Category Archives: Law

Posted on by

I’m waiting on yet another effort by the left to censor things that don’t like.

To the surprise of absolutely no one, it seems that there were warning signs known to the police about Caleb Vazquez, one of the killers in the San Diego mosque shooting. From London’s left-wing The Guardian:

One of shooters in deadly attack at San Diego mosque was previously flagged by FBI

Officials seized guns from Caleb Vazquez’s father last year amid alarm over teen’s views on mass shooters and Nazism

by José Olivares | Friday, May 22, 2026 | 12:45 PM EDT

One of the two white supremacist shooters who attacked a mosque in California on Monday and killed three people had already been on law enforcement officials’ radar, according to US media reports.

Local officials were so alarmed by Caleb Vazquez’s idolization of mass shooters and Nazism that they seized his father’s guns a year before the shooting, the New York Times reports. Similarly, Bloomberg reports that Vazquez had already been flagged by the FBI as a “potential threat” last year.

Eighteen-year-old Vazquez and his friend, Cain Clark, 17, attacked the Islamic Center of San Diego earlier this week and killed three men, including a security guard who exchanged gunfire with the attackers and prevented them from reaching 140 schoolchildren. The two shooters then died from self-inflicted gunshot wounds in their getaway car.

Further down:

Vazquez was already on law enforcement’s radar, after someone flagged to officials troubling social media posts. In a protective order last year, a police officer wrote that Vazquez was involved in “suspicious behavior” that idolized Nazis and mass shooters, prompting officials to seize Vazquez’s father’s guns. Vazquez had also been placed in an involuntary psychiatric hold, the Times reported.

Vazquez’s father and his wife had 26 guns, including pistols, rifles and shotguns in their home. The father wrote in an affidavit that he had voluntarily put the weapons in a storage facility because of concerns about his son. The court ordered him to voluntarily turn over his guns to officials.

So, law enforcement knew about young Mr Vasquez at least, though there are still no reports that I have seen indicating either of the two shooters had previous criminal records. The New York Post reported that Mr Vazquez had:

walked away from a mental health facility the day before carrying out Monday’s deadly attack, sources said.

Caleb Vazquez, 18, left the Park Mental Health Treatment Center the morning before killing three people at an Islamic center with 17-year-old Cain Clark, law enforcement sources told The Post.

So, the police knew about Mr Vazquez, and the family’s firearms were taken away, and he had been receiving some apparently-not-very-effective mental health treatment, yet he still went on a killing spree. Why, it’s almost as though the policies that the left advocate didn’t work in this case.

Mr Vazquez was reported to be somewhere on the autism spectrum, though that term is so over-diagnosed and overused as to make it practically meaningless.

Messrs Clark and Vazquez had apparently been interested in radical videos, so watch for our good friends on the left want to censor our freedom of speech and of the press because a few nutbags might be radicalized. After all, they tried it before, during Joe Biden’s four unfortunate years! The New Republic blamed Kamala Harris Emhoff’s election loss on freedom of speech, and we have reported many times on now thankfully former President Biden’s attempt to create a Ministry of Truth under the Department of Fatherland Security, called the “Disinformation Governance Board”, and how we were fortunate that it failed. The left were aghast when Elon Musk was trying to buy Twitter, because they were afraid that conservatives might use Twitter more successfully, and the very lovely Taylor Lorenz, who wants to force us all to wear face masks forever, blamed the failure of that Board on “right-wing attacks.” My good friend — we’re such good friends that she has blocked me on Bluesky — Amanda Marcotte, who exercises her own freedom of speech and of the press on Salon, wanted the government to take over Twitter while The Philadelphia Inquirer’s far-left columnist Will Bunch suggested it “should exist more as a semi-public utility than as an entity that a man with a spare $44 billion can just light on fire.”

So, I’m waiting on yet another attack by the left to censor things that don’t like. To have a free society is to assume greater risks for that freedom. People could, after all, be far safer from crime, from revolutionaries, from all sorts of things in places like China or North Korea.

Posted on by

They’re dead; what more could be done to them?

There’s some silliness in Earl Ofari Hutchinson’s concluding statement about the San Diego mosque killings:

(Cain) Clark and (Caleb) Vazquez’s hideous rampage almost certainly would have been treated as a murder, charges if they had lived. But in the hands of the Trump DOJ they may well not have been slapped with federal hate crime charges. This glaring laxity is just enough space for the Cains and Vazquez’s of America to run loose.

Uhhh, the killers are stone-cold graveyard dead; there’s not a lot more we could do to them at this point.

Why the San Diego Mosque’s Shooters Continue to Run Loose

Many police departments see hate crime data as a politically loaded minefield, leaving the FBI blind to the true scale of civil rights violence.

by Earl Ofari Hutchinson | Wednesday, May 20, 2026

At a news conference within hours after the shooting rampage at the San Diego Mosque, the San Diego Police Chief said the obvious: “The shooting would be investigated as a hate crime until it’s not.” His add-on, “it’s not,” gave with one hand and took back with the other on the issue of whether the rampage was a hate crime.

