RSS

Tag Archives: President

Will America Intervene in the Philippines?

Or…What America will look like if Trump wins.

The Philippines elected a Trump lookalike. So far, all it has gotten them is mass murder in the streets.

President Duterte perhaps emboldened by no foreign power (the US) putting their foot down on the murders of thousands of people accused of drug using or trafficking, seems to believe in his own “tough guy” talk. It is a sad thing to say, but the big powers really don’t give a damn what you do to your own people in your own country. Mass incarceration and murder are just fine. The problem with most of the tinpot dictators, is they get to smelling their own odor, and believing its like Honeysuckle. And wandering into international politics and the carefully choreographed balance of power between the big boys. That almost always results in said dictator eating a bullet, or hanging by a rope by either a “internal” coup, or a few thousand Marines. The one notable exception being Castro…But his survival wasn’t due to lack of trying by the US over several decades to kill him.

So the question is, as things continue to spiral out of control…Is the next US President going to involve us in an “Intervention”…Which is nothing more than politics-speak for war.

Hope Duterte doesn’t think his new “friends” in China are going to save him from a 9mm to the head.

And no…It isn’t about the drugs. If he stuck solely to that…He could conceivably wind up a National Hero.

Philippine mayor, on president’s drug list, killed in jail cell

Image result for Duterte murders

Philippine President Duterte

Philippine police killed a town mayor in his jail cell in a purported gun battle, the second killing in a week of a politician linked to illegal drugs under President Rodrigo Duterte’s brutal crackdown.

Rolando Espinosa Sr., the mayor of the town of Albuera in the central province of Leyte, and a fellow inmate were shot dead before dawn Saturday after they fired at officers who staged a raid in search of firearms and illegal drugs in the provincial jail in Leyte’s Baybay city, police said.

Some officials and an anti-crime watchdog have called for an investigation of the circumstances of the killings, wondering how the mayor and the other inmate got hold of guns and what prompted them to clash with several policemen while in detention.

“Offhand, I can smell extrajudicial killing,” said Sen. Panfilo Lacson, a former national police chief, adding that the suspicious deaths were the “biggest challenge” to the credibility of the national police force, which is undertaking the anti-drug crackdown.

Last week, police killed another town mayor, Samsudin Dimaukom, and nine of his men allegedly in a gunbattle in the southern Philippines.

Espinosa and Dimaukom were among more than 160 officials named publicly by Duterte in August as part of a shame campaign. Espinosa’s son, an alleged drug lord, was arrested in the United Arab Emirates’ capital city of Abu Dhabi last month.

After being linked by Duterte to illegal drugs, Espinosa surrendered to the national police chief in August in a nationally televised event. He was later released, but was arrested last month after being indicted on drug and illegal possession of firearm charges.

Image result for Duterte murders

One of over 3,600 Murders ordered by Duterte

Police estimate that more than 3,600 suspected drug dealers and users have been killed since Duterte took office on June 30. Many of those killed in the initial months of the crackdown were poor drug suspects, and police said “high-value targets,” including mayors and drug lords, would be their next target in a new phase of the crackdown that was launched late last month.

The unprecedented crackdown and killings have helped ease crime, but the U.S. and other Western governments, along with human rights watchdogs, have been alarmed and called for an end to the killings. One human rights advocate has called the killings under Duterte a “human rights calamity.”

Duterte has lashed out at President Barack Obama and other critics, saying he was dealing with a pandemic that has afflicted politics, corrupted even generals and threatened to turn the country into what he describes as a “narco state” similar to some Latin American countries.

 
Leave a comment

Posted by on November 6, 2016 in General, International Terrorism

 

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Getting Handed His Hat – Lawn Jockey David Clarke

What sort of asshat lives in Wisconsin, and wears a cowboy hat?

I mean…In Texas and anywhere in the West it makes sense, both from a cultural history standpoint as well as practicality. These hats were designed to protect the wearer from the southern and desert sun. Wisconsin doesn’t have a desert…And is sure is in the North.

