Alternate Headline: David Simon Ought To Sue Somebody!
A David Simon, HBO, BBC 4 Production
I don’t even know where to begin. Should I start with the tens of thousands stolen from taxpayers in bogus overtime? The drug dealing? The $200,000 stolen from a safe in one incident? The cop that has killed two people in the line of duty in the last decade, with one of them resulting in a six-figure settlement? There are so many choices, I just can’t decide.
U.S. Attorney Rod Rosenstein
Well, neither could Maryland U.S. Attorney Rod J. Rosenstein, so he charged the seven officers with racketeering.
The accusations portray officers who stole from taxpayers through time fraud and from citizens they stopped or searched, with at least 10 victims robbed including some who had not committed crimes, officials said.
The overtime abuses alleged include one from an officer who claimed it while on vacation in Myrtle Beach, S.C., and another who was in the poker room of a casino and not on the job, according to details released by prosecutors.
That’s jacked up, right? But it probably passes for petty in a city whose police department is known for corruption. Alas, the story continues:
The alleged robberies included stealing $1,500 from a maintenance man who planned to use the cash for rent and a theft of about $200,000 from a safe and from bags seized at a search location, authorities said.
In another instance, one officer is accused of helping an associate in a drug conspiracy remove a GPS tracking device placed on the person’s car by the DEA.
Police Chief Kevin Davis
And there we are. Fortunately the new Police Chief seems to be as disgusted as you are, calling them “heinous” and the acts of “1930’s gangsters.” Not only that, but their actions have corrupted multiple federal cases, although the U.S. Attorney’s office didn’t say what exactly they were.
Now, this is probably the last thing Balmer needs in the wake of the Freddie Gray killing and riotous aftermath. Erosion of confidence in police has already reached a critical mass once. Something like this could set any progress they’ve made back quite a bit. Fortunately, the Chief seems to grasp some of the systemic problems, acknowledging that the overtime abuse “represents a pattern and practice that has undoubtedly existed in this department for many years.” Perhaps a conviction will make other time-stealing cops think twice before continuing. Only time, and a positive outcome in the case, will tell. But he also said something else that gives me a little hope:
Davis addressed the troubled department, saying, “Reform isn’t always a pretty thing to watch unfold, but it’s necessary in our journey toward a police department the city deserves.”
Encouraging.
The officers named in the indictment:
The seven officers charged under the racketeering statute all live in suburban Baltimore. They were identified as Momodu Bondeva Kenton Gondo, 34, of Owings Mills; Evodio Calles Hendrix, 32, of Randallstown; Daniel Thomas Hersl, 47, of Joppa; Wayne Earl Jenkins, 36, of Middle River; Jemell Lamar Rayam, 36, of Owings Mills; Marcus Roosevelt Taylor, 30, of Glen Burnie; and Maurice Kilpatrick Ward, 36, of Middle River.
Authorities said that Gondo, known as “GMoney,” also has been charged with joining a drug conspiracy. Five alleged members of that conspiracy were also charged Monday with drug offenses for allegedly selling heroin at a shopping center in Northeast Baltimore.
Good luck, Mr. Rosenstein and Mr. Davis. I know you’ve got your work cut out for you as you try to root out corruption and help the citizens of Baltimore get a police department they can not only be proud of, but that they can trust to not rob them blind.
Florida Man? Pshaw! Alabama Man, not to be outdone by his panhandly (it could be a word) neighbors, decided it was a good idea to play chicken at 4:00 am. His son, rather than talk him out of the plan, decided to participate in the festivities.
This is not how they did it.
An Alabama father and son were killed in a head-on collision with each other on Saturday morning, police said.
Police said that alcohol was a factor in the crash that killed Jeffrey Morris Brasher, 50, and his son, Austin Blaine Brasher, 22, but they are continuing to investigate.
The crash occurred at around 4:10 a.m. when the 2006 Ford pickup the Brasher was driving collided with his son’s 2004 Chevrolet pickup, according to police.
Neither Brasher was wearing a seatbelt, according to reports.
Hysteria about SB1142 blew up quickly and in unexpected places. The Arizona Capitol Times, Reason Magazine, local Republican Facebook groups and even my email inbox buzzed with fears that Arizona was preparing to seize the property of peaceful protesters. Both the left and the right seemed to agree that this was a bad bill.
But, most of what I read was flat out wrong. The changes to Arizona law are minor and relatively uncontroversial. Property rights will be strengthened. So will laws against conspiracy and racketeering.
