Category Archives: George Soros

The ‘Walking Pus’ Caption Contest

This is the 227th world-famous FOTM Caption Contest!

Here’s the pic:

You know the drill:

  • Enter the contest by submitting your caption as a comment on this thread (scroll down until you see the “LEAVE A REPLY” box).
  • FOTM writers will vote for the winner.
  • Any captions proffered by FOTM writers, no matter how brilliant (ha ha), will not be considered. :(

This contest will be closed in two weeks, at the end of Tuesday, July 7, 2020.

To get the contest going, here’s my caption:

George Soros: A walking, putrid, open sore on humanity.

For the winner of our last Caption Contest, go here.

~Eowyn

Drudge Report has gone to the dark side. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by a military veteran!

Please follow and like us:

Share and Enjoy !

0Shares
0 0 0
 

George Floyd. 3 Minutes of resisting arrest. The video Fake News didn’t want you to see?

 

Video footage the MSM fake news conveniently kept out of their “breaking news story” has surfaced  of George Floyd resisting arrest for around three minutes .

Would this have stopped the riots? No. Fake news had made their minds up.  They were going do their part at destroying the country.  They were sticking to the plan.

*”One of the most obvious ways to tell I’f a event could be faked is paying attention to the news release. It’s  a dead giveaway when you see all the networks releasing the same exact story, at the same time.”

This video just adds to the long list  of events that fake news got caught at “faking news”.

There you have it.  Floyd did indeed resist arrest.  The entire fake news complex lied to you, again.  They specifically said Floyd didn’t resist arrest.

This is just another example why I quit believing everything the news media puts out..  Some might think that’s a little extreme.  No. It’s  the only logical, smart solution.  The days of me saying “they lie sometimes but usually they are pretty honest”  were gone long ago.  If you say you can tell the difference simply by using your best judgement, all you are really doing is selecting what you feel comfortable with. That does not make it true.

People saw the video.  They saw Floyd die.. Somebody mentioned in the comment section in a prior post of mine.  Something along the lines that “it’s  going to take more than different time stamps to change my mind”.

Five simple points, out of many.

  1. MSM lies all the time
  2. “Floyd is dead because the video shows it.”  Yes, the video looks like someone got killed or died of something. .. I get it, you’re convinced.  Now go turn on your TV or watch your favorite movie on the internet.   Why do you watch what you are watching?  It’s because the character’s seem real.  A block buster movie only becomes a hit if the movie is good.  This requires the actors  being skilled enough to convince you the roles the play are real..  Seeing is no longer believing.   If you believe Floyd is dead because it was captured on video, then you have to believe everything in all movies/videos  are true.
  3. If we wanted to use a video deposition in court, most states require the date/time to be burned into the video at the time of recording.  If the date is off/time is off, they cannot be used in court.  All the videos  times were different..  Floyd videos should not be legit evidence in court.  *Time/ date can be faked in any video.  Even when time of recording is hurned into video.
  4. To convict, there cannot be a reasonable doubt.   Time/date or  anything  else that’s  seemd wrong with this event causes reasonable doubt.  Innocent until proven guilty.
  5. Reliability of source of video.

I use the MSM as leads.  Then I investigate the story myself. But to each their own.

Fake ot not , some have come out ahead because of Floyd’s death.

