Holder is Obama’s favorite because he doesn’t have to hold rallies or marches; his Afrocentric racism can be enacted directly through his corruption and debasement of our nation’s laws and law enforcement agencies, as Americans have seen before.

Eric Holder is, after the all, the the one who refused to prosecute the Black hate group, the New Black Panthers for voter intimidation, even when the case was already “won” be default do to their refusal to show up at the court, because they were “his people.”

This subhuman thug-in-a-suit hasn’t stopped with that bit of race-based treason though. Now he wants to ensure that his people are the police force even though they’re abjectly unqualified to be so by any objective measurements.

The Dayton Police Department is lowering its testing standards for recruits.

It’s a move required by the U.S. Department of Justice after it says not enough African-Americans passed the exam.

Dayton is in desperate need of officers to replace dozens of retirees.  The hiring process was postponed for months because the D.O.J. rejected the original scores provided by the Dayton Civil Service Board, which administers the test.

Under the previous requirements, candidates had to get a 66% on part one of the exam and a 72% on part two.

The D.O.J. approved new scoring policy only requires potential police officers to get a 58% and a 63%.  That’s the equivalent of an ‘F’ and a ‘D’.

“It becomes a safety issue for the people of our community,” said Dayton Fraternal Order of Police President, Randy Beane.  “It becomes a safety issue to have an incompetent officer next to you in a life and death situation.”

“The NAACP does not support individuals failing a test and then having the opportunity to be gainfully employed,” agreed Dayton NAACP President Derrick Foward.

The D.O.J. and Civil Service Board declined Dayton’s News Source’s repeat requests for interviews.  The lower standards mean 258 more people passed the test. The city won’t say how many were minorities.

That’s really what it comes down to isn’t it? Blacktivists like Holder and the White ethno-guiltists known colloquially by the pejorative, Liberals are the bulk of true racists remaining in America. They are utterly unconcerned by the content on one’s character, being solely concerned with the color of people’s skin.

Thankfully and surprisingly only that it was reported upon by the media, there is dissent with this cultural treason among at least some of the Black Community.

Zachary Williams is a 21-year-old black Wayne High School grad who wants nothing more than to be a Dayton police officer or firefighter.

He’s one of 225 black applicants who took the November police entrance exam now at the center of a dispute between the city and the U.S. Department of Justice.

His test results are pending the Justice Department’s demand that the city lower its passing score for a police exam to allow for a larger pool of black applicants, while the city argues it is trying to ensure it hires the most qualified candidates.

~*~

Williams said he understands what the Justice Department is trying to accomplish, but he thinks it’s the wrong method and it’s keeping him from achieving his dream.

“You can’t blame the city for the lack of diversity,” Williams said. “This isn’t your normal 9 to 5 job and you have to want it. I don’t want to be in a department where I was hired because of my skin color. I want it because I earned it.”

Community leaders agree with Williams and said the Justice Department’s method stigmatizes blacks.

The only question remaining to Americans is what to do about Holder. There is no viable legal solution except trying not to allow Obama – Holder’s “overseer” – to be re-elected in 2012 and it is not even close to a certainty that this goal can be achieved, especially with Obama being essentially guaranteed the 95%+ of the Black vote, and a majority of the other non-White voting blocks support for no other reason than his being not White.

The above is not technically true. We could ensure that with certainty that Obama is not re-elected but it require the broad use of the same tactics that Holder’s people tried in 2008.

No, if Americans are to answer the question of Eric Holder with certainty, we’re going to have to step outside of the overly comfortable realm of legal recourse and accept the consequences of our patriotism.

~*~

Keep your eyes open. Travel light but load heavy, and always put another round in the enemy after they’re down.

A relative reported that she and two relatives – likely her husband and infant son – had fled to America after receiving received death threats.

Praxedis G. Guerrero town secretary Andres Morales, however, said that this report had not been confirmed and was merely rumor. Morales claimed that Garcia had requested some time off to attend to personal matters concerning the health of her infant son, and that she was expected back to work soon.

~*~

With conflicting reports, both of dubious origin, I find it impossible to guess whether or not Marisol Valles Garcia and her family have fled to America. I hope so though since what the cartel vermin would do to her and her infant son doesn’t bear dwelling upon.

Some will say that her fleeing Mexico was an act of cowardice. I disagree. When a person takes over a police force of 13 agents – 9 of which are unarmed women – 1 working patrol car, 3 automatic rifles and a single pistol, it cannot be rightly called cowardice to not go up against either the Sinaloa and Juarez cartels or to flee the area when presented by them with an untenable offer.

