Archive for Crime

Out of the Shadows and Into the Welfare State

They like to be in America:

President Obama, following through on his vow to sidestep Congress, will announce in a prime-time TV speech Thursday the executive actions he will take to change U.S. immigration law.

Obama will make his announcement, expected to protect roughly 5 million illegal immigrants from deportation, from the White House at 8 p.m. EST, then go to Las Vegas to promote the plan Friday.

Obama loves Vegas. That’s where he was jetting off to when Ambassador Stevens, Glen Doherty, Sean Smith, and Tyrone Woods shuffled off this mortal coil. What better place to announce the death of a once-great nation?

Step out of the shadows, my undocumented friends, and into the (flash)light:

May 2014 — Humberto Gonzalez, an illegal alien, was convicted in New Jersey of criminal assault and sentenced to 50 years in prison. The rape occurred in 2005 and Gonzalez was not identified until a DNA match was made following an arrest in Texas for aggravated assault with a deadly weapon. Gonzalez also had a criminal record in Louisiana and Arkansas. (Times of Trenton, May 9, 2014)

February 2014 — Cinthya Garcia-Cisneros, an illegal alien from Mexico, was found guilty of two counts of a felony for failure to perform the duties of a driver and sentenced to three years of probation and 250 hours of community service. Garcia-Cisneros committed a hit-and-run that resulted in the death of two stepsisters, 6-year-old Anna Dieter-Eckerdt and 11-year-old Abigail Robinson. (Associated Press, Feb. 4, 2013)

January 2014 — Jasim Mohammed Hasin Ramadon, aka Jay Hendrix, an Iraqi immigrant, was found guilty in Colorado on multiple counts of sexual assault. He faces a possible sentence of life in prison. Sarmad Fadhi “Levi” Mohammed, another Iraqi was earlier convicted for the same assault and sentenced to 16 years in prison. An additional three Iraqi immigrants involved in the assault have received misdemeanor convictions. (Colorado Gazette, January 21, 2014)

January 2014 — Modesto Osco, a Peruvian, pled guilty to indecent assault on a minor. He was sentenced in Pennsylvania to five months to two years in prison. (The Morning Call, January 6, 2014)

Modesto of name, immodest of act.

I know many criminal aliens are hard-working and law-abiding…well, hard-working…well, working. They can’t all be rapists. (Bill Cosby didn’t leave much opportunity for others. Allegedly.)

I’ve already said my piece on the subject. This is an invalid act by a man without the authority to enforce it. But what happens next? Mitch? John?

Comments

WANTED for Tax Fraud

Which one is it again?

Sharpton and his for-profit businesses owe more than $4.5 million in state and federal tax liens, according to The New York Times.

And his influential nonprofit group, National Action Network, the Times said, appears to be in a similar situation, saddled with years of unpaid travel and hotel expenses while apparently staying afloat by not paying federal payroll taxes for employees.

The newspaper also suggested that Sharpton is not paying enough or fast enough to reduce his obligation to the state of New York, a situation he sharply refuted Tuesday.

The 60-year-old civil rights leader told FoxNews.com that he has an agreement with the government to repay his personal and business-related taxes and that his payments are on time.

“We have a signed agreement,” he said. “And what is in the agreement has been kept. We’ve been up to date. This is the most bogus story in the world.”

Well, it is a Times story, so he’s got a point. But it takes bogus to know bogus:

The low point in his career likely came in the late 1980s when he accused a New York prosecutor of being part of a group of white men that abducted and raped teenager Tawana Brawley, an allegation that proved to be false.

The much slimmer and well-tailored Sharpton now has a show on MSNBC. He appeared on the streets of Ferguson, Mo., to appeal for justice and calm in the aftermath of a white police officer in August fatally shooting unarmed black teen Michael Brown.

More recently, Sharpton was at the White House when Obama announced that Loretta E. Lynch, the U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of New York, who is black, would be his nominee to be the next U.S. attorney general.

