Another Dead Black Man and No Indictment

After the evens in Ferguson and the blatant manipulation of the grand jury process to basically insure that no indictment would be handed down, it's stunning to see the same apparent result happen in New York City where police who basically strangled to death Eric Garner, a 43-year-old asthmatic, will faces no charges whatsoever - not even involuntary manslaughter.  No charges at all.  It's sadly part of a long trend where police avoid the charges that would be handed against the rest of us.  And for many blacks, it is yet further proof that their lives mean nothing in America's justice system.  A column in the Washington Post looks at this latest grand jury fiasco.  Here are highlights:

After a New York grand jury failed to indict a police officer in the death of a Staten Island man, protesters hit the streets of Manhattan and at least seven other U.S. cities. There were no reports by early morning Thursday of significant violence, in contrast to the looting and arson that broke out Nov. 24 in Ferguson, Mo., after a grand jury there declined to indict Darren Wilson, the officer who fatally shot unarmed teen Michael Brown on Aug. 9.

A wave of protests erupted from Manhattan to Oakland, Calif. Thousands in New York marched in support of Eric Garner, a 43-year-old asthmatic who died after being put in a chokehold by officer Daniel Pantaleo on July 17.

They shut down the Lincoln Tunnel. They shut down the West Side Highway. They shut down the Brooklyn Bridge, where officers threatened them with arrest if they did not move as a helicopter hovered above.

And they chanted the slogan heard around the country after Brown was killed by Wilson in Ferguson — “Hands up, don’t shoot” — as well as what may have been Garner’s last words: “I can’t breathe.”
“The lives of black young men, black children, they matter,” protester Florence Johnson told CBS at Times Square.

Garner, a father of six and grandfather of two, died July 17 after Officer Daniel Pantaleo placed him in what appeared to be a chokehold during an arrest that was recorded on videos that have been widely seen and have contributed to the public anger.

The grand jury decision that prompted Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. to announce the opening of a federal civil rights investigation.

President Obama, speaking earlier at an event in Washington, declined to comment specifically about the Staten Island case, referring instead to his plans to promote better relations between police and those they serve.
“I came down here because I’m disgusted about what happened,” said Edward Collins, a 19-year-old protester, told the San Francisco Chronicle. “It’s beyond a race thing to me. No matter what race you are, no one has the right to murder you.”

“Black lives do not matter in this system,” Dean Steed, one of the organizers of about 150 protesters in Atlanta, told the Atlanta Journal-Constitution. “And we’re out here for black lives.”

We are certainly providing America's enemies with plenty of propaganda to throw back when America tries to criticize human rights abuses in other countries.  I suspect that Vladimir Putin has a huge smile on his face right now. 

Federal Recognition of Gay Marriage Now Matches Public Opinion

Over the weekend the federal government announced that it was recognizing same-sex marriages in six additional states: Alaska, Arizona, Idaho, North Carolina, West Virginia and Wyoming.  For couples in those state, this means access to marriage benefits previously denied to them.  Just as importantly, it continues the process of making same sex marriage "normal" and an everyday occurrence, something slowly but surely undercuts the Christofascists' anti-gay propaganda and will put increased pressure on the Republican Party to jettison these foul members of the GOP base over time.  A piece in The Atlantic looks at this federal recognition and how it increasingly matches public opinion.  Here are highlights:

Now, gay couples in Alaska, Arizona, Idaho, North Carolina, West Virginia and Wyoming eligible for a variety of federal benefits such as Social Security for widowers or the ability to file a joint income tax return—a move that puts the government more in tune with popular opinion.

"With each new state where same-sex marriages are legally recognized, our nation moves closer to achieving of full equality for all Americans," said Attorney General Eric Holder. "We are acting as quickly as possible with agencies throughout the government to ensure that same-sex married couples in these states receive the fullest array of benefits allowable under federal law."

Last week, Holder issued a similar announcement about seven other states: Colorado, Indiana, Nevada, Oklahoma, Utah, Virginia and Wisconsin. With Saturday’s announcement, the federal government recognizes same-sex couples in 32 states and the District of Columbia. The two announcements come after the Supreme Court declined to hear appeals in cases that made gay marriage legal in each of these states.

Coincidentally, with the addition of the six states today, now about 39 percent of Americans (roughly 120 million people) live in states where same-sex marriage is not federally recognized—which is the same as the percentage of Americans who oppose it, according to Pew. In other words, the number of Americans who don't oppose same-sex marriage is roughly the same as the number of Americans who live in states where it's federally recognized.

