Wednesday, June 14, 2017

In the Big Scheme, what's really at the bottom of things tends to be ignored, overlooked, not believed - meanwhile, down on tiny asteroid Key West, Judith Haney of Leeds, Alabama litigation update, and harmonies and discords in The Resistance

In my Facebook timeline yesterday from a Key Largo amigo:
Christopher-Marc Parenti Get to the bottom or top of this and all your questions will be answered. Period the END!!

Sloan Bashinsky Over time, I came to think the "official" version was bogus. This particular narrative is short on facts, long on allegations. Was it an inside job? I think it was. I also think it was an outside job. I think Osama bin Laden outfoxed them all. 3 nights before 911, what I had come to call The Voice, asked me in my sleep, "Will you make a prayer for a Divine Intervention for all of humanity?" I woke up, made the prayer. To this day, I do not know if the prayer was answered, or, if it was, in what way. I do not agree, however, that get to the bottom of this, you get to the bottom of everything. Period, the end. But then, if you do get to the bottom of this, you probably get to the bottom of everything else fucked up about humanity, and it is not human. 

A few days after 911, the angels showed up as I was leaving the Key West post office and delivered this mail: 

America should get out of the Middle East altogether and stop supporting Israel and let Israel and Islam fight it out or work it out and in that way learn if either of them are God's chosen people. That referred back to God telling Abraham that the seed of his first son, Ishmael, by his concubine, Hagar, would cause trouble to the seed of his second son, Isaac, by his wife, Sarah.

Mohamed descended from Ishmael, Moses descended from Isaac. There probably is not a Muslim who does not know that scriptural history, for it is in the Koran, as well as in the Jewish Scriptures and the Christian Bible. There probably is not a Muslim who does not believe Ishmael was the child God promised Abraham, and that God wants Ishmael's seed to cause Isaac's seed, Judaism and Christendom (through Jesus), trouble.

Christopher-Marc Parenti My father worked a lot while I was growing up. My coach played a big part in my life. I have much respect for physical education teachers and coaches. This will help you out with some of the so called "allegations"



Sloan Bashinsky Perhaps in 2004, I read a letter from Osama to Americans online, in which Osama claimed credit for 911, told what had turned him against America, with which he had been allied against the Russians, that George W. Bush was easy to bait, that Americans needed to elect a different kind of president, Perhaps you try getting information from something other than human beings, it might surprise you what you learn.
When I went online just at dawn this morning, using Harpoon Harry’s wi-fi, I inadvertently typed in an “m” and that caused “Monroe County Clerk of the Court” to appear in my search bar, so I thought I might look at how the remaining two lawsuits filed by Judith Haney of Leeds, Alabama are going. The lawsuit against Bruce Gorman and his wife is still underway. The lawsuit against Rick Boettger is showing “case closed”, but no order or other explanation as to why. I called Rick Boettger and left a voicemail about what I had seen on the Clerk of the Court's website.


Judith Haney sued me, then she sued Naja Girard, Rick Boettger and Bruce Gorman for how they each got involved in Haney’s lawsuit against me. In her lawsuits against Girard and Boettger, Haney alleged they were in a conspiracy with me to invade her privacy, blackmail her into not prosecuting her legal rights against them and me, and to harm her. The conspiracy was to dig up and present the truth. Haney’s lawsuit against Girard was dismissed by Judge Tim Koenig, with prejudice, because what Girard had written to me about Haney was Girard’s opinion, which is protected by the 1st Amendment, U.S. Constitution. I made a 1st Amendment defense, which Judge Bonnie Helms did not rule on, other than to, sua sponte(on her own motion), dismiss all of my defensive pleadings, along with all of Haney’s pleadings, because none of the pleadings appeared to have merit, they were vexatious, and they imposed to great a burden on the court. Striking the pleadings had the effect of dismissing that lawsuit without prejudice. Haney sued Gorman because he published on his bigpinekey.com Coconut Telegraph public forum a comment from Stephen Freer about Haney suing me. I had nothing to do with Freer's comment.

Moving laterally in paradise pretend ...

