Connect with us

Law

Florida Sheriff Tells Al Sharpton To Go Home

Published

on

Pinellas County Sheriff Bob Gualtieri has a message for the Rev. Al Sharpton: Go home and ‘mind your own business.’

Why doesn’t Al Sharpton and Rev. Jackson parade all over Chicago calling for an end to the violence, killings, and shootings that have plagued the windy city for decades now?

Because he can’t make any money shaking down gang bangers that kill each other and other innocent people in the process… That’s why. Hypocritical, phony racist. There were only 66 people shot last weekend…

FoxNews:

A Florida sheriff on Monday responded to sharp criticism from the Rev. Al Sharpton for not arresting a white man who shot and killed an unarmed black man during a parking lot dispute last month.

Sharpton criticized Pinellas County Sheriff Bob Gualtieri at a Sunday rally for Markeis McGlockton.

Trending: Mayor Pete Finally Gets Nickname from President Trump

McGlockton was shot on July 19 by Michael Drejka in Clearwater, according to FOX13 Tampa Bay. Drekja told deputies he feared for his life and police at the time chose not to arrest him, citing the state’s “Stand Your Ground” law.

“This case should not be tried in a parking lot of a convenience store,” Sharpton said. “It should be tried in a courtroom.”

Gualtieri was asked about Sharpton’s comments Monday during a press conference for an unrelated investigation.

“It’s a bunch of rhetoric. I don’t pay much attention to it, to tell you the truth. I wasn’t there, and I don’t really care what Al Sharpton has to say,” Gualtieri said. “Go back to New York. Mind your own business.” More

According to the Tampa Bay Times, a spokeswoman for Sharpton compared the sheriff’s comments to “those of sheriffs out of the 1960s that used to call civil rights leaders invited in by victims, “outside agitators.’”

Al Sharpton plans to keep coming back to Clearwater regardless of Sheriff Gualtieri’s remarks.

Don't forget to Like The Washington Sentinel on Facebook and Twitter, and visit our friends at The Republican Legion.

Become an insider!

Sign up for the free Washington Sentinel email newsletter, and we'll make sure to keep you in the loop.

Advertisement

Law

President Trump Signs Anti-Robocall Legislation Into Law

Now, what am I going to do about my expired automobile warranty?

Published

on

The White House announced on Monday that President Donald Trump had signed S. 151, the Pallone-Thune TRACED Act, which will prevent criminal robocalls.

The White House:

This historic legislation will provide American consumers with even greater protection against annoying unsolicited robocalls. American families deserve control over their communications, and this legislation will update our laws and regulations to stiffen penalties, increase transparency, and enhance government collaboration to stop unwanted solicitation. President Donald J. Trump is proud to have worked with Congress to get this bipartisan legislation to his desk, and even prouder to sign it into law today.

The FTC explained: “A robocall trying to sell you something is illegal unless a company has your written permission to call you that way. To get your permission, the company has to be clear it’s asking to call you with robocalls, and it can’t make you agree to the calls to get a product or service. If you give permission, you have the right to change your mind later.”

Senator John Thune:

I have yet to meet someone who says they enjoy receiving those unwanted and illegal robocalls that plague our phones, whether we’re at home, at work, or in the car, which is why the TRACED Act takes several important steps in the fight to curb this scourge.  This bill represents a unique legislative effort that is not only bipartisan at its core, but it’s nearly unanimously supported in Congress. Most importantly, this is a significant win for consumers in every corner of the country, and it finally and officially puts illegal robocallers on notice. While no process is perfect, I’m glad we were able to work together with Republicans and Democrats, senators and members of the House to reach this important compromise, which, once signed into law, will begin to make an important down payment on the fight against illegal robocalls.”

Continue Reading

Law

Muslim Woman Awarded $120,000 After Police Removed Her Hijab For Mugshot

Published

on

A Muslim woman in Minnesota who was allegedly forced to remove her hijab for mugshot gets a $120,000 settlement.

In 2013, Aida Shyef Al-Kadi turned herself in after a warrant was issued for her arrest because of a missed court hearing over a traffic ticket. She described her treatment in custody as “one of the most humiliating and harmful experiences” of her life.

Washington Examiner:

A court awarded a Muslim woman a $120,000 settlement after police forced her to remove her hijab in front of male jailers for a mugshot in 2013.