The FBI was only marginally less equivocal about whether the shooting was a hate crime. A top official promised to leave no stone unturned and said, “There was definitely hate rhetoric that was involved.” But he also gave with one hand and took back with the other. He quickly added that he did not see the murderous attack as “a specific threat to the mosque.”

The police are usually circumspect in issuing statements like this; is it any surprise that they were so this time?

The irony is that the alleged shooters, Clark Cain and Caleb Vazquez, left little doubt as to why they shot up the mosque. In what’s usual in these kinds of mass killings, the shooters leave a disjointed journal filled with scribblings that spew hate against Blacks, Jews, and Muslims. The pair did the same. If ever there was a smoking gun on a hate motive for the killing, they provided it with their diatribes against Blacks, Jews, and Muslims.

But why should that surprise? Surveys have repeatedly shown that hate crimes, violence, harassment, and threats against Muslims have been almost the norm in many circles. Dozens of neo-Nazis, anti-government, white supremacist groups, and tens of thousands of individuals spew hate with aplomb. The site’s writers lambaste blacks, Jews, gays, and are unabashed in praise of Hitler. They perennially exhort their readers and followers to arm themselves to the teeth against the imagined assault by the federal government on white people’s rights. It was virtually a given that the murders would fire the horde of racists up and ignite a frenzy of debate, speculation, denial, and even veiled acquiescence to the murders.

In reading those two paragraphs, I see no evidence or even allegations of a crime prior to the killings. Their speech was certainly offensive, but offensive speech is part of our freedom of speech. If people’s “scribblings . . . spew hate against Blacks, Jews, and Muslims,” are there not other people spewing hatred of whites and Christians and really normal people in general? Does Mr Hutchinson want the Geheime Staatspolizei to search every computer posting, or perhaps search people’s homes for written journals looking for hate speech? We have reported many times on the FBI under the Biden Administration and Attorney General Merrick Garland surveilling “radical traditionalist Catholics” looking for “domestic violent extremists”, before the program was made public and embarrassment made the FBI shut it down, and even then FBI Director Christopher Wray lied through his scummy teeth about the extent of it.

However, even when the Cains and Vazquezes are known, tracked, monitored, and surveilled, and worse commit hate acts, they often evade full punishment. This has nothing to do with the First Amendment, but rather muddled, confused, and outright lax enforcement and prosecution of hate acts. Even when the FBI and local law enforcement agencies ID them for their propensity for violence, their hands are still tied.

The author keeps mistakenly referring to Cain Clark as Clark Cain.

It’s still early in the investigations, but if Messrs Clark and Vasquez committed any previous crimes, I haven’t yet seen such reported, and I have searched. If either committed offenses as juveniles, those records would have been sealed. News flash: neither the local police nor the FBI can do anything about people who have not yet committed actual crimes.

Another point: while Mr Vasquez was 18, Mr Clark was a minor at 17. Had they survived and been tried for murder, Mr Clark could be sentenced to nothing more than life without the possibility of parole. Mr Vasquez could be sentenced to death, but the Pyrite State has not actually executed anyone for the last twenty years. A ‘hate crime’ rider could do nothing more to them.

ABC Channel 7 reported:

A Sonnenrad patch, depicting a neo-Nazi symbol, and what analysts assess is likely a patch for a militant accelerationist group, are both visible on the plate carrier being worn by the person believed to be Clark, according to sources. Additionally, writings are visible on a gun, including drawings of SS bolts and neo-Nazi insignias, sources said.

According to our good friends on the left, Nazi symbols and signs are not at all disqualifying, at least not when it comes to a Democratic candidate for the United States Senate, but just youthful mistakes.

But it shows you the depth of the problem about which Mr Hutchinson complained. The same Democrats who are willing to forgive Graham Platner’s ‘youthful mistake’ were also willing to surveil devout Catholics who simply preferred the Latin Mass. Mr Hutchinson would, like the FBI surveilling “radical traditionalist Catholics,” criminalize thoughts. Like the movie Minority Report, they want to lock up potential criminals before they’ve committed any crime.

Posted on by

Some common sense concerning the Louisiana v Callais decision. This might not be quite the result for which Republicans hoped

The two pages of the Congressionally-signed original of the Fourteenth Amendment in the National Archives, written with iron gall ink on parchment. It was last publicly displayed in 2013. As of 2025, it is stored in the research wing of the archives inside a boxed book of Acts of Congress from its 39th session.

Our good friends on the left, who have been so supportive of the Fourteenth Amendment’s provision that “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside” must grant automatic citizenship to the “anchor babies” of people in our country illegally, they have not been nearly as thrilled with the Equal Protection Clause, “No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws,” when that clause says, essentially and throughout dozens of decisions, that Americans may not be treated differently based upon their race. Oh, the left certainly doesn’t want white Americans to be given a legal advantage, but legal “remedies” to “past discrimination” to assist black Americans meet with their approval.

