your passport and transport ready and right or are you going to stand and fight?

theatlantic | Liberty University’s motto is “training champions for Christ.” Apparently, the training offered by the evangelical college will now include a free concealed-weapons course for its students.

At Liberty’s convocation service on Friday, the school president, Jerry Falwell Jr., responded to the San Bernardino shooting, saying, “If more good people had concealed-carry permits, then we could end those Muslims before they walked in and killed them.” He encouraged students to enroll in the university’s gratis certification course and said he was carrying a weapon “in my back pocket right now.” He concluded by saying, “Let’s teach them a lesson if they ever show up here.”

Falwell’s comments are the latest in a string of proclamations by conservative Christians appealing to religious authority and yet apparently devoid of biblical reflection. Can they claim the Bible as their chief authority if they ignore it when politically expedient?

Falwell Jr. inherited the leadership of the school from his better-known father, but Liberty (my alma mater) has remained a popular stop for conservative politicians. Former Republican Senator Jim DeMint, the president of the Heritage Foundation, spoke in chapel prior to Falwell’s comments, which included a criticism of President Obama’s push for more gun control. While the school claims to put Jesus at the center of its curriculum, its president never referred to the Prince of Peace’s teachings in his remarks about gun violence. The absence is unsurprising. It’s hard to imagine how the Jesus’s teachings could support his case. 

gun and body armor sales spike after mass-media chumbalone-chiraq redirection...,

Time | Some stores haven't seen a spike like this since the 2012 Sandy Hook shooting

Gun sales have been spiking in the United States for weeks, especially following the mass shooting in San Bernardino, Calif. Wednesday that left 14 people dead.

Many California gun stores have seen a rush on guns after the San Bernardino shooting, according to ABC. “The knee jerk reaction of politicians is immediately after an event like this to take advantage of it for political goals and will try to restrict the rights of law-abiding gun owners,” Sam Paredes, spokesman for Gun Owners of America, told ABC. “So there is a natural rush to gun stores to purchase guns and ammunition.”

A gun store in Iowa told KCCI that their sales have shot up more than 30% in the past three weeks, and that they’ve been especially busy since San Bernardino.

And the Nardis Gun Club in Texas hasn’t seen gun sales this high since 2012, in the wake of the Sandy Hook shooting, Hawaii News Now reports.

According to the New York Times, the sales haven’t just been spiking after San Bernardino, however. More Americans had their backgrounds checked to buy guns on Black Friday than any other single day on record. 185,345 had their backgrounds checked on Black Friday, which is a 5 percent increase from the year before.

are attorneys general the godfathers in this thing of ours?

techdirt | Earlier this year, Judge Alex Kozinski went much further than his one-off comments in judicial opinions to take the prosecutors to task for… well, pretty much everything. The "epidemic of Brady [exonerating evidence] violations" he noted in 2013's USA v. Olsen decision was just the leadoff. Kozinski teed off on faulty forensic evidence (comparing arson "specialists" to "witch doctors"), the way the "first impression" almost always favors prosecutors (who get to present their case first in criminal trials), and the general unreliability of eyewitness testimony, which is often portrayed as infallible when it's the goverment presenting the witnesses. 

Several months later, the Department of Justice -- home to a great many prosecutors -- has finally responded. And its feelings are terribly hurt.

Federal prosecutors, who Judge Kozinski actually described in glowing terms, took offense at the fact they are not considered infallible by the Judge. And in the last few weeks, they have made their hurt feelings known. 

Andrew Goldsmith, National Criminal Discovery Coordinator at the Department of Justice, and John Walsh, United States Attorney for the District of Colorado, wrote aletter to the Georgetown Law Journal expressing their displeasure with Kozinski’s contribution to the journal. Rather than take the opportunity to join in Kozinki’s call for a more careful justice system, Goldsmith and Walsh demonstrated a stunning lack of awareness about what they do and how often it goes wrong these days.

According to this defensive group of prosecutors, Kozinski's "provocative preface" was certainly food for thought for whoever Kozinski was referring to, but not them, because federal prosecutors are upstanding men and women whom the judge has insulted deeply.

While the preface raises several points that merit discussion, such as the reliability of certain forms of evidence, Judge Kozinski goes too far in casting aspersions on the men and women responsible for the administration of justice in this country. His preface seemed to question not only the integrity of our agents and prosecutors, but also the government’s capacity to self-correct in the (very small) minority of cases when someone falls short.

The problem is, Kozinski is one of a very few judges to question the integrity of prosecutors. And for all the umbrage being hauled in by the semi-truckful, Kozinski was rather restrained when discussing federal prosecutors. Still, the DOJ cannot sit idly by while someone suggests a few prosecutors don't play by the rules and that the rules themselves are faulty. So, it does what the DOJ always does in these situations: defends the honor of the (not even directly) accused. When the DOJ takes down a local police force for misconduct or abuse, it always makes sure to rub the bellies of the police force at large before getting to the bad stuff. 

In this case, the bad stuff preceded the defensive statements from the DOJ, which now have to stand alone.