As I was putting together yesterday’s post at this website, my bowel thankfully released, which historically has meant what I lately have been engaging is good enough and something new is coming in for me to engage. Later yesterday, there was yet another bowel release. Historically, that also has indicated something was worked though and something new is coming in for me to engage. Big electrical storm last night, which also historically means something new is coming in for me to engage.


Last night, I bumped into a good friend, who said he has no sympathy for people who are in America illegally. I said they know what the rules are and what can happen if they are caught here. This friend is not a fan of Donald Trump. He is not a Republican. He would not be caught dead being either. He is well known in Key West. He is a member of what I call The Resistance, which is a small informal group of local citizen activists. He was astounded that City Commissioner Sam Kaufman had appointed Ed Russo to the Key West Planning Board. Ed Russo, below, claims he is Donald Trump's environmental adviser. 

Key West the Newspaper (thebluepaper.com) recently published a news report of Russo being appointed by Kaufman, without any apparent blue paper investigation or comment. A blue paper reader, who did not know anything about Russo, would understandably think the blue paper agreed with Kaufman appointing Russo. I myself was astounded the blue paper published that news report without any apparent investigation or comment. As far as I know, I am the only journalist in the Florida Keys who has taken Kaufman, Russo and the blue paper to task about that. 

http://afoolsworkneverends.blogspot.com/2017/06/if-their-lips-are-moving-small-screen.html

http://afoolsworkneverends.blogspot.com/2017/06/truth-in-american-politics-and.html

For new readers at this website, Sam Kaufman, above, is my own personal lawyer and a longtime good friend.

That preamble out of the way, if you did not yet read yesterday’s post at this website, please do that, because down below is an email exchange with Naja Girard, which stems from Naja's and my email discussion reported in yesterday’s post at this website. 

Naja and her husband, Arnaud, co-publish the blue paper. They are members of The Resistance. They are good friends of mine. I lived in their home for about a year, free, because I could not afford rent. If I ever come into money again, I will pay that rent.


As I explained to Judge Bonnie Helms during the March 31 hearing in Haney v. Bashinsky, among other things I report and comment on, I publish what other people send me, verbatim, even if it slams me. In what Naja wrote once wrote to me about her view of Haney suing me for my potential inheritance, and later Naja told Judge Tim Koenig, it is well known that if you write to Sloan Bashinsky, you can end up in print on his website. As far as I know, I am the only publisher in the Florida Keys, who does the kind of interactive journalism described above and demonstrated in this post today.
My reply note to Naja's email yesterday, followed by her email and my responses inside her email:

Morning, Naja - 

Yours yesterday included an attached letter from Mark Songer representing Last Stand re transient rentals, tourism, etc. putting too much stress on the Florida Keys. I agree, but don't know if it is relevant to your and my immigration articles/discussion, unless Mark means the Keys should restrict tourism, which is immigration of a sort. I think that would be a great thing to do, but I see no legal way to do it. That leaves blowing up bridges? Not my recommendation. But a Category 5 hurricane wrecking  a lot of homes and lodging places and washing out a bridge or two would take care of that problem and lots of other problems too many people living in and visiting the Keys cause.
From: bluepapermailbox@gmail.com <bluepapermailbox@gmail.com> on behalf of Naja Girard <editor@thebluepaper.com>
Sent: Tuesday, June 13, 2017 4:37 PM
To: Sloan Bashinsky
Subject: Fwd: interactive journalists family squabble

Sloan,

Here are a few thoughts on your local immigration enforcement stance...


The various sorts of "journalism"


Before "sounding off" you could have taken the time to get some answers to your questions. You could have made that effort wholeheartedly before assigning to the Women's March Florida Keys Chapter, through comparison, some negative characteristics you had previously assigned to a different group of people in a completely different situation where you claim motives of commercial gain were hidden from the public and a "fake" group had been created for dishonest reasons. 
I looked at the local Women's March website and facebook page and saw Natalia Duke seemed to be Women's March, which I stated in my blue paper reader comment and asked you and Duke for more details and got no response. So I asked again and you said you did not know. If there as many local Women's March members as you state later in this email, great. Perhaps today, or soon, they all will be outside the Sheriff Headquarters on Stock Island. That's the only way I know to determine how many of them there really are, and how many of them are upset with Sheriff Ramsay's current policy on his deputies dealing with illegal residents.