After a Supreme Court ruling that was an affront to history, some states can’t wait to turn back the clock on voting rights | Editorial

After long ago overcoming racist efforts to dilute the power of voters of color, the conservative justices have unreasonably made it more difficult to challenge discriminatory legislative maps.

by The Editorial Board | Monday, May 11, 2026 | 5:01 AM EDT

Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it. — George Santayana

Perhaps the most frustrating aspect of the U.S. Supreme Court giving its seal of approval to Republican attempts to turn back the clock on voting rights in America is that, after long ago overcoming racist efforts to dilute the power of voters of color, we now see similar vipers slithering past the corroded gates of hell that were supposed to hold them in check.

The court defied reason with an opinion that, in essence, neutered the 1965 Voting Rights Act by ruling government efforts to remedy past racism, which tipped the scales in favor of white political candidates, are also racist — unless those remedies can be tied to specific acts of past discrimination that made them necessary.

The decision has opened the door for states to attempt to invalidate any congressional district lines drawn to favor candidates of color.

Note what appalls The Editorial Board, that they might lose “congressional district lines drawn to favor candidates of color.” The Board are specifically asking for districts which favor non-white candidates. This would be the same Editorial Board which wrote last January:

The president has also successfully lobbied some Republican-controlled states to remake congressional maps to favor the GOP, regardless of their potential illegality. In Texas, the U.S. Supreme Court allowed 2025 redistricting maps to be used for the upcoming election, even as a legal challenge moves forward over racial gerrymandering.

It seems that the Board approve of racial gerrymandering, an attempt to create, again in their words, “congressional district lines drawn to favor candidates of color,” but are diametrically opposed to district boundaries which favor Republicans.

There is a strong bias on the part of the Board. It would seem that black Americans, in their view, can only be represented by black representatives, but if anyone were to suggest that black representatives cannot represent white Americans, they’d be among the first to scream that’s racist. If someone stated that only a white candidate could reasonably represent a majority white district, they’d also claim such was racist.

Conservatives have long fought against the reverse racism which has been used, but electorally, the Louisiana v Callais decision might not be the win they think. Blacks are the Democrats most loyal voting Demographic, frequently giving 90% of their ballots to Democrats. Creating majority black districts had the effect of making neighboring districts safer for Republican candidates. If those majority black districts are phased out, spreading heavily black areas back into other districts, Republican candidates might fare more poorly, and close races more likely to elect the Democratic candidates. The Editorial Board might be appalled if fewer black Democrats were elected, but I’m sure that they’d trade black Democrats for white Democrats if it meant fewer Republicans of any color were in office.

Posted on by

You in a heap o’ trouble, boy! Some guys are just as dumb as a box of rocks!

I will admit it; I am at a loss to figure out how people could be this stupid!

Yeah, I get it: some people are simply sexually attracted to minors. But actively trying what this gentleman from the Lone Star State allegedly did, in an environment in which such people are being sought out, prosecuted, and sent to prison for it, is stupid, as in boneheadedly stupid and criminally stupid. From The Philadelphia Inquirer:

Texas man charged with paying 13-year-old Montgomery County girl for child porn

Mitchell Van Dusen, 31, of Magnolia, Texas, was being held at the Montgomery County Correctional Facility in lieu of $500,000 cash bail.

by Robert Moran | Tuesday, April 28, 2026 | 7:40 PM EDT

A 31-year-old Texas man was charged with allegedly paying a 13-year-old girl in Montgomery County to make child pornography, authorities said Tuesday.

Mitchell Van Dusen was extradited last week and was being held at the Montgomery County Correctional facility in lieu of $500,000 cash bail, Montgomery County District Attorney Kevin R. Steele said.

No, of course the Inquirer didn’t publish the mugshot of the accused, but reporter Robert Moran included a hyperlink which led to the Montgomery County site which included his mugshot, something he has done before.

On July 17, 2025, the girl met with Whitpain Township police to describe online interactions she was having since July 4 of the previous year with an unknown man she met in a chat room on the Discord social platform, according to the affidavit of probable cause.

The girl said she had been receiving money from the man through the Venmo payment app and was exchanging sexually explicit photos and videos with the man, the affidavit said.

There’s more at the newspaper’s original. But if this had been going on for an entire year, it seems to me that there must be more to the story than we have been told. Was this girl smart enough to catch him herself, or was she conned and went to the police after her parents or perhaps a friend found out about it?

We are not told whether Mr Van Dusen is alleged to have shared the child pornography images with anyone else, or whether he was trying to actively make money off of the stuff.

But if he actually did this stuff — and he is innocent until proven guilty in a court of law — he really is as dumb as a box of rocks. He was doing this from Texas, with a girl in Pennsylvania, which means that he is subject to state charges in both Texas and Pennsylvania, as well as federal prosecution.

If he is guilty, if prosecutors have enough information and evidence to win a conviction in a trial, any lenient plea bargain arrangements need to be avoided. He ought to go to prison for many, many years.

