Rudy Giuliani came to Houston to give the finger to the Republican base:

HOUSTON (AP) — Republican presidential candidate Rudy Giuliani forcefully reaffirmed his support for abortion rights on Friday and argued that his divergence from conservatives on the issue should not disqualify him from being the eventual GOP nominee.

Does anyone else find his choice of forum - Houston Baptist University - to be ironic? Genius or hubris?

I don’t believe I’ve ever actively campaigned against a Republican candidate. There’s a first time for everything.

This dropped into our inbox a moment ago:

The Three Amigos will honor Edd Hendee with the first ever awarded “EL HENRY” for his fine journalistic contribution to immigration public policy in his live interview with Johnnie S____, US District Atty, at 4PM today. The May 11th interview on KSEV 700AM was recognized by the authoritative source of journalistic endeavors itself, The Houston Chronicle, and was reported to be widely streamed by Congress in our Nation’s Capitol yesterday morning.

The award caps a long career for Mr. Hendee in immigration public policy radio, including the recent interview of two jurors in El Paso from Ramos and Compean case prosecuted by Mr. S____ that now would like to have the chance to change their verdict in the trial. Sound clips will be played from all three individuals validating the “EL HENRY” by the all volunteer Three Amigos radio team of Paul Bettencourt, Eric Andell, and Ben Streusand.

“The Voice of Texas Morning” show Co-Host Pat Gray, and producer Russell S____ were finalists for the first award of the “EL HENRY”, but were not validated by any authoritative journalistic source and thus will have to await future awards from the Three Amigos!

LST photographers were on hand to capture the presentation of the “EL HENRY” in a private ceremony just moments ago.

Regardless of your position on Ramos and Compean, most would agree that the debate would be much less visceral if the agents were free pending appeal, rather than jailed and subject to harm from other prisoners. I have said repeatedly that I did not understand why these guys were not allowed to be out pending appeal.

First, I should correct a misstatement of my own, some time back. I said that the prosecutor did not oppose release of the two pending appeal. In fact, what the prosecutor did not actively oppose was the release of the men between their sentencing date in October 2006 and their self-surrender date in mid-January 2007. The prosecutor, Debra Kanoff, affirmatively stated “the Government does not think the defendants pose a flight risk at this time” and left any other considerations to the “discretion of the Court.” (Sentencing Transcript, Oct. 19, 2006, pp. 74-75, link here.)

The Court, in fact, permitted the men to remain free and “self-surrender” in January 2007.

On October 25, 2006, the Court denied the motion for new trial. Assuming the Court addressed all grounds raised by the men, the only basis asserted for a new trial was that some jurors later claimed they were misled by incorrect factual statements of other jurors. (This would seem a rather perfunctory motion, but perhaps it was necessary to preserve certain points for appeal and the attorneys felt that a complete assertion of all arguments for a new trial would be ineffective before the trial judge.)

What happened afterward is hard to piece together from looking only at information on the the prosecutor’s and Court’s websites. In brief orders, the trial Court denied bond pending appeal for both Ramos and Compean. In both opinions, the Court said that no “exceptional reasons,” as required for release under 18 USC Sec. 3145, existed. (The statute states that a person may be released “if it is clearly shown that there are exceptional reasons why such person’s detention would not be appropriate). The statute does not define “exceptional reasons” and apparently that is left to be decided on a case by case basis. Various cases addressing the “exceptional reasons” standard have concluded:

Obligations to take care of elderly and ailing family members, or having to take care of nine children, are not exceptional reasons.

Release for one month was permitted because of the “exceptional circumstance” that the convicted person had not yet made arrangements for the care of her three young children while she was incarcerated.

Defendant’s medical condition was not a sufficient reason without a showing he could not be treated in jail.

A large show of support from the community was not an exceptional circumstance justifying release under the statute.

A guilty plea and agreement to cooperate with the goverment were not exceptional reasons warranting release.

