The travesty of the George Zimmerman trial continues.  A jury found George Zimmerman not guilty and every objective legal analyst agrees that this was the proper verdict.  But the liberal left is determined to continue trying the case in the vain hope for a different result.  As soon as the trial ended, the prosecutors held a news conference where they tried to explain why they were still right.  Usually when people suffer a humiliating defeat they back off for a couple of seconds before stepping into another pile of crap.

There is still a large media contingent, fueled by people like Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson, determined to find a way to punish George Zimmerman.  The narrative remains that this innocent, young black kid was hunted down and shot with a gun by an angry white guy.  One would think from the rhetoric that this was a daily problem in America.  The reality is that the only reason this case is receiving such widespread media attention is that it is an extremely rare occurrence.  The liberal left is so desperate to find a case that they brought up Emmett Till.  Emmitt Till was a black kid who was killed in Mississippi in 1955 for daring to flirt with a white girl.  If they had more recent examples, they would be using them.  The reality is that young black kids get shot and killed all the time, but it is almost always by other black kids. 

The media desperately wanted to find an angry white man with a gun.  At first they wanted to paint Zimmerman as an angry white racist.  Zimmerman turned out, inconveniently, to have a mother from Peru, so they called him a White Hispanic. 

The angry white man theory was shattered by the evidence in the trial.  It was also debunked by an FBI investigation into the matter.  But there are still some media outlets pretending this is true.  Now they are focused on the theory that George Zimmerman must have been guilty of something.  This, of course, is based on the false narrative that Trayvon Martin was just some innocent black kid on his way to get candy.

The judge did not allow any evidence with regard to Trayvon Martin’s personal history to be entered into evidence at trial. That was potentially appropriate because this trial was about whether or not George Zimmerman acted in self-defense.   But now that the trial is over, it is important to tell the full truth about this incident.  This is most unfortunate, because the death of this young man is a tragedy.  His parents do not need his name dragged through the mud.  They should be allowed their privacy and we must not ignore their personal pain.  The best solution would have been to just leave things alone.   But when there are wild-eyed people trying to inflame passions based on a false narrative, simple justice requires one to respond with the truth.

Eric Holder is even considering whether or not to try George Zimmerman for violating Trayvon Martin’s civil rights.  This goes back to the Mississippi Burning trial where clearly guilty people were acquitted by an all-white jury who ignored the facts.  It does not apply when a jury properly reviewed the facts and decided that Zimmerman was not guilty.

The following article from the American Thinker outlines some of the really important things to know about Trayvon Martin:

http://www.americanthinker.com/2013/05/trayvon_martins_final_hour.htm

There is much more.  Frankly, this version of events makes a lot more sense than the case presented by the prosecutors.  That is probably one reason why Zimmerman was found not guilty.

Trayvon Martin was found with Arizona Watermelon Fruit Juice Cocktail and Skittles.  Neither package had been opened.    When the prosecutor showed the jury the bottle, he was careful to turn the label so that they couldn’t see “Watermelon Fruit Juice Cocktail.”  This was not necessarily because of the “racist” implication of “watermelon.”   There is a street drug called “purple lean” or “purple drank” that is made from:  “Watermelon Fruit Juice Cocktail (other soft drinks like Sprite can be used, but not ice tea), Skittles and Robitussen.  Some of the texts from Trayvon Martin’s phone make reference to this drug.  His autopsy showed some signs of liver damage that may or may not be related to abuse of a drug like “purple lean.”  So there is a legitimate question as to whether Trayvon Martin was out to get candy, or he was out to get the key ingredients to get stoned.  

We do know that he had trace levels of marijuana in his system when he was shot.  We also know that if he had walked straight home from the 7-11 he probably wouldn’t have encountered George Zimmerman.  Zimmerman describes him as walking between houses looking into windows.  Recall that it was raining at the time.  Zimmerman didn’t start following Trayvon Martin because he was black and because he was wearing a hoodie.   He followed him because it looked like he was casing homes.

Following is a link to a video of the 9-1-1 call by Zimmerman.  Judge for yourself:

http://news.yahoo.com/video/george-zimmermans-911-call-played-153837912.html

The phone records from Trayvon Martin show an angry young man with serious problems.  There are numerous references to fights and suspensions.  He had been kicked out of his mother’s home.  He was asking people for help in getting a gun.  None of this evidence was given to the jury.  None of this information was reported on TV, then or now.  As a result, we have people rioting all over the U.S. based on a totally false narrative.  It is probably too late to stop the violence.  There are already reports of Hispanics being beaten up by black gangs.  But the problem is that the media continues to promote a false narrative and no one is willing to tell the truth.  It is not politically correct to tell the truth about Trayvon Martin, but it is criminally negligent to inflame people to riot based on a false narrative.

But most importantly, we do not honor the memory of Trayvon Martin by distorting the facts.  The sad reality is that other Trayvon Martins are dying every day.  The death of young black boys is a national tragedy.  We don’t have to go back to 1955 to find another example of this problem.  It happens every day.  Larry Elder does an outstanding job of explaining the problem:

http://www.larryelder.com/b/Foxs-Juan-Williams-Gets-It-Half-Right-on-Guns/-115790498609215153.html

The real tragedy of this case is that while people are rioting, because of a false narrative, more black kids are dying because we are ignoring the real problem.  This is the worst thing that could happen.  It not only will not help solve the problem, it will make it worse.  The problem is not angry white men with guns.   It is angry black men, or boys, with guns, knives, sticks or whatever else works.

I recently had a lengthy and enlightening conversation with a very successful black business man.  He grew up in the Black Panther mode and blamed all the world’s problems on whitey.  He eventually self-destructed.  He turned his life around when another black man confronted him with the ugly truth.  This real friend even made him a note and put it on his bathroom mirror.  It said:  “You are looking at the problem.”  Once this guy acknowledged the truth, he was able to change. 

There are some very good black men, like Larry Elder and Juan Williams, who understand this.  If we really want to honor the memory of Trayvon Martin, we should start by listening to them.  In the meantime, we must fight back against those who continue to distort the facts in this case.  There is no excuse for those who cannot or will not tell the truth, particularly when the results are wide spread carnage that helps no one and solves nothing.