The real story here is the media advancing a prepackaged narrative in defiance of the facts. Arizona is Jon Stewart’s “Meth Lab of Democracy.” Coverage is focused on hyping unfounded fears that are consonant with that image of Arizona. Where others see a wacky, Wild West government, I see a vibrant political culture that other states should envy and emulate.
Chasing the Story
When I called Senator Sylvia Allen’s office, her representative sounded exasperated. The media had picked up a quotation by Senator Allen and presented her as a major supporter of the bill, but Allen did not sponsor the bill. “She was asked a question and she answered it.” Fair enough.
Still, her quotation was being circulated. Citizens were calling Allen and demanding answers. But she didn’t write the bill. She didn’t sponsor the bill. The logical people to speak with and quote would have been the sponsors, Senators Borrelli, Montenegro and Smith. When I contacted Senator Borrelli, he responded so quickly that I thought it was an auto-reply, but, a few minutes later, he sent a follow-up email to elaborate. Borrelli is eager to engage on SB1142.
Will innocent protesters be swept up?
The hysteria swirling around this bill centers on the claim that innocent protesters will have their property seized if anybody at the protest riots. False. A charge of conspiracy requires proof that the conspirators agreed to commit a crime.
The section on racketeering is a bit more difficult to parse, but SB1142 does not rewrite the definition of racketeering from scratch. Rioting is added to a list of offenses—terrorism, homicide, robbery, etc.—which racketeering may include. The same standards of evidence that apply to other forms of racketeering will now apply to racketeering that involves rioting.
Why do we need this law?
But why does the law need to be changed. Isn’t rioting already against the law? And conspiracy? And racketeering? Yes. All of those offenses are crimes, but those offenses are narrowly defined in Arizona Law.
Senator Borrelli
SB1142 broadens the definition of rioting to include property damage. Arizona’s conspiracy law only applies to violent felonies, burglary and arson of an occupied building. Now, you could be convicted of conspiring to riot.
Likewise, Arizona’s racketeering laws are narrowly tailored to only include certain offenses. Usually, said offense must be done for financial gain to be racketeering. Terrorism is one exception. Rioting would be the second exception to the financial gain requirement of the racketeering statute.
The definition of racketeering itself is not being rewritten. Rioting is being added to an existing list of offenses that can be prosecuted under racketeering laws. If protesters are put in jeopardy by this bill, then the law needs a more dramatic rewrite to protect others who are unwittingly implicated in other forms of racketeering.
I contacted Senator Sonny Borrelli for clarity on the bill.
Rioting is not protected in the First Amendment. Rioting is already a Criminal act. Damaging property is also a criminal act. However, if during the investigation it is discovered as fact that a person is being paid to commit these criminal acts, that fact constitutes a criminal conspiracy. This should be covered in RICO and the employer should also be held accountable.
The language of the bill seems to preclude the requirement that rioting be done for profit in order to be considered racketeering; however, simply being at a protest that “goes south,” as the Arizona Capitol Times put it, is not enough to be convicted for rioting, conspiracy or racketeering under the language of this bill.
Civil Asset Forfeiture
Michael Gibbs of the Arizona Tenth Amendment cautioned that this new law creates more opportunities for Civil Asset Forfeiture. In Arizona, your property can be seized if you are suspected of a crime. The process for recovering said property can be expensive, which favors deep-pocketed defendants and harms others. Senator Borrelli disputes this characterization. “As for the property seizure issue, that is up to the Court if convicted.” Regardless of who is correct, SB1142 did not create Arizona’s problems with Civil Asset Forfeiture.
As it happens, the Arizona state legislature is taking on Civil Asset Forfeiture reform this year. Representatives Bob Thorpe of Yavapai County and Eddie Farnsworth of Gilbert in Maricopa County have proposed a number of Civil Asset Forfeiture reform bills.
The strongest proposed reforms have been killed, but the three bills that survive have broad, bipartisan support. In various committee votes, they have passed by 9-0, 8-0 and 7-2 margins. The nay votes have come from Democrats, who have little hope of stopping any legislation in Arizona. These reforms would force law enforcement to properly report and account for seized property; give the property owners receipts and make it easier for acquitted parties to retrieve their seized property.
Is this an anti-Soros bill?
The most frivolous criticism of the bill comes from Reason Magazine. Scott Shackford claims that the bill’s sponsors are short-sighted in attacking left-wing protesters when Tea Partiers will be prosecuted under this bill as well. That supposes that Tea Partiers are rioting, conspiring to riot or meeting the qualifications for racketeering by rioting. This bill does not attempt to exempt conservative groups and there is no reason to believe that Senators Borrelli, Montenegro or Smith would oppose prosecuting Tea Partiers who commit these crimes.