Anyway, Faux News’ Lawn Jockey de jure get’s schooled.

 

 

 
Leave a comment

Posted by on November 3, 2016 in Black Conservatives

 

Tags: , , , , , , ,

Obama Unleashes on the Chumph

Damn, Prez…Tell us how you really feel!

Bout 26 minutes in is where he unloads.

Obama unleashes blistering attack on Trump

The president casts the GOP nominee as a hypocrite and a phony and urges America to vote.

 

President Barack Obama ripped Donald Trump here Friday as a man who’s embraced an attack on the “global elite” only after failing to be accepted as a member of the global elite himself, attacking the Republican nominee for running an anti-American campaign with paper-thin support that’s all about InfoWars.com conspiracy theories.

Rallying a skeptical crowd for Hillary Clinton at a small airport, Obama framed the 2016 election as a choice about democracy and moral values that goes way beyond politics — about the country coming together to reject a dangerous, self-centered cynic without “the basic honesty that a president needs” and the party that propelled that man to be its nominee.

Issues like global warming and immigration reform are important, Obama said, but this race is more about America standing up for itself and Americans standing up for the people who’ve come before them.

“Donald Trump’s closing argument is: What do you have to lose?” Obama said. “The answer is everything.”

Warning that Trump is trying to poison the entire system and nation in a ploy to dispirit the country and depress turnout, Obama urged the people here and everyone else to fight back with their votes. “Don’t fall for it,” he said.

Obama cast Trump as a false prophet, lying about who he is and what he believes. Thursday, at his own campaign events in Ohio, Trump said he was taking on the global elites. That’s absurd, Obama responded.

“This is a guy who spent all his time trying to convince everyone he was a global elite. … All he had time for is celebrities. And now suddenly he’s acting like a populist,” Obama said. “Come on, man.”

Nor is Trump the tough guy he purports to be, the president insisted, taking aim at Trump teasing the idea of the election being rigged against him, as he’s done every time his polls have dipped since the summer.

“He seems to be in the middle of the game making excuses all the time for why he might be losing,” Obama said, eagerly goading Trump. “It’s always interesting to me to see people who talk tough but don’t act tough. Because if you’re tough, you don’t make excuses.”

That’s in contrast to Clinton, whom Obama repeatedly praised for being “in the arena” and fighting for voters, waging a campaign, talking about ideas. He spoke directly to people who say they care about civil rights, inequality, Bernie Sanders’ agenda, and even values like civility, courtesy, honesty and kindness; the only way to sincerely act on those beliefs, Obama said, is to vote for Clinton.

All that Trump’s left with, the president said Friday, returning to an argument he started sounding out Thursday in Columbus, are the rabid conspiracy nuts and the Republicans who’ve aided and abetted them over the past eight years : “Donald Trump didn’t build all this crazy conspiracy stuff. Some Republicans who knew better stood by silently.”

What Trump’s left with are those people, and the kind of people who’ve taken up the InfoWars.com conspiracy site’s offer to pay people for crashing Clinton campaign events if they get on camera screaming that “Bill Clinton is a rapist.”

Obama went right at a heckler who’d made his way into the center of the crowd to hold up a piece of paper with a mock-up of the famous 2008 Shepard Fairey “Hope” poster, done instead with Bill Clinton’s face and the word “rape.”

Obama used to flare with annoyance when hecklers would interrupt him, but he’s started rolling with them more often. Friday morning, Obama turned the heckler into a prop, representing a perfect symbol of the flimsy campaign Trump is running.

“If you’re confident about the other guy, just go to his rallies,” Obama said. “You don’t have to spend time over here. Go knock on doors for your guy.”

He smiled as the security worked its way through the crowd to get to the man.

“Unless you’re getting paid to be here,” he said. “Everybody’s gotta make a living.”