Aida Shyef Al Kadi, who was born in Ohio and moved to Minnesota so her child could receive special medical care, was arrested after a judge issued a warrant for Al Kadi because she failed to appear in court for a traffic violation. After turning herself in, Al Kadi was ordered to remove her hijab and abaya, a dress that covers the body, in front of male jailers at the Ramsey County jail.

U.S. District Court Judge John Tunheim awarded the settlement last week after Al Kadi sued Ramsey County for violating her constitutional rights and appeared with lawyers at the Minnesota headquarters of the Council on American-Islamic Relations earlier this month.

“It was one of the most humiliating and harmful experiences of my life,” said Al Kadi. “I knew that I did not want any other Muslim woman to experience what I did.”

Al Kadi initially refused to remove her hijab and was allowed to take the religious clothing off in a separate cell in front of a single male jailer. She agreed to remove the clothing after receiving assurances that the photos would not appear online. More

Twitter chimes in:
Continue Reading

Law

Virginia Democrats File Proposals To Begin “Confiscation” Of Lawfully Owned Firearms

Published

on

Virginia Democrats are filing proposals to confiscate legally-owned firearms according to a second amendment reporter.

Virginia Democrats now have a majority in the state legislature and Governor Northam has committed to passing gun control measures.

TDW:

After taking complete control of the state, Virginia Democrats are beginning to enact their left-wing agenda to undermine Americans’ constitutionally protected Second Amendment rights.

The legislative action comes after leftist Virginia Democrat Governor Ralph Northam announced at the beginning of last month that Democrats “will at least start” their attempts to restrict Virginian’s constitutional rights by “banning the sale of [semi-automatic firearms] and high-capacity magazines, restoring the law that limits purchases to one gun a month, and a red flag law that would empower a court to temporarily remove a gun from a person deemed to be a risk to himself or others,” The Washington Post reported.

When Northam was asked about confiscating firearms from law-abiding citizens, the governor responded, “that’s something I’m working [on] with our secretary of public safety.”

Free Beacon Second Amendment reporter Stephen Gutowski noted the proposed legislation on Monday, tweeting: “Meanwhile Virginia Democrats are filing bills to make the possession of millions of currently-owned firearms illegal. SB16 bans possession of many rifles without any grandfathering provision which means it’s confiscation.”

The legislation that Gutowski linked to included § 18.2-308.8, which proposes banning the “importation, sale, possession, etc., of assault firearms.” More

Virginia’s elected officials swore to uphold the constitution, now that they broke that oath the people of Virginia should impeach each and every one of them.

Then the feds need to arrest them, prosecute them and convict them for civil rights violations. Let them do time in federal prison. That’s the only way this will stop.

Continue Reading

Law

Illinois Set to Revolutionize War on Drugs with Common Sense Marijuana Legislation

It seems as though Illinois is finally learning the lessons of prohibition, nearly a century removed from the violence and corruption instigated by gangsters such as Al Capone.

Published

on

Americans have dealt with prohibition before, most famously during the first few decades of the 20th century, in relation to the “scourge” of alcohol on this nation.

Then, we had the temperance movement, whose hard-line, teetotaling ethos bludgeoned the “land of the free” into outlawing booze.  Much like the restrictive gun laws we see in liberal locales today, this prohibiting of firearms has only accomplished one thing:  Putting law-abiding citizens at a disadvantage.

Soon, gangsters, rumrunners, and thugs were running amok, selling booze made either dangerously and illegally, or imported secretly from Canada.  The attempted enforcement of prohibition turned into a bloodbath, and soon, the nation rescinded their virtue-signaling attempt to ban alcohol.

American marijuana laws in the 21st century are slowly catching up to those lessons of nearly a century ago, with Illinois, of all places, working to lead the way.

When lawmakers crafted the law legalizing marijuana in Illinois, they tried to make sure it would right what many see as past wrongs linked to the drug.

In addition to expunging hundreds of thousands of criminal records for marijuana arrests and convictions, the law’s architects added provisions meant to benefit communities that have been the most adversely affected by law enforcement’s efforts to combat the drug.

The so-called social equity provisions are expected to help black applicants, in particular, as blacks are nearly four times as likely as whites to be arrested for marijuana, the American Civil Liberties Union found. The law, which takes effect Jan. 1, also established ways for qualified applicants to pay lower licensing fees and get business loans and technical assistance. And it earmarked part of marijuana sales revenue for neighborhood development grants.

