Flashback: To know what we’re dealing with here, a 2008 exchange she had in the Detroit City Council while she was, at the time, President Pro Tem.

Now, jump forward to March 10, 2010…

Former Detroit City Councilwoman Monica Conyers was sentenced to 37 months in prison today, but not before controversy and confusion erupted when she announced she wanted to withdraw her guilty plea to bribery.

In a loud and lengthy tirade that targeted federal prosecutors and the news media, Conyers said the court was trying to make an example of her and sentence her for crimes she did not commit.

“I’m not going to be made the scapegoat for other people,” Conyers told U.S. District Judge Avern Cohn. “I’m sorry that the newspapers have put pressure on you to make an example of me.”

“I’m just not going to jail for something I didn’t do.”

I think you are.

Pardon my glee when watching someone of prominence, riding on someone else’s coattail, assumes that others must knee in reverence, and displays undo arrogance.

As I didn’t think it appropriate to ask a long-winded Chris Matthews-type question, I essentially wanted to know (with all the revelations of deliberate fudging of climate data to “prove” global warming is happening) what the legal ramifications on the players could be, considering how many billions of dollars cities, states, businesses, corporations, as well as whole nations have spent going “green”, not to mention the adverse effects on developing nations?

Lord Monckton’s response was direct and to the point: “Jail the lot!”

If we find out Al Gore is changing his legal residence to Boca Raton, you’ll know the heat is on.

Previously posted on the Daily Paul, via the Smoking Argus, Ron Paul Forums and the New American. S. 3081 outlines the process by which Americans may be held indefinitely, without notice of their Miranda Rights, and without ever being charged with a crime.

SPONSOR: Sen. John McCain (R-AZ)

CO-SPONSOR(S) 9
Sen. Scott Brown (R-MA), Sen. Saxby Chambliss (R-GA), Sen. James Inhofe (R-OK), Sen. George LeMieux (R-FL), Sen. Joseph Lieberman (I-CT), Sen. Jefferson Sessions (R-AL), Sen. John Thune (R-SD), Sen. David Vitter (R-LA), Sen. Roger Wicker (R-MS)

Aside from the ominous tone, just what could be looming that could trigger the need for this kind of action against American citizens?

What’s up with these Republicans?!

h/t Craig W

They say good satire has an element of truth, and this black-led Just Us Department appears to be giving certain people a pass….

Veteran Civil Rights Division attorney Christopher Coates is no longer chief of the Voting Section, according to the division’s Web site. It could not be learned whether Coates left the department entirely or transferred to another post.

Coates signed off on the controversial voter intimidation complaint against the New Black Panther Party and three of its members, filed in the waning days of the George W. Bush administration. The Obama DOJ’s decision to dismiss most of the charges in May has become a political controversy for the administration.

Let’s sum up how this looks.

A black president, a black attorney general, New Black Panthers who clearly committed voter intimidation during the election of the first black president, and the dropping of all charges against those Black Panthers.

It didn’t look good then and it looks worse today.

Fifty Domestic Violence Myths
While the climate alarmists have been fudging data for only 5 years, the domestic violence industry has been hard at work pushing its slanted message for two decades. While the climate alarmists seek to raise our taxes and hobble the economy, the VAWA (Violence Against Women Act) Mafia seeks to destroy the traditional family and shred the Constitution.

Not to diminish domestic violence against women, but it sure has been diminished the other way around with some high profile incidents of late….

I think that Khalid Sheikh Mohammad should be tried in a military tribunal.

I think that it’ll — could ‘incent’ terrorism here and to try to bring all of the constitutional rights that we give to citizens to terrorists on the battlefield could mean that someday or own soldiers might be in a position of having to go up and say here are your Miranda rights before we engage in the battle.

It’s just an asinine approach, and I really believe terrorists the world over are laughing at us and glad that we are doing exactly this, because they know that our court system, you know, has some loopholes that they can try to jump through, and I’m just very, very concerned.
— Rep. Trent Franks (R-AZ), House Armed Services Committee

Unfortunately, we’re dealing with a narcissistic, stubborn bunch in this administration that’s already made their mind up, at least for now. They can be swayed by public opinion backlash and ridicule.

After all, President Obama has recently been interviewed on Fox News. The horror.

House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) said at a press briefing on Tuesday that there was “bipartisan support” for Attorney General Eric Holder’s decision to prosecute four prominent terrorists, including 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, in civilian court in New York City.

Hoyer pointed to “three very conservative observers”–former Libertarian Party presidential candidate and U.S. Rep. Bob Barr (R.-Ga.), American Conservative Union Chairman David Keene and Americans for Tax Reform President Grover Norquist–who he said agreed with Holder’s decision.

Keene, Norquist and Barr did not respond to requests for comment on this story.

As I wrote yesterday, this is not just about Eric Holder, the Just Us Department, or the terror defendants. This is also about the lives that will never be the same under the guise of being their civic duty, the millions in NYC who will have to relive the events of that sunny September morning by way of enduring a heightened security posture during the trial, and al Qaeda who will (via discovery) receive a treasure trove of intelligence.

