US News

US News

Sheriff Sends 24 Cops And Armored Vehicle To Collect Civil Judgement From 77 Y/O

Sheriff Sends 24 Cops And Armored Vehicle To Collect Civil Judgement From 77 Y/O

Sheriff Sends 24 Cops And Armored Vehicle To Collect Civil Judgement From 77 Y/O

By The Liberty Crier

When officials in the tiny Town of Stettin in Marathon County went to collect a civil judgment from 75-year-old Roger Hoeppner this month, they sent 24 armed officers.

And an armored military vehicle.

Among other issues, the recent unrest in Ferguson, Mo., focused attention on the growing militarization of local law enforcement, particularly the use by even very small police departments of surplus armored military vehicles.

Sheriff Sends 24 Cops And Armored Vehicle To Collect Civil Judgement From 77 Y/OMarathon County sheriff’s officials aren’t apologizing for their tactics. Sheriff’s Capt. Greg Bean said officials expected to have to seize and remove tractors and wooden pallets to pay the judgment — hence the cadre of deputies. He also said what while Hoeppner was never considered dangerous, he was known to be argumentative.

Hoeppner said when he noticed deputies outside his house, he called his attorney, Ryan Lister of Wausau. Lister said he quickly left for Hoeppner’s house but was stopped by a roadblock that was kept up until after his client had been taken away in handcuffs. “Rather than provide Mr. Hoeppner or his counsel notice…and attempt to collect without spending thousands of taxpayer dollars on the military-style maneuvers, the town unilaterally decided to enforce its civil judgment” with a show of force, Lister said.

Bean said deputies had to handcuff Hoeppner because he was not following all their instructions, but did eventually agree to pay the $80,000 judgment after a visit to a bank — accompanied by deputies.

Bean also said the armored truck was summoned only after Hoeppner initially refused to come out of his house. Once the truck appeared, so did Hoeppner.

“I’ve been involved in about five standoff situations where, as soon as the MARV showed up, the person gives up,” saving time, money and increasing safety, Bean said.

Source

Posted by Red Pill Reports in US News
Holder’s Justice Department Isn’t Interested in the Facts in Ferguson

Holder’s Justice Department Isn’t Interested in the Facts in Ferguson

Holder’s Justice Department Isn’t Interested in the Facts in Ferguson

By Bryan Preston

The official autopsy of Michael Brown leaked Wednesday. It strongly suggests that there was an altercation between Brown and Ferguson police officer Darren Wilson before the 18-year-old man was shot dead on August 9. The autopsy also revealed that Brown had been using marijuana, and had enough THC in his system to trigger hallucinations.

The Justice Department is angry — with the leak.

The U.S. Department of Justice condemned the leaks Wednesday as “irresponsible and highly troubling” and said, “There seems to be an inappropriate effort to influence public opinion about this case.”

Ferguson Cop points gun at journalists on 8-20-14

Ferguson Cop points gun at journalists on 8-20-14 – Image Credit: Joe Biggs, Infowars

That’s rich coming from a Justice Department that bigfooted its way into Ferguson with the express intent to impact public opinion, after the media did its best/worst to turn what might have been an ordinary if tragic police shooting incident into a nationwide race case.

Supposing the leaker does want to influence public opinion, why might that be the case? Could it be because the rioters who menaced Ferguson for weeks after the shooting continue to demand that Wilson not only be indicted, but convicted, no matter what the facts say? Could the leak be an attempt to start slowly draining the story’s controversy away? Could it be because the leaker is aware that the grand jury’s failure to indict Wilson, if that’s what happens, could trigger a whole new round of riots and violence if it comes without some warning?

Here’s what we’re getting, in what looks like an effort to start pulling some of the rage out of the situation ahead of any grand jury decision.

The New York Times reported that investigators found Brown’s blood on Wilson’s gun, on the interior door panel of Wilson’s car and on Wilson’s uniform.

