Please disable your Ad Blocker to better interact with this website.

Connect with us

OPINION: Liberal Ninth Circuit Judge Just Granted Illegals Dangerous New ‘Right’

Published

on

One of the toughest and most dangerous jobs in America is being a Border Patrol agent. Every year you hear of a number of them being k-lled or injured for one reason or another. The overwhelming majority of those cases are tied to those breaking the law by either trying to come here illegally or by moving g-ns, drugs, and people over the Mexican border. The men and women who sign up for this duty are nothing short of heroes in my book. And they keep doing their job even when bureaucrats nullify immigration laws and basically throw them under the bus for a political agenda. It’s a thankless job and it just got worse thanks to a liberal Ninth Circuit Court judge.

It’s bad enough that illegal immigrants are still gaining access to this country by crossing the border. They are a danger to these agents and to Americans in general. Once here, many claim welfare, work, education, to be counted in the Census, healthcare, and citizenship for their children. You can add to that list the dangerous new right for illegal aliens to sue Border Patrol agents for simply doing their jobs.

This one puzzles me because this judge was appointed by Ronald Reagan and he is considered conservative. He sure isn’t acting like it. Judge Andrew Kleinfeld ruled this week that border agent Lonnie Swartz is not covered by qualified immunity, thereby allowing a Mexican woman to sue him for sh-oting her teenage son during border violence in 2012. In other words, for doing his job and protecting himself and his fellow officers, this judge says the mother of an illegal alien that was trying to kill them can sue this officer. This should rock you on your heels because what it shows is a rogue legal system that is trying to seize control of our foreign and military policies. This has the potential to set precedent for family members of Mexicans involved in drug cartels and violence to hinder border security and the rule of law even further.

From Conservative Review:

Trending: Mark Zuckerberg Just Stole $315,000 From A Triple-Amputee Vet

“In October 2012, Agent Lonnie Swartz shot a number of rounds through a border fence in Nogales, an Arizona-Mexico border town, and killed 16-year-old Jose Antonio Elena Rodríguez, who was part of a group throwing rocks at border agents after they confronted individuals climbing a fence and smuggling drugs. Swartz was prosecuted under regular criminal law and acquitted earlier this year by a jury on charges of second-degree murder. The jury was deadlocked on charges of involuntary manslaughter, and there may be a new trial.

“Whether Swartz should have used lethal force in this case is tough to judge based on the details available, but it underscores just how dangerous our border is and the failure of our government to deal with the problems on the Mexican side of the border.

“As Breitbart Texas has reported over the years, when agents are isolated and surrounded by rock-throwers, it can’t categorically be dismissed as “kids throwing pebbles.” And as the local border patrol union pointed out, the deceased in this case doesn’t exactly appear to be a nonviolent Boy Scout. Let’s not forget that the gang life at our border in which some of these teens are reared is every bit as violent as the worst acts of ISIS.

“Whether Swartz rightfully or wrongfully pulled the trigger is a question that our military and police often face under the duress of chaotic circumstances. Those delicate cases need to be dealt with by the agency leaders, as guided by Congress. When appropriate, they can bring charges against bad actors, as has been the case in many instances. This case is no different.”

In my opinion, it is ludicrous for any judge to allow these agents to be sued for doing their jobs. If they are reprimanded for something, that should come under the oversight of the Border Patrol, the government, and our legal system. Those men were throwing rocks at these officers. Don’t let anyone tell you different… rocks are deadly weapons and can kill if they hit someone. Should the agents have just let these violent criminals come over the fence with their weapons and drugs? Agent Lonnie Swartz was acquitted over this, but because the radical Ninth Circuit thought that was unfair, they will let this officer be sued for something he was found innocent of. That’s not justice, it’s weaponizing lawfare.