Pat Robertson: Impeach Eric Holder for ‘Elevating’ Sodomy Above Religious Freedom

Local embarrassment, Pat Robertson, has yet again shot off his mouth and made himself and the Hampton Roads region - the Norfolk regional airport has a huge leering image of Robertson in a paid advertisement for Regent University in one of the concourses - look like idiots.  Robertson's latest episode of diarrhea of the mouth comes in the wake of U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder's statement that state attorneys general are not obligated to defend unconstitutional gay marriage bans.  Robertson, like most Christofascists, would prefer that attorneys general lie to the courts and misrepresent established case law.  Right Wing Watch looks at Robertson's all too common batshitery:

Pat Robertson today endorsed a campaign to impeach Eric Holder because of the attorney general’s stance on marriage equality.

“I really think the House should impeach Holder,” the 700 Club host said. “There should be a move of impeachment in the House and he should resign.”

“What we’re seeing now more and more is the rights of homosexuals, the practice of homosexuality, sodomy, consensual sodomy, is being raised and elevated above the rights of religious believers and that is terrible,” he said, warning that gay rights is trampling on the First Amendment.

 

U. S. Attorney General Backs State Attorney Generals Who Refuse to Defend Marriage Bans

Not to beat the issue to death, but ethical state attorneys general are correct to refuse to defend anti-gay marriage bans that they deem to be unconstitutional under the United States Constitution.  Which is why U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder has come out to back the state attorneys general, including Virginia Attorney General Mark Herring, who have made the decision not to defend anti-gay animus motivated state same sex marriage bans.  It is those who defends such unconstitutional laws and amendments - just as past Virginia attorney generals defended Jim Crow laws and bans on interracial marriage - who are on the wrong side of the law and on the wrong side of history.  Here are excerpts from a piece in the New York Times on Holder's pronouncement:

Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. on Monday injected the Obama administration into the emotional and politicized debate over the future of state same-sex marriage bans, declaring in an interview that state attorneys general are not obligated to defend laws that they believe are discriminatory.

Mr. Holder was careful not to encourage his state counterparts to disavow their own laws, but said that officials who have carefully studied bans on gay marriage could refuse to defend them.  Six state attorneys general — all Democrats — have refused to defend bans on same-sex marriage, prompting criticism from Republicans who say they have a duty to stand behind their state laws, even if they do not agree with them.

It is highly unusual for the United States attorney general to advise his state counterparts on how and when to refuse to defend state laws. But Mr. Holder said when laws touch on core constitutional issues like equal protection, an attorney general should apply the highest level of scrutiny before reaching a decision on whether to defend it. He said the decision should never be political or based on policy objections.

“Engaging in that process and making that determination is something that’s appropriate for an attorney general to do,” Mr. Holder said.  As an example, Mr. Holder cited the landmark Brown v. Board of Education case, which forced public school integration in 1954.  “If I were attorney general in Kansas in 1953, I would not have defended a Kansas statute that put in place separate-but-equal facilities,” Mr. Holder said.

The nation’s first black attorney general, Mr. Holder has said he views today’s gay-rights campaigns as a continuation of the civil rights movement that won rights for black Americans in the 1950s and ’60s. He has called gay rights one of “the defining civil rights challenges of our time.”

Mr. Holder is scheduled to address the National Association of Attorneys General at a conference on Tuesday, but reports of his comments drew immediate criticism from the president of the bipartisan group.

“It really isn’t his job to give us advice on defending our constitutions any more than it’s our role to give him advice on how to do his job,” said Attorney General J. B. Van Hollen of Wisconsin, a Republican. “We are the ultimate defenders of our state constitutions.”

[I]n Nevada, Oregon, Pennsylvania and Virginia, state attorneys general have refused to defend bans on same-sex marriage. Attorneys general in California and Illinois similarly refused to defend bans that were later overturned.

“The answers to these questions are crystal clear,” said Gary Buseck, legal director of Gay and Lesbian Advocates and Defenders. “Attorneys general can’t close their eyes to something that’s blatantly unconstitutional. They’re not supposed to defend the laws at all costs.”

Sadly, too many Republican attorneys general prefer to violate their duty of candor and honest to the courts and instead pander to the religious extremists and hate groups of the GOP base.  It is they, not the six attorneys general who have refused to defend marriage bans, who are ethically and in my view morally challenged. 

 

Justice Department will Extend More Rights to Married Same Sex Couples

In yet another move to bring married same sex couples to the same level in legal rights as heterosexual couples, Attorney General Eric Holder has announced that  the Department of Justice will be extending additional federal rights to married same sex couples.  The move is consistent with legal equality for all married couples but will not doubt further rankle the hate merchants of the Christofacists and trigger batshitery from their political whores in the Republican Party.  The Washington Blade looks at this development. Here are excerpts:

[T]he Justice Department will issue a memorandum on Monday to outline the changes, which will bring the department into compliance with the Supreme Court’s decision against the Defense of Marriage Act.