Posted on by

A Philadelphia Inquirer sob story about a poor, poor, misunderstood murderer.

The First Street Journal has twice noted the case of Derek Lee, convicted of second degree murder for the killing of Leonard Butler in Pittsburgh. Under Title 18 §2502(b), second degree murder is defined to be “A criminal homicide constitutes murder of the second degree when it is committed while defendant was engaged as a principal or an accomplice in the perpetration of a felony.” The penalty for second degree murder in the Keystone State is specified as life imprisonment without the possibility of parole. That’s pretty simple: the murderer is already committing a crime, so even if he wasn’t necessarily planning on killing someone, he was already on the scene, already planning on committing a crime, and prepared to kill if he thought it necessary, even if you were not the person who pulled the trigger.

Whether you’re the guy who fires the fatal shot or not, you’re still a really bad guy, and there’s no good reason for you to ever be put back out on the streets with decent people again.

Derek Lee and a gentleman named Paul Durham broke into Mr Butler’s home. I’ll let The Philadelphia Inquirer give you the details:

In 2014, Lee and Paul Durham pushed their way into a Pittsburgh home armed with a handgun and Taser. Police said they went at the request of the spurned ex-lover of the man living there, Leonard Butler, 44.

Inside, Lee and Durham forced Butler and his girlfriend into the basement. They ordered them to their knees. Lee struck Butler with the gun and used the Taser on him before going upstairs with Butler’s watch.

So, Mr Lee was not only committing a crime, but a violent crime, as he pistol-whipped Mr Butler. This wasn’t just a burglary where the homeowner surprised the criminals, but one in which the criminals were actively attacking the victim.

In the basement, Butler lunged for Durham’s weapon, and in the struggle, Butler was shot and killed.

Both criminals were packing heat that day.

Well, the newspaper is never content at just giving us the facts, but wants to weave a sob story about poor, poor Mr Lee:

Lee grew up in Pittsburgh, a small, wiry boy, the youngest of three children in a close-knit family. He played baseball and basketball, and worked as a youth camp counselor at his grandmother’s church.

His father later moved to Ashtabula, Ohio, splitting the family across state lines. Lee went back and forth between them.

In his teens, Lee’s life shifted. He drifted into street life and graduated high school “by my teeth,” he said.

At that point, at least in the online version of the story, the Inquirer gives us a photo of a smiling Mr Lee, in his graduation gown and holding his diploma.

Have your heartstrings not yet been pulled? Are you not feeling sorry for Mr Lee yet? But the newspaper continues:

When Lee was 18, he and another man shot at a group of basketball players outside a college party. Although five players were injured, none of the bullets from Lee’s gun struck anyone. Lee was convicted of attempted criminal homicide and sentenced to seven to 14 years in prison.

When he was released, Lee’s family welcomed him home with a celebration and his mother’s seven-cheese macaroni. He was 25. He found work as a dishwasher, but struggled to stabilize his life, Lee said.

So, young Mr Lee and his buddies, for whatever their reasons, were armed, and shot into a group of young men outside a party, firing indiscriminately, trying at the very least to shoot some people, and probably hoping to kill some of them. And thus, that good young man, who “worked as a youth camp counselor at his grandmother’s church,” and suffered as the son in a broken home found himself exactly where he belonged: behind bars.

Well, I’m from a broken home, too, but somehow, some way, I never tried to kill anybody due to that.

Mr Lee was then a convicted felon. And that means premeditation when Mr Durham and he broke into Mr Butler’s home, because just by carrying a firearm, Mr Lee was committing a second degree felony under Title 18 §6105.

Then came the burglary and the murder. Mr Lee was a previously convicted felon, in the process of committing more felonies. Apparently his first stint in prison did not teach him the lesson it should have, as the second group of crimes occurred less than a year after he was released from his previous time behind bars.

Why, I have to ask, would any decent people want someone like Mr Lee back out on the streets?

The Inquirer continued with their sob story:

In prison again, Lee said he reached a breaking point. “I just hit that rock-bottom place where I knew I had to do something,” he said.

He turned to religion. He entered a chaplain’s program, and trained service dogs. He also appealed his case himself, and began mentoring incarcerated men serving long or life sentences.

“Society throws away people like us,” Lee said. “It … judges them by one of the worst moments in their life. But I truly believe that people can be redeemed.”

No, Mr Lee, “society” didn’t throw you away: you did that! One of the “worst moments of (his) life”? Mr Leonard didn’t get any further moments in his life; he’s stone-cold graveyard dead because of what Messrs Durham and Lee did.

Naturally, Philadelphia’s George Soros-sponsored, criminal-loving and police-hating District Attorney, Larry Krasner, wants to see the murderers previously sentenced under the second degree murder stature given a break:

(Mr Krasner) was joined by several criminal justice advocates, including Saleem Holbrook, executive director of the Abolitionist Law Center, and John Pace, associate director of reentry and engagement at the Youth Sentencing and Re-entry Project. Both men had once been sentenced to life in prison and were later released after U.S. Supreme Court rulings barred mandatory life sentences for juveniles and made those decisions retroactive.