He said that his rise to prominence has also increased his pay and that he is negotiating a deal with government officials to clear his debt by offering them 50 cents on the dollar.

“I’ll write a check tonight,” Sharpton said.

Who wouldn’t settle a debt for 50 cents on the dollar? Since when does the IRS negotiate with tax cheats? Start thinking interest and penalties, Reverend.

The Time also reported that Sharpton, a Democrat and former mayoral and Senate candidate, also had a history of delinquent rent payments to his friend, Bishop E. Bernard Jordan.

Sharpton asked why he would be responsible for back payments at the Jordan’s Brooklyn rental home in 2006 when he had separated two years earlier from his wife, who remained in the home while he lived in a Manhattan apartment.

“What is new is this story?” Sharpton asked.

That Sharpton has been a charlatan and a hoaxster for decades is perhaps not news. That he is to this day, and has traded on his conmanship to become advisor to the president of the United States is news. News fit to print.

Comments (4)

Sensational Headline Watch

I get it that the rest of you don’t share my fascination with the scandalous events down Mexico way. I didn’t care either until Obama tried to describe that dangerously lawless land as some sort of sun-soaked Swiss canton, and dismissed media reports of cartel killings and corruption as “sensational headlines”.

I said dangerous and I mean dangerous. Not just Mexico, but Obama too.

Can you believe this [bleep]?

What do the September disappearance of 43 university students from the custody of local police in the state of Guerrero, Mexico, and new allegations of federal corruption in the awarding of public infrastructure contracts have in common? Answer: They both show that Mexico still has a huge problem enforcing the rule of law.

Until now the president has been able to ignore Mexico’s legendary lawlessness. He has been riding an international wave of excitement around the opening of the energy sector, with few questions asked. But unless he wants to make common cause with the hard left—which thinks it has him on the ropes because of the missing students—he needs to admit his mistakes, purge his cabinet and make the rule of law job No. 1.

The rule of law? In Mexico? It would be easier to wrap my head around string theory than to comprehend such a reality.

To show that Mexico is committed to ending impunity and to improving public security, the president should use his influence to push for the full implementation of the new criminal code mandating that all federal and state judicial systems move, by 2016, to the oral accusatorial system, away from Mexico’s traditional written, inquisitional system.

Monterrey lawyer Ernesto Canales founded the civic group Renace (Spanish for “rebirth”) in 1994 to work for this reform in his home state of Nuevo León. In an interview in New York in the spring he told me that the change will “mean an increase in substance over formality in public trials and an increase in transparency. It will also raise the odds that judges actually know what’s going on in their courtrooms.”

Sounds important. Yet congressional approval of the federal regulations necessary to complete the reform is moving at a glacial pace, and the judiciary is in no hurry to comply. Many of the 32 states have yet to make the transition.

Everyone knows why: The oral system will challenge the traditional use of the criminal-justice system as a profit center for the state. In that tradition the accused can either pay or do time. Culpability is beside the point, and there is no need for competitive police salaries, forensics or transparent protocols to ensure accountability and communication among municipal, state and federal authorities.

Simply put, everything in Mexican justice (again with the incomprehensible concepts!) is available for purchase, from a speeding ticket to charges of multi-billion dollar international drug smuggling.

And all Obama saw fit to mention was Frida Kahlo and Octavio Paz.

Mexico may be dangerous, but is anything more dangerous than a “raging narcissist” (HT Pat Caddell) who believes anything he says, simply because he’s the one saying it?

Understand me: it’s not about Mexico; it’s about Obama. And it’s bad news.

Comments

Ripe for Impeachment

I’m not saying it’ll happen: impeachment is more a political act than a legal one.

But Andy McCarthy makes the case:

I drew on Faithless Execution in last weekend’s column and in a follow-up Corner post, positing that, short of credibly threatening impeachment, Congress and the courts can neither compel a president to enforce the laws nor stop him from using his plenary pardon authority to grant a sweeping amnesty. That gets Obama two-thirds of the prize he is pursuing — namely, several million aliens whose illegal status has been purged, put on the path to inevitable voting rights that will give Democrats an invincible electoral majority.

