Telling it like it is, or it should be, or like it's going to be, or the way I wish it would be, or the way my girlfriend who just yelled at me told me it is
30 years of charges and you tell her to do something no man should force a woman to do. Then you hide behind your authority. It’s your job to prevent it but you’ve done it more than anyone else in prison and you got away with it too. You’re awesome. That’s not the law. I can see why women don’t report these cases. Who’s going to help them. You just add on to the humiliation.
Don’t you think it’s about time we release discovery?
That you had charges to file and chose not to and then you do this, makes it seem like it was premeditated.
Jeremy (White guy, blond buzz cut, about 230, all steroids, spoke to me at the gym no tattoos that were visible on upper body, probably not his real name, just named him that) So as not to confuse him with anyone else whose name is really Jeremy.
The U.S. Constitution establishes three separate but equal branches of government: the legislative branch (makes the law), the executive branch (enforces the law), and the judicial branch (interprets the law). The Framers structured the government in this way to prevent one branch of government from becoming too powerful, and to create a system of checks and balances.
Under this system of checks and balances, there is an interplay of power among the three branches. Each branch has its own authority, but also must depend on the authority of the other branches for the government to function.
U.S. v. Alvarez is an excellent example of how the three branches each exercise their authority.
In a Nutshell
The Legislative Branch – Congress – passed the Stolen Valor Act of 2005, punishing those who misrepresent that they have received high military honors.
The Judicial Branch – the Supreme Court of the United States – ruled in 2012(link is external) that the Act was unconstitutional because it infringed on the right to free speech protected by the First Amendment.
The Executive Branch – the Pentagon and the President – took action within a month of the Supreme Court’s decision establishing a government-funded national database of medal citations – phased in over time – to enable verification of military honors.
The Legislative Branch – Less than a year after Alvarez was decided, Congress responded with legislation that sought to remedy the constitutional problems in the 2005 legislation, which the Supreme Court decided in U.S. v. Alvarez were in violation of the First Amendment.
The new legislation continues the prohibition on false claims of military honors in instances outside the protection of the First Amendment. However, the Stolen Valor Act of 2013 narrowed the original legislation in the following ways:
Repealed the prohibition against wearing such awards without legal authorization.
Limited the prohibition to wearers who act “fraudulently” and “with intent to obtain money, property, or other tangible benefit.”
Limited the prohibition to the Congressional Medal of Honor and certain, specified decorations or medals.
But the fact remains that the Judicial Branch is not a separate part of government as expressed by the other two branches. The Judicial branch is dependent on the the other two branches for employment and advancement, therefore making the Judicial Branch a dependent branch of government. Until this is remedied, the government is in violation of the Separation of Powers Restoration Act. The Separation of Powers Restoration Act amends the Administrative Procedure Act to require that courts must decide for themselves “all relevant questions of law, including the interpretation of constitutional and statutory provisions, and rules made by agencies.” How can the courts do that if they know that advancement is judged on how they rule on cases, especially politically motivated cases. This interference is akin to coercion and can become problematic when courts rule along party lines. The current Chief Justice is perfect example of a person that has received retribution for voting his conscience. While we all feel every Justice has earned their position, their are going to be some very important questions asked and the weight and influence of politics is going to weigh heavily on what should be easy answers and that is completely unfair for the Justices. Friends might be lost, family might lose some of their luster in the eyes of other family members, all because of politics, something that is not part of the Judicial branch.
The remedy is simple, every branch chooses their own employees, that should also go for the Judicial branch. The Supreme Court should be the ones to nominate the next Supreme Court Justice, with the other branches being relegated to the confirmation process.
But I will say hahaha… because while the remedy is simple, the egos on people will not allow themselves to do the right thing and fix the apparent conflict of interest and give up power even when it benefits the nation as a whole.