This is a time when the Attorney General of the United States, who happens to be black, could be a positive influence on this.  Instead, he continues to pour fuel on the flames of outrage:

http://www.cnn.com/2013/07/16/politics/zimmerman-holder

Incredibly, he blamed this on the Florida “Stand Your Ground” statue which was not even an issue in this case:

Those laws “try to fix something that was never broken” and “senselessly expand the concept of self-defense and sow dangerous conflict in our neighborhoods,” he said.

“By allowing — and perhaps encouraging — violent situations to escalate in public, such laws undermine public safety,” Holder said in his first public comment on legislation that more than 30 states have passed in some form.

The main stream media continues to use angry and white to describe Zimmerman.  Not true.   They continue to describe Martin as an unarmed black kid just out to get candy.  Not true.  They continue to blame the “Stand Your Ground” statue, which was not even a factor.   Not true.   Here’s a message to the main stream media.  Angry white men with guns aren’t the problem.  The “Stand Your Ground” law is not the problem.  You are the problem.

TDM

A BRIDGE TOO FAR

Abraham Lincoln was assassinated on April 13, 1865.  John Wilkes Booth, the assassin, was shot and killed on April 26, 1984.  On May 1, 1865 President Andrew Johnson ordered the Lincoln assassination conspirators tried by a military commission.  The trial began on May 12.  On June 30 the Military Commission determined its verdict and issued sentences.   David E. Herold, Mary Surratt, Lewis Powell and George Atzerodt  were sentenced to be hanged.   Three other people, Samual Mudd, Michael O’Laughlen and Samuel Arnold were sentenced to life terms and Edmund Spangler was sentenced to six years.

On July 7, 1985, Surrat, Herold, Powell and Atzerodt were hanged.

But John Surrat got away.  He was allegedly in Elmira, New York on a spying mission for General Edwin Lee.  He fled to Canada after Lincoln was assassinated.  In September 1865 he went to England and later Italy.  In late 1866 he was captured in Alexandria, Egypt and brought back to the U.S. for trial in civilian court.

The trial began on June 10, 1867 and ended on August 10, 1867 with a hung jury.  The delay resulted in the statute of limitations expiring on everything but a charge of murder.  All charges against him were dropped and he was released from custody in the summer of 1868.  Incredibly Surratt tried to make money on a lecture tour where he admitted his involvement in the plot to kidnap Lincoln, but denied knowledge of the assassination plot.  It was not well received.  He died in 1916.

There is no doubt that if John Surratt had been captured in the spring of 1865 he would have been convicted of something.  He certainly had more involvement than some of the other “conspirators.” 

In this case, it would appear that the real miscarriage of justice was with regard to John Surratt.  It is very hard to believe that he was not heavily involved in the Lincoln Assassination.  It is impossible to justify hanging his mother and sparing him.  But the point is that a fair trial is nearly impossible with this level of public outcry.  At least in the case of Lincoln, a U.S. President had been assassinated and the outrage was legitimate.

 In the case of George Zimmerman the outrage was based on false and misleading information in the main stream media.  There are still people in the main stream media openly rooting for a conviction.  When it became obvious that Second Degree Murder was more than a reach, they pleaded for at least manslaughter.

Now we learn that the DOJ participated in fanning the flames of outrage.  Judicial watch has documents proving that the DOJ sent people to help protest against George Zimmerman. 

http://www.judicialwatch.org/press-room/press-releases/documents-obtained-by-judicial-watch-detail-role-of-justice-department-in-organizing-trayvon-martin-protests/

• March 25 – 27, 2012, CRS spent $674.14 upon being “deployed to Sanford, FL, to work marches, demonstrations, and rallies related to the shooting and death of an African-American teen by a neighborhood watch captain.”

• March 25 – 28, 2012, CRS spent $1,142.84 “in Sanford, FL to work marches, demonstrations, and rallies related to the shooting and death of an African-American teen by a neighborhood watch captain.

• March 30 – April 1, 2012, CRS spent $892.55 in Sanford, FL “to provide support for protest deployment in Florida.”

• March 30 – April 1, 2012, CRS spent an additional $751.60 in Sanford, FL “to provide technical assistance to the City of Sanford, event organizers, and law enforcement agencies for the march and rally on March 31.”

• April 3 – 12, 2012, CRS spent $1,307.40 in Sanford, FL “to provide technical assistance, conciliation, and onsite mediation during demonstrations planned in Sanford.”

• April 11 – 12, 2012, CRS spent $552.35 in Sanford, FL “to provide technical assistance for the preparation of possible marches and rallies related to the fatal shooting of a 17 year old African American male.”]

The following e-mail from Miami-Dade County Community Relations Board Program Officer Amy Carswel explains this very well:

“Congratulations to our partners, Thomas Battles, Regional Director, and Mildred De Robles, Miami-Dade Coordinator and their co-workers at the U.S. Department of Justice Community Relations Service for their outstanding and ongoing efforts to reduce tensions and build bridges of understanding and respect in Sanford, Florida” following a news article in the Orlando Sentinel about the secretive “peacekeepers.”

This is clear evidence that the DOJ was helping to stir up public sentiment against George Zimmerman.  They set up a meeting with the NAACP and elected officials demanding the resignation of the police chief.  Sadly, this was successfull:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/06/20/bill-lee-sanford-police-c_n_1614018.html

Bill Lee was fired as police chief.  The City Manager based that decision on the “escalating divisiveness that has taken hold of the city.”

The reality was that Police Chief Lee was fired for failing to immediately arrest George Zimmerman. 

The initial lack of an arrest following the death of Martin, an unarmed black teenager, by neighborhood watch volunteer George Zimmerman in February led to protests across the nation and spurred a debate about race and the laws of self-defense. Zimmerman’s father is white and his mother is from Peru

Note that Zimmerman is described as having a white father and a mother from Peru.  By this measure, Barack Obama could be described as having a white mother with a father from Kenya.  They did create a bridge, but it was a far cry from a bridge to undertanding and respect.  Instead it fanned the flames of discontent.  There was a time when brave law enforcement professionals protected people from any angry mob, even when the suspect was obviously guilty.  Now the DOJ is the angry man at the back of the mob egging them on.