By calling on Congress to pass a bill to his liking, Obama has admitted he doesn’t have the authority to do this on his own. He has said exactly that several times over the years, as captured in a video we posted yesterday. By issuing this fiat, therefore, he will exceed his authority—by his own admission and reasoning. Either the proposed amnesty will have no validity; or, if he attempts to enforce it, he will be violating the Constitution. Again, he says so.

That may seem like a political impossibility—I am far from prepared to issue one of my Thirstradamus predictions—but it may become more possible over time:

Congress could, in theory, block the president from granting illegal immigrants legal status and other positive benefits (such as work permits) without impeaching him. To do this in reality, though, Congress would have to use its power of the purse. Translation: It would take the credible threat of a government shutdown to check the president’s lawless conferral of benefits.

Alas, that constitutional parry has already been disavowed by GOP congressional leadership.

Against this backdrop, I am gratified that Fox News’s Megyn Kelly and Charles Krauthammer have just given the topic of impeachment in the immigration context more of the serious consideration it deserves. Appearing on The Kelly File Thursday, Dr. Krauthammer asserted that the president’s anticipated amnesty decree for millions of illegal aliens “is an impeachable offense.”

He is plainly correct. As Faithless Execution elaborates, “high crimes and misdemeanors,” the Constitution’s trigger for impeachment, is a term of art for abuses of power that violate the president’s fiduciary obligations to the American people he serves, the constitutional system he takes an oath to preserve, and the laws whose faithful execution is his core duty. High crimes and misdemeanors are not — or at least, not necessarily — the same as “crimes” and “misdemeanors” prosecutable in the courts. Impeachment is a political remedy (i.e., the removal of political authority), not a legal one (i.e., the removal of liberty after criminal indictment and conviction).

A sweeping amnesty for millions of unrepentant lawbreakers that punishes American workers, imposes crushing burdens on the states, and betrays law-abiding aliens who comply with our immigration rules is not an indictable offense. Yet it is obviously an impeachable one. So is the failure to enforce the immigration laws. And the effort to award by executive decree benefits that only Congress has the power to grant is patently lawless and thus just as clearly impeachable.

Exactly. And, not to be tiresome, but Obama, the ex-Senior Lecturer in Constitutional Law, has said so himself, repeatedly.

The argument goes on, but let me peel off here to discuss the politics. Impeachment requires a majority vote in the House, one I believe would pass easily. The case then is handed over to the Senate for “trial”. To convict, two-thirds (67) of the Senators need to vote in favor. When the new Congress is seated, there will be 54 Republicans, all of whom (let’s say) will vote for impeachment. Can they convince 13 Democrats to go against the party (and the country) to join them? Almost certainly not.

Obama’s proposed decree is politically unpopular, as is he, and a few Dems will vote to impeach. But not enough. As McCarthy says, impeachment is a political act more than a legal one. And there are more than enough political hacks among the Democrats in the Senate to spare The Nation’s First African American President™ from the humiliation of impeachment.

So, is it worth it to proceed? Democrat pollster Pat Caddell described Obama as a “raging narcissist”. Such people do not slink away with their tails between their legs. He’s not bluffing. He doesn’t have to: he can do the math as well as I can (both of us having gone to the same university). I’m not sure I see the point in pursuing a strategy that has almost no chance of success at the end, will leave the offending act unchanged, and may be political overkill.

And I’d vote to impeach him faster than you can say “undocumented citizens”.

But I wonder if wielding the power of the purse might not be a better option, even if it does lead to a shutdown. The GOP feels it took the brunt of criticism for the last “shutdown” (slowdown, barely), yet it just won an historic election. Unlike impeachment, cutting off funds is, as this administration likes to say, a “time-limited, scope-limited” action. A specific remedy to an unpopular act.