The Washington Post reported that several black witnesses had provided details in secret grand jury testimony that supported Wilson’s account.

(Those witnesses will not reveal their names now, out of fear of reprisal.)

And the official autopsy report, obtained by the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, showed a gunshot wound to Brown’s hand that appeared to be from close range. That seemed to support the officer’s account that there was a struggle for his gun inside his patrol car.

Read more


Video: From August 20, 2014

Posted by Red Pill Reports in US News
Stunning Federal Corruption Case Moving Forward

Stunning Federal Corruption Case Moving Forward

Stunning Federal Corruption Case Moving Forward With Almost No Media Attention

By Thomas Lifson

Corrupt federal prosecutors presenting false evidence in order to shake down a blameless corporation and bring in tens of millions of dollars seems like a pretty dramatic story. Especially when former prosecutors support the charge and a chief judge acts on the allegations and takes dramatic action. Yet the media silence is deafening.

Federal Corruption Case

Image credit: NYU FC (Wikis Take Manhattan 2009 participant) [CC-BY-SA-3.0] via Wikimedia Commons

Eric Holder’s Justice Department is implicated in a dramatic and shocking case of alleged corruption that is so bad that the Chief Judge of the Eastern District of California has taken what can rightly be called the “nuclear option” and recused all the judges in the district from the case because they may have been defrauded by the DoJ prosecutors.

So far, aside from the local paper, the Sacramento Bee, it is only Sidney Powell of the New York Observer, writing in the opinion pages of that publication that has paid attention to what should be a prominent national media scandal. In brief, the Sierra Pacific Industries, a lumber producer, was accused by the federal government of starting a large wildfire, and fined $55 million, and compelled to hand over title to 22,500 acres of land. The only problem is that the prosecution was allegedly corrupt, and knowingly submitted false evidence.

In an extraordinary development, Judge England, Chief Judge of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California, ordered the recusal of all the Eastern District judges from the case because of serious allegations that the Court itself was defrauded by the government in the original prosecution. To avoid any appearance of partiality, he has referred the case to Ninth Circuit Chief Judge Alex Kozinski to appoint a judge from outside the Eastern District to handle the case going forward. Judge Kozinski has excoriated prosecutors for failing to meet their legal and ethical obligations.

The order notes that the defendants filed an action this week to set aside the $55 million settlement because, as the defendants allege, “the United States presented false evidence to the Defendants and the Court; advanced arguments to the Court premised on that false evidence; or, for which material evidence had been withheld, and obtaining court rulings based thereon; prepared key Moonlight Fire investigators for depositions, and allowed them to repeatedly give false testimony about the most important aspects of their investigation; and failed to disclose the facts and circumstances associated with the Moonlight Fire lead investigator’s direct financial interest in the outcome of the investigation arising from an illegal bank account that has since been exposed and terminated.”

The Sacramento Bee reported on the Defendant’s filing. Indeed, the Defendants’ motion informs us that a former Assistant United States Attorney came forward and disclosed that he believes that he was removed from the original prosecution by “his boss, David Shelledy, chief of the civil division in the United States Attorney’s office,” because he “rebuffed” pressure to “engage in unethical conduct as a lawyer.” Of course, like other former prosecutors who were unethical, Mr. Shelledy is to receive Attorney General Holder’s highest award for excellence—this week.

The defendants also reveal that another former federal prosecutor, Eric Overby, left the Moonlight Fire prosecution team also, stating: “It’s called the Department of Justice. It’s not called the Department of Revenue.” According to the motion, Mr. Overby told defense counsel that in his entire career, “I’ve never seen anything like this. Never.”

Read more

Posted by Red Pill Reports in US News
The Political Impact of the Mainstream Media in America

The Political Impact of the Mainstream Media in America

The Political Impact of the Mainstream Media in America

Pew Survey. Conservatives Get Their News from Fox; Liberals Get Theirs Everywhere

Pew headlined on October 21st, “Political Polarization & Media Habits,” and reported “Striking Differences Between Liberals and Conservatives,” such as that Fox News Channel dominates as the news-source among conservatives, but that no news-source dominates among liberals. 

