Thursday, July 28, 2011

CREW Clearly Violated 501(c)(3) Mandate

Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington violated their 501(c)3 mandate when they set out on a politically motivated smear campaign against former Delaware U.S. Senate candidate Christine O’Donnell. The IRS has laid out criteria for organizations who receive special tax exemptions and rates and one of those criteria has to do with political activism. Section 501(c) of the Internal Revenue Code (26 U.S.C. § 501(c)) distinguishes that 28 different types of nonprofit groups are exempt from some federal income taxes. For the purposes on this discussion, we will focus only on organizations listed under the 501(c)3 designation but you can find a more complete list of these groups by clicking here.

 In short, a non-profit group that takes money from donors is required to register with the IRS and along the way they may choose to register as a non-profit group under Section 501(c) of the IRS code. 501(c)3 organizations are described as: Religious, Educational, Charitable, Scientific, Literary, Testing for Public Safety, to Foster National or International Amateur Sports Competition, to promote the Arts or Prevention of Cruelty to Children or Animals Organizations. The corporation, fund, organization or foundation applying for the 501(c)3 tax exemption MUST be organized operated exclusively for the above activities and none other. In addition to this, most 501(c)3 organizations also apply for a “170 waiver” which makes the donations to a 501(c)3 organization tax deductible for many donors. Many times, these deductions are key to a non-profit organizations survival and loss of a 501(c)3 status can be hard to overcome since most other organizations and corporations do not give to groups without that deduction status. There are two classifications of exempt 501(c)3 groups:
Public Charity – receives a substantial part of its income from the general public or the government and public support should be broad, not limited to a few individuals or families.

Private Foundation – receives most of its income from investments and endowments which are used to make grants to other organizations rather than being dispersed directly for charitable activities.
In order to obtain 501(c)3 status from the IRS, a group has to file Form 1023 and accompany that form with a filing fee ($850 if gross receipts are $10,000 or more/$400 if gross receipts are under $10,000). This certifies that the group fits the mold of 501(c)3 organizations and that the group understands the restriction placed on groups that receive the 501(c)3 deduction. One such restriction is on political activities. 501(c)3 organizations are absolutely prohibited from conducting political activities that intervene in election to public office. Specifically, the IRS website states:
Under the Internal Revenue Code, all section 501(c)(3) organizations are absolutely prohibited from directly or indirectly participating in, or intervening in, any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office. Contributions to political campaign funds or public statements of position (verbal or written) made on behalf of the organization in favor of or in opposition to any candidate for public office clearly violate the prohibition against political campaign activity. Violating this prohibition may result in denial or revocation of tax-exempt status and the imposition of certain excise taxes.

Certain activities or expenditures may not be prohibited depending on the facts and circumstances. For example, certain voter education activities (including presenting public forums and publishing voter education guides) conducted in a non-partisan manner do not constitute prohibited political campaign activity. In addition, other activities intended to encourage people to participate in the electoral process, such as voter registration and get-out-the-vote drives, would not be prohibited political campaign activity if conducted in a non-partisan manner.

On the other hand, voter education or registration activities with evidence of bias that (a) would favor one candidate over another; (b) oppose a candidate in some manner; or (c) have the effect of favoring a candidate or group of candidates, will constitute prohibited participation or intervention.

The Internal Revenue Service provides resources to exempt organizations and the public to help them understand the prohibition. As part of its examination program, the IRS also monitors whether organizations are complying with the prohibition.
There is a clear and obvious violation of the 501(c)3 charter by CREW in the first line of the IRS link above. CREW filed a very public FEC complaint against Christine O’Donnell in an attempt to derail her political campaign. Here’s video of CREW Executive Director Melanie Sloan very publicly attacking Christine O’Donnell just 5 days after she won her primary and had begun her General Election run:
Click Here for the video

We’ll get back to the fact that Melanie Sloan knew that the accusations she was making against Ms. O’Donnell were completely false. First, I’d like to show yet another video, only 3 days later in which Melanie Sloan calls O’Donnell a crook and accuses her of stealing.