He looked out at the crowd.

“Come on everybody,” he said, “let’s do our little chant: Hillary, Hillary, Hillary!”

And the crowd responded, chanting along with him.

Trump wants to be a tyrant, Obama said, but he won’t let the human rights violations that he’s fought against in other countries as president take root at home.

“Around the world, we talk to other countries, we say no, in a democracy, you can’t just threaten to jail your opponents. There are things called due process,” Obama said. “You can’t just jail or ban reporters you don’t like, because there’s this thing called the First Amendment.”

As for Trump’s telegraphing that he might not concede if Clinton wins, Obama said that represents an anti-American cult of personality: “If you lose, then you say congratulations, but then you move on, because our country, system of government is bigger than any single individual.”

 

 
Leave a comment

Posted by on October 14, 2016 in Chumph Butt Kicking, Giant Negros

 

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

“Hiawatha” Goes to War

The reason Republicans despise Elizabeth Warren (and thus the “Hiawatha” jab) is she is effective at demanding accountability for the biggest thieves, liars, and crooks in the country. Wll Street, and heads of the major banks.

Here – she lights a fire under Wells Fargo President Stumph for crooked dealing, and profiteering.

I hope like hell for a change, the DOJ prosecutes and sends this sucker to jail where he belongs. Folks are getting real tired of this “special justice” for “special people.” crap.

 

 
Leave a comment

Posted by on September 20, 2016 in American Greed

 

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

Obama To Live in DC Area After Term is Over

Well…At least he won’t have any problem finding a home, and he possibly will be the first former President since George Washington to actually live in the area.

Daughter Will Keep the Obamas in Washington

After years of speculation, President Obama confirmed on Thursday that he and his wife, Michelle, intend to remain in Washington for “a couple of years” after his term ends.

It has been decades since a president stayed in the capital after leaving office. But Mr. Obama said during a visit here that “we’re going to have to stay” in Washington until his younger daughter, Sasha, finishes school.

“Transferring someone in the middle of high school — tough,” the president said in response to a question from a woman at a restaurant here.

Sasha is on track to graduate from the exclusive Sidwell Friends School in the spring of 2019. Mr. Obama said he was unsure where the family would move after that.

 
Leave a comment

Posted by on March 4, 2016 in Giant Negros

 

Tags: , , , ,

Why Obama Needs to Nominate a Liberal Judge

Obama hopefully has gotten to the stage to cut the crap about making peace with Republican bigots. The New Jim Crow was subsidized and supported by the 5-4 conservative court.

As to Scalia’s Lawn Ornament…

The Human Toll of Antonin Scalia’s Time on the Court

Blacks, Latinos, and poor whites suffered because of his draconian approach to criminal punishment.

In the days since Antonin Scalia’s death, he has been duly recognized as one of the most impactful justices in the Supreme Court’s history. A critical part of his troubling legacy has long been staring us in the face, although it finally started receiving the public scrutiny it deserves in recent years. As draconian punishments became the norm over the last three decades, the Supreme Court largely rubber-stamped these practices. Justice Scalia played a key role in this process, as his hardline stances on criminal punishment significantly contributed to mass incarceration, numerous executions, and systemic racial discrimination. Scalia was an outspoken supporter of harsh punishments and wanted the court to take an even more hands-off attitude toward so-called “tough on crime” laws.

Not long after he made it onto the court in 1986, Scalia’s influence on these issues began to be felt. In McCleskey v. Kemp, one of the first cases he heard, anti-death penalty advocates brought compelling evidence of pervasive racial discrimination in Georgia’s administration of capital punishment. A sophisticated statistical study demonstrated that sentencing was tied to the race of the victim and offender. All other factors being equal, blacks who killed whites were the likeliest to receive a death sentence. Justice Scalia was unfazed. During oral arguments, he derisivelyasked: “What if you do a statistical study that shows beyond question that people who are naturally shifty-eyed are to a disproportionate extent convicted in criminal cases, does that make the criminal process unlawful?”

