Chicago's grim murder trend blamed on light sentencing, misguided reforms

800 shootings so far this year and it’s only April!

Congratulations!

I suspect it finally dawned on them locking these dogs up and keeping them locked up, is the answer since more stringent gun controls laws have no effect on people who don't follow the law to begin with.

The key word in this whole article is propensity. If we could get them to seek a college degree with the same zeal as they seek violence the country would be a better place.


See the guns?

 (How much would you like to bet they didn't purchased them at a legitimate gun shop after a background check?)

---------------------------------

Lamar Harris had seven felony convictions and 43 arrests when he shot three Chicago police officers. The same week, Samuel Harviley, who had just been paroled after serving less than half of his sentence for armed carjacking, shot yet another of the Windy City’s finest.

Police officials, researchers and many elected leaders all agree that the pair were prime examples of the violent pool of criminals driving the city’s historically high crime rate. Ex-cons well-known to police and with a proven propensity for violence are being let out early from prison or let off lightly by judges, only to wreak havoc on the city, they say. 

“We are not incarcerating a bunch of harmless sad sacks who are merely caught with a joint.”

- Heather Mac Donald, Manhattan Institute

"The fact that a convicted felon and gun offender is yet again out on early release to torment communities is representative of the types of individuals who are overwhelmingly driving the recent spike in violence," then-interim police Superintendent John Escalante said at a news conference last month announcing charges against Harviley.

The cycle of violence has resulted in more than 800 shootings so far this year, including seven shootings and one murder on April 4 alone. Escalante’s successor, former Chicago Police Department Chief of Patrol Eddie Johnson, says the rate of murders and shootings can’t be reversed until the criminal justice system begins to hold offenders accountable.

“We have five districts that are driving the crime in the city,” Johnson said in a recent radio interview. “And within those districts, there is a small subset of individuals who are responsible for those crimes. They have multiple arrests for gun offenses and until we start holding these people accountable [the problem will persist].”

According to the CPD’s most recent CompStat figures, 133 people have been murdered in 2016, compared to 77 during the same period in 2015. Shootings are up 91 percent.

Johnson, unlike many of the city’s African-American elected officials, is seeking tougher sentencing laws. Over the coming weeks, he plans to be “asking our legislative partners in the near future to help us” pass new laws that will ensure judges throw the book at violent offenders.

It’s become easy for police to predict who will be on both ends of the explosion in gun violence. Some two-thirds of murder victims are already on the Police Department’s “strategic subject list,” a roster of residents identified as being at risk of being a victim or an offender of gun violence. The list is kept so police can carry out lifestyle intervention efforts.

In one weekend in late March, 76 percent of shooting victims were on the SSL and 95 percent had lengthy criminal histories.

Illinois is one of several states implementing recommendations from prison reform commissions to reduce or even eliminate mandatory minimum sentences. Those groups seek to reduce prison populations by as much as 25 percent. 

The movement to slash sentences and free inmates is given momentum by controversial, police-involved shootings that galvanize communities, as well as protests by Black Lives Matter and civil rights groups. But shortening sentences of violent offenders puts both police and law-abiding residents of the inner city at risk, say law enforcement officials.

“Every day our members risk life and limb to defend our constitution and the rights it affords our citizens,” wrote Dominick Stokes, vice president for legislative affairs for the Federal Law Enforcement Officers Association in a December letter to Senate leadership. “Mandatory minimums are a vital tool utilized in dismantling criminal drug trafficking enterprises.”

Stokes’ group is opposed to the Sentencing Reform and Corrections Act of 2015, one of several bills aimed at reducing or eliminating mandatory prison sentences on the Federal level. And researchers say laws that ensure robust prison terms for dangerous people keep everyone safe.

“We are not incarcerating a bunch of harmless sad sacks who are merely caught with a joint,” said Heather Mac Donald, of the Manhattan Institute, a non-partisan research institute. “Prisons today mostly house violent criminals. Prison populations have increased because violent crimes increased.”

Mac Donald acknowledges some validity to arguments against imprisoning non-violent drug offenders, but rejects claims that rising incarceration rates are a consequence of racism.

Chicago's grim murder trend blamed on light sentencing, misguided reforms

Hillary email probe is 'independent' says FBI chief

FBI head James Comey said that the investigation into Hillary Clinton's emails would be wrapped up 'promptly.' Depends upon what your definition of promptly is since this investigation has been going on for over a year now.

