Suicidally Stupid Left-Wing Brits Choose Marxist Nutjob As Their New Labour Party Leader

Cheers! Teetotal Jeremy Corbyn Heads To The Pub For A Rousing Rendition Of The Socialist Anthem ‘The Red Flag’ After Being Elected Labour Leader In Landslide Victory With A Crushing 59.5% Of The Vote – Daily Mail

.

.
Jeremy Corbyn this afternoon headed straight to a pub with his supporters after storming to victory in the Labour leadership contest, winning almost 60 per cent of the vote in the first round.

In the most extraordinary result in modern political history, the 66-year-old Marxist throwback who has never run anything in his life will now take charge of the party of Keir Hardie, Clement Atlee and Tony Blair.

There were cheers at the QEII Conference Centre in central London as it was confirmed that the unassuming Islington MP had defied all expectations – including his own – to become leader of Her Majesty’s Official Opposition.

After thanking the unions, attacking the media, and accusing the Conservatives of ‘social cleansing’, Mr Corbyn took his supporters to the Sanctuary pub in Westminster for a victory drink where they hailed former socialist firebrand Tony Benn and sang the socialist Red Flag anthem.

Earlier, supporters wept and punched the air, chanting ‘Jez we did, Jez we did’, after it emerged Mr Corbyn had taken 59.5 per cent of the vote – 251,417 of the 422,664 votes cast – against 19 per cent for Andy Burnham, 17 per cent for Yvette Cooper and just 4.5 per cent for Liz Kendall.

But winning could be the easy part: While he was still addressing the leadership conference, the first resignations from the frontbench emerged as his critics warned he would be a ‘f***ing disaster’.

Following Mr Corbyn’s stunning victory, the new Labour leader sneaked out of the special conference building opposite Westminster Abbey to go to the pub. Jubilant supporters sang The Red Flag word perfect as bemused tourists, including one American family, looked on.

He was joined by campaign manager John McDonnell and hard-left Unite general secretary Len McCluskey. Mr McDonnell said it was the ‘‎greatest victory for the left in possibly decades’. ‘I just wish Tony Benn had been here,’ he said.

He said it was an end to the ‘dark years’ where there had been ‘no discussion of socialism’, but through which Mr Corbyn had ‘kept the flame alive’.

When the result was announced, ‘the earth moved’. ‘Another world is possible,’ Mr McDonnell added. ‎’We want to bring this government down. We want to install in Number 10 one of the best socialists.’

Standing up, Mr Corbyn apologised to an American family whose pub lunch his supporters were interrupting – causing the crowd to chant ‘USA, USA.’

Mr Corbyn said liberties had not been ‘handed down by the rich and powerful and royalty’ but had come thanks to the efforts of ‘ordinary people’.

After 32 years as a backbench MP, during which he has voted against Labour more than 500 times, Mr Corbyn must now try to piece together a frontbench team and demand loyalty from the parliamentary party.

He will face big tests in the coming days and weeks on Tory plans to curb unions, cut benefits and join airstrikes against ISIS in Syria. Conservative Defence Secretary Michael Fallon warned Labour was now a ‘serious risk to national security’.

In a rambling but uncompromising victory speech, Mr Corbyn repeatedly attacked the Tories but gave little sign he is willing to tone down his extreme socialist views to win broad public support.

To cheers from his supports, Mr Corbyn said: ‘The Tories have used the economic crisis of 2008 to impose a terrible burden on the poorest people in this country.

‘Those that have seen their wages frozen or cut, those that can’t afford to even to sustain themselves properly, those that rely on foodbanks to get by. It is not right, it’s not necessary and it’s got to change.’

Offering his backing to Sadiq Khan, Labour’s candidate for the London Mayoral elections, warning: ‘I am fed up with the social cleansing of London by this Tory government and its policies.’

Four months after Britain rejected Mr Miliband for being too left-wing and not looking like a Prime Minister, Labour is now led by the most radical leader of a mainstream party the country has ever seen.

Punters were quick to place bets against Corbyn surviving as leader until the next general election, with thousands of pounds rushing in to bookmakers within an hour of his victory.

One Paddy Power customer put £2,000 on the new leader being deposed by 2020 at odds of 5/2, with a number of other gamblers placing bids of £100 against Corbyn lasting that long.

But privately senior Labour MPs branded the result a ‘f***ing disaster’ and warned he would not survive a year.

Another MP said it was ‘absolutely disastrous’ for the party. He said Mr Corbyn would be ‘vicious’ and move to deselect rebel MPs by flooding the party with the new supporters.

A senior backbencher added: ‘I will give him 12 months. I can’t see him lasting any longer than that.’

David Blunkett, meanwhile, said he was ‘deeply fearful’ of the direction Mr Corbyn might take the party, and said there was a danger that Labour will be in ‘perpetual opposition’ unless he dramatically changes tack.

Warning of the dangers of a party split, he urged New Labour supporters not to desert the party, saying: ‘Do not allow the people who lost us elections from 1983 onwards to be the ones who run the show.’

The former Home Secretary said someone in the conference hall had shouted to him: ‘Corbyn in, Blairites out’.

‘If that is the attitude, we’re on a road to nowhere,’ he said. ‘The message has to be clear – we need consensus, we need the enthusiasm, but above all we need policies that mean something and are relevant to people out there.’

