This ain't Hell, but you can see it from here

Category: Legal

  • Meanwhile, In the “Government Transparency” Department . . .

    . . . we have the following two “inconvenient truths”:

    We all remember just how “wonderfully” the rollout of the Federal ObamaCare website went. Because of this debacle – and fears concerning system security because of the poor initial implementation of that website – the AP made a FOIA request for documentation regarding the website’s system security plan.

    The Administration is flatly refusing to release any information about the subject. They are allegedly doing so for two reasons. First, because the release of system security plan might help attackers circumvent it. And second, because “releasing this information would potentially cause an unwarranted risk to consumers’ private information.”

    Sheesh – what a load of crap. First, any competent IT professional will tell you that this is merely an example of what’s called “security through obscurity.” They will also tell you that “security through obscurity” is merely the illusion of security; a competent attacker can figure out what you’ve done in a reasonable amount of time.

    Second: the allegation that releasing the system security plan “would potentially cause an unwarranted risk to consumers’ private information” is absurd. The plan doesn’t contain a damn bit of PII.   So releasing the plan doesn’t risk disclosing squat concerning “consumers’ private information.”

    What a release of the plan would do is allow 3rd-party review and validation of the plan. It would also show if the job was done “just as competently” as the initial website implementation – and thus would risk further embarrassing the Administration.   My money’s on that being the real reason behind the refusal.

    And then, we have this. It seems that on 15 April 2009, the Administration decided to get a handle on FOIA requests throughout the Federal government. On that date, Gregory Craig – Counsel to the President – wrote a memo reminding all Federal agencies of the need to consult with the White House if any document was requested that had “White House equities”. The requirement to consult with the White House involved all types of requests – including FOIA, Congressional, subpoena, and GAO.

    You can see an extract of the memo here.

    Gee. What a wonderful way to prevent the public from finding out what you’re really doing. The late LBJ and Richard Nixon must be smiling in their graves. They’d have heartily approved this!

    Transparent? Yeah, right. Just about as transparent as a freaking stone wall.

    But this should be no surprise. I mean, when the person in charge of making nonprofit group determinations tells a subordinate in e-mail they think conservatives are ”crazies” and “assholes” you can be fairly sure that they aren’t really interested in either operating openly or fairly. And when the Attorney General won’t investigate such incidents, you know that a distain for open government goes pretty far “up the chain”.

    Like maybe to the very top.

  • No, Not an Attempt to “Railroad” Someone. No Siree. Not At All.

    One thing that military commanders are sensitive to is the concept of “command influence” in criminal matters. Best I can tell (I’m not a lawyer), it’s one of the easiest ways to get a slam-dunk court-martial case thrown out or set aside.

    But apparently the rules in Missouri must bere very different. The “esteemed, wise” governor of that state, Jay Nixon, has publicly said that “a vigorous prosecution must now be pursued” in the Ferguson shooting case.

    Now, as I said above – I’m no lawyer. But it seems to me that that statement fits the dictionary definition of one that is “prejudicial” to the investigation.  That is, it’s a statement that shows someone in authority has already determined the desired outcome of the investigation, and is blatantly attempting to influence the outcome.

    I wasn’t at the site of the shooting, so I don’t know what happened. That’s for an investigation to determine – a fair and impartial investigation.

    But last time I checked, the same is true of Governor Nixon. So, tell me: why is he publicly calling for a “vigorous prosecution” of a case that hasn’t even been freaking completely investigated yet, or brought before a damned grand jury?

    Frankly, this smacks of the old Soviet-era “show trial” mentality.  As in, “We don’t give a flying f**k if the guy is actually guilty or not; we’re going to convict him for political purposes anyway – justice be damned”.

    If the cop involved is found to have committed a crime, he should indeed be tried and – if found guilty – do time.  But at this point, the best I can tell nothing has yet determined regarding whether a crime was committed.  In fact, accounts emerging appear to points to the conclusion that the cop just might be telling the truth about what happened. Or perhaps not.

