Voters Give Police a Mandate To Lie
Breitbart John Nolte: Elite Media Defend "Cuties" While Covering Up Most Salacious Content from Readers
What is worse, Cuties, or coerced jailhouse confession so-called witnesses used to give life sentences to innocents? I expect Nolte to obfuscate and defend that second one like a depraved agent of satan, rather than cancel any Republicans over it. Sick man, that Nolte.
Hey prison (from your past?) Why don't you jump on over to the WaPo site and post things with your pals?
I'm a real conservative. Not a cop worshipper who seeks utopia through government. And then gets red flagged and shot when he comes to the door, lol.
Wow -- you're kinda' like calling AOC a liberal.
There is no utopia through government; that is socialist garbage.
You may not worship cops but they have a job to do protecting those like you who want to speak their mind without getting shot.
Do they make mistakes? You bet.
Do I want to see life without them? No bet.
Cops are aggressively defended, and supported and awarded, when caught in the crime of perjury. It is not a mistake, it is a voter preference for cops to commit perjury.
You seem like one of those small government, constitutional purist. A conceptual libertarian even...
With almost 700,000 police in this country, they can make mistakes, they can be abusive, and they can be corrupt. But that doesn't mean that we don't need police
People can be abusive. That is why we have police. But you don't see the same need to punish and deter those police when they are abusive. I hear over and over, how police are rewarded for misconduct.
People don't like seeing Casey Anthony or OJ Simpson walk out. So they send the police out with a mandate: Next time, fake evidence, frame them, do what you have to. So then police hook an innocent person, frame him, and get a parade. And if the victim's family complains, screw him, he is a communist, it is a war on police!
Nobody gives them such a mandate. You are repeating the lies of the left. There are close to 500,000 police/civilian interactions EVERY SINGLE DAY. If the cop murders and lies were like you are trying to say, we'd all be dead or in jail.
I hear over and over from people who had a problem with a cop lying. And when they tried to report it, they were told to call 1-800-E-A-T-S-H-I-T. Because there is a war on cops, which means cops are at war with anyone who complains.
But I didn't invent this idea that cops have a mandate to lie. I heard it from people over and over, Republicans. I was surprised when I heard it, and so I wrote an essay about it. The essay resonated with so many people who had the same experience, I made a website.
There is a vast range of people giving a mandate for police to engage in misconduct. The simplest is the most common, dumb statements like "Police should shoot a scumbag like Jacob Blake for the public good, who cares if he had a weapon or not." It is just bravado on the web, but the people who say it really believe it. And obviously police would then have to obfuscate, or come up with stories to justify the shooting, which some people truly think is good and right even if the justification is fake.
The next level might be, well, suppose a bunch of people are at a party, and someone gets shot. We don't know who really did it. But suppose we threaten the guy with life whose car the gun was thrown into the back seat. But only if he swears this other person did it, and this third person was in on it. We don't know if he even knows who really did the shooting. But getting one to lie to lock them all up, is better than letting everyone get away.
Or suppose the cop didn't even find the gun in the back seat, but lies and says he did to pressure the first guy to finger someone. Or suppose the cop hides that he found blood somewhere else, which would otherwise prove the guy who owns the car didn't do it. If the cop has to say he found the gun in his car, or hide the blood, to pressure the first guy to lie, so be it. Lock them all up. Surely you will agree there are people here on Breitbart who will say "Who cares, they are all lowlife thugs, lock them all up, the cop did good."
The next level might be like my friend who is serving two life sentences for a crime that didn't happen. She was arrested for having 7 pounds of GHB, it was a moral panic, it went into a hundred newspapers. The crime lab said the police were wrong, all charges were dropped. A year later, her boyfriend shot a guy in the leg who later fell off a balcony. The cop told the papers it was a planned robbery.
Then the cop's evidence fell apart. They were not in communication and could not have been coordinating. What he mistook for a robbery plan, was something unrelated. So he faked some new evidence to keep making it look like a robbery. Well today I can prove that tons of evidence was faked. But they made him LEO of the Year for inventing the evidence. And absolutely every cop in Florida will stand in a circle around him, to protect him from getting in trouble on behalf of a girl who was arrested with 7 pounds of date rape drug. Nobody asked him to fake evidence, but afterwards they protect him. And that is what Republican tough-on-crime people want. Let the druggy rot in jail, protect the cop, we will vote for people doing that again all day.