I asked Senator Borrelli if this bill was written in response to the recent Berkeley protests or the Fountain Hills protest that shut down traffic to a Donald Trump rally. He responded that this bill was incubating before those incidents.
Watching the Watchers
Getting to the bottom of this story was not hard. Senators Kavanagh, Allen and Borrelli were all happy to address my concerns. The text of the bill, a fact sheet and a record of how everyone in the Arizona Senate voted are easily accessible on azleg.gov. The changes to the law are even highlighted in blue and red to show additions to and subtractions from current law.
Michael Gibbs ventured a theory as to why the coverage has been so shoddy. Twenty years ago, your local newspaper would be delivered to your door step the next morning. When a story broke, that is when you would find out. Now, newspapers are competing with 24 news networks and social media to be first. Accuracy suffers.
SB1142 shows what is best and worst about Arizona’s political culture. Our political culture values liberty and is skeptical of government. In this case, that skepticism was exploited to cause a digital stampede.1
After eight years of waging war on whistleblowers, and indeed, being president during former Army intelligence officer Chelsea Manning’s sentence, trial, and three years of brutal detainment before that—President Obama finally delivered some pleasant news on Tuesday. Instead of 35 years in prison for 20 charges, Manning will be out in May of this year.
A heroic whistleblower to some and a traitor to others, Manning was an Army private who leaked thousands of documents related to the Iraq and Afghan wars to WikiLeaks, which in turn shared some of those documents with various newspapers. Though U.S. officials and their most dutiful lapdogs cried out in outrage over this individualist act of light shedding, no one died because of these leaks, as some claimed. We did, however, get to see what war looks like live with the “collateral murder” video. Furthermore, Manning’s information gave us body counts for Iraq, reports of the U.S. failing to follow up on reports of torture and murder, and war crimes committed that were never prosecuted.
There was all the reason in the world to assume Obama wouldn’t free Manning. His administration tried a record number of people under the espionage act. Edward Snowden fled to Russia rather than face the dubious justice that anyone unimportant would be granted for spilling government secrets. Former NSA executive Thomas Drake narrowly escaped the Espionage Act, and now works at an Apple Store, because he spoke to a reporter about privacy concerns he had with the agency, which he said was committing privacy violations worse than those which took place under Richard Nixon.
General David Petraeus could have been charged under a section of the Espionage Act for leaking classified secrets to his mistress/biographer, but he wasn’t. He pled guilty to a misdemeanor, and retired as CIA director, and that was all. Six months later, there was talk of him being in Donald Trump’s administration.
After two suicide attempts, miserable treatment, and draconian punishments for crimes such as possessing verboten books and expired toothpaste,
The law is the law, and “illegal” has serious meaning which all should respect. Because toothpaste.
and seven total years without freedom, Manning has five more months to go. It appears that President Trump will have no power to reverse this decision. Presidential clemency power is a beefy power indeed. Obama, after a term and a half of being known for a dubious healthcare law, and setting exciting new precedents in drone assassinations of Americans, finally started using that power in earnest, and is now breaking records there. As of today’s news, the president had commuted the sentences of more than 1500 people, and pardoned 212 people.
Though the news of Manning’s imminent release is great, there can be at least a semi-cynical explanation. Having diluted his civil libertarian rhetoric with his, uh, actual record, Obama can now go out with a bang, one that makes even the crankiest small government fans cheer when they consider the 1500 people whose lives are improved (or in the case of the handful of people who sentences Obama changed from death to life imprisonment, saved). But he can also keep an elite credibility by saying Manning was punished already. The clemency was a surprise, but there’s a certain savvy logic to it as well.
It’s not enough for security state vampires such as National Review’s David French, who found 35 years in prison for Manning to be an unsatisfying compromise, and seven measly years and torturous solitary confinement to be an insult. French and his ilk, such as former UN Ambassador John Bolton (and the Trump of 2010), thought Manning deserved death. She could have received the death penalty if she had been charged with treason, or if she hadn’t been acquitted of the charge of aiding the enemy. Manning’s sentencing must have been a sad day for people who demand their pound of flesh, and who think that 35 years behind bars is small.
That’s the thing. This could be a brilliant compromise move. There are people who believe Manning deserved to be punished, and there are people who have been furious about her imprisonment for the past seven years.
