07.30.13
by

Reason.com: California Student Who Had to Drink His Own Urine While in DEA Custody Settles With U.S. Gov for $4 Million

Daniel Chong, the California college student who nearly died after DEA agents put him in a holding cell in 2012 and then forgot about him for four days, will receive a $4.1 million settlement from the U.S. Government, according to the Associated Press. The AP also reports that “no one has yet been disciplined for the April 2012 incident and no criminal charges will be filed.”

Chong was arrested in April 2012 at a 4/20 party, and put in a DEA holding cell. In May 2012 NBC interviewed Chong about his experience:

In his desperation, he said he was forced to drink his own urine.

“I had to do what I had to do to survive….I hallucinated by the third day,” Chong said. “I was completely insane.”

Chong said he lost roughly 15 pounds during the time he was alone. His lawyer confirmed that Chong ingested a powdery substance found inside the cell. Later testing revealed the substance was methamphetamine.

After days of being ignored, Chong said he tried to take his own life by breaking the glass from his spectacles with his teeth and then carving “Sorry mom,” on his wrists. He said nurses also found pieces of glass in his throat, which led him to believe he ingested the pieces purposefully.

Chong said he could hear DEA employees and people in neighboring cells. He screamed to let them know he was there, but no one replied. He kicked the door, but no one came to get him.

By the time DEA officers found Chong in his cell Wednesday morning Chong was completely incoherent, said Iredale.

“I didn’t think I would come out,” Chong said.

The AP also reports that DOJ Inspector General is investigating Chong’s case.

——-

Click below for more over at Reason.com

http://reason.com/blog/2013/07/30/california-student-who-had-to-drink-his

07.29.13
by

The Daily Beast: Paul Krugman’s Nasty and Inane Attack on ‘Libertarian Populism’

130718-krugman-gillespie-tease

It’s got to be a pretty good gig to be Paul Krugman. He’s rich enough to bitch to The New Yorker about not being able to afford a home in St. John so, sigh, St. Croix has to do. He’s got tenure at the second-best college in New Jersey, an equally secure gig at the second-best newspaper in New York, and he’s even copped a Nobel Prize (economics, but still). He’s asked for his opinion on pop bands in a way that I’m pretty sure Milton Friedman or John Kenneth Galbraith never experienced (thank god for small favors). “The New Pornographers are probably technically better than Arcade Fire,” he’s solemnly sworn to Playboy. “But what the hell? It’s all good.”

The man also known as Krugtron the Invincible is able to utter such fallacious conventional deep thoughts as “the Great Depression ended largely thanks to a guy named Adolf Hitler” and that the 9/11 attacks were just the ticket to goose the soft early-’00s economy in lower Manhattan (“All of a sudden, we need some new office buildings,” he actually wrote in the Times on September 14, 2001) and still be taken seriously. He’s repeatedly called for a a bogus alien invasion that occasions even more super-stimulative spending than we’ve seen already in this awful 21st century—an idea presumably lifted, unacknowledged, from the Watchmen comic books.

 

Best of all, Krugman has attained that rare level of eminence where he doesn’t even have to engage the very opponents he dismisses as beneath contempt. Like Kurtz in Heart of Darkness and Apocalypse Now, he just needs to wave his hand, mumble vague abjurations, and rest assured his devoted minions will finish his work for him.

 

Krugman’s latest target is “libertarian populism,” which he summarizes thus: “The idea here is that there exists a pool of disaffected working-class white voters who failed to turn out last year but can be mobilized again with the right kind of conservative economic program—and that this remobilization can restore the Republican Party’s electoral fortunes.”

 

This ain’t gonna happen, chuffs Krugman, because … because … because … Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.)! Despite the fact that the former Republican vice-presidential nominee and marathon-time amnesiac is nobody’s idea of a libertarian or a populist, Krugman insists that libertarian populism is doomed precisely because  to “the extent that there was any substance to the Ryan [budget] plan, it mainly involved savage cuts in aid to the poor. And while many nonwhite Americans depend on these safety-net programs, so do many less-well-off whites—the very voters libertarian populism is supposed to reach.”