I’d also take my chances in the Supreme Court, however this issue might come before them. Even there, the issue would be as much political as it would be legal. But I think a majority of Roberts, Alito, Scalia, Thomas, and Kennedy would rule that the Constitution is not the president’s napkin at a barbecue joint, to be soiled, wadded up, and thrown away whenever it suited him. On that, I would give my Thirstradamus guarantee.

Comments

Million Lawman March

About time:

Sheriffs across the country are planning a massive gathering in Washington, D.C., to speak out against President Obama’s potential executive action on immigration.

Sheriff Thomas M. Hodgson of Bristol County, Mass., sent a letter to organize a meeting of sheriffs in Washington, D.C., on December 10, two days before the existing government-funding bill expires, to meet with congressmen and encourage them to take action to secure the border.

“Never before in our nation’s history has it been so important for the American sheriffs to stand united and speak with one voice to secure our nation’s borders,” Hodgson wrote. “Senator Jeff Sessions, Senator David Vitter and other members of Congress have agreed to join us at the Capitol to demand immediate action to secure our borders as the first step in achieving legitimate immigration reform in the future. Several sheriffs have agreed to work in a spirit of cooperation to assist in recruiting at least 200 sheriffs to travel to Washington, D.C. for this historic meeting and press conference with members of Congress.”

Shoot. Only 999,800 short.

He says the sheriffs will send the message that: “We are sick and tired of being marginalized in our ability to protect our citizens. We want the border secured. And until you do that, until you secure these borders, which you’ve been telling us since Day One, you will never ever have legitimate comprehensive immigration reform.”

I’ve heard Hodgson interviewed. I think he’ll get his 200 sheriffs.

Maybe then, they can get to work on this:

A career attorney with top ratings at Immigration and Customs Enforcement says that she faced retaliation from superiors for refusing to drop cases pending against illegal aliens guilty of DUI, identity theft and other crimes.

Patricia Vroom, 59, made the claims in a lawsuit filed last week in U.S. District Court of Appeals in Arizona against Department of Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson.

Vroom, who has worked for ICE and its predecessor for 26 years, alleges that in Feb. 2013 she was contacted by ICE deputy director Sarah Hartnett and was “instructed to look favorably for prosecutorial discretion on immigration removal cases involving the lowest level of felony convictions for identity theft under Arizona law.”

Vroom also claims that on Nov. 5, 2013, Downer emailed her concerning the case of an individual who was found ineligible for relief under the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program, which was started by President Obama, because of an ID theft conviction.

Unknown to Vroom at the time, top ICE and DHS officials had discussed that individual case on a conference call in August 2013.

An angry Downer emailed Vroom on Nov. 5, 2013, demanding to know why she had been unable to convince her field office director to cancel the “notice to appear” order for the alien.

I hear adds on the radio telling me how dangerous identity theft is. I’m supposed to spend a lot of money to protect myself from just that threat. Yet my government wants more of it. Not that I’m surprised.

PS: This is why I’m immune to sob stories about criminal aliens. The violation of our immigration laws is usually just the beginning. Call it a gateway crime.

Comments

Where’s Their Hashtag?

#bringbackourburnedanddecomposedstudents

The 43 Mexican students who disappeared in southern Mexico in September were abducted by police on order of a local mayor, and are believed to have been turned over to a gang that killed them and burned their bodies before throwing some remains in a river, the nation’s attorney general said Friday.

That’s quite a mouthful right there.

This is the conclusion that investigators have reached, Attorney General Jesus Murillo Karam said, though he cautioned that it cannot be known with certainty until DNA tests confirm the identities.

This will be a challenge, he said, as the badly burned fragments make it difficult to extract DNA.

“I have to identify, to do everything in my power, to identify, to know if these were the students,” Murillo said.

You may wonder why there would be any doubt. Is Mexico so riddled with dead bodies that they can’t tell their atrocities apart?

Yes. It is:

The initial shock of the police rampage that day had barely set in when the attorney general for the state of Guerrero, Iñaky Blanco Cabrera, announced that over the weekend investigators had exhumed the contents of six mass graves discovered on a densely wooded parcel of land outside of Iguala. The assumption was that the abducted students might be among the cadavers. The initial body count was estimated at 28, but subsequent reports raised the estimate to 34.