But I'm not going to tell you how to conduct your form of journalism any more than I want you telling me how to conduct ours. But when you want to interject your form of journalism into our publication then I do have a say. 




You say Rick Ramsay has a "side"?
What is this about how "far more people" are on Rick Ramsay's "side" than the Blue Paper's "side"?  How interesting. Has Rick Ramsay taken "a side" Sloan? He claims he has "no policy". Several persons [one a City Commissioner - attorney] and at least this one group you choose to attack, are asking for their elected Sheriff to state his policy. One could be on any "side" and still call for a transparent policy.  One could be 100% in favor of MCSO being "with ICE", as you put it, and still find it quite reasonable and important to ask for a transparent policy that ensures accountability. Border Patrol and ICE agents, in fact, are specially trained and there are various requirements in place to safeguard civil rights and to ensure accountability. 

Yes, based on what you wrote, Ramsay took a side, which was leaving up to his deputies' discretion. What I see now happening is, Ramsay comes to your side, or he goes the other way. I hope he comes to your side. If he doesn't and goes the other way, I doubt you will like that better than what he was doing before you challenged him.

As to the Blue Paper's "side" - the Blue Paper would indeed like to see a transparent policy that they and everyone else can scrutinize. There is nothing controversial about that position. Of course as journalists we would want the official positions of elected officials to be pinned down so that we can understand them.

I agree about needing transparent policy. Based on blue paper reporting, Ramsay stated his side. It's up to his deputies' discretion what they do when they find an illegal resident. Nothing. Call in Border Patrol/ICE. That's transparent, even if you don't like Ramsay's side.

The El Siboney Chef is not being accused of a federal "crime"
The Chef at El Siboney is not accused of entering the country illegally. He did not sneak across the border in the middle of the night. He is not accused of failing to leave after being issued an order of removal. According to Border Patrol, he is accused of staying longer than he was authorized to stay.  Congress chose to enact legislation that sees that as NON-CRIMINAL. il
So, the El Siboney chef does not have to leave? He is a legal visitor? Congress made that so? My problem with him, same problem for a friend of ours, with whom I spoke about this yesterday, was the chef was driving a motor vehicle in Key West without a license - for how long? That's pretty darn in your face, America; and its real illegal; and it's not something American citizens can do, but he did it. I still don't think he should be deported, but, darn, he sure lived on the edge driving without a license, and he sure knew if he got caught, he was looking at being deported. Our mutual friend said the chef should have stayed under the radar. He said he has no sympathy for illegal aliens. They know the rules when they come to America. He is not a Republican. He detests Donald Trump. He is a member in good standing of The Resistance in Key West. He has run for local public office several times. He attends and speaks out at city commission and other local government meetings. He was astounded City Commissioner Sam Kaufman appointed Ed Russo to the Key West Planning Board, which the blue paper seemed to rubberstamp in its last Friday edition.

Likewise, working without authorization absent some proof of fraudulent documentation, has also been characterized by federal legislators as a CIVIL matter. He is not facing CRIMINAL prosecution by ICE - there is no foreseeable prison sentence due to his overstay. 
It never occurred to me the chef would be sent to prison; I thought the issue and objection is that he is at risk to being deported.

You omitted important facts from your analysis
Despite how you portrayed it, the truth is the deputy has not been restricting his activities to "asking questions". He is detaining immigrants ["arresting" them - they believe they do not have the freedom to leave] and holding them for a considerable amount of time, absent any warrant or probable cause that a CRIME has been, is being, or will be committed. He is requiring them to wait around for Border Patrol, long after the mission of the traffic stop has been completed. Our US Supreme Court, as I told you before when I gave you the case citations, has had a lot to say about that sort of thing.ug
I wrote in a comment to the blue paper that the deputy in the first illegal resident case the blue paper reported was out of line siding with the white American woman motorist and not worrying about the bicyclist who was run over. That was the heat in that incident, I wrote in a later comment, which caused that blue paper report to go viral all over America. 
Same deputy involved in the second illegal alien traffic case reported by the blue paper. I'm that deputy and find the driver has no driver's license, yes, he is obviously Hispanic and, yes, I ask if he is an American, and, yes, I do that because it makes no sense he does not even have a driver's license unless, res ipsa loquitur (the thing speaks for itself), he is an illegal resident. He tells me he is an illegal resident. Yes, I call Border patrol, because I'm a deputy sheriff and  have been told by Sheriff Ramsay that's my call to make. The heat for me in that case is the brazenness of the chef driving a car without a license knowing it's illegal and what will happen if he gets caught.