He added: ‘I’m deeply fearful of the direction in which we might go. All of us will be giving Jeremy our best wishes in the weeks and months ahead.

Many senior Labour MPs will quick to refuse to serve under him as party staffers are braced for a ‘purge’ of non-Corbyn supporters from the Brewer’s Green headquarters.

Ahead of the announcement, one staffer told MailOnline: ‘The mood is not great. I’m getting made redundant on Monday. It’s the Corbyn purge isn’t it.’

Defeated leadership contender Yvette Cooper immediately announced that she would quit as shadow home secretary and return to the backbenches.

Shadow public health minister Liz Kendall, who secured just 4.5 per cent of the vote in the contest, is also expected to quit.

Shadow education secretary Tristram Hunt and shadow health minister Jamie Reed were also quick to confirm they would refuse to play any part in the new leadership team.

Mr Hunt said: ‘It is important to be honest about it – I have substantial political differences with Jeremy’.

Asked if he thought Mr Corbyn would find sufficient numbers of MPs willing to be part of his front bench, he said: ‘That’s for his team to discover. I imagine they are working on that.’

Mr Reed – whose Copeland constituency includes the Sellafield nuclear reprocessing site – condemned Mr Corbyn’s anti-nuclear policies as ‘poorly informed and fundamentally wrong’.

And Mr Reed warned: ‘No amount of well-meaning protest will protect the NHS, drive up standards, recruit more medical professionals or improve the accessibility of world-class healthcare to the British people. Only an elected Labour government will do this.’

Emma Reynolds, who has been an outspoken critic of Mr Corbyn’s wavering support for the EU, quit as shadow communities secretary. Writing on Twitter she said: ‘Congratulations to Jeremy – he needs to space to build his own team. I will serve our party and my constituents from backbenches.’

Others expected to refuse to serve in his team are current shadow chancellor Chris Leslie, shadow defence secretary Vernon Coaker, shadow transport secretary Michael Dugher, shadow chief secretary to the Treasury Shabana Mahmood, shadow international development secretary Mary Creagh and shadow Cabinet Office minister Lucy Powell.

During the campaign, Ms Cooper and Ms Kendall both refused to work with Mr Corbyn team, while Mr Burnham insisted the party should always come first and was prepare to work with anyone.

However, shadow business secretary Chuka Umunna – a senior centrist who withdrew from the contest after a matter of days – issued a plea for the party to ‘come together’ behind its new leader.

In a post on Facebook, Mr Umunna said: ‘Now the contest is over, we must respect the result, come together and focus on providing the most credible and effective opposition to the Tories.’

Mr Corbyn is expected to promote Angela Eagle and Owen Smith to more high profile roles, and his close friend and leftwing firebrand John McDonnell is in line for a top job.

Corbyn supporter Clive Lewis, who entered Parliament as MP for Norwich South in May, said: ‘One of the things that Jeremy is about is about opening up the party, being more inclusive. Rather than the top-down ‘Here is the policy’, it’s going to be from the bottom up and everyone will have an input into it.’

At the height of Corbynmania the party was deluged with members, swelled by new 113,000 registered supporters who paid just £3 to get a vote, along with an extra 148,182 affiliated supporters and 105,973 full members who have signed up since May.

It led to allegations of ‘entryism’ by extreme left-wingers and Trotskyites seeking to hijack the contest in favour of Mr Corbyn. There were also claims that many people did not receive their ballot papers in time to vote, leading to calls for the result to be delayed for three days.

But in his speech, Mr Corbyn said: ‘During these amazing three months, our party has changed. We have grown enormously, because of the hopes of so many ordinary people for a different Britain, a better Britain, a more equal Britain, a more decent Britain.

‘They are fed up with the inequality, the injustice, the unnecessary poverty. All those issues have brought people in in a spirit of hope and optimism.

‘I say to the new members of the party, or those who have joined as registered or affiliated supporters – welcome. Welcome to our party, welcome to our movement. Can I say to those returning to the party who were in it before and felt disillusioned and went away. Welcome back, welcome back to your party, welcome home.’

He said his campaign had given the lie to claims that young Britons are apathetic about politics, showing instead that they are ‘a very political generation that were turned off by the way in which politics was being conducted’. He said: ‘We have to and must change that.’

Mr Corbyn said: ‘The fightback now of our party gathers speed and gathers pace.’

Iain McNicol, Labour’s general secretary, earlier insisted that the party had ‘weeded out’ people who had tried to ‘subvert our democracy’.

Addressing the leadership conference, He added: ‘We have run a free and fair election.’

Mr McNicol added: ‘In the leader we place our trust and on their shoulders they carry the hopes of millions in Britain and beyond our borders. It is not to be taken lightly or without a due sense of responsibility.

‘Friends, this Labour Party is bigger than any of us.’

In a thinly-veiled swipe at Mr Corbyn, he warned the new leader: ‘Our leaders have come and gone through the decades.’

He also aimed a dig at the thousands of £3 supporters behind Mr Corbyn’s surge. He said: ‘I look forward to seeing them on the doorstep.’ Mr McNichol said he wanted them to do more than ‘click a button’ to vote in the leadership contest.

Economist Richard Murphy, whose ‘people’s quantitative easing’ plan has been adopted by Corbyn, told the BBC: ‘I’m going to be very pleased that ideas I’ve promoted for a long time are now, I guess, going to be part of Labour Party policy, and I will be delighted about that.’

