July 16, 2009

Double Jeopardy

This is really sleazy:
Senate Judiciary Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) Monday announced his intent to introduce the Matthew Shepard Hate Crimes Prevention Act as a bipartisan amendment to the National Defense Authorization bill this week.

I don't know if Leahy will be able to pull this off. Apparently, it doesn't have enough support to pass on its own, so the ploy is to attach it to something that has to pass.
Existing hate crimes law covers race, color, national origin, or religion, but only where the victim is engaging in one of the following federally protected activities: (1) attending or enrolling in a public school or public college; (2) participating in a benefit, service, privilege, program, facility or activity administered by a state or local government; (3) applying for or working in private or state employment; (4) serving as a juror in a state court; (5) using a facility of interstate commerce or a common carrier; or (6) enjoying public accommodations or places of exhibition or entertainment. The bill eliminates the outdated “federally protected activities” requirement and expands the federal government’s ability to prosecute crimes targeting victims because of their sexual orientation, gender, gender identity or disability.

In other words, eliminate all "outdated" federalist limitations on federal intrusion into state business.

As you may or may not be aware, murder and other crimes of violence are already against the law in just about any state you can name. Most states already have hate crimes legislation, as well. The initial point of this bill is to violate the Constitution's prohibition on double jeopardy by giving prosecutors two bites at the apple with politically unpopular defendants. Leahy's press release explains that it will be used when "a state prosecution has failed to vindicate the federal interest against hate-motivated violence" -- i.e., when a state jury has acquitted somebody the feds don't like.

The long term goal is likely to lay the groundwork for eventually prosecuting dissident voices on the Internet, such as, oh, me.

My published articles are archived at iSteve.com -- Steve Sailer

38 comments:

El Caudillo said...

Nice to see ya finally take a stand and do a story on this SUPER IMPORTANT piece of sh-t 'legislation', Don Steve!

This so-called "Hate-Bill" is actually A HATE CRIME against White, Christian, and all freedom-loving Americans of any background who is committed to Truth!

Now, if you can further help RALLY THE TROOPS by giving them a Guide to Action -

HATE BILL ACTION PAGE:
http://truthtellers.org/actionplan.html

CALL THE SENATE AND THE SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE PEOPLE,

...AND ENCOURAGE EVERYONE YOU KNOW TO DO THE SAME!!!

*If you value your freedom, that is:-).

Anonymous said...

"The initial point of this bill is to violate the Constitution's prohibition on double jeopardy by giving prosecutors two bites at the apple with politically unpopular defendants."

Let's not be euphemistic here. By "politically unpopular defendants", you mean straights, whites, Christians, and/or males. Who, frankly, deserve everything they get for oppressing everyone else by having the nerve to explore the world, invent every modern technology, and create freedom and prosperity unprecedented in human history. I fully support the government's decision to punish these cultural imperialists in order to create a more authentic, natural society as defined by the rich traditional heritage of African and South Asian communities.

headache said...

Steve I'm fixing my joint in South Africa. In the long term the place will turn to darkest Africa again. Nobody will be able to find you there and the police force is either corrupt or not functional. Your only worries are maintaining the solar panels so you can continue publishing, keeping the wild beasts at bay, and being armed to resist the occasional genocide attempt. They will only kill you because of the color of your skin, not the stuff you write. I don’t think they can even understand what you write about. So when the feds start chasing you down, get a ticket to the jungle.

Another option would be to somehow live in outer space. You can send your posts via the satellites to the persecuted masses below, whilst Leaky Leahy and his helpers try getting the pentagon to shoot you down with a laser or something.

Oh man, get used to the Alexander Solzhenitsyn treatment. Better read his books to get some cues as to how to deal with the coming Gulag.

Anonymous said...

"The long term goal is likely to lay the groundwork for eventually prosecuting dissident voices on the Internet, such as, oh, me. "

Oh yeah. America: Canada v2.0.

Sandra Day O'Sotomayor said...

The long term goal is likely to lay the groundwork for eventually prosecuting dissident voices on the Internet, such as, oh, me.

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

curt said...

Don't you just love the way this administration either shoves a bill throught without explaining or reading it, or , like the Hate Crimes bill, tries to "sneak" it in with another bill. These guys know what the bill is about, know it can't stand up if presented nationally in its comprehensive form, and know it will only go through the side door. This is becoming a nightmare. Holder is becoming the racist everyone said he was. A big "Thank you" for all the whites that voted for Obama, I hope you are happy now.

Big Bill said...

