THE LAWLESS
LAWYER CLASS
LAWYER
JACKIE LACEY PROTECTS HER MURDERING GANG INFESTED L.A. SHERIFF’S DEPARTMENT.
SHE IS A REMINDER THAT THE LAWS DO NOT APPLY TO THE LAWYER CLASS!
ONLY KAMALA
HARRIS HAS DONE MORE FOR MURDERING COPS AND THEIR GENEROUS NEO-FASCIST COP
UNIONS!
https://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2020/10/the-lawless-class-how-lawyer-jackie.html
During
her time in the DA’s office, Lacey has prosecuted only one officer for killing
a civilian, leading to protests outside her office and her home.
“She
continues to find that it is necessary for police
to kill
unarmed people,” Gascón said. “Perhaps she
thinks
it’s fine, or perhaps it’s all the money she
has taken
from police unions.” Lacey has benefitted
from
more than $5 million in contributions to
outside
committees benefiting Lacey has come
from law
enforcement unions.
In terms of her politics, there is clearly nothing
“historic” about Harris. As district attorney in San Francisco (2004-2011),
attorney general in California (2011-2017), and, finally, US senator (2017 to
the present), Harris has compiled a track record of backing the police, locking
up workers and immigrants, covering up for the banks and supporting militarism
and war.
The
selection of Kamala Harris and the degradation of American politics
13 August 2020
With the selection of Kamala Harris to be the running mate
of Joe Biden, the framework of the 2020 elections has been set. As was to be
expected, the Democrats have chosen the most right-wing candidates to run the
most right-wing campaign possible.
There is a certain inevitability to the
choice of Harris. In July of last year,—based on a survey of who would be the
worst, most reactionary and at the same time most suitable choice for second
spot on the Democratic Party ticket— predicted that Harris would most likely be
named the vice presidential candidate if she failed to win the nomination. She
had all the ruthlessness, narcissism and careerism requisite for the job, plus
the ethnic background to suit the Democrats’ obsession with racial and gender
identity.
Kamala Harris is a dyed-in-the wool political reactionary.
This year has seen mass demonstrations throughout the
country in response to the police murder of George Floyd. As a direct result of
the policies of the ruling class, nearly 170,000 people have died to date in
the coronavirus pandemic, with the daily death toll now at more than 1,000.
There is growing anger in workplaces over the homicidal back-to-work campaign
and broad opposition among teachers to the efforts to reopen the schools. Tens
of millions of people are unemployed, and they have been cut off from federal
benefits and face being evicted from their homes.
In the midst of this monumental political, economic and
social crisis, and against the backdrop of so much suffering, the American people
are to be offered the “choice” between the fascistic Trump, the conman from New
York, and a Democratic Party ticket headed by a corporate shill from Delaware
and an ex-prosecutor from California. This says everything about the degraded
state of American politics.
Following the announcement by Biden on Tuesday, the media
leapt into action with its nauseating effusion of state propaganda. The
selection of Harris has been universally proclaimed to be “historic,” a
watershed moment.
In terms of her politics, there is clearly nothing
“historic” about Harris. As district attorney in San Francisco (2004-2011),
attorney general in California (2011-2017), and, finally, US senator (2017 to
the present), Harris has compiled a track record of backing the police, locking
up workers and immigrants, covering up for the banks and supporting militarism
and war.
Wall Street is certainly happy with the
choice. “A VP pick that big business can back,” ran a headline on the inside
pages of the New York Times. As for the military, its main
concern is what will happen if the aging Biden doesn’t make it through a full
term. Since the beginning of the Trump administration, opposition from the
Democratic Party has been focused on issues of foreign policy. Harris, who has
no other agenda than her own self-promotion, will be silly putty in the hands
of the military-intelligence apparatus.
The “historic” character of the Harris nomination is
premised entirely on her race and gender. She would be the “first
African-American vice president,” the “first Asian-American vice president” and
the “first female vice president.” She already is the “first Black woman on the
national ticket of the Democrats or Republicans.” Everything is about the
symbolism involved in the choice of Harris, with not a word about the program
of a Democratic Party administration.
As if any of this makes a bit of difference for workers,
whatever their race, gender or ethnicity. As if, moreover, the world has not
already had the example of Obama, not to mention Clarence Thomas, Condoleezza
Rice, Susan Rice, Hillary Clinton and many others.
The selection of Harris exposes the utterly reactionary
character of politics that bases itself on race, gender and other forms of
identity—anything but class. In response to the eruption of protests against
police violence, the Democrats did everything they could to obscure the class
issues, promote racial divisions and propagate the lie that the violence of the
police is an expression of the oppression of “black America” by “white America.”
The outcome of this racialist campaign is the selection as their
vice-presidential candidate of a right-wing ex-prosecutor who once covered up
evidence to keep an innocent man on death row and worked to tear immigrant
children from their parents.
Those invested in the racialist campaign
have jumped on the bandwagon to declare the selection of Harris “historic.”
Ibram Kendi, author of How to Be An Antiracist and one of
the chief inspirers of the New York Times’ 1619 Project, wrote on
Twitter that “the Democrats now have a presidential ticket that reflects the
American people better than the GOP ticket and every presidential ticket in US
history.”