The DOJ wanted to try Khalid Sheik Mohammed in civilian court in New York because everyone, no matter how despicable, deserves a fair trial.  Perhaps they were hoping for another John Surratt outcome.  But with George Zimmerman, they had zero interest in a fair trial; they were only interested in convicting him of something.  When our DOJ sends in people to fan the flames of outrage, it is quite simply a bridge too far.

TDM

Girls will be girls and boys will be boys, except in California.  The difference between boys and girls used to be pretty obvious.  I know there are some animals where gender identification is an issue.  Chickens, for example, create some challenges.  That is why there are professional Chicken Sexers:

http://www.businessinsider.com/the-incredible-intuition-of-professional-chicken-sexers-2012-3

It turns out that to most people all chickens, regardless of sex, look pretty much the same.  But getting the sex right really matters.  Male chickens tend to end up on the grill, while female chickens are kept alive to produce eggs.   You can keep a male chicken until the cows come home, because both you and the chicken think it’s a male, but you won’t get any eggs.  Hence, the professional chicken sexer.

To the best of my knowledge, no professional chicken sexer actually asks the chicken for his or her opinion.  They just check out the appropriate physical parts and go from there.  Even if a male chicken is convinced that he is actually a she, the chicken sexer is not impressed.  If it doesn’t fit, you must omit.

I always thought it was relatively easy to tell the difference between male and female humans.  Granted there have been occasions when I saw someone whose physical appearance was more than a little ambiguous.  But I always felt that underneath it all was some significant plumbing equipment variations that would seal the deal.  But, I was wrong.  Here in California our esteemed legislature has passed AB1266.  Now, it turns out, that we can’t actually rely on physical characteristics to determine sex.  Instead, we need to rely on the more modern approach of determining sex by the perceived preference of the individual.  If this seems confusing to you, you are probably from a state that lacks the culture and sophistication of California.

The California legislature has decided that individuals who were inconveniently born with the wrong physical parts can now change their gender simply by announcing that they are now the opposite sex.  This is great.  If you are a boy, you just announce that you are a girl and you can use the girl’s rest rooms, the girl’s locker rooms and even try out for the girl’s basketball team.  I know some teenage boys, not confused about their gender identity that will find this appealing.

If you think the problem is equal for both sexes you are more than a little naïve.  Just do a little research and find out how many women have been arrested for hiding cameras in restrooms to spy on naked men.  I suspect that more than a few women are going to be less than thrilled about this new found freedom.   The good news is that if this law passes, we can expect some really outstanding performances from high school girls in California.  We could even see some new world records here.

For years some foreign countries have sent some rather masculine looking female athletes to the Olympics.  They won a lot of medals but the real girls weren’t all that enthusiastic.  The problem became so severe that the Olympic Committee now has rather extensive testing on the subject.  Following is an article about how this works:

http://msmagazine.com/blog/2012/07/30/olympics-new-hormone-regulations-judged-by-how-you-look/

California Democrats are, of course, outraged by this.  Just because a female athlete is six feet tall, two hundred pounds, with no boobs and facial hair is no justification to suspect a problem with gender identity.  If you think you are a girl, you are a girl, regardless of any physical evidence to the contrary.

This is going to create some real challenges for California parents.  What’s a mother (or father) to do?  I mean we all want to be fair and more importantly, legal about this.  How do you find out if your girl is really a boy or vice versa.  Obviously the traditional method of checking out the plumbing fixtures is obsolete. 

Suppose your sixteen-year-old boy, who you just caught looking at porn on your computer, announces that he had decided to be a girl.  He contacts the school principal and declares that he has always thought he was secretly a girl.  By the way, he wants to try out for the girl’s basketball team.  He is six feet tall, which is too short for the boy’s basketball team, but he would be the tallest player on the girl’s team.  Getting to use the girl’s restroom and locker room is just a bonus.

You are pretty convinced that he is lying to you, but can you take the chance?   I mean transgender people have rights.  Do you really want to risk forcing your child to deny his own gender identity?  What if you are wrong about this?

By now we are used to California being the laughing stock of the country.  But with this brilliant move, we could qualify for the coveted  Nobel prize for Stupidity.  If you wonder how other people really feel about this stuff, read the following article from a Nigerian who is sick and tired of Obama lecturing them on moral values:

http://www.vanguardngr.com/2013/07/when-obama-eventually-comes-here/

“…we in Nigeria and Africa as a whole, whether Christians, Muslims or traditionalists, consider homosexuality and bestiality as taboo. The West, on the other hand, has uprooted the Christian foundations of their societies and adopted atheistic definition of “freedom” or human rights. They have taken the definition beyond sane boundaries. This is why the US Supreme Court recently ruled that marriage is no longer defined as a union between a man and a woman. With this new definition, men can marry men, women can marry women. In fact, American soldiers are free to have sex with animals and, perhaps, marry them!

Count us out of that!

Without a spiritual base, the West is in steep decline, and they cannot take us with them. Nigeria and Africa are rising. We will take what we want from the West and drop the rest in the trash bin, just like the Asians have done.”

I am sure he will be very impressed with the new California experiment. 

In California, the parts you were provided with at birth by God, Karma or just plain luck, no longer matter.  You are who you think you are.  When it comes to choosing a rest room, your physical gender doesn’t matter.  You just have to decide to pee or not to pee.

TDM

On January 30, 1033, Adolph Hitler was appointed chancellor of a coalition German government.  The theory was that by sharing power with him in a democratically elected government he would be less dangerous.  But Adolph Hitler had little interest in democracy or a democratic transition of power.  The NAZI party never had the support of a majority of the people, but once they were invited into this “power sharing” “coalition,” the end was near.  Within a very short period of time, Hitler destroyed all his political opposition and took over as absolute dictator.  Hitler and the Nazi Party had zero interest in co-existing with anyone.

There were at least some people in the German army who knew that Hitler was bad news.  Yet there does not appear to have been any attempt at a military coup until Germany was on its way to defeat in World War II.  So the question is:  “if the German military had deposed Hitler, before he had a change to take complete control, would that have been a good thing or a bad thing?

