Friday, June 22, 2018
Ed. This dangerous loon might have effectively destroyed someone's life and she is sentenced only to 45 days in jail?
The following article appeared in the American Thinker on June 21st
The good news is that the serious crime of making a false rape report is being punished. The bad news is that the punishment is a tiny fraction of the potential prison term an innocent man could have faced if convicted based on false testimony. MLive reports on the case of Delta College student:
Despite previously indicating he wouldn't do so, a Bay County judge sent a woman to jail for making up a story about being raped in a Delta College parking lot.
Bay County Circuit Judge Joseph K. Sheeran on Monday, June 18, sentenced 21-year-old Mary T. Zolkowski to 45 days in jail, with no credit for any time served. Once Zolkowski serves her term, she'll be on probation for two years, during which she is to be tested for drugs and alcohol and participate in substance abuse counseling.
The judge also ordered Zolkowski receive a mental health assessment.
Sheeran deferred an additional 220 days in jail, meaning Zolkowski will only have to serve them if she violates probation.
Zolkowski's sentencing guidelines ranged from zero to six months.
Although an innocent man was detained and given a lie detector test that he passed, he did not face the financial and personal ordeal of a trial. Unlike the infamous Duke lacrosse team case. The fact that Zolkowski changed her story a few times probably contributed to the lessening of what was still a personal ordeal for the falsely accused man. The New York Post summarizes her flip-flops (detailed here and here):
She reportedly told police she was walking to her car when a man grabbed her from behind and raped her without a condom while holding her face and throat, and said she only saw the man’s hands and that he fled in a car before she could see his face.
Zolkowski refused a physical exam after the alleged incident, the news outlet reported in August 2017.
When investigators met with her a second time, Zolkowski reportedly said the suspect was an acquaintance and she had been raped at an apartment.
The student at the time apologized for her confusion, adding she didn’t want to press charges. In a third interview with police, Zolkowski reportedly changed her story again — telling police she wanted to tell the suspect to stop during sex, but it ended before she was able to do so.
The Post’s report indicates much higher potential legal jeopardy for Zolkowski than the sentencing guidelines reported by MLive of Zero to six months.
Zolkowski, who pleaded guilty to making a false report of a felony, faced up to four years in prison and a $2,000 fine.
A false accusation of rape or a lesser sexual assault can ruin a man’s life, and if a conviction results, serious prison time, which realistically includes the likelihood of extended prison rape for the innocent man.
In this case, the worst possible outcomes were avoided. And Zolokowski may have mental issues, as MLive reported:
Zolkowski's attorney, James F. Piazza, said in the same March hearing that his client has been diagnosed with bipolar disorder and post-traumatic stress disorder, conditions for which she is receiving treatment.
But so far as I can tell, claims of mental incapacity were not a factor in her relatively light sentence. Maybe the fact that her false claim didn’t get very far is a mitigating factor explaining a month and a half in jail. Probably, it will function as a deterrent.
But I would like it to be firmly in the consciousness of all that false reports of assault are a serious crime, and I would like some degree of proportionality between the punishment for a false accusation and the punishment for the crime that is being alleged, for that is the potential harm at stake.
The following article appeared in the American Thinker on June 21st
By Joshua Broom
Black pride. Brown Pride. Gay Pride. White Pride. At face value, each two-word motto conveys an identical notion of cultural dignity and heritage. Nothing more. Nothing less. The concept really is that benign.
|Sign from "Days of Absence" event at Evergreen State College, 2017|
However, while three of these four mentioned in-groups are romanticized by the mainstream media, just one is unduly synonymous with hatred and racism -- and thus forced toward society’s cold-comfort fringes: White pride.
Those eleven simple letters, without hesitancy, spark an unbridled ire within progressive viscera.
But why? What is so caustic about a Caucasian who is simply proud to be Caucasian? Why does the very mention of white affirmation spark such outrage and condemnation?
Again, at its core, White pride is no different from any other form of ethnic or lifestyle pride. At its essence, it does not promote hatred, bigotry, or racism. It is what it is.
