Supremes give AZ supremely foolish silent treatment

March 20, 2018

Without even trying to rationalize its decision, the U.S. Supreme Court rejected Arizona Attorney General Mark Brnovich’s efforts to uphold a 6-year old executive order issued by then-Gov. Jan Brewer, which denied driver’s licenses to those known as DACA recipients — Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals. Though characterized as children brought to the United States by their illegal alien parents, there is no means of verifying the claims. Those who have signed up for DACA are shielded from deportation, allowed driver’s licenses and given work permits.

They need only affirm they were 16 years of age or younger when they initially entered the United States and are currently 35 years of age or younger. They have to declare that they have been persons of good moral character since initially being brought to the U.S. as children by their parents — illegally. Authenticating how many came as babes in arms or ably propelled themselves over the border last year at age 34 is impossible to substantiate. As we’ve previously pointed out many of these “kids” could actually be grandparents. 

“Our case has always been about more than just driver’s licenses,” Attorney General Brnovich said in a statement. “It’s about the separation of powers and whether the president, any president, can unilaterally act and bypass Congress to create new laws.”

This ongoing legal issue was precipitated by Barack Obama and was stopped dead in its tracks on Monday. Read the May 22, 2017 petition to the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals, which begins with the “Question Presented“ and ends with the “Conclusion” which authorized the denial, stating it did “not warrant the Court‘s consideration.”

That is exactly what occurred yesterday at the U.S. Supreme Court.

For the U.S. Supreme Court to remain silent on this crucial issue is shameful.


Traumatized teens marching against guns target wrong culprit

February 20, 2018

Blame and threaten Pres. Trump, NRA rather than gun free zones

Statistics point to the fact that it is guns in the hands of the wrong people — psychotic shooters in gun free zones — who are the actual culprits.

This National Review article,A Look at the Facts on Gun-Free Zones,” was published over two years ago, prior to the carnage perpetrated by an expelled student charged with  killing at least 17 classmates and wounding more than a dozen others at his former high school in Parkland, Florida. The LA Times provides an overview of the shooter.

The nation’s sympathies are with the survivors of the horrific bloodbath and the families of those who were mowed down by the manic assailant, who mysteriously slipped through the hands of law enforcement, though the FBI was pre-warned about him in January. Students, encouraged by anti-Second Amendment activists, have called on their peers around the country to demand action. The National School Walkout on March 14 and the March for Our Lives on March 24 are scheduled. With no understanding of the Second Amendment, they are calling for its repeal as they blame the NRA and President Trump for the actions of a former classmate many described as odd and troubled. That would be analogous to banning cars for highway deaths or bread knives for fatal stabbings.

“We’re marching because it’s not just schools. It’s movie theaters, it’s concerts, it’s nightclubs,” student Alex Wind when appearing on NBC’s “Meet the Press.”

“This kind of stuff can’t just happen. You know, we are marching for our lives, we’re marching for the 17 lives we lost. And we’re marching for our children’s lives and our children’s children and their children.”

“These people who are being funded by the NRA are not going to be allowed to remain in office when midterm elections roll around,” student Emma Gonzalez declared. “They’re going to be voted out of office. Incumbency rates are going to drop.”

Mute when 14 mass shootings occurred during Barack Obama‘s presidency, they obviously have been well coached to blame President Trump. Student David Hogg, called the president “disgusting” for questioning a lack of action by Democrats when they controlled both houses of Congress and the White House.

Ignoring Obama, whose gun-controlled hometown of Chicago rivals a battlefield, Hogg stated, “You are in that exact position right now, and you want to look back on our history and blame the Democrats? That’s disgusting, You’re the President. You’re supposed to bring this nation together, not divide us. How dare you!  Children are dying, and their blood is on your hands because of that. Please take action. Stop going on vacation in Mar-a-Lago. Take action. Work with Congress.”

What they don’t understand is that “gun free zones” are tantamount to issuing an invitation to would-be assassins, alerting them to the fact that there’s no security.

There is no question that our culture has made violence an entertainment staple for decades, from violence in cartoons watched by toddlers to video games favored by preteens and their older siblings, willingly purchased by their obliging parents who slough off the mind numbing effects. Movies and song lyrics contribute to desensitization to violence.

The Second Amendment was placed immediately after the First enshrining freedom of speech for a reason. Our Founders regarded gun ownership as that important.  Not only for hunting, but to provide a means of defense against an over-zealous government.