This kind of ruling is commonplace for the Ninth Circuit Court and many of their rulings are overturned for this reason. This is an abuse of power and it’s not even remotely constitutional. Kleinman conceded that “Border Patrol agents protect the United States from unlawful entries and terrorist threats,” which are activities that “help guarantee our national security,” but then speculated that “holding Swartz liable for this constitutional violation would not meaningfully deter Border Patrol agents from performing their duties.” First off, as I said, I do not believe the ruling is constitutional. But beyond that, claiming that the ruling would not deter Border Patrol agents from performing their duties is laughable. If officers fear being sued into the ground for doing their jobs, they are likely not to do their jobs. See California.

We seem to now have judges determining national security policy and that should never be the case. Similarly, these same activist judges are trying to undermine executive power from the president constantly. We should be solely concerned with our own national sovereignty. But this judge snarked that “the only foreign policy concern that we can glean from the briefs is the need to avoid violating Mexican sovereignty.” He then had the nerve to cite an amicus brief filed by the government of Mexico. I think he is confused about what the term ‘sovereignty’ means and which country he is a citizen of.

This ruling will work its way to the Supreme Court and most likely result in a ruling in favor of Agent Swartz. But the left, Mexico and the Ninth Circuit Court will keep pulling these stunts until someone steps in and breaks up that radical court so these types of incidents stop occurring. A ruling such as this screams that we are no longer a sovereign nation and that our Border Patrol agents are the enemy, not our protectors. That’s insane. The ruling ignores Supreme Court law and tries to control the separation of powers between the judiciary and the political branches of government.

The Border Patrol should feel safe to do their jobs and know that Americans have their back as well. Our Constitution and laws were meant to protect American citizens, not to enable foreigners who are intent on hurting or killing law enforcement and American citizens.

Note From the Editor: The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the position of this website or of the owners/administrators of where this article is shared online. Claims made in this piece are based on the author's own opinion and not stated as evidence or fact.

 

Join the conversation!

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. If a comment is spam, instead of replying to it please hover over that comment, click the ∨ icon, and mark it as spam. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.

Opinion: Congress Just Exposed Democrat Collusion – Dems In Major Trouble

Published

on

...

* By

For far too long politics in America has been much more about right or left rather than right or wrong. If Donald Trump’s presidency accomplishes nothing else, it has exposed the sheer volume of corruption in Washington D.C. that has been allowed to fester in such a way as to make it undeniable, except perhaps to those that are content to live with their delusions. Though they make pharmaceuticals for that…but I digress.

It seems Senator Charles Grassley, Chairman of the Judiciary Committee is also sick to death of the lies and shenanigans it seems. He sent a searing letter to the attorneys representing Christine Blasey Ford, who made 11th-hour accusations that Supreme Court Justice nominee Brett Kavanaugh sexually assaulted her more than 35 years ago. In the letter, he reiterated his already twice-stated request for Ford’s attorneys to turn over the “therapy notes, polygraph materials, and communications with The Washington Post that Dr. Ford has relied upon as evidence.”

The evidence includes notes from Ford’s therapy sessions and detailed charts from the polygraph exam she arranged to take in August prior to going public with her accusations.

Grassley began his letter with a simple civics lesson noting that the Senate is specifically charged by the Constitution to advise the President, be it President Trump or another president future or past, on his nominees for the Supreme Court. As such, Grassley charged that the Committee had a “constitutional obligation to investigate and evaluate independently the President’s nominees.” He also clarified the Senate’s “obligation is unrelated to anything the FBI does … We have to make our own assessment.”

Grassley has extended deadlines and written multiple letters requesting this information be provided to the Committee so they could be properly evaluated as part of the Senate’s vote on Kavanaugh’s nomination. Every single request has been ignored and rebuffed. The latest excuse in an ever-growing list that grows longer by the hour has Ford’s attorneys stating to Grassley that the information in question would now only be turned over to the FBI as part of a full investigation into Ford’s accusations.

Grassley unequivocally let them know that is not how this works, stating – “The U.S. Senate doesn’t control the FBI. If you have an objection to how the FBI conducts its investigations, take it up with Director [Christopher] Wray. But don’t raise that objection as a reason not to respond to this committee’s demand for relevant evidence.”

