DOJ seeks to Suspend Certain Constitutional Rights During Coronavirus Emergency

This is worse than what Michigan’s Governor is doing!

The Justice Department has quietly asked Congress for the ability to ask chief judges to detain people indefinitely without trial during emergencies — part of a push for new powers that comes as the coronavirus spreads through the United States.
Documents reviewed by POLITICO detail the department’s requests to lawmakers on a host of topics, including the statute of limitations, asylum and the way court hearings are conducted. POLITICO also reviewed and previously reported on documents seeking the authority to extend deadlines on merger reviews and prosecutions.
A Justice Department spokesperson declined to comment on the documents.

The move has tapped into a broader fear among civil liberties advocates and Donald Trump’s critics — that the president will use a moment of crisis to push for controversial policy changes. Already, he has cited the pandemic as a reason for heightening border restrictions and restricting asylum claims. He has also pushed for further tax cuts as the economy withers, arguing that it would soften the financial blow to Americans. And even without policy changes, Trump has vast emergency powers that he could legally deploy right now to try and slow the coronavirus outbreak.
The DOJ requests — which are unlikely to make it through a Democratic-led House — span several stages of the legal process, from initial arrest to how cases are processed and investigated.
In one of the documents, the department proposed that Congress grant the attorney general power to ask the chief judge of any district court to pause court proceedings “whenever the district court is fully or partially closed by virtue of any natural disaster, civil disobedience, or other emergency situation.”
The proposal would also grant those top judges broad authority to pause court proceedings during emergencies. It would apply to “any statutes or rules of procedure otherwise affecting pre-arrest, post-arrest, pre-trial, trial, and post-trial procedures in criminal and juvenile proceedings and all civil process and proceedings,” according to draft legislative language the department shared with Congress. In making the case for the change, the DOJ document wrote that individual judges can currently pause proceedings during emergencies, but that their proposal would make sure all judges in any particular district could handle emergencies “in a consistent manner.”
The request raised eyebrows because of its potential implications for habeas corpus –– the constitutional right to appear before a judge after arrest and seek release.
“Not only would it be a violation of that, but it says ‘affecting pre-arrest,’” said Norman L. Reimer, the executive director of the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers. “So that means you could be arrested and never brought before a judge until they decide that the emergency or the civil disobedience is over. I find it absolutely terrifying. Especially in a time of emergency, we should be very careful about granting new powers to the government.”
Reimer said the possibility of chief judges suspending all court rules during an emergency without a clear end in sight was deeply disturbing.
“That is something that should not happen in a democracy,” he said.
The department also asked Congress to pause the statute of limitations for criminal investigations and civil proceedings during national emergencies, “and for one year following the end of the national emergency,” according to the draft legislative text.

And….:

Another controversial request: The department is looking to change the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure in some cases to expand the use of videoconference hearings, and to let some of those hearings happen without defendants’ consent, according to the draft legislative text.
“Video teleconferencing may be used to conduct an appearance under this rule,” read a draft of potential new language for Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 5(f), crossing out the phrase “if the defendant consents.”
“Video teleconferencing may be used to arraign a defendant,” read draft text of rule 10(c), again striking out the phrase “if the defendant consents.”

I have always suspected something like this might happen, irregardless of which party is in power. Now, it does say that the Democrats likely will not allow this to happen. But, you never know. I just find it amazing that a Republican lead Justice Dept. would do such a thing.

As Rick Moran at PJ Media said:]

Regardless, I’ll stick with Ben Franklin: ” They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.”

Indeed.

Others: Outside the Beltway, Letters from an American, PJ Media Home, Raw Story, Redstate, Daily Kos, The Hill, Reason, The Moderate Voice, Rolling Stone

Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer says, “I am not enacting martial Law”… but her words betray her

She says she is not: (via WXYZ-TV)

But, if she is not, what the hell do you call this?

(WXYZ) — Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer has signed a new Executive Order reducing the number of people allowed at assemblages and events.
The new Executive Order reduces the allowable number to 50. A previous Executive Order had reduced it to 250.
It comes on the heels of new guidance from the CDC and will go into effect Tuesday, March 17 at 9:00 a.m. and will remain in effect until April 5 at 5:00 p.m.
The order provides an exception from its prohibition on assemblages for health care facilities, workplaces not open to the public, the state legislature, mass transit, the purchase of groceries or consumer goods, and the performance of agricultural or construction work.
“My number one priority remains to protect the most people we can from the spread of coronavirus,” said Governor Whitmer in a news release. “We are all better off when all of us are healthy, and that’s especially true for the most vulnerable. These aggressive actions are aimed at saving lives. My administration will continue to do everything we can to mitigate the spread of the disease and ensure our children, families, and businesses have the support they need during these challenging times. We are going to pull through this together, just as Michigan has done in the past.”