Mr Corbyn only scraped on to the ballot paper after gaining the nominations of Labour MPs who did not want him to win and was installed with odds of 200/1.

Andy Burnham, the northern shadow health secretary who had shifted to the left, was seen as the frontrunner while shadow home secretary Yvette Cooper presented the strongest threat from the centre.

After strong Blairite candidates including Chuka Umunna and Tristram Hunt pulled out of the race, it was left to Liz Kendall to fly the flag for moderates in the party – with little success.

Union barons who backed Mr Corbyn over his rivals could not contain their delight at his victory.

Len McCluskey, general secretary of the UK’s biggest union Unite, said: ‘Voters can now look at Labour and see, unquestionably, that it stands for fairness, justice, peace and strong communities. It is the party of hope, ready to take on a Government hell-bent on making life worse for ordinary people.

‘The task now for all of us who support Labour is to back the leadership team, to unite, to turn to face the Tories and hold them to account. It is what the voters expect, it is the way back to power and it is the duty of those at all levels of the party to deliver.’

UNISON General Secretary Dave Prentis said: ‘Today people for the first time in a decade are hearing a message of hope. ‘A clarion call that there is another way, an alternative message that it doesn’t need to be like this.

‘People see in Jeremy a politician who has created a wave, a vision of a better, kinder world that works for everyone, not just a self-serving few‎. ‘‎Jeremy has ignited a spark of hope, a spark that had been dampened for decades. This is a chance to claim back the heart and the soul of the party and make it our Labour Party once more‎.’

Outgoing acting leader Harriet Harman today issued a plea for unity, urging people across the party to take roles on the frontbench.

She told The Times: ‘You’ve got a commitment to the party whoever is the leader.

‘I’ve served under Michael Foot to Tony Blair, my first boss was Michael Meacher.

‘The point is, it’s a broad team and you don’t decide you’ve got abilities and energy and commitment by virtue of who the leader is.’

Former mayor of London Ken Livingstone – tipped for a job under a Corbyn leadership – insisted he a is a ‘consensual’ politician who wants to have proper discussions about the direction of the party on key issues.

‘It will work if Jeremy starts to connect with people,’ he told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme.

‘He is nice and that connects with people. Don’t forget, a big factor in John Major’s surprise win in 92 was the fact that people thought John Major was nice.’

The ex-MP said he has ‘never seen him lose his temper or even be rude to anyone’.

‘And he has an economic strategy to modernise our economy, create a better range of jobs and build homes to rent.’

Shadow Scotland secretary Ian Murray told BBC News: ‘Whoever is crowned winner, we will unite behind him. That’s what the Labour Party and the Labour movement does.’

Mr Murray said that the almost 600,000 people signed up to vote in the election amounted to around one in 100 of the entire UK population, adding: ‘The Labour Party should be very proud of the way it’s been able to engage communities in this and the number of people who’ve turned out to vote and registered to vote.’

Yesterday the Labour party announced Sadiq Khan, the son of a bus driver and former human rights lawyer, would be the party’s candidate in the London Mayoral election.

His victory over Tessa Jowell, a Cabinet minister under Tony Blair, was seen as further proof of the party’s lurch to the left.

Mr Khan was one of the MPs responsible for securing Mr Corbyn a place on the ballot paper only to ensure a wider debate, despite backing actually Mr Burnham as leader.

As well as appointing a new frontbench, the new leader will have to prepare to appear on BBC One’s Andrew Marr Show tomorrow morning and the first confrontation with David Cameron at Prime Minister’s Questions on Wednesday.

The Conservatives have timed key votes on controversial anti-strike laws for this week to pile pressure on Labour’s links to the unions.

Having resisted the temptation to comment on the contest for months, the Tories are preparing to take the gloves off.

Mr Cameron yesterday warned victory for Mr Corbyn would be bad for the country as it would break a consensus between the main parties on issues such as nationalisation, nuclear weapons, taxation and union laws

‘The country is stronger when you have shared objectives rather than when you’ve got someone who wants to take us back to the days of Michael Foot and Arthur Scargill,’ he said.

The contest showed that Labour had ‘completely vacated the intellectual playing field and no longer, in my view, represents working people’, he said.

.

.

Holder’s DOJ Coordinated With Left-Wing Extremists At Media Matters To Attack Breitbart Reporter

Department Of Justice, Media Matters Coordinate To Attack Reporter – Daily Caller

.

.
Since when does the Department of Justice coordinate with an obviously liberal media organization to go after a conservative reporter? It’s official: At least since 2011.

In email exchanges obtained by The Daily Caller in two separate FOIA requests, a coordinated effort to slam Breitbart News reporter Matthew Boyle emerged. To be sure, Boyle is not a reporter who is beloved by other reporters and he’s been critiqued on any number of matters that include his youthful chipmunk cheeks, his previously questionable Twitter avatar and his TV skills. But his beat was DOJ and Eric Holder and shouldn’t a reporter be commended for going after an enterprising story or two on his beat?

Even Slate‘s Dave Weigel agreed with that sentiment. “I see Media Matters giving Holder a huzzah for calling the Caller out,” he wrote in November 2011. “But calling it out for what? Are news organizations not allowed to enterprise stories by asking people whether they think someone should resign? News organizations do this all the time. The Caller’s ‘sin’ seems to be doing it with no back-up from the rest of the press.”

