JEFF SESSIONS IS OUT AS DOJ CHIEF; WHO IS MATTHEW WHITAKER?

JEFF SESSIONS IS OUT AS DOJ CHIEF; WHO IS MATTHEW WHITAKER?

TRUMP vs SESSIONS BATTLE FINALLY COMES TO AN END.


Post Sources: ABC News, Youtube


***** What we know about Matthew Whitaker, man who replaces Jeff Sessions


Matthew Whitaker, tapped by President Donald Trump as acting U.S. Attorney General, once made a key reception in a Rose Bowl football game, ran as a conservative Republican for the U.S. Senate in Iowa, and wrote an opinion piece arguing that special counsel Robert Mueller was "going too far" in his investigation of Russian meddling in the 2016 presidential election.

Whitaker, 49, was named the acting head of the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) after Jeff Sessions resigned Wednesday after being asked to do so by Trump, according to a letter Sessions sent to the president.

Trump has long been angered by Sessions' decision to recuse himself in March 2017 from the Russia investigation headed by Mueller.

Whitaker had been Sessions' chief of staff.

"We are pleased to announce that Matthew G. Whitaker, Chief of Staff to Attorney General Jeff Sessions at the Department of Justice, will become our new Acting Attorney General of the United States. He will serve our Country well....," Trump tweeted after accepting Sessions resignation.

Whitaker's appointment was met almost immediately with calls from the Democratic leadership for him to recuse himself from overseeing the Mueller probe.

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi slammed the appointment as an attempt to quash the Russia probe.

"It is impossible to read Attorney General Sessions’ firing as anything other than another blatant attempt by @realDonaldTrump to undermine & end Special Counsel Mueller’s investigation," Pelosi tweeted.

"Given his record of threats to undermine & weaken the Russia investigation, Matthew Whitaker should recuse himself from any involvement in Mueller’s investigation. Congress must take immediate action to protect the rule of law and integrity of the investigation. #FollowTheFacts."

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer also called on Whitaker to recuse himself from the probe.

"Given his previous comments advocating defunding and imposing limitations on the Mueller investigation, Mr. Whitaker should recuse himself from its oversight for the duration of his time as acting attorney general," Schumer said in a statement.

Schumer later tweeted that: "Clearly, the President has something to hide."

Whitaker, a lawyer from Iowa, joined the Department of Justice in August 2017. It was his second stint at the DOJ, where he was appointed U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of Iowa in June 2004 by then-President George W. Bush. He resigned from the DOJ in 2009 after Barack Obama became president.

In his first tenure at the DOJ, Whitaker served on the Controlled Substances and Asset Forfeiture Subcommittee for the Attorney General's Advisory Committee and also served on the agency's White Collar Crime and Violent and Organized Crime subcommittees.

A month before joining the DOJ for the second time, Whitaker penned an opinion piece for CNN.com criticizing Mueller's Russia investigation.

"Last month, when President Donald Trump was asked by The New York Times if special counsel Robert Mueller would be crossing a line if he started investigating the finances of Trump and his family, the President said, 'I think that's a violation. Look, this is about Russia," Whitaker, then a CNN legal commentator, wrote in the August 2016 piece.

"The President is absolutely correct. Mueller has come up to a red line in the Russia 2016 election-meddling investigation that he is dangerously close to crossing."

Whitaker wrote that he found the possibility of Mueller digging into Trump's finances as part of the Russian probe "deeply concerning to me."

"He [Mueller] is only authorized to investigate matters that involved any potential links to and coordination between two entities -- the Trump campaign and the Russian government," Whitaker wrote. "People are wrongly pointing to, and taking out of context, the phrase 'any matters that arose or may arise directly from the investigation' to characterize special counsel's authority as broad."

He also defended Donald Trump Jr. in a CNN interview for taking a controversial meeting in June 2016 with a Russian lawyer claiming to have damaging information about Hillary Clinton, then-candidate Trump's opponent for the White House.

"Anybody would have taken that meeting," Whitaker said in the July 2017 CNN interview.

Whitaker earned a master of business administration and a law degree at the University of Iowa. He also played tight end for the University of Iowa Hawkeyes football team that lost to the University of Washington Huskies in the 1991 Rose Bowl game in Pasadena, California.