Morsi was elected President of Egypt by a somewhat shaky process.  There were several candidates and Morsi ended up in a run-off with Ahmed Shafik, who had been prime minister under Mubarak.  Even though a majority of Egyptians did not want the Muslim Brotherhood, in a choice between a Mubarak clone and Morsi, they chose Morsi.  It was a big mistake.  Almost immediately, Morsi and the Muslim Brotherhood tried to assume total control.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/23/world/middleeast/egypts-president-morsi-gives-himself-new-powers.html?_r=0

President Mohammed Morsi declared himself above any court as guardian of Egypt’s revolution.  The Muslim Brotherhood, with its extremist agenda, was taking over.  No one should have been surprised by this.  Following is the motto of the Muslim Brotherhood:

“Allah is our objective. The Prophet is our leader. The Qur’an is our law. Jihad is our way. Dying in the way of Allah is our highest aspiration.”

The Muslim Brotherhood, like the Nazi Party in German, has zero interest in sharing power with anyone.  They viewed the “democratic elections” in Egypt exactly the same way Adolph Hitler viewed elections in Germany in 1933.  They would play the game, long enough to gain power, but once they got in power they quickly took over. 

There were people in Egypt who figured this out.  One of them was quoted in the New York Times article referred to above: 

Amr Hamzawy pointed out that Egypt was facing a horrifying coup against legitimacy and the rule of law and a complete assassination of the democratic transition. 

Obama either wanted Muslim extremists to take over Egypt, or he was too naïve to realize why that would be a major problem.  Either way, if the Egyptian people were expecting help from the United States, they were in for a long wait.

This takeover by the Egyptian military could be a very good thing.  There is a reason so many people in Egypt are celebrating tonight.  They are definitely not cheering for Barack Obama.

Courage is contagious. There are already rumors that moderate Palestinians may finally gain the courage to throw out Hamas.  All over the Muslim world there are signs of people willing to stand up to Muslim extremists. 

The wise move by the United States would be to recognize that this coup is not necessarily a bad thing and to at least acknowledge why it was necessary.  But, not President Obama.  Following is the White House statement: 

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2013/07/03/statement-president-barack-obama-egypt

we are deeply concerned by the decision of the Egyptian Armed Forces to remove President Morsy and suspend the Egyptian constitution. I now call on the Egyptian military to move quickly and responsibly to return full authority back to a democratically elected civilian government as soon as possible through an inclusive and transparent process, and to avoid any arbitrary arrests of President Morsy and his supporters. Given today’s developments, I have also directed the relevant departments and agencies to review the implications under U.S. law for our assistance to the Government of Egypt.  

A terrorist organization dedicated to destroying the United States has been thrown out of power so now Obama wants to cut aid to Egypt?

Obama is asking the Egyptian military to do something incredibly stupid.  The arrest of President Morsi and top leaders in the Muslim Brotherhood may prevent a bloody civil war.  The Egyptian military removed Morsi because they had no choice.  There is no potential for a true Democracy in Egypt if the Muslim Brotherhood is part of the equation.  If that was not obvious before Morsi was elected, it was sure obvious when he tried to assume absolute power.  

The Muslim Brotherhood was and is a terrorist organization with zero tolerance for anyone who gets in their way.  One of the reasons Egypt was reasonably stable for all those years was that the Mubarak regime clamped down on the Muslim Brotherhood.  The Egyptian military is now rounding them up again and that is by far the best news out of Egypt for a long time.  Asking the new Egyptian government to tolerate the Muslim Brotherhood is akin to asking the Germans to tolerate the Nazi party under Adolph Hitler.  You cannot reach a reasonable compromise or even consider sharing of power with those who are dedicated to exterminating opponents.  

I am sure that there are some tough times ahead for Egypt.  But the action by the Egyptian military may give Egypt a chance for real democracy.  If the people are given a choice, my guess is that they will reject the Muslim Brotherhood and Muslim extremists.

 One thing is certain.  If the Muslim Brotherhood had been allowed to gain total control, democracy in Egypt would have been nothing more than a distant memory.  Perhaps someone should explain that to Obama.  

(When I original wrote this I spelt Morsi as Morsy.  That is the way the White House spelt it on the official press release.  I guess I should have expected them to muck that up too!)

TDM

Everything about the George Zimmerman case reeked from day one.  Originally the police did not even file charges.  That is because from day one the facts supported self-defense.  Then the national media got involved and started screaming racism.  The liberal left has been desperately praying for this kind of case.  This is second only to the dream where an enraged Tea Party member shoots up a bunch of innocent people.  They need a case where an angry white man, with a gun, shoots an innocent black teenager.  They are desperate to showcase the dangers of letting ordinary citizens own guns.

According to the main stream media, Trayvon Martin was just an innocent teenager out to buy candy.  George Zimmerman was an angry white man, looking for someone to shoot with his gun.  Barack Obama even weighed in about how Trayvon could have been his son.

The media still refuses to report the truth about Trayvon Martin. He was a far cry from the innocent dove portrayed on the national news.   In addition, George Zimmerman is most definitely not an angry white man.  Instead, he is a Hispanic man who stood up for black homeless people he felt were being abused by the police.   He was also a man who volunteered to mentor black youths, and he has several black friends.  Of course, the press ignores all of this, because it does not fit the desired narrative.

The prosecutor began his opening argument claiming that Zimmerman profiled Martin, hunted him down and shot him in cold blood.  So far there is no evidence of that.  This theory appears to be based solely on the 9-1-1 call made by Zimmerman.   You know, where he called the police to tell them he was watching Martin.  How many deranged white men out to kill black kids call the police to check in?

No one is completely sure what Zimmerman said.  He does appear to use the “F” word and he does appear to be complaining that these guys always get away with it.  Perhaps that is because there had been a string of burglaries, and they had been getting away with it.

ABC News even edited video to prove that George Zimmerman wasn’t injured.  When someone ran the full unedited clip, it proved the opposite.  We now have numerous pictures and eye witness testimony verifying that Zimmerman was injured and that his back was wet from lying on the grass.

