Based on what the Biden administration is doing, regarding the border wall and their immigration policy changes, Texans are going to suffer safety-wise and economically, while all other state resources and services will be strained as well.
So, what is Texas to do?
Do Texans have to sit back and accept what the federal government is imposing on them, or can they defend themselves?
Can Texans continue to build the wall that’s located in their own state?
Can Texans defend themselves by deploying their own border guards?
Can Texans refuse to allow a federal presence in their state, like federal troops were not allowed in Seattle, Portland, and elsewhere?
I wonder if these are questions that Texas’ Governor (Greg Abbott) and Attorney General (Ken Paxton) have been considering?
Because it may be time for the state of Texas to go “maverick.”
It may be time for Texas to stand-up and tell the federal government that they’re not going to put up with their foolishness and disregard for the welfare of the people in their state any longer.
It may be time for Texas to tell the radical democrats back in Washington D.C. to go to hell, and “don’t mess with Texas!”
If you’re not already “following” me and you liked my blog(s) today, please choose to “follow” me, which will keep you up to date on all of my latest posts, and/or leave me a comment. I value your feedback and I’d love to hear from you!
The only question left is: Is The Supreme Court going to sit back and allow the democrats to steal this election or not?
According to Tyler Olson and Bill Mears of Fox News, “Texas on Friday morning filed a ‘reply brief’ with the Supreme Court as it asks the tribunal to hear its lawsuit that aims to essentially nullify the presidential elections in Pennsylvania, Michigan, Georgia and Wisconsin — putting the ball in the justices’ court to issue an order in the case.”
“The ‘briefing stage’ of Supreme Court litigation consists of the first party, in this instance, Texas, asking the court to hear the case. Then opposition briefs are filed by those on the other side of the case. Then the first party is allowed to file a ‘reply brief,’ which Texas did Friday morning.”
‘“Defendant States do not seriously address grave issues that Texas raises, choosing to hide behind other court venues and decisions in which Texas could not participate and to mischaracterize both the relief that Texas seeks and the justification for that relief,’ the Texas brief says of the opposition briefs filed by Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Michigan and Georgia Thursday.”
“Texas continues: ‘An injunction should be issued because Defendant States have not—and cannot—defend their actions.’”
“The justices now could simply issue an order saying that they refuse to hear the case. They could also agree to hear the case and promptly dismiss it or rule in favor of Texas. The justices could also request oral arguments before ruling.”
“The crux of the Texas case is the argument that the four states it is suing — all four of which swung for President-elect Joe Biden — unconstitutionally changed their election statutes in their judiciaries or executive branches, when only the legislature is allowed to make election law. The reply brief Friday says that the four states failed to adequately dispute their point that this makes their entire elections invalid.”
‘“Defendant States do not credibly dispute either that they changed election statutes via non-legislative means or that the Electors Clause preempts such changes,’ the Texas brief says. ‘Accordingly, Texas is likely to prevail on the merits.’”
“Texas’ Friday brief says that it not asking the Supreme Court to decide or overturn the results of the presidential election, but right a constitutional wrong.”
‘“Texas does not ask this Court to reelect President Trump, and Texas does not seek to disenfranchise the majority of Defendant States’ voters,’ Texas’ brief says.”
“It continues: ‘Texas asks this Court to recognize the obvious fact that Defendant States’ maladministration of the 2020 election makes it impossible to know which candidate garnered the majority of lawful votes. The Court’s role is to strike unconstitutional action and remand to the actors that the Constitution and Congress vest with authority for the next step.’”
How can the Supreme Court not act in this case?
‘“The timing is extremely late and the justices have been reluctant to resolve election disputes too close to an election, much less after a presidential election has been conducted and votes certified in the states at issue,’ [University of Richmond School of Law professor Carl] Tobias told Fox News.”
“Late?”
Is that all you’ve got?
“Late?”
“Late” regarding what?
Is it ever too late to request that justice be served?
They just finally completed counting votes not too long ago!
And it seems like they keep finding more ballots to count all the time!
“There is no specific time limit for the justices to issue an order in the case, though some action is likely to come before Monday [12/14/2020], which is when presidential electors across the country will assemble in their state capitals to cast their electoral votes for president.”
Again, it is my belief that, considering all of the possible ramifications, this decision by The Supreme Court will go down in history as the most important decision it has ever made.
We’ll now see if the five conservative judges on the Supreme Court have the courage to do the right thing. I already know how the liberal judges are going to vote.