We have both worked with many prosecutors during our combined thirty-three years at the Justice Department. We have served as line prosecutors and supervisors, and now hold positions with national responsibility. Throughout our careers, what has always struck us is the professionalism, integrity, and decency of our colleagues. They care deeply about the work that they do, not because they are trying to rack up convictions or long sentences, but because they seek to ensure that justice is done in each and every case they handle. This extends to the seriousness with which they take their discovery obligations. Our prosecutors comply with these obligations—because they are required to do so and because it is the right thing to do. It is a principle embedded not only in the Department’s internal rules, but in the Department’s culture.

And being so good is oh so exhausting.

At the Department of Justice, we recognize our responsibility to work tirelessly to improve the work that we do, and to enhance the fair administration of justice.

In support of its assertions, the DOJ claims only a small handful of prosecutions have resulted in the courts calling it out for abusive actions. But that does nothing to diminish Kozinski's points.

a system designed to fail?

Tribune |  Chicago police officers enforce a code of silence to protect one another when they shoot a citizen, giving some a sense they can do so with impunity.

Their union protects them from rigorous scrutiny, enforcing a contract that can be an impediment to tough and timely investigations.

The Independent Police Review Authority, the civilian agency meant to pierce that protection and investigate shootings of citizens by officers, is slow, overworked and, according to its many critics, biased in favor of the police.

Prosecutors, meantime, almost never bring charges against officers in police shooting cases, seeming to show a lack of enthusiasm for arresting the people they depend on to make cases — even when video, an officer's history or other circumstances raise concerns.

And the city of Chicago, which oversees that system, has a keen interest in minimizing potential scandal; indeed, it has paid victims and their families millions of dollars to prevent information from becoming public when it fears the shooting details will roil neighborhoods and cause controversy for the mayor.

In many quarters, it's common knowledge that Chicago's system of investigating shootings by officers is flawed. But the Tribune's examination of the system shows that it is flawed at so many levels — critics say, by design — as to be broken. IPRA's own statistics bear that out. Of 409 shootings since the agency's formation in September 2007 — an average of roughly one a week — only two have led to allegations against an officer being found credible, according to IPRA. Both involved off-duty officers.

Attorney Joseph Roddy, who was a police union lawyer for a quarter-century, said the IPRA figures suggest a deep problem.

"It's hard to believe," Roddy said in an interview. "Michael Jordan couldn't make 407 out of 409 shots — even from the free-throw line."

Lorenzo Davis was more blunt. Davis, a retired Chicago police commander who joined IPRA and became a supervisor, sued the agency in September after he said its chief ordered him to change his conclusions in six cases in which he found officers wrongly shot citizens.

"The public cannot trust anyone who is currently in the system," said Davis, who himself was cleared in two shootings while an officer years ago.

under federal case law - overseer lying can't be used to prosecute the lying overseer?

Tribune |  Federal officials also are investigating the shooting. A federal grand jury investigation has involved more than 80 witnesses and branched into possible obstruction of justice by the officers at the scene, sources told the Tribune. In particular, the sources said, federal prosecutors are investigating the officers who made statements as well as the officers who prepared the reports of the statements.

Records show that a federal grand jury subpoenaed the Chicago Police Department for these same reports on Aug. 28.

Bringing charges against the officers for their statements could be difficult, however. Under federal case law, statements the officers were compelled to make as part of the police department's internal investigation cannot be used against them in any criminal prosecution.

The reports state investigators viewed the video and found them consistent with officers' accounts. The reports also note the 911 call after the shooting and radio transmissions from the scene "were consistent with the statements of the police officers."

The city has released information — including the video — in dribs and drabs, prolonging the scandal around McDonald's shooting. It was only after the video's release, in fact, that Emanuel fired Police Superintendent Garry McCarthy, saying McCarthy had lost the public trust.

chumbolones believe CPD protects them from lawless black teenagers, truth is...,

What interests me is that it is now clear that a significant number of CPD officers witnessed the murder, did nothing to prevent it, did nothing to assist the victim, and then went back to their desks and falsified their official reports with convenient narratives of a lunging, threatening attacker. Where are the reports of the 6 or 8 officer suspensions?

The situation is so "amiss" in Chiraq that lying on official reports is considered standard operating procedure. Forget about a fraternal or a fraternal order (police union) blue wall of silence.  This goes well beyond that. This right'chere is Omertà, straight up, simple, and plain.

Pervasive, systemic, overseer corruption from the top to the bottom and the bottom to the top - when it comes to covering up civilian murders - means that CPD is the mafia in Chiraq.

This level of corruption simply and elegantly answers a number of key questions concerning the flow of illegal guns and narcotics into Chiraq: Why haven't overseers stopped the flow of guns into Chiraq? Why haven't overseers stopped the flow of drugs into Chiraq?  Why hasn't there been any organization and control of criminal gangs since the terminal incarceration of Jeff Fort thirty years ago? Why so much ceaseless strife and disruptive violence around the drug business (not good for business) - unless somebody else profits from the strife, violence, and the chumbolone narrative about gangs? 

Who gets to sleep peacefully at night, not have to look over their shoulders, and rake in the hundreds of millions (billions) being harvested in the Chicago drug trade?

Chumbolones love to believe that blacks are inherently criminal and too stupid to organize themselves like every other ethnic group that did dirt, got paid, and went legit. Chumbolones love to believe that the blue mafia only makes clean kills of savage and inherently criminal blacks - because they're heroic first-responders who have every right to come home safely and enjoy a good nights sleep with the families.