Notice the good law professor below is trying to characterize Petraeus as worse than Killary. What Petraeus did was a drop in the bucket compared to the wholesale abuse of the rules perpetrated by Killary. You have to have your own server  because you're a Clinton marinaded in scandals which requires covering shit up. Petraeus committed a crime. The big difference is he wasn't running for president.


--------------------------------------------

  

FBI chief James Comney touted the 'independent' nature of his bureau, while saying he's 'stayed close' to the ongoing investigation of Hillary Clinton's emails. 

He made these remarks yesterday at Ohio's Kenyon College, according to Politico, assuring students that the FBI would ward off any political influence due to the ongoing presidential campaign.

'I love the FBI because we aspire to, and I think we are, three things: We're honest, we're competent, we're independent,' Comey said. 'We're not perfect. We're competent, we're independent,' the director said reiterating the latter two. 

FBI Director James Comey wouldn't say too much about the ongoing FBI investigation into Hillary Clinton's emails, but did praise the bureau for its independence, competence and honesty 

FBI head James Comey said that the investigation into Hillary Clinton's emails would be wrapped up 'promptly,' but said he's not taking the timing of the Democratic National Convention into account 

While he gave a general 'no comment' on the investigation, he also gave an explanation of what his role was. 

'I've stayed close to that investigation to ensure that it's done that way,' Comey said. 'That we have the resources, the technology, the people and that there's no outside influence.' 

'So, if I talk about the investigation while it's going on there's a risk that I'll compromise both the reality and the perception that it's done honestly, competently and independently,' he added. 

Earlier this week, while Comey was addressing an audience in New York he said the investigation would be wrapped up 'promptly,' but would not be taking the timing of the Democratic National Convention into consideration. 

A week ago, Al Jazeera America reported that the investigation has now reached a 'critical stage,' in that the bureau has finished examining her emails and homebrew server and will now be interviewing top aides, along with Clinton herself.

Among those to be interviewed: Clinton's State Department chief of staff Cheryl Mills and senior advisor Philippe Reines, Al Jazeera America said.

'Soon after those interviews – in the next few days and weeks – officials expect director Comey to make his recommendation to Attorney General Loretta Lynch about potential criminal charges,' network anchor David Shuster said. 

The Justice Department and the FBI opened up their investigation in July upon receiving a security referral from the inspector general of the intelligence community, who concluded at the time that Clinton had sent emails deemed 'secret,' the highest level of classification, through her personal email system.

The inspector general's office was leafing through the 30,500 emails Clinton had turned over from her homebrew server that she said were work-related.

'None of the emails we reviewed has classification or dissemination markings, but some included [intelligence community]-derived classified information and should have been handled as classified appropriately marked, and transmitted via a secure network,' Inspector General I. Charles McCollough wrote Congress in a letter at the start of the investigation.

Previously, the inspector general and the State Department were shown to be in a dispute over whether these correspondences should be considered classified. 

Since then the State Department has released the emails publicly, as part of Freedom of Information Act requests, and 22 emails were marked 'top secret,' while hundreds of others were marked 'secret' or 'confidential.'

None of the emails had markings indicating their classified nature at the time.

Clinton has used this as part of her public defense of the email scandal explaining that these emails were 'retroactively' classified.

She's complained of the government's overzealous nature in classifying the documents and called for the contents of them to come out publicly so that the stink of the scandal would subside.

Clinton had also deleted 31,830 emails from her server that she said were personal correspondence.

The Los Angeles Times found out that most of those emails have since been recovered since Clinton handed the physical server over to the FBI in August. 

Legal experts suggested to the Times that it would be difficult to prosecute Clinton over her handling of classified information as prosecutors would have to prove she knew the information was classified at the time she was sending it.

While Democratic rival Sanders has shied away from criticizing Clinton for the email scandal – famously saying on the first Democratic debate stage that 'the American people are sick and tired of hearing about your damn emails' – Republicans have been chomping at the bit over it.

Throughout the campaign they've portrayed Clinton as worse than former CIA head David Petraeus, who pleaded guilty of a misdemeanor charge of mishandling classified material and thus was spared prison time.