“On the surface, its tone and what it’s trying to do is ahead of any state that’s done this. They’re really setting off in the right way,” said Kayvan Khalatbari, a board member of Minority Cannabis Business Association, which has composed model laws outlining social equity programs. He added that follow-through will be key: “We can’t just set this in motion and set it free.”

Companies that apply for a license to sell marijuana will be judged on a 250-point scale, and those that qualify as social equity applicants will get a 50-point bump.

Not only will these laws take a great deal of power and money out of the hands of Illinois’ violent black market, but they will also spur on an entrepreneurial boom in the midwestern rust belt.

Well over half of the states in the nation currently allow for some form of legal or decriminalized use of cannabis.

Continue Reading

Law

Democrats Furious: President Trump to Receive Justice Award from Black Justice Group

Liberals are furious that President Donald Trump is about to be awarded the “Bipartisan Justice Award” by a prestigious black justice group.

Published

on

Liberals are furious that President Donald Trump is about to be awarded the “Bipartisan Justice Award” by a prestigious black justice group for his work on criminal justice reform.

Trump will receive the award at the 2019 Second Step Presidential Justice Forum being held at Benedict College in Columbia, South Carolina, by the 20/20 Bipartisan Justice Center, a group founded by twenty black Republicans and twenty black Democrats back in 2015, according to the Daily Caller.

The annual dinner recognizes a public servant who has reached across the aisle to work on matters of criminal justice.

The White House released a celebratory press release about the award, saying:

The Bipartisan Justice Award is the highest honor given annually to a public servant who has demonstrated the ability to work across the aisle to achieve meaningful progress in reforming our criminal justice system. The 2019 Bipartisan Justice award winner is President Donald J. Trump for his Bipartisan leadership in the passage of the historic First Step Act. The award is being given by the 20/20 Bipartisan Justice Center, a non-profit organization founded by 20 Black Republicans and 20 Black Democrats in 2015, to elevate the issue of criminal justice reform above partisan politics.

Even more galling for liberals, many of the Democrat candidates for president will be in attendance at the event and will have to sit squirming in their chairs as Trump gets his award.

According to the Daily Caller:

The following Democrats are set to attend the forum: Maryland Rep. John Delaney, New Jersey Sen. Cory Booker, South Bend Mayor Pete Buttigieg, California Sen. Kamala Harris, Minnesota Sen. Amy Klobuchar, former Vice President Joe Biden, Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren, former HUD Secretary Julian Castro, and Hawaii Rep. Tulsi Gabbard as well as Independent Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders.

Beto O’Rourke is also reportedly scheduled to attend.

Previous honorees include, Democratic New York Rep. Hakeem Jeffries, Republican Georgia Rep. Doug Collins, and Republican West Virginia Sen. Shelley Moore Capito.

Follow Warner Todd Huston on Twitter @WTHuston.

Continue Reading

Law

Gen. Flynn Attorney Files Surprise Request for Content of Joseph Mifsud Devices

The attorney for General Michael Flynn dropped a bombshell with a request to learn the contents of electronic devices owned by Joseph Mifsud.

Published

on

The attorney for General Michael Flynn dropped a bombshell with a request to learn the contents of electronic devices owned by Joseph Mifsud, a mysterious figure at the heart of the government’s case against the general and other members of the Trump administration the government has been targeting.

Mifsud is someone the media has been utterly ignoring, and attorney Sidney Powell’s filing to compel the release of the information on the man’s devices comes as a shock because few even knew that the Department of Justice even possessed any of Mifsud’s devices.

Powell’s filing revealed that the DOJ had somehow come into possession of two of Mifsud’s electronic devices. [See filing here]

The filing introduced on Wednesday demands access to the information on the devices: “The information is material, exculpatory, and relevant to the defense of Mr. Flynn, and specifically to the ‘OCONUS LURES’ and agents that western intelligence tasked against him likely as early as 2014 to arrange — unbeknownst to him ‘connections’ with certain Russians that they would then use against him n their false claims.”

This information may hold information proving that “western intelligence” agencies hired Mifsud to illicitly target the Trump campaign.