  • Floyd family got millions in donations. Fame and fortune.
  • Black LIves Matter seemed to grow in numbers.  They assaulted and killed police officers which continues at this very moment.  They ignore   black on black deaths., or any other death in the black community..  They’ve actually got people giving in to their demands..  Some are actually kneeling for them, because BLM expects it.  .  Yes, they have been successful proving racism and bigotry exist in America.  BlM being perhaps the most openly racist group to ever exist in America..
  • Let’s not forget the 35 million and more BLM has received  in donations..  Unfortunate for them,  the people handling their money, the Minnesota Freedom Fund (MFF) has only spent  $200,000 of the money on bail money for protesters.  They haven’t  said where the rest of the money went.  MFF deleted the board members(which are almost all white) page on their site and they quit accepting donations.  They already admitted on Twitter that ” the donations are turned over to ACTBLUE.  ACTBLUE then give it to the democrats”.  That’s  because ACTBLUE is part of the Democrat party. Looks like the democrats hustled BLM.  Watch, BLM will still support democrats. Ok
  • Democrats have shown how much they love their voter base by allowing out of town rioters to destroy their cities, their  businesses, get assaulted, killed and have their whole lives destoyed.
  • Biden says Floyd is more important than MLK.
  • Science makes discovery that protesting will keep you safe from getting covid19 but attending church, working, etc, increases your chance to get the virus.
  • The first time in history that a transperson parent got to fight alongside their transchildren and transhgrandkids with their trans dog and trans bird. Take over American soil.  They did this through violence and   declared their own country.  Perhaps the #1 country of starving people because the homeless stole all the food the firds day.
  • The first time a unknown rapper declares himself the police after removing the police because they didn’t want police there.  He also declares himself to be leader of country by beating and who knows what.  Proving the people with guns win. Tupac  and biggie would be proud.
  • Floyd  so influential and important that he gets minute by minute coverage the day he is buried.  He gets second by second camera coverage from helicopter  of his car as it travels to his resting grounds. The man is treated like a Saint, even though he was a hardened thug who died while being arrested for committing a crime that is a violation of federal law , which can carry a sentence  of 20 years.
  • Police are getting replaced and now, just as I predicted, democrats are going after their weapons.
  • Muslims love the replacing the police with something like community police.  Perfect because to Muslims, community police is religion police or the morality police.  That gives them a chance to bring in Sharia  law.

Minneapolis is home to the largest population of Somali in the USA.  That means Muslim. You can be sure a Muslim controlled replacement for the police is ready to fill the spot.

I find it unusual that CUP FOODS is also the address of a Mosque.  Yes, they have a Mosque in the basement.  An “underground Mosque”. Now you know it’s  true.  They exist.

I mentioned earlier  about the video source being reliable. There is some evidence that the owner(from Palestine)of Cup Foods might have had some animosity toward the police.

That area of town is a hotspot for crime.  Cup Foods being a hotspot for drug trafficking.

The owners  son is a convicted felon who has been to prison. The business has been in trouble with the law in the past.  Both the owner and son have criminal records.

This document will explain the situation better than I.

 

CUP Foods, Inc., a Minnesota Corporation, and its President Samir Hamaden Abumayyaleh, Relators, vs. City of Minneapolis, Respondent. C2-01-399, Court of Appeals Published, September 11, 2001.

STATE OF MINNESOTA

IN COURT OF APPEALS

C2-01-399

CUP Foods, Inc., a Minnesota Corporation, and its President Samir Hamaden Abumayyaleh,

Relators,

vs.

City of Minneapolis,

Respondent.

Filed September 11, 2001

Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded

G. Barry Anderson, Judge

City of Minneapolis

Docket No. 9-2110-12612-3

Ronald I. Meshbesher, Jonathan M. Peck, Meshbesher & Spence, Ltd., 1616 Park Avenue, Minneapolis, MN  55404 (for relators)

Jay M. Heffern, Minneapolis City Attorney, Scott Reeves, Assistant Minneapolis City Attorney, 300 Metropolitan Centre, 333 South Seventh Street, Minneapolis, MN  55402 (for respondent)

Considered and decided by G. Barry Anderson, Presiding Judge, R.A. Randall, Judge, and Robert H. Schumacher, Judge.

S Y L L A B U S

If an agency adopts the findings and conclusions of an administrative law judge, but rejects or significantly deviates from the recommendations of that judge and does not make findings explaining the deviation, the decision is arbitrary and capricious, and the case should be remanded for the agency to make findings explaining its decision to deviate.

O P I N I O N

G. BARRY ANDERSON, Judge

Respondent city stayed revocation of relator’s business licenses subject to store closure for six months and compliance thereafter with several conditions.  Relator argues that respondent’s decision is not supported by substantial evidence and that the sanction was arbitrary and capricious.  Relator also argues that the administrative law judge (ALJ) abused her discretion by denying his motion to strike testimony concerning controlled drug buys.  We conclude that there is substantial evidence to support respondent city’s finding of good cause for adverse license action against relator.  In addition, because relator did not make a timely motion to strike, we conclude that the ALJ acted within her discretion by denying the motion.  But because respondent deviated from the ALJ’s recommendations when imposing its sanction, without making findings explaining the reasons for doing so, we reverse and remand.

FACTS

In 1989, relator Samir Abumayyaleh opened a convenience store at the northeast corner of 38th Street and Chicago Avenue South in Minneapolis.  The store sold groceries and the usual convenience items.  Eventually, relator added numerous goods and services to the store, including a delicatessen, cellular phone and pager sales, tobacco products, and off-sale 3.2 beer.