The next level might be like the Florida Supreme Court Innocence Commission. They saw that 50% of murder convictions exonerated when DNA was invented, involved lying jailhouse witnesses. This is when the deputies at the jail give an inmate a newspaper with the allegations in it, or create an opportunity for an inmate to steal a police report from another inmate's cell. When they have no other evidence, they threaten another inmate with life, and then reduce the sentence when that inmate swears the other inmate confessed to whatever the allegation is.
Sheriff Doughnut Bill Cameron of Charlotte sat on the Innocence Commission. He went in there with a mandate from Florida sheriffs and their Republican constituency, to make sure they could keep getting their coerced liars in front the the jury, and no judge would have the discretion to stop it. Today state attorneys like Phil Archer will tell their constituents they need this category of witness or we will go back to the 1970's and rapists and carjackers will get your family. Even though he knows it is garbage, a scam. And his voters vote him back in office for doing this.
There are absolutely people here on Breitbart, voters, whom I get examples from like these. There are people who will say wait a minute, this girl was arrested with 7 pounds of GHB a year earlier? You say that is not true, but I believe it is true because the papers say it is. Well come on, it is good that cop framed her for murder. If you go to my website, I may even have transcribed some of those types of arguments over there.
And I think you know there are people right here on Breitbart who will say that person was arrested with heroin a year earlier? That person was previously accused of rape? Well it is good that cop lied and faked evidence to lock him up. And the people here on Breitbart are examples of a popular sentiment, a common line of thinking.
All I can say... Dashcam is your friend.
No amount of cameras can make up for a lack of any deterrent from punishing cops who get caught. It's like okay, so this cop lied, send him back out next shift. Oh, but fire that judge who let a criminal go because the cop lied.
Can you cite a case where a judge got fired because a cop lied? Just one?
I was speaking figuratively. What they actually do is try to campaign on term limits for judges or vote them out or vote for politicians who will appoint different judges. Or more often remove discretion from judges with mandatory minimums or in any other way possible. Or circumvent the whole process, by just having police lie, to predetermine the outcome of the trial regardless of what the judge does.
Often when a judge knows the cops and prosecutor are lying, the judge will give a suspended sentence, to nullify the verdict. Or will give a sentence that better fits actual guilt. When you pass a mandatory minimum law, you are in effect firing the judge.
Here is an example of Sheriff Doughnut Bill Cameron of Charlotte subverting the whole justice system and its credibility in Florida, to make judges irrelevant and push perjuring jailhouse witnesses past them:
Florida Supreme Court Permits Perjury
They sat down to solve the problem that 50% of murder convictions exonerated when DNA was invented, resulted from jailhouse witnesses. Some states allow judges to bar such witnesses, which they absolutely should because they are pure evil garbage. If you like the death penalty, you should be aware that 90% of opposition to the death penalty, and 90% of the costs in practice, probably result from jailhouse witnesses.
So it is a real problem that jailhouse witnesses lie, a problem from your point of view. But faced with the fact that judges might try to fix it when sheriffs manufacture liars at the jail, the sheriffs argued that the judge was the problem. And rather than give the judge any discretion, the most they were willing to give was a less-than-worthless jury instruction. So faced with an inmate provided with information by the sheriff and coerced to lie by the sheriff at the jail, they decided to fire the judge, in effect, by depriving the judge of discretion to limit the witness.
Without law enforcement, we get chaos like Portland. I've been a judge and I didn't always believe the police officers that testified. The system isn't always perfect, but it is necessary.
I really don't GAF what a judge thinks. Because a judge cannot, and especially a local judge will not, investigate punish and deter police from lying.
So judges are just worthless political punching bags, in my opinion, spending all day struggling and failing to get the law right and run trials in a uniform way.
Since judges cannot become relevant in deterring police perjury, what judges should do is inform, instead of mislead the public about what goes on in courtrooms.
You should tell the public yes, contrary to your ideal image of the justice system, there are lies all day, and there is nothing I can or will do about it.
