Sunday, March 31, 2019

Law and Order Breaking Down in Chicago as Mob Forces Cop To Free Suspect

In the 1997 movie “L.A. Confidential,” one character said of a police sergeant who was enduring a grueling situation: “I wouldn’t trade places with (him) right now for all the whiskey in Ireland.”

It’s easy to echo that sentiment in regard to Chicago police officers.

As if the city’s maddening number of homicides isn’t enough of a burden, actor Jussie Smollett — on whom Chicago law enforcement had wasted considerable resources and countless hours — was inexplicably cleared of all charges in an apparent hate-crime hoax.

And now, we’ve come to discover, it seems Chicago police can’t even arrest a drug suspect without being harassed or threatened by a menacing crowd.

More @ WJ


  1. Sorry, but I agree with the "menacing crowd." When laws do no apply to the privileged few, then they apply to NONE! After the turning loose of that punk Smollett, I have ZERO belief anyone should be convicted of anything. I know my rights to "Jury Nullification." I will NEVER vote guilty, if I am on a jury. Until I see laws applying everyone. Until that day EVERYONE goes free.


    1. the turning loose of that punk Smollett


  2. Badger, your comment reminds me of a dissenting SCOTUS judge from 1928:

    Justice Louis Bandeis, Olmstead vs. U.S.277 US 438, 48 S.Ct. 564, 575; 72 L ED 944 (1928):

    “Decency, security, and liberty alike demand that Government officials shall be subjected to the same rules of conduct that are commands to the Citizen. In a Government of laws, existence of the Government will be imperiled if it fails to observe the law scrupulously. Our Government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the Government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself. It invites anarchy. To declare that, in the administration of the law, the end justifies the means would bring a terrible retribution. Against that pernicious doctrine, this Court should resolutely set its face.”

    --Ron W

  3. Correction: His name was Brandeis. He was basically a classical liberal, like our founders and I consider myself. Today's so called liberals are lawless authoritarians who want us in slavery, or dead, if we refuse to submit. --Ron W