"One of the greatest experiences I ever had as a Hawkeye was playing in that Rose Bowl game and having a catch," Whitaker said in the 2015 article in the Hawkeye Nation, a website for University of Iowa sports fans. "To this day I can brag to anyone who will listen that I had a catch in the Rose Bowl."

In 2014, Whitaker ran for the Republican nomination to fill the Senate seat vacated by Democrat Tom Harkin. He finished fourth in the Republican primary won by Joni Ernst, who went on to win the general election.

Following his foray into politics, Whitaker went back to practicing law, becoming managing partner of Des Moines-based law firm, Whitaker Hagenow & Gustoff LLP.

From 2014 to 2017, he served as the executive director of FACT, The Foundation for Accountability & Civic Trust.

Whitaker has also been a member of the University of Iowa Political Science Department Advisory Board and the National Association of Former U.S. Attorneys.

KATE STEINLE’S KILLER (JOSE INES GARCIA ZARATE) WILL BE PROPERLY PROSECUTED AFTER ALL: TRUE JUSTICE

KATE STEINLE’S KILLER (JOSE INES GARCIA ZARATE) WILL BE PROPERLY PROSECUTED AFTER ALL:

HE MURDERED AN INNOCENT WOMAN IN COLD BLOOD & SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN IN THIS COUNTRY ILLEGALLY.

IT’S NOT ABOUT POLITICS NOR NATIONALITY……..IT’S ABOUT TRUE JUSTICE.

ZARATE SHOULD BE IN PRISON FOR LIFE.


Sources: MSN, Fox News, YouTube


***** DOJ issues arrest warrant for undocumented immigrant acquitted in Kate Steinle killing


A Federal warrant has been issued for the arrest of a Mexican immigrant acquitted Thursday evening of murder charges in the 2015 killing of Kate Steinle.

Steinle's death has been taken up by opponents of so-called sanctuary cities.

They argue that stricter immigration enforcement would have kept Jose Ines Garcia Zarate, who is residing in the U.S. illegally and was deported five separate times before the 2015 shooting, off the streets.

The arrest warrant unsealed in the Western District of Texas by the Justice Department on Friday accuses Zarate of violating his supervised release.

Zarate was released from jail in 2015, despite a federal immigration detainer request. Months after his release, he allegedly shot and killed Steinle on a pier in San Francisco.

Zarate was acquitted on Thursday of murder and manslaughter charges after a weekslong trial. He was convicted on a charge of being a felon in possession of a firearm.

President Trump seized on Steinle's killing as a presidential candidate, pointing to it as an example of the need to strengthen immigration laws. He chimed in on the subject after the verdict was announced Thursday night, calling it "disgraceful."

"No wonder the people of our Country are so angry with Illegal Immigration," Trump tweeted.

The Justice Department is also considering federal charges from Steinle's death.

"We're looking at every option and we will prosecute this to the fullest extent available under the law because these cases are tragic and entirely preventable," Sarah Isgur Flores, the department's director of public affairs, said on "Fox and Friends."

In a statement issued shortly after the verdict was rendered on Thursday, Tom Homan, the deputy director of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, said the agency would "work to take custody of Mr. Garcia Zarate and ultimately remove him from the country."

MS-13 GANG VIOLENCE INCREASED UNDER OBAMA LIKE ISIL (BORDER PATROL)

MS-13 GANG VIOLENCE INCREASED UNDER OBAMA LIKE ISIL:

MS-13 GANG MEMBERS CONSIST MAINLY OF LATINO ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS.

UNDER OBAMA MEDIA ONLY FOCUSED ON BLACK GANG VIOLENCE.

US TROOPS SHOULD PATROL TEXAS-MEXICO BORDERS.

TIME FOR GOP & DEMS TO UNITE AGAINST ALL GANG VIOLENCE.


Sources: Fox News, CBS, Business Insider, YouTube


***** How MS-13, One of America’s Most Dangerous Gangs, is Funded


President Donald Trump is ready to crack down on the infamous, money-making MS-13 gang, after a violent quadruple homicide in Long Island, N.Y. last week left four teenagers dead and badly beaten. Trump is promising to remove the gang from U.S. streets “fast.”