John Charles Boger, who represented the black death-row prisoner in McCleskey, responded by pointing to the obvious: “This is not some sort of statistical fluke or aberration. We have a century-old pattern in the state of Georgia of animosity [toward black-Americans].” Scalia and four other justices nonetheless chose to analyze discrimination out of its social context, including in cases from Southern states with a lengthy history of slavery, segregation, and lynchings.

Scalia was in the majority as the court held that statistical proof of systemic discrimination in the death penalty is irrelevant. A defendant must instead prove intentional discrimination in his own case, an almost impossible standard without considering systemic patterns. Many experts consider McCleskey among the worst Supreme Court decisions of all-time. It largely closed the door to statistical evidence as a means of challenging systemic discrimination in criminal punishment.

Scalia would also play a significant role as the Supreme Court licensed ruthless sentences leading America to world record incarceration levels. He wrote the operative part of the influential Harmelin decision, a 1991 plurality opinion holding that the Eighth Amendment ban on “cruel and unusual punishments” does not require that a prison sentence be “proportional” to the crime. The court thus upheld a life-sentence for cocaine possession.

Scalia again was in the majority in Lockyer v. Andrade, a 2003 case upholding a 50-year-to-life sentence under California’s three-strikes-law for a man who shoplifted videotapes worth $153 because he had prior convictions for petty theft, burglary, and transporting marijuana. Erwin Chemerinsky, who zealously represented the prisoner,was in tears as the media asked him about his reaction to the court’s inhumane decision.

McCleskey, Harmelin, and Lockyer were all 5–4 decisions that could have been decided otherwise if Scalia had thought differently. Naturally, he was not a swing vote but a sure one for harsh justice.

While the justices might not have been able to stop mass incarceration singlehandedly, they definitely could have limited it. Indeed, the court’s belated decision in Brown v. Plata, has contributed to reducing California’s incarceration rate. In this 2011 case, the court ordered California to reduce its dramatically overcrowded prison population because “depriv[ing] prisoners of basic sustenance, including adequate medical care, is incompatible with the concept of human dignity.” In a vehement dissent, Scalia charged that this was “a judicial travesty” and that the majority was “wildly” overstepping its authority.

Similarly, he fiercely dissented in other rare cases where the court decided to check ruthless punishments. If it had been up to Scalia, it would still be constitutional to execute mentally retarded people or teenagers, not to mention sentence teenagers to life imprisonment without the possibility of parole for homicide or any other crime.

This aspect of his legacy has been overshadowed by the common misconception that “at least Scalia was quite fair to criminal defendants.” To his credit, he concluded in several procedural cases that juries, not judges, must decide if all facts leading to harsher punishment are proved beyond reasonable doubt. In various other cases, he found that police searches went too far. But these are exceptions. He regularly took an extremely narrow view of due process, such as when he argued that the Constitution does not create “a right to demand judicial consideration of newly discovered evidence of innocence.” Scalia further suggested that executing an innocent person would not be unconstitutional per se. More than 1,300 prisonerswere executed while Scalia was on the Supreme Court though he was persuaded that his colleagues created unjust procedural hurdles to executions by baselessly expanding the rights of death row prisoners.

Had Scalia had his way, far more people would have been executed during his tenure and the court would have adopted an even more accommodating approach to mass incarceration. In his view, merciless punishments were just deserts for “evildoers.” Hescoffed when fellow justices advanced a more nuanced view of criminal behavior or occasionally suggested that draconian punishments were dehumanizing. He was certain that the court already cared too much about people who faced the death penalty or endless prison sentences. Justices who disagreed with him were judicial activists who refused to defer to elected branches of government. Of course, Scalia did not do so himself in multiple cases. Tellingly, he voted to strike down campaign finance legislation in Citizens United. He likewise voted twice, unsuccessfully, in favor of eviscerating the democratically enacted Affordable Care Act…More Here

 

Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

Birthers Now Go After Ted Cruz!