Now the Mexican Federal Government has taken note. A cordon of about 200 Mexican Army soldiers, Marines and Federal Police stood guard as the bodies were exhumed from a hilly stretch of nearly inaccessible woodland known as Pueblo Viejo. The bodies had been piled onto dry branches and logs, doused in gasoline, and set afire. DNA testing is underway to identity the cadavers, which at the time of discovery were burned beyond recognition. But four members of a drug cartel known as Guerreros Unidos that operates in Iguala, who are currently in police custody, told investigators that they knew of 17 student activists transported to the killing ground of Pueblo Viejo.

This may have been the fate of some of the students. The rest sleep with the fishes:

The suspects told police they don’t remember exactly how many people they killed, but they were told by their leaders that there were more than 40, Murillo said.

The abducted men were then burned at the dump in a fire that was kept alive for at least 14 hours by adding diesel fuel, tires and debris, the attorney general said.

The next day, the gang members were ordered to further break up the remains and place them in black garbage bags that were tossed into the San Juan River, Murillo said.

Scuba divers searched the river and found pieces of the bags and remains. One bag was found intact, with human remains inside, the attorney general said.

Really, BTL, is this necessary? Must we know the gruesome and ghastly details of a drug cartel mass murder?

Well, I think you do. Otherwise, you’d believe this:

It is wonderful to be back in México — lindo y querido. (Applause.)

And it’s an honor to be back in Mexico City — one of the world’s great cities. Es un placer estar entre amigos. (Applause.)

In modern times, Mexico’s blend of cultures and traditions found its expression in the murals of Rivera and the paintings of Frida, and the poetry of Sor Juana and the essays of Octavio Paz. [And the charred cadavers of students? ed]

Some Americans only see the Mexico that is depicted in sensational headlines of violence and border crossings.

Thus was born my lengthy series of posts under the title Sensation Headline Watch. Some of you may remember them.

My point then and now wasn’t to wallow in the lurid, blood-spattered, fly-swarmed mess that is Mexico in “modern times”. Anyone can see that. My point was—and is—to warn that Obama is so dishonest, so deceiving (not least self deceiving), that he would try to portray the corpse flower that is today’s Mexico as a rose in June. He might even believe it, as he might even believe anything he says (“without a Negro dialect unless he wants to have one” ©Harry Reid).

Mexico may be fighting back against the drug cartels that so brutally rule so much of its territory. It may be punishing the corruption that runs through every level of its government. It may mean well.

But it is still, well, mean. Millions of Mexicans may long for peace and prosperity, may yearn to have the time (and literacy) to read the essays of Octavio Paz. But as long as the government and organized crime are two sides of the same peso, Mexico is a hot zone—one to be avoided and quarantined as Sierra Leone, which it so closely resembles.

PS: That Mexico is not quarantined is made obvious by the reports of cartel activity across the United States.

Comments

Document Dump

Holder finally releases some Fast and Furious documents, during mid-term election coverage

The Justice Department sent Congress 64,280 pages of documents it had previously withheld from the botched Fast and Furious gun-walking operation on Tuesday, in a move Republicans said was an admission by President Obama that he overstepped his legal bounds.

Investigators had sought the documents for years, with the House even suing in federal court to force their release. Mr. Obama had asserted executive privilege, claiming the documents were part of the “deliberative process” of White House decision-making and therefore didn’t need to be divulged, but the court rejected those claims.

The most despicable administration evah.

– Aggie

Comments

This Is What American Fascism Looks Like

Obama planning amnesty by Christmas

The law? Why Obama Is The Law.

ABC News Chief White House Correspondent Jon Karl reported that according to WH officials “the president will move forward with an executive order on immigration reform “no matter how big a shellacking Democrats get tonight” during ABC’s Election coverage on Tuesday.

Karl said “White House officials are saying that you can expect the president to set an aggressive, and defiant tone tomorrow. You’re not going to see any mea culpas, no big firings, no change in direction.”