Where an “Indian” who assaulted his brother had no previous violations of law, displayed constant remorse, had been forgiven by victim and other family members, and needed environment of his father’s home in very remote area where no drinking, violence, or smoking is permitted, the Court found “exceptional reasons.”

I did not see any cases in which the status of a defendant as a LEO was raised, but the case law indicates the determinaiton of “exceptional reasons” is within the judge’s discretion. From the information available on the websites, I do not know what “exceptional reasons” that the agents raised, though it may be in the Court file in El Paso.

What I found most curious, though, were statements in the opinion of the Fifth Circuit, which is hearing the appeal. On February 22, the Fifth Circuit denied the agents request for release during the appeal, stating that the agents “have not shown unique or unusual circumstances that justify their release based on an exceptional reason.” But the part that most caught my eye was this:

The motion of Ramos to seal his appeal of the district court’s denial of bond pending appeal and/or the memorandum in support of the motion for release pending appeal is GRANTED. The motion of the Government to seal its response to the appellants’ motions for release pending appeal is GRANTED.

Since Compean’s memorandum is apparantely not sealed, perhaps it is available in the court file to determine what the agents asserted as a basis for release.

All of this leaves several questions in my mind:

1. What were the arguments of the agents for release?
2. Why did the trial court not exercise its discretion in favor of release?
3. Did the Government ultimately oppose release in the sealed memorandum? (One of the written statements from Johnny Sutton’s office said that the district court properly applied the law which “mandated” detention pending appeal because of the conviction of a violent crime. One could infer from this that the Goverment opposed release, but the statement does not specifically address the Government’s position.) If so, why (considering the prosecutor did not consider them a flight risk for the puropses of release between sentencing and the self-surrender date)?
4. Why did Ramos file his motion to seal?
5. Could the subsequent jailhouse violence against one of the agents be used to make a new request for release pending appeal?

The answers to these questions may be as obvious as the nose on my face to one who is well-versed in this type of criminal prosecution. If so, perhaps one of LST’s readers can enlighten us. The fewer straw men in this case, the better.

Or, there may be more interesting answers to these questions. Of course, you are invited to postulate.

(And if we have anyone in El Paso who might be interested in looking at the public record for briefs and other items not in the transcripts or otherwise on the web sites, weigh in.)

Sorry for the length of this post, but nothing in this case seems simple.

It’s hard to find this in the Dinosaur Media, but guess where some of the Fort Dix terrorists entered the country:

The brothers entered the United States near Brownsville, Texas, in 1984, the source said, which would put their ages at 1 to 6 when they crossed the border.

The source said there is no record of them entering by way of a regular border crossing, so they are investigating whether they were smuggled into the country.

It’s also quite sobering that they crossed over 20 years ago. Were they brought here by far-sighted terrorists to be raised and trained as terrorists in this country?

Three of the six arrested were here illegally, and officials are now investigating whether the other three lied on their immigration paperwork.

I was stunned at what a Google search for “terrorists” and “southern border” or “Mexico” turned up. It is frightening.

Now, will someone remind me of the arguments for not protecting our southern border?

At least now the white flaggers on Capitol Hill will have to look the Iraquis in the eye and tell them we’re sacrificing them to the terrorists:

WASHINGTON - Worried Congress’ support for Iraq is deteriorating rapidly, Baghdad dispatched senior officials to Capitol Hill this week to warn members one-on-one that pulling out U.S. troops would have disastrous consequences.

For those who say the Iraq war had or has nothing to do with terrorism, that’s not the view of the guy trying to run the country:

With the clock ticking, Saleh — a Kurdish politician highly regarded by U.S. officials and who speaks impeccable English — said he came to Capitol Hill to convey the “imperative of success” in Iraq.

“Iraq is a central battleground in this historic conflict” against terrorism, he said in a brief interview after meeting with Reid, the Senate majority leader.

At least Iraqi leadership is finally taking some initiative.