MS-13, a group that was started by Central American immigrants in Los Angeles in the 1980s, is known for its ruthless and violent tactics. Most of the founding members were from El Salvador and fled to the U.S. during the country’s civil war that lasted 12 years, from 1980-92. Since then the gang’s membership has ballooned to at least 10,000 members in the United States and more than 30,000 worldwide, according to the FBI and Treasury Department.

“[MS-13] is one of the most dangerous and rapidly expanding criminal gangs in the world today,” Philip Holloway, a legal analyst and former police officer, told FOX Business. “MS-13’s mottos is ‘Mata, roba, viola, controla’ (Kill, steal, rape, control),” he noted.

The gang has managed to expand its business tentacles into a variety of illegal activities, despite sanctions levied against the group by the U.S Treasury Department under the Obama administration. “They are involved in multiple crimes including murder, racketeering, drug trafficking, sex trafficking and human trafficking including prostitution,” Holloway said.

MS-13 also uses violence as a means for extortion, which constitutes much of its income, University of Houston sociology professor Luis Salinas told FOX Business.

“A lot of the violence is part of the extortion … and prostitution. Once they get here they get these individuals and extort money from their families. They’re also into extortion for protection of this neighborhood or that neighborhood,” Salinas said.

In 2015 the U.S. Treasury Department froze the assets of three members of the gang who were funneling funds back to higher-ups in El Salvador from prison. These actions were an attempt “disrupt” MS-13’s financial network by cutting off profits from illegal activities in the United States, the Treasury Department said. In 2012 the Obama administration designated MS-13 a transnational crime organization and implemented sanctions against six members in 2013.

While the U.S. government attempts to target MS-13’s earnings, targeting its culture is proving more difficult. The fierce loyalty among members is unique, Ron Hosko, former assistant director of the FBI’s Criminal Investigative Division, told FOX Business.

“They're very cohesive and often directed by imprisoned bosses in El Salvador to recruit and expand in American communities. That tends to mean there's an aggressive internal enforcement mechanism which equates to internal discipline involving physical violence and murder for disrespect or betrayal,” he said.

Membership in street gangs showed no signs of decreasing, according to the FBI’s 2015 National Gang Report, and MS-13 was identified as one of the top gangs involved in cross-border crimes. Recently, law enforcement has taken a tougher stance on making arrests; a move spurred by Attorney General Jeff Session’s focus on illegal immigrant crime, Hosko said.

“MS is a clear example [of illegal immigrant crime]. Affiliates would cross the border and make their way to American enclaves where they found friends and relatives living here already,” he said. “Citizenship is a combination of American born (many to illegals) and illegal immigrants.”

Salinas said about 60-70 percent of current U.S. members in MS-13 are immigrants, the majority of which could be illegal.

On Tuesday during an interview on Fox News, Attorney General Jeff Sessions said he believes the gang “could qualify” as a terrorist group. In El Salvador, MS-13 has already been designated as a terrorist organization.

Hosko said President Trump’s administration is changing the narrative quickly for both gang members and law enforcement in the United States.

“[The FBI] believed that claiming of ‘credible fear’ of persecution, gang retaliation, other bad acts in their homeland to immigration authorities likely resulted in widespread release of bad actors into the U.S. as their claims were being evaluated. With Obama, that was acceptable risk. I think that's changing fast.”

.

MCCRORY vs LORETTA LYNCH: MCRORY MAY LOSE

MCCRORY vs LORETTA LYNCH: MCRORY MAY LOSE

WHITE MAN vs BLACK WOMAN FOR 2016 POLITICS.

MCRORY STOOD UP AGAINST POLITICAL INTIMIDATION BUT HE MAY HAVE DONE SO TOO LATE.

Sources: Fox News, CNN, Citizen Wells, Youtube

In February 2016, despite wide voter opposition, Charlotte City Council members passed a Transgender Bathroom Sharing Ordinance which only forced Private Businesses, Private Schools (not Public Schools), Churches and Non-Profit agencies to comply.

The Ordinance was due to become effective April 1st.

In March 2016, North Carolina Gov Pat McCory and the NC General Assembly repealed the Charlotte Ordinance via passage of House Bill 2.

Ironically the man who spearheaded passage of Charlotte's Transgender Bathroom Ordinance is an LGBT Advocate who was Convicted of taking Indecent Liberties with a 15-yr old boy on a field trip.

