Connect with us

Everything

When will activist judges be satisfied? Never

Published

on

Federal Judge Nelva Gonzalez Ramos, in a stunning display of naked judicial activism, has again struck down a Texas law requiring proper identification to vote, even though this law had addressed the concerns expressed by the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals toward its predecessor. Ramos wrote that the law “imposes burdens disproportionately on blacks and Latinos.”

Wow. What a load of horse manure.

How is anything ever more difficult for blacks and Latinos than it is for white people or anyone else? Well, the only answer for that is, of course, that Judge Ramos sees these people as less capable than whites or Asians. If a requirement that is uniformly applied is somehow seen as discriminatory against one group or another, it is because those seeing the discrimination see those being “discriminated” against as less capable.

They aren’t. Blacks and Latinos are just as capable as anyone else of raising families, having a job, paying their bills, voting, and getting an ID. Leftists constantly tell us they are not, and that voter ID is therefore racist. Seems to me the fact that the Leftists see blacks and Latinos as less capable of getting an ID is racist.

The Democratic National Convention was held last year. Guess what you needed to get in? An ID. You have to have proper ID to buy alcohol, drive a car, get a job, or fly on an airplane. Are all these activities racist? The stupid people of the world will immediately try to argue these are not rights, but privileges.

Ok smart people: You have to have an ID to buy a gun, which is a RIGHT guaranteed by the Constitution. Are we going to start selling guns to people without ID now? No, because Leftists don’t want that done at all, much less without ID. By Leftist logic though, requiring ID to buy a gun is racist.

A few years ago I was working as a process server and private investigator. I was delivering court documents to the courthouse and there was a black man in the clerk’s office, trying to get some paperwork done. He needed a notary and couldn’t afford a lawyer. I happened to be a notary so I had him follow me down to my truck after I filed my paperwork, just so I could help him out free of charge.

He was obviously disabled and blind in one eye. I found out he was on disability. He was black, poor, disabled. The guy had nothing. He was a perfect example of what the Left claims Voter ID laws discriminate against. Guess what he DID have? If you said “an ID” you’d be correct. I wouldn’t be able to notarize anything for him without one. He wouldn’t be able to DO anything without an ID. That’s life in America today. The idea that he wouldn’t be able to get an ID is complete fantasy.

There’s only one logical reason liberals in general and the Democratic Party in particular make these bogus claims of racism when it comes to voter ID: they want to be able to commit voter fraud.

They want illegals to vote. They want volunteers to go vote claiming to be people they know are dead. They want to be able to go and vote on behalf of people they don’t think will show up.

When I worked at a polling station a few years ago before Texas had voter ID, a number of people were not able to vote because they “had already voted.” They were understandably angry. They showed us ID voluntarily, proving they were who they said they were. Unfortunately, since it wasn’t required, other people had come before them, claiming to be them and voting in their stead.

How do I know they were voting for Democrats? Who is doing the complaining about voter ID? Sure, plenty of Republicans would be against voter ID if they thought they could benefit from it, but so far they haven’t.

It’s funny to me how the American Left is constantly railing about “the integrity of our democracy” etc when it comes to talking about the electoral college verses the popular vote, but they aren’t the least bit interested in making sure that popular vote has integrity through a simple thing like making sure voters are who they say they are, and that they are American citizens who have the right to vote in our elections. No, illegal aliens, and even legal immigrant non-citizens do NOT have a right to vote in our elections.

The argument over Voter ID really is one of the silliest we’ve seen, and that is saying something in this day in age. Blacks and Latinos are just as capable as anyone else of getting an ID. To say otherwise is racist. So is the American Left racist or are they simply interested in committing the crime of voter fraud on a massive scale? Those are the only two options.

I almost feel silly writing this article, since this is all so obvious. I should have written this under the pen name “Captain Obvious.” And yet, the Left will make their ridiculous arguments, and you and I, dear reader, can just sit back, shake our heads, and mock the transparency of their fraud.

Judge Ramos is continuing the work of the 9th and 4th Circuits, as well as the lunatic judge in Hawaii who struck down President Trump’s travel ban even after it was upheld by the Supreme Court, in completely destroying what’s left of the credibility American judiciary. A lawyer I have close ties to once told me that all judges rule based on the law, not personal ideology. My eyes nearly rolled out of my head. This is a prime example of judicial activism and it has to stop.

Congress needs to start impeaching these out of control judges and get us back to the rule of law. I fear that will never happen though, as the current congress can’t even get a repeal of Obamacare done with both houses of Congress under their control as well as a Republican in the White House. This would be an obvious place to start, since the integrity of our elections should be important to everyone… except for those who don’t want integrity in our elections, of course.