Chumbolones are so fscking stoopid that they can't see what is conspicuously obvious to any reasonably astute casual observer. CPD has worked tirelessly to make the south side a feared and fearful community, the object of international scorn and derision, America's very own Chiraq.  CPD, with the full faith and backing of Chiraq's elite civic community and scum sucking political establishment, has done absolutely nothing to prevent Mexican drug cartels from making a home there and exploiting the city's unique status as America's number one rail and commerce hub.

Given the bounty of an endless supply of drug wholesale money, the stereotypical racist narrative of inherently savage and disorganized Black youths, watch now as the politics in Chiraq shift so as to require the political installation of a Mexican superintendent to work with the Mexican money people in Chiraq. 

Not only is all of the above entirely plausible, just watch it play out. I'm telling you what's going to happen. Watch, and you too will quickly come to understand that it is in fact an entirely true and accurate account of what's up in Chiraq (as well as many other major metropolices all across Uhmurkah.) The shooting of Laquan is a deja vu moment in the Matrix. You need to look at this situation closely. It's a HUGE glitch in the otherwise seamless Chumbolone sleep machine.

Sheeeeiiiiitt......, this situation is so squalid and deep from the top to the bottom and the bottom to the top - that a false flag sleeper operation had to be set off in San Bernadino to redirect all media - all at once - away from this ginormous glitch in the Uhmurkan Political Matrix.

Watch now as the sleep police systematically redirect your collective attention away from this tear in the fabric of Uhmurkan consensus reality. Spike Lee movie notwithstanding, the hole in consensus reality is not going to get much more attention from the national press. This fact is a major story in and unto itself.

Hell, it's not going to get top billing in Chiraq. Centrally controlled and consolidated Chiraqi media is doing everything in its power to diffuse the cover-up.

The Chicago Tribune has broken it up into digestible Chumbolone-sized servings:

"Emanuel objects to federal probe of police, but may not be able to stop it"

"Emanuel: 'I don't appreciate' family vacation question"

"Cop in Laquan McDonald video tied to another police shooting death"  (Van Dyke is a fscking button man/torpedo)

"Chicago's violent crime changed little during McCarthy's time"

If I can scry Chiraq's real deal from 670 miles away, do any of you believe that local Chicago media can't do any better with all its many sources and boots on the ground right there at home?  The Chicago Tribune, WGN (Tribune Broadcasting) and CLTV (also Tribune Broadcasting) - are all in on the hustle. Like agents in the Matrix, their job is to keep the Chumbolones soundly asleep.

If you hadn't realized why there used to be law against a major local newspaper owning a major local broadcast system in the same city, now you know why those restrictions were lifted.

Chumbolones - Subrealism is school for you..., Accept no substitutes!

I've stopped and frisked a thousand young punks fscking chumbolones...,

urbandictionary |  Noun. Pronounced: "chum'-buh-loan"
1) term originally used primarily in and around the Chicago area to describe a person who is easily tricked into doing something directly counter to their own personal self-interest; 2) since the 2008 presidential election, also applied to anyone outside the Chicago area who exhibits similar incapacity for sound judgment; 3) a person so devoid of common sense that they can be manipulated in any number of ways without having the slightest clue as to how ignorant and/or stupid they are. 

Application: Originally applied to lesser-educated Caucasians of lower intelligence who tend to believe anything that government officials and the news media tell them; since the 2008 election, now also applied to better-educated and intelligent Caucasians of all ages and genders who are totally devoid of any street smarts whatsoever, as well as to members of all other races, age groups and genders who also continue to believe whatever is told to them by government and media representatives evidence to the contrary notwithstanding.

Synonym: chump, dupe, stooge, imbecile, sucker, idiot, hick, hayseed, moron, roundhead, ignoramus, dumb-ass, dip shit.
Antonym: urban street-wise denizen, intelligent well-versed voter.
Government Manipulator: "I'm doing this for you, because it's really in your best interest." Chumbolone: "Well, heck, gee wiz, OK, why didn't you just say so- just tell me what I should do."

Government Manipulator: "If you give me $20 I'll make your life much better." Chumbolone: "Well, jeez, now you're talkin'- here's $40, so you can make my life twice as good!"

dirty metropolices - this one in dothan al - and straight up, grade-A pulitzer work

Henry County Report | HUNDREDS OF CASES PROSECUTED WITH PLANTED EVIDENCE, MANY WRONGLY CONVICTED STILL IN PRISON

The Alabama Justice Project has obtained documents that reveal a Dothan Police Department’s Internal Affairs investigation was covered up by the district attorney. A group of up to a dozen police officers on a specialized narcotics team were found to have planted drugs and weapons on young black men for years. They were supervised at the time by Lt. Steve Parrish, current Dothan Police Chief, and Sgt. Andy Hughes, current Asst. Director of Homeland Security for the State of Alabama. All of the officers reportedly were members of a Neoconfederate organization that theSouthern Poverty Law Center labels “racial extremists.” The group has advocated for blacks to “return” to Africa, published that the civil rights movement is really a Jewish conspiracy, and that blacks have lower IQ’s . Both Parrish and Hughes held leadership positions in the group and are pictured above holding a confederate battle flag at one of the club’s secret meetings.