Now, when it is impossible to dispute that Trayvon Martin was on top and he was punching Zimmerman, the liberal left is incredibly arguing that he wasn’t injured enough.  How many times do you need to get your head slammed into concrete before you become concerned?

The prosecution witnesses are consistently ridiculous.   All of the witnesses were helped with their testimony one way or another.  One witness was shown a picture of Trayvon Martin when he was 12 years old and asked if this was the guy winning the fight.  She didn’t realize that Trayvon was 17 years old and six feet tall.   Another witness appeared on CNN in disguise.  The star witness, who received a telephone call from Trayvon Martin shortly before the incident, didn’t bother telling anyone about the call for more than 30 days.  Then the police contacted her and took her to the home of Trayvon’s mother to interview her for the first time.  That is clear evidence of witness tampering.

She has been caught in numerous lies and she couldn’t even read the letter she allegedly wrote.  It is hard to imagine her having a coherent phone conversation with anyone about anything.

There is the only real eye witness, who is clearly not trying to help Zimmerman.  He says he saw Martin on top of Zimmerman throwing punches.  Another witness took pictures of Zimmerman, because he noticed the injuries.  ALL of the credible witnesses support Zimmerman’s version of events with no exceptions.

But perhaps most devastating was the testimony of the lead homicide detective.

http://legalinsurrection.com/2013/07/zimmerman-trial-day-6-analysis-video-serino-testimony-challenges-very-foundation-of-states-charge//#more

He admits that there is no evidence that anything Zimmerman said was inaccurate.  But he was ordered by the prosecutor to interview Zimmerman again and try to intimidate him into admitting guilt.  In other words, the prosecutor needed Zimmerman to confess because the evidence didn’t support charging him with a crime.  Media pressure demanded that Zimmerman be charged with a crime.  At one point this detective lies to Zimmerman and says there is a video of the whole event.  Zimmerman responds by saying: “Thank God.”  Wow!  A real admission of guilt there!  While under oath, the detective admits that he believes Zimmerman is telling the truth.  He should not have been allowed to say that, but he did.

This is as bad as it gets and I am sick and tired of so-called analysts who are afraid to tell the truth.  Even Fox News is afraid to tell the truth.  The prosecutor in Florida is trying to railroad an innocent man solely because of pressure from the main stream media.  The fix was on from the beginning.  The media wants Zimmerman to be guilty.  Every piece of evidence that supports Zimmerman is downplayed as misleading or incomplete.  The most absurd testimony by non-witnesses is viewed as the gospel truth.  But the witnesses have been so bad and the evidence in support of Zimmerman so strong that now everyone admits that Trayvon Martin was on top and that he was punching Zimmerman.  So the latest theory is that Zimmerman wasn’t hurt enough.  He should have waited until Martin was more successful in inflicting life threatening injuries before daring to defend himself.

We cannot tolerate this.  This is no longer about George Zimmerman or Trayvon Martin.  This is bad enough when it is about something like abortion, gay rights, or gun control.  It is intolerable when it results in the wrongful prosecution of a clearly innocent man.

There isn’t a shred of evidence to support prosecuting George Zimmerman.  There never was a shred of evidence to support prosecuting George Zimmerman.  It is time we all realize the truth.  It isn’t just George Zimmerman on trial.

This is about racial injustice and it has always been about racial injustice.   George Zimmerman is guilty because he is too white.  Trayvon Martin must be innocent because he is too black. There was a time when a black man could not get a fair trial in the South.  That was disgraceful.  It was wrong.  Fortunately, those days are gone.  But now, people such as Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson, with the loud support of the main stream media, are doing everything possible to make sure George Zimmerman does not get a fair trial.  There was relentless pressure on the prosecutor to charge George Zimmerman and there is extreme pressure to find him guilty.  We are being warned of possible race riots if the jury makes a mistake and votes for acquittal.  No one should ever be charged with a crime because of lies and distortions in the main stream media.

This case never warranted one second of major media coverage.  I am thoroughly convinced that if the media had not intervened, George Zimmerman would never have been charged.  At worst, he might have been charged with manslaughter, but I doubt that any prosecutor would have even tried the case.  If George Zimmerman was black and Trayvon Martin was white, the media would have ignored this case.

George Zimmerman is not on trial, white America is on trial.  George Zimmerman is not on trial, anyone who wants to own a gun for self-defense is on trial.  George Zimmerman is not on trial, we are all on trial.  We are Zimmerman.

TDM

The Supreme Court has kicked the Proposition 8 ball, somewhere.  Governor Brown stopped celebrating long enough to order everyone to get ready to marry same sex couples.   But at least Governor Brown gave some time for opponents  to appeal. 

The Ninth District Court immediately removed the stay, telling California to go ahead with same sex marriages.  Attorney General Kamela Harris almost immediately conducted a same sex marriage ceremony herself. 

The gay community is celebrating and the main stream media is cheering.  Unfortunately, they are all missing the point.  This really has nothing to do with same sex marriage.  It is far more important than that.   One Judge arbitrarily decided that the California constitution did not matter and he overturned the decision by 7,001,084 voters in California.  When the Governor and the Attorney General refused to appeal his decision, they were also deciding that political correctness trumps our constitution.  That endangers every citizen in this state: 

Following is the oath of office for Governor of California and the Attorney General of California:

“I, ___________________________, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of California against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of California; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties upon which I am about to enter.

Both Governor Brown and Attorney General Harris had a duty to defend Proposition 8, whether they liked it or not.  If they did not want to appeal the decision of Judge Walker, they should have either resigned their office, or recused themselves and delegated this to someone else within the California Government.  They refused to do either.  Instead, they deliberately violated their oath of office.

The California Constitution is deisgned to defend all of us against tyranny.  Following is a link to the DECLARATION OF RIGHTS found in the California Constituion:

http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/.const/.article_1

This time the Governor and the Attorney General didn’t like section 7.5  Suppose, in the future,  we get a Governor and an Attorney General that decides they don’t like Section 8:

 SEC. 8.  A person may not be disqualified from entering or pursuing

a business, profession, vocation, or employment because of sex, race,

creed, color, or national or ethnic origin.