    Bottom line:  right now we just don’t freaking know the score.  And neither does Governor Nixon.

    We don’t need Governors decreeing the results of legal investigations a priori, or trying to pressure prosecutors or investigators into conducting prosecutions for political purposes.  Ditto the US Attorney General’s office.  Allegedly, this country operates under the rule of law – not according to the  whims of those in power.

    Rule by fiat and politicized justice was the kind of sh!t went on in the Soviet Union, Nazi Germany, and in Mao’s China – as well as numerous other communist and non-communist dictatorships throughout history.  It was wrong there and then; it would be even worse here and now, since we (the US) purport to obey the rule of law – and claim that justice should be blind.

     

    (PS – if you’re wondering what might possibly be Governor Nixon’s political motive here, check out the first linked article.  It identifies Govern Nixon’s political affiliation.)

  • This IRS Crap Just Keeps Getting “Better and Better”

    Well, it seems as if the IRS realizes it has a problem. And it released a solicitation recently – apparently this week – for contractor assistance in getting the problem fixed.

    No, it’s not for help in finding Lois Lerner’s missing email.

    The problem the IRS is seeking contractor assistance to solve? Destroying magnetic computer storage media and devices – including “. . . . at least 65,464 magnetic tapes, 3,225 hard drives, 5,856 floppy disks and 708 reels . . . .”

    Yeah, you read that correctly.  The IRS wants a contractor to help them destroy magnetic tapes and hard drives.  Those are exactly the kinds of storage media on which missing email relating to the current IRS scandal was located before the items holding those missing emails supposedly “crashed” or “were reused”.

    I’m not joking.

    Oh, and it gets even better.  Remember Lerner’s hard drive?  The one that was supposedly “destroyed”, was “unrecoverable” – and took all her archived 2009-2011 email with it?

    Well, it appears that IRS IT experts have indicated to House Ways and Means Committee investigators that Lerner’s hard drive was found to be only scratched, not “destroyed” – and that data from the device should have been recoverable.

    House investigators found this out during recent conversations with IRS IT experts.  The IRS initially refused to make these in-house experts available to the House Ways and Means Committee.

    The IRS also refused to use outside experts to attempt to recover data related to this matter.  Use of an outside data recovery expert was something the IRS’s own IT staff recommended.

    Gee.  Now, why wouldn’t the IRS want an outside expert in data recovery looking into the matter?  It couldn’t be because that would be someone whose livelihood they didn’t control and might not be able to muzzle – could it?

    Don’t forget:  IRS officials also initially told the House Ways and Means Committee, under oath, that the device was toast.  They further said that data from said device was “unrecoverable”, and that the device had been “recycled”.

    But it also turns out that the agency isn’t sure precisely what happened to Lerner’s hard drive, either.  And an internal memo has now come to light which appears to describe her computer as having been “recovered”.

    Hmm.  That’s . . . interesting.

    This whole mess is now far past ridiculous and well into disgusting.  “Transparent”?  Well, if you mean that as a synonym for “obvious” – as in “transparent and shameless dissembling” – that certainly IMO looks like it’s the case here.

    I’m thinking it’s about time to subpoena a few folks from the IRS to testify before the House Ways and Means Committee, maybe some for the second or third time.  And if and when they try to plead the fifth, the committee’s lead counsel should tell the first couple of them who do that the following:  “Use immunity.  Now spill – or you’re going to jail tonight for contempt instead of home.”

  • More “Good News” About IRS Computers

    Now it looks like even more have crashed – and more email may be “lost”.  Including, of course, email from a few more key players in the IRS scandal.

    This is getting f**king disgusting.  I’m too p!ssed to write an article, so you’ll have to go and read this one from the Daily Caller.

    “Most transparent administration in history” my ass.

  • Dare to Criticize the POTUS, Get Investigated by DoJ

    Seriously.