I’ll continue to keep you posted.
If you’re not already “following” me and you liked my blog(s) today, please choose to “follow” me, which will keep you up to date on all of my latest posts, and/or leave me a comment. I value your feedback and I’d love to hear from you!
The “defendant states’” responses are in. Now it will be up to the Supreme Court to decide if Texas’ lawsuit is even worth consideration.
Tyler Olson and Bill Mears of Fox News report that, “Pennsylvania, Georgia, Wisconsin and Michigan filed briefs Thursday in response to the Texas case seeking to bar their presidential electors from voting.”
“In briefs submitted with the Supreme Court on Thursday, Georgia, Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin slammed the Texas lawsuit to prevent those four states from casting their electoral votes as a ‘meritless’ effort to ‘decimate the electorate of the United States.’”
Excuse me Georgia, Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin, but the Texas lawsuit is hardly “meritless.”
Taken from the filed Texas motion and supporting documentation:
“Expert analysis using a commonly accepted statistical test further raises serious questions as to the integrity of this election.”
“The probability of former Vice President Biden winning the popular vote in the four Defendant States—Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin—independently given President Trump’s early lead in those States as of 3 a.m. on November 4, 2020, is less than one in a quadrillion, or 1 in 1,000,000,000,000,000. For former Vice President Biden to win these four States collectively, the odds of that event happening decrease to less than one in a quadrillion to the fourth power (i.e., 1 in 1,000,000,000,000,000^4). See Decl. of Charles J. Cicchetti, Ph.D. (“Cicchetti Decl.”) at ¶¶ 14-21, 30-31. See App. 4a-7a, 9a. 11.”
So, expert mathematical analysis is saying that Joe Biden winning the vote in these four states, given the circumstances, was basically impossible.
We have to listen to the “experts” after all, don’t we?
We have to follow the Science, don’t we?
Just sayin’.
“The response briefs were filed just ahead of a 3 p.m. deadline the Supreme Court previously gave the states to respond to the Texas suit.”
“It [the Texas lawsuit] aims to take advantage of the Supreme Court’s original jurisdiction in disputes between states, bypassing lower federal courts, which have uniformly ruled against other election-related litigation by President Trump and his allies.”
Bypassing the lower federal courts, in this case, was key. The lower courts, in regards to this case, would most certainly dismiss it out of hand, either because the judge had a liberal bias, or the judge did not want to assume the responsibility for ruling in favor of Texas.
“The Texas suit gained the backing of 17 other states Wednesday when, led by Missouri, they filed a brief endorsing the Paxton’s case. Then on Thursday, Missouri and five other states filed another brief with the Supreme Court this time asking to be allowed to join Texas as litigants in the case.”
“But despite the widespread support from red-state attorneys general for Texas’ case, attorneys general Pennsylvania, Michigan, Georgia and Wisconsin attacked the suit in their responses as ‘meritless’ and ‘nakedly political.’”
‘“Texas waited until now to seek an injunction to nullify Pennsylvania’s election results because all of the other political and litigation machinations of Petitioner’s preferred presidential candidate have failed,’ the Pennsylvania brief, led by Attorney General Josh Shaprio, states.”
So, what?
What does this, if even true, have to do with the merits of Texas’ lawsuit?
‘“The Trump campaign began with a series of meritless litigations. When that failed, it turned to state legislatures to overturn the clear election results,’ Pennsylvania continued. ‘Upon that failure, Texas now turns to this Court to overturn the election results of more than 10% of the country. Texas literally seeks to decimate the electorate of the United States.’”
Nooo…, Texas now turns to the Court to stop the fraudulent election results from 10% of the country decimating the rights of the other 90% of the country!
‘“Texas asserts that this Court’s intervention is necessary to ensure faith in the election. But it is hard to imagine what could possibly undermine faith in democracy more than this Court permitting one state to enlist the Court in its attempt to overturn the election results in other states,’ the Wisconsin brief says. ‘Merely hearing this case—regardless of the outcome—would generate confusion, lend legitimacy to claims judges across the country have found meritless, and amplify the uncertainty and distrust these false claims have generated.’”
“Michigan, led by Attorney General Dana Nessell, also laid out a variety of factors that it believes weigh heavily against the Texas case.”
‘“The base of Texas’s claims rests on an assertion that Michigan has violated its own election laws. Not true,’ the Michigan brief says.”
Now there you go lying again, Ms. Nessell.
I know…, it just comes with the job, and with being a democrat.