Dear Mrs. Stupid Democrat,

You can not call it martial law, but when you issue an order, not allowing people to gather; that’s damned martial law.

First amendment states:

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 grievance

So, call it what you wish, but it is a forcing of the state government to force people to do something. That is martial law.

Video: Idiots React to Coronavirus

This….is….excellent: via Paul Joseph Watson on YouTube:

UPDATED: Say goodbye to Chris Matthews

Update #2: Matthews Retires

Stage 1 of his disappearing: Via Daily Beast:

A day after he was accused of sexual harassment by a journalist, MSNBC decided to keep host Chris Matthews off its airwaves during coverage of the South Carolina primary results.
Matthews is normally a fixture of election night coverage, which made his absence on Saturday all the more notable. His disappearing act came as MSNBC faced calls from a feminist organization to fire him because of sexism and sexual misconduct allegations—after raised eyebrows over other on-air remarks.
<….>
MSNBC did not immediately return a request for comment.

It’s starting.

—-Original Story Below—-

Honestly, I do not see Chris Matthews surviving this report.

MSNBC host Chris Matthews, whose long history of sexist comments and behavior have somehow not yet gotten him fired, tested the boundaries of his own misogyny again on Wednesday night. After the tenth Democratic presidential debate, the Hardball anchor grilled Elizabeth Warren about one of her lines of attack against Mike Bloomberg during the debate: that a pregnant female employee accused Bloomberg of telling her to “kill it.”
“You believe he’s lying?” Matthews asked Warren of Bloomberg’s denial.
“I believe the woman, which means he’s not telling the truth,” said Warren, who recently had to defend her own credible story of pregnancy discrimination.
“And why would he lie?” Matthews said. “Just to protect himself?”
“Yeah, and why would she lie?” Warren responded pointedly.
“I just wanna make sure you’re clear about this,” Matthews said. Right there on America’s purportedly liberal network, the anchor spoke to a 70-year-old United States senator who is running for president—and a renowned Harvard Law professor, no less—like she couldn’t possibly understand her own words, as if she were a child choosing between a snack now or dessert later.
The allegation that Matthews, a veteran journalist, was trying so hard to undermine was actually corroborated by a third party to The Washington Post earlier this month. There was no reason for him to harp on its veracity, except, perhaps, that he himself has made so many sexist comments over the years that he has a vested interest in Bloomberg being let off the hook.
Some of Matthews’s behavior has already been well-documented. Like Bloomberg, who frequently remarked “nice tits” and “I’d do her” at the office, Matthews has a pattern of making comments about women’s appearances in demeaning ways. The number of on-air incidents is long, exhausting, and creepy, including commenting to Erin Burnett, for example, “You’re a knockout…it’s all right getting bad news from you,” while telling her to move closer to the camera. Behind the scenes, one of Matthews’s former producers told The Daily Caller in 2017 that he allegedly rated his female guests on a numerical scale and would name a “hottest of the week,” like a “teenage boy.” In 1999, an assistant producer accused Matthews of sexual harassment, which CNBC, the show’s network at the time, investigated. They concluded that the comments were “inappropriate,” and Matthews received a “stern reprimand,” according to an MSNBC spokesperson.
This tendency to objectify women in his orbit has bled into his treatment of female politicians and candidates. He has repeatedly lusted over women in politics on air, including remarking in 2011 that there’s “something electric” and “very attractive” about the way former vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin walks and moves, and noting in 2017 that acting attorney general Sally Yates is “attractive, obviously.” But he has reserved a particular contempt for the woman who made it closest to ascending the heights of American political power, Hillary Clinton, calling her “witchy,” “anti-male,” and “She-Devil.” The Cut obtained footage of him joking in early 2016, just before a live interview with then candidate Clinton, “where’s that Bill Cosby pill,” referring to the date-rape drug. In 2005, he openly wondered whether the troops would “take the orders” from a female president; after another interview, he pinched Clinton’s cheek; and in another, he suggested that she had only had so much political success because her husband had “messed around.” This evening anchor, in addition to everything else, has repeatedly challenged whether women are legitimate politicians or could be president at all. “I was thinking how hard it is for a woman to take on a job that’s always been held by men,” he said of Clinton in 2006. – Source: Like Warren, I Had My Own Sexist Run-In with Chris Matthews | GQ

There is much more, click the link to read this story. You should look for Matthews to retire very soon.