The mainstream media refuses to report on this fact.

In May 2016, GOP North Carolina Gov Pat McCrory is suing the Federal gov't for its overreach in trying to force every state and commonwealth in America to enact laws which order Private Businesses and Churches to allow Transgender people to use Bathroom facilities of their personal choice.

US DOJ Attorney General Loretta Lynch, a Black Woman from North Carolina, claims that denying Transgender people access to use Bathrooms of their choice is a Civil Rights Violation.

In response to Gov McCrory's lawsuit, Loretta Lynch has now countersued the state of North Carolina.

So here we have a Powerful Black Woman from North Carolina fighting a Powerful White Man from North Carolina over Bathrooms for Transgender people during a critical election year.

Unlike Black people, Transgender were not Biologically born Transgender. Instead their sexual orientation is merely a Lifestyle choice.

Millions of US citizens are unemployed, the US Military is lacking in crucial funding for Training so they can defeat ISIL and America's Borders are porous yet Obama has Politicians fighting and wasting US Taxpayer money over Bathrooms for Transgender people.

God Forbid!

I stand with Gov McCrory on HB2, however this public legal battle may indeed cost him re-election.

Why?

Because McCrory sat quietly for too long and then allowed Obama to intentionally drag him into a Cultural Political war for the sole purpose of destroying Pat McCrory's political career forever and for the 2016 election.

I will continue to Pray diligently for Gov McCrory and for the entire United States of America.

**** North Carolina, U.S., square off over transgender rights

(CNN)The United States and North Carolina tangled over transgender rights on Monday, with the Justice Department filing a civil rights lawsuit over the state's so-called bathroom bill and state officials defiantly filing suits against the federal directive to stop the implementation of the controversial legislation.

Also, a major player in North Carolina -- the state's public university system -- defied the governor and legislature and told the Justice Department on Monday it intends to act "in compliance with federal law" as it relates to House Bill 2, known as HB2.

The Justice Department seeks declaratory relief and threatens to curtail federal funding to the North Carolina Department of Public Safety and the University of North Carolina.

With hundreds of millions of dollars in funding at stake, UNC System President Margaret Spellings said longstanding policy prohibits university personnel from discriminating on the basis of, among other things, gender identity, sex, or sexual orientation.

Attorney General Loretta Lynch, announcing the U.S. legal action to reporters on Monday, cast the bathroom bill issue as the latest civil rights struggle of the era.

"It was not so very long ago that states, including North Carolina, had other signs above restrooms, water fountains, and on public accommodations, keeping people out based on a distinction without a difference. We've moved beyond those dark days," Lynch said.

The act bans people from using public bathrooms that do not correspond with their biological sex. Since its passage in March, North Carolina has become a national battleground on the issue of transgender rights. It has drawn a flurry of condemnation from civil liberties groups, LGBT advocates and major businesses. It has also won praise from groups like the Family Research Council.

After the law's passage, musicians Bruce Springsteen, Demi Lovato, Nick Jonas, and the bands Pearl Jam and Boston canceled concerts in the state. Those cancellations have cost one major venue nearly $200,000 in ticket sales.

PayPal and Deutsche Bank have both canceled plans to expand into North Carolina.

The Justice Department said last week that "access to sex-segregated restrooms and other workplace facilities consistent with gender identity is a term, condition or privilege of employment. Denying such access to transgender individuals, whose gender identity is different from their gender assigned at birth, while affording it to similarly situated non-transgender employees, violates Title VII," a section of the Civil Rights Act prohibiting discrimination against workers on the basis of sex, race, color, national origin, and religion.

The federal government demanded the state "remedy" the act or risk being in violation of federal law. 

Instead, North Carolina officials filed a lawsuit calling the Justice Department's position a "radical reinterpretation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act." Top state legislators, Phil Berger and Tim Moore, also filed a complaint against the Justice Department.

But Lynch on Monday said the legislature and governor put the state in "direct opposition to federal laws prohibiting discrimination on the basis of sex and gender identity. More to the point, they created state-sponsored discrimination against transgender individuals who simply seek to engage in the most private of functions in a place of safety and security, a right taken for granted by most of us."