Let me also add that all the Justices were rated highly by the American Bar Association, a peer review that is trustworthy and are pillars of their profession and this is not a criticism of them personally but how politics tries to influence every facet of life and we desperately need a branch of the government that is apolitical so we can get definitive answers that would calm the storm before it becomes a hurricane of political unrest, like what’s happening now.
The one year anniversary of a missing child Dulce Alavez is here and investigators are no where near a solution. In this age of high technology and advanced investigating, you would think some kind of lead would pop up. Italicized is from the news report, regular font is my opinion.
A month later, on October 15, 2019, police released a composite sketch, describing the man as Hispanic, roughly 5’7″, slender build, roughly 30-35 years old. He last seen wearing a white T-shirt, blue jeans and a white baseball-style hat.
(The change of description is odd because they are nothing similar. You went from bright clothes to bland clothes)
With no cameras keeping an eye on the area where Dulce was last seen, investigators were left with very few clues.
Now, I don’t know Bridgeton but I know that all of the Turnpikes and GSP have cameras as well as anything leaving the State. There has to be some traffic cameras in the surrounding area. In my opinion, not having a video is more likely the result of not maintaining the cameras. There should be something, I mean I get a ticket if I fail to pay those ridiculous tolls, I get a ticket the next day, with a pic of my face, tag and car, now they don’t have a camera working. There are traffic news cams, weather cams, people’s cars cams, cams we don’t know about and there is no video of this guy. To me there is two possibilities, 1) This person knew everything about this town or 2) It’s complete bullshit, I’m not sure which one it is.
Cryptic notes
In addition to the thousands of tips and alleged Dulce sightings, police say psychics came forward and three cryptic letters started popping up in the Ohio area; one at a racetrack/casino; one at a library; and another at an ice cream shop, according to NJ.com.
Rodriguez says she became spooked after she received a letter in South Jersey sometime in March. She said she received random scribblings on pieces of paper sent to her P.O. Box … the only thing was, there was no address assigned to the envelope. When Rodriguez asked the post office about it, she says the worker looked up the name and was able to find the closest P.O. box addressed on to the name on the envelope. The notes on the letter had random words like, “Mexico,” “1776,” “campground.”
Those cryptic notes are weird but, with the ongoing boyscouts of America debacle, that is something that might fit or it could have been a white nationalist.
Another thing is that some people believe that the mother is not emotional enough but I am pretty sure she is very “dry” and most likely not the culprit. They did not mention why a little girl who has never ran off before all of a sudden,out of nowhere, drops her ice cream and starts to run towards a person by a building. My guess is, he was on his PHONE. That sudden feeling to just run from a 5 year old, to a person she probably didn’t know, is completely odd. My son used to run away from people, when they didn’t have PHONES. Maybe his PHONE has that same Uber App that makes Uber drivers go crazy. This girl is in a park, this person of interest is 200 maybe three hundred feet away, I don’t know, if he had yelled, then people would have heard and said something. So, magically, this young person starts to run for no reason. My theory is pretty straight forward. I think you get it.
As I was writing this, I was apologized to twice and told to let it go twice. I will also add that in this region, there seems to be a lot of problems with people taking advantage of people with questionable immigration status. That would be one place where I would look.
Section 242 of Title 18 makes it a crime for a person acting under color of any law to willfully deprive a person of a right or privilege protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States.For the purpose of Section 242, acts under “color of law” include acts not only done by federal, state, or local officials within their lawful authority, but also acts done beyond the bounds of that official’s lawful authority, if the acts are done while the official is purporting to or pretending to act in the performance of his/her official duties. Persons acting under color of law within the meaning of this statute include police officers, prisons guards and other law enforcement officials, as well as judges, care providers in public health facilities, and others who are acting as public officials. It is not necessary that the crime be motivated by animus toward the race, color, religion, sex, handicap, familial status or national origin of the victim.The offense is punishable by a range of imprisonment up to a life term, or the death penalty, depending upon the circumstances of the crime, and the resulting injury, if any.