Legally this was the right call and decision.

It’s also, however, a decision that has scared and angered a number of people, for variety of knee-jerk, self-serving, and some valid reasons respectively, since the shifts in technology have lured many people into storing vast amounts of private information within their mobile devices.

We granted review in this case to decide whether the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution permits law enforcement officers, approximately 90 minutes after lawfully arresting a suspect and transporting him to a detention facility, to conduct a warrantless search of the text message folder of a cell phone they take from his person after the arrest. We hold that, under the United States Supreme Court’s binding precedent, such a search is valid as being incident to a lawful custodial arrest. We affirm the Court of Appeal’s judgment.

– Supreme Court of California
The People v. Gregory Diaz (S166600)

The police have the legal right, as affirmed multiple times by the SCOTUS, to search anything on the person of- or in the immediate control of anyone that they arrest without the requirement of obtaining any form of warrant to do so. Any evidence found during such searches is admissible in court and is not limited to such as is pertinent to the charges that the arrestee was originally detained for.

The previous SCOTUS opinions on: Harris v. United States (1947), United States v. Rabinowitz (1950), and Chimel v. California (1969) even extend this right of search and seizure to the room in which the suspect is arrested within – Chimel being a limiting factor since the Court held that the seizure of the entire contents of a house and its removal to FBI offices 200 miles away for examination, pursuant to an arrest under warrant of one of the persons found in the house, was unreasonable.

None of this is new; this is settled law. What is new is the amount of type of data that people carry on their persons and which is therefor subject to warrantless search in the event of their arrest.

That she will end up raped, murdered, and dismembered is almost a foregone conclusion.

Chief Valles Garcia will be leading an amazingly courageous force of 13 agents, one working patrol car, three automatic rifles and a single pistol against the thugs of the Mexican drug cartels which war upon each other and the Mexican government’s forces for control of the area. Nine of her agents are women and will not be armed.

Cobardes sucios! Maricones poco – ustedes permite que sus esposas e hijas a luchar sus batallas. Ustedes me hace mal!

This young woman is amazingly brave, quite beautiful, totally committed to her people, and whole orders of magnitude better than the residents of the Mexican border state of Chihuahua can reasonably hope to ever deserve. But the cowards and filth in the Juárez Valley – who will still claim to be men – will sacrifice her and her family to the drug cartels while they hide in their hovels.

Chief Marisol Valles Garcia’s Fate?

I very much do not look forward to reading about Marisol Valles Garcia’s rape and murder or to see pictures of her dismembered corpse; nor do I look forward to reading about what the Cartel thugs will do to her infant son. I fully expect to though unless something is done about the Mexican drug cartels – and I don’t see either Calderon’s failed government or the average pocho being either willing or able to do anything.

As one would likely expect, outside the Civic Center some 200 Tea  Party supporters held a protest. What few people expected was the response to this protest by Team Obama. Upon seeing the Tea Party supporters nearing the civic center sometime after Obama’s motorcade had arrived and the attendees of speech had entered the building, they summoned a squad of riot police to deal with the Tea Party.

Many Americans are outraged and more than a little scared by the use of such levels of force and intimidation against what was an entirely peaceful protest. The massacres of protesters by agents of the law in Orangeburg, SC, Kent, MS, and Jackson, OH are still, decades later, part of America’s national consciousness.

Certainly, outrage is in order, as is a certain amount of well-founded concern for the safety of those who dissent against President Obama’s agenda to reconstruct the foundations of America. But the Obama regime’s recourse of using riot police to attempt to intimidate some 200 peaceful Tea Party protesters is also cause for joy. It means we, the People a making strides in our war to maintain American liberties.

When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.

– Attributed to Thomas Jefferson

The government’s – in the form of Obama’s administration – fear of we, the People was quite in evidence in Quincy, IL. The heady scent of liberty was thick in the air as President Obama’s cadre called out the police from several jurisdictions in full riot gear to quell and intimidate the Tea Party protesters Oakley Lindsay Civic Center during President Obama’s visit.

Illinois Riot Police Summoned To Block Tea Party

Team Obama Deploys Riot Squad vs. Peaceful Protesters

So the American people should be somewhat joyful. We have struck a certain amount of fear into the government. Since fear is one of the few things governments – especially Obama’s pseudo-messianic regime – listen to, this is a sign that we’re winning the war for our children’s nation.