After the federal government asked the state to certify by the end of the day Monday that it would not comply with or implement the bill's restriction on bathroom access, Lynch said the state requested an extension and that had been under "active consideration."

Instead, the governor and the state chose another course: a lawsuit.

"But instead of replying to our offer or providing a certification, this morning, the state of North Carolina and its governor chose to respond by suing the Department of Justice. As a result of their decisions, we are now moving forward," Lynch said.

The federal suit also says the state is in violation of Title IX, the Education Acts Amendment of 1972 that bans gender discrimination in education, and the Violence Against Women Reauthorization Act that outlaws discrimination on the basis of sex. 

"This action is about a great deal more than bathrooms," Lynch said. "This is about the dignity and the respect that we accord our fellow citizens and the laws that we as a people and as a country have enacted to protect them."

Lynch said there have been "discriminatory responses to historic moments of progress": the Jim Crow laws that followed the Emancipation Proclamation, the resistance to Brown V. Board of Education, and the "proliferation of state bans on same-sex unions that were intended to stifle any hope that gay and lesbian Americans might one day be afforded the right to marry."

"That right, of course, is now recognized as a guarantee embedded in our Constitution. And in the wake of that historic triumph, we have seen bill after bill in state after state taking aim at the LGBT community," she said. 

She told transgender people that the Obama administration "will do everything we can to protect you going forward."

'Not a protected class'

McCrory's communications director Josh Ellis said after Lynch's remarks that the governor is "appropriately seeking legal certainty to a complex issue impacting employers and students throughout the country" but "in contrast, the attorney general is using divisive rhetoric to advance the Obama administration's strategy of making laws that bypass the constitutional authority of Congress and our courts." 

The act puts in place a statewide policy that bans individuals from using public bathrooms that do not correspond to their biological sex and stops cities from passing anti-discrimination ordinances to protect gay and transgender identity. That power is reserved for the state under the new law. 

North Carolina officials defend the act and said it doesn't violate federal law. The state also said the United States didn't give the state enough time to deal with the matter.

McCrory said Monday that he requested an additional two weeks to respond but was told he would be granted one week, and only if he issued a statement concurring with the Justice Department.

The lawsuit filed by the governor and Public Safety Secretary Frank Perry calls the demand that the state "remedy" the legislation by Monday or risk being in violation of federal law "a baseless and blatant overreach" and said it is making a "radical reinterpretation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act."

McCrory's argument also said the state of North Carolina hasn't been given enough time to respond and that the federal government is overstepping its authority.

In a Monday news conference, McCrory blamed the city of Charlotte for raising the issue of gender identity and public restrooms. The matter was not on the state's agenda, he said, until the city imposed a mandate that "caused major privacy concerns about males entering female facilities and females entering male facilities."

Because, he said, this is now a national issue -- and could affect every U.S. company with more than 15 employees -- McCrory called on Congress to revisit the anti-discrimination provisions under Titles VII and IX.

"Our nation is one nation, especially when it comes to fighting discrimination, which I wholeheartedly support," McCrory said. 

North Carolina homes in on Title VII in its lawsuit, saying precedence is clear: "Transgender status is not a protected class under Title VII," and it cites a half-dozen cases that it says back its stance. Only Congress can change this, the lawsuit says.

Even if the state felt transgender individuals were afforded federal protection, the Justice Department demands overstep, the state suit says, because the law "allows accommodations based on special circumstances, including but not limited to transgender individuals." 

In a statement announcing the lawsuit, McCrory said the federal government was trying to tell every government agency and company employing more than 15 people "that men should be allowed to use a women's locker room, restroom or shower facility."

He said later that the "new, complex and emotional issue" pitted privacy against equality.

The lawsuit emphasizes that no one is facing discrimination because the law applies equally to everyone.

"All state employees are required to use the bathroom and changing facilities assigned to a person of their same biological sex, regardless of gender identity, or transgender status," it says.

The lawsuit filed by Berger, North Carolina Senate president pro tempore and Moore, state House Speaker, reflected the views of many of the bill's supporters that people "expect to encounter only other people of the same biological sex" when they are in intimate setting such as public bathrooms.

It says the "ideological extremity -- and utter unworkability -- of the department's position on the issues in this case is astonishing." 