So Breitbart idiots need to realize that courtrooms are worse garbage than the post office or the DMV, before you hand out any more life sentences in pursuit of utopia.
Weak. And based on your comment profile, in the very small minority.
Unfortunately that "very small minority" came within a half inch of electing Andrew Gillum and Stacey Abrams, beat Trump by 2.8 million votes, and is about to wipe Republicans out of office and replace them with marxists. But if you don't see that, then I have a pillow to sell you.
Did you hear about the cop who arrested a nurse for NOT taking a blood test of a suspect?? He was demonized in the media, and then fired.
But yes. Sadly, there are many situations where misconduct is permitted way too much. The responsibility for this falls on the town mayor who hires and fires the police chief.
One thing people don't realize, is there is no more "media". Not in the sense of the left-wing journalist shadowing police and rooting out corruption all day. Newspapers, and local newspapers entirely, laid off all their reporters and just have interns who copy-paste Twitter and transcribe youtube. So the "media" demonizing a cop today, is just a bunch of idiots sharing video clips on Twitter. And actual newspapers are cozy with cops and want to earn favor from them. Because cops are their only investigative journalists, producing click-worthy local gossip with no threat of a libel suit.
Of course the mayor is in the same political party with the police chief and probably went to high school with him. The newspapers are down to a skeleton staff of idiots copying local sports scores. The idiots on Twitter very rarely get a good cop video, and when they do, they take it out of context. Any criminal who complains about police misconduct is smeared as having a past arrest, so that you literally have to be a nurse with a halo over your head to be taken seriously when reporting a guy who once saved a dog for a crime. And if the family and sympathizers of the accused who is not a nurse complain, that is just the "war on cops" and they must be marxists and lowlifes. Trump is a political novice, who is told by Republican fossils how they won in the 1980's, by being tough on crime against the "rehabilitation and root causes" theorists.
Add it all up, and we are living in a golden age of perjury, used to convict the innocent. And it manufactures a cumulative demographic of disenchanted nihilists, who will vote to let everyone out of prison, with a greater persistence and inevitability than immigration. And you can see, these people are more passionate than someone who, for example, had his taxes raised 5%.
23 people per year per county who experience a consequence of police misconduct, each with 3 friends or family members, times 20 counties per state, times 50 states, times 30 years, comes out to 2.8 million, the number by which Hillary Clinton beat Donald Trump in the popular vote.
Says the punk that thinks he wants all police in prison. Until society truly breaks down, you soil yourself, and then beg and sob for the police to protect your worthless ass.
Another sad thing is nutjobs with a random teenage fantasy of "society truly breaks down" which fantasy they consider legitimate for policy debates.
I will give you an example of society breaking down. My female friend is serving life without parole from age 21 for a crime that didn't happen, because nobody cares if cops lie. An entire political party defending cops in the crime of perjury, is a broken down society.
Do you comprehend that there is no institution to deter those cops from committing perjury and victimizing the innocent for sport?
Perjury's a crime.
"victimizing the innocent for sport" That could get two things, a myriad of letters to law makers that it's impossible to ignore and class action suits.
The media would be all over it and being liberal, they'd report it without hesitation.
Now, how do you expect the to be enforced without police or a justice system?
The media won't report it 1) the editor at the regional paper pressured the cops to lie,
2) papers have laid off everyone and no longer have the investigative and editorial capacity to verify and publish an inflammatory story,
3) most of the allegations are based on libel in papers, which is hard to fight from prison,
4) the victim of police perjury is white.
Papers don't want to prove the truth, that a cop victimized a white person, and punish him and fix it.
Papers want to prove Republicans are racist, which can never be fixed, and win elections over and over until everything is gone.
You also don't appreciate that since papers laid off their reporters, police are their investigative reporters.
Police are their only source of juicy local gossip which they can print without any libel risk.
If they alienate police, they will have nothing to copy paste but local sports scores, and will go out of business.
So they humor police as heroes, in a quid pro quo for stories they can sensationalize for clicks.
Of course lawmakers ignore cops lying. Republicans ignore all allegations of police misconduct since Ferguson, and since Heather MacDonald told them they need to, to save lives.