As the Daily Wire notes –

“Grassley then set the record straight about the attorneys using their objections to the FBI investigation as an excuse to deny the Judiciary Committee access to the information they were demanding. He wrote, “The FBI’s investigative decisions aren’t our concern. Even if the FBI never interviews Dr. Ford, or interviews her ten times, this Committee has a constitutional obligation to investigate Dr. Ford’s allegations, and that’s what we’ve been doing since we became aware of her allegations.”

Grassley pointed out that the attorneys had “claimed repeatedly that the evidence I have requested supports Dr. Ford’s allegations against Judge Kavanaugh. She even provided some of this evidence to national news. Indeed, if the evidence supported your client’s allegations, you surely would produce it as quickly as you could.”

Then Grassley really got to the nitty-gritty: “But you have repeatedly refused to produce this evidence to the Senate. In doing so, you are preventing the Senate from considering the evidence most crucial to Dr. Ford’s allegations. I don’t know what other inference we should draw from your refusal but that the withheld evidence does not support Dr. Ford’s allegations in quite the way you have claimed.”

Grassley’s concluding paragraph indicated he thought there might have been some interesting communication going on between Ford or her attorneys and some of the alleged witnesses she named to the alleged sexual assault by Kavanaugh –

“In addition to the evidence I requested in my October 2 letter, in light of recently uncovered information, please turn over records and descriptions of direct or indirect communications between Dr. Ford or her representatives and any of the following: (1) U.S. Senators or their staffs, particularly the offices of Senators Feinstein and Hirono, other than your communications with me and my staff in preparation for the September 27 hearing; (2) the alleged witnesses identified by Dr. Ford (Leland Keyser, Mark Judge, and Patrick “P.J.” Smyth); and (3) Debbie Ramirez, Julie Swetnick, or their representatives.”

There has been some significant speculation with regards to exactly what Grassley has uncovered and when the American people will find out. If it is collusion as the letter appears to suggest, then it could potentially spell more bad news for Democrats with less than a month away from the 2018 midterm elections.

Ford’s allies did their level best to demonize Grassley and his committee of “11 old white men” for browbeating an alleged sexual assault victim.  Ford’s team of attorneys — Debra S. Katz, Lisa J. Banks, Joseph E. Abboud, and Michael R. Bromwich — have been highly critical and very vocal in their criticisms of the handling of their client’s allegations. They have questioned just why the Judiciary Committee did not allow more witnesses last week and then blasted the FBI for choosing to not interview Ford herself as a part of its new five-day investigation into the accusations of sexual assault and rape from her and another woman, Deborah Ramirez.

With allegations so suspect that Ford’s former school Leland Kyser told the FBI she was pressured by Ford’s best friend, Monica McLean, to “clarify” her original statement. McLean just happens to have spent 24 years working for the Department of Justice, including as an FBI special agent. During her time in the FBI, McLean also served as a spokesperson for the FBI’s New York field office, according to a 2009 CNN report.  She also just happens to be a former spokesperson to Preet Bharara, a far left-wing former US attorney fired by President Trump last year.

Kyser originally stated through her attorney regarding the accusations levied against Kavanaugh – “Ms. Keyser does not know Mr.Kavanaugh and she has no recollection of ever being at a party or gathering where he was present, with, or without, Dr. Ford.”

According to the Wall Street Journal

“A person close to the former classmates said it was her understanding that mutual friends of Dr. Ford and Ms. Keyser, including Ms. McLean, had contacted Ms. Keyser after her initial statement to warn her that her statement was being used by Republicans to rebut the allegation against Judge Kavanaugh. The friends told Ms. Keyser that if she had intended to say she didn’t remember the party—not that it had never happened—that she should clarify her statement, the person said…”

Continue Reading

DEVELOPING: Christine Ford Nailed Over Major Polygraph Slip Up – Why Is She Hiding This?!

Published

on

...

* By

Now that Dr. Christine Blasey Ford testified we can safely say we have more questions about her story than we did before she testified.