Of course, some Democrats used the meetings to explain their decision to surrender:

Reid’s spokesman Jim Manley said the senator told Saleh that “U.S. patience, blood and treasure were not unlimited and that the Congress would be taking a more decisive role in the coming weeks and months.”

“Salih understood the point, and said he would deliver the message to the Iraqi cabinet,” Manley added.

(Note Hillary Clinton is quoted in this article, but on such a beautiful Friday, I didn’t have the stomach to deal with Her Emptiness. Wait until the cocktail hour, though.)

Your tax dollars are rolling into Washington at a record pace.

So far this year, tax revenues total $1.505 trillion, an increase of 11.2 percent over the same period last year. That figure includes $383.6 billion collected in April, the largest monthly tax collection on record.

And with this being an AP news story, the requisite tax commentary must be included.

The federal budget was in surplus for four years from 1998 through 2001 as the long economic expansion helped push revenues higher. But the 2001 recession, the cost of fighting a global war on terror and the loss of revenue from President Bush’s tax cuts sent the budget back into the red starting in 2002.

Typically, no one in media notices the disconnect when “Bush’s tax cuts” get blamed for loss of revenue in a story about record-high revenue to the U.S. Treasury. More conservative readers probably realize that reducing steep tax burdens spurs economic activity, since folks can simply keep more of what they earn. The resulting record-high tax receipts from increased commerce give us biased news stories.

Our liberal friends see things a bit differently, of course: Evil, greedy corporate robber barons have their pockets lined at the expense of working families, the poor, and the infirm thanks to Bush’s tax cut for his rich oil friends. No blood for oil! Bush lied, people died! Trim the Shrub! Aaaaaaaaarrrrrrrgh!

Ahem, yes, well, this story would not be complete without a laughable Washington prediction.

“With strong economic growth and spending restraint, we can continue to reduce budget deficits and balance the budget as the president has proposed,” [White House Budget Director Rob] Portman said in a statement.

You should probably reconsider holding your breath waiting for that one.

Once again, the Texas “Republican” led legislature has virtually assured us that no property tax relief will escape from their mitts.

Lawmakers would be prohibited from cutting school property taxes any further until they boosted every teacher’s annual salary by $6,000 under a plan the Texas House tentatively approved Thursday.

That vote could kill a push by Gov. Rick Perry and others for a new round of property tax cuts that would follow the one-third reduction in school district tax rates that lawmakers approved last year. And the odds are stacked against such a large teacher raise becoming law anytime soon. The raise is in an amendment that was added to the tax cut legislation.

Right now I don’t see any chance of that type of a bill passing with that amendment,” said Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst, who had been slow to embrace the latest tax cut proposal even before House members attached the teacher measure.

Thank you, Repubs, you guys really know how to prioritize and lead. You could have blocked the amendment that called for the pay raise but chose not to upset teachers because your opponents could have used this against you in the next election. So much for principle.

“Everybody goes out on the campaign trail and they talk about teachers all the time,” Dunnam said. “This is putting your money where your mouth is.”

Nonsense, Mr. Dunnam. Teacher pay raises should be in the realm of the local school districts, after all, isn’t that why we have forty gazillion districts? But no, you want to make it a state issue so that the “poor” little districts don’t have to worry about it and can build gigantic sports arenas, have nice little expense accounts and more staff than teachers.

“It was basically an intimidation move: ‘We’re going to make you vote against the teacher pay raise so we can say that you don’t like teachers,’ ” Eissler said.”We would all like to pay the teachers more, but really it’s up to the local school districts to pay them.”

Yes, it was an intimidation move and you guys cried and whined like little kittens instead of bucking up to the Democrats and holding the party line. Of course, the party line is useless when it comes to Texas Republican politicians. Wimps all. Smart money would be on the Dems to control Texas politics again within the next two election cycles.

Readers comments from this past Friday - Thursday. Note that these are neither the best nor the worst - just some that caught my attention.