And yet, all this media scheming from the Department of Justice.

As revealed in the FOIA docs, Media Matters Deputy Research Director Matt Gertz sent a post concerning the NRA’s growing contributions to Holder’s critics to DOJ spokeswoman Tracy Schmaler, Holder’s top press flack who resigned in March, 2013. She replied, “Thanks, you know boyle has been doing robo calls to top members right? This is campaign mounted by daily caller. He has called 60 offices and gotten to 8 last week.” Gertz replied, “Yeah, that was what my original piece on the story was about.”

At the time of the exchange, Boyle worked for The Daily Caller.

Years later in February, 2013, Boyle wrote a story for Breitbart News about Schmaler’s “colluding” with “far left wing” Media Matters to attack him, lawmakers and other members of the media. Funny enough, Boyle attempted to seek comment from Schmaler on why she resigned. He wrote, “Schmaler has not answered when asked by Breitbart News whether her resignation has anything to do with the coming hearings on DOJ collusion with groups like Media Matters.”

Weirdly, it takes two years (or longer) for DOJ to respond to FOIA requests.

Further perplexing: TheDC FOIA’d the Justice Department for all mentions of Matthew Boyle in agency communications. The specific request was ”All records relating to and about Matthew Boyle.” Carmen Mallon, chief of staff for DOJ, replied in a formal letter saying that no such records existed despite the above exchange between Schmaler and Gertz.

“For your information, neither this Office nor any of these senior leadership offices of the Department typically maintain records on individuals,” she wrote. “As such, this office would not maintain the type of records you are seeking.

“However, in an effort to be of assistance, please be advised that a search has been conducted of the electronic database of the Departmental Executive Secretariat, which is the official records repository for the Offices of the Attorney General, Deputy Attorney General, and Associate Attorney General, and no records subject to FOIA were located. A search has also been conducted in the Office of Information Policy and no records subject to the FOIA were located.”

Gee, thanks Carmen. Except that the records concerning DOJ and Boyle were maintained, located and sent.

Please be advised. If you’re the DOJ and want to get some bad press out there on a reporter who may or may not be a thorn in your side, Media Matters is on speed dial.

DOJ-Media Matters Coordination

.

.

.

.

.

Left-Wing Activist Judge Goes Out Of His Way To Prevent School Choice In North Carolina

One Judge Attempts To Block Thousands Of Students From Accessing School Vouchers – Daily Signal

.

.
Last Thursday, North Carolina Superior Court Judge Robert Hobgood ruled the state’s school voucher program unconstitutional because the program “appropriates funds in a manner that does not accomplish a public purpose.” The Opportunity Scholarship Program was established last year and set to go into effect this school year, providing children from low-income families scholarships worth up to $4,200 to attend a private school of choice.

The ruling halts implementation of the program and suspends disbursement of scholarship funds.

In February Hobgood granted a preliminary injunction against the program, arguing that the vouchers were “likely” unconstitutional and halting applications to the program. But in May, the North Carolina Supreme Court issued a temporary stay against Hobgood’s ruling.

Hobgood declared the Opportunity Scholarships unconstitutional based on the state’s obligation to provide students a “sound basic education,” finding that the state could not “delegate this responsibility to unregulated private schools…”

The Institute for Justice has filed a motion to intervene in the case to defend the program.

“This decision from the judge was not unexpected, given his willingness to preliminarily enjoin the program last February. The Institute for Justice was successful in getting the North Carolina Supreme Court to stop that injunction and we hope to have similar success in stopping this one,” said IJ senior attorney Richard Komer. “We are moving quickly to try and get the program up and running again. We remain confident that the program is constitutional in all respects.”

According to Parents for Educational Freedom, over 5,500 families applied for the scholarship this year. The North Carolina State Education Assistance Authority, the organization managing the scholarships, notes that more than 1,800 of those students have already received their awards – and many of those students have begun their school year. It is now unclear whether those students will be able to attend their school of choice.

Darrell Allison, president of Parents for Educational Freedom in North Carolina, writes:

“Today’s ruling strikes at the heart of what thousands of North Carolina families have been fighting for over the past several months. With nearly 2,000 already enrolled and more than 300 private schools registered to educate these students, there is no doubt that the families, for whom this program is targeted, desperately desire this program. The Opportunity Scholarship Program is offering parents choices where none have existed before and is leveling the playing field when it comes to our state’s most disadvantaged children.”

Last year, North Carolina launched its first private school choice program, the Education Tax-Credit Program, while also adopting the Opportunity Scholarship Program. By doing so, North Carolina enacted options that could improve the educational landscape in the Tar Heel state for some of the most vulnerable students.

As the school choice march continues across the country, this ruling causes thousands of North Carolina students to wait, their educational futures on hold.

.

.

Left-Wing Activist Judge Sentences Man Who Raped His Own 3-Year-Old Daughter To Probation

Judge Said Du Pont Heir ‘Will Not Fare Well’ In Prison – Delaware News Journal

.
………………….

.
A Superior Court judge who sentenced a wealthy du Pont heir to probation for raping his 3-year-old daughter noted in her order that he “will not fare well” in prison and needed treatment instead of time behind bars, court records show.