 

Had Colonel Krugman ventured outside his ideological compound, he might have happened upon the writings of Tim Carney of The Washington Examiner. To the extent that libertarian populism has a policy agenda, it’s mostly thanks to Carney, who likes to write books attacking right- and left-wing crony capitalists. He’s libertarian in that he consistently believes that freer markets function more fairly and more efficiently, and he generally thinks people should be left alone when it comes to economic and personal freedom (he’s not an absolutist on most things). He’s populist in that he is basically obsessed with what he sees as concentrations of power and wealth among elites who rig markets, status, and more against the little guy.

 

Unsurprisingly, Carney’s libertarian-populist policy agenda has precious little to do with starving poor people to death or stoking white working-class resentment against dusky hordes (Carney is pro-immigration). Unless by dusky hordes, you mean Wall Street banksters and well-tanned pols such as Speaker John Boehner.

 

For better or for worse, it’s filled with prescriptions such as “cut or eliminate the payroll tax” (that’s the one that hurts low-wage earners the most); “break up the big banks and/or place stricter safety and soundness rules on them” (hmm, how does that help the Rothschilds again?); and “end corporate welfare” (Carney specifically name-checks the awful Export-Import Bank and subsidies to Big Sugar, which both receive bipartisan congressional support).

—-

Click below for the full article.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/07/19/paul-krugman-s-nasty-and-inane-attack-on-libertarian-populism.html

07.28.13
by

Market Watch: Attempt to curb NSA surveillance defeated in House

House lawmakers on Wednesday defeated an attempt to drastically curb a national-security program that collects the phone records of millions of Americans, after a tense debate on the balance between privacy rights and
government efforts to find terrorists.

The measure was narrowly defeated, 205-217, after last-minute lobbying by the Obama administration and House members on the intelligence panel, who said the program was crucial to national security.

House Speaker John Boehner (R., Ohio), who doesn’t often cast a ballot, voted against the amendment, reflecting nervousness among opponents about whether they would be able to defeat the bill.

The measure, from Rep. Justin Amash (R., Mich.), would have blocked funding for the National Security Agency to collect phone records unless they pertained to a particular person under investigation. The program came to public attention due to disclosures by Edward Snowden, the former NSA employee who recently released details of two classified programs.

——

Click below for the full article.

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/attempt-to-curb-nsa-surveillance-defeated-in-house-2013-07-25?siteid=yhoof2

07.27.13
by

NY Times: The Pros and Cons of a Surveillance Society

Here are three topics much in the news these days: Prism, the surveillance program of the national security agency; the death of Trayvon Martin; and Google Glass and the rise of wearable computers that record everything.

Although these might not seem connected, they are part of a growing move for, or against, a surveillance society.

On one side of this issue we have people declaring that too much surveillance, especially in the form of wearable cameras and computers, is detrimental and leaves people without any privacy in public. On the other side there are people who argue that a society with cameras everywhere will make the world safer and hold criminals more accountable for their actions.

But it leaves us with this one very important question: Do we want to live in a surveillance society that might ensure justice for all, yet privacy for none?

In the case of Mr. Martin, an unarmed black teenager who was fatally shot by George Zimmerman, a neighborhood watch volunteer, the most crucial evidence about how an altercation between the two began — one that ultimately led to Mr. Martin’s death — came down to Mr. Zimmerman’s word.

As the trial showed, eyewitness accounts all differed. One neighbor who was closest to the altercation saw a “lighter-skinned” man on the bottom during a fight that ensued. Two other neighbors believed that Mr. Zimmerman was on top during the fight. One said she saw the man on top walk away after the fight.

Clearly the memory of one or all of those neighbors had been spoiled by time, confusion and adrenaline. But if one of those witnesses — including Mr. Martin or Mr. Zimmerman — had been wearing Google Glass or another type of personal recording device, the facts of that night might have been much clearer.

“Whenever something mysterious happens we ask: ‘Why can’t we hit rewind? Why can’t we go to the database?’” said Jay Stanley, a senior policy analyst with the American Civil Liberties Union in Washington. “We want to follow the data trail and know everything that we need to know. The big question is: Who is going to be in control of that recording and data?”

Prism, the highly secretive government program that was brought to light last month by a government whistleblower, is an example of a much larger scale of recording and data. President Obama has defended the government’s spying programs, saying they help in the fight against terrorists and ensure that Americans stay safe.