Respondent City of Minneapolis issued CUP Foods (Chicago Unbeatable Prices) four licenses: (1) grocery store; (2) food manufacturer; (3) tobacco dealer; and (4) off-sale 3.2 beer vendor.  Respondent first issued the licenses in 1989 and each is subject to annual renewal.  Relator’s family, including his father and two younger brothers, work at the store, but relator also employs other workers.  Relator’s younger brother Nabil, known as “Billy,” one of the store employees, has a prior felony conviction for auto theft.

CUP Foods is located in a high-crime area of Minneapolis and, not surprisingly, experienced problems with loitering and drug activity in and around the store.  In 1991, relator complained to respondent about the loitering problem, and at a city crime specialist’s recommendation, relator placed two yellow “no trespassing” signs outside his store.  Respondent conditioned relator’s licenses on reduced hours of operation.  On several occasions, however, the store remained open after the designated closing time.

In 1993, after receiving additional complaints about loitering and drug activity near CUP Foods, respondent scheduled a committee meeting to consider adverse license action.  As a result of the meeting, relator agreed to remove public pay phones, hire off-duty police officers for security, reduce hours of operation, hire older employees for evening shifts, report drug activity to police, and remove signs blocking store windows.  Relator understood that failure to comply with the agreed-on conditions could result in revocation, suspension, or non-renewal of his licenses.  Relator complied with the conditions, including the employment of off-duty police officers as security guards.  But approximately one-year later, relator discontinued their employment because of the cost and because “things got a lot better at the intersection.”

As time went on, however, the crime problem at 38th and Chicago became worse.  In 1996, neighborhood residents formed a task force to improve safety and reduce drug-dealing activity in the neighborhood.  In 1998, the number of complaints concerning CUP Foods prompted police community crime specialists to open a file on the store.  Crime-prevention specialists visited CUP Foods and relator signed a Minneapolis “no trespassing” affidavit and received two new “no trespassing” signs.  The specialists advised relator to call 911 to report trouble, and he and his employees did so.

On July 13, 1998, a shooting took place near CUP Foods.  Shortly thereafter, relator attended a task-force meeting and asked for a greater police presence at the intersection.  A few months later, two more shootings took place near CUP Foods.

Beginning in October 1998, police conducted surveillance of CUP Foods.  Police observed loitering and hand-to-hand exchanges outside the store and in the store entryway.  Using confidential informants, police made several “controlled buys” of either crack cocaine or apparent crack cocaine inside CUP Foods.

Based on the results of the controlled buys, police obtained a search warrant for CUP Foods and executed that warrant on November 18, 1998.  Police recovered: stolen cell phones; a bullet-proof vest; live ammunition; a stolen bicycle; ephedrine, an ingredient in methamphetamine; glass tubing; baggies of what appeared to be crack cocaine (but later proved to lack cocaine base); postal scales; and three firearms.  Police also observed bullet holes in a door.  The state charged Nabil Abumayyaleh with unlawful possession of a firearm, but later dismissed that charge.  Police did not link any of the stolen items to relator, and did not charge him with any crime.

Police continued to make controlled buys in CUP Foods during 1999.  On one occasion, the participants completed a transaction in plain view of Nabil Abumayyaleh as he worked as a cashier.  On November 9, 1999, a Minneapolis police officer recovered crack cocaine from a CUP Foods shelf during the course of answering a call reporting an armed man in the area.

In November 1999, the Hennepin County Attorney’s Office commenced a nuisance-abatement proceeding against CUP Foods.  That proceeding was stayed pending the city’s resolution of appellant’s licensing issues because, on November 19, 1999, respondent filed a notice of hearing concerning all CUP Foods licenses.  Respondent filed amended notices on February 25, 2000, and again on March 27, 2000.

An ALJ conducted evidentiary hearings on March 28, 30, and 31, and on May 5 and 15, 2000.  Respondent presented testimony from police and neighbors, and argued for revocation of relator’s licenses.  Relator presented favorable testimony from neighbors and customers, testified to his own compliance with recommendations, and explained that he, too, sought to end the criminal activity near the intersection.