Getting crazy out there. Seems that the same scumbags who challenged President Obama’s have a new target – Sen. Ted Cruz who was born in Canada to an American mother and Cuban citizen father. Even worse, Cruz failed to renounce his Canadian citizenship until just before he announced his run in the Republican Primary. My problem is the fact of the dual citizenship – not where he was born.

Insofar as the State Department –

The “Foreign Preference” criterion (Guideline C) of the December 2005 “Adjudicative Guidelines for Determining Eligibility for Access to Classified Information” makes the “exercise of any right, privilege or obligation of foreign citizenship after becoming a U.S. citizen” a potentially disqualifying condition for a security clearance. Guideline C also states:

And the Department of Defense –

The security concerns underlying this guideline are that the possession and use of a foreign passport in preference to a U.S. passport raises doubt as to whether the person’s allegiance to the United States is paramount and it could also facilitate foreign travel unverifiable by the United States. Therefore consistent application of the guideline requires that any [DoD] clearance be denied or revoked unless the applicant surrenders the foreign passport or obtains official approval for its use from the appropriate agency of the United States Government.

In govermentese that means you cannot get a security clearance in the DOD (Army, Navy, Air Force, National Guard) with a dual citizenship. You must renounce your other allegiance.

Ted Cruz should have been disqualified from being a Senator. Being able to be President is absurd, regardless of the birthright claims – because at no point did he renounce his foreign citizenship…

Until it became necessary for his campaign.

Obama Birthers Now Want Ted Cruz’s Head

In 2008, they went after Barack Obama. In 2016, they’re going after Ted Cruz.

The originators of the so-called birther movement are leading a charge this campaign cycle with the same accusations they had two campaign cycles ago.

Eight years ago, the loosely-organized group came together other-izing the man who would become the first black president. Now, they’re attempting to do so with the potential first Latino one. And it’s not just isolated fringe bloggers who have taken up the mantle. WorldNetDaily, a site that has touted both Donald Trump and Cruz and been essential reading for their fans, is supporting the cause as well.

The senator from Texas was born in Calgary, Canada to an American mother and a Cuban father. Cruz released his birth certificate in 2013 and renounced his Canadian citizenship a year later in advance of his presidential campaign, in an attempt to put the issue to bed before it reached national headlines in this campaign cycle.

And that might have resolved it, if Donald Trump had not questioned his legitimacy as a candidate.

“How do you run against the Democrat, whoever it may be, and you have this hanging over your head if they bring a lawsuit?” Trump said in an interview on CNN this week. And just like that, with one question, the real estate mogul effectively brought this issue from the far-reaches of conspiracy internet sites to the forefront of American dialogue.

Trump later suggested that Cruz ask a judge for a “declaratory judgment” to definitively prove the status of his citizenship.

This, of course, would likely create a spectacle that could prove politically advantageous to Trump, who is currently losing to Cruz in Iowa, the first primary state.

“I’m doing this for the good of Ted… I like him. He likes me,” Trump asserted.

While this reads as a witch hunt to most eyes—akin to Trump’s previous efforts to get Obama’s birth certificate released—many of the original founders of the 2008 movement seem to agree with the leading Republican candidate. Unlike Obama, they like Cruz and they want him to clear the air on this birth issue before it’s too late.

“I think it does disqualify him,” said Teo Bear (an online pseudonym), who warned about the issue of Ted Cruz’s birth on his site Birthers.org in 2014. “Let me ask you a question, if you were dating a girl and you come to realize that she wanted to get serious and wanted to have children and you didn’t want puppies, don’t you think you should tell her ‘I don’t want puppies?’”…More

 
Leave a comment

Posted by on January 8, 2016 in The Clown Bus

 

Tags: , , , , , , , ,

 
%d bloggers like this: