Go Home

police officers

5 documents found in 0 seconds.

Get Adobe Flash player

DOWNLOADS: (134)
Download WMV Download Quicktime
PLAYS: (630)
Play WMV Play Quicktime
Embed

Better get used to the idea of the coming anarchy people. According to Sen. Lindsey Graham, all of us need to arm ourselves to the hilt, because if he has his way with the upcoming budget cuts, we won't be able to count on the police for help: Graham: We Need Guns Because Of Budget Cuts, Fewer Cops:

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) argued on Wednesday that Congress should think twice about passing new gun control regulations because future budget cuts in cities will constrain the size and quality of police forces across the country, thwarting effective response to violence.

Lindsey Graham: GOP-Forced Budget Cuts Will Mean Fewer Cops, So People Need To Arm Themselves:

Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC), who has been among the Senate’s most vocal backers of draconian budget cuts and has opposed increasing funds to put more police officers on the streets, said Wednesday that he will oppose gun violence prevention legislation because budget cuts will mean inadequate police forces to protect the public.

Graham told Baltimore Chief of Police James Johnson and former naval Captain Mark Kelly (husband of former Rep. Gabby Giffords) that he planned to oppose the gun violence measures because people will need high-capacity magazines to compensate for the police response times these austerity measures will force:

GRAHAM: The point is, we have different perspectives on this. The reason I will oppose the legislation, Chief Johnston, is because i respect what your do as a lot — what you do as a law-enforcement officer. Has your budget been cut?

JOHNSON: Yes.

GRAHAM: Do you think it be cut in the future?

JOHNSON: I am optimistic that it is not.

GRAHAM: Well I hope your right, but I can tell people throughout this land, because of the fiscal state of affairs we have, there will be less [SIC] police officers, not more, over the next decade. Response time are gonna be less, not more. So, Captain Kelly, I really do want to get guns out of the hands of the wrong people. I honest to god believe that if we arbitrarily “say nobody in this country can own a 10-round magazine in the future, the people who own them are the kind of people we’re trying to combat to begin with.” There can be a situation where a mother runs out of bullets because of something we do here.



Get Adobe Flash player

DOWNLOADS: (308)
Download WMV Download Quicktime
PLAYS: (2837)
Play WMV Play Quicktime
Embed

So much for caring more about keeping teachers, firefighters and police officers working. The Republicans in the Senate with some help from the usual suspects when it comes to blocking anything that might help everyday Americans -- Ben Nelson (Neb.), Mark Pryor (Ark.) and Joe Lieberman (Conn.) -- blocked the passage of a portion of President Obama's jobs bill this Thursday night.

Lawrence O'Donnell showed us some of Vice President Joe Biden's speech from the day before, urging members of the Senate to support the bill -- Supporting middleclass over millionaires:

Vice President Joe Biden eloquently offers Republicans a simple choice: support your local sheriffs or support your local millionaires. MSNBC's Lawrence O'Donnell explains in the Rewrite.

Here's more from The Hill on the vote -- Senate deals second defeat to Obama's 'jobs' plan:

For the second time in two weeks, Senate Republicans voted in a unison to block “jobs” legislation, which the Obama administration and Senate Democratic leaders have made central to their agenda.

The measure, a piece of President Obama’s larger jobs package, failed by a tally of 50 to 50 after several Democrats joined with Republicans to the Senate from moving to the measure.

Democrats Ben Nelson (Neb.) and Mark Pryor (Ark.), who voted last week to block Obama’s full jobs measure, again sided with Republicans.

Sen. Joe Lieberman (Conn.), an independent who caucuses with Democrats, also said no, citing concerns about the legislation’s cost effectiveness.

As with last week’s vote, Democrats failed to woo a single Republican vote. The staunchly unified GOP opposition calls into question whether the Democratic strategy has been able to exert the intended pressure on centrist Republicans. [...]

The $35 billion Democratic measure was designed to prevent layoffs of teachers, police officers and firefighters in cash-strapped states. Most of the funding, $30 billion, would have gone to saving teaching jobs and the rest to first responders.

The most controversial element of the bill was a plan to pay for it by raising taxes on income over $1 million by 0.5 percent. Republicans argued that it would put more pressure on small businesses that are already having difficulty maintaining cash flow because of the tight credit market.

Republicans said the latest Democratic jobs measure is a replay of the $787 billion stimulus Congress passed at the beginning of 2009, which they argue had little impact.Senate Democrats say they will bring additional pieces of the president’s jobs bill to the floor. One measure will likely include infrastructure spending; another would extend the payroll tax holiday and extend it to employers; a third would extend unemployment insurance.

Democrats expect to propose the same pay-for — raising taxes on income over $1 million — for each.

And here's more from Greg Sargent on what the blocking of this bill means for the people that these Senators are supposed to be representing, the topic of which, sadly, we now have the answer to -- Will Senators do the right thing on jobs, or will they shaft thousands of their own constituents?:

Continue reading »



Get Adobe Flash player

DOWNLOADS: (588)
Download WMV Download Quicktime
PLAYS: (1400)
Play WMV Play Quicktime
Embed

Rachel Maddow reviews the case against six New Orleans police officers who are now finally facing federal charges for shooting unarmed citizens on the Danziger Brige in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. It's really sad that it has taken this long for the Justice Department to finally be doing something with this case. It's long overdue. TPM has more.

DOJ Charges Six NOPD Officers Involved In Danziger Bridge Shooting:

The Justice Department has charged four New Orleans police officers with opening fire on unarmed civilians in the days after Hurricane Katrina, killing two and wounding four. The DOJ has also charged them, and two other officers, with conspiracy relating to the resulting cover-up.

U.S. Attorney Jim Letten and Attorney General Eric Holder announced the charges in an afternoon press conference today, five years after the shootings on the Danziger Bridge in New Orleans.

Four police officers -- Kenneth Bowen, Robert Gisevius, Robert Faulcon and Anthony Villavaso -- are being charged with civil rights violations in connection with the shootings. If convicted, they could face life imprisonment or the death penalty.

The two others, Archie Kaufman and Gerard Dugue, are charged with conspiracy to obstruct justice. Kaufman and Dugue were the investigators in the original case, and are accused of falsifying reports and false prosecution.

Five other police officers and one civilian have already pleaded guilty to charges related to the cover-up. The four accused of the shooting had been charged with murder in connection with the incident, but the case was thrown out in 2008.

On Sept. 4, 2005, seven NOPD officers, including the four charged today in the shootings, rode to the Danziger Bridge after getting reports of officers under fire. There, they encountered a family on their way to the supermarket for supplies. For unknown reasons, the officers allegedly opened fire, killing 17-year-old James Brissette and wounding others.

The officers then allegedly drove to the other side of the bridge, where they found another group of people and again opened fire. Ronald Madison, 40, who was mentally disabled, was shot in the back and killed.

Faulcon is the one who allegedly shot Madison, according to the indictment. Bowen is accused of kicking Madison as he lay on the ground dying.



Daily Show: Latino 911!

From The Daily Show July 8, 2010:

Arizona police officers can't arrest you for not carrying your papers, but if you don't have them, you can be detained. I guess that's what's known in Arizona as a "Catch Veintidos".



Get Adobe Flash player

DOWNLOADS: (667)
Download WMV Download Quicktime
PLAYS: (1766)
Play WMV Play Quicktime
Embed

A new Arizona immigration allow will allow police to demand proof of residency if they have "reasonable suspicion" that a person is not in the country legally. Fox News' Brit Hume supports the bill but predicts it will lead to civil rights violations.

"I think it's going to be quite a trick to train the police officers in that state so that they can carry out this mandate to check anybody who they have a reasonable suspicion of being in the country illegal without engaging in profiling or violating their civil rights. I think that's going to be very difficult to do. There probably and inevitably will be civil rights violations," Hume told Chris Wallace Sunday.

Hume called the bill "emergency policy" but said it was unclear if it would stand up to a court challenge.

"The question really though is, that seems to me, did Arizona act reasonably here under the circumstances by passing this somewhat draconian law? And the answer may well be yes, because they are facing a serious crisis down there induced by the presence in their midst of a lot of illegals, some of whom are causing terrible problems," said Hume.

Arizona law enforcement got a head start on harassing Latinos even before Gov. Jan Brewer could sign the bill into law Friday. AZFamily.com reports that a truck driver in Phoenix was arrested because he could not immediately produce a birth certificate.