Now it should be pointed out that Christine has been cleared of all charges by the U.S. Attorney in Delaware and also that the FEC has yet to find an anomaly with her campaign funds. Also, the “former campaign manager” was with the campaign for two weeks and was let go (as she had been by a number of campaigns previously) for being ineffective in her job.  Finally, the complaint from CREW relies on knowingly false statements made by David Keegan. In the following audio clips, Keegan admits that what he said was “political”, “worthless” and “heresay”.
Clearly, from the audio clips above, CREW was engaged in a partisan attack (not to mention a criminal misuse of taxpayer dollars) against Christine O’Donnell that was based on knowingly false statements made by David Keegan. This clearly contradicts the statement made by CREW on their IRS Form 990 where they state that the engaged in no “direct or indirect political campaign activities on behalf of or in opposition to candidates for public office”.

Below, Anderson Cooper gets Melanie Sloan to flat out admit that this attack is political in nature and an attempt to influence the election. She also doesn’t dispute the fact that all of CREW’s leadership is made up of Democrats and Democrat supporters.

O’Donnell Shoots Down McCain

On Wednesday, longtime Arizona Senator and failed Presidential candidate John McCain bizarrely decided to attack the TEA Party and even former U.S. Senate candidates. John McCain, a one-time war hero and a POW in Vietnam has consistently soiled his good name over the years but Wednesday he finally disgraced himself to the point of no return. For the many conservative Republicans who had seen McCain for the RINO that he is for some time, his comments came with little surprise. He has always had severe contempt for the TEA Party uprising of the American people and the lack of support for his Presidential campaign by conservatives. The fact is that the only Republican candidate of 2008 that could have allowed Socialist Barack Obama to win the Presidency was in fact John McCain. McCain used an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal to display his ire at the TEA Party and under the guise of “reading from the column” he proceeded to blast TEA Party members as “Hobbits”, question the intelligence of freshman members of Congress and then turned his insults to Republican U.S. Senate candidates.

While reading the article, McCain made the following comment, "The idea seems to be that if the House GOP refuses to raise the debt ceiling, a default crisis or gradual government shutdown will ensue and the public will turn en masse against Barack Obama....Then Democrats would have no choice but to pass a balanced budget amendment and reform entitlements, and the tea party hobbits could return to Middle-earth...This is the kind of crack political thinking that turned Sharron Angle and Christine O'Donnell into GOP nominees. The reality is the debt limit will be raised one way or another." Before we jump the gun, let’s hear Senator McCain in his own words, as he defends his lunatic statements:

FYI, McCain’s “conservative voting record” is light on substance. His record is more like that of Mike Castle who was defeated by one of the candidates that he cited in his little rant. McCain took a cheap shot at Christine O’Donnell, who smacked down his friend Mike Castle in 2010 and Christine fired back by saying, ".... I think that it is inappropriate to insult the judgment of the majority of Republicans in Nevada and Delaware and that the implication that nominating RINOs somehow means we win was irrefutably disproven by McCain's own presidential candidacy debacle. After that nightmare, McCain had to veer right so fast he almost got whiplash from all his flip-flopping just to keep his Senate seat. It doesn't help him to attack those conservatives and Tea Partiers who graciously gave him another chance to keep his job...." 

We concur Christine, we concur, in fact, consider John McCain’s next opponent, my new favorite person. Mr. McCain, you WILL be replaced. Many of the people that you insulted and refused to apologize to from the TEA Party, were split on your reelection in 2010 against J.D. Hayworth and that split allowed you to keep your job. That split won’t happen again now that we Main Street Americans clearly understand what you think of us. Christine has shown in recent weeks that she will NOT be attacked without retaliation anymore. CREW tried to smear her and they will now face criminal charges for their actions. Senator McCain did nothing illegal, but his statements were incendiary, ridiculous and called into question his belief in the voters of his own party.

