Friday, October 21, 2016

Hillary Clinton’s Blackberry Blues Place National Security at Risk

There is no longer any question that Hillary Clinton’s email scheme jeopardized our national security. Look no further than what we revealed this week.
We released new documents containing email correspondence between former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Gen. David Petraeus, in which she had what she termed “blackberry blues” over her inability to use her BlackBerry inside her secure office. The FBI recovered these new emails from those not turned over by Hillary Clinton.
These emails are government documents and not personal emails, as Clinton claims in defending her decision to not turn over 30,000 emails sent or received by her as secretary of state.  The emails also show she knew about the security issues of her BlackBerry use (and yet denied recalling anything about it or refused to answer our questions).
In the newly obtained email exchanges, Clinton also told Petraeus, “If there is ever anything you need or want me to know, pls use this personal email address” – – when corresponding with her. Petraeus, at the time of the email from Clinton, was the Commander of the United States Central Command, overseeing U.S. military efforts in critical areas, stretching from Northeast Africa across the Middle East to Central and South Asia, and including Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Egypt.
The new documents were among the nearly 15,000 Clinton emails discovered by the FBI, and obtained in response to a  court order in a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit for State Department records about Clinton’s separate email system  (Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Department of State (No.1:15-cv-00689)).
On January 28, 2008, only one week after becoming secretary of state, Clinton sent an email to Petraeus from her email account apologizing for her “tardy” response to his earlier email and blaming it on what she termed “blackberry blues”:
From: H []
Sent: Wednesday, January 28, 2009 9:33 PM
To: Petraeus, David H. GEN USA
Subject: Re: Follow up
David – Sorry to be so tardy in responding. I’ve had blackberry blues. I can’t use mine all day long since my whole office is a SCIF [Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility]. I don’t yet have a computer and I had to change my address and lost some of my traffic.
(The State Department represented to a federal court that Hillary Clinton did not have a State Department computer.)
Shortly before taking office, Clinton emailed Petraeus asking that he use only her personal email account when contacting her. At the time, Petraeus was the Commander of the United States Central Command:
Sent: Saturday, January 10, 2009 3:57 PM
To: Petraeus, David H. GEN USA
Subject: Follow up
Dear Dave,
Thanks for giving me so much of your time the last two nights. I appreciated our conversations and enjoyed the chance to see you and Richard becoming acquainted. I’m looking forward to working w you both. If there is ever anything you need or want me to know, pls use this personal email address. All the best, Hillary.
Also included in the new emails is a response from Colin Powell to a January 23, 2009, message from Clinton detailing Powell’s warning to keep her BlackBerry use secret to circumvent federal records laws:
However there is real danger. If it is public that you have a BlackBerry and … you are using it, government or not to do business, it may become an official record and subject to the law….Be very careful. I got around it all by not saying much …
(The Powell email had previously been released.)
Our lawyers specifically asked about Clinton’s BlackBerry use as part of the twenty-five questions submitted on August 30 to Clinton as ordered by U.S. District Court Judge Emmet G. Sullivan (see especially her answers to questions 14, 15, and 16).
In December 2015, thanks to a federal court order, we released documents  containing more than 50 State Department internal emails from 2009 and 2011 warning of serious security concerns involving the use by then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and her staff of “highly vulnerable” BlackBerrys in the executive offices of the Foggy Bottom headquarters.
The discussion included a March 2, 2009, internal memorandum from Assistant Secretary for Diplomatic Security Eric Boswell in which he advised Clinton and her Chief of Staff Cheryl Mills of “the vulnerabilities and risks associated with the use of BlackBerrys in Mahogany Row [seventh floor executive offices] considerably outweigh their convenience.” Testimony by Cheryl Mills in separate Judicial Watch litigation suggests Clinton used her BlackBerry in her office’s Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility (SCIF), despite security rules prohibiting the use of such devices in secure areas.
These new emails show the truth that the separate email system was never a matter of “convenience” for Mrs. Clinton. She wanted to hide her emails from the American people.
And her request to Petraeus while he was the Commander of the United States Central Command to communicate with her solely at her unsecure email address shows Hillary Clinton’s willful negligence in handling national defense information.
It’s now clear why she deleted or withheld so many and why Mrs. Clinton didn’t recall or declined to answer our questions about her email security.

New Emails Raise Questions about Hillary Clinton’s Sworn Testimony

Many Americans may be despairing as news comes out week after week of the FBI and Justice Department’s corrupted investigation of the Clinton email matter.   But you can rest assured that your JW is on the case.  Indeed, the latest from our own independent investigation might warrant the attention of honest law enforcement.
In her sworn responses to the questions in our written deposition, Hillary Clinton said she “did not recall” communicating with her IT specialist about her account. Inconveniently for her, we now have emails making that excuse look rather flimsy.
We just released another batch of State Department documents  uncovered by the FBI.   The emails included reveal direct communications between Clinton and her top IT specialist, Bryan Pagliano, management problems.
Clinton claimed under oath  that she “does not recall having communications” with Pagliano relating to the email system. Clinton’s emails to Pagliano, who installed and maintained the clintonemail.comcomputer system in the Clinton’s New York home, relate to email management problems with Clinton’s BlackBerry.
The FBI recovered these emails from those not turned over by Hillary Clinton. These new emails are government documents and not personal emails as Hillary Clinton claimed in defending her decision to not turn over 30,000 emails sent or received by her as Secretary of State.
The new documents were among the nearly 15,000 Clinton emails discovered by the FBI and obtained in response to an April 8, 2016, federal court order directing the Department of State to begin producing materials for Judicial Watch in response to a September 3, 2015, Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit (Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Department of State (No. 1:15-cv-01441)). The lawsuit was filed after State failed to comply with an August 5, 2015 FOIA request seeking information about Bryan Pagliano’s involvement with Clinton’s email system.
Several “Test” messages were sent between Pagliano, Clinton, and her then-Deputy Chief of Staff Jon Davidson on September 2, 2011. And on March 2012 Clinton writes to Pagliano, “Once again, I’m having BB [BlackBerry] trouble”:
From: H
Sent: Sunday, March 18, 2012 8:45 AM
To: Justin Cooper, Bryan Pagliano [Cooper was a senior advisor to Bill Clinton]
Cc: Oscar Floras [manager of Clinton’s New York home]
Subject: Help!
Once again, I’m having BB trouble. I am not receiving emails although people are getting ones I send but I get their replies on my IP. I’ve taken out the battery and done what I know to do but with no luck yet any ideas?
From: H
Sent: Sunday, March 18, 2012 8:54 AM
To: Justin Cooper
Cc: Bryan M. Pagliano, Oscar Flores
Subject: Re: Help!
Thanks, Justin. How does that happen.  do I need to do anything?
From: Bryan Pagliano
Sent: Sunday, March 18, 2012 10:32 AM
To: H
Cc: Justin Cooper, Oscar Flores
Subject: Re: Help!
Let me take a look at the server to see if it offers any insight. iPhone is not much different from iPad, however in both cases the security landscape is different from the blackberry.
From: H
Sent: Sunday, March 18, 2012 11:44 AM
To: Justin Cooper
Cc: Bryan M. Pagliano, Oscar Flores
Subject: Re:
Thanks again. I’m back in business.
On October 13, 2016, we released Clinton’s responses given under oath to 25 questions we posed as ordered by U.S. District Judge Emmet G. Sullivan in separate litigation. The final question reads:
Identify all communications between you and Brian Pagliano concerning or relating to the management, preservation, deletion, or destruction of any emails in email account, including any instruction or direction to Mr. Pagliano about the management, preservation, deletion, or destruction of emails in your account when transferring the email system to any alternate or replacement server. For each communication, identify the time, date, place, manner (e.g., in person, in (e.g., in person, in writing, by telephone, or by electronic or other means), persons present or participating, and content of the communication.
Clinton’s response:
Secretary Clinton objects to Interrogatory No. 25 on the ground that it requests information that is outside the scope of permitted discovery for the reasons set forth in General Objection No. 5. Secretary Clinton further objects to Interrogatory No. 25 on the ground that the word “management” is vague. Secretary Clinton further objects to Interrogatory No. 25 insofar as it requests information related to alternate or replacement servers used after Secretary Clinton’s tenure as Secretary of State. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, Secretary Clinton states that she does not recall having communications with Bryan Pagliano concerning or relating to the management, preservation, deletion, or destruction of any e-mails in her email account. [Emphasis added]
Clinton also claimed she “does not recall” 20 times in her responses given under oath.
In addition, Judicial Watch deposed Bryan Pagliano in June. He invoked his Fifth Amendment right not to incriminate himself more than 125 times, including:
Q. During your tenure at the State Department, did you communicate with Secretary Clinton by e-mail?
A. On the advice of counsel, I will decline to answer your question in reliance on my rights under the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution.
These newly exposed emails leave little doubt that Hillary Clinton was less than forthright and misled the public when she wrote, under oath, that she ‘does not recall’ communicating with Bryan Pagliano about her email scheme. Again, no wonder Clinton and her agents deleted these emails time and time again. And remember: these smoking gun emails would never have seen the light of day but for Judicial Watch’s federal lawsuits.

9th Circuit Hears Cross-Border Shooting Case

SAN FRANCISCO (CN) — Attorneys for a Border Patrol agent who shot and killed a Mexican teenager through a border fence told a Ninth Circuit panel Friday that the boy's family does not have enough ties to the United States to sue on Fourth Amendment violations.

     In October 2012, 16-year-old Jose Antonio Elena Rodriguez was shot 10 times from behind while he was walking on Calle Internacional, a street in Nogales, Sonora, that runs parallel to the U.S.-Mexico border fence.

     His mother, Araceli Rodriguez, sued in July 2014, claiming her son's death was "senseless and unjustified." Lonnie Swartz, a U.S. Customs and Border Patrol agent, was later disclosed to be the agent who shot the teenager.

     Swartz was indicted in 2015 for second-degree murder in Rodriguez's death. A trial date is scheduled for February in the matter.

     At the start of Friday's hearing, Ninth Circuit Judge Milan Smith said that normally the court would not ask for oral arguments in a case so similar to one that the U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to hear.

     Last week, the Supreme Court granted a writ of certiorari in a lawsuit filed by the family of Sergio Hernandez Guereca, another Mexican teenager shot and killed by a Border Patrol agent aiming into Mexico from across the Rio Grande in Texas. The en banc Fifth Circuit found last year that there were no Fourth Amendment excessive force claims in that case because Hernandez had no "significant voluntary connection" to the United States.

     "There are some differences in the case and we also have a Supreme Court composed of eight justices. We have some recent cases where there is a 4-4 split and doesn't grant a precedent, and we had some situations where [certiorari] has been withdrawn, so we don't know what is going to happen," Smith said. "If the Supreme Court rules and gives definitive instructions, of course, we will follow those, but in the meantime, we don't know what's going to happen."

     Sean Chapman, an attorney for Swartz, argued there are no differences between the Hernandez and Rodriguez lawsuits.

     Smith countered that Rodriguez was close to his grandparents, then legal permanent residents of the United States who regularly would cross into Nogales to take care of the teenager.

     "The emphasis is on whether the decedent J.A. has developed significant ties or taken on societal obligations," Chapman said. "There was no evidence that J.A. came to the U.S. I think that is where the focus needs to be."

     U.S. District Judge Raner Collins found in July 2015 that Rodriguez was entitled to Fourth Amendment protections at the time of his death.

     "[W]hile J.A.'s nationality weighs against granting him protection pursuant to the Fourth Amendment, his status as a civilian engaged in peaceful activity weighs in favor of granting him protection despite the fact that J.A. was in the territory of another country," Collins wrote.

     Collins considered Rodriguez's relationship with his grandparents, and his residence in the border town of Nogales as substantial connections to the United States.

     Justice Department attorney Henry Whitaker agreed with Chapman's argument that there is no difference between the two lawsuits.

     "On the constitutional issue, we don't think that there is any material difference," Whitaker said. "Here, there is no allegation that this individual had ever been inside the United States."
     Lee Gelernt, an attorney for Rodriguez's mother, said the teenager was closely connected with his grandmother, who is now a U.S. citizen.

     "She essentially was the caretaker because the mother unfortunately could not get a job in that town and was away a lot," Gelernt said. "What we are hearing a lot from the other side about, well, he didn't live in the U.S., he didn't want to live in the U.S. We don't think that you need to want to live in the U.S. to not be shot across the border."
     Under Collins's ruling, Swartz did not have qualified immunity for his actions.

     "[T]his is not a case involving circumstances where Swartz needed to make split-second judgment — in circumstances that are tense, uncertain, and rapidly evolving — about the amount of force that is necessary in a particular situation," Collins wrote. "Instead, the facts alleged in the first amended complaint, demonstrate an 'obvious case' where it is clear that Swartz had no reason to use deadly force against J.A."

     Whitaker told the appellate panel that the circumstances surrounding the shooting remain unclear.
     "Is it clear what the circumstances of the shooting were?" asked Senior District Judge Edward Korman. Korman is sitting by designation from the Eastern District of New York.

     "We are at the pleading stage of this case and the court has to accept at this stage the allegation that the shooting was unjustified," Whitaker replied.

Friday, September 30, 2016

The corruption by political officials within the hub (Florence, Arizona) of Pinal County needs to a come to a stop

Florence Mayor Tom Rankin

From the page of Injustice for All

People... the corruption by political officials within the hub (Florence, Arizona) of Pinal County needs to a come to a stop... Now! This election year is our chance... we, you the people, need to look at the verifiable facts that have been presented to us since 2012 and much much earlier. Newly elected officials take notice, understand and right the wrongs of your predecessors!
At this time our attention is on the Town of Florence, because in my opinion that is where all this unethical political favors, embezzlement of government funds, cover-up of criminal criminal activity by the Town and County Management/ Administrators, where this corruption festers and grows. Yes the Town of Florence is a corrupt little system, and a major cog in the wheel of Pinal County injustice! So with that being said... lets look at some of the facts of corruption and criminal cover-up starting in the Town of Florence that is attached to the Pinal County Sheriff's Office, and the Pinal County Attorney's Office.
1. Mayor Tom Rankin, was a proven corrupt and a verified racist Police Chief in Florence from the early 80's till mid 1994, when he was exposed by Inside Edition whom confirmed that Tom J. Rankin used the term “Nigger” to verbally identify what “he” thought about African-Americans living within the community of Florence. Rankin was fired immediately by the Town, however Mr. Rankin vowed his revenge on anyone who crossed his path. Years later in 2011, the citizens within the Town of Florence had amnesia or thought old Tom Rankin had changed his ways when he was elected Mayor. Just prior to his election, and well after, Tom Rankin had the incredible bad habit of interfering with criminal investigations through intimidation and at one point moving dead bodies prior to police arrival. These acts of course being criminal acts committed by Mayor Rankin, put Florence Chief of Police Robert Ingulli, former Florence Detective Jarris Varnrobinson and former Detective Walt Hunter in his cross hairs. Rankin is still sore about his son Tom Tom Rankin Jr. being sent to prison in the mid 2000’s by Florence PD.
2. Here’s another verifiable fact, Detective Walt Hunter and Detective Jarris Varnrobinson reported several criminal acts committed by Mayor Tom Rankin’s close personal friend, Florence PD Lieutenant Terry Tryon. Yep, Terry Tryon and Tom J. Rankin go way back to the late 80’s when Tryon was just a mere Police Dispatcher and Reserve Police Officer with the Florence PD/ Marshal’s Office. So this all leads to the bigger plot of the matter, Tom J. Rankin has abused his position as Mayor, that as soon as he took office in May of 2012 he conspired with Lt. Terry Tryon, Sgt. Renee Klix, former Town Manager Himanchu Patel, Lisa Garcia and Scott Barber to first terminate without just cause Chief of Police Robert Ingulli in July of 2012, then replace him with a puppet whom is both corrupt and racist with a questionable past filled several lost lawsuits related to racism and violation of employee rights… the man for the job was Daniel R. Hughes whom was vetted by Tom Rankin in May of 2012 after he was referred by a Rankin relative living in Surprise, Arizona, which just happens to be the City where Dan Hughes was forced to resign as Chief of Police after a receiving a vote of “ No Confidence” from the Surprise Police Department personnel. Hughes is a snake in the Garden of Eden, and the Town of Florence bit into his apple! We are sure Daniel R. Hughes has failed to mention all the losing lawsuits for which he was named as a Defendant, leaving the full-expense of these suits to be paid by the former city employers.
3. Soon after Daniel Hughes was hired as the Interim-Chief of Police in July 2012, but in order for him to get the Full-Time Chief of Police position in November 2012, he prepared a packet on the two successful Detective’s Varnrobinson and Hunter, with the help of Terry Tryon whom was under an “administrative” investigation by Arizona Department of Public Safety for the criminal allegations related to tampering with evidence presented by both Hunter and Varnrobinson. Would you say conflict of interest! In this packet that was presented Mayor Tom Rankin and the Town of Florence by Daniel R. Hughes, he made several unsubstantiated allegations failing to conduct a proper internal affairs investigation, refusing to interview the detectives about his allegations, therefore violating their rights to due process, as protected by the Arizona Revised Statutes 38-1101 to 38-1106. Daniel R. Hughes held on to his packet until after he was given the Full-time Police Chief position. Even after this, the Detectives were never interviewed, but just terminated on December 14, 2012 by Himanchu Patel which happened to be the day of his resignation. Varnrobinson and Hunter were not at-will employees, and to date their careers have been ruined due to both unethical and defamation of character acts currently being committed by Daniel R. Hughes, Tom Rankin, Lando Voyles and the Town of Florence Management, whom are currently being sued by the two Detectives in Federal Magistrate Court located in Phoenix. If you the people want to know the facts, get yourself a copy of all the Transcripts from the Detective’s reinstatement hearings and the Federal Deposition transcripts. It is truly disturbing as to the fact, lies and conspiracy perpetrated by the Town of Florence management. The Town of Florence will lose and will pay for what they did to the personal and professional lives of both Detectives Varnrobinson and Hunter.
4. So here is the criminal aspect related to all of this; Lt. Terry Tryon committed several criminal acts that are prosecutable under Arizona Revised Statutes, but mayor Tom Rankin’s criminal intent and influence caused for County Attorney Lando Voyles to write a letter stating that they were not going to prosecute Terry Tryon, even though in the letter it says they are not disputing the fact a crime was committed by Tryon. Tom Rankin did the same for his nephew Deputy Heath Rankin, after Heath had shot an unarmed hispanic man in the back with a high powered rifle. Yep if you remember this was a video recorded event. The violence committed by Heath Rankin has been protected for years now by the Sheriff and the County Attorney because of his family relation to Mayor Tom J. Rankin. Heath is now a Sergeant with PCSO. Where is the Justice? During Federal Depositions, it was disclosed that Terry Tryon also referred to African-american’s as “Niggers”, especially Detective Jarris Varnrobinson, on several occasions, on and off-duty. Tryon has acted beyond the scope of his authority, unethically, and violates the people’s trust… Tryon is a cowardly criminal, corrupt cop whom abused cocaine regularly as an adult while hiding behind a badge with a gun that he does not deserve!
5. Let’s take a look at some other issues…It is already confirmed that Daniel R. Hughes committed perjury during the Detective reinstatement hearings and during his Federal Deposition a few months ago, as did Himanchu Patel, and Florence PD. Sgt William Tatlock. There will be others attempting to follow their steps as the Federal Depositions draw to a close this September 2016. Let us put it to you straight… the allegations trumped up against Varnrobinson and Hunter by Daniel R. Hughes have been confirmed, proven and validated as misleading lies… fabrications supported and conspired with the Town of Florence in attempt to cover-up actual internal corruption, which leads to misappropriation and embezzlement of public funds, unethical deals with figures like George Johnson of Johnson’s Utilities, Lando Voyles and the Sheriff of Pinal County Paul Babeu. All of this abuse, even the honest little guys like two Detectives protecting public interest and the community are subjected to persecution by the corrupt and wicked! All of this actual does relate to the story below. This is why the state of Arizona has the Town of Florence on Home Rule... Mayor Rankin, your corruption travels far and wide!
There is so much more to inform you the people, but to write it all here is nearly impossible for us to do! This where you the people take this information and follow up, verify and confirm what we are telling you (Don’t BE SHEEP!) because we know as well as you, that Lando Voyles, Sheriff Paul Babeau/ Steve Henry, Mayor Tom Rankin, and Chief of Police Daniel R. Hughes need to be forced out of office and removed by our VOTES. A balance needs to be restored, the wrong against the people, victim’s of crime, the wrong committed against the former Florence Police Detectives Varnrobinson and Hunter for exposing internal police corruption needs to be set right! It’s just the ethical thing to do! The Town of Florence Mayor, Management and Administration shall be held responsible and accountable for the abuse and violations of state law they so intentionally dismiss with malice!
Here is something of related interest
Letter to the Editor, Bogan; Abuse of RICO funds in Pinal
Posted: Wednesday, August 31, 2016 9:04 am
Letter to the Editor, Bogan;
Abuse of RICO funds in Pinal
Casa Grande Dispatch Casa Grande Valley Newspapers Inc.
Editor, Casa Grande Dispatch:
As this election day passes I feel a need to share the following facts with the people of Pinal County.
Sheriff Babeu, Chief Deputy Henry, Capt. Tami Villar, Lando Voyles and others have been laundering RICO money for campaigns.
Our sheriff and his staff are quickly covering up the theft and misuse of thousands of dollars worth of equipment that they purchased to bolster their mounted posse unit. Babeu even accepted thousands of dollars in the form of a Gila River Indian Community grant to purchase support equipment. The purchase included horses, tack, saddles, a horse trailer, corrals and 20-something police mountain bikes. The mounted posse disbanded years ago.
Chief Henry, who is running for sheriff, Capt. Tami Villar and others have decided to use this property as their own. As recently as two weeks ago, Villar had a horse, a trailer, the corrals, a saddle and one of the bikes at her house. Henry had one of the saddles with a replica PCSO badge. Villar has since had staff remove the stolen property from her home but satellite photos show it on her property. You may remember Villar from an earlier Dispatch story in which she returned thousands of dollars she had taken from a nonprofit. They disciplined her by promoting her to captain.
An independent investigation is required.
Mark Bogan
Casa Grande

Friday, September 23, 2016

Dear Sheriff Babeu: A citizen asking for help that never came

Talks a good game! In the end its just that all talk

I received your letter requesting support in your re-election efforts.  While I support you 100% in what you are trying to do, I cannot lend my financial support until the drug dealer, who does business out of his home at the dead end of XXXXXX Drive in Oracle, is put out of business.
When he first moved in five years ago, there were 50 cars per week from Wednesday to Saturday.  Every one of these cars drove past my house since it is the only other house on this street.  These visitors only stayed for 2-5 minutes and then drove by on their way out again.
I put up with this for almost two years and finally decided to do something.  I notified our esteemed County Attorney (he lives out of the line of vision to see this activity even though he is only a few hundred feet from us) about my suspicions on more than one occasion, and he finally asked Xxxxx Xxxxx to contact me.  Everything we told her apparently went straight back to the drug dealer because the patterns changed.  The number of cars dropped, cars now came and went with lights off and some even switched license plates.  We had given Xxxxx a list of license numbers of frequent visitors.  Then we heard she had left your office under probably less than happy circumstances.
Next time we called the Xxxxx phone number, Xxxxx Xxxxx answered that number and we began all over again.  Xxxxx came to our home to interview us, got copies of some of our correspondence and the list of plate numbers which had grown.  She asked if there was any place to do surveillance and we offered her our property and alternately told her Chaparral Street.  Three days later a masonry wall as high as the drug dealer's house began to be installed and was completed in record time in order to block that view.  I don't think that it was a coincidence that he suddenly decided to build that wall after dealing from there for three years with no interference from anyone.
I have personally witnessed him dealing at the Circle K located at the end of Linda Vista, on American Avenue.  I have also seen other known area dealers visiting his home which indicates to me that he may also be a supplier.
I believe another neighbor named Xxxxx is involved and may be storing drugs in a new garage-type building which he tried to have built without obtaining permits.  This new building is sited closer to the drug dealer's house than Xxxxx's even though it is on Xxxxx property.  I suspect his involvement  since he will no longer acknowledge that he knows me since XXXX or someone else in the Sheriff's Dept told the drug dealer that I was wise to them and reporting their activities.
My granddaughter and her husband and children visited at our home for Christmas 3 (now almost 4) years ago at and after observing the parade of cars going by on their way to the drug dealer's house, staying for 3-5 minutes and leaving again, determined that our place was no longer safe for their children to visit.  Our entire family is concerned for us because they know that these historically are not "nice" people and that drive-by shootings are a possibility.
The front of our house is 35 ft. from this traffic to and from the drug dealer's.  We are seriously considering just walking away from this home which was appraised a couple of years ago at $875,000.  That would please our County Attorney and other neighbors happy because they believe I'm talking through my hat because none of them can see what's going on from where they are located.
Jim Walsh, after inviting me to attend one of his "drug" meetings in Oracle, later had his secretary call to tell me not to come.  Does that tell you anything about how serious he is about getting rid of a drug dealer in his own neighborhood?  I understand a drug cartel is planning to re-open an old gold mine in Oracle...maybe they want to buy a nice house?  Or is the County interested in buying a 5600 sq. ft. house on 1.25 acres, now that the price (and probably the value) has been dropped to $550,000.  We have homes in two other states and by the end of this year, will have spent almost nine months out of Arizona because our kids are so concerned about us.
I have told as many people as I can to stay the hell out of Arizona because of corruption and greed.  I truly believe that besides the drug buyers and dealers,  you also have deputies or others in your organization who are dirty and dangerous to me and my wife.  Trust me when I tell you that I have the equipment and the means to protect my family and my property, including a 175 lb. Anatolian Shepherd.  If the County continues to ignore what I have given you an opportunity to fix, I will not hesitate to act if my walls and fences are breeched. 
Should you have more interest than anyone else in the County to date, the drug dealer's name is Ramon Gomez.  He kives and deals at the dead end of North Cedar Hills Drive in Oracle.  There is also a XXXXXXX in San Manuel at XXX McNabb...a father maybe??? Or another address from which to operate.  When we notified the IRS they didn't respond, probably because of this confusion or because this country has become so ambivalent about these activities that nobody gives a damn anymore.
Thanks for reading this and happy hunting!!

Tuesday, September 20, 2016

The PCSO criminal case on the attempted murder of Deputy Puroll That Paul Babeu Mishandled

Corrupt Criminal

The closing, reopening, closing and reopening of the PCSO criminal case on the attempted murder of Deputy Puroll

Babeu and the Puroll shooting incident. There is a curious, out-of-regulation handling of the criminal case by the Babeu team after the smoke settled. And it is wrong. Simply, clearing a criminal case that can't be cleared, except in Babeu's administration.

Background for my brief information below: I wrote the material below in 2011 as some observations of PCSO's handling of the Puroll case. The "Uniform Crime Reporting" rules mandated for all law enforcement agencies by the FBI are basic and should not be difficult to comply with. Except for Mr. Babeu. LE statistics for Arizona are compiled and submitted to the FBI by the Arizona DPS.

"Crime in Arizona Report 2009" (attached) was compiled and put out by DPS according to federal requirements.  Babeu, he being a new rogue sheriff, followed whatever rules he found convenient or useful. "Closing" (or clearing) the criminal case for the Puroll incident can't be done by accepted LE standards - but he did it. The standards are explained in "Clearances" below (taken from the UCR guidelines in effect when the incident happened in April 2010).

Babeu cleared the case. It remained closed until Puroll's bloody T-shirt being kept in property needed to be sent (months after the incident) to the DPS laboratory for forensic testing. A case number was needed for submission. Simple. Use the same case number, just reopen the case. Experts still disagree on the laboratory findings about the shirt. The T-shirt was eventually returned to PCSO after the analysis and again, the case was closed by PCSO. 

Read the actual state and federal guidelines that LE agencies are to follow. Basic and understandable. Thus comes my subject for this email, discussing the closing, reopening, closing and reopening of this criminal case. It should have never been closed. How was the case "cleared?" It wasn't and the criminal case should still be open - but it isn't. Rules seem to be for the other guys.

I attached the Uniform Crime Reporting guidelines that were in effect when the shooting incident happened. Reportedly, this was the attempted murder of a police officer, Puroll. Fleeing armed suspects, yet to be identified or arrested. 

I do request anonymity as your source in this matter. I am a retired Arizona police officer and I am submitting this information to you based on a series of facts and on common regulations in published guidelines in effect for LE at the time of the incident. No hearsay. No rumors. Just pointing out a matter of poor case tracking that is against contemporary police agency practices. 

If you need further information, please feel free to contact me. 

For the real (non)answers, you might just ...

End of my trivial background. Now on to the questions about the improper case handling by PCSO---------------------

The question remaining on the Puroll shooting incident is “how can a case be closed where no suspects have been identified or arrested?

The Arizona Department of Public Safety follows the strict FBI guidelines for Uniform Crime Reporting purposes. Attached is the 2009 “Crime in Arizona” report by DPS.  Below is the DPS standard on closing cases:
Clearances (page 11 of DPS "Crime in Arizona")

An offense is considered cleared (solved) when at least one offender is arrested for a crime, even though several may have been involved. Offenses may also be cleared by exceptional means when the offender: Commits suicide; makes a dying declaration; confesses while in custody or serving time for another crime; is prosecuted in another jurisdiction for the same offense; is a juvenile who is handled by notifying the parents; when the victim refuses to prosecute; or another jurisdiction refuses to extradite the offender.

Clearances are counted as “adult” or “juvenile.” A “juvenile” clearance is counted only when juveniles are exclusively involved in the commission and clearance of an offense. If the arrest of both adults and juveniles results in a clearance, it is counted as an “adult” clearance only.

Glossary of terms (page 134)
Cleared by Arrest - An offense that is cleared (solved) when at least one person is (1) arrested, (2) charged with the commission of the offense, and (3) turned over to the court for prosecution.

Cleared by Exceptional Means - For UCR purposes, an offense is considered exceptionally cleared when law enforcement has: (1) definitely established the identity of the offender, (2) there is enough information to support an arrest, charge, and turning over to the court for prosecution, (3) the exact location of the offender is known so the subject could be taken into custody, and yet (4) some reason outside law enforcement control prevents bringing the offender to court.

By DPS and FBI standards, how can this case be closed by any means?  No suspects have been identified.  As the county law enforcement head, you would want to keep the case open and active until the suspect(s) who tried to murder the deputy is found.  The suspect(s) is a danger to law enforcement and to the public.


Final thought: Babeu followed his own rules. Henry followed Babeu.

Monday, September 19, 2016

Open borders zealot Loretta Lynch contributing to heroin overdoses

By M. Catharine Evans

If the Obama administration is out to make heroin the #1 drug of choice in the United States, it couldn't be doing a better job.  How?  By ignoring its open borders policy and placing the majority of blame for the opioid "epidemic" on the nation's physicians.
Designating September 18-23 as National Prescription Opioid and Heroin Epidemic Awareness week, Attorney General Loretta Lynch told USA Today the DOJ will enlist federal prosecutors to share information on overprescribing doctors in order to curb the use of painkillers.
This is a twofer for the regime.  First, much as the war on cops has led to increased federal involvement in local law enforcement matters, demonizing all doctors for a few bad apples means more government control over our health care.
Second, emphasizing prescription drug abuse distracts the public from our unsecured borders and the free flow of illegals and drugs into the country. 
The transport and distribution of heroin is a lot easier when border patrol and local law enforcement personnel are told essentially to ignore the drug mules, gang members, and illegals walking into our country.
Open borders means more heroin.  Naturally, prices drop, and the market expands.  In this way, Lynch and the Department of Justice have been instrumental in fueling the heroin "epidemic."  According to the CDC, "in 2013, an estimated 517,000 persons reported past-year heroin abuse or dependence, a nearly 150 percent increase since 2007."
Lynch, speaking at a Massachusetts Medical Society summit a year ago, focused solely on prescription drugs, doctor shopping, and disrupting online "pill mills."  A.G. Lynch boasted about using "every civil, criminal, and administrative tool to dismantle illegal traffic in pharmaceutical controlled substances."  She assured her audience of medical professionals she will prosecute those physicians who over-prescribe opioids.   
We won a conviction in a 49-count case against a former heart surgeon in Georgia who aggressively prescribed controlled narcotics to patients who were addicted to them and who, at one point, received more Oxycodone pills than any other doctor in the state.
If only Lynch's DOJ, the Department of Homeland Security, and the U.S. Drug Enforcement Agency would be as tenacious and resolute when it comes to stopping drug traffickers at the border.
Not one time in her address did Lynch mention securing our southern border.  It's quite an omission, considering that most heroin is smuggled into our country from Mexico, according to the DEA.
The president of the Laredo, Texas chapter of the National Border Patrol Council stated that "every single illegal alien that comes into the country goes through the hands of a drug cartel."  The U.S Drug Enforcement Administration, an agency under Lynch's supervision, wrote in its 2015 National Drug Threat Assessment Summary that seven Mexican drug cartels control nearly all of the U.S. heroin market.
Lynch is expected to announce a new strategy memo to combat the opioid and heroin problem in the U.S.  As her boss cuts prison sentences for known drug dealers, and as she refuses to stop illegals from crossing the border with backpacks full of heroin, we can safely assume that doctors seem to be the only ones in Lynch's crosshairs.

American Thinker