Category Archives: legal news

legal news, local news

Conflict of interest?

Ellen Skinner wants to be elected justice of the peace in Collin County, Texas. If the Republican nominee for JP wins, she will join her husband as an elected official in this fast-growing county northeast of Dallas.

Now, what do we make of these two folks holding elected office?

Well, Mr. Skinner happens to be Collin County Sheriff Jim Skinner, which makes me scratch my head just a bit. You see, Ellen Skinner would be adjudicating cases brought into her court — as often as not — by Collin County sheriff’s deputies. Both of these individuals are Republicans.

I am not going to level any accusations here, because I don’t know either of them … although I did shake Ellen Skinner’s hand several months ago at a meeting in Farmersville.

I reached out to a friend of mine, a former Democratic JP in Potter County. I asked my friend if she perceived a conflict of interest if the judge is making a judicial decision on a matter brought to her by the sheriff’s office. My friend believes a conflict could exist.

Hmm. I need to pursue this matter a bit further. I don’t want any conflict of interest. The JP candidate is a lawyer. The sheriff is an experienced law enforcement officer. Surely, they have discussed this matter at home.

From my seat, though, I have difficulty imagining how the JP avoids a complaint from someone who comes up on the short end of a judgment brought to the judge by the sheriff’s department.

johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

crime news, legal news, military news

Talk to us, Mr. VPOTUS

(AP Photo/Chase Stevens)

Mike Pence has some things he needs to explain to Americans. The former vice president of the United States tried like the dickens to squash the insurrection that damn near succeeded in overturning the 2020 election.

Except that the orders he issued to the military brass violated the U.S. Constitution. But … did they?

Pence reportedly issued the order for the active-duty military to put down the assault on Capitol Hill; he issued one for the National Guard, too. He did so in the presence of Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Gen. Mark Milley. But only the president has the authority to issue that order. Then again, the president was doing nothing to end the violence. It well could have fallen, then, to the VPOTUS to take command in that extraordinary circumstance.

Pence was being threatened explicitly by those who were carrying signs and yelling “Hang Mike Pence!” Donald Trump did nothing to quell that hideous act. It well could have fallen to the VP to do what the head man refused to do.

Pence well might be called to testify before the House 1/6 select committee. I do hope the panel members are able to pull some answers from Mike Pence on what happened on that horrifying day.

johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

crime news, FBI, legal news, national news, political news

Believing now that indictment is coming

From virtually the moment that he skulked out of town prior to the ceremony celebrating the guy who defeated in the 2020 presidential election, I have resisted the notion that Donald J. Trump would be indicted on charges of criminal behavior.

Today, though, my thoughts have changed … dramatically, I must add.

I believe that Attorney General Merrick Garland is going to indict the former president of the United States, making a huge bit of history in the process. The charges that Garland might level against Trump, though, remain an open question.

They include the most serious, say, obstruction of justice or conspiracy to commit sedition. Those are felonies that carry enormous prison terms if someone is convicted of the allegation.

There might be misdemeanor charges leveled, dealing with the handling of those classified documents that Trump squirreled away in his glitzy Florida estate.

Friends of mine who live in faraway lands have speculated that Trump would be hauled off in leg irons and handcuffs. Other friends of mine — those who are loyal to Trump — have said quite the opposite. They don’t defend the individual’s character, saying he “never would do” the things that have been alleged already. Instead, they challenge the motives of the federal investigation.

I believe Merrick Garland is as fine a public servant as we can find. His career as a federal judge was marked by universal praise — from the left and the right — for his judicial scholarship and the meticulous nature of his court rulings. Even when the Senate GOP leadership blocked his nomination to the Supreme Court in early 2016, they didn’t question his qualifications or the quality of the man; they were motivated by pure politics.

I am unaware of the particulars of the AG’s investigation. All I have to assess it is my belief in the character of the man leading it.

He has said that “no one is above the law.” By “no one,” he means, well … no one!

Therefore, I believe he has compiled enough evidence to cobble together a prosecutorial complaint against Donald John Trump.

Then we shall watch the full-scale implosion of a man deluded with notions of grandeur. It cannot happen to a more deserving individual.

johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

legal news, local news, medical news, State news

Personhood debate enters absurdity level

A North Texas woman got pulled over by a police officer because she was the sole occupant in a vehicle that was traveling down a high-occupancy vehicle lane — which requires two or more passengers to qualify.

Except that the woman is pregnant, so she has contested the citation issued in Dallas County, contending that her unborn child is a person, which makes the HOV restriction moot.

Hmm. How do I say this? This incident goes beyond absurd. It is ridiculous in the extreme, but it surely opens the door to endless debate over the whole “personhood” issue brewing now that Texas has made abortion illegal.

The driver in question, Brandy Bottone, said she isn’t trying to make this a “political” issue. Yeah, sure thing. It’s like the pro athlete who holds out for more money who then says, “It’s not about the money.” Of course it is … about the money. Bottone’s bitching about the traffic ticket is most certainly a political issue.