Monday, July 25, 2011

Pillars of Strength

You can say what you want about their politics (and you will) but conservative women are strong willed.  The stand and speak with more conviction than any male candidate on either side that I have ever seen since Ronald Reagan (although Bush was strong on the War on Terror).  They may not always be 100% correct, they may not always get every fact right or use the right words to describe the situation but they know right from wrong and they aren’t afraid to call down even their own party when it chooses the path of least resistance over the path of least injustice.  They’re also tormented by the Mainstream Media outlets that constantly chastise, nitpick and laugh at them when they make a mistake.  Never mind that Barack Obama said that he had 57 states, that he called a Navy Corpsman (field nurse/doctor) Corpse-man or that while making a case for government run healthcare he said "UPS and FedEx are doing just fine, right? It's the Post Office that's always having problems."  They say not a WORD about these or any of the other amazingly silly gaffes that President Obama has made yet they are quick to assault Michelle Bachmann on her saying that our “forebearers” worked tirelessly to end slavery.  Truth is, John Quincy Adams was one of many “forbearers” (meaning: Ancestor, Forefather) who worked tirelessly to end slavery.  They’ve even gone so far as to replace “forebearers” with “founders” in an attempt to call into question her intelligence by pointing out that George Washington, Thomas Jefferson and other “founders” were slave owners.  Without spending too much time on the subject, Jefferson called slavery “an abhorrence” and indeed wrote “ALL MEN ARE CREATED EQUAL” to ensure that our basic document of grievances made that clear, in addition, Benjamin Franklin, Benjamin Rush, John Adams (and his wife Abigail) and a number of other “founders” were fervent abolitionists and so it is not even inaccurate to say that many of our FOUNDERS worked tirelessly to end slavery.  The media all howled and the blogs were alive with the sound of insanity at Christine O’Donnell over a sound bite from 2007 where she said that scientists were creating mice with human brains in them (and in the December 2005 edition of National Geographic, Brian Handwerk wrote the article titled “Mice With Human Brain Cells Created”) but they let Joe Biden get away with telling wheel chair bound man to stand up, saying that you can’t go into a 7-11 or Dunkin Donuts in Delaware without a slight Indian Accent and told NBC’s Today Show audience that he would tell members of his family not to fly or travel in confined spaces during the swine flu outbreak (which caused a bit of a panic).  They mocked Sarah Palin when she said that Paul Revere’s midnight ride was as much a warning to the British as it was to the Patriots even though local historians insist that she is correct and a letter from Paul Revere himself backs up their claim.  Yet they let Hillary Clinton get away with saying that she was shot at in Bosnia despite video evidence to the contrary, then changing her story and saying they had to run to the car with no ceremony (again, video evidence shows no real urgency in getting her off the tarmac, she even meets the Bosnian President and a young girl).

It’s no surprise that liberal media hypocrisy knows no bounds or that left wing bloggers can’t bring themselves to admit that facts are facts.  It’s also no surprise that the liberal media ignores the gaffes of liberal leftist politicians.  It is however, astounding to me, that they are so vehemently opposed specifically to women and minority candidates in the Republican Party.  These are the same people who rail against racism and gender discrimination from anyone else, yet they show no remorse in dishing it out against conservatives.  Herman Cain and Alan Keyes are sell-outs and Uncle Toms; Sarah Palin, Michelle Bachmann and Christine O’Donnell are stupid and incapable; and Mitt Romney, Glenn Beck and Jon Huntsman are crazy Mormons.  So the mainstream media and left wing bloggers have attacked black candidates, women and the Mormon religion but no substantive policy differences.  In fact, when they try to call these candidates on facts, it backfires or at least it WOULD if these “journalists” were honest.  Take for instance, the 2010 U.S. Senate race in Delaware.  At a debate at Widener University (which I attended), Republican Christine O’Donnell called out Chris Coons on the issue of separation of church and state.  Coons had cited the 1st Amendment as the source of the separation between church and state:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