The documents shared reveal that the internal affairs investigation was covered up to protect the aforementioned officers’ law enforcement careers and keep them from being criminally prosecuted.

Several long term Dothan law enforcement officers, all part of an original group that initiated the investigation, believe the public has a right to know that the Dothan Police Department, and District Attorney Doug Valeska, targeted young black men by planting drugs and weapons on them over a decade. Most of the young men were prosecuted, many sentenced to prison, and some are still in prison.  Many of the officers involved were subsequently promoted and are in leadership positions in law enforcement. They hope the mood of the country is one that demands action and that the US Department of Justice will intervene.

The group of officers requested they be granted anonymity, and shared hundreds of files from the Internal Affairs Division. They reveal a pattern of criminal behavior from within the highest levels of the Dothan Police Department and the district attorney’s office in the 20th Judicial District of Alabama. Multiple current and former officers have agreed to testify if United States Attorney General Loretta Lynch appoints a special prosecutor from outside the state of Alabama, or before a Congressional hearing. The officers believe that there are currently nearly a thousand wrongful convictions resulting in felonies from the 20th Judicial District that are tied to planted drugs and weapons and question whether a system that allows this can be allowed to continue to operate.

democratic leadership proves beyond any shadow of a doubt that black lives don't matter to the party

thenation |  Emanuel has enjoyed baffling immunity from criticism from just about every elected Democrat outside the city of Chicago.

The exception is a small handful of prominent black members of the House of Representatives, like Jim Clyburn of South Carolina, who told The Hill “It’s pretty obvious to anybody that there is some cover-up taking place here.”

From pretty much everybody else in the party, there has been silence.

None of the major presidential candidates—who have spent the better part of a year embracing the Black Lives Matter movement and decrying police brutality—have even timidly called out Emanuel’s blazing misconduct in the case, let alone asked for his resignation. Hillary Clinton’s initial statement on the shooting  didn’t so much as allude to a year-long cover-up. She has since voiced support for a federal investigation into the shooting death, which Emanuel opposes, but has otherwise not broken with the mayor. Emanuel said Wednesday that he is “pretty confident” he still enjoys Clinton’s support.

President Obama’s statement also didn’t address the cover-up. Senator Bernie Sanders has been silent on the mayor’s role in the McDonald case, which is particularly odd given he’s been a longtime critic of Emanuel.

It’s hard to imagine this being the case if Emanuel were a Republican. Pretend that Florida Governor Rick Scott, a two-term conservative governor of a key swing state and a frequent Democratic punching bag, had similarly aided state troopers in covering up a police killing. Or imagine a presidential candidate like Chris Christie did it. While impossible to prove the hypothetical, it seems certain that leading national Democrats would have pilloried Christie relentlessly and demanded he resign.

That criticism and demand for accountability would have been fair and appropriate—it would arguably have been the most helpful thing prominent Democrats could do in a situation like this. While they can’t personally prosecute offending officers, they can create serious political consequences for other leaders that facilitate and enable a racist and violent system of policing.

But no political consequences for Rahm appear to be forthcoming, at least not from his Democratic colleagues. For different reasons—namely, a disinclination to mount a serious fight against police brutality—leading Republicans won’t go after Emanuel either, thus giving him a free pass from both sides. That’s a shame, because the mayor is already teetering on the brink of political collapse and exhibiting all of the signs of a politician who’s tenure is in critical condition: scapegoating his police commissioner (after a long and telling period where he refused to do so), cancelling scheduled visits, and sniping with reporters. One nudge from the likes of Hillary Clinton, and Emanuel would surely be headed to an early retirement.

Republicans, and particularly conservative media figures, like to portray Democratic crusades against police brutality and their embrace of Black Lives Matter as a crude and insincere play for votes. That criticism is now in danger of being validated. If you want people to know you care about police brutality, you have to demonstrate that you care even when “your team” needs to be held accountable. Otherwise, everything else you say on the subject is rendered insincere.

chiraq to the potomac - what effect will Hizzoner's fiasco have on the encompassing political scrum?

NYTimes |  The richest man in Illinois does not often give speeches. But on a warm spring day two years ago, Kenneth C. Griffin, the billionaire founder of one of the world’s largest hedge funds, rose before a black-tie dinner of the Economic Club of Chicago to deliver an urgent plea to the city’s elite.

They had stood silently, Mr. Griffin told them, as politicians spent too much and drove businesses and jobs from the state. They had refused to help those who would take on the reigning powers in the Illinois Capitol. “It is time for us to do something,” he implored.

Their response came quickly. In the months since, Mr. Griffin and a small group of rich supporters — not just from Chicago, but also from New York City and Los Angeles, southern Florida and Texas — have poured tens of millions of dollars into the state, a concentration of political money without precedent in Illinois history.

Their wealth has forcefully shifted the state’s balance of power. Last year, the families helped elect as governor Bruce Rauner, a Griffin friend and former private equity executive from the Chicago suburbs, who estimates his own fortune at more than $500 million. Now they are rallying behind Mr. Rauner’s agenda: to cut spending and overhaul the state’s pension system, impose term limits and weaken public employee unions.