Holbrook stressed that the hundreds of men and women incarcerated under the former law were waiting for an opportunity to be released and show they could contribute meaningfully to their communities.

“(S)how they could contribute meaningfully to their communities”? Yeah, uh huh, right. I have a bridge you can buy, too.

So, what’s the outcome? Mr Lee will have to be resentenced, and his new sentence could still be life, even life without the possibility of parole. But the decision in his case could mean that others in the Keystone State sentenced automatically to life without parole could have their cases reopened for more lenient terms. Some could even be sentenced to time already served, letting actual killers back out on the streets.

The Abolitionist Law Center does not believe anyone should be incarcerated at all, and would if they could opposes all prison sentences, and would, if they could, free every murderer, every rapist, every drug dealer, and every assailant locked up in Pennsylvania’s prisons.

But there’s one person in Mr Lee’s case who cannot be resentenced, and that’s Mr Butler: he was sentenced to death, executed on the spot, and there is no appeal from that.

Despite the efforts of the newspaper to paint Mr Lee as a basically good kid who just made a couple of forgivable mistakes, I remain unmoved. He has already proven himself to be a cancer on civilized life, and should never be allowed to menace decent people again.

Posted on by

Why don’t the left at least want to get rid of the really bad guys who are here illegally?

I really can understand how some generous and kind and good-hearted Americans could have sympathy and support for those immigrants, even those here illegally, who have been committing no crimes other than those related to being in our country illegally, those simply trying to live a decent life for their families and themselves, being respectable members of their communities. But I can’t understand how there are Americans who want to protect those illegals who are here breaking non-immigration-related laws.

ICE arrests Latin Kings member after NYC sanctuary release despite assault charge on first responder

DHS says Bryan David Tasiguano Leon, an Ecuadorian national, was arrested by ICE on March 4 after the NYPD freed him over federal objection

By Louis Casiano, Fox News | Friday, March 27, 2026 | 6:34 PM EDT

An illegal immigrant gang member accused of assaulting a first responder was arrested by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents after he was released by New York City authorities despite him posing a danger to public safety, the Department of Homeland Security said Friday.

Bryan David Tasiguano Leon, an Ecuadorian citizen, was arrested by the New York Police Department on Feb.14 on suspicion of assault on a first responder. He has a prior arrest for assault and family neglect.

Leon, a member of the Latin Kings, was subsequently released from custody despite ICE having lodged a detainer with the NYPD so he could be transferred to federal authorities, DHS said.

Who are the “Latin Kings“? They are an Hispanic street and in-prison gang, of extremely unsavory reputation. When they’re around, decent people are not safe.

“New York sanctuary politicians chose to release this Latin Kings gang member from jail back not New York City communities,” said Acting Assistant Secretary Lauren Bis said. “This gang member was previously arrested for assault on a first responder and family neglect.”

ICE agents arrested Leon on March 4 during immigration enforcement operations in New York City. He remains in ICE custody pending deportation proceedings.

And, of course, there’s this:

Leon first illegally entered the United States around Nov. 11, 2022 through the southern border and was released into the country by the Biden administration. He was issued a final order of removal by a judge on Feb. 27, 2025.

Who can be surprised that the Biden Administration turned this guy loose in the US. And, since there is already a final order of removal against him, he doesn’t need to be held in ICE custody; the government can simply ship him straight back to his native Ecuador.

My good friend and occasional blog pinch-hitter William Teach reported earlier today on the efforts of the Pyrite State to “audit the operation of joint intelligence centers where federal, state, and local agencies share information,” saying that “CalMatters investigations last year and last month found instances where local law enforcement agencies shared license plate information with ICE or the Border Patrol, violating state law.” California is trying to protect illegals!

I would hope that if the police/sheriff’s departments/prisons and jails don’t formally notify ICE when a criminal illegal is about to be released, due to the completion of sentences or releases on bail, patriotic officers would do so covertly.

Posted on by

Pennsylvania just became a little less safe

Well, of course.

Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro, a Democrat of course, opposes capital punishment, as do I, but the Governor of the Keystone State does not have arbitrary power to issue pardons or sentence commutations on his own. The most Mr Shapiro could do, as his predecessor Tom Wolf did before him, was to decline to sign any death warrants. But now, the Governor is happy that the state Supreme Court held that mandatory sentences of life without the possibility of parole for second-degree murder violate the state constitution.

We have previously noted this case.

Under Title 18§2502(b), murder of the second degree is a criminal homicide which is committed while defendant was engaged as a principal or accomplice in the perpetration of a felony. That’s pretty simple: the murderer is already committing a crime, so even if he wasn’t necessarily planning on killing someone, he was already on the scene, already planning on committing a crime, and prepared to kill if he thought it necessary.

Whether you’re the guy who fires the fatal shot or not, you’re still a really bad guy, and there’s no good reason for you to ever be put back out on the streets with decent people again.