“The crux of the arguments from Texas and the states that support it is that the Constitution gives only state legislatures the power to set rules regarding presidential elections. Therefore, when the executive and judicial branches in Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Georgia changed how their elections would work this year in light of the coronavirus pandemic, their elections became invalid.”
‘“When non-legislative actors in other States encroach on the authority of the ‘Legislature thereof’ in that State to administer a Presidential election, they threaten the liberty, not just of their own citizens, but of every citizen of the United States who casts a lawful ballot in that election—including the citizens of amici States,’ the Wednesday brief filed by Missouri and 16 other states says.”
Bingo!
Now, what’s so hard to understand about that, and how can that thinking even be argued with?
Regardless, the democrats are arguing against it.
“But most legal experts agree that for many procedural reasons the Texas case is almost certain to fail, and that their merits argument is fatally flawed too.”
‘“To begin with, the imagined “rule” is universally ignored since states have in fact allowed their governors, judiciaries, or both to make rulings and determinations affecting the manner in which presidential elections are held and electors thus chosen,’ Walter Olson of the libertarian Cato Institute told Fox News.”
This “imagined rule” you refer to, Mr. Olsen, is a little thing called The Constitution of the United States!
And whether or not states have chosen to ignore The Constitution in the past, has no bearing on whether or not their current election processes are legal or not.
It’s really a childish excuse.
“We’ve established illegal voting processes before, so…”
“Harvard law professor [Okay…, I can already see where this is going!] and former Supreme Court clerk to late Justice Antonin Scalia, Lawrence Lessig, meanwhile, said that the motivations for the Texas case are purely political.”
See, I told you!
‘“This is political posturing through litigation. Not one of those attorneys general believes they are entitled to win,’ he told Fox News. ‘As lawyers, that should stop them from signing onto such an action. But they are acting as politicians, not lawyers here — to the detriment of the rule of law.’”
I really can’t believe you were able to get that statement out, Mr. Lessig, without choking on your own words!
People “acting as politicians,” and the “detriment of the rule of law?!”
Seriously?
Along with all of the additional states supporting the Texas lawsuit, The President has signed on in support of it, as have 106 House members who filed a brief with the Supreme Court as well.
It is my belief that, considering all of the possible ramifications, this decision by The Supreme Court will go down in history as the most important decision it has ever made.
I’ll continue to keep you posted.
If you’re not already “following” me and you liked my blog(s) today, please choose to “follow” me, which will keep you up to date on all of my latest posts, and/or leave me a comment. I value your feedback and I’d love to hear from you!
It looks like everyone wants to get in on the fun now.
According to the CBSDFW.com Staff (The Dallas/Fort Worth CBS local affiliate), “Eighteen states — now including Arizona — have joined a Texas lawsuit filed by Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton against the states of Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Georgia. That lawsuit was filed directly with the United States Supreme Court on Monday, Dec. 7.”
Eighteen states!!!
That’s over a third of the United States!
“The suit asks the court to order the ‘defendant states’ legislatures to displace ‘tainted’ election results in those states and choose their own slate of electors.”
“Paxton sued battleground states on behalf of the state of Texas saying the ‘defendant states’ made unconstitutional changes to their laws before the 2020 election.”
“He said those states tainted the integrity of the vote for Texas and all states.”
“An amicus brief (amicus curiae) or ‘friend of the court’ brief was filed with the high court earlier Wednesday. The states of Missouri, Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Indiana, Kansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Utah and West Virginia have all signed on to the brief that backs the Texas suit.”
“Arizona was the latest state to file an amicus brief on Wednesday bringing the total to 18 states.”
Thank you, thank you, thank you, to all of these other states which have chosen to stand up for justice and stand up for America.
“According to the American Bar Association, ‘Friend of the court’ or amicus curiae briefs are often filed in appellate cases heard by the U.S. Supreme Court and state supreme courts, as well as intermediate courts of appeal. And there is considerable evidence that amicus briefs have influence.”
“On Tuesday evening, the Supreme Court ordered the defendant states to reply by 3 p.m. on Thursday, Dec. 10.”
‘“It’s not unusual,’ SMU [Southern Methodist University] Constitutional Law Professor Dale Carpenter told CBS 11. ‘I don’t think it indicates anything very important… I think the court will act quickly on Thursday.’”