    DOJ investigates Nebraska parade float critical of Obama

    So much for that pesky “free speech” concept.  I guess to some folks, free speech means, “Free for me – but not for thee.”  I guess the same holds true regarding that little oath taken to “. . . preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States . . . “, too.

  • The SEAL Who Knocked Ol’ Jessie Down

    Coming of age in the late 40’s and early 50’s, like so many I was a boy reared on the declining realities of WWII and the much more immediate Hollywood depictions of that cataclysmic event in Technicolor epics that could fire the sense of joining battle even in a Quaker. The United States Army designated we youthful devotees of such movies as John Wayne’s, foolish young men who leaned more to the Hollywood version of combat than the brutal reality our fathers experienced, with a lot to learn.

    An integral part of that Hollywood and John Wayne induced reality was the barroom brawl, and as a former combat military policeman in the 101st Airborne Division during that era, I can assure you that such brawls were frequent, sometimes bloody, but above all, celebrated as demonstrations of unit pride. They would never admit it back then, but there were plenty of colonels and sergeant majors who swelled with satisfaction upon being handed a military police report that indicated their paratroopers had kicked the butts of the paratroopers from another battalion or regiment. That pride was pure spades if the defeated happened to be Marines. This was the Airborne Army back in the 50’s and early 60’s, the lifestyle among the elite units of the military in those long ago days. The training encouraged aggression and weekend alcohol fueled the fires of that aggression until it blazed throughout some on-post club or an off-post bar or night club in a club-wide brawl.

    I have both been a participant in such brawls and policed many such fights; and the unwritten, unspoken but blood-sworn rule, held to by even those most egregiously battered, was that you never pointed a finger at whatever soldier it might have been who kicked your butt. When the fighting stopped, there were no recriminations and no blame attached to any participant. The parties either returned to their seats and resumed drinking or left the premises, frequently with numerous middle fingers being thrown back.

    All of the above brings me to the point of this piece. A tough guy ex-Navy SEAL, Jesse Ventura, former professional wrestler and Minnesota governor, allegedly found himself in a bar in Coronado, California, frequented by SEALs where he reportedly imbibed adult beverages to the point where he became verbally boisterous about political and combat issues best not raised in such an environment. Another SEAL took offense and following the warrior tradition outlined in the paragraphs above, pulled a John Wayne and knocked ol’ governor Jessie smack on his butt. Or so the story goes, one that Jesse disputes.

    Sadly, the SEAL who knocked ol’ Jessie down was later murdered by one of those inexplicable crazies that surface all too frequently and far too tragically, a young man the SEAL was endeavoring to help. Now, the widow of that SEAL who knocked ol’ Jessie down is being sued by Jessie, the Soulless SEAL, for defamation because her deceased husband had alleged on television that he had, indeed once knocked ol’ Jessie down.

    Good grief, Jessie, lots of us military tough guys get knocked down in barroom fights from time to time; I most certainly have and know how well it hurts, both physically and emotionally. But the real men always get up and get over it, sometimes even buying the guy who belted us a beer. And you want to sue the guy’s widow? Because he says he kicked your butt? Hell Jessie, you’re no real SEAL, you’re just a crass, greedy opportunist seeking headlines no matter what the financial and emotional costs to the widow of a REAL SEAL.

    Jessie, I would wager you’re stock is well beneath contempt in the military community.

    Crossposted at American Thinker

  • Lerner: “. . . we need to be cautious about what we say in emails.”

    I’ve written previously (here . . . and here . . . and here – and Jonn’s written about it here) about the IRS and “missing” email relating to their recent scandal. Well, today we have a new indication that something shady was indeed going on – albeit a circumstantial indication.

    The quote above is accurate. It came from Lois Lerner – the former head of the IRS Exempt Organization, which has been accused of blatant anti-conservative bias in its actions from 2009-2011.

    The quote is from one of Lerner’s emails that didn’t disappear. In it, she’s telling subordinates to be cautious about what they say in email.