If you do not believe this is possible, you haven’t been paying attention to countries governed by Sharia law. 

We either have a constitution or we don’t.  We either have public officials who are willing to abide by their oath of office or we don’t. The duty to uphold the constitution trumps political correctness.

The California constitution itself has been put behind the 8 ball.  That is a very dangerous place to be. 

TDM

Yesterday was a great day for gay activists, or was it?  There certainly was a lot of celebrating and the pundits on TV were all saying this.  But then I realized that something strange had happened.  Anthony Scalia gave a scathing rebuttal to the overturn of the Defense of Marriage Act provision, but he actually agreed with the decision regarding Proposition 8 in California.  That gave me pause.  If he was so dead set against gay marriage, why the decision on Proposition 8 which appeared to approve gay marriage in California?

http://www.cnn.com/2013/06/26/politics/scotus-prop-8/index.html 

CNN added a little fact and a lot of assumption.  They were correct in describing the Supreme Court decision, but not necessarily correct in assuming that this will result in an immediate resumption of gay marriages. 

So I did a little research and I think the following article on Breitbart.com provides a clue: 

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/06/26/Not-So-Fast-Prop-8-Still-California-Law 

The Supreme Court did not overturn Proposition 8.  They didn’t even rule on the merits of Proposition 8 or the merits of the lower court decisions.  Instead they ruled that the appeal of Judge Walker’s decision itself was a non-starter because the petitioners did not have standing in federal court.  They ruled that only the Governor or the Attorney General could have filed that appeal.  They just tossed the whole process in the trash and told them to start over.  In making this decision they vacated the decision by the Ninth District Court to uphold Judge Walker’s decision.  That means that the only decision that remains in effect regarding Proposition 8 is Judge Walker’s decision. 

It is vital to point out that Proposition 8 was upheld by the California Supreme Court.  

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/27/us/27marriage.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0 

The California Constitution does not allow anyone to ignore a California law because they consider it to be unconstitutional, unless that opinion has been ratified by an appellate court.  That would appear to mean that Judge Walker’s opinion is nice, but it doesn’t change the law.  His decision must be confirmed by an appellate court or it has no enforcement value.  The failure of Governor Brown and/or Attorney General Harris to appeal Judge Walker’s decision means there was no appellate review.  Since there was no appellate review, the law remains in effect.  Walker’s opinion is only that, an opinion.  It does not have the force of law.  

The California constitution is actually quite clear about this: 

CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION

ARTICLE 3  STATE OF CALIFORNIA 

SEC. 3.5.  An administrative agency, including an administrative

agency created by the Constitution or an initiative statute, has no

power:

   (a) To declare a statute unenforceable, or refuse to enforce a

statute, on the basis of it being unconstitutional unless an

appellate court has made a determination that such statute is

unconstitutional;

   (b) To declare a statute unconstitutional;

   (c) To declare a statute unenforceable, or to refuse to enforce a

statute on the basis that federal law or federal regulations prohibit

the enforcement of such statute unless an appellate court has made a

determination that the enforcement of such statute is prohibited by

federal law or federal regulations. 

Governor Brown and Attorney General Harris refused to appeal Judge Walker’s decision.  That is why those other people filed the petition, the State of California failed to file an appeal to uphold its own law.  Now the Supreme Court has ruled that since neither Governor Brown nor Attorney General Harris filed an appeal, no appeal has been filed.  The Ninth District Court’s decision is irrelevant, because they had no justification for even reviewing the file.  

It is just possible that we will go back to August of 2010, when Judge Walker issued his opinion and start over.  It could easily take another three years, or longer,  for this to work its way, again, through the legal process and then there is no guarantee of results.  In the meantime the California Supreme Court has upheld Proposition 8, so it remains the law of the land. 

Governor Brown was quick to order state agencies to get ready to issue marriage licenses to same sex couples.  I suspect some very smart lawyers are already preparing the request for an emergency injunction, in state court, for a restraining order preventing him from doing that.  They have a good argument, because the state constitution is quite clear.  

If this is true, there are going to be a lot of very embarrassed people, a lot of very angry people and an enormous amount of frustration.  It is bad enough to lose.  The ultimate insult is to find out that in winning you actually lost.  I do not know how this will work out, but my guess is that it is at least murky enough to slow things down.   Don’t be surprised to learn that instead of adding clarity to this issue, the Supreme Court just brilliantly kicked the can further down the road. 

TDM

Eric Snowden is now in Moscow, allegedly with 4 laptops full of NSA data.  He may or may not be on his way to Ecuador via Cuba.  I can pretty much guarantee that Russia will borrow those laptops for a while and the results will be the worst security breach for the United States since the capture of the U.S.S Pueblo.  Putin will publicly release everything that is embarrassing to the Obama administration and will exploit the rest.  This is turning out to be a huge blunder. 

By making this maneuver, Snowden has moved totally into the treason category.  But the problem is that this didn’t have to happen.  If, and that is a big if, the data he had was that important, the U.S. should have authorized someone we trust to make him a deal.  At least in Iceland the Russians would not have access to our data.  But instead the United States filed charges against him and tried to intimidate Hong Kong into giving him up.  It sure looks like Eric Holder, once again, botched it up and didn’t get the paperwork filed properly and on time.  They made Snowden’s ultimate decision very easy and his ultimate decision is the worst case scenario for us.

Up until now, the information Snowden had released did not jeopardize anything but the abuse of power by the Obama administration.  But, if the Russians gain unfettered access to those computers they may learn more than even Snowden can imagine.  According to reports Snowden is holed up at the international airport in Moscow.  I doubt seriously that Putin would have agreed to this without something in return.  That something was probably access to those computers. 

The most important piece of information available to any country is to learn what your enemy knows about you.  Everybody knows that spying is going on.  That is hardly news.  During World War II, Japan did not realize that the U.S. had broken the diplomatic code and they did not realize that the U.S. had broken the Japanese naval code.  The Battle of Midway was lost, at least in part, because the U.S. learned that Midway was the target of their next invasion.  During the battle of the Atlantic, Allies had broken the German Enigma code.  If German had known that the Enigma code had been compromised, it would have made a major difference.  