But, Some Needed Perspective

Some people – many actually – have claimed that the police called out to block off and intimidate the Quincy Tea Party were SWAT. This is erroneous at best, mendacious at worst. The law enforcement detail assigned to this event was the Illinois Law Enforcement Alarm System (ILEAS) Mobile Field Force Team (MFFT) 8. They are equipped for- and trained in crowd control not, in the sort of aggressive tactical operations undertaken by SWAT teams.

My condolences to the family and teammates of MMFT 8 Team Member Sheriff’s Deputy Lamont Reid who passed away Monday April 26 while working an assignment in E. St. Louis

If they had been SWAT the armor would have been largely the same but their weaponry would have been much deadlier and far more in evidence since SWAT teams are used for offensive missions instead of defensive and containment ones. Indeed, even for riot police MFFT Team 8 came significantly under-armed if they expected to encounter any trouble at all – which they at least obviously didn’t.

Wanna Toss Him In With The “Lower Taxes Now” Bunch?

For myself, I think it’s pretty funny as an image and as an idea. It’d make a great reality TV show. We could just drop members of opposing groups in cells together, let them “discuss their differences,” and broadcast the ensuing hilarity for America’s enjoyment.

It’d be like the WWE cage matches, but without the oddly and disturbingly transsexual costumes.

The ObamaCare Line – Enforcement Of Obama’s Policies

Well, as over-the-top and hyperbolic as this video by Concerned Women For America is, mandatory health insurance is part of the proposed ObamaCare. Enforcement capabilities have to be assumed, especially with the proposed sharing of health insurance information and medical records between different branches of the federal government, including the IRS.

All sarcasm and humor aside, this video speaks to a real fear among Americans. If the government controls our access to medical care, how can we dissent from anything that the government wants to do without risking our health and lives and that of our children?

On the other hand, if they’d have included that creepy Obama cult hold music, it might make one glad for the police to come to take you away.

That’s becoming normal and is certainly a welcome change from the general apathy the electorate has shown in previous decades.

What is also becoming normal, or at least normalized, and is most certainly unwelcome is the behavior exhibited by Obama’s supporters, now including ones who operate under the Color of Law.

Black Thug in Uniform says It Ain’t America No More

School security officer Wesley Cheeks, Jr. took offense to one of the protester’s posters, one utilizing a variation of Firas Alkhateeb’s now-viral Obama-as-Joker imagery. Unlike others who might have disliked the poster in question, Officer Cheeks had the badge, firearm, and misused legal authority to threaten an American into taking down the sign that so offended what passes for his “sensibilities.”

As is clearly demonstrated by this thug-with-a-gun-and-badge, a certain sort of follower of Obama just doesn’t care about the Constitution, especially the 1st Amendment, when the assembly or expression it would protect is counter to the agenda of the First Black President.

Protester – This is America. This used to be America.

Officer Cheeks – It ain’t no more, OK?

The thug, Cheeks must be given some credit for honesty at least. He was blunt and unapologetic in his treason to the ideals and foundations of America. It should only be a modicum of credit though; Cheeks is Black and therefore, due to various programs and laws in the South, shielded from disciplinary action or termination for his action; he’s protected and held to a far lower standard of behavior than a White officer would be.

Frankly, I’m thankful the protester was White. I’m afraid of what Cheeks’ response would have been to a Black who he might have considered a “Race Traitor.”

Don’t expect the Reston, VA Police Department to do anything to Cheeks. Don’t expect the ACLU to help in any civil suit. Certainly don’t expect President Obama to issue a condemning statement. If something is to be done about Officer Cheeks and the forces he’s a stormtrooper for, it must come from we, the People.

No matter what filth like Cheeks jabber, this is still America and it will remain such as long as Americans are willing to to balk the actions of such as him and, if needed and no other recourse is allowed, make an example of him such as will be remembered with terror by others of his foul ilk throughout the years.

Still, there is a lot of divergent opinions on the matter and the underlying causes of it. This is to be expected, since there are many who would use such an incident, and it’s inappropriate addition to the national news, to further their own biased agendas.

So let’s boil down the situation that occurred between Prof. Gates and Officer Crowley:

No! I won’t excuse You for being White and a Cop

On one side of the issue we have Harvard Prof. Henry Louis Gates Jr., a professional racial activist who made his fame and fortune largely, though not exclusively, by capitalizing on the “plight of the Black man in America.”