The Texas Tribune reports: Bottone argued that under Texas’ abortion laws, which went into effect after the U.S. Supreme Court overturned the constitutional right to abortion, a fetus is considered a living being. She argued the same should be true when it comes to the state’s traffic laws. “I’m not trying to make a political stance here,” Bottone said, “but in light of everything that is happening, this is a baby.”

Fetal personhood law is complex and Texas is only beginning to untangle it | The Texas Tribune

I have a fear that other would-be political activists are going to test this law and well could clog up municipal courts with ridiculous arguments that suggest that even though a woman is, say, six or seven weeks pregnant that she is therefore allowed to flout a reasonable law aimed at helping motorists who have actual passengers sitting next to them navigate their way through traffic congestion.

This whole matter appears to be taking an absurd turn.

johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

Donald Trump, legal news, national news, national security, political news

What’s with Barr?

More than a few Americans are wondering: What in the world has gotten into William Barr, the last man to serve as attorney general during the Donald Trump administration?

Barr succeeded Jeff Sessions as AG after Trump fired Sessions because Sessions refused to investigate the “Russia collusion” matter, citing potential conflict of interest; Sessions acted out of conscience and a standard of ethical behavior. Trump looked for an AG who he thought would be loyal to the president; he found one in Barr.

Barr did Trump’s bidding. His disgraceful whitewashing and deceptive misinterpretation of Robert Mueller’s probe into the Russian “collusion” matter will stand for all time as an attempt at pandering to the boss. Then he quit just near the end of Trump’s term. Barr had grown weary of defending Trump’s Big Lie about alleged widespread voter fraud during the 2020 election.

Now comes the “new” William Barr. He says Trump should never have taken those top-secret documents out of the White House and kept them in his Florida home. Barr’s critics say his “coming out” as Mr. Legal Straight Arrow is too little, too late. I am not going to pound Barr for his late-blooming fit of reason and sanity.

He’s speaking the proverbial truth to power. When is that ever a bad thing? He has been a frequent guest on Fox News talk shows to do precisely that. Indeed, he has walked into the belly of the beast to tell us all the truth about what is right and wrong in Trump’s pitiful attempts at defending the indefensible.

Why Barr is breaking from Trump — and the GOP — over Mar-a-Lago search | The Hill

I am going to give William Barr credit for telling the world what many of us knew already, that the ex-POTUS deludes himself with grandeur and visions of lifelong power. Do I wish Barr had spoken out while he served in the Trump administration? Certainly!

He’s doing so now. That’s all right with me.

johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

crime news, legal news, local news, national news, State news

Nothing to brag about here, Texas

Well now, it turns out Texas is No. 1 in a category of states that should bring plenty of shame.

Texas has more Oath Keepers members than any other state in the Union. Who are the Oath Keepers? This is one of the groups involved in inciting the 1/6 insurrection against the government, the attack that sought to block the certification of the 2020 presidential election … the one that Donald Trump lost fair and square to Joe Biden.

Oh, but there’s more.

Among the more than 3,300 Texans listed as members of Oath Keepers, some of ’em are law enforcement officers. They include two constables and four chiefs of police.

The findings come from the Anti-Defamation League, an organization dedicated to rooting out evil among us. They have hit the mother lode when it comes to Texas’ involvement in the Oath Keepers, many of whom were photographed prancing through the Capitol on 1/6 carrying Confederate flags and shouting “Hang Mike Pence!”

Hey, you want more? Try this: One of the constables serves a precinct in Collin County, where I live with other members of my family. When I saw the Collin County connection to this far-right-wing group of fruitcakes, my thought turned immediately to a gentleman I have gotten to know — who happens to be a constable in Collin County.

My friend ain’t that guy. What’s more, you know of course that constables in Texas also happen to be elected politicians who run for the office either as Democrats or Republicans.

For the record, the Collin County constable associated with the Oath Keepers is Joe Wright, who serves Precinct 4. Constable Wright has some explaining to do to his constituents who might be concerned about this fellow’s link to an organization involved in one of the darkest days in U.S. history.

More than 3,300 Texans were members of the Oath Keepers, report says | The Texas Tribune

This is a strange turn that makes me decidedly not proud of the state where my wife and I chose to relocate more than 38 years ago.

I consider the Oath Keepers to be replete with traitors.

johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

crime news, legal news, national news, political news

Hillary is right about Trump

Say whatever you want about Hillary Rodham Clinton, who grabbed defeat from the jaws of victory in the 2016 presidential election … but she is correct in asserting that the man who defeated her then is a criminal.

Donald Trump, said 2016 Democratic presidential nominee Clinton, has committed an act of “seditious conspiracy” against the federal government. She is convinced of the evidence that has been gathered and she wants him prosecuted.

So do I and so do millions of other Americans.

Clinton told CBS News what many of us already know, that she was unhappy that she collected 3 million more votes than Trump but lost the Electoral College vote, which is the count that matters in electing presidents.

“Did I consider for a nanosecond” an effort to overturn the results of that election? Clinton asked. “No!” she answered with stunning emphasis.