TITLE 18, U.S.C., SECTION 242
Whoever, under color of any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, willfully subjects any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States, … shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both; and if bodily injury results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include the use, attempted use, or threatened use of a dangerous weapon, explosives, or fire, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.
Attorney General William Barr directed U.S. attorneys across the country to prioritize cases in which landlords have been accused of asking renters for sexual favors in exchange for housing, targeting those who need to defer rental payments because of economic hardship caused by the ongoing pandemic.
“Such behavior is despicable and it is illegal,” Barr said in the memo. “And the Department of Justice has not hesitated to intervene when clear misconduct occurs. This behavior is not tolerated in normal times, and certainly will not be tolerated now.”
CITIZEN’S GUIDE TO U.S. FEDERAL LAW ON CHILD PORNOGRAPHY
18 U.S.C. § 2251- Sexual Exploitation of Children (Production of child pornography) 18 U.S.C. § 2251A- Selling and Buying of Children 18 U.S.C. § 2252- Certain activities relating to material involving the sexual exploitation of minors (Possession, distribution and receipt of child pornography) 18 U.S.C. § 2252A- certain activities relating to material constituting or containing child pornography 18 U.S.C. § 2256- Definitions 18 U.S.C. § 2260- Production of sexually explicit depictions of a minor for importation into the United States
Images of child pornography are not protected under First Amendment rights, and are illegal contraband under federal law. Section 2256 of Title 18, United States Code, defines child pornography as any visual depiction of sexually explicit conduct involving a minor (someone under 18 years of age). Visual depictions include photographs, videos, digital or computer generated images indistinguishable from an actual minor, and images created, adapted, or modified, but appear to depict an identifiable, actual minor. Undeveloped film, undeveloped videotape, and electronically stored data that can be converted into a visual image of child pornography are also deemed illegal visual depictions under federal law.
Notably, the legal definition of sexually explicit conduct does not require that an image depict a child engaging in sexual activity. A picture of a naked child may constitute illegal child pornography if it is sufficiently sexually suggestive. Additionally, the age of consent for sexual activity in a given state is irrelevant; any depiction of a minor under 18 years of age engaging in sexually explicit conduct is illegal.
Federal law prohibits the production, distribution, reception, and possession of an image of child pornography using or affecting any means or facility of interstate or foreign commerce (See 18 U.S.C. § 2251; 18 U.S.C. § 2252; 18 U.S.C. § 2252A). Specifically, Section 2251 makes it illegal to persuade, induce, entice, or coerce a minor to engage in sexually explicit conduct for purposes of producing visual depictions of that conduct. Any individual who attempts or conspires to commit a child pornography offense is also subject to prosecution under federal law.
Federal jurisdiction is implicated if the child pornography offense occurred in interstate or foreign commerce. This includes, for example, using the U.S. Mails or common carriers to transport child pornography across state or international borders. Additionally, federal jurisdiction almost always applies when the Internet is used to commit a child pornography violation. Even if the child pornography image itself did not travel across state or international borders, federal law may be implicated if the materials, such as the computer used to download the image or the CD-ROM used to store the image, originated or previously traveled in interstate or foreign commerce.
In addition, Section 2251A of Title 18, United States Code, specifically prohibits any parent, legal guardian or other person in custody or control of a minor under the age of 18, to buy, sell, or transfer custody of that minor for purposes of producing child pornography.
Lastly, Section 2260 of Title 18, United States Code, prohibits any persons outside of the United States to knowingly produce, receive, transport, ship, or distribute child pornography with intent to import or transmit the visual depiction into the United States.