No federal authorization
Additionally, the US Supreme Court in 2012 made it crystal clear that local law enforcement is not empowered to enforce CIVIL immigration statutes absent federal authorization.  These local deputies do not have federal authorization - as our Sheriff has not signed an agreement with ICE for training, deputizing and oversight by ICE. There is such a federal program that would allow his deputies to enforce civil INS laws in accordance with the policies [there's that word again] that federal agents must follow - but the Sheriff has not pursued such an agreement. 
The US Supreme Court said deputy sheriffs cannot call Border Patrol/ICE about an apprehended illegal resident? If so, this no longer practicing attorney thinks the Supreme Court had its head way up where the sun don't shine. In the two cases the blue paper reported, did not Border Patrol/ICE handle the illegal resident part of the incident? Is that now Border Patrol/ICE's job description? It's illegal for sheriff deputies to call in the proper legal authority to deal with illegal residents? The US Supreme Court made that ruling?  

X-lawyers who show no interest in constitutional safeguards?
There are indeed constitutional law implications in what the Sheriff's deputies are running around doing in the name of federal immigration law enforcement. If those fighting against this concept of an open transparent policy [apparently that is what you are doing] were in good faith, they would instead be joining The Women's March in the call for the Sheriff to create and publish a formal policy consisting of guidelines and accountability standards.
Sorry, I thought you reported the local deputy brought in Border Patrol to deal with the illegal resident issue.
Your personal lack of interest in and respect for our U.S. Constitution and the rights it affords to everyone present in the country, including immigrants, especially since you are someone trained as an attorney, is quite astounding to me.
Baloney, Naja. I was sued for exercising my 1st Amendment right of free speech by the same woman who ended up suing you, Rick Boettger and Bruce Gorman for the same thing, and you did not even report it. I was threatened with arrest by KWPD if I slept outside at night after being banned from KOTS for life [Key West's homeless shelter], and you did not report it. Homeless American citizens have no due process rights at the city's homeless shelter next door to the Sheriff Headquarters. You and Arnaud were offered all three cases by me and you both declined. I have repeatedly stated I did not think either Hispanic man should have been turned into Border Patrol. But not for legal reasons you argue. For humanitarian reasons, which is something that interests God.
Some questions raised by the Sheriff's deputy's actions that those with a legal background are normally interested in:

1. Are local law enforcement officers empowered to enforce CIVIL laws - be they state or federal?  [Shall deputies also begin questioning people, arresting and detaining them during traffic stops for suspected violations of the Florida's Landlord/Tenant statutes? How about for building code violations?] Supreme Court said no - didn't it Sloan?
As I already commented under the Women's March piece, if local law enforcement cannot call in Border Patrol/ICE, that makes Border Patrol/ICE's job a lot harder, doesn't it? What about a private citizen, you for example, learning of an illegal resident. It is illegal for you to call Border Patrol/ICE? I don't think so. So why would it be illegal for a sheriff deputy to do it? Not that you would rat out an illegal resident, but why would it be legal for you to do it, if a deputy sheriff could not?

2.  Are the Sheriff's deputies empowered by law to detain someone (technically an "arrest" if the persons believes they are not free to go) while Border Patrol makes their way to the scene to inquire about a possible violation of CIVIL immigration laws? Supreme Court said no - didn't it Sloan?
If that is your read on the Arizona case, why doesn't the blue paper, Last Stand, ACLU and/or Women's March hire a lawyer for these two illegal residents, to bring that case against Sheriff Ramsay in local federal court and get that decided? 