“It was clear that they wanted to change the power structure, change the way business was conducted and change the status quo,” said Andy Shaw, an acquaintance of Mr. Rauner’s and the president of the Better Government Association, a nonpartisan state watchdog group that received donations from Mr. Rauner before he ran.

The rich families remaking Illinois are among a small group around the country who have channeled their extraordinary wealth into political power, taking advantage of regulatory, legal and cultural shifts that have carved new paths for infusing money into campaigns. Economic winners in an age of rising inequality, operating largely out of public view, they are reshaping government with fortunes so large as to defy the ordinary financial scale of politics. In the 2016 presidential race, a New York Times analysis found last month, just 158 families had provided nearly half of the early campaign money.

chiraq to the potomac already a wrap...,

Hizzoner took his hamfisted lying directly from the Clinton family political playbook.

He denounced the shooting but claimed he had not seen the video, then he fought to keep the video from being released to the public.

Those three facts don't add up.

The conspicuously obvious to the casual observer truth is, he DID see the video a year ago, he realized it meant the end of his re-election bid, he THEN fought to keep it hidden. When a journalist and a judge upset those plans, Hizzoner sacrificed the police superintendent and sought to position himself as an advocate for transparency.

His administration paid five million dollars in hush money before a wrongful death lawsuit had even been filed.

I see in this episode everything he has learned from the Clintons…lying, obscuring, and eventually trying to reframe the debate.

This piece of chit will not, however, cease to be the mayor of Chiraq. In a world in which the rule of law actually functions as it's supposed to, he would face a federal indictment for obstruction of justice in connection with a civil rights violation.

Anita Alvarez, Cook County prosecutor, gotta go immediately. This heiffer sat on her direct knowledge of a murder of a teenager on her watch by a policeman for 13 months, all for the sake of her and Hizzoner's political gain.  In addition, despite her knowledge, she allowed the murderer to remain in uniform until he was charged.

Also, as late as November 24, 2015 she was still insisting that there was nothing untoward about the erasure of 86 minutes of tape at Burger King, which showed Mr. McDonald immediately before he was murdered. This despite the fact that the Burger King manager had reported the erasure "earlier this year" after 3 policemen asked for and received permission to review the video the night of the shooting.

www.nbcchicago.com/news/local/Alvarez-Addresses-Missing-Minutes-From-Sec...

The Supreme Court of Illinois has plenary jurisdiction over the practice of law in Illinois.

Based on what is in the public record about Alvarez's actions and inaction the Court should suspend her license to practice law pending a formal disciplinary proceeding.

In a world in which the rule of law actually functions, this would already be a work in progress. That's not gonna happen either, and here's why.

1. Hizzoner was just reelected to a four year term in 2015.

2. Mayoral elections are in off-years and have historically low turnout.

3. The Shakman decrees notwithstanding, the City of Chicago and Cook County have large numbers of public employees, who, with their families, vote loyally for the Machine. Add the precinct captains and other party workers to that and you have an almost insurmountable head start in any election.

The system is utterly rigged. Accountability is non-existent. Do you think the US Attorney is going to investigate President Obama's first chief of staff? Or that Lisa Madigan, the Attorney General and daughter of the most powerful politician in the state, is going to mount a credible investigation against the mayor?

Particularly with Granny Goodness running for POTUS right now and the Machine being heavily depended upon to help deliver Illinois to the party of Apokalips.

Here end our practical understandings of the limitations of the Rule of Law, the machinic workings of party politics, and the truth of what's going to happen in Chiraq over the next several weeks and months. A veritable microcosm of Uhmurkah indeed...,

EVERYTHING you believe about the RULE OF LAW is a pack of lies! revisit robin hood...,

mysanantonio |  A Texas State Highway Patrol Trooper was arrested Monday night on charges of official oppression and prostitution after an incident in September in which he allegedly offered $300 for sex with a woman he had pulled over for speeding in the San Antonio area.

According to an arrest warrant affidavit, Trooper Christopher Champion, 31, pulled the 20-year-old woman over on the Northeast Side near the 15500 block of Interstate 35 North around 12:30 a.m. on Sept. 17.

The affidavit said Champion asked the woman to step out of her vehicle after telling her that he had pulled her over for speeding. The pair had a short conversation before Champion asked the woman to relocate to a nearby Rudy’s Country Store and Bar-B-Q restaurant, the document said.

Once there, Champion offered the woman $100 for sex, according to the report.

When the woman refused, saying that her boyfriend would not like that, Champion upped the amount to $300, the affidavit said.

During the nearly 40-minute interaction, the affidavit said Champion took the woman’s phone and sent himself a text message so he would have her contact information.

The next day, the woman went to authorities.

chiraq to the potomac - ubiquitous necropolitical rottenness to the core open thread

The essence of the claim in the Laqan McDonald case is that there was an attempt to cover up the matter. Everybody knows there was a $5 million settlement in April -- it was front page news. Nobody seems to know that, immediately after the settlement, the case was handed over to the FBI, which has been actively investigating from the time of the settlement. How the locals cover up a case in the hands of the feds is a mystery to me.

Instead of the Hon.Bro.Preznit's Justice Dept running an investigation - how about we ask Canada's Justice Dept to do the investigating? Hizzoner is Obamamandius' friend and former Chief of Staff - and that's more than a little conflict of interest, it's more like a person investigating wrong doing by their good buddy.