1000 DEAD BLACK MEN IN 2015; REMEMBER DYLAN ROOF

1000 DEAD BLACK MEN IN 2015 - REMEMBER DYLAN ROOF:

BLACK MEN YOUR LIVES ARE IN DANGER, FEDERAL GOV'T WANTS YOU DEAD.

I STILL REMEMBER DYLAN ROOF.

In the year 2015 at least 1,000 BLACK Men were Killed by the POLICE.

Statistics for BLACK Male Genocide appears to have increased for the past 7 years.

It also appears as if the Federal Govt is Complicit in Exterminating BLACK Men in America.

Unemployment for BLACK Men in America remains at 14%.

Each year more BLACK Men are being Incarcerated.

Each year more BLACK Men currently on Death Row are being Executed.

The Mainstream Media wants to falsely claim that BLACK Men and Boys Shot by POLICE are "Mentally ill".

In June of 2015, a young, WHITE "Mentally ill" man named DYLAN ROOF Murdered 9 BLACK people at a Church in Charleston, SOUTH CAROLINA.

DYLAN ROOF was captured in Shelby, NORTH CAROLINA.

Did the POLICE Shoot DYLAN ROOF when they located him?

No.

~ Number of people killed by US police in 2015 at 1,000 after Oakland shooting

Killing of man who allegedly pointed a replica firearm at officers in California is 1,000th entry in Guardian database tracking police killings this year.

The number of people killed by law enforcement in the US this year has reached 1,000 after officers in Oakland, California, shot dead a man who allegedly pointed a replica gun at them.

Authorities said several officers opened fire on the man on Sunday evening when he walked toward them as they towed away cars that had been used to perform so-called “sideshow” stunts in east Oakland. Officers discovered later that the gun was a replica, police said.

“Officers working sideshow approached by subject who pointed firearm in their direction,” the Oakland police department said on Twitter. “Officers fatally shot subject.” A spokeswoman said the department would investigate the shooting itself. The man’s name was not released.

Hundreds of cars had been involved in hours of chaotic sideshow stunts that shut down several intersections in Oakland from late on Saturday into the early hours of Sunday, according to police. 

One man was arrested and several shots were fired.

The man shot in Oakland became the 1,000th database entry in The Counted, an ongoing investigation by the Guardian to record every fatality caused by police and other law enforcement officers in 2015, to monitor the demographics of the people who died and detail how and why they were killed.

Sunday’s incident was the 883rd fatal shooting by a law enforcement officer so far in 2015, according to the Guardian’s records. Another 47 people died after being shocked with an officer’s Taser, 33 died after being struck by a law enforcement officer’s vehicle, and 36 were killed in custody. 

Another received a deadly blow to the head during a fight with an officer.

The shooting was also the 183rd death recorded in California, by far the greatest total of any state. Nine states, however, have recorded more deaths per capita, with Oklahoma having the highest rate.

The US government publishes no comprehensive record of people killed by law enforcement, even after a series of controversial deaths unleashed a national protest movement and demands from activists and lawmakers alike for better data on the subject.

An analysis of the statistics collected so far found the rate of deaths currently stands at 3.1 per day. This rate has remained relatively steady throughout the year, peaking through the month of March to a daily rate of almost four and dipping to an average of 2.6 through June.

The Counted was launched on 1 June, logging 464 deaths in the year to that point. 

At that time 102 or 22% of those killed had been unarmed. This proportion has since fallen slightly to 20% or 198 of the total 1,000. In 59 deaths, however, it remains unclear whether the suspect was armed.

As of 1 June, black Americans were more than twice as likely to be unarmed as white Americans when killed by police. At that point 32% of the 135 black people killed by police had been unarmed, compared with 15% of the 234 white people. This disparity has since shrunk, with 26% of the 248 black people and 18% of 490 white people being recorded as unarmed.

Brittany Packnett, a member of Barack Obama’s taskforce on 21st century policing and a founder of the Campaign Zero movement that lobbies to curb the levels of police violence in America, said the milestone should be met with “sadness, but not deep shock”.

“Black folks like me have known for a long time that the police do not always represent safety for us and that an encounter could be deadly,” said Packnett. “But having these statistics that add to our personal stories should continue to move everyone towards wanting to having a part in correcting this.”