47% of “Consistent Conservatives” cite FNC as their “main source for news about gov’t and politics,” whereas 15% of “Consistent Liberals” cite CNN as theirs — and no news-source is more-frequently cited by them than CNN. NPR ranks second among them, at 13%. MSNBC is third, at 12%. New York Times is fourth, at 10%. Local TV is fifth, at 5%.

Mainstream Media in AmericaBy contrast: for “Consistent Conservatives,” Local radio is second, at 11%. Local TV is third, at 5%. Local newspaper is fourth, at 3%. Google news is fifth, at 3%.

Those are the main news-sources for more than 96% of Americans.

Here are the two main tables, showing which news sources each of the 2,901 respondents named:

The key question listed 36 news-sources, and doesn’t indicate influence but only that the respondent has “heard of” the named source (it’s like a politician’s name-recognition, versus his actual support):

ASK ALL WEB RESPONDENTS:

Q.20 Please click on all of the sources that you have heard of, regardless of whether you use them or  not. If you are unsure, please DO NOT click it. You can click anywhere in each of the boxes.

Mar 19-Apr 29 2014

Based on web respondents

[N=2,901] [%]

95 CNN 

94 ABC News 

94 NBC News 

93 CBS News 

93 Fox News Cable Channel 

90 USA Today 

89 MSNBC 

88 PBS 

85 New York Times 

82 Wall Street Journal 

80 Yahoo News 

80 Washington Post 

76 BBC 

71 Google News 

66 Rush Limbaugh Show 

66 Huffington Post 

65 The New Yorker 

64 Daily Show

62 Colbert Report

60 Bloomberg

53 NPR

49 Glenn Beck Program

42 Al Jazeera America

36 The Guardian

34 The Economist

34 Drudge Report

32 Politico

31 BuzzFeed

22 Mother Jones

21 Slate

18 The Blaze

15 Breitbart

12 Daily Kos

9 ThinkProgress

In addition, there were included a few news-sources that shouldn’t have been. For example, the Ed Show, on MSNBC, was listed, whereas it’s only one show of many on that channel and not even the most-watched. (Among the ones more-watched there are Rachel Maddow, and Lawrence O’Donnell.) But no show on the channel should have been listed, because the channel itself, MSNBC, was one of the listed options. Similarly, the Hannity Show on Fox was listed, though FNC itself was also listed, and though the O’Reilly show on that channel has an even larger audience. Moreover, Mother Jones was listed, but The Nation was not, National Review was not, Harper’s was not, etc.

Read more

 

 

Posted by Red Pill Reports in US News
Police Dept. Requests Facebook PASSWORD From Gun Permit Applicant

Police Dept. Requests Facebook PASSWORD From Gun Permit Applicant

Police Dept. Requests Facebook PASSWORD From Gun Permit Applicant

Request violates Constitution & Facebook’s Terms of Service

by Kit Daniels | Infowars.com

The Watervliet, N.Y., Police Department is asking pistol permit applicants for access to their Facebook accounts.

The department recently sent an applicant a form which asked for his Facebook username and password, and after the applicant complained, the department claimed the form was sent to him by mistake and was only used during face-to-face interviews when the department asks applicants for access to their Facebook accounts.

Gun Permit

Credit: Cal A. Feit @tazcat2011

“It is… a common practice to view social media as a means to identify and determine character of a pistol permit applicant, in addition to other investigatory methods,” the department’s spokesperson told the applicant. “Typically all we ask is that an applicant access their account during an interview.”

But if the police dept. gets the applicant’s login credentials as requested on the form, and the applicant does not change his password afterwards, the police and the court reviewing the application can theoretically access his Facebook account as much as they want.