I think you can kiss off seeking refugee status anywhere in Europe or Canada, for that matter. The OSI (Office of Special Investigations: how Orwellian is that!) has expanded their scope beyond chasing decrepit elderly gentile immigrants to general "human rights violators".

Working together with the ADL and European hate speech agencies, they will make short work of you. I give them five years, max.

Abe Foxman and the ADL have held at least one international program co-sponsored by some east coast Jewish university (Brandeis?) to help all the national hate agencies and hate activists coordinate their activities and make up for America's (to them) depressing lack of hate crime laws. Until they can get national hate crime laws passed in the USA, they will use the OSI and deportation to other jurisdictions wherever possible.

It is strange to realize that the hate crime movement is only thirty years old. I remember when I was a kid, the ACLU still fought for free speech.

it has been a gradual process. They started with laws in Europe prohibiting any Holocaust revisionism speech and the creation of the OSI in the 70's.

Now, just 30 years later, they are approaching their ultimate goal: transnational enforcement of crimethink.

And with the ADL-sponsored hate crime seminars for Federal and state judges, police departments and prosecutors all across America (are they mandatory now?) they have a solid foundation that is ready, willing and able to imprison or deport offenders.

Anonymous said...

other than VDare the right's silence about this, probably from fear of being associated with 'the nazis' is appauling.

Don't expect the ACLU to help (no surprise, if you ask, who, whom?) they are in support of them.

Marc B said...

They are already pulling this off in Tennessee. A white murdered a black and got an extremely light sentence(via plea bargin) by any measure. Rather than going after the judges and prosecutors that allowed this, they are getting another crack at this cracker by prosecuting this convicted murderer a second time under hate crime statutes.

Rep. Steve "Black Grandmother" Cohen pushed hard for this upcoming miscarriage of justice. BTW, Memphis judges are notoriously lenient with large numbers of black defendants, regularly bargaining down attempted murder to misdemeanors. This is often in violation of the mandatory minimums on the books for using a gun in the commission of a crime. However, rarely a peep of outrage over this regular miscarriage of justice by the local media is heard.

Anonymous said...

I agree that on balance the hate crime bill as written is terrible.

That being said, There is a very good argument that the federal government should supervise the prosecution of people that commit crimes against people of other races.

There is a pronounced tendency of juries in some states to acquit members of their own race when they commit crimes against members of other races. For example, all-black juries regularly acquit blacks who commit crimes against whites.

And all white juries in the deep south cwill regularly acquit whites who commit crimes against blacks.

Local politics are heavily racial and you thus can't trust many local justice systems to handle racial crimes appropriately.

Anonymous said...

Wait, so according to Leahy's PR we already have 'outdated' federal hate crime laws covering 6 areas like school, work, fed/state facilities/programs, public areas, etc. Doesn't these existing fed hate crime laws already violate double jeopardy and freedom of speech rights?

The 'hate crime' entry at Wikipedia omits double jeopardy as a criticism and largely discredits the 20/20 report that claimed the Sheppard murder was motivated by a bad drug deal and not an anti-gay animus.

MacroScope said...

The left is close to achieving an Officially Anti-White Government in the U.S.A.

Eventually the gigantic body of federal laws will enforce comprehensive de facto second class citizenship status for whites in general ----> and third class citizenship for white males.

The Sotomayor hearings are a disgraceful mile marker on the road to hell, and the intellectual rot in the media is so deep now that there is no turning back. The non-internet USA Today newspaper frontpage top headline yesterday strongly hinted that the documented La Raza supremacist Sotomayor was a poor victim of bullying white racist/sexist senators.

Who? Whom? It seems to be all about setting up "persecution networks" ----> Agents work for an identity group and act as a network in defaming the target and attempt to create a "chorus effect."

Discussion of this grim situation with the typical white Baby Boomer adult will usually only produce a blank stare. Most white adults don't want to face the social ramifications of a hostile Officially Anti-White Government for their children and grandchildren: They just prefer to not discuss it while they obsessively seek out "good schools" [racially safe] and "good neighborhoods" [racially safe].

MacroScope said...

The fact is that entire generations - like the Baby Boomers - who steer their society into dire straights with destructive social policy and nonsensical intellectual boilerplate ----> must physically pass from the scene [retire and die of old age] before meaningful change can occur. Because there really is very little hope of changing people's minds once people hit 40 years of age.

The politically radical Baby Boomers will be in solid control of congress for probably another twenty years or so: It's doubtful that even mass bankruptcy of their retirement funds will cause them to rethink their core ideology ----> they will rationalize and project blame onto some other target of hatred that was crystallized in their brain during their youth.

Q- What is the Baby Boomer core group ideology?

A- "Whatever my parents were for, I'm against."

The Baby Boomers were the first to experience a television childhood ----> which of course was a massive brainwashing exercise. The left sought to divide & conquer the traditional family by stoking the generational divide ... and the media was tip of the spear in this war.

The Baby Boomer senators are still acting out the rage toward their parents and grandparents [essentially their entire family tree (race)] that was mass programmed into their psyche long ago. Also the age group 5-15 years older than the oldest boomers is supposedly called the "Silent Generation" but it was filled with extreme political radicals who detested the "Greatest Generation" [parents of the boomers].

It would be accurate to describe the Greatest Generation as The Most Hated Generation. Or was/is it envy? The confidence, winning record, and lack of guilt displayed by the Greatest Generation drove much of the Silent Generation and most of the Baby Boomers insane ----> due to the latter groups' very deep television-induced leftist psychic programming.

And by "media" and "television" I mean not only the programming content but, perhaps even more importantly, the advertising messages. Edward Bernays was very clear about power of mass mind control through advertising:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Bernays

albertosaurus said...

Yes it may be tough for you. My views are very much like yours so I have attempted to mask my true identity.

My real name is not Albertosaurus. Shock!

I don't think there is anything I could do to actually hide from the government but maybe I can hide from the non-profit "community".

The Obama administration has a lot of ties to radical non-profit groups like ACORN. In recent elections, groups like this slashed the tires of Republicans poll workers.

If the local Welfare Rights office has you listed as a racist. You don't want that list to also have your real name or your home. address.

A good tactic is one your people enjoy. - Alinsky

A lot of those in Acorn or Welfare Rights would probably enjoy burning down the house of someone identified as a racist.

Assistant Village Idiot said...

I'm not sure prosecuting is the goal. They hope it will become increasingly unnecessary to bother because they have made it so socially and monetarily expensive for anyone to assist by publishing the views in any form.

Prosecuting individuals runs the risk of the populace identifying with defendants and waking up. Much better to just quietly make things more and more difficult.

ben tillman said...

Eventually the gigantic body of federal laws will enforce comprehensive de facto second class citizenship status for whites in general....

It's time to point out that laws with this effect (1) are unconstitutional bills of attainder and (2) work "corruption of blood", which is also prohibited by the Constitution.

http://www.usconstitution.net/glossary.html

"In the context of the Constitution, a Bill of Attainder is meant to mean a bill that has a negative effect on a single person or group...."

"The corruption of blood would forbid the accused's family from inhereting his property."

What was the 1965 immigration act if not "corruption of blood" applied to an entire racial family of 170 million people? The inheritance bequeathed to the founders' posterity was annulled.

Pissed Off Chinaman said...

Alright. While the white male paranoia on this group is just a bit much, believe it or not Steve I actually agree with you on this one. While in law school I never could reconcile the separate sovreignty doctrine with the doctrine of incorporation. The double jeopardy restriction should not be breached just because we did not like the verdict that came from a local jury. Of course this does not mean that the Feds shouldn't be allowed to prosecute the events of a crime if the theory they are using is substantially different from state law charges.

Anonymous said...

Prosecuting individuals runs the risk of the populace identifying with defendants and waking up.

Not really. Generally, whenever show trials are held, whatever defendents say is not widely publicised or they aren't even permitted a defence in the first place. The whole idea that persecuting good people creates martyrs is naive. Effective martyrdom requires a core of powerful supporters and saintliness has little to do with it. Examples of modern day martyrs are MLK and Che Guvera. They became martyrs because powerful sympathisers approved of their ideologies.

Anonymous said...

Someone needs to ask Sotomayor if she supports hatespeech laws or other restrictions to free speech?

Muswell Hillbilly said...

The initial point of this bill is to violate the Constitution's prohibition on double jeopardy by giving prosecutors two bites at the apple with politically unpopular defendants.

Double jeopardy does not apply to state and federal convictions for the same conduct.

Nanonymous said...

Sandra Day O'Sotomayor:
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

This is one myth that poor bastards keep telling themselves. Truth is, a government that is not squeamish will always trump any militia. FYI: under Saddam, 95% of Iraqi households had firearms. Didn't help them much - Saddam was still as much Stalin as he wanted to be.

It's only when a government becomes rotten (or weak) to the point of not being able to use brute force that it can be overthrown.

Anonymous said...

Incredible.

I called my Senator to voice my opposition to the Hate Crime bill only to find he co-sponsored it.