Democrats say yes, we know cops lie, every day, get in line, vote us a majority and we will let everyone out. There is no incentive for politicians to waste time on individual cases.
Democrat lawmakers will for real tell you: Police perjury originated with slavery, and can be solved by fixing global warming. So helpful!
Or what if the defendant has a past drug arrest? Half the public likes for police to frame drug people.
You should try being a victim of police perjury and discover reality. I have proof, there is nobody to report it to.
I guarantee there will never be justice for those cops victimizing the innocent. The only hope is for it to happen less in the future.
So you're going to vote for the party who's vice presidential candidate withheld exculpatory evidence against two innocent men until AFTER they were executed? Not to mention a presidential candidate that sponsored a minimum sentencing guideline law that substantially impacted black non violent offenders by giving them lengthy sentences. Versus the party that has passed sentencing reform laws, instituted programs to help convicted felons get jobs and has implemented programs to encourage companies to hire felons?
Trump working to change the 1994 crime bill that the racist Biden sponsored. He is also working to help those unjustly imprisoned.
You act like a crooked prosecutor is a problem with one prosecutor. But it is Republicans who block any effort to punish prosecutors who victimize the innocent, to create a deterrent. So all prosecutors are free to victimize the innocent without consequence like in ancient Rome.
It was Clarence Thomas the originalist, who found something that is not in the Constitution, a prosecutor's right to have immunity to do whatever he pleases, supersedes the rights of the individual.
It was Connick v Thompson where Scalia and Thomas erased much of any remaining deterrent to prosecutorial misconduct, by interpreting the archaic rights of the King of England to displace US law and the Constitution as broadly and completely as possible.
Trump is an ordinary moderate. The mainstream of Republicans are to the left of Trump right now, in that they will defend a corrupt government institution, police and prosecutors, at all costs, based on a utopian notion of the justice system based on zero actual experience.
Not at all. To remain vital, it's important to wonder why someone has a different opinion than you. Then you have to wonder who feels better and accomplishes more. Focusing on the best is important for a successful life. While there are unethical behavior on the parts of DA's and police, my guess it's in the minority and they probably perpetrate it on all races Andrew Weismann is one of the worst perpetrators of this. Having ruined many people's lives. if you're so outraged by such behaviors then do something about it.
As a voter, is it really your job to guess? Or do you have a responsibility to do better than that?
99% of instances of police misconduct, and 99.99% of allegations of police misconduct, are never written down much less published for voters to understand what is going on, and fulfill their responsibility. An entire political party has been led by Heather Macdonald to believe they have a moral obligation to ignore allegations of police misconduct, and insulate police from any consequences, to save lives. I have personally witnessed police committing perjury in four states, and there is no record of it anywhere for you to find out about it. I have witnessed police committing perjury to convict my friend of murder. If I didn't tell you about it, you wouldn't know. And because it is coming from me, even though I have documented it thoroughly, you still don't believe it.
So because of all that, there is no deterrent to police committing perjury. And there is a reward, because police can clear cases, and portray themselves as heroes, and it is a sport. Would you like to stop guessing, and instead have an independent institution in the executive branch to require reports, and punish reporting failures like the SEC, of every time a cop is accused of misconduct? So that you can act responsibly as a voter, instead of spouting theories like a leftist or global warming person?
#1 i don't think it is as predominant as you think it is. #2 I don't think it is systemic, #3 I think it is perpetrated against people of all races, and #4 I think it is part of human sociopathic behavior by people in those positions.
Do you agree that any institution which gives people death sentences, should not leave voters to compare their guesses about how often police commit perjury? 99% of instances of police misconduct, and 99.99% of allegations of police misconduct, are never written down much less published for voters to understand what is going on, and fulfill their responsibility. An entire political party has been led by Heather Macdonald to believe they have a moral obligation to ignore allegations of police misconduct, and insulate police from any consequences, to save lives. I have personally witnessed police committing perjury in four states, and there is no record of it anywhere for you to find out about it. I have witnessed police committing perjury to convict my friend of murder. If I didn't tell you about it, you wouldn't know. And because it is coming from me, even though I have documented it thoroughly, you still don't believe it.