 

Benjamin Wilhelm served as a commissioned officer in the United States military for 10 years, serving one combat tour in Afghanistan. He is a recipient of the Bronze Star and Combat Action Badge among other military awards. Ben has worked in a variety of private sector businesses both large and small. He is a former military and civilian firearms instructor and an advocate for veterans issues. Ben is a strict Constitutionalist who sees the Federal government as an out of control leviathan, and the federal debt as a burden that will break the country. Ben is a divorced father of two boys.

Entertainment and Sports

LeVar Burton is being attacked by people thinking he’s LaVar Ball. Brent Spiner’s response is hilarious.

Published

on

LeVar Burton is being attacked by people thinking hes LaVar Ball Brent Spiners response is hilarious

LaVar Ball wasn’t impressed with President Trump’s efforts to get his son released from a Chinese prison for shoplifting. His reactions have prompted many Trump supporters to go after him as ungracious, hypocritical, and much worse.

Unfortunately, many of these attacks are being directed towards actor LeVar Burton. The Reading Rainbow host who rose to prominence after Roots and solidified his status as a Hollywood icon while playing Geordi La Forge on Star Trek: The Next Generation has a name similar to Ball’s and is also black. Responses to the attacks from other Twitter users has been brutal, but Burton has remained calm. His lone response:

Former colleague Brent Spiner, who played Data on ST:TNG, offered some advice to his friend.

“If you cared about our President, you’d change your name.”

I don’t normally applaud when leftist Hollywood gets political, but this one was too good to pass.

Source: Twitter

Continue Reading

Guns and Crime

Michael Flynn’s lawyers break contact with White House lawyers

Published

on

Michael Flynns lawyers break contact with White House lawyers

The legal team for former White House National Security Adviser Michael Flynn have stopped sharing information about special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation into Russian tampering in the 2016 election. This could be a blow for the President and some who are close to him if information gleaned from Flynn points to the Trump campaign, his transition team, or his administration itself.

The NY Times is reporting that four anonymous sources have said the agreement between the two legal teams has been ended from Flynn’s side. It is normal for teams with parallel interests to share information, but when there becomes a conflict of interest, any such sharing is halted. This leaves two likely possibilities: either Flynn is negotiating a deal to cooperate with the investigation or they’re cooperating already.

If it’s the former, there’s a chance the information sharing could be renewed if no deal is struck

Flynn is at the heart of the investigation. It was his actions and the White House’s reactions before and after he resigned that prompted the investigation in the first place. Flynn had lied on more than one occasions about financial interactions he’d had with Russian and Turkish interests. This made him vulnerable to blackmail, according to former acting attorney general Sally Q. Yates. After Flynn resigned, the President had a one-on-one meeting with then-FBI Director James Comey and allegedly asked him to stop pursuing Flynn. Comey was fired by the President, then leaked a memo detailing the meeting regarding Flynn.

Outcry from many in DC and in the media prompted Mueller’s appointment. Since then, he charged Paul Manafort, Rick Gates, and George Papadopoulos. Charging or cutting a deal with Flynn would likely be the step prior to pursuing people directly associated with the President.

Further Reading

Flynn moving to cooperate with Mueller in Russia probe: report | TheHill

http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/361687-flynn-moving-to-cooperate-with-mueller-in-russia-probe-reportThe report comes after NBC News on Wednesday reported that Mueller is looking to question Bijan Kian, an associate of Flynn. Previous reports have suggested that the special counsel already has enough evidence to indict Flynn and his son, who also worked for Trump’s campaign.

Trump’s legal team has insisted recently that Mueller’s probe will end in the coming months, though legal experts have said the investigation is likely to drag on.

Continue Reading

News

After nearly 4 decades of crimes against his people, Robert Mugabe granted immunity, military protection

Published

on

After nearly 4 decades of crimes against his people Robert Mugabe granted immunity military protecti

In what may be the best deal ever struck by a dictator forcibly removed by the military and despised by a majority of his people, Zimbabwe’s former president Robert Mugabe has been granted full immunity, a “generous pension,” and military protection so he can stay in his country without fear that any of the millions of people he persecuted will be able to seek their vengeance.

Zimbabwe grants Robert Mugabe immunity from prosecution

Mugabe, who ruled Zimbabwe with an iron fist for 37 years, resigned on Tuesday, hours after parliament launched proceedings to impeach him. He had refused to leave office during eight days of uncertainty that began with a military takeover.

Emmerson Mnangagwa, the former vice-president sacked by Mugabe this month, is to be sworn in as president on Friday.

My Take

Despite complaints from the people, this is the smart move. If they allow him to leave, they have no control over him or the influence that he continues to wield at home and abroad. If they jail him, kill him, or otherwise make him face prosecution, he would be at best a distraction and at worst a martyr. This move allows them to move forward the fastest which is what former Vice President Emmerson Mnangagwa and his military allies want.

Continue Reading

NOQ Report Daily

Advertisement

Facebook

Twitter

Advertisement

Trending

Copyright © 2017 NOQ Report.