“It is what it is,” the Chief of Police, Ron Boisvert, told gun rights advocate Robert Farago after Farago told him the request was unconstitutional.

So essentially, the Watervliet Police Dept. and the court are violating the First, Second and Fourth Amendments by strong-arming applicants into a warrantless search, which allows the court to deny applicants their Second Amendment rights based on their views expressed on Facebook.

“…If you decline – such information is no doubt handed up to the judge deciding yes or no on your application,” reported nyfirearms.com. “The question remains – How many people actually gave into this blatant violation of their rights when applying for a pistol permit?”

The request is also a violation of Facebook’s terms of service which prohibits users from sharing their passwords.

“…We’ve seen a distressing increase in reports of employers or others seeking to gain inappropriate access to people’s Facebook profiles or private information,” Erin Egan, the site’s chief privacy officer, wrote. “This practice undermines the privacy expectations and the security of both the user and the user’s friends.”

“If you are a Facebook user, you should never have to share your password, let anyone access your account, or do anything that might jeopardize the security of your account or violate the privacy of your friends.”

Source

Posted by Red Pill Reports in US News
Cops Need a Warrant to Grab Your Cell Tower Data

Cops Need a Warrant to Grab Your Cell Tower Data

Cops Need a Warrant to Grab Your Cell Tower Data, Florida Court Rules

By 

Americans may have a Florida drug dealer to thank for expanding our right to privacy.

Police departments around the country have been collecting phone metadata from telecoms and using a sophisticated spy tool to track people through their mobile phones—often without obtaining a warrant. But a new ruling out of Florida has curbed the activity in that state, on constitutional grounds. It raises hope among civil liberties advocates that other jurisdictions around the country may follow suit.

Cops Need a Warrant to Grab Your Cell Tower Data

Image Credit: Joe Ravi, lic. CC-BY-SA 3.0

The Florida Supreme Court ruled Thursday that obtaining cell phone location data to track a person’s location or movement in real time constitutes a Fourth Amendment search and therefore requires a court-ordered warrant.

The case specifically involves cell tower data for a convicted drug dealer that police obtained from a telecom without a warrant. But the way the ruling is written (.pdf), it would also cover the use of so-called “stingrays”—sophisticated technology law enforcement agencies use to locate and track people in the field without assistance from telecoms. Agencies around the country, including in Florida, have been using the technology to track suspects—sometimes without obtaining a court order, other times deliberately deceiving judges and defendants about their use of the devices to track suspects, telling judges the information came from “confidential” sources rather than disclose their use of stingrays. The new ruling would require them to obtain a warrant or stop using the devices.

The American Civil Liberties Union calls the Florida ruling “a resounding defense” of the public’s right to privacy.

“Following people’s movements by secretly turning their cell phones into tracking devices can reveal extremely sensitive details of our lives, like where we go to the doctor or psychiatrist, where we spend the night, and who our friends are,” said Nate Freed Wessler, an attorney with the ACLU’s Speech, Privacy and Technology Project. “Police are now on notice that they need to get a warrant from a judge before tracking cell phones, whether using information from the service provider or their own ‘Stingray’ cell phone tracking equipment.”

The ruling constitutes the first time that a state court has reached this finding under the Fourth Amendment. It comes at a timely moment when federal courts of appeal in other jurisdictions are in the midst of taking up the question of cell tower data, Wessler told WIRED. Even if other jurisdictions rule differently, the Florida case makes it more likely that the issue will one day get to the U.S. Supreme Court. If it does, civil liberties advocates hope that the federal court would rule as it did on the use of GPS tracking devices used by police, determining that it constitutes a search under the Fourth Amendment. Though the court in that case fell short of ruling that the use of GPS devices requires a warrant, law enforcement agencies around the country have changed their practices as a result of the ruling.

Read more

Posted by Red Pill Reports in US News
Parents Liable for What Kids Post on Facebook?