O’Donnell asked Coons to show her specifically where in the 1st Amendment to the Constitution, the phrase separation appears.  The law students, the professors, Chris Coons, the moderators, the media, everyone snickered at the question (although when I asked the law students on my left and right to locate it in my pocket Constitution, they were unable to locate it) and it was a story for days.  How STUPID could she be not to see that the First Amendment guarantees a separation of church and state?  As you can see from above, the phrase “separation of church and state” does not appear in the 1st Amendment.  There are two clauses relating to religion in the 1st Amendment, the Establishment Clause and the Free Exercise Clause.  The Establishment Clause says that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion” meaning that Congress cannot establish any specific religion as THE religion of America (a la the Anglican Church of England).  The federal Constitution applies only to the FEDERAL government (unless it specifically states otherwise) and many states in fact, established their own religions.  The second clause is the Free Exercise Clause and it states, “or prohibiting the free exercise thereof” which means that government may not prohibit the free exercise of your religion (so long as it does not infringe on the life or liberty of another person).  The phrase separation of church and state doesn’t appear in the Constitution, nor does the Constitution imply that our government officials cannot (or should not) believe in God or even openly display their faith.  It simply states that the federal government can’t create a government sponsored religion and that they can’t stop you from practicing whatever religion you want.  So where does it come from?  The phrase “separation of church and state” appears in a letter from Thomas Jefferson to a group of Baptist ministers in Connecticut who had written to him with concern over the 1st Amendment which suggested that the right of religious freedom was given by the government as opposed to God.  They thought government might someday attempt to regulate religious expression (oh how right they were!).  Jefferson’s response was that he envisioned a wall of separation between church and state because the right to freedom of religion was God-given (inalienable) not government given (alienable).  Jefferson was saying to the ministers that the difference between God-given rights and government-given rights precluded the government from involving itself in religious matters.  Since then, activist judges in the Supreme Court have simply ignored the context of the phrase and instead used it to apply to the Constitutionality of religious exercise in exactly the way those Baptist ministers had been afraid of.

You’ll never hear the explanation above, unless you look at WallBuilders, listen to Glenn Beck or read the original sources yourself.  The mainstream media is too lazy, too liberal and too rigid on their agenda to tell you the truth.  That’s why I say that Christine O’Donnell, Michelle Bachmann and Sarah Palin are Pillars of Strength.  They take on the other politicians, the pundits, the bloggers AND the mainstream media with almost no help.  They are their own media organizations in many cases and except for a few appearances on Beck, Hannity, Rush, Levin and a handful of other talk radio shows, they are dealing with hostile media that will not only twist their words, but completely make them up.  They call them dumb, they call them incapable and they call them even worse names but what they really are, is strong.  They’re strong, unabashed, unafraid and even proud of their ideological positions.  Some, like O’Donnell, will tell you about their journey from left to right on some issues and they will even buck their own party when it doesn’t fit with their personal opinions.  They aren’t afraid to take that step that more often than not, makes them outcasts among their own side.  Christine O’Donnell has a new book coming out August 16th called “Troublemaker” and maybe that best describes these women.  They’re troublemakers and THAT is why the MSM, the liberal left and the establishment Republicans can’t stand them.  It’s also why Main Street Americans love them and why God blesses them. 