Any violation of federal child pornography law is a serious crime, and convicted offenders face severe statutory penalties. For example, a first time offender convicted of producing child pornography under 18 U.S.C. § 2251, face fines and a statutory minimum of 15 years to 30 years maximum in prison. A first time offender convicted of transporting child pornography in interstate or foreign commerce under 18 U.S.C. § 2252, faces fines and a statutory minimum of 5 years to 20 years maximum in prison. Convicted offenders may face harsher penalties if the offender has prior convictions or if the child pornography offense occurred in aggravated situations defined as (i) the images are violent, sadistic, or masochistic in nature, (ii) the minor was sexually abused, or (iii) the offender has prior convictions for child sexual exploitation. In these circumstances, a convicted offender may face up to life imprisonment.
So what do you do when you catch them showing this crap to your kid and you reported it and nothing happens. I wonder if these rules apply to everyone, even the people that wrote them. That’s alright, keep paying me. BTW, according to these statutes as they read, due to your previous infractions, this would mean you would get life in prison.
No deaths occurred on my shifts or anything I was protecting
No complaints of excessive force
One accommodation for restraint
Around 1,000 arrests, mas o menos (mostly in the Border Patrol)
Been shot at twice and had numerous items thrown at me (mostly rocks)
Pulled my weapon 5 times in twenty years
Never fired a shot
One whistleblower complaint about a terrorist plot prior to occurring, that would eventually occur
One goof up, when I lied about where I met my wife, which, believe it or not, is a 10 year federal sentence. Luckily, the statute of limitations expired on Aug. 30th, 2020, hence why I can now post this.
When I retired, I was deemed a threat, Red Flagged because of my training, same training as everyone else but they chose not to prosecute for the illegal entry, so they weren’t that worried about me being a threat
Solo para dejar las cosas claras y todos esteamos en acuerdo. Bienvenidos a los Estados Unidos.
All that sacrifice just to end up homeless because some college kid that had his parents pay for everything, that the only thing he ever risked was a divorce when he woke up on the wrong side of his girlfriend’s bed when his wife called him to ask him where he was and decided to take it out on me.
All that and I didn’t even like the job, I was kind of forced to do it because I couldn’t afford college and I didn’t want to be a clerk.
Can we have justice for Enrique “Kiki” Camarena.
I just want to note that all this information has been leaked previous to my disclosure.
VP nominee states the obvious. The question is where do the nominees lie on this obvious statement. My opinion is a little different then how they see it though. Today, it’s not about black and white as much as it’s about socioeconomics, it’s about who can afford/get a lawyer and who can’t or is allowed to.
Pete Buttigieg says Trump disrespected US military since the day he let a ‘sucker’ serve in Vietnam in his place.
Lol… hahaha… that’s a good one, yep…. that’s a heck of a dig. Where I grew up, that’s called playing the dozens.
and not to date myself, but that’s one hell of a diss….
In the debates, Presidential nominee Biden is going to need something Pete who should have been the Presidential nominee has, the ability to hit back in a way that makes you say goddamn, I know that hurt.
10 years and 1 day is the expiration of the statute of limitations for lying to get your naturalization papers. If they don’t catch you before that, enjoy the rest of your life.
A news outlet reported that the President of the United States derided military veterans. There is no recording of this and I personally do not believe that it happened and will be labeled fake news. I understand the tactics used to persuade voters and both sides are guilty of being uncivil and contentious in a time when unity is really needed. I don’t think fake news is needed right now.
In response, the Demo Candidate VP Biden made a statement “If the revelations in today’s Atlantic article are true, then they are yet another marker of how deeply President Trump and I disagree about the role of the President of the United States,” Biden said. “I have long said that, as a nation, we have many obligations, but we only have one truly saved obligation — to prepare and equip those we send into harm’s way, and to care for them and their families.”
If both sides actually care what happens to military servicemen, then they can show their legitimacy by granting the deported American veterans, who put their lives on the line for this country and were then unceremoniously deported for infractions, a path back into this country. They gave all of themselves to protect our liberties and were good enough to serve in our military and after returning from war were deported for infractions that were most likely caused due to trauma during combat. Do the right thing and make these families whole. I’m sure that they are not asking for a free pass but a fair one.
mannysblog.com 