And it is shamefully mislabeled, all for political gain. In a land of free speech, is it not hypocritical that every ethnicity and sexual orientation, besides white and straight, enjoy a safe-space for unfiltered expression?
Yet, far beyond this expression, non-whites and LBGTQ -- along with their sympathizers -- can blatantly censor, shame, and exclude hetero-Caucasian voices from these platforms.
In addition, these coddled minorities are also granted months, weeks, and days to further their ascendance and pride.
And amid such a climate, it comes as no surprise that big media, and alt-left activists vigorously promote a fabulist straw man made of mythical “white privilege.” For once their propaganda seeped into mainstream awareness these Machiavellian entities brazenly forced a white-washing, white-apologist agenda upon our nation's universities and campuses.
Predictably, the resistance went for young minds in hopes of building a new America. An America obsessed with subverting white history and pride. With the specious boogeyman of white privilege carefully presented, scholastic textbooks and curricula have been re-written in the interest of veiled diversity. Though, under the new rules, and among confused, impressionable psyches, such proactive bigotry needn't make sense. All that forms now in the upcoming generation's clouded eyes is the leftist-version of white history, one of oppression of all other groups.
And it is fear of this past, even as we've mostly all moved forward, which sparks such blatant resentment toward white America. However, even through this madness, and the heavy propaganda stating otherwise, being proud of one’s ethnic heritage is far from shameful, even for Caucasians.
More and more, the left's divisive identity politics are losing ground as middle America proclaims no more lies, no more distortions.
Ed. When has a Marxist ever helped anything? De Blasio was all set to pontificate as the media wept but Trump would have none of it! What a hoot!
Anyone still wonder why Democrat hacks and Faux-Conservative Republicans want Donald Trump out of the White House? They’re tired of being made to look foolish in front of the voting public!
The following article appeared in Breitbart on June 21st
By Joshua Caplan
New York City mayor Bill de Blasio traveled to the U.S.-Mexico border with more than 20 other mayors Thursday and was turned away from an immigrant detention facility in Tornillo, Texas.
|Bill was made to look like the silly, useless ass he is!|
“This is our federal government denying access, and not allowing information, and it’s not America. It’s crazy,” de Blasio told reporters as he stood outside the gates of Tornillo Migrant Children’s Facility.
“I’ve never seen anything like this,” he continued. “These are public facilities paid for with taxpayer dollars. How on earth are we not allowed to see what’s happening to these children? It’s astounding, and it feels really un-American.”
A report revealed Thursday that the Tornillo facility only holds teenage illegal immigrants who entered the U.S. unaccompanied — and thus is not a symbol of the Trump administration’s “zero tolerance” policy which has separated some children from their parents after crossing the border illegally.
The New York City Mayor asked a guard if he could meet with employees of the facility to “see what’s going on,” inside — but was denied.
“Sir — to my knowledge — everybody’s unavailable,” the guard told de Blasio.
The potential 2020 presidential contender later told reporters, “We’ve got an unacceptable situation here and we’re talking on behalf of millions and millions of people and saying the status quo can’t hold.”
“What’s happening in Washington is changing fast enough,” he added.
“We’re trying to show the American people that this is a situation that doesn’t represent our values.”
On Wednesday, President Donald Trump signed an executive order halting immigrant children from being separated from their families after illegally crossing the Southern border.
Trey Gowdy and Company grill Obama’s Inspector General
The following article appeared in Frontpage Magazine on June 21st
On Monday, DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz testified with FBI boss Christopher Wray before the Senate Judiciary Committee. In a predictable performance, the duo cited mistakes and raised concerns but solved none of the lingering mysteries the massive report released last week that found anti-Trump bias did not affect FBI and DOJ decisions.
|Horowitz and Wray before the House Committee|
On Tuesday Horowitz performed solo before a joint session of the House Oversight and Judiciary Committees. Oversight chairman Trey Gowdy delivered the opening statement.