Good thinkin’, guys.

The problem is that this continued practice could make the creators take direct action against all of us, and that could mean demanding we pull their clips down from our sites, or not being able to download clips from network sites as they’d block that ability. This could also negate our “fair use” rights with an accurate copyright infringement accusation.

How would Townhall like someone plastering logos on their original videos?

With that, by President Obama directing the Just-Us Department to try Khalid Shaikh Mohammed in an American court of law instead of a military tribunal, should twelve people find him guilty, it may be very hard for them to buy life insurance policies.

Wanted: 12 New Yorkers willing to put their lives on hold – and maybe on the line – to try the mastermind behind the biggest crime in U.S. history.

The jury ultimately chosen to hear the case against confessed 9/11 mastermind Khalid Shaikh Mohammed will face months of heart-wrenching testimony amid air-tight security.

Unlike the O.J. jury where there was a not-guilty verdict, there may be no book deal takers, the lawyers (and their daughters) won’t become household names, and the media will be speculating how one lives with fatwas hanging over their heads.

Something for the administration to ponder as their decision will directly and adversely affect the lives of  “ordinary people”.

As guardian of the true history of the Black Panther Party, the Foundation, which includes former leading members of the party, denounces this group’s exploitation of the party’s name and history. Failing to find its own legitimacy in the black community, this band would graft the party’s name upon itself, which we condemn.
— Huey P. Newton Foundation, statement

Lighten up, gentlemen. You know this generation lacks originality. When Busta Rhymes rapped to the theme from Knight Rider, nothing else needed be said.

h/t Dan G

See how long that lasts once should they continue to get people fired because they dare not agree with their brand of “marriage”….

A Massachusetts man was fired from a national retail corporation because of his traditional beliefs on same-sex marriage. Peter Vadala was formally dismissed from his job as second deputy manager of the Brookstone store at Boston’s Logan Airport on August 12, 2009, after a supervisor reported him to Human Resources regarding an incident two days earlier.

Peter has since found another job in the retail field. But it was nevertheless a horrible and frightening experience. But this is a chilling example of what can and will happen to people when same-sex “marriage” is imposed on society. What happened to Peter is exactly what was intended by the homosexual movement –– imposing a forced normalization (and even celebration) of homosexual behavior under threat of losing one’s job and livelihood.

People don’t take well to losing their jobs based on a personal belief (which IS still legal in Massachusetts, at least for now), and if the gay community decides to continue on this payback mode, they may not like the pushback they’re inspiring.

h/t Mass Resistance

But mandating people buy federal health insurance could be constitutionally dicey.

Whether such a requirement would be constitutional under the Commerce Clause is perhaps the most challenging question posed by such a proposal, as it is a novel issue whether Congress may use this clause to require an individual to purchase a good or service.
— Congressional Research Service

The government has never required people to buy any good or service as a condition of lawful residence in the United States. An individual mandate would have two features that, in combination, would make it unique. First, it would impose a duty on individuals as members of society. Second, it would require people to purchase a specific service that would be heavily regulated by the federal government.
— Congressional Budget Office analysis, 1994

Many on the left parrot the notion that forcing people to buy health insurance is like the way people are forced to buy car insurance. There are many people who don’t own cars by choice, thus they don’t have to obtain car insurance. We have no choice with having our bodies.

Duh.

I would like our community to be aware of this case, because if we win in this case, this is another historic moment in the United States, and this will go down in history, like Rosa Parks did 50 years ago. And it would be a defeat for prejudice, and it would be a defeat for those who trying to … subjugate the Muslim community, and silence any voice of opposition to discrimination and hatred.
— Nihad Awad, national executive director, Council on American-Islamic Relations

The part Nihad left out is the fact that Rosa Parks rode buses.

CAIR supports those who blow them up.

h/t Qulmos

Senate Finance ranking member Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) is raising concerns that a Department of Health and Human Services Web site that urges visitors to send an e-mail to President Barack Obama praising his health care reform plan may violate rules against government-funded propaganda.

The Web page is accessed through a “state your support” button featured prominently on the HHS Web site and carries a disclaimer that the Web site is maintained by HHS.

How much praise do these people need?

Please share this with your friends….

Edited by Bob

li·bel
2 a : a written or oral defamatory statement or representation that conveys an unjustly unfavorable impression b (1) : a statement or representation published without just cause and tending to expose another to public contempt (2) : defamation of a person by written or representational means (3) : the publication of blasphemous, treasonable, seditious, or obscene writings or pictures (4) : the act, tort, or crime of publishing such a libel

Obviously, this is what we have here.

Whether it be football players reciting or reacting to statements made by so-called media professionals that cannot be fully attributed anywhere, Rush Limbaugh needs to take this to the next level because if the media (that berates “bloggers” for not having editors of “filters”) believes they can just pull an incendiary quote out of the air and make it stick to someone who never said it, no one is safe, especially coming from thin-skinned news anchors and pundits who believe they’re shielded from retribution simply because they are the press.

So why should Rush sue? Because he can probably prove some serious damages.