Suspended lawyer attacks AZ AG in Republic editorial & UPDATE

December 17, 2017

Serial suer has filed hundreds of lawsuits, been suspended by State Bar

The Opinion page at the daily newspaper consists of a one-sided view of events and individuals. There hasn’t been an Op-Ed page in years — one challenging the editorial page rife with leftist spew. At one time the now-failing Arizona Republic occasionally ran syndicated conservative columnists, whose opinion pieces it had to purchase. Now it relies on “My Turn” activists with a grudge to bolster its radical editorial board’s distorted views.

 The irrational headline, “Why does Brnovich hate the disabled,” is a case in point. Brnovich is Arizona’s Attorney General Mark Brnovich. The absurd “hate” charge is leveled by lawyer Peter Strojnik, a legal gadfly who has made a career of filing specious Americans with Disabilities Act lawsuits.  In 2012, Peter Stojnik, was reinstated as a member of the State Bar of Arizona  after being suspended for 30 days.

 The lack of ethics are hereditary. In December 2016, Strojnik’s same named lawyer son was suspended by the State Bar of Arizona for attempting to “publicly shame” a business into settlement. Peter K. Strojnik was suspended for 30 days and ordered to serve a two-year probation period, which included undergoing chemical dependency treatment and  psychological evaluation.

 ABC15 News Investigative reporter Dave Biscobing provides the background on the elder Peter Stojnik’s ongoing legal battles with the Federal Court and Attorney General Mark Brnovich. Hundreds of questionable accessibility lawsuits have been filed against Valley businesses without prior notification.

 The bizarre newspaper article features a boldfaced question below the vulgar headline claiming Brnovich hates the disabled: “Courts have repeatedly slapped down the Arizona attorney general’s efforts to fight the rights of the disabled. Why is he still at it?”

That the Arizona Republic would print this factually incorrect information tells more about the lack of judgment of Phil Boas, the newspaper’s editorial director, than it does about the repeatedly sanctioned, provocateur lawyer who wrote the preposterous article and deals in deceit.

December 19, 2017  UPDATE:

Mea Culpa from Phil Boas

 Boas: We need to set the record straight on ADA-lawsuit guest column

Using the royal “We” Phil Boas, the Arizona Republic’s Editorial Page director admits his mistake in giving credibility to repeatedly sanctioned gadfly lawyer Peter Strojnik.

Strojnik, who makes his living filing hundreds of bogus lawsuits under the guise of the Americans with Disability Act, was provided a platform and despicable headline to slander Arizona Attorney General Mark Brnovich.

The failing newspaper has begun resorting to obviously unvetted My Turn “guest columns” since they cost nothing and  it is in neither a mental mode nor financial position to purchase actual Op-Eds challenging the liberal vantage point of the Hillary endorsing daily, which claimed to be conservative as they made the preposterous recommendation.  Arizonans who still read their spew overwhelmingly rejected the advice. Many cancelled their subscriptions.

It’s not surprising that within just two years of being brought on as president of the Arizona Republic, Mi-Ai Parrish is resigning the post she took to much acclaim — irrationally based on her ethnic minority status.  What more appropriate spot to move on to than the Walter Cronkite School of Journalism at ASU where students who should value the First Amendment, shut down the free speech of invited guest, then-Maricopa County sheriff Joe Arpaio, by rudely singing over him at the mistakenly named First Amendment Forum, until it was shut down.


Jeff Flake’s son, ex-wife lose: Jury decides in favor of Arpaio & taxpayers

December 16, 2017

During a federal civil court trial in which Austin Flake and his now-ex wife Logan Brown were suing the taxpayers of Maricopa County for $8 million in a malicious prosecution case, their attempts to play on the sympathies of the jurors fell flat with Thursday’s verdict.

 The duo were the caretakers for nearly two dozen dogs who died excruciating heat related deaths at a Gilbert kennel owned by Brown’s vacationing parents. They claimed former Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio brought charges against them in order to embarrass Flake’s father, Sen. Jeff Flake — so out of step with Arizona Republicans, he does a fine job of discrediting himself without any outside assist. Papa Flake’s polling numbers sunk so low that he has opted not to seek reelection. After writing a 140-page anti-Trump diatribe masquerading as a book and with a title stolen from Barry Goldwater‘s iconic, “Conscience of a Conservative,” he was unable to resuscitate his career. Arizona is not the place to deride Pres. Trump. He won Arizona’s GOP primary by more than 20 percentage points before carrying the state in the general election. Among the president’s most ardent supporters, the feeling of betrayal is particularly intense.