God Bless David Harsanyi

Never though I would ever write that headline here…. Especially seeing Harsanyi is an atheist.

But, when he’s right, he’s right.

Mr. Harsanyi is responding to this:

First he came for @comey, and I said nothing because I was mad at @comey because of the Clinton email investigation and I blamed him for Trump’s election.
— Benjamin Wittes (@benjaminwittes) February 9, 2020

Harsanyi had something to say about that, seeing he is Jewish. He writes at National Review:

When fellow Hungarians came for my grandfather — he was one of the first to be deported from the country — they sent him to sweep mines on the Eastern Front before handing him over to the Germans at Mauthausen and then Gunskirchen.
At some point he perished, no doubt, in a vile and undignified manner, perhaps succumbing to starvation or typhoid or dysentery, or maybe he was shot in the head and left in a shallow unmarked grave. We don’t know. His wife and son, the latter of whom he would never meet, would never find out how he died, despite decades of trying. His loss, like the deaths of millions of other powerless and now anonymous victims of that age, would have repercussions that reverberate today.
When “they” came for James Comey, on the other hand, he landed a massive book deal, made millions on the speaking circuit, wagged his finger at his former boss through social media to his million followers, and spent some quality time with family. He never once had to worry about state-sanctioned violence. Comey, a man powerful enough to oversee a cooked-up investigation into a presidential candidate, merely lost a job.
Like Comey, all the alleged victims on Wittes’s ludicrous list served at the pleasure of the president and could be fired by Donald Trump for almost any reason he desired, just as they could have been fired by Barack Obama or Jimmy Carter or FDR. Many of the people on the list, in fact, have been investigated by the inspector general, who found that they acted either incompetently or potentially illegally.
Government bureaucrats aren’t endowed with a God-given right to work in the executive branch of the United States government. Most of these “victims” will find lucrative work elsewhere. None, I confidently say, are going to be thrown into camps. If you don’t like who Trump fires, or how he fires them, you can always vote for another candidate.
It might come as a surprise to those who, through hyperbole, demean the real victims of history, but Nazi Germany didn’t hold impeachment hearings for their leaders in 1938, there was no institutional anti-Hitler media in 1939, and most people in 1940 did not publicly accuse Hitler of being a seditious criminal and madman. Those who did, such as Martin Niemöller, ended up in Sachsenhausen and Dachau, not the green room at CNN.

God bless him. It is about time that someone spoke out against that sort of nonsense.

Religion of Peace?: Another Islamic Terrorist Stabbing in London

Here we go again. But, first the video made after the London police killed the terrorist:

Via BBC:

Quote:

A man has been shot dead by police in south London after he attacked people on a busy high street.
The man was under active police surveillance at the time of the attack, which police believe to be an Islamist-related terrorist incident.
He had a hoax device strapped to his body, police said. Three people were injured, with one person in a life-threatening condition.
Gunshots were heard on Streatham High Road just after 14:00 GMT on Sunday.
Reports suggest a man entered a shop and started stabbing people. It appears he then left the shop and stabbed a woman.
Witnesses reported hearing three gun shots and seeing a man lying on the ground, as armed police approached.
The BBC’s Daniel Sandford said the events appeared to unfold after witnesses saw an unmarked police car pull in front of another car near Streatham Common, forcing it to stop.
He said this could be linked to the subsequent stabbings and police shooting and it was possible somebody was stopped, before being followed by undercover officers.
[….]
Eyewitness Emma, from Streatham, told the BBC she saw an injured woman lying in the street.
She said she was told by another woman that an attacker had pulled out a knife in a shop before leaving and stabbing the woman.
Another eyewitness saw the shooting of the man take place in front of Boots pharmacy.
“I was crossing the road when I saw a man with a machete and silver canisters on his chest being chased by what I assume was an undercover police officer,” he told the PA news agency.
“The man was then shot. I heard three gunshots.”
Karker Tahir said he then saw police approach the man, before telling people nearby to move back in case a bomb went off.

I cannot believe I actually voted for this man

Here is the letter, that President Donald Trump wrote to Nancy Pelosi. I am not a fan of hers either. But, this is some seriously stompy foot stuff here. 😒

Click here to read the letter, it’s a PDF file.

The President is on shaky ground. and he knows it.