Obama’s taskforce, convened after unrest in Ferguson, followed the decision not to prosecute the white officer who shot dead Michael Brown, an unarmed black 18-year-old, and made the collection of more reliable data on the number of police killings in the US one of its central recommendations.

FBI director James Comey said earlier this year that it was “ridiculous and embarrassing” that the Guardian and a separate project by the Washington Post had better information than the federal government about deaths at the hands of law enforcement officers.

The Department of Justice is trialling a new program, which resembles The Counted, to proactively collect data on killings by police. Currently, the FBI records the number of “justifiable homicides” reported to the bureau voluntarily by police departments that choose to participate.

Packnett said that while the government was “still in the beginning stages” of instigating that process, campaigners realised “it’s not enough just to talk about police involved shootings”.

“We have to talk about in custody deaths, we have to talk about non-lethal police violence, we need to talk about particularly vulnerable communities like children and the LGBTQ community,” Packnett said.

“We have to track it all, and we have to track it knowing that stronger, more comprehensive data can better lead us to the place of building solutions.”

Sources: The Guardian, CNN, YouTube

SANDRA BLAND CRIES FOR JUSTICE FROM THE GRAVE; MEDIA HAS FORGOTTEN

SANDRA BLAND CRIES FOR JUSTICE FROM THE GRAVE:

THE MEDIA HAS FORGOTTEN.

Following a simple Traffic stop, Sandra Bland (young BLACK woman from Chicago) was found hanging Dead July 13, 2015, in a Waller County, Texas jail cell.

Texas Jail employees claimed Sandra was "SUICIDAL" and had Marijuana in her system.

An Autopsy was performed on her body and a Federal investigation has been conducted.

However five months later her Murder remains a Mystery and no one has been held Accountable or Prosecuted for her Death.

Will Sandra's Murder be used as a POLITICAL Weapon just as Laquan McDonald's Murder is being used, to help DEMOCRATS win another general election via angry BLACK voters??

~ An American Tragedy

Five months after Sandra Bland was found hanging in a Texas jail cell, her family still searches for resolution. An intimate look at a life interrupted.

The stretch of boulevard just outside the campus of Prairie View A&M University in Texas lay lonely and quiet one early morning this past November when a woman emerged from her rental car and stepped toward a towering tree, her form shrouded in gray drizzle. She was dressed somberly, in heels and a black-and-white-striped skirt, a string of pearls dangling from her neck. In her left hand, she clutched an umbrella; in her right, a cellophane-wrapped spray of yellow tea roses that she’d bought at a nearby supermarket that morning.

Sharon Cooper had passed this site before. She’d certainly seen enough of it on the jerky cell phone video that circulated on the Internet: the haunting, murky silhouette of a state trooper hovering over her sister as she lay face-down, arms handcuffed behind her. 

He had pulled her over here for failing to signal a lane change. But things escalated.

He arrested her.

Three days later, Sandra Bland would be found hanging in her jail cell.

Such was the media frenzy in the immediate aftermath—as speculation swirled about foul play in the 28-year-old Chicago native’s death—that there had been no time for Sharon, her three surviving sisters, or their mother to steal away to simply, quietly reflect at the spot where everything had gone awry.

Merely coming to town—to retrieve Bland’s body, to pick up her personal effects, to address legal matters—had been a trial for the family each time they made the trip from Chicago. “There is a seismic shift in every individual’s demeanor when we land in Texas,” Sharon says. “And the seismic shift is just a ripping of the Band-Aid.”

There are too many memories. Like of the first time Sharon saw her sister’s lifeless body at the funeral home in nearby Hempstead. “My heart stopped. Time froze,” Sharon recalls. “She was on a table and they had a sheet on her. It was all the way up to her neck. I could not see the [ligature] mark, though I knew it was there from pictures I had seen. They hadn’t put any makeup on her or anything, but she still looked good, which is what gave me some solace.

She looked like herself.”

There were no news cameras on this day, as Sharon stepped gingerly off the sidewalk onto the wet grass, where a makeshift memorial had sprung up. She stooped to place the roses. Then she began playing one of her sister’s favorite songs, Tye Tribbett’s “What Can I Do,” on her phone and tidying up the collection of stuffed animals, candles, T-shirts, and ribbons as the gray rain fell.