‘“The states violated statutes enacted by their duly elected legislatures, thereby violating the Constitution. By ignoring both state and federal law, these states have not only tainted the integrity of their own citizens’ vote, but of Texas and every other state that held lawful elections,’ said Paxton. ‘Their failure to abide by the rule of law casts a dark shadow of doubt over the outcome of the entire election. We now ask that the Supreme Court step in to correct this egregious error.’”
‘“Ken Paxton is asking that Republican state legislatures in four states be allowed to displace the will of the voters in those States and choose their own slate of electors, presumably to hand the election to Donald Trump in January,’ said [Professor] Carpenter. ‘The Supreme Court is not going to allow that to happen.’”
Nice try professor!
“Displace the will of the voters?!!!
You mean “displace the will” of the cheaters?
That’s the whole point here, Professor! Tens of thousands, possibly hundreds of thousands, of fraudulent and illegal votes in these 4 defendant states displaces the actual will of legal voters, who submitted legal ballots in the 4 defendant states and every other state in the union.
Excuse me…, but you are such a “tool” and such a “useful idiot,” Professor Carpenter.
I have also heard that President Trump and his legal team have officially signed on to the lawsuit, and that they have asked Senator Ted Cruz of Texas to represent them all and plead the case in the Supreme Court.
Today may end up being a VERY big day in the history of United States and a big day for the future of these United States.
I’ll keep you posted.
If you’re not already “following” me and you liked my blog(s) today, please choose to “follow” me, which will keep you up to date on all of my latest posts, and/or leave me a comment. I value your feedback and I’d love to hear from you!
Yes…, President Trump just keeps on winning, while the democrats and the lamestream media come out the losers…, again.
According to Doug Schoen, for Fox News, “Trump is big winner and Sessions is the big loser in Tuesday primaries, while Dems remain divided.”
He also reports that, “The President’s current chances for reelection may be stronger than national polls indicate.”
“There are two key takeaways from the outcome of Tuesday’s primaries in Alabama, Maine and Texas.”
“First, the big winner of the night was President Trump. Several Trump-backed candidates defeated their opponents and unquestionably benefited significantly from The President’s support. The most notable of these was former Auburn University football coach Tommy Tuberville, who defeated former senator and attorney general Jeff Sessions for the GOP nomination for a U.S. Senate seat in Alabama. Tuberville will face Democratic Sen. Doug Jones, considered a highly vulnerable incumbent.”
“Second, Democratic primary results show the party is deeply divided, complicating the Democrats’ path to winning majority control of the Senate and defeating Trump in the November election.”
“Alabama was the biggest race Tuesday and of special interest to [President] Trump. The President forced out Sessions as attorney general after Sessions recused himself from overseeing the investigation of Russia’s interference in the 2016 U.S. presidential election – a decision Sessions said he was required to make because he had been involved in the Trump campaign. Trump never forgave Sessions for the recusal and considered it a betrayal.”
“In his bid to regain the Senate seat he resigned to become Trump’s attorney general, Sessions faced fierce opposition from The President, who repeatedly criticized him with harsh insults and actively supported Tuberville. Trump’s endorsement clearly carried more weight with voters than Sessions’ endorsements from prominent Republicans and his former Republican Senate colleagues, including Sen. Richard Shelby, R-Ala.”
So, who are these other “prominent republicans who went out of their way to buck President Trump and endorse Jeff Sessions?
Ann Coulter
Michelle Malkin
And republican senators:
Jim Inhoffe (OK)
Pat Roberts (KS)
Mike Enzi (WY)
Mike Crapo (ID)
John Barrasso (WY)
Roy Blunt (MO)
John Boozman (AR)
Ron Johnson (WI)
Deb Fischer (NE)
Michelle Malkin…, you have broken my heart! Jeff “the backstabber” Sessions?! Really? What could you have possibly been thinking? I’m going to have to re-evaluate our relationship.
And my own senator, Ron Johnson! Why would you endorse Jeff “the mole” Sessions?!
Very disappointing.
“Meanwhile, in Texas, former White House physician Dr. Ronny Jackson, who was endorsed by [President] Trump, won his primary for a U.S. House seat, beating out Josh Winegarner. Winegarner was endorsed by the outgoing Republican Rep. Mac Thornberry.”
“In many ways, the weight of [President] Trump’s endorsements in Alabama and Texas signals that The President’s current chances for reelection may be stronger than national polls indicate.”
Recollecting the polls and their accuracy during the 2016 presidential election, I would say this is most definitely the case.
A day or so before the primaries, I can recall the media touting that the Sessions-Tuberville race was a virtual toss-up.