All one has to do is look at what the monetary worth of the-then St. Louis Lambs was, and contrast that with what the Rams were worth during the “The Greatest Show on Turf” days. We could be talking billions of dollars in increased and higher-priced ticket sales, merchandising, television rights for local broadcasts, increased national exposure on Sunday and Monday nights.

Because Rush’s partners jettisoned him and the baggage the media threw his way, even as a minority partner, the potential monetary losses could be huge.

With that, he’d need to go after everyone who repeated the “slavery” quote, including the man who originally composed it, the media entities who ran it without checking it’s authenticity, the news and sports punditry who publicly reacted to (and based negative opinions on) the false quotes, the commissioner of the National Football league and Indianapolis Colts owner who publicly declared Rush Limbaugh guilty before proven innocent, and at least admonish those players (whom he had the most admiration of) who accepted that guilty charge and made their own pre-trial closing statements.

In order to clear his name, and as we’re talking the potential loss of serious millions, Rush Limbaugh could conceivably own a significant part of CNN, MSNBC, and toss a lot of irresponsible hacks out on their asses. That’s how much we could be talking about.

Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson cannot be allowed to continue dictating what good taste and permissible speech in America is. Just the fact he said he was going to talk to NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell about the situation is laughable. Who is Sharpton to get an audience in the first place, just because he decided to interject himself into a manufactured controversy after the media called their favorite race-issue consultant?

And as I said earlier, if Rush doesn’t take these lying slanderers out back once and for all, they will do it again to anyone with a Republican last initial.

Pulitzer Prize-winning journalism professors (moonlighting as cable news experts) cannot be allowed to go to any old website containing a post with no attribution and use that as a basis for character assassination. Partisan pundits can’t hide behind freedom-of-the-press to repeat false quotes just because they don’t like another persons’ success at articulating an opposing point of view.

Race hustlers cannot be allowed to interject themselves into a false controversy and anoint themselves as speech arbiters, especially when they were given a pass on false comments (including ones that cost people their careers.

News anchors cannot be allowed to work on a news set after they knowingly read a false quote and their way of apologizing is to ring up other quotes out of context. The very football players, who claim to be this potential victim of a Rush Limbaugh, can’t just go to the media and repeat false quotes because of what could’ve been.

The media also has to believe in fairness and equality.

Should any media personality decide to go back and create a story based on fabrications, they should also be worried about their own skeletons, right Mr. Sanchez? They are the first to get all bent when they receive criticism for malicious damage of someone else’s reputation. They’re always too good to apologize; it’s beneath them.

Now’s the time for them to find out what it’s like to have your life destroyed. It’s time for the message to be sent that the arena of ideas is just that. Should they decide to play loose with the rules, they must suffer the same consequences as the dozens of others they’ve had their way with.

Rush Limbaugh has an obligation, not only to us but himself, to sue everybody involved in this sham.

I guess some at the ACLU actually love meat. Who woulda’ thunk it.

h/t George L

Since passing tort reform in 2004, Mississippi has seen the number of medical malpractice claims plummet by 91 percent from its peak. The state’s largest medical liability insurer dropped its premiums by 42 percent, and has offered an additional 20 percent rebate each year since tort reform went into effect.

“You can’t pass real tort reform unless it’s led by the governor,” Mississippi Republican governor Haley Barbour said. “The other side is tough. They have enormous resources. And they fear the trial lawyers — that if you beat them on tort reform, they won’t have those resources anymore.”

This health care initiative might have been palatable had tort reform been an integral part of the discussion, but we all know it’s not even up for discussion.

In the end (despite the flowery rhetoric) it’s not about sob stories about how people were denied coverage, or lost relatives because of impersonal insurance companies. It’s about payback to lobbyists and hefty campaign contributors. Screw the rest of us.

A California judge today tentatively scheduled a trial for Jan. 26, 2010, for a case that challenges Barack Obama’s eligibility to be president based on questions over his qualifications under the requirements of the U.S. Constitution.

The suit alleges Obama is actually a citizen of Indonesia and “possibly still citizen of Kenya, usurping the position of the president of the United States of America and the commander-in-chief.”

In the U.S. Justice Department’s motion to dismiss, attorneys didn’t address the concerns directly, but instead focused their efforts on technical procedures, suggesting the matter can’t be decided in court and that the dozens of plaintiffs cannot demonstrate they have been injured by having Obama in the Oval Office.

Maybe, but there are lots of people who may be injured by this: the people who got in everyone’s face with ridicule, the political party that blindly certified the Electoral votes, the Supreme Court that was too worried about the perception of “overturning” another election to uphold their oaths, the media that insisted that the facts weren’t worth investigating (which is their JOB), and the Congress and senators that failed to uphold the Constitution and will have to worry about legislation signed into law that suddenly may become moot.

A prominent physicians’ group and a non-profit organization that advocates for inner-city poor are suing the Obama administration for free speech and Privacy Act violations committed through a “snitch” program, in which people were asked to e-mail the White House at a special online address – flag@whitehouse.gov — any “fishy” information seen on the Web or received electronically about the President’s health plan

And Obama thought his pre-election pushbacks were effective….