Judge Jan Jurden’s sentencing order for Robert H. Richards IV suggested that she considered unique circumstances when deciding his punishment for fourth-degree rape. Her observation that prison life would adversely affect Richards was a rare and puzzling rationale, several criminal justice authorities in Delaware said. Some also said her view that treatment was a better idea than prison is a justification typically used when sentencing drug addicts, not child rapists.

.

.
Richards’ 2009 rape case became public this month after attorneys for his ex-wife Tracy filed a lawsuit seeking compensatory and punitive damages for the abuse of his daughter.

The fact that Jurden expressed concern that prison wasn’t right for Richards came as a surprise to defense lawyers and prosecutors who consider her a tough sentencing judge. Several noted that prison officials can put inmates in protective custody if they are worried about their safety, noting that child abusers are sometimes targeted by other inmates.

“It’s an extremely rare circumstance that prison serves the inmate well,” said Delaware Public Defender Brendan J. O’Neill, whose office represents defendants who cannot afford a lawyer. “Prison is to punish, to segregate the offender from society, and the notion that prison serves people well hasn’t proven to be true in most circumstances.”

O’Neill said he and his deputies have often argued that a defendant was too ill or frail for prison, but he has never seen a judge cite it as a “reason not to send someone to jail.”

Richards was no frail defendant, court records show, listing him at 6 feet, 4 inches tall and between 250 and 276 pounds. Nor do court records cite any physical illnesses.

O’Neill said the way the Richards case was handled might cause the public to be skeptical about “how a person with great wealth may be treated by the system.”

Richards, who is unemployed and supported by a trust fund, owns a 5,800-square-foot mansion in Greenville he bought for $1.8 million in 2005. He also lists a home in the exclusive North Shores neighborhood near Rehoboth Beach, according to the state’s sex abuse registry. His great-grandfather is du Pont family patriarch Irenee du Pont, and his father is Robert H. Richards III, a retired partner in the Richards Layton & Finger law firm.

Jurden, who has been a judge since 2001, and Superior Court President James T. Vaughn Jr. did not respond to questions last week about the case.

Deputy State Court Administrator Amy Quinlan said in an email that judges must consider the charges, state sentencing guidelines and “any mitigating or aggravating factors and recommendations” from prosecutors, defense lawyers, corrections officials and others. “That procedure was followed in this case as well.”

The lawsuit filed by Richards’ ex-wife accuses him of admitting to sexually abusing his infant son between 2005 and 2007, the same period when he abused his daughter starting when she was 3.

Police said they investigated allegations involving the boy in 2010 after his mother filed a complaint, but said they did not have sufficient evidence to justify charges. Investigators will take another look at the allegations included in the lawsuit, which are based on reports by probation officers.

The plea offer

Attorney General Beau Biden’s office had initially indicted Richards on two counts of second-degree rape of a child – Class B violent felonies that carry a mandatory 10-year prison term for each count.

According to the arrest warrant filed by a New Castle County Police Detective JoAnna Burton in December 2007, the girl, then 5, told her grandmother, Donna Burg, that Richards sexually abused her.

Burg said the child reported that her father told her it was “our little secret” but said she didn’t want “my daddy touching me anymore.” The girl said her father molested her in the bedrooms of her mother and brother in the mansion at 10 Summit Lane near Winterthur Museum, the arrest warrant said.

Tracy Richards, who confronted her then-husband, told police he admitted abusing his daughter but said “it was an accident and he would never do it again,” the warrant said.

Richards was free on $60,000 secured bail while awaiting trial on the charges that could have put him behind bars for years.

But in June 2008, just days before a scheduled trial, prosecutor Renee Hrivnak offered Richards a plea to a single count of fourth-degree rape, which carries no mandatory time, and he accepted, admitting in court that he abused his child.

“It was more than reasonable, an enlightened plea offer,” Richards attorney Eugene J. Maurer Jr. said.

Probation offered

Fourth-degree rape is a Class C violent felony that by law can bring up to 15 years in prison, though guidelines suggest zero to 2½ years in prison.

At his February 2009 sentencing, Hrivnak recommended probation, Biden’s chief deputy Ian R. McConnel said, adding that in retrospect he wished she would have sought prison time. Hrivnak would not comment.

Biden spokesman Jason Miller said the attorney general – who routinely hails the prosecution of child predators as a top priority for his office – did not know about the case.

Miller said only Hrivnak and her supervisor, Allison Texter, were part of the decision on how to resolve the case. Texter, who is now in private practice in Wilmington, did not return calls for comment.

State Prosecutor Kathleen M. Jennings could not discuss the case, McConnel said, because she had represented Richards while he was on probation. Jennings, a former chief deputy attorney general, rejoined the office in November 2011 after about 15 years in private practice. She would not say when she represented Richards.

McConnel would not discuss the rationale behind the Richards’ plea deal and Hrivnak’s recommendation of probation for the fourth-degree rape conviction.

He noted, however that prosecutors handling child sex cases routinely have difficulty relying on the testimony of youngsters, especially if the defendant is their father. The well-being of the child is paramount in such cases and parents and prosecutors are often reluctant to put children through the trauma of testifying and being cross-examined, he said.