One particular question that’s very odd is when she was asked about the polygraph test and she actually said she doesn’t think she paid for it. What? How can you not know if you paid for something or you didn’t? Only in Liberal Land can someone forget if they paid for something so important when they are testifying in front of the U.S. Senate and the world.

Here is more on this controversy via Breitbart:

“Christine Blasey Ford, the California psychology professor who leveled allegations of teenage sexual misconduct against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh, said she does not know who paid for a polygraph examination regarding the incident while testifying before the Senate Judiciary Committee Thursday.

UPDATE — 1:44 PM: Ford’s counsel, Debra Katz, after a break in the hearing, says: “Let me put an end to this mystery – her lawyers have paid for her polygraph. As is routine.”

Blasey Ford told prosecutor Rachel Mitchell Thursday afternoon that she did “not yet” know who paid for the polygraph exam she underwent on August 7, one week after her allegations against Kavanaugh reached Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA).

Ford testified Thursday before the Senate Judiciary Committee, leveling her accusations against President Donald Trump’s Supreme Court Justice nominee. The Republican members all ceded their time for questions to Mitchell, a veteran sex crimes prosecutor.

In this exchange, Mitchell asked whether Ford recalled who had paid for the polygraph exam:

MITCHELL: Did you pay for the polygraph yourself?

FORD: I don’t think so.

MITCHELL: Do you know who paid for the polygraph?

FORD: Not yet, no.

Mitchell also asked why Jerry Hanafin, the polygraph administrator, did not conduct the examination in his Virginia office, rather at a hotel next to Baltimore–Washington International Airport. “I had left my grandmother’s funeral at that point at Fort Lincoln Cemetery that day and I was on a tight scheduled to get to make a plane to Manchester, New Hampshire,” Ford told Mitchell. “He was willing to come to me, which was appreciated.”

Mitchell followed up, “So you were administered a polygraph on the day that you attended your grand mother’s funeral ?”

“Correct, or it might have been the next day,” Ford replied.

In a hot mic moment, Ford then turned to one of her attorneys, Debra Katz, and said, “I don’t remember the exact day.”

Asked if she had ever been advised on how to take a polygraph or offered any “tips” regarding an examination, Ford said she had not. She said that while she was “scared” to take the test, she believed it would accurately gauge whether her responses were truthful.

“I didn’t expect it to be as long as it was going to be,” she added. “It was a little bit stressful.”

Why is it that when Liberals testify against conservatives the mainstream media never call them out on what they say? And why is it that everytime a Conservative man seems to have an issue with some women in his past that woman always turns out to be a far left wing liberal? Why don’t conservative women ever seem to come out and accuse anyone? Maybe they do, but when Paula Jones and Juanita Broaderick came out and accused Bill Clinton instead of investigating the only thing that happened is that Hillary Clinton referred to them as “Bimbo Eruptions.”

Dr. Ford made a fool out of herself in today’s testimony. She came across as someone who didn’t know what had happened and who when asked about that night actually had to read a notepad in order to remember. That doesn’t sound normal when you have been traumatized so severely that you claim to not be able to go into small spaces, although you do fry in airplanes and you do go scuba diving which is terrifying for anyone who suffers from claustrophobia as Ford claims she does.

The left-wing media is as I write this already conspiring with the Democrat Party as to how to spin this so this woman looks somewhat credible. But the truth of the matter is the damage has already been done and the American people already saw first hand what kind of Democrat Party orchestrated farce this whole thing is.

Perhaps the saddest part about all this is how, even if confirmed, Kavanaugh’s reputation has already been tarnished to a level no innocent individual should have to endure. Let’s hope and pray that all this fake narrative from the left is uncovered and those who conspired and lied go to prison. If not then we can safely say America has lost its greatness and all we are is just another banana republic like so many others in the world.

Please pray for Judge Kavanaugh, His family, President Trump, and the United States of America!

Continue Reading




Latest Articles

Become an insider!

Thank you for your interest in receiving the Right Wing News newsletter. To subscribe, please submit your email address below.

Send this to a friend