I told his staffer I was strongly opposed because this 'hate' crime (isn't all crime based upon selection of a victim reflecting hatred): (1) violation of the first amendment, (2) politicalization and intimidation at the federal level of non-favored defendents, causes and ideas and (3) a racist double standard elevating the rights and protections afforded various 'minorities" over other Americans she basically lied flat out to me about the bill. When I gave her some facts and quotes from AG Holdner to dispel her squid ink she just hung up on me.

The incredible arrogance.

Anonymous said...

"Pissed off Chinaman" -- this might help you understand how hate crime laws will be applied:

http://www.therightperspective.org/2009/06/12/no-hate-crime-charge-for-black-teens-arrested-for-anti-asian-murder/

David said...

Found this quote:

"Solzhenitsyn laments that the citizens of St. Petersburg cowered behind their doors when the black vans pulled up at their apartment houses night after night to arrest their neighbors. If only the decent Russians had fought back, Solzhenitsyn says, if only they had ambushed some of these secret police thugs in the hallways of their apartments with knives, pickaxes, or hammers, if only they had spiked the tires of the police vans while the thugs were in the apartments dragging out their victims, they could easily have overwhelmed Yagoda's forces and forced an end to the mass arrests. But they didn't fight back, and the arrests and liquidations continued."

Make sure to wait for the arrests and liquidations.

Lucius Vorenus said...

Muswell Hillbilly: Double jeopardy does not apply to state and federal convictions for the same conduct.

You know, it doesn't take much more than a couple of clicks of a mouse to see that that assertion is completely false:

...nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb...

It is an absolute prohibition against any entity [federal, state, local, other; legislative, executive, judicial, other] imposing a burden of double jeopardy upon a citizen.

[The 1st Amendment, by the way, applies only to the Federal Congress - state and local governments, as well as the federal executive and the federal judiciary, are NOT bound by the 1st Amendment.]

Anonymous said...

Pissed Off Chinaman said...Alright. While the white male paranoia on this group is just a bit much.

Also where is MacSweeney with his sore losers - who can't take the Asian competition?

I see this week a Chinese spy at NASA is in court.

Someone do remind me about all those white folks who work on the Chinese space program.

Anonymous said...

Heh, was working with a Chinese programmer on 9/11: when the rest of the office was all WTF? he said "The FBI is the largest intelligence office in the world, how did they not know?" This, minutes after the fact.

I only smelled what he was cooking years later, but he literally didn't buy what was happening for a minute.

Pissed of Chinaman said...

Two the two Anonymi who responded to my post:

Anonymous #1-What's your point? Like I said, I think that the double jeopardy clause of the Bill of Rights should be incorporated just like the laws on speech, religion, cruel and unusual punishment...etc. Of course I think a federal charge that is different from a state charge should still be permitted. My problem with the Leahy amendment is that it is overbroad.

Anonymous #2-Look there are plenty of Chinese American and Asian American engineers at defense firms and other places that are not spies so I don't think some dumbass from Boeing should be a reflection on all us Chinese and Asian Americans. Oh and as for me, you don't have to worry. I am an attorney, the only secrets I could transfer to Beijing concern the benefits of the American common law system.

And frankly what the F is it with all these Anonymous posters. Okay so ya'll don't want to give your real names...fine. Can't you people be a bit more creative than to write in as Anonymous?

Anon #1 said...

Pissed Off Chinaman --

You said: "Of course this does not mean that the Feds shouldn't be allowed to prosecute the events of a crime if the theory they are using is substantially different from state law charges."

Hate crimes proponents argue that there's no double jeopardy when a case is tried twice IF the defendant's hate was not tried the first go around.

The point of my first post is hate crimes charges are pressed for political purposes. The facts of the case are immaterial. Divining the intent of the accused is not even the issue. White guy kills a black guy after calling him a n*gger? Hate crime. Black guys seek out an Asian to rob and kill? Not a hate crime because according to victimology, Asians are basically white.

Anonymous said...

Let's hope Goldman Sachs gets Matt Taibbi put in jail for his Jew baiting.

http://www.alternet.org/blogs/workplace/141268/ludicrous:_matt_taibbi_accused_of_being_anti-semitic_for_goldman_sachs_article

Mr. Anon said...

"Anonymous said...

Heh, was working with a Chinese programmer on 9/11: when the rest of the office was all WTF? he said "The FBI is the largest intelligence office in the world, how did they not know?" This, minutes after the fact."

How did they not know? Because they are the FBI. Because they are lame government hacks.

Anonymous said...

"And frankly what the F is it with all these Anonymous posters."