He added “officials tell me the president is prepared to aggressively pursue his agenda using his power of executive authority, where he can’t work with Congress, and the big one is going to be on immigration reform. White House officials tell me that the president will move forward with an executive order on immigration reform no matter how big a shellacking Democrats get tonight.”

I surely hope that all you O-Bots recognize what you’ve done to the country.

– Aggie

Comments

Justice4GentleGiant

Justice it may well be, but that doesn’t mean people are going to like it:

Justice Department investigators have all but concluded they do not have a strong enough case to bring civil rights charges against Darren Wilson, the white police officer who shot and killed an unarmed black teenager in Ferguson, Mo., law enforcement officials said.

When racial tension boiled over in Ferguson after the Aug. 9 shooting, Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. traveled to the St. Louis suburb to meet with city leaders and protest organizers in an effort to bring calm. He assured them that the federal government would open a civil rights investigation into the fatal shooting of Michael Brown. But that investigation now seems unlikely to result in any charges.

“The evidence at this point does not support civil rights charges against Officer Wilson,” said one person briefed on the investigation, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the case.

I didn’t think it did. But all I knew was what I read in the papers.

But don’t let the facts get in the way, Reverend (as if you ever would):

The Reverend Al Sharpton is en route to Ferguson for the National Action Network’s four-day ‘Justice for Michael Brown Weekend.’ The event will start with a Leadership Breakfast, Friday morning at 8a.m., at the Hubbard Community Center.

Michael Brown’s parents, Leslie McSpadden and Michael Brown Sr., will also be in attendance.

Rev. Sharpton will also host a Luncheon Meeting for the ‘Disciples of Justice,’ who will monitor police interactions with the community, after the grand jury makes its decision.

The National Action Network plans to hand out candy, scarves and hats to children tonight at the Greater St. Mark Family Church in Ferguson.

Will Tawana Brawley be in attendance? How about Yankel Rosenbaum? (Oh wait, he was murdered.)

“Disciples of Justice” is pretty funny coming from the serial flim-flam man. Unsurprisingly, the term already seems to have been in use before he appropriated it. My search turned up a video game and a law enforcement motorcycle club using that name. Like I said, pretty funny, Al.

As I’ve said many times before, I’m sorry Michael Brown is dead (as I’m sorry Trayvon Martin is dead). But the apparent behavior of these two young black men was not consistent with surviving their encounters with law enforcement (even of the “mall cop” variety of George Zimmerman). Both would still be alive, however anonymously, if they had made better choices. Any choices but the ones they made.

Comments

You Watching The Ferguson Riots Tonight? [UPDATED]

Looks like the autopsy supports the police officer’s story

FERGUSON, Mo. (KMOX) – A report by the St. Louis Post-Dispatch this morning shows the official autopsy supports Ferguson officer Darren Wilson’s claim that Michael Brown struggled with him in his patrol vehicle, and that Brown did not have his hands up when he was shot Aug. 9.
A source tells the Post-Dispatch that Wilson testified to the Grand Jury that when he tried to get out of his SUV to talk to Brown and his friend Dorian Johnson about the theft of cigarillos, Brown slammed the door shut and punched him in the face.
Wilson pulled his weapon, and Brown grabbed it. At one point, the barrel was pointed at Wilson’s hip, then a shot was fired hitting Brown’s hand.
Wilson says he then chased Brown, who turned and ran toward him. Wilson said “stop,” then fired. Brown kept coming, so Wilson fired several more shots.
The Post-Dispatch also had three experts examine the official autopsy.
St. Louis medical examiner Dr. Michael Graham says the report supports claims that there was a “significant struggle” in Wilson’s patrol car, and Brown suffered a hand wound at “relatively short range.”
A forensic pathologist from San Francisco, Dr. Judy Melinek, says based on a bullet wound to Brown’s arm, Brown’s palms could not have been facing Wilson in the standard surrender position – with hands up and palms out – when he was shot, and Brown was falling forward or lunging when he was hit by the fatal shot to the top of his head.