“These cases are extremely complicated and difficult and we strive to do justice in each and every case to the best of our ability given the facts and circumstances presented,” McConnel said. “That sometimes results in a resolution that is less than what we would want.”

‘Will not fare well’

While judges have the latitude to sentence defendants within legal parameters, they are urged to follow more lenient guidelines established by the Delaware Sentencing Accountability Commission, a panel of judges and other top officials in the criminal justice system. The panel, known as SENTAC, has a policy that prison should be reserved for violent offenders, including rapists.

Jurden gave Richards, who had no previous criminal record, an eight-year prison term, but suspended all the prison time for probation.

“Defendant will not fare well in Level 5 setting,” said the final line of her sentencing order. In Delaware’s correctional system, Level 5 is prison.

Joseph S. Grubb, chief New Castle County prosecutor, said he was not involved in the case, but stressed that whether Richards’ might suffer or thrive in prison was not something prosecutors considered.

“It’s not a concern for us,” Grubb said. “We try to do the right thing in each case. Absent that equation is the physical condition of the defendant.”

Grubb said he did not know “how the judge gathered” that Richards might have trouble in prison, but assumed the presentence report included information she used. That report was not available in the court file.

O’Neill, the public defender, said that while Jurden’s rationale surprised him, “I commend her for making such a courageous ruling. When I find the appropriate place, I’m going to make that argument.”

Defense lawyer Michael W. Modica said he has argued that clients should be spared prison because of medical or mental issues, but judges routinely reject the suggestion. He said he recently persuaded a prosecutor not to recommend prison for a client who had cardiac bypass surgery while awaiting sentencing for a DUI, and the judge sentenced the man to home confinement.

“I’ve never heard of the judge saying in general that he is not going to do well,” Modica said. “Who thrives in jail?”

Treatment sentence

Jurden also ordered Richards to “participate in a sex offenders” treatment program after his lawyer provided her with an evaluation from a clinic in Massachusetts. Her order stipulated that he undergo inpatient treatment followed by outpatient treatment. The judge also ordered him to have no contact with children under 16 and prohibited him from possessing pornography.

Jurden’s order also included other mitigating circumstances considered before sentencing, citing his “strong family support” and “significant treatment needs which must be met.” The order noted, “Treatment needs exceed need for punishment,” which the SENTAC manual lists as a factor for judges to consider.

Attorneys said a treatment sentence is more common for first-time drug offenders, drunk drivers and the mentally ill, but is not unheard of for sex offenders. “It’s not completely out of left field that a judge would say that,” Grubb said.

Prosecutor Josette Manning, who spent six years in the sex crimes unit, said juvenile offenders in Delaware are often sent to out-of-state treatment facilities rather than a detention center. Some adults can get sex treatment in prison, she said, but when an offender can afford to pay the cost of inpatient treatment themselves, judges sometimes make that part of the sentence instead of prison.

“It’s absolutely appropriate for a judge to consider a defendant’s treatment needs during sentencing” for sex crimes, Manning said.

Modica, who has represented numerous sex offenders, said he has seen the need for treatment as a factor in reduced sentences for defendants in child porn cases but not for sex crimes. “I can’t think of a case like that,” he said.

Richards spent eight months on Level 3 probation, which requires weekly contacts with a probation officer, before Jurden moved him down to Level 2, which requires only monthly visits with a probation officer.

‘Right on’

County police chief Elmer Setting said that while police can’t control how attorneys and a judge resolve a case, “In serious situations where we have a guilty plea, we hope for prison time.”

Kendall Marlowe, executive director of National Association for Counsel for Children, said the bottom line is that individuals who abuse youngsters deserve to be punished.

“Child protection laws are there to safeguard children, and adults who knowingly harm children should be punished,” said Marlow, whose nonprofit agency assists lawyers who handle child welfare cases.

“Our prisons should be more rehabilitative environments, but the prison system’s inadequacies are not a justification for letting a child molester off the hook.”

Defense lawyer Joseph A. Hurley said it makes sense to him that the judge would be concerned about Richards’ time in prison.

“Sure, they have protective custody, but that is solitary confinement for 23 hours a day. We’re not a third-world society,” Hurley said.

“Sex offenders are the lowest of the low in prison,” Hurley said. “He’s a rich, white boy who is a wuss and a child perv. The prison can’t protect them, and Jan Jurden knows that reality. She is right on.”

Click HERE For Rest Of Story

.

Iconic Left-Wing Journalist Calls For Obama’s Impeachment

Liberal Icon Urges Obama Impeachment – WorldNetDaily

Worse than Richard Nixon. An unprecedented abuse of powers. The most un-American president in the nation’s history.

Nat Hentoff does not think much of President Obama.

And now, the famous journalist says it is time to begin looking into impeachment.

.

.
Hentoff sees the biggest problem as Obama’s penchant to rule by executive order when he can’t convince Congress to do things his way.

The issue jumped back into the headlines last week when, just before his first Cabinet meeting of 2014, Obama said, “I’ve got a pen and I’ve got a phone… and I can use that pen to sign executive orders and take executive actions.”

“Apparently he doesn’t give one damn about the separation of powers,” Hentoff told WND. “Never before in our history has a president done these things.”

And just to make sure everyone knew how extremely serious he regarded the situation, the journalist added, “This is the worst state, I think, the country has ever been in.”

Many have regarded Hentoff as the conscience of civil libertarianism and liberalism for decades.