Friday, July 22, 2011

CREW continues to attack an exonerated O'Donnell

So, Melanie Sloan, the Soros attack animal who leads CREW, still hasn’t gotten the message.  Very well then.  Enough is enough.  America is sick and tired of these kinds of unfounded, wasteful accusations based on politics and not evidence.  It’s time we had a new dialogue in America.  It’s time that we talked about the issues and really discussed facts and not fear mongering.  We’ve got to get away from the President erroneously claiming that “I cannot guarantee that Social Security checks will be sent out on Aug. 3 if a debt ceiling agreement isn’t reached.”  This is complete hogwash, the facts are that there are two kinds of spending in Washington, Mandatory spending, like Social Security, Medicare/Medicaid and Defense; and the second is Discretionary spending which encompasses everything else the government spends money on, like shrimp fitness, Jell-O wrestling and curbing the drinking of Chinese prostitutes.  While Obama and the Democrats are pressing the idea that simply increasing our spending limit is the answer, Republicans are looking to make the cuts to sustain our nation.  Ask yourself this, if you made $20,000 per year, owed your credit card company $140,000 and your debt limit is $150,000 which has already been increased a dozen times, is the answer to curbing your debt limit another increase?  Any rational thinking person knows the answer is no, it’s cutting your debt, paying off that credit card and understanding your limits.
The reality is that simply cutting discretionary spending, even if you cut all of it, wouldn’t fix our debt situation.  The real beef when it comes to our federal budget is in the Mandatory spending.  In 2011 (as of 9AM on July 22), our largest budget items are Medicare/Medicaid ($822.5 Billion), Social Security ($715.4 Billion) and Defense ($701.8).  They are followed by Income Security/Welfare ($421.8 Billion), Interest on the Debt ($212.6 Billion) and Federal Pensions ($212 Billion).  We have a national debt over $14.5 Trillion that works out to $46,577 of debt for every man, woman and child in the United States.  Think about that for a moment when you hear “fair share”, if you’re pregnant or just had a baby, your child automatically owes $46,577.  As soon as he/she is born, they start life with more than $46,000 of debt.  Do you think it’s fair to start your son or daughter out owing money before they can even crawl?  We have to start addressing the largest items in the budget instead of ignoring them.  The Democrats would have you believe that income tax revenue is the answer, taking as much as you can from the richest Americans is the answer and attacking corporations is the answer.  You can explore that here, where you will see what happens if you go ahead and “soak the rich”.  The current federal tax revenue is almost $2.2 Trillion while our budget is more than $3.5 Trillion (the Big 6 budget items above, total $3.086 Trillion alone) and the top 50% of wage earners (over $33,048) pay more than 97% of the taxes.  With that said, the top 1%, those earning more than $380,354, pay more than 38% of the federal personal income tax.  What’s fair?  Should they pay 40%, 50%, 60% of the federal income tax?
I’ve laid out facts above and I’ve asked questions of you, as a person.  What’s the right answer?  Is there any way to get to even without cutting spending on the Big 6 budget items?  After watching the Eat the Rich video, seeing the facts about taxes and our debt, can you see any way to get around some cuts to our largest budget items?  So why are the Democrats stalling with a discussion about raising our debt limit?  Because they can use the line, “Well, ok, the Republicans can play chicken with America’s credit rating if they want to but we can’t guarantee that Social Security checks will go out on time.”  They know that you, the average American, the senior, the soon to be retired, the bleeding heart will panic and demand that we continue to be irresponsible with our money.  It’s totally ridiculous.  The Big 6 get paid before the shrimp treadmills, before starving artists and before Jell-O wrestling.  It’s time to stop believing it just because it scares us.  Look it up, find it be true yourself, do your own homework and don’t take my word for it.  Look up the facts I cite and decide for YOURSELF what is true.  I ask you to do the same thing for Melanie Sloan and Christine O’Donnell.  Sloan’s attacks are purely politically based and they are not rooted in any facts.  The few so-called facts she has cited turned out to be outright lies by a man who had no knowledge of any of the events of which he spoke.  We’ve got to question everything she says and take her words with a grain of salt.  Every charge thrown at O’Donnell has ended up being totally false and yet how can we continue to levy a stigma against her?  Imagine if someone accused you of molesting their child who you had never even met and those charges were found to be completely false.  Would you want that accusation to remain on your record regardless of the outcome?  Is that “fair”?

Friday, July 15, 2011

CREW complaint against O'Donnell thrown out by US Attorney

For the 2nd time in two months, the U.S. Attorney has dismissed a complaint against former U.S. Senate Candidate Christine O'Donnell.  The second complaint, filed by the Soros funded Citizens Against Government Waste, alleged that O'Donnell violated campaign finance laws by paying rent and buying food.  NEWS AT 11!  This complaint, like that filed by RNC attorney Michael Toner on behalf of the Delaware Republican Party, cost O'Donnell election to Delaware's Senate seat vacated by Vice President Joe Biden and it cost the Republicans yet another seat.

In an act of desperation, Mike Castle and his friends leading the Delaware Republican Party filed a complaint against Christine O'Donnell with the FEC alleging misconduct with the TEA Party Express group.  The complaint came just a week before the September 15th Republican Primary and was an attempt to Their accusation was that O'Donnell's campaign coordinated with the TEA Party Express in order to stage events and raise funds.  Unfortunately, as with most FEC complaints, this one fell on its face because there were few, OK ZERO, facts in it.  As someone with firsthand knowledge of the case (you'll find my name in the complaint, listed as "Press Secretary" a position I never held within the campaign), I can attest to the absurdity of the entire argument.  First of all, the supposed "link", the "Press Secretary" (me) was not even a member of the campaign until AFTER the Primary campaign had ended.  Second, while I was referred to as "a spokesperson" for Christine O'Donnell on air by local radio host Rick Jensen, I immediately corrected his misstatements on air.  Early last month, the FEC dismissed the complaint for a lack of evidence.  Despite media reports to the contrary, it is expected that the FEC lawyers who filed their report "split along party lines" will clarify their statement and remove all doubt that there was no evidence to support the claim.