The national press has largely moved on from the Sandra Bland story, but a family’s grief remains. 

Fully understanding the depth of their pain—and of the tragedy itself—requires far more than digesting a few sound bites on CNN. It requires a nuanced look at the real woman behind the headlines and at how a heartbreaking combination of factors years in the making—racial, cultural, intimately personal—collided devastatingly in the waning light of a late afternoon on what was once an unremarkable stretch of road in Texas.

Credits: NBC News, Chicago mag, YouTube

GAY MARRIAGE: Why Is Pres OBAMA Obsessed With GAY Rights?? (UTAH)

#UTAH

WHY IS PRES OBAMA OBSESSED WITH GAY MARRIAGE??

OBAMA RECOGNIZES GAY MARRIAGE IN UTAH

Effective immediately the OBAMA Admin has announced it will recognize GAY Marriage in UTAH.

Why am I Not surprised??

Pres OBAMA will Speak up LOUD & CLEAR for GAY Marriage,

yet remain SILENT for a CHILD in CALIFORNIA who was almost MURDERED just to Cover-Up Medical MALPRACTICE & ORGAN Harvesting.

I have NEVER in my life time seen a U.S. President so Obsessed with GAY Marriage!

And if any American Voters Oppose GAY Marriage, or Disagree with GAY Marriage the OBAMA Admin Punishes those people.

It's absolutely Unreal how much Pres OBAMA caters to GLAAD & other GAY Rights Organizations.

Is it because GLAAD donated a ton of MONEY to both of his Presidential Campaigns??

Let's be real people.

OBAMA fights Harder for GAY Marriage then he does for ANYTHING else in America.

For ex:

AL-QAEDA

Improving OBAMACARE

JOBS

EDUCATION

Fixing the NSA

Restructuring the IRS & Reforming the TAX CODE, etc.,

Instead he is Only Laser-Focused on GAY Marriage & GAY Rights!

So is there any wonder why most American Voters NO longer TRUST him???

WHY IS PRES OBAMA OBSESSED WITH GAY MARRIAGE??




ARTICLE: "Obama Administration Will Recognize Same-sex Marriages In Utah"

The Justice Department announced Friday it will recognize - for federal purposes - same-sex marriages performed for a short period in Utah.

The state on Wednesday said it would not recognize the approximately 1,000 marriages or marriage licenses issued for gay and lesbian couples, at least until the issue is fully resolved in the courts.

"These families should not be asked to endure uncertainty regarding their status as the litigation unfolds," Attorney General Eric Holder said in a videotaped message.

"In the days ahead, we will continue to coordinate across the federal government to ensure the timely provision of every federal benefit to which Utah couples and couples throughout the country are entitled – regardless of whether they in same-sex or opposite-sex marriages," he added.

The federal government's decision will likely create more legal chaos over the constitutionality of same-sex marriage that is playing out in Utah, and several other states.

The Supreme Court last year said gay and lesbian couples legally married in their states were entitled to the same federal benefits enjoyed by opposite-sex partners.

The office of Utah Gov. Gary Herbert had sent a letter to Cabinet officials Wednesday saying that, based on advice from the state's attorney general, "state recognition of same-sex marital status is on hold until further notice.

"Please understand this position is not intended to comment on the legal status of those same-sex marriages - that is for the courts to decide," the governor's chief of staff, Derek Miller, wrote. "The intent of this communication is to direct state agency compliance with current laws that prohibit the state from recognizing same-sex marriages."

The current legal and political fight erupted December 20 when U.S. District Judge Robert Shelby concluded Utah's law banning same-sex marriage, approved in 2004, conflicted with the constitutional guarantees of equal protection and due process. That prompted many counties to begin issuing marriage licenses, but the state then appealed to the Supreme Court.

The justices on Monday blocked enforcement of the district court ruling until the constitutional questions are fully resolved. A federal appeals court could hold oral arguments as soon as March. A ruling there could affect all states within the court's jurisdiction: Colorado, Kansas, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Utah and Wyoming.

But Holder said, "In the meantime, I am confirming today that, for purposes of federal law, these marriages will be recognized as lawful and considered eligible for all relevant federal benefits on the same terms as other same-sex marriages."

Sources: AP, CNN