But critics say it goes too far. Representative James Sensenbrenner, the longtime Republican lawmaker from Wisconsin, compared today’s government surveillance to “Big Brother” from the Geroge Orwell’s “Nineteen Eighty-Four.”

Michael Shelden, author of “Orwell: The Authorized Biography,” told NPR earlier this month that today’s surveillance society is just like the book.

Orwell, Mr. Shelden said, “could see that war and defeating an enemy could be used as a reason for increasing political surveillance.” He added, “You were fighting a never-ending war that gave you a never-ending excuse for looking into people’s lives.”

——

Click below for the full article.

http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/07/16/the-pros-and-cons-of-a-surveillance-society/?partner=yahoofinance&_r=0

07.26.13
by

1787 Network: Is Detroit Our Starnesville?

Detroit reminds me of a quote from the Grail Knight in Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade, “He chose poorly.”  In the movie the evil bastard who “chose poorly” shrivels up and turns to ancient ruins because of his “enlightened” choice, so too has Detroit. Indy who didn’t choose poorly did not suffer the same fate.  Just like in the movie those who “chose wisely” don’t suffer the same fate, nor should they.

Detroit is the manifestation of those who “chose wisely” going Galt. It is precisely the condition and outcome that result from the reality of implementing the utopian ideas of so called progressives.  Detroit mirrors Starnesville, a car-manufacturing city that became a ghost town after experimenting with socialism. You can read about it in Ayn Rand’s 1957 novel “Atlas Shrugged.”

The federal government and tax payers from the other 50 states should under no circumstances bail out Detroit. It should be allowed to go bankrupt.  The citizens of Detroit should be allowed to suffer the consequences of their choices: specifically their voting decisions.  It is the citizens of Detroit who are at fault for Detroit’s demise not the rest of the nation. Every single voter in Detroit who voted for politicians who expanded the government of Detroit is responsible.

Let’s hope Detroit isn’t the indicator that Starnesville was in the novel.  In Atlas Shrugged, the demise and failure of Starnesville was the harbinger of the collapse of the entire society.  Detroit and its current bankrupt condition is the direct result of who the people of Detroit elected.  Those who were disproportionately taxed and had to pay for the utopian ideas of the elected leaders, when it was obvious that their vote for responsible government and free enterprise were ineffective, voted with their feet; they moved.  The auto industry built plants in Kansas, Alabama, Georgia, Kentucky, etc. they quit building and expanding in Detroit. The empty wasteland of factories in Detroit is evidence of the reality of implementing enlightened ideas of the statist leftists.  The voters of these states, who elected people that created laws and an environment more inviting to auto manufactures than Detroit and Michigan did, are not responsible and should not have to bail out the voters who embraced the empty promises of Democrats.

——

Click below for the full article.

http://1787network.com/2013/07/is-detroit-our-starnesville/7203

07.25.13
by

Motley Fool: Bernanke’s QE Magic Trick

In May of this year, Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke suggested to a congressional panel that the Fed could taper its policy of Quantitative Easing (QE). The obvious happened — the stock market took a quick hit, and interest rates spiked.

So Bernanke pulled a quick change, saying the Federal Reserve will continue an open-ended policy of QE, which artificially suppresses interest rates but immeasurably helps the housing, bond and stock markets. This was a calculated act to test the reaction of the markets.Their negative response validated what Bernanke already knew to be true, that the Fed is trapped in its magic policy of Quantitative Easing, and it’s going to be much harder to make it disappear than anticipated.

Bernanke will be exiting the Federal Reserve stage at the end of his term in January 2014, and returning to academia. I imagine he is glad to do so, leaving the possible tapering of QE to his successor. And, with only months left in his tenure as chairman of the Fed, it’s understandable that he would not want to show his hand and risk rocking the stock market.

—–

Click below for the full article.

http://beta.fool.com/oglove/2013/07/25/bernankes-qe-magic-trick/41523/?source=eogyholnk0000001

07.24.13
by

National Journal: Michigan’s Amash Quietly Tries to Build a National Brand

The libertarian lawmaker wants to be a known name, whether he runs for the Senate or not.

——

The young conservative known to Republican colleagues as the most reliable “no” vote in Congress is trying to build his political brand—and collect the campaign cash that comes with it.