The ALJ concluded that respondent had shown good cause for taking adverse action against CUP Foods, but recommended that the city council consider placing conditions on CUP Foods licenses, rather than revoking the licenses outright.  On December 29, 2000, the Minneapolis City Council adopted the ALJ’s report but, rather than placing conditions on relator’s business licenses, it revoked all the licenses, stayed on the conditions that CUP Foods (1) close for six months and (2) take additional specified crime-prevention measures upon re-opening.  The council, however, waived 90 days of the closure period, upon relator’s payment of a $10,000 administrative fine.  The mayor approved the decision on January 4, 2001.  Relator now proceeds by writ of certiorari.

ISSUES

I.                    Was respondent city’s decision to stay revocation of relator’s business licenses, subject to conditions, a denial of due process, arbitrary and capricious, or unsupported by substantial evidence?

II.                 Did the ALJ violate relator’s right to due process of law by denying relator the opportunity to cross-examine confidential informants who made controlled buys at CUP Foods?

ANALYSIS

I.

            Appellant first argues that respondent city’s decision to revoke his business licenses is arbitrary and capricious, is unreasonable, is irrational, and not supported by substantial evidence, and that it violates his due-process rights because neither relator nor his employees had direct knowledge that drug activity took place inside CUP Foods.

Generally, decisions of administrative agencies, including cities, enjoy a presumption of correctness and will be reversed only when they reflect an error of law or where the findings are arbitrary, capricious, or unsupported by substantial evidence.  Cable Communications Bd. v. Nor-West Cable Communications P’ship,356 N.W.2d 658, 668 (Minn. 1984); see alsoMinn. Stat. § 14.69 (2000) (setting forth the scope of judicial review).

 Where the evidence is conflicting or more than one inference may be drawn from the evidence, findings must be upheld.  City of Minneapolis v. Richardson,307 Minn. 80, 88, 239 N.W.2d 197, 202 (1976).  If the agency engaged in reasoned decision-making, a reviewing court will affirm its decision even though the court may have reached another conclusion. State by Khalifa v. Hennepin County,420 N.W.2d 634, 639 (Minn. App. 1988), review denied (Minn. May 4, 1988). 

A.         Due Process

            Relator argues that respondent’s decision denies him “due process of law.”  To determine what process is due, this court first determines whether a property interest is implicated.  Humenansky v. Minnesota Bd. of Med. Exam’rs,525 N.W.2d 559, 566 (Minn. App. 1994), review denied(Minn. Feb. 14, 1995).  Relator correctly points out that he has a property interest in his business licenses.  See Bird v. Dep’t of Pub. Safety,375 N.W.2d 36, 42 (Minn. App. 1985) (finding property interest in automobile dealer’s license).  Our second inquiry requires weighing the particular interests involved. Humenansky,525 N.W.2d at 566. 

Sufficient due process generally requires reasonable notice and a hearing.  In re License of W. Side Pawn,587 N.W.2d 521, 522 (Minn. App. 1998), review denied (Minn. Mar. 30, 1999).  Although relator argues that he was denied due process, he does not allege that he was denied either reasonable notice or an opportunity to be heard.  The record shows relator received initial notice of the hearings approximately four months before the license proceedings, a five-day trial-type hearing, representation by counsel, an impartial decision-maker, and a decision based solely on the record.  This is sufficient to satisfy the due-process requirement.  See Humenansky,525 N.W.2d at 565 (describing the process due when property interests are implicated).

B.         Substantial Evidence

Relator argues that respondent violated his due-process rights because revocation

extinguishes [relator’s] property interest and deprives [relator] from making a living without a factual finding that either [relator] or any of his employees permitted, encouraged, or had any direct knowledge of the alleged controlled buys.

In essence, relator alleges that respondent lacked substantial evidence of “good cause” to take adverse license action against relator’s business.

 Substantial evidence, for the purpose of appellate review of an administrative agency’s decision, is: (1) such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion; (2) more than a scintilla of evidence; (3) more than some evidence; (4) more than any evidence; and (5) evidence considered in its entirety.  In re Friedenson,574 N.W.2d 463, 467 (Minn. App. 1998) (citation omitted), review denied (Minn. Apr. 30, 1998).  We defer to the agency’s fact-finding process and it is the challenger’s burden to establish that the findings are not supported by the evidence.  In re Lakedale Tel. Co.,561 N.W.2d 550, 554 (Minn. App. 1997).  Unless manifestly unjust, inferences must be accepted even though it may appear that contrary inferences would be better supported by the record.  Id.  Thus, relator must show that the evidence, considered in its entirety, and drawing inferences in favor of the decision, is not substantial, and, therefore, does not adequately support respondent’s finding that good cause existed to take adverse action against his business licenses.