In the category of “Readers Do Patronize LST Advertisers and Spread the Word” goes:

BoxieAgain Says:
May 4th, 2007 at 1:49 am e

Have any of you actually taken a CCH recertification class from Austin Arrington? DH did…………and entertained me with his experience for over an hour…it was a hoot! Especially the duck!

You guys have gotta go see this man when it is your time to re-certify. You go Austin!

In the category of “Where Did All the Good Guys Go?” goes:

Cajun Says:
May 9th, 2007 at 12:13 pm e

It’s one of the things I’m really struggling with… the guys that are up for (R) prez are all cheating, philandering type men. What does this say about the people that we (conservatives) consistently vote into power.

While ‘we’ as conservatives, might have the ‘ideal’ candidate in mind - the reality is that we are left with a bunch of people who do not fit our standards - but we still vote for them out of fear the democrats will be in charge.

I’m getting seriously sick of this. I wish we could clone Dan, and send his butt to the White House. Let him pi$$ a few people off, but run the country like it needs to be ran.

In the category of “It Wasn’t Dan, It Was A Clone!” goes:

Jaime Says:
May 8th, 2007 at 9:17 am e

When Hooters came to Houston they advertised as a family friendly joint. One day, we were in the vicinity of the new Hooters, on 45 Gulf Freeway, and looking for a place to eat. My wife and my 2 children (3yrs and 1.5 yrs at the time) were with me. I did not know anything about Hooters and we went to try it. To sum up the type of place it is I quote my wife: who wants to eat in a place where you can see moley breasts, gross.

Being in Hooters is of very low concerns but …

Hooters marketing and theme IS the girls in scantly clad clothes. That is way different than going to the mall or to the grocery store or the beach.

I wonder what his preacher thinks about it. Do you you think that Ed Young would join Dan at Hooters for lunch?

Read more

U.S. Attorney Johnny Sutton–prosecutor of Border Patrol agents Ramos and Compean–after making the rounds of talk-radio yesterday, stopped by the Houston Chronicle to share his thoughts and feelings with more sympathetic ears.

You know you can trust what you read in the Chronicle because, unlike nutty talk-show hosts, professional print journalists can be counted on to get the basic facts right.

The former Harris County prosecutor said he came to Houston to appear on the Edd Henry talk radio show, where the host has taken to calling him “Johnny Satan.”

Edd Henry? Was this interview transcribed by Scooby-Doo?

We liked this too.

“I’m giving him the benefit of a doubt,” Sutton said. He added: “I try not to take it personally. I went on that show because I grew up on the west side. I know Edd doesn’t have many listeners, but the listeners he does have are on the west side of Houston.”

Niiiice.

Speaking from personal experience, the already slight chance that Edd Hendee is ever going to release his pit-bull jaw-clamp on Johnny Sutton’s arse just disappeared.

When asked by the Chronicle to respond to Sutton’s comments, here’s what Mr. Henry had to say:

[/crickets chirping]

Double nice.

Here’s the good news–EricPJohnson is already active in comments over at the Chron’s site, presenting the entire world with the facts on this issue, based on his early reading of the trial transcript.

So for once, this never-ending debate will be held not here, but there.

Comments on this thread are closed.

Go duke it out over at the Chron.

Ahhh. That feels good.

 

TGIF!

Concealed Handgun License Training– New licenses $100 (classes approximately every other week), recertification $80 (done weekly). Price includes all range fee, fingerprinting, notary work and photographs. Basic training available for persons who want a license but have little or no experience with a firearm. Ask about special group classes. Contact Austin Arrington 281-948-8373.

——————–

Get paid to tell us what you think– Register to participate in one of our focus groups; earn money telling us what you think about politics, your community and consumer goods. Click here to learn more and sign-up!

——————–

——————–

Dawn Wolf Design– LST’s full-service graphic designer of choice. Talented, professional, competitively priced; a generous LST volunteer, we could not recommend her more highly. | 713-781-8900 | website

——————–