'I mean look at Petraeus – good guy, made a mistake, and by the way, leave the guy alone,' said Republican frontrunner Donald Trump in January. 'Leave Petraeus alone. Right? Enough already. Enough. They've gone after him, they've destroyed him and yet Hillary's flying safe and she did 100 times worse than what he did,'

But there's a pivotal distinction between the Petraeus case and the ongoing one swirling around Clinton.

Petraeus knowingly provided classified material to his mistress and biographer Paula Broadwell, legal experts pointed out. Broadwell was a civilian.

Clinton's emails, even the ones that were later marked classified, were sent to aides who had been cleared to receive the contents.

'Those cases are just so different from what Clinton is accused of doing,' American University law professor Stephen Vladeck told the Times. 'And the Justice Department lawyers know it.'

Hillary email probe is 'independent' says FBI chief

Ted Nugent’s 20 Reasons to Vote for Trump Go Viral… Liberals Horrified

As much as I hate to admit it there are some favorable aspects in his thought process. 

------------------------------- 

Conservative favorite Ted Nugent is known for his straightforward approach.

It should come as no surprise, then, that a recent Facebook post by the outspoken guitarist explaining reasons to vote for GOP front-runner Donald Trump would send liberals into full panic mode.

While Nugent did not endorse any candidate, he said his list in favor of voting for “The Donald” was too special not to share.

We think you’ll agree with him:

Obama is against Trump

The Media is against Trump

The establishment Democrats are against Trump

The establishment Republicans are against Trump

The Pope is against Trump

The UN is against Trump

The EU is against Trump

China is against Trump

Mexico is against Trump

Soros is against Trump

Black Lives Matter is against Trump

MoveOn.Org is against Trump

Koch Bro’s are against Trump

Hateful, racist, violent Liberals are against Trump

The Nuge nailed it. The reason these people and organizations are against Trump is because he threatens them and their left-wing agenda. A Trump presidency would certainly shake up the infrastructure many on this list have either established or fought to maintain under President Barack Obama and his administration.

Nugent even provided a few “bonus points” for a Trump presidency as well:

Cher says she will leave the country

Mylie Cyrus says she will leave the country

Whoopi says she will leave the country

Rosie says she will leave the country

Al Sharpton says he will leave the country

Gov. Brown says California will build a wall

There is absolutely no reason to argue with Nugent on any of this. In fact, this looks more like a reason to celebrate should Trump make his way to the White House.

Ted Nugent’s 20 Reasons to Vote for Trump Go Viral… Liberals Horrified

California law enforcement officers seize Planned Parenthood videos, activist says

Just what the hell country are we living in? The baby killers at PP break the law and the whistleblowers are raided by the DOJ!

Think the last paragraph sums it up perfectly. 

And a special shout out to Paul Ryan in recognition of his efforts to continue to fund PP even after the appalling videos. 

This photo provided by The Center for Medical Progress shows anti-abortion activist David Daleiden, who produced a series of undercover videos that seek to implicate Planned Parenthood in illegalities related to the handling of fetal tissue. (The Center for Medical Progress via AP)

Agents from the California Department of Justice raided the home of an indicted anti-abortion activist and seized undercover videos allegedly showing Planned Parenthood officials arranging to illegally sell fetal tissue for profit, the activist said late Tuesday. 

David Daleiden, the founder of the Center for Medical Progress, which released the videos, said in a Facebook post that agents had "seized all video footage showing Planned Parenthood's criminal trade in aborted baby parts, in addition to my personal information."

Daleiden added that the agents left behind documents that he contends implicate Planned Parenthood in illegal behavior related to the handling of fetal tissue.

Center for Medical Progress spokesman Peter Robbio told the Associated Press the social media posting was authentic, but he declined further comment. He said Daleiden lives in Orange County, Calif.

Rachele Huennekens, a spokeswoman for state Attorney General Kamala Harris, said in an email that she can't comment on any ongoing investigation.

Harris said in July that she planned to review the undercover videos to see if center violated any state charity registration or reporting requirements. She said that could include whether Daleiden and a colleague impersonated representatives of a fake biomedical company or filmed the videos without Planned Parenthood's consent.

Harris, a Democrat, is running for the U.S. Senate. Daleiden suggested in the social media posting that the raid was politically motivated because Harris has accepted campaign contributions from Planned Parenthood.

Daleiden faces related charges in Texas. One of his Texas attorneys, Terry Yates, did not return telephone and email messages Tuesday.