Maybe it’s for a Senate run. (Justin Amash still won’t say.) But what’s certain is that the Michigan Republican wants to be seen as the go-to libertarian in the House—a position he’s been trying to fill since Ron Paul left Congress.

“Regardless of what my decision is [on the Senate race], I think it’s important to get out there, spend some time throughout the state and try to spread the message that I’ve been spreading here and in my district—the message of limited government, economic freedom, and individual liberty,” Amash said.

Amash, in his second term, has already earned a reputation as one of the libertarian stalwarts in Washington. After the National Security Agency’s surveillance programs were revealed, Amash was sought out by reporters and lawmakers alike. When he introduced a bill with Democratic Rep. John Conyers to limit the NSA’s targeting of phone records, dozens of members, in both parties, asked to become cosponsors. And last week, as the House considered an appropriations bill for the Defense Department, Amash pushed an amendment to defund the NSA’s surveillance.

But those limited accomplishments don’t easily penetrate the donor class beyond the Beltway and his own district. So now, Amash is focused on bolstering and broadening his fan base.

Last week, the lawmaker attended a series of fundraisers in the vast expanse known as Metro Detroit—on the opposite side of the state from his district. He met with well-heeled Republican donors in Birmingham, chatted with the Lebanese Chamber of Commerce in Southfield, and held private gatherings with a smattering of other business groups, according to a source close to Amash.

And last month, he quietly launched a national mail campaign, targeting wealthy libertarian-leaning donors in places such as Florida and California, the source confirmed.

Amash is seeing a return on the investment already. According to his newly filed report to the Federal Election Commission, he raised roughly $220,000 in the second quarter of 2013—significantly more than the $125,000 he raised in the first quarter and easily eclipsing his haul from the second quarter of last year.

Still, these improved second-quarter numbers are not particularly strong for any member of Congress, much less someone considering a Senate campaign. As a point of comparison, House Intelligence Committee Chairman Mike Rogers, R-Mich., who also weighed a Senate bid, raised more than $420,000 during the same period. And their Michigan colleague, Rep. Gary Peters, who entered the Senate race in June as the Democratic favorite, raised more than $1 million.

——

Click below for the full article.

 

07.23.13
by

UPDATE: Rutherford deputy in DUI checkpoint video once resigned post

NOTE: The following article is an update to the video we posted on July 4….

——————————–

A Rutherford County Sheriff’s deputy at the center of a controversy tied to a videotaped DUI checkpoint stop has in the past drawn the scrutiny of his superiors and once resigned from the office, a review of disciplinary records shows.

Deputy A.J. Ross was featured in a July 4 video posted by the Libertarian Party that depicted a verbal altercation between Ross and 21-year-old Chris Kalbaugh. The Middle Tennessee State University junior accuses Ross of violating his constitutional rights during a checkpoint stop.

Sheriff Robert Arnold’s office has refused to comment on the video, other than to say Ross’s actions are “currently under investigation.”

But sheriff’s office records show Arnold rehired Ross in November 2010, six years after the deputy resigned amid accusations that he lied about whether he had auto insurance after an accident on Thompson Lane in Murfreesboro.

According to the incident report, Ross told the Murfreesboro police officer on the scene of the September 2003 accident that “he did not have his insurance card with him nor inside the vehicle he was occupying.”

“Mr. Ross, however, was very assuring that the pickup he was in was insured,” the report states.

Ross identified himself as a member of the Rutherford County Sheriff’s Office and was not issued a citation, according to the report.

The other man involved in the accident, after discovering the deputy’s vehicle was uninsured, called authorities and demanded to know why Ross was not given a citation, the report saud.

The sheriff’s office on June 22, 2004, recommended termination. Ross resigned June 23.

In the letter to then-Sheriff Truman Jones, Ross said he hoped they would be able to talk in the future. Jones hired Ross in 2002.

“I have enjoyed working for the Rutherford County Sheriff’s Office and wish I could have stayed and continued to do an excellent job for you and the citizens of Rutherford County,” Ross said in his resignation letter.

The office also suspended Ross for three 10-hour shifts for failing to appear in general sessions court in August 2003 for a DUI citation he issued, the disciplinary records show.

——–

Click below for the full article.

http://www.wbir.com/news/article/279740/2/Rutherford-deputy-in-DUI-checkpoint-video-once-resigned-post