Democrats—and some Republicans.

Democrats certainly can be counted on to argue for the other side—any side other than the so-called sovereign people they swore to represent.

In fairness to the Democrats, Republicans are only notionally committed to the tough policing of the border. And certainly not if policing the porous border entails threatening trade tariffs against our neighborly narco-state. Some Republican senators even considered a vote to block the tariffs.

Nevertheless, to the hooting and hollering of the cretins in Congress and media, Trump went ahead and threatened Mexico with tariffs.

More than that. The president didn’t just tweet out “strong words” and taunts.

Since Mexico, the party duopoly, and his own courts have forced his hand, the president proceeded to “retrieve from his arsenal a time bomb of ruinous proportions.”

Or, so the Economist hyperventilated …

READ “Trump Barters For Borders — And Wins, Big Time,” on the Unz Review and WND.COM.

RELATED at Townhall.com: “Why The Mighty USA Must Beg Mexico To Police Its Border.”

* Image courtesy of the Unz Review.

Larry Elder Shares Mercer Article On Intra-Racial Reparations

Celebrity, Conservatism, Ilana Mercer, Justice, Race, South-Africa

Larry Elder, a great American, has shared with his many followers my Unz Review column, “How About Intra-Racial Reparations in South Africa?”

The excerpt Mr. Elder chose from “How About Intra-Racial Reparations in South Africa?” is:

“…white South Africans are told to accept their obligation to give up ancestral lands they are alleged to have stolen. Should not the relatives of cannibals who gobbled up their black brethren be held to the same standards?”—ilana mercer

This is quite nice, too.

But “she” is not a public person. Glad to assist the queen bee, aka President Ann Coulter, behind the scenes, as she rescues the country.

NEW COLUMN: Mueller Inquisition: ‘Collusion’ Pushers Must Pay

Constitution, Democrats, Donald Trump, Justice, Law, Politics, Republicans, THE ELITES, The Establishment

NEW COLUMN IS “Mueller Inquisition: ‘Collusion’ Pushers Must Pay.” It’s now on WND, the Unz Review and Townhall.com.   http://tinyurl.com/y36fergx

Excerpt:

… In the course of defending his reputation against silly, but gravely serious, smears—that he was a “Russian asset,” in the words of former acting FBI Director Andrew McCabe—the president forcefully and publicly berated the Mueller proceedings and his turncoat attorney, Michael Cohen (who, though a hostile witness, testified that there was no collusion).

To Mueller, that paragon of virtue, the dilemma revolved around whether to indict Trump for the fighting words he spoke in defense of his now-proven innocence. Free speech, some might call it. (Remember that quaint thing?)

For in the legal penumbra in which the U.S. Office of Special Counsel operates, aggressively professing your innocence can amount to obstructing “justice.”

Fight an unjust conviction with everything you’ve—and you risk being convicted of a crime.

This is the Kafkaesque, circular reasoning that animates the workings of the U.S. Office of Special Counsel (OSC): It can criminalize conduct—worse, it can criminalize speech—that is perfectly licit in natural law, such as verbally defending oneself against spurious accusations.

Or, as Attorney-General William Barr put it, “Mr. Trump could not have obstructed justice because HE DID NOT COLLUDE WITH RUSSIA.”

As a scrupulously honest broadcaster, Tucker Carlson recently confessed to “looking back in shame” for having originally supported Kenneth Starr’s independent counsel investigation of President Clinton. (Good libertarians have always opposed the very existence of the OSC. This writer certainly has.)

Another honest man, Democrat Mark Penn, former chief strategist to Hillary Clinton and a frequent guest of the Tucker Carlson show, had “spent a year working with President Clinton” to fend off Special Counsel Ken Starr’s extrajudicial onslaught. Penn had recently remarked candidly that the Starr investigation “was child’s play” compared to the infractions of the Mueller investigation.

Yet, few have been willing to concede that the Mueller inquisition was the Kenneth Starr Chamber by any other name.

The origin of the Star[r] Chamber sobriquet is in 15th-century England.

Meant to remedy injustice in the times of Henry VIII, the “Court of Star Chamber,” as it was known, was soon co-opted and corrupted, becoming “a symbol of oppression” during the times of Charles I.

For reasons obvious, the “Starr Chamber” designation stuck to the outfit run by Independent Counsel Kenneth Starr, in1998.

Likewise, there was, seemingly, no limit to the broad remit of Special Counsel Robert Mueller. Other than some accused Russians, nobody stateside dared challenge—from the vantage point of first principles—this draconian medieval inquisition …

… READ THE REST. NEW COLUMN IS “Mueller Inquisition: ‘Collusion’ Pushers Must Pay.” It’s now on WND, the Unz Review and Townhall.com.   http://tinyurl.com/y36fergx