It is conspicuously obvious to the casual observer that the allegations of cover-up are true with respect to Rahm Emanuel and his re-election bid. That being the case, the Hon.Bro.Preznit Obama should have no remaining loyalty to the man who was his first chief of staff. The Preznit needs to call Prime Minister Trudeau and request Canadian Justice ministry intervention to investigate and prosecute.

Rahm Emanuel has been in in full panic-to-appease mode, jettisoning a chief of police who no longer suits. Clown puh-leez..., a new chief, with nothing else, will not fix Chicago's police problem.

FBI Chief Comey, in a speech he gave in Chiraq, said something we know to be the bogus "Ferguson effect." What is curious about that interlude, is that it was about how Chiraqi overseers' fear of being video taped is what is causing the murder rate to go up in the city. Why would Chiraq cops feed Comey that line? Toronto needs to investigate that as well.

This is bigger than any local, state, or compromised federal Justice Department should handle. Given the relationships between the White House and the subjects of investigation, an objectively independent prosecutor would be best. Mr. Preznit, Loretta Lynch is not up to the task, you better call Tyrone....,

there will be absolutely no consequences for the little piece of chit floating at the top of the chiraq punchbowl...,

NYTimes |  The cover­up that began 13 months ago when a Chicago police officer executed 17­year­old Laquan McDonald on a busy street might well have included highly ranked officials who ordered subordinates to conceal information. But the conspiracy of concealment exposed last week when the city, under court order, finally released a video of the shooting could also be seen as a kind of autonomic response from a historically corrupt law enforcement agency that is well versed in the art of hiding misconduct, brutality — and even torture.

Mayor Rahm Emanuel demonstrated a willful ignorance when he talked about the murder charges against the police officer who shot Mr. McDonald, seeking to depict the cop as a rogue officer. He showed a complete lack of comprehension on Tuesday when he explained that he had decided to fire his increasingly unpopular police superintendent, Garry McCarthy, not because he failed in his leadership role, but because he had become “a distraction.” 

Mr. Emanuel’s announcement that he had appointed a task force that will review the Police Department’s accountability procedures is too little, too late. The fact is, his administration, the Police Department and the prosecutor’s office have lost credibility on this case. Officials must have known what was on that video more than a year ago, and yet they saw no reason to seek a sweeping review of the police procedures until this week.

The Justice Department, which is already looking at the McDonald killing, needs to investigate every aspect of this case, determine how the cover­up happened and charge anyone found complicit. The investigation needs to begin with the Police Department’s news release of Oct. 21, 2014, which incorrectly states that Mr. McDonald was shot while approaching police officers with a knife. A dash cam video that was likely available within hours of the shooting on Oct. 20 shows Mr. McDonald veering away from the officer when he was shot 16 times, mainly while lying on the pavement. Why does the video completely contradict that press release? 

The question of what pedestrians and motorists said about what they saw that night is also at issue. Lawyers for the McDonald family say that the police threatened motorists with arrest if they did not leave the scene and actually interviewed people whose versions of the events were consistent with the video, but did not take statements. Last week, a manager at a Burger King restaurant near the shooting scene told The Chicago Tribune that more than an hour of surveillance video disappeared from the restaurant’s surveillance system after police officers gained access to it. 

The dash cam video might have been buried forever had lawyers and journalists not been tipped off to its existence. Mr. Emanuel, who was running for re­election at the time of the shooting, fought to keep it from becoming public, arguing that releasing it might taint a federal investigation. 

why chiraqi political animals have cracked down so hard on whistleblowers truth-tellers...,

chicagoreporter |  It was just about a year ago that a city whistleblower came to journalist Jamie Kalven and attorney Craig Futterman out of concern that Laquan McDonald’s shooting a few weeks earlier “wasn’t being vigorously investigated,” as Kalven recalls. The source told them “that there was a video and that it was horrific,” he said.

Without that whistleblower—and without that video—it’s highly unlikely that Chicago Police officer Jason Van Dyke would be facing first-degree murder charges today.

“When it was first reported it was a typical police shooting story,” Kalven said, where police claim self-defense and announce an investigation, and “at that point the story disappears.” And, typically, a year or 18 months later, the Independent Police Review Authority confirms the self-defense claim, and “by then no one remembers the initial incident.”

“There are an average of 50 police shootings of civilians every year in Chicago, and no one is ever charged,” said Futterman. “Without the video, this would have been just one more of 50 such incidents, where the police blotter defines the narrative and nothing changes.”

Last December, Kalven and Futterman issued a statement revealing the existence of a dash-cam video and calling for its release.  Kalven tracked down a witness to the shooting, who said he and other witnesses had been “shooed away” from the scene with no statements or contact information taken.

In February, Kalven obtained a copy of McDonald’s autopsy, which contradicted the official story that McDonald had died of a single gunshot to the chest. In fact, he’d been shot 16 times—as Van Dyke unloaded his service weapon, execution style—while McDonald lay on the ground.

The next month, the City Council approved a $5 million settlement with McDonald’s family, whose attorneys had obtained the video. They said it showed McDonald walking away from police at the time of the shooting, contradicting the police story that he was threatening or had “lunged at” cops. The settlement included a provision keeping the video confidential.