The Minneapolis Code of Ordinances provides that “[a]ny license granted under this chapter may be revoked by the mayor or the city council as in the city charter provided.”   Minneapolis, Minn., Code of Ordinances § 188.350 (1999).  The city charter provides:

Section 16.  Licenses May Be Revoked.  Any license issued by the authority of the City Council may be revoked by the City Council at any time upon proper notice and hearing for good cause * * * .

Minneapolis, Minn., City Charter ch. 4, § 16.

The ALJ’s memorandum explained that relator’s employment of his brother Nabil Abumayyaleh, a convicted felon, and the handguns found during the search of CUP Foods, did not warrant taking adverse license action against relator because relator legally employed his brother and legally possessed the handguns for protection.  Similarly, the ALJ found that, because respondent failed to link any of the stolen items recovered during execution of the 1998 search warrant to relator, that evidence alone did not support adverse license action.  Further, the ALJ found that the three shootings near CUP Foods had no connection to the store and were simply a “by-product of the gang violence that is prevalent in this south Minneapolis neighborhood.”

But respondent, through the testimony of police officers and neighbors, presented evidence of: (1) chronic loitering at CUP Foods; (2) numerous hand-to-hand exchanges, an indication of drug dealing, taking place in and outside the store; and (3) controlled drug buys inside the store.  Respondent also presented evidence that despite the earlier license conditions, the store’s windows remain obstructed by advertising, signs, and shelving, and that the lack of visibility inside the store hampers law-enforcement efforts.

For these reasons, the city council adopted the ALJ’s conclusion that

[respondent] has demonstrated by a preponderance of the evidence that drug dealing and loitering have occurred on a frequent basis on and near CUP Foods’ premises.  * * * [Relator’s] failure or inability to prevent or meaningfully control the sale of drugs occurring inside his store constitutes good cause for taking adverse action against CUP Foods’ licenses. While [relator] testified that he routinely asks loiterers to leave, substantial credible testimony from neighborhood residents and police officers established that there is an ongoing pattern of loitering and drug dealing both inside the store and outside the store’s front entrance.  And, despite some measures taken by [relator] to increase visibility in his store, the record established that the majority of the store’s windows remain obstructed by shelving, advertisements, and other signage.  The inability to see into the store’s windows encourages loitering and criminal activity in general at CUP Foods.

Although there is no direct evidence that relator or his employees observed drug transactions, there is ample evidence, including the evidence of the controlled buys, that such transactions took place in and around CUP Foods and that relator knew that crime in and near the store was an ongoing problem.  Although relator made efforts to improve security and reduce crime, he failed to decrease the height of store shelves or remove window advertisements, and, until very recently, relator had abandoned the use of security guards.

Drawing inferences in favor of respondent city’s decision, as we must, and viewing the record as a whole, we conclude that the evidence, though hardly overwhelming, is reasonable, “more than a scintilla,” “more than some,” and “more than any” evidence.  The evidence, therefore, is substantial and supports the conclusion that respondent had “good cause” to take adverse license action against relator.[1] 

C.        Arbitrary and capricious

Relator also argues that the adverse license action is arbitrary and capricious.  Reviewing courts may reverse an agency’s decision if the decision is arbitrary or capricious.  Minn. Stat. § 14.69(f) (2000).  An agency decision is arbitrary and capricious if it is an exercise of the agency’s will, rather than its judgment, or if the decision is based on whim or is devoid of articulated reasons. Friedenson,574 N.W.2d at 467;Mammenga v. State Dept. of Human Servs.,442 N.W.2d 786, 789 (Minn. 1989).  “Where there is room for two opinions on the matter, [an agency’s choice of one course of] action is not arbitrary and capricious * * * .”  Friedenson,574 N.W.2d at 467 (citing Brown v. Wells,288 Minn. 468, 472, 181 N.W.2d 708, 711 (1970)).     

The problems at CUP Foods illustrate the collision between two important principles of United States jurisprudence: the reasonable public safety expectations of citizens and the preservation of private property rights, which, in this case, take the form of business licenses.