This is looking worse by the minute.  According to the following, Snowden chose this last job because he knew it would gain him access to all the systems.  If that is true, then the foreign agent theory starts to gain a little weight.  This may not be a country, it could be an organization like Wikileaks.  Someone told this guy where to go and what to do.  He didn’t learn that in school and he probably didn’t figure it out by himself.  The following ABC News report is stunning:

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/headlines/2013/06/officials-how-edward-snowden-could-hurt-the-u-s/

There are reports of “gaps” in his resume.  Following is the timeline published by ABC on June 13, 2013.

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/timeline-edward-snowdens-life/story?id=19394487&page=2

He claims to have worked “undercover” for the CIA in Switzerland.  He claims to have attended a University of Maryland campus in Japan.  His alleged college work is not verified by transcripts.  He definitely doesn’t have a degree in anything. 

So we ended up putting someone with gaps in his personal history, unexplained overseas travel, questionable associates, no documented experience and unverified academic history in a position of power.  Does this sound familiar?  Why would we have expected a different result?

TDM

According to the following story, the NSA is very concerned about the quality of the background investigation of Snowden:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/20/nsa-data_n_3474820.html?icid=maing-grid7%7Chtmlws-main-bb%7Cdl2%7Csec1_lnk3%26pLid%3D333404

It is pretty embarrassing when someone with a top secret clearance spills the beans to the Guardian UK and then runs off to Hong Kong.  I can already guarantee you that there are far fewer holes in the background of Eric Snowden than there are with Barack Hussein Obama and we elected him President.

I speak from experience, because I had a top secret clearance.  It took several months to conduct my background investigation and they checked everything.  I even had friends from high school telling me about how someone sat down next to them in a bar and started up a conversation.  Then at one point they were casually asked if they knew me from high school.   They checked my background from date of birth until the day I got my clearance. 

They would never have considered giving a security clearance to someone who could not verify where they were born.  I am not a birther, but Barack Obama has never produced a certified copy of his birth certificate.  No representative from the State of Hawaii has ever said the following:  The birth certificate presented by Barack Obama is identical to the one we have on file.   They have said they have his records, that they can verify he was born in Hawaii and that he is a U.S. citizen.  All that is nice, but we still don’t have a single copy certified copy of his birth certificate.  You know the kind we all needed to get a driver’s license or register to vote, before Democrats decided that was no longer necessary.  I believe Obama was born in Hawaii and I am really sure he wasn’t born in Kenya.  But that doesn’t change the fact that he has never produced this most basic of personal documents. 

This was discussed, again, this week on MSNBC:

http://tv.msnbc.com/2013/06/18/republican-congressman-questions-obamas-validity/

Once again, MSNBC missed the point.  This is a photocopy of a long form birth certificate that looks like it was photocopied out of a book.  Does your birth certificate look like this?  Do you know anyone else whose birth certificate looks like this?  I mean this is not hard.  You ask for a certified copy of your birth certificate and you get it in about two days.  This is like driving around with a photocopy of your driver’s license.  Do you think any cop would accept that, not matter how “good” it looked? 

They would never have considered giving a security clearance to someone with a history of drug abuse.  That includes pot smoking.  Barack Obama admits to using cocaine and smoking pot enthusiastically.  This would have disqualified him for a security clearance.  I had one guy who went all the way through language school with me.  The Air Force had invested over 18 months in training him.  They found out he had smoked pot one time and they immediately booted him out of the program.  To all you kids out there who think that all the baby boomers smoked pot, I guarantee you that if they did, they didn’t work for the NSA if anyone knew about it.

They would never have considered giving a security clearance to someone who had traveled overseas under less than clear circumstances.  Barack Obama’s great adventure to Pakistan, after leaving Occidental College, would have drawn a lot of scrutiny.  It was probably not illegal to travel to Pakistan at that time, but it would have raised some very red flags. 

They would have never considered giving a security clearance to someone who had close blood relatives living overseas.  Barack Obama has several close relatives, including a grandmother and a half-brother living in Kenya. 

They would never have considered giving a security clearance to someone who was close friends with someone like William Ayers.  Ayers was a leader in the Weatherman Underground, a terrorist organization that conducted bombings against government facilities, including the pentagon.  They don’t give security clearances to people who are best friends with enemies of the state.

Both Barack Obama and Michelle Obama surrendered their law licenses.  Michelle surrendered hers in 1994.  Barack Obama surrendered his in 2007.  There are no public records verifying the reason.  Factcheck.org tried to discredit rumors that both Obamas surrendered their licenses to avoid discipline.  The following article contains their report:

http://www.factcheck.org/2012/06/the-obamas-law-licenses/

Actually this report only demonstrates the lengths to which factcheck.org went to try and cover for Obama.  The exact wording is as follows:

Neither of the Obamas has any public record of discipline or pending proceedings against them, according to the online public registration records of the ARDC. We also confirmed that with Grogan, who said that the Obamas were “never the subject of any public disciplinary proceedings.”

I am sure this is absolutely true and absolutely meaningless.  The key word is “public.”  There is no “public” record.  The official policy of the Illinois Attorney Registration and Disciplinary Commission (ARDC) is that if the ARDC investigates a licensed lawyer, the proceedings become public record, but the ARDC won’t punish or publicize finding against a lawyer who voluntarily resigns.  The only thing factcheck.org was able to prove was the lack of a public record.

Barack Obama surrendered his law license after a request was filed with the Illinois Attorney Registration and Disciplinary Commission asking that the application to the bar that Barack Obama had filed in 1991 be examined in light of information that had recently been made public.  Was that a coincidence?

You will also notice that factcheck.org uses tortured logic to try and prove that Obama didn’t say what he said during a State of the Union address.  What Obama actually said:

Abroad, America’s greatest source of strength has always been our ideals. The same is true at home. We find unity in our incredible diversity, drawing on the promise enshrined in our Constitution: the notion that we’re all created equal; that no matter who you are or what you look like, if you abide by the law you should be protected by it; if you adhere to our common values you should be treated no different than anyone else.. 

