" . “I don’t have a problem with people who think they’re doing the right thing. I have a problem with people who are doing the wrong thing, and they know it.”.."
No, sorry. Wrong. Terrible. We should have no more tolerance for someone doing wrong under a belief of being right than someone knowingly doing wrong. In fact, you might say that the man committing injustices without a consciousness of that evil (or worse, believing it is good) is the worst problem of all because they have either lost all moral sense or they are such an ideologue that evil has become their good. In either case they will commit any manner of evil without qualm or compunction. These are the kulangeta that Matthew Crawford writes about, who must be pushed off the iceberg into the ocean.
Centralization of Power is always bad. The FBI belongs to the same department that would prosecute it eliminating an sense of checks and balances. Why would any Attorney General not use one to protect the other to achieve their political goals in the name of the King?
Congress makes Federal Law. The President approves it. The Attorney General supposedly enforces it. As long as that enforcement is inside Washington it will be partial and political and protect the other branches that feed it.
Enforcement of law should not be at the whim of the executive as it is in the federal government. It is not in the States where the AG is separately elected. It is not in the counties and municipalities with elected prosecutors and district attorneys.
The U.S. attorney general and federal prosecutors should be appointed by and serve at the will of the elected attorneys general of the states. This would actually put the prosecutorial power of the United States in the hands of these United States as opposed to the Federal Empire. A corrupt law enforcement agency like the FBI would be much less likely to get immunity from the laws they are breaking. Putting all prosecutorial powers in the hands of the states also does much to defang the administrative state that currently makes, adjudicates and punishes its own law.
Ponder that.
Yes some AGs are Soros stooges. Have to deal with that separately.
Maybe Mark has an opinion on this, but I wonder just how many federal laws are absolutely necessary? I.e., what laws absolutely must exist at a minimum on the federal level? Do we need this gargantuan federal criminal code?
A valid but also separate concern. Nobody knows how many criminal punishments are codified in federal law. It's greater than 30,000 felonies. To the government, that is a feature not a bug. There are too many laws to count much less understand but if you break one the government will be there to punish you...unless you're politically well connected.
"There's no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws." [Ayn Rand]
Gotta believe this had to "hurt" some to blog about this Mark. Being a dedicated, law enforcement professional you epitomize what the FBI stood for. Rank and file. Politicized law enforcement is in fact "tyranny" no matter how small or how big.
Has an agency that could spare a dozen agents to investigate how a NASCAR garage door pull rope was knotted but couldn't find the time to do anything with Hunter Biden's stupendously incriminating laptop lost its way? Tough call.
"FBI Used Terrorism Laws to Investigate 'Dozens' of 'Concerned Parents' Who Attended School Board Meetings", an article by Victoria Taft, published by PJ Media this afternoon.
Yes, and Zerohedge carried a story yesterday evening. The idea is that Garland may have committed perjury during testimony to Congress. May be just my pipe dream, but grounds for impeachment after Election 2022? A number of cabinet heads SHOULD be in danger.
" . “I don’t have a problem with people who think they’re doing the right thing. I have a problem with people who are doing the wrong thing, and they know it.”.."
No, sorry. Wrong. Terrible. We should have no more tolerance for someone doing wrong under a belief of being right than someone knowingly doing wrong. In fact, you might say that the man committing injustices without a consciousness of that evil (or worse, believing it is good) is the worst problem of all because they have either lost all moral sense or they are such an ideologue that evil has become their good. In either case they will commit any manner of evil without qualm or compunction. These are the kulangeta that Matthew Crawford writes about, who must be pushed off the iceberg into the ocean.
Centralization of Power is always bad. The FBI belongs to the same department that would prosecute it eliminating an sense of checks and balances. Why would any Attorney General not use one to protect the other to achieve their political goals in the name of the King?
Congress makes Federal Law. The President approves it. The Attorney General supposedly enforces it. As long as that enforcement is inside Washington it will be partial and political and protect the other branches that feed it.
Enforcement of law should not be at the whim of the executive as it is in the federal government. It is not in the States where the AG is separately elected. It is not in the counties and municipalities with elected prosecutors and district attorneys.
The U.S. attorney general and federal prosecutors should be appointed by and serve at the will of the elected attorneys general of the states. This would actually put the prosecutorial power of the United States in the hands of these United States as opposed to the Federal Empire. A corrupt law enforcement agency like the FBI would be much less likely to get immunity from the laws they are breaking. Putting all prosecutorial powers in the hands of the states also does much to defang the administrative state that currently makes, adjudicates and punishes its own law.
Ponder that.
Yes some AGs are Soros stooges. Have to deal with that separately.
Maybe Mark has an opinion on this, but I wonder just how many federal laws are absolutely necessary? I.e., what laws absolutely must exist at a minimum on the federal level? Do we need this gargantuan federal criminal code?
A valid but also separate concern. Nobody knows how many criminal punishments are codified in federal law. It's greater than 30,000 felonies. To the government, that is a feature not a bug. There are too many laws to count much less understand but if you break one the government will be there to punish you...unless you're politically well connected.
"There's no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws." [Ayn Rand]
Re: Ham Sandwich Nation [Glenn Reynolds]
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2203713
The FBI, like so many other government agencies, will remain corrupt until there is serious punishment of criminal behavior.
Don't see it happening.
Gotta believe this had to "hurt" some to blog about this Mark. Being a dedicated, law enforcement professional you epitomize what the FBI stood for. Rank and file. Politicized law enforcement is in fact "tyranny" no matter how small or how big.
Nowadays it seems like a long time ago.
Has an agency that could spare a dozen agents to investigate how a NASCAR garage door pull rope was knotted but couldn't find the time to do anything with Hunter Biden's stupendously incriminating laptop lost its way? Tough call.
"FBI Used Terrorism Laws to Investigate 'Dozens' of 'Concerned Parents' Who Attended School Board Meetings", an article by Victoria Taft, published by PJ Media this afternoon.
https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/victoria-taft/2022/05/12/fbi-used-terrorism-laws-to-investigate-dozens-of-concerned-parents-who-attended-school-board-meetings-n1597389
The article links to a letter sent by Representatives Jim Jordan and Mike Johnson (House Judiciary Committee) to Merrick Garland on May 11.
Yes, and Zerohedge carried a story yesterday evening. The idea is that Garland may have committed perjury during testimony to Congress. May be just my pipe dream, but grounds for impeachment after Election 2022? A number of cabinet heads SHOULD be in danger.
I saw a sign on the back of a bus today:
Report Hate Crimes
1-800-CALL-FBI
Time to turn in and harass some deplorable wrong thinkers
We should report Strzock and Comey for their hate crime against the Donald.
Yes, I meant to add that and forgot.