Clinton lost the 2016 election in one of the most bizarre political flukes in U.S. history. Trump pilfered states that by all rights should have ended up in Clinton’s column. She lost them and I, for one, am not going to dispute that Trump was elected president in 2016. Thus, he benefited from a peaceful power transition that he denied the man to whom he lost four years later.

And in denying that peaceful transition to an opponent, Joe Biden, who defeated him decisively, Trump committed a criminal act of “seditious conspiracy.”

The record is now chock full of evidence presented to a select House committee. Just think: this is just one of at least three probes into criminal activity involving the twice-impeached former president of the United States of America.

The beat, as they say, just goes on.

johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

crime news, legal news, national news, State news

Lame-duck courage: overrated

One would think that a politician who declares his or her intention to walk away from a public office would be infused with all manner of courage to say things about which he or she would normally remain quiet.

It is not so.

How do I know that? Because I know many politicians in this era of hyper-division who have announced their intention to bow out of the public arena but who don’t go public with how they really feel about other pols and public policy issues.

Tarrant County Judge Glen Whitley over the weekend, for instance, said out loud that he would vote for Democratic lieutenant governor candidate Mike Collier over incumbent Republican Dan Patrick. Big deal? Yeah, it is. Whitley is a stellar, stalwart mainstream Republican politician who told WFAA-TV that he won’t back arguably the state’s most power GOP politician.

Why does Whitley stand out? Why aren’t there many more politicians willing to say what Whitley said. It doesn’t take a whole lot of courage for a lame-duck pol to speak from his or her gut when they no longer face a political campaign.

Yet, for reasons that escape me too few of them step up and speak their minds.

Might it be that they don’t want to face their next-door neighbor who would challenge their intelligence? Or the guy in the grocery story who would recognize them? Or perhaps the husband and wife who sit next to them in the house of worship on Sunday?

What does take courage is for a politician who continues to run for re-election to challenge the party’s leadership. I give you Rep. Liz Cheney, the Wyoming Republican who has condemned Donald Trump in the strongest terms possible … only to lose huge in the recent GOP primary in her state.

We’re seeing a large number of Congress members retiring this year. However, we are seeing a surprisingly limited number of them speaking from their gut about the future of their party … or the nation.

That frustrates me.

johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

crime news, legal news, national news, national security

Is she a ‘Trump judge’?

Donald J. Trump’s past blathering about “Obama judges” and “Clinton judges” ruling against him in various legal battles gives me pause as I try to weigh the legal significance of a federal judge who has ruled in the ex-president’s favor in his fight with the FBI over those classified documents he squirreled away at his Florida estate.

Legal and constitutional scholars have been quick to condemn Trump’s assertion that those decisions with which he disagrees are the result of the political leanings of the judges who delivered them. They have said that judges take solemn oaths to be faithful to the Constitution and that’s what they have done in issuing their rulings.

Now we have a Trump-appointed federal judge — Aileen Cannon — deciding that it’s OK to appoint a special master to pore through the documents seized by the FBI in its search for possible criminal evidence.

The Justice Department argued against the appointment of such a special master. It well could appeal the decision by Judge Cannon.

But I am left to ponder something. If the ex-POTUS is going to rant and rail against judges who happen to occupy their seat on the bench because they are appointed by political rivals of his, is it OK for others to do the same thing when a Trump-appointed judge issues a key ruling in the former president’s favor?

Just askin’, man.

johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

legal news, national news

Trump gets special master … what’s next?

Do not look for me or listen for my voice among those who might be inclined to complain about a federal judge’s decision to grant Donald Trump’s request for a special master to investigate the FBI seizure of records from Trump’s posh Florida estate.

U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon is a Trump appointee and today she ruled that a special master can be selected to examine claims of lawyer-client privilege as Trump seeks to block the probe into why he took classified documents from the White House to his glitzy estate in south Florida.

I am going to presume that Cannon is following the law as she sees fit. She ruled that the investigation by Congress and the Justice Department will continue and that she doesn’t see any overly long delay coming up as the courts look for a special master.

I do have one worry, which is that Cannon might bend to the idiocy being pitched that Trump is entitled to “executive privilege,” even though many other judges have ruled that as a former POTUS … he does not! Trump is declaring that he does enjoy that privilege, despite the fact that he left office in January 2021 and that, as one judge noted in an earlier ruling that “we only have one president at a time.” Trump ain’t it.

But, as The Hill reported: Prosecutors also said Trump could not claim executive privilege as a former president against the current executive branch, but Cannon said the DOJ’s position “arguably overstates the law.”

Judge grants Trump’s request to appoint special master to review Mar-a-Lago documents | The Hill

I am going to offer a word of hope that we can get this special master issue settled, get someone appointed, have that individual make rulings in a timely manner and that we can get to the bottom of the “probable cause” for criminality that resulted in the FBI search classified documents.

Attorney General Merrick Garland, to my way of thinking, has the goods to indict Trump on several counts. The question now becomes, will he get the chance to exercise his own constitutional authority?

The special master ploy mustn’t get in the AG’s way.

johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com