Miscellaneous And Off Topic Subjects

[iam416]

On its face, this particular prosecution strikes me as ridiculous. If you buy into the argument that the Feds were targeting this family, it's a fucking disgrace. This is the protestors version of the backstory - TIFWIW:

The story as told by the protesters begins not with the federal criminal case against Steven and Dwight Hammond but many years earlier, with the creation and expansion of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge, a tract of federal land set aside by President Theodore Roosevelt as “a preserve and breeding-ground for native birds.” The federal government has since expanded the preserve in part by buying adjacent private land. Protesters allege that when private landowners refused to sell, the federal government got aggressive, diverting water during the 1980s into the “rising Malheur lakes.” Eventually, the lakes flooded “homes, corrals, barns, and graze-land.” Ranchers who were “broke and destroyed” then “begged” the government to buy their “useless ranches.”

By the 1990s, the Hammonds were among the few private landowners who remained adjacent to the Refuge. The protesters allege that the government then began a campaign of harassment designed to force the family to sell its land, a beginning with barricaded roads and arbitrarily revoked grazing permits and culminating in an absurd anti-terrorism prosecution based largely on two “arsons” that began on private land but spread to the Refuge.

[AlabamAlum]

So, any other legal appeals remain for the brothers or are they stuck with this?

[iam416]

Not sure where they stand, but 9th Circuit en banc and then Supreme Court.

This past term the Court struck down a prosecution under the anti-shredding provisions of Sarbanes-Oxley of a fisherman who threw fish back at the harbor. A Fed was inspecting the boat and told the dude to keep some undersized grouper as evidence. Apparently the guy threw those fish back and replaced them with not quite as undersized fish. The Court thought the application of Sarbanes-Oxley to this situation was poppycock. (He was convicted of and did not appeal violating a law that actually made sense in his situation). The dissent (Kagan, Thomas, Scalia and Kenndy) argued a fish is a tangible thing -- good counterpoint. But the intent of the bill carried the day. So, they're not entirely receptive to Federal laws being stretched well-beyond their intent to prosecute folks.

Personally, I think the royal we all ought to be concerned about the misapplication of prosecutorial discretion, whether it's in the hinterlands of Oregon or the inner city of Cleveland. It's a shame each respective issue tends to break down along perceived party lines.

But, alas, I am not king and thus cannot advance mankind with my benevolent wisdom.

[entropy]

all you have to do is watch "Making a Murderer" on Netflix to understand corruption in our gov't system...

[Wild Hoss]

Personally, I think the royal we all ought to be concerned about the misapplication of prosecutorial discretion, whether it's in the hinterlands of Oregon or the inner city of Cleveland.

This.

However, they'd been in negotiations for almost ten years....the Hammonds had the opportunity to end this before it got this far. I would not be the least bit surprised to learn they have purposefully passed on such chances to continue to poke Uncle Sam in the eye. It happens alot. From there it starts to get personal...and a federal prosecutor is the wrong individual to get into a personal beef with.

[Dr. Strangelove]

The Lt. Gov. of Texas was on the BBC today. He denounced Obama's latest gun speech and called for an end to any and all background checks.

[iam416]

That dude is out there.

[AlabamAlum]

I'm kinda impressed with you Talent. You are a bed-wetting lib, but have set aside politics and are defending the tea party Hammond brothers in the face of overreaching prosecutorial head hunting.

Kudos.

[iam416]

I'm a true moderate/independent these days. In fact, I'd say I'm probably more right than left. But, eh, whatever.

[AlabamAlum]

You have truly changed and are closer to my moderate (little L) libertarian leanings.

Again, kudos.

[AlabamAlum]

The question is, do you hold your nose and vote for the PAH?

[lineygoblue]

PAH = President Apparent Hillary?

[iam416]

My wife wants to see a woman elected President. And she's still bitter that PAH got more primary votes than Obama. So, I'll probably do just that. Plus, I think she's pragmatic to the core of her porcine bones. As an added bonus, it's potentially better for me if she wins. That would all but guarantee an R win statewide in Ohio, and my boss is probably the favoritem to run for the Rs for Gov.

I will officially become an R if Sanders is nominated.

[iam416]

Pig Ankled Harridan. As coined by Volmillion over a decade ago on PNN.

[AlabamAlum]

Sanders is a fruitcake. I have an uncle in Scotland who remonds me of Bernie.

On the vote: what's funny if you do a blind assessment of policies (aside from the tv rhetoric), the PAH is more hawkish and conservative than The Donald in many respects. Pragmatic? Yes. Nicely phrased. I'll probably do the same and give her my vote, too. Not that it matters in Alabama. The R's candidate will carry 85% of the vote.