He was clearly quoting the Declaration of Independence and he was clearly referring to the Constitution.  Actually, I don’t care, because Obama didn’t write the speech and the blame for this mistake rests with his speech writer and his TelePrompter.  I only mentioned to show that factcheck.org went to great lengths to avoid actually checking facts.  They should have said:  “Obama made a mistake.”  I mean who really cares?

I firmly believe that at some point all of this will eventually come out and there are going to be a lot of red faces.  But, I doubt that this will happen while Obama is still President.  We are just now learning about JFK and he has been dead for nearly 50 years.  We recently learned that JFK wrote in his diary,about the great job Adolph Hitler was doing in Germany.  Nice!

http://dailycaller.com/2013/05/24/jfks-secret-diary-fascism-right-thing-for-germany/

Of course the main stream media never reported this, because Camelot is still Camelot.

Snowden probably should not have been given a clearance, but he was vetted a lot more than Obama.  Maybe, during our life time, we will learn the truth.  Don’t hold your breath.

TDM

Several years ago, while working at a major corporation I got a threatening letter from an attorney.  This was no surprise because I was responsible for handling all the tort litigation nationwide so I got these kinds of letters all the time.  In this particular case the attorney was demanding huge sums of money because one of our janitors allegedly destroyed a crucial piece of evidence.  This plaintiff attorney was apparently planning on filing a major claim against SunGlo.  He left the crucial piece of evidence, an empty SunGlo pop bottle on top of his desk.  Our hero, the janitor, came in after hours; saw an empty bottle sitting on a desk, so he threw it in the trash.  Then, to complete the cycle, he emptied the trash.  The next day the attorney lost his mind when his crucial piece of evidence was missing.  He decided we were to blame because our janitor threw out that extremely important bottle.

I contacted the attorney and told him to tee it up.  I explained that we would not offer him a dime and that if he wanted to sue us and go to court that he better be prepared to explain to a jury why an $8 per hour janitor should take all of the blame for throwing away an empty soda bottle a $300 an hour attorney stupidly left on his desk.  After a few more attempts at hyperventilating his way into undeserved settlement money, the plaintiff attorney hung up and I never heard from him again.  I suspect he had night mares about that jury trial.

The Snowden NSA scandal reminds me of the SunGlo Ultimatum.  While the Obama administration, and their RINO Republican support crew, is busy trashing Snowden and calling him a traitor, they are missing the point.  What idiot allowed this clown to have access to top secret information in the first place?  We are not even sure this guy graduated from high school.  His first job at the NSA was as a security guard.  He has no known academic credentials and certainly no significant work history.  Yet he was hired, as an “analyst,” paid $120,000 per year, and given access to top secret information.  Not only was he given access, apparently no one noticed that he was copying documents and/or electronic files and taking them home.  It is pretty hard to deny that he had access, because he managed to leak information to the press that was so secret Peter King said this damaged National Security:

http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-TV/2013/06/12/Rep-Peter-King-NSA-Leaker-Traitor-Damaged-Natl-Sec

John McCain and Lindsey Graham are tied in a race to see who can say the dumbest things in front of the nearest microphone.  It was close, but McCain managed to out stupid Graham, which was quite an accomplishment.  He called for the U.S. to bomb Hong Kong until we get Snowden back:

http://dailycurrant.com/2013/06/10/john-mccain-calls-for-invasion-of-hong-kong/

“Either you’re with us or you’re against us,” McCain explained to anchor Freddie Lyon, “and clearly the nation of Hong Kong is against us. By harboring this known cybercriminal they pose a clear and present danger to the American people.

“I don’t want to hear about extradition or rendition or any of that nonsense. This man is a traitor and if we don’t get him within 24 hours I say we need to start bombing the hell out of Hong Kong.

McCain has done something I did not think possible.  He has convinced me that he would have been an even worse choice for President than Barack Hussein Obama.  Before this comment, I wouldn’t have thought that was possible.

Lindsey Graham came perilously close to matching McCain for stupidity.  It is really embarrassing when MSNBC sounds more rational than a Republican Senator:

http://maddowblog.msnbc.com/_news/2013/06/12/18922414-we-dont-need-to-censor-the-mail-but

“In World War II, the mentality of the public was that our whole way of life was at risk, we’re all in. We censored the mail. When you wrote a letter overseas, it got censored. When a letter was written back from the battlefield to home, they looked at what was in the letter to make sure they were not tipping off the enemy,” Graham, a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, told reporters on Capitol Hill. “If I thought censoring the mail was necessary, I would suggest it, but I don’t think it is.”

This is absolutely brilliant.  He stopped short of bombing Hong Kong but he would consider censoring the mail. This was after he twittered that we should hunt down Snowden:

“I view Mr. Snowden’s actions not as one of patriotism but potentially a felony,” Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., said Monday in a post on his Twitter account. “I hope we follow Mr. Snowden to the ends of the Earth to bring him to justice.”

It was a close call as to who won the stupidity award, but bombing Hong Kong is really hard to beat.

There are only two possibilities here, both really bad.  One is that a subcontractor to the NSA was hiring near high school grads off the street, paying them exorbitant salaries  and letting them handle top secret information.  Oh, by the way, they also let them copy secret stuff and disappear.  The other is that this guy had virtually no access at all and King, Graham and McCain started lathering at the mouth before bothering to find out if he leaked anything of value.  In either case, they are acting like blithering idiots.  And these are supposed to be the good guys looking out for us.  Please, please, please Mr. Tea Party, do whatever it takes to get rid of the RINOs.  Sarah Palin, if you ever support John McCain again conservatives should disown you. 

We expected the Obama administration to botch things.  When you elect the most naïve and inexperienced person to ever run for President of the United States you should not be surprised that he screws everything up.  The miracle would have been if this didn’t happen.

So, I think this is similar to the SunGlo ultimatum.  The more anyone points the finger at Snowden, the more they will be pointing the finger at themselves.  The worse he looks, the worse they look. 

I don’t consider him to be a traitor.  I also don’t consider him to be a hero.  I guess I would sum him up, not as the man who never was, but rather the man who never should have been.  No matter how you look at it, it looks bad.

TDM