Via New York Magazine’s Intelligencer

Lawd have mercy! I actually agree with Whoopie Goldberg!

Let’s see, where’s the graphic?

Via the Daily Beast:

“Listen, the last time people did this, people ended up killing themselves,” Goldberg said, referring to Joseph McCarthy’s Hollywood blacklist of the 1950s. “This is not a good idea, OK?” As Meghan McCain nodded in agreement, “Your idea of who you don’t want to work with is your personal business. Do not encourage people to print out lists because the next list that comes out, your name will be on and then people will be coming after you.”
“We had something called a blacklist and a lot of really good people were accused of stuff,” she continued. “Nobody cared whether it was true or not. They were accused. And they lost their right to work. You don’t have the right! In this country, people can vote for who they want to. That is one of the great rights of this country.”
As the uproar over both the Hollywood fundraiser and Messings’ tweets raged, President Donald Trump himself jumped into the fray, claiming in a tweet that when both he and the actress worked at NBC, she came up to him at an event and “profusely thanked me, even calling me ‘Sir,’” and adding, “How times have changed!”
“You don’t have to like it, but we don’t go after people because we don’t like who they voted for,” Goldberg added. “We don’t go after them that way. We can talk about issues and stuff, but we don’t print out lists.”
Speaking to Messing and her Will & Grace co-star Eric McCormack, who joined her in her call to print the list, Goldberg said, “I’m sure you guys misspoke when you said that because it sounded like a good idea. Think about it. Read about it. Remember what the blacklist actually meant to people and don’t encourage anyone—anyone to do it.”

The Video:

Oh my.… I agree with her. 😯

Finally: Justice for Islamic terrorist Arabs Accused of Plotting 9/11 Attacks Is coming 2021

Via NYT:

WASHINGTON — Moving toward a final reckoning as the nation approaches the 20th anniversary of the day that led to the longest war in American history, a military judge on Friday set a date for the death penalty trial at Guantánamo Bay of the five men accused of plotting the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.
The judge, Col. W. Shane Cohen of the Air Force, set Jan. 11, 2021, for the start of the selection of a military jury at Camp Justice, the war court compound at the Navy base in Cuba. It is the first time that a judge in the case actually set a start-of-trial date.
The case against Khalid Shaikh Mohammed and four other men, should it proceed, would be the definitive trial tied to the Sept. 11 attacks. Until now, only foot soldiers of Al Qaeda have been tried at Guantánamo, and many of their convictions have been overturned.
Mr. Mohammed and the four others face the death penalty in a conspiracy case that describes Mr. Mohammed as the architect of the plot in which 19 men hijacked four commercial passenger planes and slammed two of them into the World Trade Center towers and one into the Pentagon. The fourth, which was believed to be aimed for the Capitol, crashed into a Pennsylvania field instead. The other four men are described as helping the hijackers with training, travel or finances.

[….]

In July, a prosecutor, Ed Ryan, urged the judge to set a date saying, “Our client, this nation, deserves a reckoning.”
In a lengthy exchange with the judge, Mr. Ryan argued that “dates energize and mobilize” people to prepare.
On Friday, defense lawyers on the case said that many of the judge’s milestones toward trial were dependent on the prosecution meeting a series of deadlines.

“For a January 2021 trial date to happen, the government would have to drop its obstructionism and produce a lot of important evidence and witnesses,” said James G. Connell III, the lead defense counsel for Mr. Baluchi. Mr. Connell said he had received more than 25,000 pages of case-related documents since July and expected that many more were coming.
Selection of the jury — 12 members and four alternate members — is expected to last months, with American military officers shuttled by air to and from the base in groups because of the limited housing at Guantánamo.
Besides conspiracy, the men are charged with committing murder in violation of the law of war, attacking civilians and terrorism. Should the men be convicted and sentenced to death, it is up to the secretary of defense to determine the method of execution.

It’s about damned time that these sleaze ball motherfuckers got to trial and are tried and killed. As someone who lived through 9/11 and struggled with depression, Anxiety; of which I am now on medication for…. I hope these rat bastards get the firing squad.

Screw them and their false religion and Pedophile prophet!

How to and how not to address the subject of reparations for slavery in America

First the proper, dignified, and intelligent way to argue against reparations for Slavery.

And there’s the is the stupid way, as presented by one of the stupidest people in Conservatism today: (Via the Daily Beast)

If this is the best that the Republican Party and/or The Conservative movement can come up with, we’re screwed. She’s really giving Ann Coulter a run for her money.