Prof. Gates and his attorney, Charles Ogletree, released a statement – to The Root, a purely “Afrocentric” organ,  of course – outlining Gate’s view of the incident.

On the other side of the issue we have Cambridge Cambridge Police Officer, James Crowley, an 11-year veteran of the police force. Officer Crowley, in addition to his regular duties, has for the past 5 years taught a class on avoiding racial profiling for five years at the Lowell Police Academy. He was hand-picked to teach the course by former police Commissioner Ronny Watson, who is Black.

Officer gates, along with his partner, Officer Carlos Figueroa, who is Latino, filed their official police reports of the incident.

What happened? A professional Black Activist and a White police officer who teaches an anti-Racial Profiling course had a dispute during the course of investigating a burglary. Since the issue boils down to the character and probable motives, I’ll you all decide whose story is closer to the truth and who had a motivation and predilection for racial antagonism.

Barring further developments, I’m done with this farce, though I may comment futher on tangential issues.

These Miranda warnings were mandated as a result of the June 13, 1966 United States Supreme Court decision – Miranda v. Arizona – as a means of protecting a criminal suspect’s 5th Amendment right to avoid coercive self-incrimination.

The person in custody must, prior to interrogation, be clearly informed that he or she has the right to remain silent, and that anything the person says may be used against that person in court; the person must be clearly informed that he or she has the right to consult with an attorney and to have that attorney present during questioning, and that, if he or she is indigent, an attorney will be provided at no cost to represent him or her.

While the SCOTUS did not specify the exact wording that must used by law enforcement, all of the points above must be included substantively in the warning given to anyone before any sort of interrogation – beyond that of biographical information such as name, date of birth, and address (Stop-And-Identify laws) – may commence. The typical warning is as follows:

You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law. You have the right to an attorney present during questioning. If you cannot afford an attorney, one will be appointed for you. Do you understand these rights?

That was then, and it is still that way now, but President’s Obama’s administration would like that not to be the future, and they’re willing to use the weight of the US Justice Department to attempt to do so.

The Obama administration, claiming that the right to have an attorney present during questioning “serves no real purpose” and offers only “meager benefits,” wants to overturn the previous SCOTUS rulings and limit the requirement that police do not initiate questioning of a defendant who has a lawyer or who has asked for one unless the attorney is present.

From Associated Press (A) via The Huffington Post:

WASHINGTON — The Obama administration is asking the Supreme Court to overrule a 23 year-old decision that stopped police from initiating questions unless a defendant’s lawyer is present, the latest stance that has disappointed civil rights and civil liberties groups.

While President Barack Obama has reversed many policies of his Republican predecessor, George W. Bush, the defendants’ rights case is another stark example of the White House seeking to limit rather than expand rights.

Since taking office, Obama has drawn criticism for backing the continued imprisonment of enemy combatants in Afghanistan without trial, invoking the “state secrets” privilege to avoid releasing information in lawsuits and limiting the rights of prisoners to test genetic evidence used to convict them.

The case at issue is Michigan v. Jackson, in which the Supreme Court said in 1986 that police may not initiate questioning of a defendant who has a lawyer or has asked for one unless the attorney is present. The decision applies even to defendants who agree to talk to the authorities without their lawyers.

Anything police learn through such questioning may not be used against the defendant at trial. The opinion was written by Justice John Paul Stevens, the only current justice who was on the court at the time.

The justices could decide as early as Friday whether they want to hear arguments on the issue as they wrestle with an ongoing case from Louisiana that involves police questioning of an indigent defendant that led to a murder confession and a death sentence.

Seeking to assure that the right to counsel is not lost during police interrogation, the Court ruled in Jackson that, once an accused has claimed that right in court, any waiver of that right during police questioning would not be valid unless the individual initiated communication with the officers. Overturning Michigan v. Jackson would be a huge mistake and a crime against American freedoms.

So will they create a new Miranda warning? One that more accurately reflects the strictly limited and curtailed rights of suspects and defendants in police custody?

Would anyone care to estimate – or even hazard a guess – what the hue and cry over this would have been if President Bush, had tried this? The Liberals’ media would have decried his assault on civil liberties from coast to coast. The ACLU and other groups would have staged protests in every American city, which – unlike the Tax Day tea Parties – would have been extensively and positively covered by what passes for journalists these days. They would have called President Bush a Nazi fascist for denying legal counsel to people under police interrogation.

But with President Obama in the White House, the American media is conspicuously silent on the matter. The only mainstream media outlet carrying the story was The Telegraph which is a British newspaper!