Holder . . . . [made] the announcement in the same speech in which he . . . .[reflected] on the 50th anniversary of Martin Luther King, Jr.’s “I Have a Dream” speech and passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

“And yet, as all-important as the fight against racial discrimination was then, and remains today, know this: my commitment to confronting discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity runs just as deep,”  . . . . “Just like during the civil rights movement of the 1960s, the stakes involved in this generation’s struggle for LGBT equality could not be higher.”

Each of the changes is related to the way the Justice Department handles recognition of married same-sex couples. They range from rights in civil and criminal cases, rights as inmates and access to benefits programs:

• The Justice Department will recognize that same-sex spouses of individuals involved in civil and criminal cases have the same legal rights as straight married couples, including the right to decline to give testimony that might incriminate a spouse.
This new rule applies in non-marriage equality states. The government won’t object to couples in same-sex marriages invoking this right if they marry in another state, but their current jurisdiction doesn’t recognize their union.

• In bankruptcy cases, the U.S. Trustee Program will take the position that same-sex married couples should be treated in the same manner as opposite-sex married couples. Consequently, same-sex married couples will be eligible to file for bankruptcy jointly; certain debts to same-sex spouses or former spouses will be excepted from discharge; and domestic support obligations should include debts, including alimony, owed to a former same-sex spouse.

• Federal inmates in same-sex marriages will be entitled to the same rights and privileges as inmates in opposite-sex marriages. These rights include spousal visitation; inmate furloughs to be present during a crisis involving a spouse; escorted trips to attend a spouse’s funeral; correspondence with a spouse; and compassionate release or reduction in sentence if an inmate’s spouse is incapacitated.

• The Justice Department will recognize same-sex couples for the purposes of a number of benefits programs it administers, such as the Radiation Exposure Compensation Program and the September 11th Victim Compensation Fund.

Also among these programs is the Public Safety Officers’ Benefits Program, which provides death benefits to surviving spouses of public safety officers, such as law enforcement officers and firefighters, who suffer catastrophic or fatal injuries while on duty.

The Justice Department has coordinated the effort across the Obama administration to ensure married same-sex couples have the same rights and benefits under federal law as opposite sex couples in the wake of the DOMA decision. The various departments and agencies announced changes in policies since that time.

The New York Times has coverage here.  The Christofascist goal to keep LGBT citizens inferior under the law is slowly but steadily being destroyed.  Its total destruction cannot come soon enough, especially in anti-gay states like Virginia.

GOP Congressman Darrell Isa's Own Questionable Background

Among the GOP demagogues seeking to manufacture a presidential crisis out of virtually nothing  is GOP Congressman Darrell Isa.  Like most of today's GOP base and its Christofascists puppeteers, Isa puts on a false air of piety and feigned outrage over claims that the facts do not even support.  What the media needs to actually be reporting about is Isa's own questionable past that suggests that he has far more things to answer for than Barack Obama.  Here are highlights from NPR: 

Issa made his fortune building and selling Viper car alarms. He is the wealthiest member of Congress, worth as much as $450 million. In fact, it's Issa's voice on the popular alarm's signature warning to would-be thieves: "Protected by Viper. Stand back."

What's less well known is how Issa got into car alarms in the first place.

"For years I used to tell everyone that I went into it because my brother was a car thief. Then they found out when I ran for office my brother did spend time in prison as a car thief, and it ruined the whole joke I'd had for 20 years in business," Issa said during an interview with WhoRunsGov.
Issa himself was accused several times of auto theft. In the early 1970s, he and his brother were arrested after police suspected them of stealing a Maserati sports car from a dealership in Cleveland. Issa says the police mistook his identity, and the charges were later dismissed.

Another time, Issa was arrested and eventually pleaded guilty to carrying a concealed weapon. Police found a handgun and a tear-gas gun — plus ammunition for both — in Issa's glove compartment.

Issa had a warehouse full of electronics that, one night in 1982, caught fire. Investigators later found "suspicious burn patterns," Lizza reported, and found that Issa had done some odd things.
A co-worker claimed that before the fire, Issa had put important electronic prototypes in a fireproof box, and that he'd removed the business's computer and financial files from the building. Investigators also found that less than three weeks before the blaze, Issa had increased the company's fire insurance from $100,000 to more than $400,000.

"So you add the more than quadrupling of the insurance along with the taking the computer and putting the other stuff in a fireproof box, and you can see why both the arson investigators and the insurance investigators pointed a finger, you know, at Issa after this fire," said Lizza.

Issa said he had nothing to do with the fire, but the insurance company refused to pay the claim. The two later settled out of court.

It was in part because of these allegations that Issa lost his Senate bid in 1998. He went on to win his House seat, he worked to recall the governor of California, and now he chairs the powerful House Oversight and Government Reform Committee.

Of anyone, Isa ought to know the dangers of smearing others based on sketchy facts and inuendo.  But, given the depravity of today's GOP base, Isa ignores such an approach.