itshappening
04-20-2013, 08:03 AM
Prof. Anderson nails it! Terrific and important post:
-
Prepare for Carmen Ortiz's Political Rehabilitation and Other Events Plumbing the Depths of Political Cynicisnm
Posted by Bill Anderson on April 20, 2013 07:46 AM
The last time we heard from Carmen Ortiz, she was trying to justify her outrageous actions in the persecution of Aaron Swartz that led to his suicide. At the time, thinking people figured that perhaps one good thing that would come from this tragedy that Ortiz's political ambitions -- she has her sights set upon the governorship of Massachusetts -- would be forever derailed as the public reacted to her ambitious brutality.
Unfortunately, Ortiz is back because of the utter hypocrisy of Democratic politicians. While it would be possible to try Dzhokhar Tsarnaev under Massachusetts law, the state does not have a death penalty because the "sophisticated" Progressives of that state hold that such things are beneath them, and there are no bigger names in modern Progressivism than Barack Obama and Deval Patrick, the state's governor who also has presidential ambitions. (Likewise, presidential wannabee Maryland Governor Martin O'Malley led the charge in having Maryland repeal its death penalty in order to impress Progressives when he enters the presidential primaries in a few years.)
Federal law, however, does have executions and Tsarnaev will be charged under federal statutes which can carry the death penalty upon conviction, if federal prosecutors choose to pursue it. (Look for the federal indictments to have references to "interstate commerce" in order to justify charging Tsarnaev with federal crimes, more cynicism courtesy of Congress and U.S. attorneys.)
So, here is where we stand. Dzhokhar Tsarnaev will be charged with federal crimes that carry execution even though he could be tried under Massachusetts law which has life imprisonment as its most severe penalty. There is no more Progressive state in this country than Massachusetts and Gov. Deval Patrick is a Progressive's Progressive. The President of the United States wears his Progressive Liberalism proudly. All of them oppose state-sponsored executions, or at least they say they are against such things.
(Progressive Liberals also used to say they opposed police state tactics, but no Progressive raised even a peep of objection to the flooding the city with federal and state paramilitary forces in order to find one person. In fact, the Progressive Washington Post editorialized praise for how federal and state officials handled the whole thing, and the editorial also praised the compliant citizens of Boston for their "cooperation." Likewise, every other Progressive journalistic outlet has been overflowing with hosannas for our "law enforcement saviors." It goes without saying, of course, that the conservatives have supported the police state all along, so one can be assured that no conservative publication or prominent conservative columnist will question the "law enforcement" response to the bombing and its aftermath.)
However, so far I have not seen evidence that one prominent and Progressive Democrat has objected to charging Tsarnaev under a statute that has execution as a possible outcome of conviction. Not one. Nor will there be one, for the same people who are wildly cheering Obama's assassination-by-drone policies will be quite happy to attend Tsarvaev's execution, if that is what is needed to boost their political ambitions.
This brings me back to Carmen Ortiz. She once had her sights set upon being governor of the Bay State until she ran aground by driving Swartz to take his own life, and had she surfaced in a future Democratic primary (which is the main election in Massachusetts, given it is a one-party state), no doubt activists would have hounded her and she would never have had a chance to win.
However, by abusing the law even further -- and make no mistake, increases in the scope of federal criminal law is utter abuse of law itself -- Ortiz now is given the opportunity for complete political rehabilitation. If she is able to win a conviction against Tsarnaev and have him sentenced to death, she can campaign as the person who "saved Boston from terrorism," and who possibly could be against that? So, the Progressives will have "won" by employing police state tactics and doing the very thing that they supposedly hate: pursuing executions.
Just when one believes that the depths of the depravity of the political classes have effectively been plumbed, one finds that the pit is deeper still. In fact, I believe that we are dealing with a bottomless pit.
http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/136160.html
-
Please spread this important post everywhere to expose the liberal hypocrisy!
-
Prepare for Carmen Ortiz's Political Rehabilitation and Other Events Plumbing the Depths of Political Cynicisnm
Posted by Bill Anderson on April 20, 2013 07:46 AM
The last time we heard from Carmen Ortiz, she was trying to justify her outrageous actions in the persecution of Aaron Swartz that led to his suicide. At the time, thinking people figured that perhaps one good thing that would come from this tragedy that Ortiz's political ambitions -- she has her sights set upon the governorship of Massachusetts -- would be forever derailed as the public reacted to her ambitious brutality.
Unfortunately, Ortiz is back because of the utter hypocrisy of Democratic politicians. While it would be possible to try Dzhokhar Tsarnaev under Massachusetts law, the state does not have a death penalty because the "sophisticated" Progressives of that state hold that such things are beneath them, and there are no bigger names in modern Progressivism than Barack Obama and Deval Patrick, the state's governor who also has presidential ambitions. (Likewise, presidential wannabee Maryland Governor Martin O'Malley led the charge in having Maryland repeal its death penalty in order to impress Progressives when he enters the presidential primaries in a few years.)
Federal law, however, does have executions and Tsarnaev will be charged under federal statutes which can carry the death penalty upon conviction, if federal prosecutors choose to pursue it. (Look for the federal indictments to have references to "interstate commerce" in order to justify charging Tsarnaev with federal crimes, more cynicism courtesy of Congress and U.S. attorneys.)
So, here is where we stand. Dzhokhar Tsarnaev will be charged with federal crimes that carry execution even though he could be tried under Massachusetts law which has life imprisonment as its most severe penalty. There is no more Progressive state in this country than Massachusetts and Gov. Deval Patrick is a Progressive's Progressive. The President of the United States wears his Progressive Liberalism proudly. All of them oppose state-sponsored executions, or at least they say they are against such things.
(Progressive Liberals also used to say they opposed police state tactics, but no Progressive raised even a peep of objection to the flooding the city with federal and state paramilitary forces in order to find one person. In fact, the Progressive Washington Post editorialized praise for how federal and state officials handled the whole thing, and the editorial also praised the compliant citizens of Boston for their "cooperation." Likewise, every other Progressive journalistic outlet has been overflowing with hosannas for our "law enforcement saviors." It goes without saying, of course, that the conservatives have supported the police state all along, so one can be assured that no conservative publication or prominent conservative columnist will question the "law enforcement" response to the bombing and its aftermath.)
However, so far I have not seen evidence that one prominent and Progressive Democrat has objected to charging Tsarnaev under a statute that has execution as a possible outcome of conviction. Not one. Nor will there be one, for the same people who are wildly cheering Obama's assassination-by-drone policies will be quite happy to attend Tsarvaev's execution, if that is what is needed to boost their political ambitions.
This brings me back to Carmen Ortiz. She once had her sights set upon being governor of the Bay State until she ran aground by driving Swartz to take his own life, and had she surfaced in a future Democratic primary (which is the main election in Massachusetts, given it is a one-party state), no doubt activists would have hounded her and she would never have had a chance to win.
However, by abusing the law even further -- and make no mistake, increases in the scope of federal criminal law is utter abuse of law itself -- Ortiz now is given the opportunity for complete political rehabilitation. If she is able to win a conviction against Tsarnaev and have him sentenced to death, she can campaign as the person who "saved Boston from terrorism," and who possibly could be against that? So, the Progressives will have "won" by employing police state tactics and doing the very thing that they supposedly hate: pursuing executions.
Just when one believes that the depths of the depravity of the political classes have effectively been plumbed, one finds that the pit is deeper still. In fact, I believe that we are dealing with a bottomless pit.
http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/136160.html
-
Please spread this important post everywhere to expose the liberal hypocrisy!