Can Eric Holder demand that the Grand Jury indict the police officer anyway? Or can they just throw him in jail or execute him without a trial? Because if not, expect riots (weather permitting).

– Aggie

UPDATE
BTL here, adding this nugget:

Angry protesters in Ferguson, Mo., shut down CNN’s live broadcast Monday night after repeatedly heckling the reporter and cameraperson for working for an organization “run by AIPAC” and “Zionists.”

The heckling is audible in a video filmed by protester Bassem Masri, whose Twitter profile touts the Palestinian cause and reads “long live Palestine.”

“You fucking lie about Ferguson; you lie about Occupy Wall Street; you lie about Palestine. You’re all run by Zionists,” one protester said. “We’re holding y’all accountable.”

The hecklers threatened to shut down future CNN broadcasts. “They’re an AIPAC-run agency,” Masri said. “Don’t even think that we won’t.”

No wonder Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson couldn’t wait to get there.

PS: Curiously, CNN doesn’t mention any of this.

Comments

Can We Pick ‘Em?

Remember the Watergate-era bumper stickers: “Don’t Blame Me, I Live in Massachusetts”? (The only state to vote for McGovern over Nixon.)

As if Ted Kennedy, John Kerry, Barney Frank, and Mike Dukakis weren’t enough proof of our miserable judgement…

We can’t even build a casino without [bleeping] it up:

State and federal indictments were made public Thursday against three owners of the land in Everett where Steve Wynn plans to build a resort casino, alleging that the men defrauded Wynn and lied to state regulators by hiding the fact that convicted felon and known Mafia associate Charles Lightbody was one of the partners.

According to the 13-page federal indictment, Lightbody and two other defendants went to elaborate lengths to cover up Lightbody’s interest in the land, fearing that if his presence were known, it would jeopardize Wynn’s chances of getting the sole Eastern Massachusetts casino license.

The state’s gambling law bars criminals from profiting from a gambling facility.

No public officials were indicted by either grand jury, nor was a fourth land owner, Paul Lohnes, a former business partner of gambling commission chairman Stephen Crosby.

Wait, one of the land owners was a partner of the gaming commission chairman? And neither of them is crooked???

We need Howie Carr to ‘splain what it all means:

Did I call it or what? The headline on my Sept. 16 column was “Everett: Can Youse Believe It?”

The only surprise is that it took the feds just two weeks to sweep the alleged hoods and assorted bad actors off the board.

The G-men didn’t just grab Charles Lightbody, the ex-jailbird who brilliantly brags on tape: “They’re … not gonna find me anywhere. You know what I mean?”

In an unrelated shakedown, they also picked up the alleged boss of the New England Family of La Cosa Nostra (NELCN), one Anthony Spagnolo, who has the moniker of a submarine sandwich — Spucky. He’s 72, and his muscle, Pryce Quintina, is a pup of 74.

Lightbody, at 57, is “The Kid.”

Everybody knew this Everett land deal was about as dirty as the King Arthur’s Lounge that Lightbody was allegedly planning to run hookers out of. Yet these statesmen on the Mass. Gaming Commission couldn’t help themselves. But what did Deval Patrick expect when he handed the chairmanship to Steve Crosby, a corpulent career hack whose brainpower lights up the world like a three-watt bulb?

Imagine. Organized crime being involved in a casino deal. Who ever heard of such a thing?

[C]ritics said the indictments reflect exactly what people fear about bringing casino gambling to Massachusetts: increased crime.

“Today, the corrupt casino culture burst into clear focus, and the voters now have an even clearer choice in 33 days,” said John Ribeiro, chairman of Repeal the Casino Deal. “The barons of Beacon Hill who empowered this new wave of corruption should feel all new shame.”

Mayor Martin J. Walsh of Boston — who had urged the gambling commission to delay issuing a license for the Eastern Massachusetts casino, in part because of controversy over the Everett land — said the commission failed “the people of Boston and of the Commonwealth by allowing, even remotely, the taint of corruption to be associated with this land transaction.”