A city council may affirm, reject, or modify an ALJ’s findings or conclusions.  See Hymanson v. City of St. Paul,329 N.W.2d 324, 326-27 (Minn. 1983) (a city council may make new findings or decide contrary to the hearing examiner’s recommendations).   Despite this authority, when an agency significantly deviates from a reviewing authority’s conclusions, it must explain the deviation.  Beaty v. Minnesota Bd. of Teaching,354 N.W.2d 466, 472 (Minn. App. 1984).  Failure to do so “evidences the agency’s desire to exercise its will and not its judgment.”  Id.see also Burnett v. Stearns County Welfare Bd.,370 N.W.2d 452, 455 (Minn. App. 1985) (holding county welfare board acted arbitrarily and capriciously by rejecting without comment merit system council recommendation to grant relator a merit increase).  But see Friedenson,574 N.W.2d at 467-68 (holding revocation of relator’s medical license not arbitrary and capricious, even though board failed to explain its reasons for deviating from ALJ’s findings of fact and conclusions of law, because reviewing court was satisfied penalty was the product of “careful and prudent judgment”).  

Respondent adopted the ALJ’s findings, as well as the conclusions supported by those findings.  But respondent did not adopt the ALJ’s recommendations to place conditions on relator’s business licenses, and instead stayed revocation on the conditions that CUP Foods close for six months and, upon re-opening, comply with numerous crime-prevention measures.  Respondent significantly deviated from the ALJ’s recommendations without explaining why the ALJ’s recommendations were rejected or making additional findings to support this disposition.  At a minimum, a business owner with property rights in the form of government licenses is entitled to know the reasons for adverse action by the city council.  We therefore hold that the absence of such findings renders the respondent city’s decision arbitrary and capricious, and we reverse and remand for additional proceedings and to permit respondent to make appropriate findings explaining its decision.

We caution respondent, however, that any additional findings or conclusions it may adopt on remand, to explain its reasons for significantly deviating from the ALJ’s recommendations, must be limited to the issues raised in the earlier proceedings.  See Interstate Power Co. v. Nobles County Bd. of Comm’rs, 617 N.W.2d 566, 580 (Minn. 2000); Earthburners, Inc. v. County of Carlton, 513 N.W.2d 460, 463 (Minn. 1994) (reviewing board “must confine its inquiry to those issues raised in [the] earlier proceedings”); White Bear Rod & Gun Club v. City of Hugo, 388 N.W.2d 739, 742 (Minn. 1986) (city council not required to make formal findings but, at a minimum, must “‘have the reasons for its decision recorded or reduced to writing and in more than just a conclusory fashion’” (quotation omitted)). 

II.

            Relator also argues that the ALJ abused her discretion by denying relator’s motion to strike testimony concerning the confidential informants who completed “controlled buys” inside CUP Foods, contending that by failing to strike that testimony the ALJ denied him his right to confront the informants.  Evidentiary rulings in administrative proceedings are subject to an abuse-of-discretion standard.  See Lee v. Lee,459 N.W.2d 365, 369 (Minn. App. 1990) (applying abuse-of-discretion standard to appeal of evidentiary ruling on hearsay evidence made during an administrative child-support hearing conducted under Minnesota Administrative Procedure Act rules), review denied(Minn. Oct. 18, 1990).

During the license hearings, respondent’s counsel questioned Sherry Appledorn, the police officer who arranged the controlled buys, about her conversations with the confidential informants.  Relator’s counsel objected on hearsay grounds.  The ALJ sustained the objection, but permitted the officer to testify concerning matters within her own knowledge.  At the close of the hearings, relator moved to strike all testimony concerning the controlled buys on the basis that he was denied the right to confront the informants.  The ALJ ruled that the request was untimely.  Respondent argues that this court need not reach the issue of confrontation because relator’s motion to strike was untimely.  We agree.

The rule that an objection to the admission of evidence must be made at the time the evidence is offered is well established.  Eilola v. Oliver Iron Mining Co.,201 Minn. 77, 79, 275 N.W. 408, 409 (1937); see also Minn. R. Evid. 103(a)(1) (providing that there is no error unless an evidentiary ruling affects a substantial right of a party and a timely objection or motion to strike is made).  Although relator objected to out-of-court statements made by the informants as hearsay, relator did not (1) bring any motion to compel respondent to disclose the informants’ identities, even though the initial notice of hearing indicated that the controlled buys would be part of respondent’s evidence, or (2) object to the admission of Appledorn’s testimony concerning her knowledge of the controlled buys until the close of the hearing in May 2000, more than one month after she testified.  We therefore conclude that the ALJ acted within her discretion by denying relator’s motion to strike, and we decline to further address relator’s confrontation claims.