“The real issue here is, this terrible thing happened, how did our governmental institutions respond?” Kalven said.  “And from everything we’ve learned, compulsively at every level, from the cops on the scene to the highest levels of government, they responded by circling the wagons and by fabricating a narrative that they knew was completely false.”  To him this response is “part of a systemic problem” and preserves “the underlying conditions that allow abuse and shield abuse.”

clown please..., stop stalling and commence to stepping!!!

chicagoist |  Chicago Police Superintendent Garry McCarthy took one for the team when Mayor Rahm Emanuel formally asked him for his resignation this week. But some Chicagoans do not think ousting McCarthy is enough to quell the public outcry about the Laquan McDonald video, and calls for Emanuel's resignation are getting louder.

It's been quite a tough year for Emanuel: an unexpected runoff with Jesus "Chuy" Garcia,Chicago's fiscal crisis, a massive tax hike proposal and the Barbara Byrd-Bennett scandal. But the mounting allegations that people within his administration "covered-up" the Laquan McDonald shooting video until compelled to release it by court might be the final straw for his administration.

"City leaders did everything in their power to keep the homicide from the public as long as possible," former University of Chicago law and political science professor (and current Columbia University professor) Bernard Harcourt wrote in an New York Times op-ed calling for the resignation of Emanuel, McCarthy and Cook County State's Attorney Anita Alvarez.

Reporters peppered Emanuel with questions about calls for him to step down and whether or not he's a become "distraction" during an extremely rare news conference Tuesday morning announcing a new police accountability task force. He deflected the questions before abruptly walking out of the conference:

there was no tampering with the video gotta go, gotta go, gotta go....,

nbcchicago |  Now NBC 5 News has obtained screen grabs of what appears to be at least one police officer in the Burger King at what appears to be a computer terminal that night.

What happened to the video is disputed. Cook County State’s Attorney Anita Alvarez said testing showed the computer files had not been tampered with.

But as we first reported last May, a Burger King district manager said police deleted the security footage after spending more than three hours in the restaurant.

NBC 5 has been told four to five officers were inside the Burger King after the shooting of McDonald who had run through the restaurant parking lot and onto Pulaski Road where, approximately 11 seconds later, he was shot.

In May, Jay Darshane, a district manager for Burger King, said both cameras and video recorder were all on and working properly the night of the shooting.

“We had no idea they were going to sit there and delete files. I mean we were just trying to help the police officers,” Darshane said.

When asked if he was sure they deleted the files, he said, “yes.

The time gap in the footage, Darshane said, ran from 9:13 to 10:39. Chicago police officer Jason Van Dyke fired his first shot at 9:57, according to charges.

Alvarez said at a press conference last week no one tampered with the Burger King video.

the cover-up ALWAYS exponentially compounds the crime...,

NYTimes |  City leaders did everything in their power to keep the homicide from the public as long as possible. Indeed, Mr. Van Dyke was indicted only after the forced release of the videos.

We can surmise that each had particular reasons. Mayor Emanuel was fighting for re-election in a tight race. Superintendent McCarthy wanted to keep his job. Ms. Alvarez needed the good will of the police union for her coming re-election campaign and probably wished to shield the police officers who bring her cases and testify in court.

None of that alters the fact that these actions have impeded the criminal justice system and, in the process, Chicago’s leaders allowed a first-degree murder suspect, now incarcerated pending bail, to remain free for over a year on the city’s payroll.

There is good reason to appoint an independent commission to investigate the conduct of these public servants. But frankly, at this point, who would trust Chicago’s political institutions or criminal justice system?

An investigation would create further delay in justice and distract our attention from the real issues at hand: the senseless death of a 17-year-old, and the systemic problems of excessive police violence and lack of accountability.

Rather than hold hearings, investigate and perhaps prosecute its leaders, the city of Chicago needs to restore trust. These officials no longer have the public’s confidence. They should resign.

criminal justice reform = football - if america wanted this to end, it would end

NYTimes |  Truly, there are many troubling aspects to this case. But having covered so many of these cases in the last couple years, it strikes me that we may need to push back and widen the lens so that we can fully appreciate and understand the systemic sociological and historical significance of this moment in our country’s development.

While police departments definitely have distinct cultures, in a way they are simple instruments that articulate and enforce our laws and mores, which are reflections of our values.

The only reason that these killings keep happening is because most of American society tacitly approves or willfully tolerates it. There is no other explanation. If America wanted this to end, it would end.

The exceeding sad and dreadfully profound truth is that America — the majority of America, and that generally means much of white America — has turned away, averted its gaze and refused to take a strong moral stance in opposition. That’s the same as granting silent approval.

People try to pitch this as some sort of ideological argument, as an issue of blacks against the police or vice versa, but that is simply an evasion, a way of refusing societal blame for a societal defect: We view crime and punishment with an ethnocentric sensibility that has a distinct and endemic anti-black bias.

the bleak future of college football

theatlantic |  Football can be a force for good. The University of Missouri’s football team proved it earlier this month when student athletes ​used a facet of campus life many often decry—the cultural and economic dominance of college football—​to help force a national debate about the persistence of racism on American campuses. Football can build a sense of community for players and fans alike, and serve as a welcome escape from the pressures of ordinary life.