Texas authorities initially began a grand jury investigation of Planned Parenthood after the undercover videos were released in August.

But the grand jury cleared Planned Parenthood of misusing fetal tissue and indicted Daleiden and a colleague, Sandra Merritt, in January on charges including using fake driver's licenses to get into a Houston clinic.

Daleiden previously said his group followed the law in making the videos. His post Tuesday called the raid an "attack on citizen journalism" and said he will "pursue all remedies to vindicate our First Amendment rights."

Matt Heffron, a former federal prosecutor and a legal adviser to Daleiden, said the raid was "outrageously out of proportion for the type of crime alleged. It’s a discredit to law enforcement [and] an oppressive abuse of government power."

California law enforcement officers seize Planned Parenthood videos, activist says

CONGRESS INVESTIGATING OBAMA ADMINISTRATION FOR DECEPTION ON IRAN DEAL

On a tip from ed Kilbane

State Department: Iran Never Signed Nuclear Deal, Which Isn't 'Legally Binding'

Adam Kredo of the Washington Free Beacon reports that Congress is investigating whether the Obama administration misled lawmakers last summer about the extent of concessions granted to Iran under the nuclear deal. It is also looking into whether administration officials have been quietly rewriting the deal’s terms.

The investigation stems from statements by top administration officials last week suggesting that Iran is set to receive weapons and sanctions relief the administration had promised Congress would not occur back when Team Obama was promoting the deal last summer. The invaluable Rep. Mike Pompeo put it this way:

When multiple officials—including Secretary Kerry, Secretary Lew, and Ambassador Mull—testify in front of Members of Congress, we are inclined to believe them. However, the gap between their promises on the Iran nuclear deal and today’s scary reality continues to widen. 

We are now trying to determine whether this was intentional deception on the part of the administration or new levels of disturbing acquiescence to the Iranians.

Either way, it sounds like treachery.

What are the instances of misrepresentation that concern Pompeo and others? For one thing, according to Kredo, congressional leaders are concerned that the administration no longer considers recent Iranian ballistic missile tests a “violation” of United Nations Security Council Resolution 2231, which codifies the nuclear deal.

Top administration officials including Secretary of State John Kerry assured Congress that Iran would be legally prohibited from carrying out ballistic missile tests under the resolution. In response to a question from Sen. Menenedez, Kerry insisted that old language banning Iranian ballistic missile launches had been imported unchanged into the new UNSCR. Similarly, ambassador Stephen Mull, our Lead Coordinator for Iran Nuclear Implementation, said that such missile launches would continue to be banned by U.N. Security Council resolutions. 

But these statements now appear to be “inoperative.” Last week, U.N. ambassador Samantha Power refused to call recent Iranian launches a “violation” in a letter she signed criticizing those launches.

Second, Treasury Department officials are suggesting that the administration is now set to grant Iran non-nuclear sanctions relief, including indirect access to the U.S. financial system, weeks after top Iranian officials began demanding this form of relief. Top administration figures, including Treasury Secretary Jack Lew, had promised Congress that pre-existing restrictions barring Iran from accessing the U.S. financial system in any way would remain in place even after the nuclear deal. 

Here is what Lew said on July 23 of last year: 

But a number of key sanctions will remain in place. . .Iranian banks will not be able to clear U.S. dollars through New York, hold correspondent account relationships with U.S. financial institutions, or enter into financing arrangements with U.S. banks. Iran, in other words, will continue to be denied access to the world’s largest financial and commercial market. The JCPOA makes only minor allowances to this broad prohibition.

This statement now appears to be “inoperative.”

Team Obama’s duplicity apparently has generated dissension within the administration. Kredo reports that in a letter to the State Department, Rep. Peter Roskam and Lee Zeldin complained that the administration is stifling voices within its ranks for stronger action against Iran. Roskam and Zeldin suggested that the administration is “putting the JCPOA [the Iran deal] and political legacy above the safety and security of the American people.”

I suspect that putting the Iran deal above the safety and security of the American people will be a major part of President Obama’s legacy.

--------------------

My prediction is nothing will come out of this investigation because when it comes to leadership we have none in the House and Senate.

-------------------------------------------



Oh... and let's not forget about this recent weapons seizure.

US Navy: Weapons shipment from Iran to likely Yemen seized

CONGRESS INVESTIGATING OBAMA ADMINISTRATION FOR DECEPTION ON IRAN DEAL