But the former could develop some proportionality and realized that seven years is a lot of life to lose. Manning was punished for trying to show the world what war looks like beyond George W. Bush and a “mission accomplished” banner, or even sanitized photos of flag-draped coffins. By freeing her, Obama gets to get back some of his civil libertarian cred, but also isn’t doing something “crazy” like pardoning Snowden. In a country that loves to punish too much (2.3 million people in prison), Obama ending his presidency with a cascade of mercy is a good thing, no matter what you think of the people whose sentences he has commuted, or the people he has freed. But it’s a shame that he didn’t have the courage to push for these things earlier. Or that he didn’t feel like risking some of the political capital that he spent on drones, Libya, and ObamaCare.
Petraeus was showing off to his mistress. Hell, Dick Cheney has been enjoying his freedom for many years now. Henry Kissinger has a Nobel Peace prize, no matter how many Cambodians he helped to melt.
What happened to Manning is proof that there are rules for them, and rules for the rest of us. There are rules for former heads of the CIA, and there are rules for Army privates who want Americans to know what is going on.
They will go to war for us, and in our name. But God help anyone who wants to help the public get a picture of what those wars really resemble. No matter what Obama’s motivation was, sincere or otherwise, his freeing of Manning is a pleasant surprise, and a capper to a rocky, often-authoritarian presidency that Trump is about to inherit.
Originally published at Rare.us on January 17th, 2017. Reprinted with permission.
So I read a book recommended to me by a nice dealer at the Lewisville Gun Show a few weekends back: Patriots: A Novel of Survival in the Coming Collapse, by James Wesley Rawles. I’ll give a brief review, then I thought it might be interesting to open up the comments to ideas on prepping and survivalism, since these are recurrent themes in a lot of the circles that radical constitutionalists and libertarians run in.
I am sorry to say the book disappoints. The writing is didactic in the extreme. People regularly refer to their gear by both the brand and model number, and their weapons by brand, model, and caliber. In casual conversation. I don’t think at any point during my time in the Army National Guard did I ever refer to my equipment by anything more than it’s most generic name, i.e., “Hey hand me my LBE”. The names of specific companies where supplies were purchased are given, and even the names of the clerks at the companies that the protagonists deal with, only to never be used throughout the rest of the story. The author goes into agonizing detail on how to weld steel shutters over your windows, set up traps, etc. Frankly it reads more like the author wanted to write a how-to manual on setting up your own Cwazy Compund, but decided to do it through the medium of a novel.
There are, of course, the usual fringe-right fever dreams. The villains are cardboard cutouts: the UN, lead by nefarious Europeans, wants to conquer America because they simultaneously hate/envy us because we’re free, and two traveling communists are found to be literally eating children. Only religious people can be moral, and one of the most important things you ask refugees when you first meet them is if they’re Christian. It’s formulaic: everyone who has a Bible or mentions going to Bible study is found to be a good-guy, and the ones who don’t, well…see the second sentence of this paragraph. There is a Jew who is one of the main protagonists, though he several times reminds the group that they worship the same God. Their Christianity is repeatedly invoked as being the reason they don’t go around raping and pillaging. The main protagonist is leery of leaving two young people alone at his compound, because he won’t tolerate “fornication”, but his wife assures him that as Good Christians they can be trusted to be celibate until they are married. And the Waco and Ruby Ridge killings by the government are described as specifically being the massacre of Christians who just want to be left alone. Would those incidents have been less tragic if they were Buddhists?
There is a happy ending – a Libertarian gets elected president! Hooray! But aside from that, I’m afraid it doesn’t resonate with a person like myself, who is taking sensible precautions for a several week disruption of supplies and services (accompanied by potential looters or attempts at street violence by bolsheviks), but doesn’t have the time or money needed to create your own private Fortress of Solitude in rural Idaho. Even if it sounds like a fun project, I have no doubt that a divorce would be in my near future should I attempt the thing!
That brought me the idea for the post: if you’re reading this, presumably you, too, are of a libertarian-ish bent. That means that it is likely that you have thought about prepping in some form or other. Personally, I have several weeks worth of water and non-perishable food stored, a bug-out bag with the usual contents, and a variety of weapons in several common calibers, with a few hundred spare rounds for each.
So I’ll open it up to the comments: do you consider yourself a “prepper”? What thought, if any, have you given it? What preparations have you made? What’s in your bug-out bag? What’s your main plan (bug-out, bug-in, etc.)? Perhaps we can have future articles on BOB prep, good fall-back locations, tips & tricks on making do without utility service, etc.