Recognized as one of the foremost authorities on the Bill of Rights and the Supreme Court, Hentoff was a columnist and staff writer with The Village Voice for 51 years, from 1957 until 2008, when his columns began appearing in WND.

Hentoff left the Voice after he looked into the abortion industry, was shocked by what he found and had a falling-out with colleagues.

The First Amendment expert still hews left on many issues, railing against former President George W. Bush, former Vice President Dick Cheney, the prison at Guantanamo Bay and the National Defense Authorization Act.

But he hasn’t liked Obama from the start.

“Within a few months after he was elected, I wrote a column saying he was going to be the most destructive, dangerous president we’ve ever had,” he said.

Hentoff said people he’d known for years told him to stop being so negative and to give Obama a chance.

“Well, we’ve given him a chance. I understated the case a little.”

In other words, Hentoff thinks Obama is the most dangerous and destructive president ever.

And, that’s why the veteran journalist thinks it’s time to begin looking into impeachment.

“He has no right to do these executive orders,” Hentoff insisted, his voice reaching a crescendo of indignation.

He says Obama gets away with it only because there is no outrage in Congress, no coverage by the media and no knowledge by the public.

“He’s in a position now where he figures he’s going to do whatever he wants to do.”

In fact, Hentoff said, Obama doesn’t even pretend to care about the separation of powers between the executive branch and Congress anymore, because “He’s the boss and hardly anybody cares enough” to stop him.

The most well-known examples of Obama changing or issuing laws with the stroke of a pen by issuing executive orders include:

* Delaying the employer mandate in Obamacare

* Changing the types of plans available under Obamacare

* Ensuring abortions would be covered under Obamacare

* Enacting key provisions of the failed Dream Act to halt deportations of illegal immigrants

* Enacting stricter gun-control measures

* Sealing presidential records

* Creating an economic council

* Creating a domestic policy council

* Changing pay grades

As WND previously reported, even the the far left-leaning FactCheck wrote, “It’s true that President Obama is increasingly using his executive powers in the face of staunch Republican opposition in Congress. He’s changed federal policies on immigration and welfare and appointed officials without congressional approval.”

“I would say that never before in our history had a president done these things,” Hentoff mused.

He noted that while Nixon merely claimed that winning an election gave him the right to do what he wanted, Obama is actually doing whatever he pleases.

The journalist said he doesn’t think any other president has acted so lawlessly as a matter of habit.

“So, if this isn’t a reason for at least the start of an independent investigation that would lead to impeachment, what is?”

Hentoff is baffled that Obama should escape such scrutiny when former President Bill Clinton faced impeachment just for being “a lousy liar.”

A big part of the problem, the journalist believes, is what he calls the utter ignorance of a huge portion of the population, which is not outraged at losing its basic right to be self-governing.

And Obama “doesn’t give a damn, because he can get away with whatever he wants.”

That’s why Hentoff called this the worst state the country has ever been in, “Even worse than Woodrow Wilson’s regime, when people could be arrested for speaking German.”

Compounding the problem he says, is the digital age, which has allowed the president to engage in unprecedented domestic spying with the apparatus of the National Security Agency.

WND asked if Obama really posed such a threat, considering he was a professor of constitutional law.

“People forget, he taught a course that he was not fully qualified to teach. But nobody seemed to care,” Hentoff observed.

He also pointed out that Obama was the only editor of the Harvard Law Review to never publish an article, something that went virtually unnoticed when voters considered his qualifications.

“See, that was a case of affirmative-action and people feeling, ‘Hey we ought to do something important, symbolically, and here’s a black guy, and he’s articulate, so we’re gonna do this.’”

Hentoff mentioned that former U.S. Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglas, the man Time Magazine once called “the most doctrinaire and committed civil libertarian ever to sit on the court,” once personally lectured him that “Affirmative-action on a racial basis is a total violation of the 14th Amendment, no doubt about it.”

And, referring to Obama’s presidency, the journalist said, “That’s what that kind of affirmative-action did for us.”

He told WND that he firmly believed the president does not care about due process, the separation of powers, the concept of a self-governing republic or many other basic American ideals.

And that’s why, he said, “What Obama is doing now is about as un-American as you can get.”

Hentoff wanted to make sure no one thought he was engaging in hyperbole.

He said it was literally true that Obama is “the most un-American president we’ve ever had.”

And just to make sure everybody heard him, he added, “I hope the FBI got all of that.”

Hentoff is just the latest public figure to be added to the growing list of those mentioning the possible impeachment of President Obama.

WND has been keeping track, and that list now includes:

Reps. Steve King, R-Iowa; Blake Farenthold, R-Texas; Rep. Steve Stockman, R-Texas; Rep. Bill Flores, R-Texas; Rep. Duncan Hunter, R-Calif.; Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla.; Rep. Kerry Bentivolio, R-Mich.; Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas; Sen. James Inhofe, R-Okla.; Rep. Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah; Sen. Tim Scott, R-S.C.; Rep. Michele Bachmann, R-Minn.; Rep. Louie Gohmert, R-Texas; Rep. Trey Radel, R-Fla., and Rep. Ted Yoho, R-Fla.

Click HERE For Rest Of Story

.