But until now, the public was not aware that the DOJ even had these devices. We still don’t know where these devices came from. We have some information that one was manufactured in 2011 and the other in 2014.

Furthermore, the media (and the government) has been claiming that this Mifsud character is a “Russian intelligence agent.” But, doesn’t the fact that the DOJ has these devices mean that claim may be in doubt?

U.S. Attorney John Durham and U.S. Attorney General Bill Barr flew to Italy to review a taped deposition of Joseph Mifsud in September. This all indicates that Mifsud is far more integral to all this than we were previously told.

The DOJ responded to Powell’s filing, saying if there is anything “relevant to sentencing” on the devices, they would provide it to the general’s defense team.

Mifsud is already known to have lied to the FBI about his actions in this case. Rep. Jim Jordan (R, OH) has already highlighted this fact:

Rep. Devin Nunes (R, CA) has also claimed that the FBI “has something to hide” about its interactions with Mifsud.

Follow Warner Todd Huston on Twitter @warnerthuston.

Continue Reading

Law

Evidence Piling Up That Prosecutors Blackmailed Gen. Michael Flynn with Threat of Prosecuting Son

Evidence is piling up that federal prosecutors committed serious misconduct in their attempt to put Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn in jail.

Published

on

Evidence is piling up that federal prosecutors committed serious prosecutorial misconduct in their attempt to put Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn in jail. And a new filing by Flynn’s attorney, Sidney Powell, highlights some very troubling actions by the federal government in both his and his former business partner’s cases.

On September 30, Powell filed her latest supplemental status report summarizing the acquittal of Flynn’s former business partner, Bijan Rafiekian.

Last week, the federal judge in Rafiekian’s case acquitted the man on all counts and said that the government utterly failed to prove its case.

Judge Anthony Trenga, of the Eastern District of Virginia, threw out Rafiekian’s convictions on violating the Foreign Agent Registration Act for work reportedly done on behalf of Turkey. Trenga said that there was insufficient evidence to sustain the convictions.

“The evidence was insufficient as a matter of law for the jury to convict Rafiekian on either count,” Judge Trenga wrote in his opinion. The judge added that a new trial may be warranted “in the interest of justice should the Court’s judgment of acquittal be later vacated or reversed.”

Rafiekian and Flynn worked together in Flynn’s now dissolved Flynn Intel Group before Flynn joined President Donald Trump’s administration.

Judge Trenga ruled that there was no evidence whatever that Rafiekian knowingly broke the law by filing false papers to register as a lobbyist for a foreign government. This finding has direct bearing on Flynn’s own case as one of the chief accusations against him is that he knowingly lied about working for a foreign government.

Powell’s Sept. 30 filing points out all the misconduct engaged in by the prosecutors in the Flynn case, especially in light of the Rafiekian ruling.

Powell notes that Flynn had lived up to his agreement with the government to offer full cooperation in the Rafiekian case, and that prosecutors wanted him to testify that he and Rafiekian knowingly signed a false FARA registration. But Flynn had already told the government that he did not file false FARA paperwork and that he could not lie in court that he and Rafiekian did such a thing.

That is when the government broke the agreement and barred Flynn from testifying in the Rafiekian case. This is an admission that their whole point (the false FARA issue) was the crux of their case and now that Judge Trenga has found that Rafiekian did not file a false FARA, the charges against Flynn is also untenable.

In her filing, Powell notes that they have the paper tail to prove this: “In our endless document review, we now have a draft of the statement of offense that proves the contrary, showing similar language deleted,” Powell says.

In that statement, Flynn said directly that he does not agree that he filed a false FARA, yet the government’s main case went forward as if he DID agree to this claim.

Worse, Powell shows that the government then used threats of prosecuting Flynn’s son as a weapon of intimidation to force the general’s acquiescence to the government’s desires. Powell notes that Flynn steadfastly refused to agree that he filed a false FARA, and in response the prosecutors turned on his agreement and charged him as a co-conspirator (with Rafiekian who has now been acquitted).

Powell is steadily building a mountain of evidence that the government abused its powers and prosecutors perpetrated serious misconduct during its investigation and prosecution of both Flynn and Rafiekian.

Follow Warner Todd Huston on Twitter @warnerthuston.

Continue Reading

Latest Articles

Become an insider


Best of the Month

Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!

Send this to a friend