    The email from which the quote comes is from 2013. It was written after Congress had started inquiring about email traffic.

    The basic article linked above has more info. IMO it’s worth a read.

    Now, why would someone working for “the most transparent Administration in history” feel the need to tell her employees to “be cautious in what we say” in their email – by sending them an email, no less? (smile)  And why would she do that right after Congress started asking about getting access to IRS email?

    C’mon, Lois – enlighten us. “Inquiring minds want to know.” (smile)

     

  • Charles Allen Chavous; Stolen Valor in the courtroom

    Charles Allen Chavous; Stolen Valor in the courtroom

    Charles Allen Chavous mugshot

    We’ve written about Charles Allen Chavous in May and June this year. He used his phony POW and war hero stories to avoid a long prison sentence for his participation in a murder back in 1974 – he was sentenced to five years of probation and a $1000 fine. Chief Tango and TSO send us a link to an article in Stars & Stripes in which Jon Harper drills a little deeper into the story;

    Judge Michael Annis of the Richmond County, Ga., Superior Court, did not respond to queries about whether Chavous’ purported service record played any role in his sentencing decision, handed down in April.

    Assistant District Attorney John Markwalter said he did not recommend any particular sentence as part of the plea agreement. Markwalter said the punishment was left to the discretion of the court, and he would not speculate as to why Annis chose not to give the man any prison time.

    Kay Levine, a professor at Emory University Law School in Atlanta who specializes in criminal law, said that a defendant’s history often plays a big role in sentencing, especially their criminal history.

    […]

    But Levine said Connell’s portrayal of his client as a war hero could have been a major factor in him avoiding prison.

    “The war hero story, I think, would function pretty heavily in this calculation of what’s his just dessert,” Levine said. “There are all of these things that [suggest that] the past is this record of heroism, and also tragedy … to the extent that he was injured in Vietnam fighting for the country. … That factors into how much punishment does he deserve now, because it kind of serves as a counterweight to the wrongdoing of the crime. Somebody who doesn’t have that, there is no counterweight.”

    We posted Chavous’ DD214 in May. It was riddled with blatant forgery, as cited by our buddy Doug Sterner in the S&S article;

    Parts of Block 24 (Awards) and Block 25 (Education and Training) clearly are in a different font than the rest of the DD-214.
    The word “Gallantry” is misspelled “Gallentry” in Block 25.
    The “Navy Cross Medal” and the “Silver Star Medal” — as they appear in the document — are referred to simply as “Navy Cross” and “Silver Star,” without the word “Medal” appearing after them.
    Block 30 (Remarks) states that Chavous served in Vietnam 30 Jan 1970-1 December 1970 and then again from 15 Jan 1971-6 July 1971. But the font listing the second tour is different from the text above it, which indicates it came from a different typewriter.
    Block 30 (Remarks) states that Chavous was “(Missing in Action) November 21-24, 1970,” but the (month/day/year) date format is different from the date format used just above it, and it is not the proper (date/month/year) format used by the military. This suggests the “Missing in Action” part was added later by someone else.
    In Block 5a & 6 (Rank), his rank is shown as “Sgt.” with a date of rank of Jan. 3, 1970, but the “g” in “Sgt” is in a different font than the “g” in “Augusta,” which indicates that “Sgt” was written with a different typewriter.

    “That DD-214 is BOGUS AS HELL,” Sterner said in an email.

    Here is the forged DD214 for your edification;

    Charles Chavous forgery

    OK, so the judge won’t answer whether the forgery played a part in the sentencing and the prosecutor won’t take the blame, but I don’t see either of them bringing charges that Chavous brought a forged government document into the court and presented it as mitigation for his role in the murder. I mean, if I was an officer of the court, I’d want to send a message to the thousands of criminals out there who would seek to influence the court with phony documentation. But, I guess that’s just me.

    TSO communicated with Chavous’ lawyer and some guy named Mothax wrote about it.