Category Archives: Law

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

What The Crap Country Of Britain Did To Activist Tommy Robinson For The Crime Of … Speech

Britain, Criminal Injustice, Free Speech, Individual Rights, Islam, Law

The country from which the American Constitution makers got their inspiration is now a crap country. For reporting news—speaking, nothing more—Britain’s anti-Islam activist Tommy Robinson was imprisoned in a jail with the largest Muslim population and kept in solitary confinement for 2 months.

He went to prison in a supposedly free country for expressing unpopular opinions in public and then purposefully placed in predicaments that almost got this young man killed: That’s England.

Due process? There was none. But there was a mosque in his prison.

Media? The legal profession? All formed a conga-line to attack Tommy Robinson.

Tommy’s fight is ongoing: “Tommy Robinson contempt of court hearing over Facebook video delayed.”

The latest in the annals of the crap country of Britain: “Devout Catholic ‘who used wrong pronoun to describe transgender girl’ to be interviewed by police.”

Comments Off on What The Crap Country Of Britain Did To Activist Tommy Robinson For The Crime Of … Speech

Written by on

Why We In The West Care So For Animals (Or Should)

Argument, Environmentalism & Animal Rights, Ethics, Justice, Law, Morality, Reason, The West

Writes HENRY STEPHENSON, of O’Fallon, Illinois:

… Laws protecting animals are perfectly justifiable, not because [animals] have rights, but because we value their welfare and are repulsed by acts of cruelty against them. Upholding such laws does not require the cascade of nonsense that would ensue from pretending that animals have moral or legal standing.

HENRY STEPHENSON,
O’Fallon, Illinois

I would put it thus:

We care for animals and codify that care in law, not because animals have human rights, but because of our own humanity.

The Economist (Letters, Jan 12th 2019)

Or, as Schopenhauer mused:

Asylum Laws: Are Lawmakers Committing Treason Against Americans?

Ethics, Homeland Security, IMMIGRATION, Law

NEW COLUMN IS “Asylum Laws: Are Lawmakers Committing Treason Against Americans?” It’s currently on WND, the Unz Review and Townhall.com.

An excerpt:

The Wall is crucial, but it’s not everything.

Caravans of human cargo are filing into the United States because … they can. U.S. law allows it, even invites it.

Here’s how: Provided you’re not a white, South African farmer—in other words, a real refugee—you may plonk yourself at an American “port of entry,” say San Ysidro in San Diego, and simply assert your right to petition the U.S. for asylum.

Then and there you claim asylum on the grounds that your race, religion, nationality or politics expose you to persecution in the country you want to leave.

Compared to a multicultural mecca like America, where faction fighting is rising, Latin American arrivals seem rather homogeneous. Dare I say they’re largely Hispanic Catholics? Dare I ask who’s persecuting them in their homelands?

By the law’s logic, Muhammadan terrorists entering the U.S. through its southwestern border should have a far better legal case for asylum than Latin Americans: “I’m from Pakistan. I’m an LGBTQ activist, fleeing Islamic oppression. You’d better believe it.”

If you can’t quite manage to locate the legally designated gate, and a “misguided” U.S. border agent attempts deportation, you may, nevertheless, “defend” yourself against U.S. law by—you’re getting the hang of it!—lodging an asylum claim.

The American lawmakers and jurists who legislate and adjudicate immigration generally have the migrant’s back, and will right away accept the “credible fear” yarn he spins. He will thus be granted face-time with a judge. Their stupidity (and venality) is also his signal to vamoose, never to be seen again.

Children are the charm, a magic amulet. Courtesy of the Flores Settlement Agreement, unaccompanied children or adults with children must be released after a brief timeout in well-appointed detention centers. (“Cages,” as Democrat ingrates call this generous gift from the put-upon American taxpayer.)

All a single male or childless couple needs to do is grab a child. Borrow one if there isn’t an urchin handy, and drag him along for the trip. However hirsute and ink-covered your juvenile is; he cannot be detained for longer than 20 days.

Next, “the child” and his adopted Caravan “family” (or predatory parent) rest up in detention, fill in asylum applications and are subsequently cut loose in the U.S. with a nod and wink. (“Come back for your court hearing, amigos, know what I mean? Grin grin, wink wink, nudge nudge, say no more,” as the old Monty Python skit goes.)

Ludicrous? American lawmakers—incontestable majorities on the Republican side included—don’t think so. Why else would they have kept these aberrant, catch-and-release, mickey-mouse laws in place?! …

…. READ THE REST. NEW COLUMN, “Asylum Laws: Are Lawmakers Committing Treason Against Americans?”, is currently on WND, the Unz Review and Townhall.com.