Haven't you read Sun-Tzu's Art of War? It's all about formlessness, baby, so you attack the idea instead of crap I said five threads ago.

We don't have the freedom of expression in my country (Canada) that they do in, say, China, at least about important stuff, so it's also important for us un-PC guys not to leave footprints.

Anything that disappoints my enemy is good, and if the Anonymous handle pisses you off then all the better.

Pissed Off Chinaman said...

Anon #1: Alright then, we agree with the basics about Leahy's bill. And I don't think "hate" should be tried as a stand alone federal crime but I see no problem with federal anti-lynching laws for example or federal laws concerning the violation of civil rights that can rely on theories of crime different from the actual common law criminal act. It is a fine distinction but still. I also agree with you that hate crime prosecution should not be politicized and that all Americans of whatever color, creed...etc should be protected.

Anonymous #2:

Hey just because I am Chinese does not mean I read Sun Tzu....you bigot, stop stereotyping :D. Seriously though, I am aware that folks like yourself need to keep it on the down low. I got no problem with that. Hell I don't even post under my real name here. But I was creative enough to pick a pseudoymn like a lot of others on his board. It's easier to debate people that way. I mean even Steve has pointed out previously that a pseudonymn would be easier for the board to deal with.

Oh and I am your "enemy." Gee you've never even met me. Sheesh.

Anonymous said...

Pissed off Chinaman - But there are no whites employed in the Chinese space program. The issue of their loyalty does not arise, preventitive measures are the most cost effective.

Pissed Off Chinaman said...

How would you know whether the PRC has white folks in its space program or not. In fact I believe it would be a strong possiblity that there are Russian scientists working for the PRC. Speaking of which I am certain NASA and other American agencies have Americans of Russian and Chinese ancestry working for them. Is it just us yellow people you are worried about? I mean spies come from all nations and in all colors. Hell some of those spies working for China could even be WHITE AMERICANS!!!!! It ain't unheard of.

Anyway, I wonder how this conversation about federal double jeopardy turned into a conversation about me being a potential spy. Once again don't worry your head off. I sucked at math and physics...okay not really I just found the topics boring. I am an attorney and the only secrets I can reveal to Beijing involve the superiority of our legal system relative to whatever passes for the rule of law in the PRC. :)

Anonymous said...

The long term goal is likely to lay the groundwork for eventually prosecuting dissident voices on the Internet, such as, oh, me.

You're a dissident voice? That's a good one.

Anonymous said...

Nanonymous:
Truth is, a government that is not squeamish will always trump any militia. FYI: under Saddam, 95% of Iraqi households had firearms. Didn't help them much - Saddam was still as much Stalin as he wanted to be.

David:
If only the decent Russians had fought back, Solzhenitsyn says, if only they had ambushed some of these secret police thugs in the hallways of their apartments with knives, pickaxes, or hammers

1) Governments can do pretty much what they want to, legally or illegally. They have the resources, the troops, the black vans and helicopters.

2) For private citizens, resistance is much harder. People (even militia persons) have to make a living, work, sleep, change their kids' diapers, and all that.

3) When the black vans come into your neighborhood, it is easier to pretend they are coming for the other guy, and not you or your family or tribe. After all, you are just one of thousands, and statistics are in your favour.

4) In places like Iraq and Russia, government is expected to be tyrannous. The alternative is anarchy. The average citizen would expect the trains to run on time and no fighting in the streets, with occasional secret police raids on "the other guy" a small price to pay.

5) Tribal legitimacy always trumps abstract freedom. Being oppressed by one of your own kind means nothing.

Even in Stalin's Russia this was true; the purges affected only a tiny elite. The average Ivan Ivanovski in Moscow didn't care about abstract freedom (or even understand the concept) and had food and shelter. (Not so for millions of Ukrainians and Kazakhs, but they were a minority.)

Anonymous said...

"Hate" Bills & Christians

If "hate bill"-obsessed Congress [and Obama] can't protect Christians from "gays" as much as it wants to protect "gays" from Christians, will Congress be surprised if it can't protect itself from most everyone? If "hate bills" are forced on captive Americans, they'll still find ways to sneakily continue to "plant" Biblical messages everywhere. By doing so they'll hasten God's judgment on their oppressors as revealed in Proverbs 19:1. (See related web items including "David Letterman's Hate, Etc.," "Separation of Raunch and State," "Michael the Narc-Angel," "Obama Avoids Bible Verses," and "Tribulation Index becomes Rapture Index.") Since Congress can't seem to legislate "morality," it's making up for it by legislating "immorality"!