So because of all that, there is no deterrent to police committing perjury. And there is a reward, because police can clear cases, and portray themselves as heroes, and it is a sport. As Sowell will tell you, any time man has no deterrent, and anything to gain by it, he will do evil. Would you like to stop guessing, and instead have an independent institution in the executive branch to require reports, and punish reporting failures like the SEC, of every time a cop is accused of misconduct?
I just have no interest in people who can't stay out of prison and blame all of their shortcomings on others instead of taking a look in the mirror and addressing the real issue.
Well Throatpunch, there are laws created through a designed process to determine who gets locked up. If police and local government hacks that process to shoot and lock up whomever they want to, and then lie and cover up to avoid being locked up themselves, the political party that supports that will lose. So there is is really no role for self-determining individuals and mirrors, in designing the process or the outcome. It is sick people breaking the law with no fear of consequence, to determine who gets shot and locked up. And they are supported by nazis like you, who want to lock up people you find undesirable, outside of what the law prescribes.
You are just saying if people weren't lowlifes, then you wouldn't want to break the law to lock them up. So it is their own fault you support police and prosecutors resorting to criminal behavior.
Cops who break the law should definitely be accountable for it. However, you want to blame EVERYTHING that has happened to you on bad cops, yet you won't own up to your own mistakes. You know who does that? Adolescent children. If you are as old as you say you are, you haven't learned anything in life except to blame everyone else for your own life mistakes. No sane woman finds that an attractive trait, which is one of the reasons why you are still single. Wake up and do better.
You don't believe in democracy and the law. You believe if a person was once arrested for drugs or beating his wife, then police in your neighborhood are allowed to frame him for a crime he didn't do because you don't like him. And then you say your choice to not apply the law and to ignore the legislature and the voter, is his fault for being a bad person.
Real life example. Mandi Jackson was arrested with 7 pounds of GHB. Crime lab said the cops were wrong, all charges were dropped, that never went into the paper. Later, her boss made her go home with him, her boyfriend got into a fight with her boss, and her boss later fell off his balcony.
The cops faked evidence and gave her two life sentences. Examples of perjury in the case:
Do you believe that because Mandi Jackson was once arrested with GHB (she wasn't), and she hangs out with bad people, that she and her family and the taxpayer and the dead guy's family deserve life without parole from age 21, and the cops who lied did a good thing? Even though that never passed the legislature?
You have defined other people's individual responsibility as your personal preference. You say this is what I would like, and if anyone who disagrees with me has ever sinned, then they deserve to suffer something they don't like, as an appropriate price for their sins. It is a neat way to trick yourself into thinking substituting your own personal preference for law and democracy is moral.
You call it other people's individual responsibility to suffer through whatever you desire, even if you never submitted your desire to the democratic process.
Congressman Pete Stauber: We all want police reform. We all want change. But until both sides of the aisle work together, we're stuck with another radical and harmful bill from the Democrats.
Don't lie. We don't all want police reform. When Democrats ignored your bill, you quietly put it in your pocket, to save for no other purpose than to write the letter you just wrote, months later.
Compare this to when Pelosi and the Democrats refused to pass a virus relief bill around the same time. Republicans all shouted as loud as they could, that Democrats are blocking the relief.
The reality is, most people in gerrymandered districts want police to be able to break the law as needed, to round up undesirables. People want to be able to look the other way on police misconduct, against the untermenschen up the street.
Police lying is a ring of power, from an ancient time. Whoever has local political control over police, can use the police as a tool of aggression at their whim. They will never throw that ring back into the fire.
Police lying is a worn out hollywood cliche. But some Republicans live in a reality where they will tell you with a straight face that it doesn't happen. That, and not Democrats, is why your bill didn't get passed.
The politics of police is kind of like lotto and drunk driving. Everyone thinks they might win the lotto, and someone else will get in trouble drunk driving. Everyone thinks it is great that police lie, because it will be used against someone else, not their own family members.
Meanwhile, criminal justice is the most truthless profession in the United States. It is the only industry where not just government employees, but also newspapers, can broadcast defamatory lies to destroy innocent people and advance their own careers. And that is actually the primary product.
Republicans will never know why they lost.