According to Kendi, politicians “reflect” the American
people not because of the socioeconomic forces they represent, but solely by
their racial and ethnic background and their gender. Interests are determined
by race. This is not progressive politics, but right-wing and racialist
politics, which shares much in common with the fascistic politics of Donald
Trump.
Black Lives Matter activist Shaun King wrote that he was
“incredibly proud to see a brilliant Black woman, and HBCU [historically black
colleges and universities] grad, chosen as a vice presidential nominee.” This
was, he added, the stuff “dreams are made of.”
Commenters on Twitter quickly pointed to the contrast
between this statement and his declaration in November 2018 that he would never
support Biden or Harris because “they both helped build & advance mass
incarceration.”
Political principles have never been a strong suit of
Democratic Party hacks. They look forward to positions within the Biden
administration and other opportunities that will reap financial rewards.
Then there is Bernie Sanders. In the Democratic Party
primaries, Sanders won widespread support for his attacks on social inequality
and his calls for a “political revolution” against the establishment. On this
basis, he emerged as the main contender against Biden for the Democratic Party
nomination. In the end, however, the “Sanders wing” of the Democratic Party got
nothing.
BLOG EDITOR: SANDERS ALSO ENDORSED
BANKSTER-OWNED CROOK ON THE LAM, HILLARY CLINTON!
This has not, however, stopped Sanders from praising the
outcome. Sanders tweeted that Harris “will make history as our next vice
president.”
Since packing in his campaign in mid-March, Sanders has
assumed his assigned role as principal cheerleader for the Biden campaign,
along with Elizabeth Warren, et. al. The more that social anger grows, and the
more the Democrats are exposed, the more determined is his support for the
Democratic Party.
What an exposure of the Democratic
Socialists of America (DSA), Jacobin magazine and other
political agents of the Democratic Party who claimed that Sanders was the path
to the transformation of American politics and even the realization of
socialism! They make fools of themselves every election. They will tag along
with the Democratic Party in one form or another, no doubt accompanied by talk
about how they are building a “progressive movement” inside that party of
American imperialism, along with other varieties of political fraud. Every four
years, the same play is performed.
There is something incredibly degrading and shameful about
the whole process, testifying to the intellectual and cultural collapse of
American politics.
Certain conclusions must be drawn from this experience, not
only about Sanders, but about an entire type of pragmatic politics that hopes
for easy answers to the crisis confronting the working class without a direct
challenge to capitalism and its state apparatus.
The politics of the working class must begin with a serious
theoretical understanding, rooted in a Marxist and class analysis. The
Democratic Party is a party of Wall Street and the military-intelligence
apparatus. The politics of race and gender identity, which it relentlessly
promotes, gives expression to the interests of layers of the upper-middle
class, which employ this right-wing ideology in their fight for positions of
power and privilege in the state, academia and corporate boardrooms. The
pseudo-left, including the DSA and associated organizations, represent this
social layer.
All of this is directed against the working
class and the development of a genuine movement for socialism. Objective
conditions, however, have created the conditions for a powerful eruption of
class struggle, in the United States and internationally. The coronavirus
pandemic, as the Socialist Equality Party has explained, is a “trigger event
in world history that is accelerating the already far-advanced economic,
social, and political crisis of the world capitalist system.”
Nothing progressive will emerge except through the
intervention—the interference—of the working class. The Socialist Equality
Party and our election campaign are oriented to the development of a socialist
leadership in the working class. Our campaign is the only campaign that raises
critical questions of perspective, exposing the reactionary promoters of racial
conflict and the cheerleaders of Sanders’ “political revolution.”
The SEP is spearheading the organization of workers against
the homicidal policy of the ruling elite, in opposition to all factions of the
ruling class, on the basis of a revolutionary program to put an end to
inequality, war, dictatorship and the capitalist system. This is the way
forward.
Oversight Panel Calls for Resignation of LA
Sheriff Alex Villanueva
FILE: L.A. County Sheriff Alex Villanueva speaks in August at
the graduation ceremony for the latest Academy Class. (Mario Tama/Getty Images)
In a significant erosion of
support for Los Angeles Sheriff Alex Villanueva, the Sheriff's Civilian Oversight
Commission Thursday called on him to resign as leader of one of the largest law
enforcement agencies in the country. Commissioners said the sheriff has
obstructed oversight at nearly every turn and failed to address major problems
at the agency, including the existence of "deputy gangs."
The commission's resolution
describes "a serious lack of judgement and leadership by Sheriff
Villanueva" and decries "his efforts to block meaningful
reform." It also says Villanueva has restricted access to the department
by the county's inspector general.
In an extraordinary move, the sheriff opened a criminal
investigation into Inspector General Max Huntsman in 2019, accusing him of
unlawfully accessing department records. Huntsman — and the county's attorney —
said he had access to those files under the law that created his office.
Members of the commission called the sheriff's move an act of intimidation.
LOST CONFIDENCE
The nine-member panel says it
has lost confidence in Villanueva's ability to effectively govern the agency,
which employs nearly 18,000 people and operates the largest local jail system
in the country.