The Philadelphia Inquirer’s story on the case can be found here. The opinion of the court can be found here. From the newspaper:

One of the lead lawyers in the case, Bret Grote of the Abolitionist Law Center, said the decision “will have profound ramifications” for the state’s criminal justice system, and that it “represents the culmination of decades of movement-building by incarcerated people and their families and communities.”

Ben Grote, huh? How unserious is Mr Grote? He couldn’t even be bothered to clean up his beta male beard before going before the state Supreme Court. But, alas! he won his case.

Image from main page of Abolitionist Law Center website, screencaptured on October 9, 2024.

Mr Grote works for the Abolitionist Law Center, which we have previously mentioned. What is not mentioned is that the Abolitionist Law Center is opposed to incarceration for anything, opposes all prison sentences, and would, if they could, free every murderer, every rapist, every drug dealer, and every assailant locked up in Pennsylvania’s prisons.

We challenge every point on the criminal punishment conveyor belt including policing, courts, jails and prisons, and various forms of legal supervision, as well as other aspects of the carceral machine.

Boldface in the original.

I might have ignored this story, especially since I was eating the very delicious lamb chops my wife made for supper, were it not for a very lovely lady on Twitter. Miss Long has in her Twitter bio a background illustration saying:

Roses are red,
No lives are blue,
Defund the Police,
Abolish ICE too.

Miss Long posted a series on Twitter, beginning here, praising the Abolitionist Law Center for its work. We already know that the Abolitionist Law Center wants to abolish prisons completely, to give dangerous predators some cockamamie “restorative justice” bovine feces.

Some people are beyond redemption, some people are simply evil and can never be trusted in society. Miss Long and the Abolitionist Law Center would see the gates of prisons thrown open and deranged killers like Wesley Cook let back out on the streets. They don’t even like, as noted above, “legal supervision,” which means probation and probation officers. Miss Long wants to see criminal illegal immigrants, some guilty of murder and rape, left free to terrorize innocent people.

I assume that Miss Long and the others believe that people are just innately good, and if the people we now see as bad guys are just left alone and shown sweetness and light, they’ll all be great people and credits to their communities.

Well, that’s just plain bovine feces. Some people simply need to be removed from society, for society to remain safe and secure for the people who are actually good citizens. I can’t even understand how some people can think differently.

Posted on by

You in a heap o’ trouble, boy! Hold them accountable

One would have thought that Abdimahat Bille Mohamed would have been in a heap o’ trouble when he was arrested on charges of having raped a child and sexually assaulted another woman in Hennepin County, Minnesota, but if one would have thought that, one would have been wrong. From Minnesota Public Radio, on December 9, 2025:

Mohamed pleaded guilty in April to state charges of criminal sexual conduct for the rape of the child victim and the sexual assault of another woman in 2024, but he avoided prison as part of a plea deal with the Hennepin County Attorney’s Office. County prosecutors also pledged not to prosecute him for a 2018 rape in which he was suspected.

Emphasis mine.

What? Prosecutors gave him a sweetheart plea deal which allowed him to escape prosecution for the rape of a minor? How the Hell does that work?

Oh, wait, I know how it works: the same source tells readers that Mr Mohamed is not an American citizen, but a foreign national “is living in the country as a legal permanent resident.” As you might guess with this being Minneapolis, he is Somali.

The local prosecutor tried to make excuses. From the Minnesota Star-Tribune:

Attorneys on both sides of the plea deal rejected the notion that Mohamed avoided prison because Minnesota’s judicial system is too willing to give violent criminals a pass.

The Justice Department comments are “a clear attempt to politicize a sexual assault prosecution to inflict further harm on our entire Somali community,” Hennepin County Attorney Mary Moriarty said in a statement. “Those who actually prosecute sexual assault cases every day know there are significant evidentiary hurdles to obtaining a prison sentence.”

Moriarty pointed out that her office “overcame the loss of critical witnesses to secure felony convictions against Mr. Mohamed earlier this year. Because our case was substantially weakened, we could not get the prison sentence we wanted.”

Thomas Beito, Mohamed’s attorney who negotiated the earlier plea agreement, told the Minnesota Star Tribune that “the prosecution did not give us anything out of the goodness of their hearts.” He said there were “serious problems with the credibility of the [teenage] victim.”

In the second case under the plea deal, he said, “we had a great consent defense. … We turned up a video of the act itself showing that this was consensual. That’s why [prosecutors] gave him what they did.”

Except, of course, the state had actual DNA evidence! From the United States Department of Justice, Office of Public Affairs:

Minor Victim 1 was forced—at gunpoint and in fear for her life—to perform oral sex on Mohamed. He then raped her vaginally. After the group sexually assaulted the girl, they let her out of the car. Minor Victim 1 ran, hid, and called the police. The police took Minor Victim 1 to the hospital, and she consented to a sexual assault exam. On September 17, 2024, after Mohamed’s DNA was taken in connection with another sexual assault, the Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension (BCA) laboratory matched Mohamed’s DNA to the swabs taken from Minor Victim 1’s body, excluding more than 99.99% of the general population.