Tuberville crushed Sessions, 60.7% to 39.3%.
Some kind of “toss-up,” huh?
“In several U.S. House and Senate Democratic primaries held in June, progressive challengers either defeated or came close to nearly defeating their well-funded establishment opponents.”
“Likewise, the division between the progressive and moderate factions of the party was manifest in Tuesday’s primaries.”
“Given the clear progressive insurgency within the Democratic Party across the country, there will also likely be greater pressure on the party to embrace left-leaning policies, such as defunding the police, which are unpopular with the general electorate.”
You mean most people don’t want to operate under jungle rules?
You mean most people believe that criminals should be arrested?
You mean that most people believe that other people who can’t behave in a civilized manner should be dealt with accordingly?
If that’s what you mean, well then maybe you do agree with me that these favorable polls for Sleepy Joe are seriously flawed.
It’s hard to believe the democrats believe most people in the country want the Chicago, the L.A., or the New York lifestyle of burning, looting, shooting, killing and just general lawlessness.
“Doing so could cost the Democrats the presidency, the Senate, and even their current House majority.”
We can only hope!
The only mention of these primary events by CNN is a whiney little article about Sessions and how he was mistreated by The President, and how he paid the price for being associated with President Trump somehow, even though The President firmly backed his opponent in the primary.
Only the “logic” of CNN can explain that “expert” analysis.
WINNING!
If you’re not already “following” me and you liked my blog(s) today, please “click” on the comment icon just to the right of the date at the bottom of this article. From there you can let me know if you “like” my blog, leave a comment or click the white “FOLLOW” button at the bottom of that page, which will keep you up to date on all of my latest posts.
We’re all entitled to our opinions. I value yours and your feedback as well.
According to David Aaro of Fox News, “Authorities are looking for multiple suspects captured on video punching and kicking a man outside a gas station convenience store in Texas on Sunday, in what was described as a ‘brutal attack,’ police said.”
“Graphic video shows a customer carrying grocery bags out of the Harris County establishment around 7 p.m., when a group of at least five men [men?] attacked, knocked him to the ground, and continued to strike him before fleeing the scene, according to authorities.”
These brave, Black Lives Matters, individuals sure reflect proudly on their race and their cause, don’t they?
“The unidentified victim, 24, informed deputies that he was waiting to buy grocery items at the convenience store when a group of up to six young men tried to cut in line, according to Houston’s KTRK-TV.”
This is what is referred to now as “Black privilege.”
‘“I looked over and said, ‘There’s a line for a reason,’ the victim said. He told police the group mocked his hair and clothes before attacking him when he exited the store.”
‘“I don’t know what else I could do,’ he told KTRK-TV. ‘The fifth one at the end came out of the store after purchasing goods, and came up to me and kicked me in the face and said, ‘Black Lives Matter, [expletive].’”
“Black Lives Matter, [expletive]?”
‘“I really hope they’re caught before someone else gets hurt,’ the victim’s girlfriend told the station. ‘I hope that the people take this and don’t say, “It’s white against black.” I don’t want this to be the statement. I want it to be, here’s a man who was checking out and stood up for himself and he was targeted for that.’”
I’m sorry, sweetheart, but what you want doesn’t change what it was.
What we had here was four, five or six, racist, Black, punk, individuals, who perpetrated a “hate crime” against another person.
The perpetrators obviously wouldn’t have declared, “Black Lives matter, [expletive],” to another Black person.
I get that African Americans are upset about police brutality [most Americans are as well, in general] and a level of “white privilege,” but that does not give some Blacks the excuse to run around attacking innocent and unrelated white people under the guise of “Black Lives Matter.”
If you’re not already “following” me and you liked my blog(s) today, please “click” on the comment icon just to the right of the date at the bottom of this article. From there you can let me know if you “like” my blog, leave a comment or click the white “FOLLOW” button at the bottom of that page, which will keep you up to date on all of my latest posts.
We’re all entitled to our opinions. I value yours and your feedback as well.
Jeff DeGraff, Ph. D. for Psychology Today writes, ‘“I’m mad as hell and I’m not going to take it anymore’ declared the longtime news anchor Howard Beale in the 1975 film classic ‘Network.’ In the picture [movie], people everywhere toss open their windows and repeat the catchphrase with a barbaric yell. Sadly, Howard Beale, symbolic spokesman for the hoi polloi [the common people], comes to realize that the system co-opts both social and economic power to its own advantage. The movie is a parable about how all of our screaming really changes very little and in the act we often lose our voice.”