3. What if the untrained, unsupervised [in this realm] Sheriff's deputies are only enforcing immigration laws against Hispanic persons? What if there is a pattern of ethnic discrimination? Well, how would we know? There is "no policy" requiring reporting or tracking of these interactions.  Constitution says make sure you don't treat people differently based on their ethnicity or race - doesn't it Sloan?
Well, Hispanic persons tend to be the most likely illegal residents in America. I imagine Border Patrol/ICE don't look hard at white people like you and me. Although there might might be quite a few illegal white East European residents in Key West, who deserve equal treatment to the illegal Hispanic people living here. Don't imagine many illegal Asians here. Might be a few illegal people of African descent. But to be fair and square, only real Americans should be allowed to decide who gets to live in America. The deciders should be white people once called "savages, redskins. Indians", because Christopher Columbus believed he had reached islands near India. Today the real Americans are called Native Americans. Probably the truly fair thing is all of us white people get deported. The Hispanic peoples were in America long before British and French and other western Europe white settlers arrived. Perhaps the Native and Hispanic Americans, and the African Americans, whose ancestors were dragged over here in chains, should deport us white people and divvy America up.

Look in the mirror
So, what you might do Sloan is look in the mirror and ask yourself why YOU yourself are not calling for the Sheriff to state a transparent policy for all to see and to measure against the law of the land? What exactly is your legitimate reason for being comfortable with the legality of the status quo where there are obvious concerns over civil rights violations and overstepping of bounds and an abundance of case law out there for you to study if you cared to? 
I repeatedly stated I do not think those two Hispanic men should be deported. I have no leverage over Sheriff Ramsay. He was not put on my plate to try to persuade. I commented in the blue paper that Sheriff Ramsay needs to have a uniform policy about this and that I do not agree with your view of what the law requires. I commented that I think you are egging Sheriff Ramsay to go in a direction you will not like. I have commented that you have a really big charge about this issue and it belies something else in your past not resolved, which requires you looking in the mirror to address. 

Sloan and the muslims
And thanks for sharing that you are in agreement with President Trump's "muslim ban" - an executive order that has been declared unconstitutional by every Court that has looked at it thus far. Are you also in favor of internment camps for muslims, Sloan? 
America is at war, Naja, with Islam, mutually declared. I'm a realist. I would love to be blown up by a suicide bomber tomorrow, because I'm really tired of living. However, I doubt you would like to be blown up. I doubt your children would like to be blown up. I know my children and their children would not care to be blown up. Were I US President, I would do all I could to stop any Muslim from entering America. I don't know where you got me being in favor of internment camps for Muslims already here. Reminds me of the wild allegations that woman who sued me made up about me. Cause me to think you are protesting way too much, Naja.

Your attack on the Women's March group:
As to how "substantial" the group Women's March Florida is - you did not bother to properly investigate this before again bashing the group by implying they are not what you consider  "substantial' enough to have their name published along with their statement - having shown your emphatic support for the Citizen's handling of their press release by not only not writing a story about the group having had the guts to call out the local Sheriff, but not even placing the name of the organization in the Letter to the Editor - but instead reducing their voice to that of one person.  I will note that other organizations such as Reef Relief, Last Stand and I'm sure there are others, often have their statements published in the Letter to the Editor section of the Citizen and just beneath the name of the spokesperson you will indeed find the name of the organization...a
Again, I went to their website and Facebook page and it seemed that was Natalia Duke's deal. I asked you and Duke to say who Women's March are and how many, and I got nothing back from you or Duke. I kept asking, and finally you said you didn't know and I should find out and write about it. You published their press release without knowing what little I knew of them and was asking questions at the blue paper, which you at first ignored and Duke has yet to respond. 

Of course, I realize with respect that I am in no position to criticize the publishers of the Citizen about how they run their publication. I am very grateful and appreciative of all the fine work that the Citizen staff does informing us about so much of what is happening in our community.  I am just pointing out that YOU are in favor of their choice in how to handle the Women's March press release that was provided to all local media by the organization with the organization's name and website included in the correspondence.) 
I have heard you grouse about the Citizen reporting stories the blue paper broke and gave the blue paper zero credit. I have published that was foul doing by the Citizen. You published Rick Boettger's article last week, in which he ripped the Citizen to shreds for the way it has treated the blue paper and misreported Judith Haney's lawsuit against you. I doubt the Citizen has any illusion you do not agree fully with Rick.