After a six-day trial, the jury was unmoved by Flake and Brown’s claims of fear, distrust of the criminal justice system and depression requiring therapy and medication, resulting in “bickering” that ended their marriage. Austin Flake testified that he was forced to quit BYU until the matter was resolved — and gasp! — he had to get a job. Jurors refused to award them damages in the animal cruelty case that riveted Valley residents in 2014. The shocking account revolved around the boarded dogs being locked in a small utility room, without food, water or cooling in the scorching summer heat. After initially alleging the dogs bit through the electrical wires, they later claimed the air-conditioning unit malfunctioned. A Maricopa County Grand Jury indicted the Flake’s and Logan’s parents Todd and MaLeisa Hughes.

After the divorce, whiney Austin testified he got a dog for emotional support. Had he won, the millions of dollars the twosome originally claimed they deserved, the greenbacks would not have licked his face, but would likely have calmed him considerably.

Deputies from the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office found dead dogs piled like cordwood in a nearby shed after the couple’s crude attempts to revive the still dying pets with a garden hose failed.  Austin and Logan admitted they never called a veterinarian, when they first saw the horrific condition of the family pets left in what their owners believed was optimum care.

Seeing Red AZ wrote numerous accounts of the then-ongoing saga that took unexpected twists and turns, exemplified by Logan’s mother and stepfather who were not even in the state at the time of the atrocity serving 23 days jail time. This single post provides a broad overview.

Russian involvement in US election? Nope. it was the FBI

December 15, 2017

When suspicious Republicans got wind of the fact that Democrat operative and former CNN commentator Donna Brazile was funneling questions to Hillary Clinton in advance of the presidential debate, the topic was stonewalled and termed preposterous — until  Brazile, the onetime chair of the DNC, finally admitted her involvement. Hacked emails from the campaign blew the lid off her previous denials.

And so it is with the now known to be fraudulent claims of Russian involvement in the 2016 presidential election. “Collusion” was the Democrat’s repeated byword, used to describe Donald Trump, his friends and even family members.

It turns out the collusion was on the part of the FBI, the agency with the reputation of being squeaky clean. People working for the FBI from former Director James Comey on down, were poised to protect the conniving Hillary Clinton. Judicial Watch has done the research and exposes the incredible deception, including the purposeful words Comey used to exonerate Clinton — replacing “gross negligence” which denotes criminality, with the softer term “extreme carelessness.” Political bias clearly influenced the Clinton email investigations.

Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s Russia probe has become “irreparably tainted” after “endless revelations of bias” against President Trump. Laura Ingraham’s “Angle” monologue is enlightening.

 And that damning dossier guaranteed to bring Donald Trump’s political aspirations to a screeching halt? It was a bogus construct, but gleefully hand-carried to then-FBI Director Comey by none other than Trump-hater Arizona’s Senior Senator (ASS), who had previously referred to his liberal friend Hillary Clinton as a rock star he could support. In the end, he did — as did Arizona’s junior senator Jeff Flake. Both Republicrats announced they and their families withheld their votes from Republican nominee, Donald Trump.

 Flake, who authored a Trump-bashing 140-page booklet, has opted not to seek reelection due to bottom-dragging polling numbers. He did not  want the embarrassment of a massive primary election loss to Dr. Kelli Ward, a family practice physician and conservative former state senator, who had been crushing him in the polls. Prior to his political career, unprincipled Flake worked as a lobbyist and registered foreign agent for Rossing Uranium — one of the world’s largest suppliers of nuclear fuel —- which operates a mine in the African country of Namibia where Flake did his LDS mission. Flake earned a substantial salary opening doors in D.C. and promoting the firm which had deep financial ties to Iran.

Using The Freedom of Information Act, lawyers at Judicial Watch have sued for access to documents to probe this scandal that has permeated the highest levels of our government.

Fox News headlines its report:Republicans turn focus to FBI’s McCabe over texts on ‘insurance’ against Trump.” It’s filled with revealing information.

Although the networks and newspapers have given this scant coverage, expect this investigation to explode.