“Minor Victim 1” was 15 years old when she was raped. Under Minnesota state law, the age of sexual consent is 16, but persons between the ages of 14 and 15 can consent to sex with someone not more than 24 months older, the old “Romeo and Juliet” exception which exists because people do not want to send high school juniors to prison for f(ornicating) with their sophomore girlfriends. Mr Mohamed, now 28, would have been 19 in 2017, four years older than his victim, so Mr Beito’s claim that there had been consent in the latter case would not have held water in the rape of a minor girl.

Miss Moriarty? She’s openly queer and was the county’s chief public defender before becoming prosecutor. She has a soft spot in her heart for criminals, refusing to try as adults two 15 and 17 year old brothers guilty of murder, saying “Our goal is to treat kids like kids,” and “We know that kids that age are impressionable, they are impulsive, they’re easily manipulated and subjected to peer pressure.”

Now the federal Department of Justice has gotten involved.

In September 2025, Mohamed committed another kidnapping and rape. On September 15, 2025, Mohamed picked up an adult woman (Victim 5) in Mankato, Minnesota. Victim 5 met Mohamed that night and Mohamed was supposed to take Victim 5 to get food and then bring her back home. Instead, after Victim 5 was in Mohamed’s car, he kidnapped her. After Victim 5 asked Mohamed to bring her home, Mohamed kept driving and said, “you are not going home.” Mohamed drove Victim 5 approximately 70 miles to a hotel in Bloomington, where he kept her for nearly a week. When Victim 5 tried to leave on the first day, Mohamed grabbed her by the hair, slapped her face, and told her she could not leave. Mohamed raped Victim 5 twice. Mohamed choked Victim 5 while he raped her. Victim 5 was able to text her sister, that “I think I’m getting kidnapped” and needed help, but Mohamed took her phone away. Victim 5’s sister contacted the police, who worked to find Victim 5. On September 21, 2025, Victim 5 jumped out of Mohamed’s car and told a nearby man, “Can you help me? I am being kidnapped.” The man called 911 and police responded to the scene. Police took Victim 5 to the hospital, where she consented to a sexual assault exam. The DNA profile obtained from Victim 5 matched to Mohamed’s known sample.

But Miss Moriarty wanted to treat Mr Mohamed leniently, to not lock him in a cage, and possibly see him shipped back to his [insert slang term for feces here]hole country. This is what happens when leftists try to shield criminals from the consequences of their crimes: innocent people get punished instead as those criminals stay out on the streets committing even more crimes. According to the New York Post, the distinguished Mr Mohamed committed his last (known) rape after the state had already released him in his sweetheart deals. Whoever the unnamed rape victim was, she received the punishment, she paid the penalty for Mr Mohamed’s previous crimes.

I wonder how we can hold Miss Moriarty accountable, because she is just as responsible for the ‘extra’ rapes Mr Mohamed committed as he is. She could have at least tried to have him locked up, but didn’t.

As for the local media cited, the Star-Tribune and Minnesota Public Radio, they had long stories, but neither of them noted that the state, and now the federal government had the DNA evidence, irrefutable evidence, concerning Mr Mohamed’s crimes. I wonder why that is.

Posted on by

Will Bunch wants yet another failed impeachment of President Trump He knows it would just be more political theater, but his #TrumpDerangementSyndrome overrides any political sense he has

We noted on Monday The Philadelphia Inquirer’s far-left columnist Will Bunch’s skeet telling us that, assuming the Democrats take control of the House of Representatives following the elections this coming November, that President Trump will ‘inevitably’ be impeached. It took longer on Tuesday for Mr Bunch’s column to be published than I had guessed, 11:52 AM EDT, but finally it came out. It was the same laundry list of ‘high crimes and misdemeanors’ that the denizens of Bluesky always parrot, but really nothing new.

The ‘high crimes and misdemeanors,’ as the columnist listed them:

  • The pardon mess, as described above. Trump’s outrageous abuse of his clemency pen has proved America’s founders made a big mistake in granting such absolute power to just one man. Congressional hearings can and should spur pardon reform, but could also expose evidence that could be used in a Trump impeachment case.

The pardon power is explicitly listed in the Constitution, and Congress cannot simply change it.

  • Cryptogate. Presidents used to put their assets in a blind trust, as Jimmy Carter famously did with his peanut farm. Trump, on the other hand, keeps doing deals and has seen his net worth roughly triple to more than $6 billion in just the first year of his second term. There are many tentacles to what I called Cryptogate with this handy guide I published last spring. Trump’s pump-and-dump meme coin launched on inauguration weekend seems a high crime unto itself.

I am amused that Mr Bunch cited an opinion article, his own opinion article, to declare something a “high crime”. But if making money while in public office is a high crime or misdemeanor, the members of Congress, many of whom have become far wealthier while in office themselves, far wealthier than their congressional salaries would support, would be hanging themselves with such a charge.