As to how "substantial" the local chapter of the Women's March is, this is what the Key West Citizen published last January when they reported on the large turn out on the group's first organized march in Key West: 

"Key West Police officials estimated 2,500 to 3,000 people took part in the local event, said Officer Steve Torrence of the Key West Police Department." 

The Keynoter published that it was more like 3,000 - 3,500: 


That's quite a "substantial" turnout in my book.

Naja

That is a HUGE turnout. Are they all members of Natalia Duke's local chapter? Or did they show up just for that event? I have no clue. But and again, if Natalia spoke for them all in the blue paper last Friday, will we read in the Citizen and the Keynoter of them all gathering at Sheriff Ramsay's Headquarters on Stock Island and giving him a piece of their huge collective mind about his illegal resident policy? If they do that, will Sheriff Ramsay bend to their view, or will he hold to his current policy, or will he go with the people who want all illegal residents deported? That's the pot the blue paper and Duke are stirring. Me, I'd leave that pot alone and tell illegal Hispanic and other illegal residents to stay off the radar, and, if possible without getting themselves in dutch with Border Patrol/ICE, try to become legal, like Arnaud did.

Sloan 

Naja wrote:


So your answer is to mischaracterize what I have said? 


I have nowhere said that local law enforcement is "not allowed" to call Border Patrol.  As a matter of fact there is a federal statute that makes it illegal for them to be prohibited from sharing information with Border Patrol. That same federal statute says that in order for local and state law enforcement to have the powers to investigate and enforce immigration law there must be an agreement with the Attorney General.  


Of course, local officers can call Border Patrol all day long and so can you or I or anyone else.   The issue, that you don't seem capable of looking at, is that it is questionable whether local law enforcement has the authority to detain someone during a routine traffic stop on a secondary offense of violation of federal CIVIL immigration law absent an agreement, training, tracking, and oversight by the federal government and absent probable cause that a CRIME has been committed.  To continue with these operations without so much as training program, tracking, or oversight by the local Sheriff is the primary issue that the Women's March and others are concerned about.  


Should every person in Key West who has an accent and doesn't have an ID with them be subjected to roadside detentions by local officers on behalf of the federal government and if so, should there be a requirement that those incidents be described in incident reports, that there be tracking to see whether or not there is any racial or ethnic profiling occurring, and whether any persons who are in fact, "legal" documented aliens or citizens are being held during these incidents and there are questions as to under what circumstances deputies are allowed by the Sheriff to carry out their investigations into alien status.


For example, should local deputies also try to ascertain the alien status of victims of crime?  We don't know -- the Sheriff has "no policy".  Victims of crime may also have violated civil INS statutes. 


I actually meant to remove the Citizen's Letter to Editor written by Mark Songer of Last Stand from the email to you, but the point would be that the Citizen, in that case, chose to include the name of the organization and printed it below the name of the person representing the organization who had sent the communication to the publication on behalf of the organization thereby informing the public that the words had been authored by the organization as a their official statement and that they were not just the words of the one person signing on behalf of the organization or the contact person for the press release.  Get it?


I replied:


Sorry, Naja - 

Looked to me your bitch was the deputy called in Border Patrol.

I think the deputy had the legal right and duty to call in Border Patrol, after being told by the chef that he was not a legal resident, which came about after the chef told the deputy he had no driver's license, which was a huge red flag for the deputy, or for anyone, given the chelf probably was not American. Law enforcement officers are supposed to use common sense, make on site decisions. They are not supposed to be robots. 

In the first case with this same deputy, I think he was entitled to ask for the victim bicyclist's identification, but not seeming concerned about the bicyclist's injuries, whatever they were, I have yet to see that reported by the blue paper, was egregious. Doubled by the deputy trying to pin the fault on the bicyclist in favor of the white woman driver. 

Illegal aliens in Key West and the Florida Keys tend to have accents and no ID, and that's their problem when they get involved with local law enforcement. 

Again, I suggest the blue paper, Women's March, ACLU, Last Stand, put this into federal court here in Key West and let a US District Judge straighten it out. 

I suggest that, because you keep talking about the law, and the only place to resolve that talk is in court.

Thanks,

Sloan
sloanbashinsky@outlook.com



No comments:

Post a Comment