The attorney general had been accused of “softening or watering down his report,” Gowdy said, “When the reality is it was Jim Comey who softened and watered down his press release, announcing no charges against Secretary Clinton. We see Jim Comey and Jim Comey alone deciding which DOJ policies to follow and which to ignore, to decide whether there is sufficient evidence to support each and every element of an offense and we see Jim Comey and Jim Comey alone deciding whether to send a letter to Congress in the throes of looming election.”
In a devastating exchange with Horowitz, Gowdy said that “prejudging the outcome of an investigation before it ends, and prejudging the outcome of an investigation before it begins” is the “textbook definition of bias.” Democrats echoed the IG report’s conclusion that there was no bias. Republicans sought to tie up some loose threads.
The IG report confirmed that President Obama communicated with Hillary Clinton on her unsecured email system. Horowitz said the president had been one of 13 who had done so. Rep. Steve King asked about the volume of communications between the president and Clinton.
“I’ll have to get back to you on that,” Horowitz said, and the IG was “not sure” if any of the communications had involved classified or top secret material. If the IG did know the subject of the president’s communications with Clinton, he failed to reveal any details. Horowitz “would have to ask” if his team interviewed any officials at the Obama White House but said “not the president himself.”
|Why, they hardly KNEW each other!|
Rep. King asked Horowitz about his first encounter with the switch of “extremely careless” for ‘gross negligence,” which violated a criminal statute. Horowitz found that Peter Strzok, Lisa Page, and James Comey were all involved. The IG also said his team focused on the fact that the classified material on Clinton’s server was “not clearly marked,” which repeated one of Clinton’s claims about her negligence.
As for the question of her “intent,” Horowitz said it arose “months earlier,” maybe in 2015, though he couldn’t be sure. King said President Obama had suggested the “careless but not intentional” language in a “60 Minutes” appearance in October of 2015. And King had observed that in his July 5, 2016 statement, James Comey used “intent” six times.
Horowitz said Comey “concealed from the attorney general and the deputy attorney general, his intention to make a unilateral announcement in July 2016 about the reasons for his recommendations not to prosecute former Secretary Clinton.” The IG also described his report as a “thorough, comprehensive and objective recitation of the facts.”
The IG did confirm that Peter Strzok and Lisa Page worked on the Clinton investigation, the Russia and the Mueller team. Horowitz said Strzok and Page had exchanged “tens of thousands of texts.” Ohio Rep. James Jordan asked Horowitz when his team had discovered the message about “we’ll stop” Trump.
|Strzok and Page|
Horowitz conceded that this meant “stop Trump from becoming president.” The IG said they uncovered that text in May, and Jordan asked “why did we not see it until last Thursday?”
“I can’t answer that,” Horowitz said, adding that it had been sent to Rod Rosenstein’s department at the DOJ. Jordan concluded that Rosenstein “made the decision that we had to wait a month.”
Several representatives were curious about two FBI agents and one lawyer the IG report had not named. “The FBI raised a concern because they work on counterintelligence matters,” Horowitz said.
Rep Mark Meadows asked if the two FBI agents were Kevin Clinesmith and Sally Moyer, which the IG declined to confirm. “They don’t work in counterintelligence,” said Meadows, who charged that the FBI gave the IG “false information” and altered key witness reports.
“How did Comey see the report before it came out?” Rep. Darrell Issa wanted to know. Horowitz said Comey didn’t see the whole thing, but explained that he allowed those the IG team had criticized to have a look before release.
|Comey, Rosenstein and Mueller|
By the end of the day it was evident that Congress would have to hear from Comey, Rosenstein, Strzok and others. Horowitz confirmed that the IG is investigating whether FBI official Peter Strzok’s anti-Trump bias factored into the launch of the bureau’s Russia probe.
Also on Tuesday Peter Strzok was “escorted” from the FBI building. As his lawyer told reporters, Strzok had “played by the rules,” but been targeted by “unfounded personal attacks, political games and inappropriate information leaks.”
“I hope he comes and portrays himself as a victim,” Trey Gowdy told Fox News. Rep. Bob Goodlatte said the committee would issue a subpoena for Strzok to testify “next week.”
That will make for an exciting show on C-SPAN but none of this would be happening if the deep state plot to “stop” Trump had succeeded.