Villanueva was an
unconventional candidate for sheriff when he beat incumbent Jim McDonnel in the
2018 election. He was a retired lieutenant with little management experience
who had never supervised more than 100 people. Villanueva won largely because
of the backing of the deputy's union and an endorsement by the LA County
Democratic Party.
The vote Thursday to call on
Villanueva to resign was unanimous. Some of the panel's most traditionally
pro-law enforcement members agreed the sheriff must go, including former Federal
Judge Robert Bonner, former Deputy District Attorney Lael Rubin, and former
Sheriff's Lt. J.P. Harris.
Despite those credentials,
Villanueva has called the panel anti-law enforcement.
"They're political
philosophies are either they really, really hate cops or they slightly hate
cops or they're not too sure," he said. In the sheriff's view, attempts by
the panel to oversee his department are part of a "proxy war" by the
Board of Supervisors. The board appoints the panel.
It's worth noting Villanueva's
relationship with the board has deteriorated too — two members of the board
have asked him to resign. Aspiring members of the board also are critical of
the sheriff. In Wednesday's debate hosted by
our newsroom,
Herb Wesson and Holly Mitchell both said the sheriff was unqualified to do the
job. They're vying for the open District 2 seat, which represents cities such
as Carson, Compton, Culver City and Inglewood; all or part of L.A.
neighborhoods including Crenshaw, Koreatown, La Brea, and Mar Vista; and other
unincorporated areas of the county.
Villanueva did not immediately
respond to requests for comment on the commission's vote.
AN ELECTED OFFICE
The sheriff is elected by the
voters — so it's unclear what effect the calls for resignation will have. In
fact, several commissioners worried their resolution will close the door on any
hope for effective oversight — even though it simultaneously calls on the
sheriff to cooperate with the panel.
"It does seem to be a bit
of a contradiction," said Harris. "I hope it doesn't close the
door."
"He is the one that closed
the door, he's the one that can open it," said Commissioner and Loyola Law
School Professor Priscilla Ocen.
The vote comes amid a raging
debate over policing in the country and a demand for more accountability and
transparency. It also follows a series of controversial shootings by sheriff's
deputies that drew angry protests, as well as accusations of brutality by the
department during the George Floyd and other demonstrations.
Among the resolution's points:
§ Sheriff Villanueva removed the
Sheriff's Department's constitutional policing advisors, while at the same time
attempting to rehire deputies who were fired for cause, such as fabricating
evidence and domestic violence.
§ Sheriff Villanueva alleged,
without proof, that the disciplinary process was "unfair" and
deactivated the disciplinary proceedings against deputies accused of using
excessive force and committing child abuse
§ Violent deputy cliques or gangs
continue to operate within the department, particularly in the Compton and East
Los Angeles stations... Despite Sheriff Villanueva's claims that members of
these cliques/gangs have been disciplined or reassigned pursuant to Sheriff's
Department policy, Inspector General Max Huntsman has said that he is
"'aware of no implementation whatsoever' of the policy and that his office
can't effectively investigate the secret societies 'because of the obstruction
of the Sheriff's Department.'"
In another part of the
resolution, the commission says the commission has "violated the First
Amendment rights of residents engaging in protest activity as well as
journalists covering protests." It cites the arrest of LAist/KPCC reporter
Josie Huang,
who was taken into custody by deputies last month after identifying herself as
a member of the press. "In defending the arrest, Sheriff Villanueva cited
inaccurate and misleading information that was contradicted by contemporaneous
video footage."
THE BACKSTORY
When Villanueva took office in
December of 2018, commissioners initially were hopeful for a better
relationship with him than his predecessor Jim McDonnell, who sometimes
resisted requests for information from the panel and attended only a handful of
their meetings.
Indeed, Villanueva attended
several meetings during his first few months in office but as commissioners'
questions became more pointed about deputy discipline, use of force and other
matters, he quit showing up.
Villanueva was particularly
perturbed by the panel's demand for more information about his decision to
rehire a former campaign aide who had been terminated by the department for
alleged domestic violence and lying. The rehiring of Caren Carl Mandoyan
sparked a lawsuit by the board of supervisors and a judge's ruling it was
unlawful.
His relationship with the
nine-member civilian panel steadily deteriorated since then with his often
refusing to even send subordinates to answer questions necessary for them to
conduct effective oversight. McDonnell almost always sent his undersheriff to
meetings - even if his responses to inquiries left the commission unsatisfied.
In May, Villanueva defied the
first ever subpoena by the commission to testify about how he was handling the
spread of coronavirus inside LA County's sprawling jail system. The sheriff
worried it would be a "public shaming" of him.
The commission was created by
the Board of Supervisors in January of 2016 to increase transparency and
accountability at the department. In March, voters approved a measure giving subpoena
power. At each point, criminal justice reform advocates expressed high hopes
for better oversight and changes at the sheriff's department.
With the commission now at a
standoff with the sheriff, nobody expressed much hope.
There was talk of a recall of
the sheriff among a few activists who spoke at the meeting - the only hope for
some to oust a sheriff who's vowed to remain in power.
»
No comments:
Post a Comment