With that said, the claim did not derail the campaign as Mike Castle and his cohorts would have liked.  So what do they do?  Simple, they sell the lies that they had been spinning throughout the campaign to the highest bidder.  In this case, the George Soros funded liberal hit group CREW took the reins.  Well known in Washington for their partisan attack dog tactics, CREW filed their brief on Sept. 20th, just 5 days after O'Donnell had defeated Mike Castle in the Delaware Senate Republican Primary.  Turns out that CREW's fearless leader on this crusade was none other than Melanie Sloan.  Miss Sloan is a former Federal Prosecutor who made her name representing former CIA Agent Valerie Plame in a case against the Bush Administration which even the Obama Administration tossed out on its face.  She was also publicly admonished by the judge in the Scooter Libby trial for trying the case in the media instead of the courtroom.  This led Miss Sloan to CREW but not before she worked for Delaware's own, Joe Biden!  Well isn't that a "special" connection?  Oh, it gets better.  Sloan used her own father to file the claim against O'Donnell since it must come from someone in Delaware.  The CREW complaint was simply a compilation of ridiculous lies made up by the Castle campaign early on which were intended to paint O'Donnell as frivolous with money and illegally using campaign funds. 

In a shocker, the CREW team could only find the same two discredited witnesses from the beginning of the campaign to attack O'Donnell and wouldn't you know it, one of them has now been found to have filed a knowingly false affidavit.  Turns out that David Keegan, who had done some VERY brief consulting work for O'Donnell when she ran against Joe Biden back in 2008, simply lied about his relationship with the campaign and knowledge of specific events (which apparently never occurred).  Sloan herself may have violated the law but in the very least, as an attorney, Sloan certainly violated ethics rules while filing false complaints and making outrageous statements like "Christine O'Donnell is clearly a criminal, and like any crook she should be prosecuted,".  That's interesting Miss Sloan, because today we learned that the US Attorney disagreed.  In fact, it turns out that your witness David Keegan and potentially YOU Miss Sloan, are the crooks and criminals here.  I certainly hope that you are prosecuted for YOUR crimes against Ms. O'Donnell and the lies you perpetrated against her.  I say it's time to start holding people accountable for their false statements against candidates.  Enough mudslinging and demagoguery, anyone willing to ACTUALLY debate issues?  I certainly hope that Ms. O'Donnell pursues charges against Keegan, Sloan and CREW.

Thursday, July 7, 2011

American media reduced to tabloid status

Jurors in the Casey Anthony trial are currently seeking the release of the names and contact information for all of the jurors who returned Not Guilty verdicts on the counts of 1st Degree Murder, Aggravated Manslaughter and Aggravated Child Abuse.  In arguments before the presiding judge, the Honorable Belvin Perry, local and national media entities cited cases where juror information has been published int he past and an attorney for the media said "privacy issues should not be the only factor here".  Judge Perry rightly observed that jurors are selected, against their will at times, to serve on the jury.  They are subject to potential imprisonment if they do not show up.  Why should the state then NOT protect their identities if they are being forced to participate?  That's nothing short of holding a person against their will, forcing them to make a decision and then turning them over to the wolves.  Judge Perry cited a number of specific threats and actions taken by nuts, crazies and media persons against jurors who information hadn't been released and rightly showed concern that those individuals didn't deserve this kind of attention. 

The media's attorney argued that judges and lawyers were had as much to fear from  these people but their names are public.  The problem with that argument is that judges can recuse themselves, lawyers can refuse the case, etc. and they are paid quite handsomely for their participation whereas jurors are paid a pittance and forced under penalty of law to participate.  Their privacy should be respected and their concerns at the top of the heap.  It's understood that the American media isn't content to have the facts, they need to sensationalize, to drive up ratings and to "scoop" the other papers.  This isn't done through old fashioned gum shoe reporting anymore, it's done through gestapo tactics and court orders.