  • War crimes. The war in Iran is illegal, period. The president did not seek congressional approval to start dropping bombs up and down the Persian Gulf as required by both the U.S. Constitution and the 1973 War Powers Act. It’s also an illegal, aggressive war under international law. Ditto his regime-change assault on Venezuela, which killed more than 100 people. Ditto his regime’s unending lethal attacks on boats in the Caribbean and the Pacific, which have no legal basis. Congress can reassert its authority by impeaching Trump.

The distinguished columnist apparently does not understand the War Powers Resolution of 1973 that he claims was violated because the “president did not seek congressional approval to start dropping bombs up and down the Persian Gulf”. As we pointed out here, under the War Powers Resolution of 1973 (50 USC §1541-1550), the President is required to notify the Speaker of the House of Representatives and he President pro tempore of the Senate within 48 hours after “any case in which United States Armed Forces are introduced into hostilities or into situations where imminent involvement in hostilities is clearly indicated by the circumstances”, which Mr Trump did. Prior notification is not required under the law.[1]§1543(a)(3)

  • Abuse of power in the justice system. The flip side of Trump’s pardons has been the unprecedented attempt to use the Justice Department to go after the president’s perceived enemies, from former FBI chief James Comey to Federal Reserve chairman Jerome Powell. These investigations, directly urged on by Trump in Truth Social posts, have repeatedly failed to pass muster with judges or grand juries, but that doesn’t erase the stain of such clearly wrongful prosecutions.

Would this be the same Justice Department which pursued mostly working-class people for the January 6th Capitol kerfuffle, charging the vast majority with four crimes[2]The standard four charges with which the majority were charged: 18 U.S.C. § 1752(a)(1) – Knowingly Entering or Remaining in any Restricted Building or Grounds Without Lawful Authority. If there … Continue reading but allowing them to plead down to a single count of Parading, Demonstrating, or Picketing in a Capitol Building, for which most received little or no time in jail, and a fine, using the bullying power of the federal government against people who could not afford to fight the charges.

Would that be the same Department of Justice which was surveilling traditionalist Catholics, based almost entirely on an assessment from the hard-left Southern Poverty Law Center? Would that be the same Department of Justice whose FBI Director, Christopher Wray, lied to Congress about the extent of the program?

Would that be the same Justice Department which constantly went after Mr Trump’s friends and attorneys?

Despite the constant pleas of his base to “Lock her up,” in reference to Hillary Clinton, during his first term, President Trump had no such effort made. The tactic of going after the previous Administration’s people started under President Biden and Attorney General Merrick Garland. Whatever aggression is being made to go after Mr Trump’s enemies falls in the category of “What comes around, goes around.”

The columnist actually admitted that it was highly unlikely that there would be the 67 votes in the Senate necessary to actually remove the President from office; he’s actually asking for just more political theater, hoping it damages a President who can’t even run again.

Nothing is more central to that than reestablishing that high crimes and misdemeanors against the Constitution have consequences — including the stain of impeachment.

This is a laughing out loud moment, because not one, not two, but three failed impeachments against a single President will be no stain at all, and only make a mockery of impeachment itself, a laughable display of failed partisanship because the Democrats hate Mr Trump and his policies. The “stain” of two previous failed impeachments didn’t prevent 77,302,580 Americans from voting Mr Trump back into office! Mr Bunch ought to be smart enough to realize that, but his #TrumpDerangementSyndrome simply overwhelms any good sense he might have.

References

References
↑1 §1543(a)(3)
↑2 The standard four charges with which the majority were charged:

  • 18 U.S.C. § 1752(a)(1) – Knowingly Entering or Remaining in any Restricted Building or Grounds Without Lawful Authority. If there is no accusation of harming anyone or carrying a deadly weapon, the maximum punishment under (b)(2) is a fine under this title or imprisonment for not more than one year, or both, in any other case.
  • 18 U.S.C. § 1752(a)(2) – Disorderly and Disruptive Conduct in a Restricted Building or Grounds. If there is no accusation of harming anyone or carrying a deadly weapon, the maximum punishment under (b)(2) is a fine under this title or imprisonment for not more than one year, or both, in any other case.
  • 40 U.S.C. § 5104(e)(2)(D) – Disorderly Conduct in a Capitol Building: utter loud, threatening, or abusive language, or engage in disorderly or disruptive conduct, at any place in the Grounds or in any of the Capitol Buildings with the intent to impede, disrupt, or disturb the orderly conduct of a session of Congress or either House of Congress, or the orderly conduct in that building of a hearing before, or any deliberations of, a committee of Congress or either House of Congress; The penalty for violating 40 U.S.C. §5104(e)(2) is a misdemeanor conviction punishable by a maximum fine of $5,000 fine or up to six months in prison, or both.
  • 40 U.S.C. § 5104(e)(2)(G) – Parading, Demonstrating, or Picketing in a Capitol Building; The penalty for violating 40 U.S.C. §5104(e)(2) is a misdemeanor conviction punishable by a maximum fine of $5,000 or up to six months in prison, or both.