Leftist Corruption Update: Obama’s FBI Partners With Left-Wing Extremist Group

Obama FBI Partners With Left-Wing Extremist Group – Townhall

The magnitude of this Obama administration’s “progressive” radicalism becomes more evident with each passing day. In recent months, there has been a drastic spike in acts of both anti-Christian and anti-conservative discrimination and intimidation on military bases across the country. This mounting harassment is not being carried out at the hands of regular enlisted folk but, rather, at the hands of high-ranking officials who, in their official capacity, are targeting Christian and conservative organizations and individuals in an effort to silence them.

.

It has long been suspected that the Obama administration is using propaganda circulated by the roundly discredited Southern Poverty Law Center, or SPLC, a left-wing extremist group that, in recent years, has adopted two primary goals: 1) raising truckloads of money and 2) smearing as “domestic hate groups” dozens of mainstream Christian ministries like the Family Research Council, or FRC, and the American Family Association, or AFA.

This suspicion has now been verified.

The problem on military bases has gotten so bad, in fact, that the U.S. Congress is demanding answers from the Pentagon. Recently, the AFA-affiliated OneNewsNow.com newsgroup reported that “Congressman Alan Nunnelee (R-Mississippi) is 1 of 38 members of Congress signing off on a letter to the Secretary of the Army – especially about an incident last month at Camp Shelby, Mississippi, in which the Tupelo-based American Family Association was labeled in Army training material as a ‘hate group.’ The Army initially claimed it was an isolated incident.

“‘But as we looked into it, [we found] this is not an isolated incident,’ Nunnelee [told] OneNewsNow. ‘There are a number of cases where the Army has singled out the American Family Association and other Christian organizations as hate groups, and service men and women have been threatened with sanctions if they support these groups.”

After a tremendous public outcry – and in an embarrassing slap to the face of the SPLC – the Pentagon quickly backpedaled, later apologizing about the Camp Shelby incident and publicly admitting that, despite the SPLC’s absurd claims to the contrary, the AFA is not a “hate group.”

Still, rather than distancing itself from the anti-Christian SPLC as one might expect, the Obama administration has, instead, strengthened ties to the hard-left outfit. Even after this string of military scandals.

For instance, I recently learned that on its official website, the FBI lists as one of its primary “hate crimes resources,” the Southern Poverty Law Center.

This is especially mysterious when you consider that the FBI’s own verified hate crimes statistics are completely at odds with numbers put out by the SPLC in its fundraising propaganda. Whereas the FBI indicates that there was a sharp 24.3 percent decrease in hate crimes from 1996 to 2010, with racial hate crimes dropping by 41.9 percent, the SPLC incongruously claims that since 2000, the number of “hate groups” has somehow increased by 67.3 percent.

So send your money right away!

The FBI’s empirical data doesn’t track with the SPLC’s political propaganda. Consequently, by partnering so closely with this discredited organization, the Department of Justice significantly undermines its own credibility.

Still, while the SPLC has proven utterly unreliable in its actuarial acumen – as well as intentionally dishonest – it has also proven demonstrably dangerous in its prolonged campaign of anti-Christian agitation.

You may recall that it was the Southern Poverty Law Center’s somewhat clever, yet patently dishonest and reprehensible strategy of juxtaposing, as fellow “hate groups,” mainstream Christian organizations like the FRC and the AFA alongside violent extremist groups like the Aryan Brotherhood and the Skin Heads that, on Aug. 15, 2012, led to an actual act of domestic terrorism.

On that date, “gay” activist Floyd Lee Corkins II – who later confessed in court that he was spurred-on by the SPLC’s anti-Christian materials – entered the lobby of the Washington-based Family Research Council intending to kill every Christian within.

Corkins was armed with both a gun and a backpack full of ammunition. He also had 15 Chick-fil-A sandwiches that he intended to rub in the faces of his would-be victims. (FRC had recently defended the food chain’s COO Dan Cathy for pro-natural marriage statements he made.)

The only thing standing between Corkins and mass murder was FRC facilities manager and security specialist Leo Johnson. As Corkins shouted disapproval for FRC’s “politics,” he shot Johnson who, despite a severely wounded arm, managed to tackle Corkins and disarm him.

Of Johnson’s actions, D.C. Police Chief Cathy Lanier said, “The security guard here is a hero, as far as I’m concerned.”

I agree.

Upon hearing of Leo’s selfless act of heroism, I was reminded of John 15:13: “Greater love has no one than this, that he lay down his life for his friends.”

But according to both the SPLC and the FBI (by virtue of its close ties to the group), Leo’s heart is, instead, full of hate. Everyone at FRC is hateful.

In fact, if you happen to be a Bible-believing Christian, you too are hateful.

You get the drill.

The Obama administration has absolutely no business partnering with this extremist organization – and it’s an outrage that it does. If this troubles you as much as it does me, please contact the FBI at (202) 324-3000 and respectfully voice your concern. Then call or email your local FBI office. (Click here to find that location.) It’s critical that freedom-loving Americans light-up the FBI’s phone lines and demand that all facets of government completely disassociate from the SPLC and disavow any further use of its anti-Christian propaganda.

The Southern Poverty Law Center must be held accountable for its inflammatory and potentially deadly anti-Christian bigotry.

Click HERE For Rest Of Story

.

*VIDEO* Alfonzo Rachel: Left-Wing Media Ignore The Gosnell House Of Horrors


.