D E C I S I O N

Respondent’s conclusion that there is good cause to take adverse license action against relator is supported by substantial evidence.  Respondent’s decision to deviate from the sanctions recommended by the ALJ, however, is arbitrary and capricious because the deviations are significant and respondent did not make findings explaining its decision to deviate.  Finally, the ALJ did not abuse her discretion by denying relator’s motion to strike testimony concerning controlled drug buys because the motion was untimely.

Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded.

[1]Relator devotes more than three pages of his brief to a discussion of Saxon Coffee Shop, Inc. v. Boston Lic. Bd.,407 N.E.2d 311 (Mass. 1980).  In Saxon,a license-revocation action, criminal activity inside a store and the non-cooperation of the store’s management did not meet the substantial-evidence test.  Id at 319.  We reject Saxon’sreasoning because City of Mankato v. Mahony,542 N.W.2d 689 (Minn. App. 1996), suggests that a city may take adverse-license action in response to criminal activity if the licensee does not cooperate to prevent future violations.  Id. at 692 (reversing revocation of landlord’s license where landlord acted responsibly to prevent further violations of city noise codes). 

Source

Perhaps Floyd and the business was doing a drug deal.  When Floyd was on the ground, leaning against Dragon Wok, an officer leaned over and picked something up off the ground and put it in his pocket.  Maybe it was just a dime or something.

False Flag or not, the whole situation has the Democrats name written all over it.  It’s  only going to get worse until election  day.

Respectfully

Deplorable Patriot.

Please follow and like us:

Share and Enjoy !

0Shares
0 0 0
 

Evidence points to CNN and Shaun King guilty of fabricating George Floyd video.

 

More  and more information related to this event becomes available daily.  In an effort to not be fake news. I will be updating this post often..  For example, The original version of this post was based on a video that lead  me to believe the event happened on one street.  Later on after posting, a new, more complete video became available.  Irregardless,  my opinion on this event will not change.  I believe this event was staged. The embedded recording times in the  videos iis the proof. That is the focus of this post/research.  If  the information was not related to the video time, chances are I didn’t  include it. Sometimes too much information can be confusing and unnecessary once you have proven your point.  I believe this is one of those situations.  Any information I include that does not support my point, I do so in the spirit of information  sharing.

 

Update- Body cam footage  worn by officer driving “Park Police” vehicle has different  embedded time  and  date in video.  That’s  3 different recording times  for 3 different  video’s  of the same event.

Given the obvious importance of accurate time and date in body cam videos. Real police officers would be sure time was correct.  

 

 

 

Continue reading

Please follow and like us:

Share and Enjoy !

0Shares
0 0 0
 

Cops in the Cross-hairs – Antifa Declares War on Police

There was a time in our country when not even the Mafia dared kill a cop. But those times are long past. Well-funded and highly organized anarchists have used the protests over the killing of George Floyd as an excuse to burn private and government property and loot businesses across the country. In the beginning, these terrorists focused on destruction and inciting others to riot. But now, these provocateurs have ratcheted up their mayhem by taking aim at police officers and attempting to kill them. The rule of law has fallen by the wayside. The guerrilla war now is being waged with lethal intent. Follow the dollar. The foul reek of Darth Soros, who bragged about turning in his own people to the Nazis during WWII, fills the air. Here are just a few of the assaults on police in the past week.

St. Louis, MO

Four police officers shot during a downtown protest, two in leg, one in arm one in the foot. St. Louis Police Chief John Hayden said they were hit by gunfire by “some coward” while standing on the side of a police line. “As we speak we’re trying to get control out of this city, still hearing gunfire and everything,” he said. I don’t know what else to say. This is horrible. Thank God, they’re alive.” The St. Louis Post-Dispatch reported that all of the officers were conscious and breathing after being rushed to the hospital.

Las Vegas, NV

Officer was in a fight with a suspect at the Circus Circus Hotel and Casino on the strip when someone walked up behind the officer and shot him in the head. The officer is on life support.

Richmond, Va.