Fast forward to the year 2020.
According to Danielle Wallace of Fox News. “Texas police union voices outrage after recently released career criminal fatally stabs grandma, 80, in broad daylight.”
“A Texas career criminal who was recently released from jail despite being arrested nearly 70 times is accused of fatally stabbing an 80-year-old woman out shopping Saturday, police said.”
“The suspect, 38-year-old Randy Roszell Lewis, was shot and killed by a responding officer who was flagged down by witnesses at the scene. Police said the man was armed with the 6-inch blade.”
Thank God.
Thank God they killed this guy!
Thank God they killed this guy, or he probably would have been released again and killed someone else’s mother or grandmother!
What the hell is going on in this country?!
“The incident sparked outrage from the Houston Police Officers’ Union, which blamed the ‘total failure’ of criminal justice reform for his release weeks earlier — without paying bail.”
Being “outraged” is all well and good, and certainly justified…, but when are we going to move past being outraged and start demanding that people be held accountable for these all too often tragedies we see more and more of these days?
“Lewis allegedly stabbed 80-year-old Rosalie Cook in the chest as she returned to her car after shopping inside a Walgreens in Houston. She was pronounced dead at a local hospital.”
“Her son, Chuck Cook, said his mother was a ‘perfect’ grandma to six grandchildren and three great-grandchildren.”
‘“Nobody should have to go through this, an 80-year-old woman, disabled, who had to walk with a cane,’ Cook said.”
That’s exactly right, Mr. Cook. This horrendous crime was completely avoidable, if not for a broken justice system and incompetent judges.
As American citizens, one of the most basic things we expect from our government is protection from individuals who refuse act in a civilized manner in our society.
We expect law enforcement to apprehend these offenders…, we expect the government to effectively prosecute these individuals, and we expect the judicial system to sentence those found guilty commensurate with their crime.
If for some reason the government fails at this, or balks at its responsibility, then we will start to see a breakdown in our society, and people will begin to take the law into their own hands…, and who could blame them?
“Police said officers were already in the area after receiving calls around 10:15 a.m. about a man matching Lewis’ description demanding money from shoppers at knife point by a nearby grocery store.”
“Two years ago, Lewis was charged with assaulting a public servant — breaking the person’s nose — while being transferred to county jail, KHOU reported.”
“In all, he had been arrested 67 times and has faced dozens of charges throughout his life, including assault, theft, trespassing, the possession of marijuana and burglary of a vehicle, the Houston Police Officers’ Union said.”
He’s been arrested 67 times and has faced dozens of charges.
‘“Randy Lewis should never have been free. Now an innocent woman has been murdered. Everyone deserves better. This is absolutely shameful,’ the Houston Police Officers’ Union tweeted Monday, sharing his public record.”
Exactly. “Randy Lewis should never have been free.”
And it is “absolutely shameful” this poor woman was murdered.
But you know what’s more shameful? The fact that no one is going to have to answer for her death beyond Randy Lewis.
Sure, Randy Lewis committed the murder…, but he had numerous accomplices in the justice system and government who will never face the music for their parts in this crime.
‘“The defendant had a history of mental illness and he should have been kept off the streets. He recently absconded from the personal-care facility where the judge ordered he live instead of being held in jail,’ the Houston District Attorney’s Office said in a statement.”
“The judge had not issued a warrant for his arrest even when he had absconded, so police did not even know to look for him and unfortunately this tragedy occurred before he could be returned to court.”
‘“Where’s the outrage when our cops are putting their lives on the line arresting the same person time and again who’s got a violent history,’ Houston Police Chief Art Acevedo told KHOU.”
True…, but at least the police know they’re putting their lives on the line in the line of duty. These judges are putting the lives of the rest of us on the line by their irresponsible actions, and we have no reason to expect this kind of malpractice.
“He said the department would review body camera and security footage of the incident. He added the officer who shot Lewis was a nine-year veteran of the force.”
Yes…, they should review the footage to determine how big of a medal he should get!
This officer did everyone a favor by putting an end to this walking piece of garbage.
I value your feedback and I’d love to hear from you!
If you’re not already “following” me and you liked my blog(s) today, please “click” on the comment icon just to the right of the date at the bottom of this article. From there you can let me know if you “like” my blog, leave a comment or click the white “FOLLOW” button at the bottom of that page, which will keep you up to date on all of my latest posts.
Mr. Erickson Rules! 