More than a taint, Marty, and hardly remote.

Is it any wonder why this question is on the ballot?

The Affordable Casino Repeal Initiative, Question 3 is on the November 2014 statewide ballot in Massachusetts as an initiated state statute. If approved by voters, the measure would repeal a 2011 law that allows resort casinos to operate within the state.

Based on the wording of the measure, a yes vote on Question 3 means no casinos in the state, and a no vote would uphold the law, which will facilitate the licensing of up to three resort-style casinos, to stand.

I don’t gamble, but I have no problem with those who do. And I am predisposed to like Steve Wynn for what he said about Obama recently (see below). But I am voting “Yes” on Question 3. Claude Rains put up a better acting job of “shock” in Casablanca than these jabronis.

I’m sure the timing by Eric Holder’s Justice Department has nothing to do with Wynn going on CNBC Wednesday and saying of Dear Leader: “I am stunned at the immaturity of this administration. … We elected a man as president who had no experience at anything. Nothing!” Except maybe revenge.

Sorry, Steve, I couldn’t agree more. But. They. Cannot. Be. Trusted.

Comments

Taking a Beating II

Yesterday (three posts down), we began a Conversation on Race™ by noting that not only were Ray Rice and Adrian Peterson, the two most notorious abusers in the NFL today (against stiff competition), African American—so were their defenders. We learned, and shared, that “whooping” a four year old child with a “switch” (the leaves from which were stuffed in the child’s mouth) was commonplace in the black community (at least in the South). Like “baking a pie”.

So, apparently is domestic violence:

Ray McDonald and Chris Cook of the San Francsico 49ers, Tony McDaniel and Kevin Williams of the Seattle Seahawks, Brandon Marshall and Santonio Holmes of the Chicago Bears, Greg Hardy of the Carolina Panthers, Dez Bryant of the Dallas Cowboys, Erik Walden of the Indianapolis Colts, Donte Whitner of the Cleveland Browns, Randy Starks of the Miami Dolphins and Frostee Rucker of the Arizona Cardinals have all been arrested for domestic violence or related charges since 2005, according to a USA Today database that tracks players’ arrests since 2000.

I wasn’t sure, so I checked: all 12 are black men. In a league that is roughly 60% black, how can 100% of the domestic abusers be black? As a New England Patriots fan, I remember Christian Peter, a serial abuser who was white—and of course Aaron Hernandez, a Hispanic gang-banger who played professional football on the side. Where are the four or five white guys in this list? These are just numbers. They don’t tell a story.

These tell a story:

[T]here are a large number of people who don’t think Adrian Peterson did anything wrong at all, including fellow NFL players (both retired and active):

Keith Bulluck: Adrian Peterson might go to jail for whoop’n his son? Oh ok…

Darnell Dockett: I got a ass whippn at 5 with a switch that’s lasted about 40mins and couldn’t sit for 2days. It’s was all love though. Times have changed!

Mark Ingram: When I was kid I got so many whoopins I can’t even count! I love both my parents, they just wanted me to be the best human possible!

I have no comment on their upbringing. But did they see the pictures of Adrian Peterson’s son? Have they read the reports? That wasn’t discipline; it was fetishistic abuse. And why are all three black men?

As is this guy:

NBC NFL analyst Tony Dungy joined the show to talk about Week 2 in the NFL and to share is opinion on charges against Vikings running back Adrian Peterson. Dungy said that he believes it remains to be seen whether what Peterson did was abuse and Dungy noted that he grew up with that kind of discipline in his home.

I admit I’m jumping back and forth between domestic abuse and child abuse, but can you blame me? That’s the news. What I’m trying to get at in this Conversation on Race™ is what I’m often trying to get at: the violence committed against black people by black people—from inner-city crime to abortion—is appalling. If it is to end, and it must end, we first need to talk about it. Thanks for listening.

Comments

« Previous entries Next Page » Next Page »