The sport cuts across distinctions of race, class, geography, and religion in a way few other U.S. institutions do, and everyone who participates reaps the benefits. But not everyone—particularly at the amateur level—takes on an equal share of the risk. College football in particular seems headed toward a future in which it’s consumed by people born into privilege while the sport consumes people born without it. In a 2010 piece in The Awl, Cord Jefferson wrote, “Where some see the Super Bowl, I see young black men risking their bodies, minds, and futures for the joy and wealth of old white men.” This vision sounds dystopian but is quickly becoming an undeniable reality, given new statistics about how education affects awareness about brain-injury risk, as well as the racial makeup of Division I rosters and coaching staffs. The future of college football indeed looks a lot like what Jefferson called “glorified servitude,” and even as information comes to light about the dangers and injustices of football, nothing is currently being done to steer the sport away from that path.

The football-consuming public has only recently started to grapple with the magnitude of the dangers inherent in playing football—traumatic brain injury and painkiller addiction chief among them—and to understand that you don’t need to play 10 years in the NFL to suffer permanent physical, psychological, or neurological damage. Though football’s dangers compound over time, they manifest right away, even at the lowest levels. Therefore, as more information comes out, more and more parents are hesitating to let their sons play organized football. An NBC/Wall Street Journal poll from January found that 37 percent of respondents would prefer that their children play any other sport, which seems understandable—what parent wouldn’t protect his or her children from unnecessary risk?

Unfortunately, the degree to which children are protected from the risks of playing football is very much related to the level of privilege—racial, economic, and social—the child experiences while growing up. That same NBC/Wall Street Journal poll found that while 50 percent of respondents with postgraduate degrees would prefer their children not play football, only 31 percent of people with a high-school education or less would say the same.

There’s a good reason for that disparity—better-educated and wealthier people have more access to information about football’s concussion crisis. A 2013 poll conducted by HBO and Marist found that 63 percent of college graduates and 66 percent of people making more than $50,000 per year said they’d heard “a good amount” about football causing concussions, compared to 47 percent of those who made less than $50,000 per year and half of those without a college degree.

In other words, children are being put in danger not because of their own carelessness, or a difference in parenting style, or even because poorer, less privileged kids have fewer ways to climb the class ladder. It’s because many of their parents—especially those who earn less or who haven’t attained as much education—aren’t getting the information they need to make the best decisions for their families.

students foot the bill for college sports - how some are fighting back

WaPo |  At Texas A&M University, the president’s proposal to charge all 50,000 students $72 per year to help pay for a $450 million football stadium renovation brought protests.

At Clemson University, the athletic director’s idea to charge all 17,000 students $350 per year to help him keep up with competition brought pushback from student government.

At the University of Kansas, a walk-on golfer’s push to eliminate a $50 fee all 17,000 students paid the increasingly wealthy athletic department brought a strong — and to some students, vindictive — response from administrators.

And at many of America’s largest public universities, athletic departments making millions more every year from surging television contracts, luxury suite sales and endorsements continue to take money from tens of thousands of students who will never set foot in stadiums or arenas.

Mandatory student fees for college athletic departments are common across the country. Often small line items of a couple hundred dollars on long, complex tuition bills, these fees make millions for athletic departments at larger colleges.

In 2014, students at 32 schools paid a combined $125.5 million in athletic fees, according to a Washington Post examination of financial records at 53 public universities in the “Power Five,” the five wealthiest conferences in college sports.

To rich athletic departments, these fees represent guaranteed revenue streams that, unlike ticket sales or booster donations, are unaffected by on-field success. To less flush departments, increasing student fees is one way to keep up.

Athletic directors defend fees as well worth what their programs give back to schools.

“Athletics is a common good, bringing people together, developing relationships, unifying the institution, bringing fantastic exposure,” said Virginia Athletic Director Craig Littlepage, whose department charges undergraduates $657 annually.

why no smart city would want the nfl

reason |  “The NFL is good at fleecing taxpayers,” says ESPN columnist Gregg Easterbrook, author of The King of Sports: Football’s Impact on America. “It’s about a billion dollars a year I’ve calculated in public subsidies to NFL owners and this is a group that consists almost entirely of billionaires and yet receiving significant public subsidies every year.”

The NFL raked in over $9 billion in revenues last season and the league is pushing team owners to triple that mark over the next decade. 

With the league’s overwhelming success, many cities are eager to get a piece of the action, often offering billions in public subsidies to attract (or keep) football in their localities. 

But with the NFL making record profits, is it right for cities to spend public money on these type of projects? Especially when over half of NFL team owners are ranked on the Forbes billionaire list?

No where is this illustrated more than in Los Angeles, which has been trying to lure the league back to the area ever since the Raiders and Rams left town 20 years ago. And though numerous economists have demonstrated that sports stadia don’t increase local economic activity, it hasn’t stopped debt-ridden cities like L.A. from approving a $1.2 billion dollar stadium deal that would be financed with nearly $350 million in taxpayer-backed bonds. 

Los Angeles City Councilman Tom LaBonge has been an advocate of bringing the NFL back to Los Angeles and voted along with the rest of his colleagues to approve the stadium deal (whether it ever gets built is remained to be seen). “There’s a beauty to the game and I’d like to see the beauty in Los Angeles. I like what it does for a city when their team wins,” says LaBonge.