Unseemly sideshow at the Ninth Circus Court of Appeals

December 11, 2017

Sexual impropriety once again raises its multi-faceted, sordid head. As if members of the U.S. House and Senate, business titans, and celebs aren’t enough, the judiciary now gets its turn at the harassment lynching tree. Ancient claims, often alleged by unidentified women are all that are needed to bring down the powerful in the current climate.

The latest is Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Alex Kozinski. We’re no fans of the liberal, frequently overturned U.S. Circuit Court, but Alex Kozinski, a Reagan appointee on the bench since 1985 is decidedly unlike his fellow jurists. His few campaign contributions were not large and made in the early 1990s, but they all went to Republican congressional candidates. He served as chief judge of the appellate court for seven years.

Judge Kozinski’s personal background contributed to his broader view. He was born in Communist Rumania and immigrated to the U.S. with his Holocaust survivor parents when he was 12.  His background made him a supporter of the Second Amendment. Among his many notable quotes is this:

“My excellent colleagues have forgotten these bitter lessons of history. The prospect of tyranny may not grab the headlines the way vivid stories of gun crime usually do. But few saw the Third Reich coming until it was too late. The Second Amendment is a doomsday provision, one designed only for those exceptionally rare circumstances when all other rights have failed. A free people can only afford to make this mistake once.”

Yet, none of this background explains his bizarre predilections. In his case, there is no presumption of innocence. His actions are a repeat performance.

Just days ago, Heidi Bond —- who as a romance novelist uses the pseudonym Courtney Milan —- told The Washington Post that Kozinski showed her pornography three times in his chambers while she was clerking for him over a decade ago. Four other women who previously worked for Kozinski have since followed suit, saying he also acted improperly towards them, lacing his conservation with sexual innuendo. Except for Bond, Judge Kozinski’s accusers remain anonymous saying they feared “retaliation.” Other former Kozinski clerks contacted by the newspaper denied experiencing any harassment.

The judge, described as “brilliant and possessing a wry sense of humor,” is decidedly a mixed bag. n 1992 Judge Kozinski authored the foreword to a handbook titled, “Sexual Harassment in Employment Law.”

Constitutional-law professor Josh Blackman writing for National Review provides insight into the legality 0f Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) and Arizona law. Kozinski dissented. Read his reasoning on this contentious issue.

He may be brilliant and funny, but he has a decided disconnect. Similar allegations against Judge Kozinski emerged in 2008. At the time, his lawyer wife, Marcy J.K. Tiffany, sent this email* attempting to explain the reasons he had pornography on his computer.

The time has come for Judge Kozinski, age 67, to retire from his lifetime appointment. With President Trump naming his replacement, conservatives can breathe easily.

* H/T Patterico’s Pontifications


SCOTUS OKs Trump’s sensible travel restrictions — for now

December 5, 2017

Left-wing media placing political correctness before safety, reconfigure restrictions as a “Muslim ban”

Good news came Monday in the form of a U.S. Supreme Court decision which handed a victory to President Donald Trump by allowing imposition of his travel restrictions affecting people from six terror sponsoring countries to go into effect. Countries on the list are Chad, Iran, Libya, North Korea, Syria, and Yemen. Some Venezuelan government officials are also denied access to the U.S.

But the high court’s order is a waffle.

A federal court in Hawaii blocked the government from implementing the Trump administration’s Sept. 24 order allowing enhanced vetting and blocking entry into the U.S. by potential terrorists or other public safety threats. A federal judge in Maryland barred the government from enforcing the order relating to foreign nationals of affected countries claiming to have relationships with persons or institution in the United States. Lawyers representing the administration took the case to the Supreme Court last month seeking to implement all of the provisions providing security to Americans. 

The Trump administration argued that the September 24 order is different from its predecessors not only because of the “extensive worldwide review process” that led to its creation, but also because it applies to countries where Muslims are not a majority.

Still, the challenges go forward. The far left and frequently overturned San Francisco-based 9th Circuit Court of Appeals is scheduled to hear oral argument on Wednesday, with oral arguments to follow in the 4th Circuit, based in Richmond, Virginia on Friday.

Liberal Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg (Clinton appointee) and Sonia Sotomayor (Obama appointee) dissented from Monday’s Supreme Court opinion.

Supreme Court Justices and their bios can be seen here.