Parents Liable for What Kids Post on Facebook?

Parents May Be Liable for What Their Kids Post on Facebook, Court Rules

“Legal precedent” on issue of parental responsibility over children’s online activity

by Jacob Gershman | Wall Street Journal
Parents can be held liable for what their kids post on Facebooka Georgia appellate court ruled in a decision that lawyers said marked a legal precedent on the issue of parental responsibility over their children’s online activity.

Parents Liable for What Kids Post on Facebook?

Image Credits: Maria Elena / Flickr

The Georgia Court of Appeals ruled that the parents of a seventh-grade student may be negligent for failing to get their son to delete a fake Facebook profile that allegedly defamed a female classmate.

The trouble started in 2011 when, with the help of another student, the boy constructed a Facebook profile pretending to be the girl. He used a “Fat Face” app to make her look obese and posted profane and sexually explicit comments on the page depicting her as racist and promiscuous, according to court documents.

When the girl found out about it, she told her parents who then complained to the school’s principal. The school punished the boy with two days of in-school suspension and alerted his parents, who grounded him for a week.

Read more

Posted by Red Pill Reports in US News
Mexican Gov’t Paying to Help Shield Illegal Immigrants

Mexican Gov’t Paying to Help Shield Illegal Immigrants

Mexican Gov’t Paying to Help Shield Illegal Immigrants in the U.S. from Deportation

by Breitbart
The government of Mexico is paying to help its citizens who are living illegally in the United States avoid deportation.

According to a report from National Public Radio, the Mexican government through its 50 consulates around the United States has been helping to fund low-income illegal immigrants to apply for President Obama’s Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, or DACA — which shields illegal immigrants from deportation and allows them to work in the U.S.

Mexican Gov’t Paying to Help Shield Illegal Immigrants

Image Credits: Gerald L. Nino, CBP, U.S. Dept. of Homeland Security

NPR’s report details the story of Tania Guzman, an illegal immigrant who said the cost of applying for DACA worried her, but she was able to afford it after her pro-bono lawyer from Public Counsel told her she could access financial help from the Mexican Consulate in Los Angeles.

Mexico paid for all Guzman’s attorney fees and application fees, according to NPR. In the end Guzman told NPR she paid just $50.

Read more

Posted by Red Pill Reports in US News
Courts Block Voter ID Laws In Texas, Wisconsin

Courts Block Voter ID Laws In Texas, Wisconsin

Courts Block Voter ID Laws In Texas, Wisconsin

by Associated Press

A federal judge likened Texas’ strict voter ID requirement to a poll tax deliberately meant to suppress minority voter turnout and struck it down less than a month before Election Day — and mere hours after the U.S. Supreme Court blocked a similar measure in Wisconsin.

Courts Block Voter ID Laws In Texas, Wisconsin

Image Credits: Vox Efx, Flickr

The twin rulings released Thursday evening represent major and somewhat surprising blows to largely Republican-backed voter identification rules sweeping the nation that have generally been upheld in previous rulings.

Approved in 2011, Texas’ law is considered among the nation’s harshest and had even been derided in court by the Justice Department as blatant discrimination. Wisconsin’s law was passed the same year and has remained a similar political flashpoint.

“We are extremely heartened by the court’s decision, which affirms our position that the Texas voter identification law unfairly and unnecessarily restricts access to the franchise,” U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder said in a statement. “We are also pleased that the Supreme Court has refused to allow Wisconsin to implement its own restrictive voter identification law.”

U.S. District Judge Nelva Gonzales Ramos of Corpus Christi on Texas’ Gulf Coast, an appointee of President Barack Obama, never signaled during a two-week trial in September that she intended to rule on the Texas law before Election Day. But the timing could spare an estimated 13.6 million registered Texas voters from needing photo identification to cast a ballot.

Read more

Posted by Red Pill Reports in US News