And why should we be surprised?  National television hosts call those who disagree with them "Nazis" and "talk sluts" and only rarely end up disciplined.  National media stations hire disgraced attorney's like Nancy Grace who was all but disbarred by the State of Georgia for being a liar and who has written books that embellished the death of her former fiance for profit to label people guilty before even the first shred of evidence is admitted.  In fact, if Nancy Grace's treatment of "Tot Mom" (Casey Anthony) is any indication of the media concern for human rights, it's amazing they don't dig up the bodies and interview the corpses of the victims.  Remember, it was the "esteemed" (and I use that term VERY lightly) Nancy Grace who pronounced Robert Ricci "guilty" of kidnapping Amy Smart despite the fact that the real kidnappers were Brian David Mitchell and Wanda Barzee.  Ricci died in custody despite his innocence and Grace never apologized.  She also attacked the Duke lacrosse team after a local stripper accused them of raping her.  On her prime time show, Grace said, "I'm so glad they didn't miss a lacrosse game over a little thing like gang rape!" and "Why would you go to a cop in an alleged gang rape case, say, and lie and give misleading information?".  Turns out that the prosecutor in the case, Mark Nifong was disbarred for knowingly lying and accepting false statements from the accuser in the case while the defendants were pronounced not guilty.  The stripper, Crystal Gail Mangum is now being held on murder charges for stabbing her ex boyfriend.  Grace has never apologized for any of her attacks or misstatements. 

Enter the mainstream media at local and national papers, on radio and TV who consistently feed the world the leftist agenda, hound the innocent and ignore more facts than they report all in search of ratings or sales.  Is it any surprise that these animals are seeking the contact information for the jurors who rendered an unpopular but arguably correct verdict?  Do you think these "people" care about who they hurt?  Ask Christine O'Donnell, Sarah Palin or Michelle Bachmann about the media abuse.  These animals know no bounds.  I witnessed the media sleaze of the News Journal with Ginger Gibson who did everything she could to trash Senate candidate Christine O'Donnell and knew no bounds.  I hope that Judge Perry rejects the media's motion and upholds the privacy of jury members. 

Wednesday, July 6, 2011

Casey Anthony verdict shows prosecutorial negligence

Many Americans are outraged. The way I see it, the Anthony case and the OJ Simpson Trial are indictments of the prosecutors in America as opposed to the whole system. American prosecutors have, for the last 100 years, had all the help that robed judges and corrupt governments could give them. They have sensationalized and forgotten the law. This is why defense attorneys have succeeded in recent years. The American judicial system is the single toughest standard in the world. It's the greatest system in the world for the individual and protects against an oppressive government. It's also reliant on DIRECT evidence for convictions (or it SHOULD be) and these jurors showed that even when everyone knows what SHOULD be, the only thing that matters is what this case, the reality IS that no one proved anything and therefore they could not convict. The jury is not and cannot be asked to pontificate about what could, should or might have happened. They have to follow the evidence where it leads and SOMETIMES that leads to a place where we would disagree. Think of the British troops involved in the Boston Massacre. The public opinion was all torches and pitchforks against them but John Adams defended them...the jury aquitted them and all because the evidence did not confirm what the public thought.

This is a TRAGIC situation, no doubt about that. Denzel said it best in Training Day: "It's not what you know, it's what you can prove." The prosecution couldn't prove anything, it sucks, but it's the truth and if we go around screwing the people we don't like because we don't like them or ignoring the law because it didn't work out the way we wanted it to, it makes us no better than those who we stand against who would use the power of government to snuff out the fires of liberty.troops involved in the Boston Massacre. The public opinion was all torches and pitchforks against them but John Adams defended them despite his own personal prejudice. The jury acquitted them and all because the evidence did not confirm what the public thought. The prosecution couldn't prove anything, it sucks, but it's the truth and if we go around screwing the people we don't like because we don't like them or ignoring the law because it didn't work out the way we wanted it to, it makes us no better than those who we stand against who would use the power of government to snuff out the fires of liberty. What we need today are prosecutors who don’t rely on sympathetic juries, sensational media campaigns or helpful judges. We need prosecutors who know the law, know how to gather and present evidence and know how to make the bad guys talk. What we have are a bunch of media monkeys playing games with victims.

Continue reading on This day in history: July 6th - National American history |