NBC-12 in Richmond reported that two police officers and a suspect were injured in a shooting after they were called to investigate a report of an armed person on Semmes Avenue early Tuesday morning. When they arrived, gunfire erupted. The two cops and the suspect were taken to local hospitals.

The Bronx, NY

An NYPD sergeant was critically injured when he was brutally and deliberately run over by a speeding SUV hit and run assailant. In a similar incident in the Bronx in New York City, an NYPD officer investigating reports of break-ins was struck by a vehicle early Tuesday in a hit-and-run. The officer survived being run over and is said to be in a stable condition.

This video of the hit-and-run was posted on social media. It is extremely graphic. View with caution.

Davenport, Iowa

According to authorities, an officer was “ambushed” with gunfire Sunday. Another officer shot back, and the suspects fled but were later arrested. Near where the officer was wounded, police found a man shot to death and a handgun under his body. His identity wasn’t released.
Police said surveillance video shows that the man and some of the arrested suspects were involved in a shooting outside a jewelry store hours earlier. They were casing the business when other cars arrived and multiple people fired shots at each other, police said.

Atlanta, GA

An Atlanta Police officer was seriously injured after being hit by an ATV in downtown Atlanta during a second night of protests. Police said Sunday that the officer had surgery early this morning and is currently recovering in the intensive care unit at Grady Memorial Hospital. Mayor Keisha Lance Bottoms identified him Sunday night as officer Maximilian Brewer, who has been with the department for 18 years. “We ask that you keep him in your thoughts and prayers,” Bottoms said. “He has a long road to recovery.” Brewer was on foot when he was hit on Ted Turner Drive around 10 p.m. He sustained significant injuries to his legs.Police said the ATV’s driver suffered non-life-threatening injuries and was taken into custody. Bottoms said Sunday night that they do believe the rider struck Brewer intentionally.

Oakland, CA

Two federal officers in Oakland were shot Friday night, one of them fatally, as protests over the death of George Floyd turned violent. The two Federal Protective Service officers worked for Homeland Security, and were based at the Oakland Downtown Federal Building, according to report. No arrests have been made. During the riot, six Oakland police officers were injured, in addition to the federal officers who were shot.

Denver, CO

Denver police are searching for a Chevrolet Cobalt or Cruze, that struck a Denver Police vehicle and severely injured 3 police officers, and a civilian. The suspect driver of the car did not stop. The officers suffered serious injuries, but were expected to survive. So far, there is no word on the condition of the civilian.

And so it continues. The mayhem continues; the marching for one murdered man goes on. But the question arises, who will march for the dead police officers?

~ Grif

Please follow and like us:

Share and Enjoy !

0Shares
0 0 0
 

Minnespolis police chief: Many of criminal rioters came from outside the city

Using the tragic and unconscionable death of George Floyd last Wednesday, May 27, 2020, as their excuse, rioters not only have converged on Minneapolis, they are now fomenting mayhem across America, including an attack on the White House itself.

We have every reason to suspect an unseen hand behind the riots.

None other than Minneapolis Police Chief Medaria Arradondo, who is black, said that “many” of the people who looted businesses and set fires in the city are not from Minneapolis. He said:

“There was a core group of people who…were focused on causing some destruction. Certainly we saw that in the looting and setting fires…. It was clear to me also hearing from local community leaders that many of the people involved in criminal conduct last night were not known Minneapolitans to them…not recognized as being here from the city.

For video of Arradondo, go to Fox9 KMSP.

Given the fact that George Soros had funded so many “protests” and social unheavals, we have every reason to suspect his hand in the current riots:

Update (May 31, 2020):

Black leaders condemn and said they did not organize the riots. Somalis and provocateurs probably funded by DNC and Soros.

~Eowyn

Drudge Report has gone to the dark side. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by a military veteran!

Please follow and like us:

Share and Enjoy !

0Shares
0 0 0
 

Deceptions of the sleazoid Swamp Donkey


Swamp Donkey –  Individual who is part of the Democrat party or allied with the Democrat party that deceives the citizens of America for personal gain.   A Swamp Donkey works against the will of the people, the government, the President. They think they are above the law.  They lack honor, integrity, and loyalty.  Public opinion indicates that they are responsible for many False Flag events.     Synonymous with  rats on a sinking ship,  traitor, periplaneta americana, deep state, globalist, Cabol, Illuminate, sell out, stooge, puppet, bottom feeders.”  Wikipedia
*A Wikipedia editor removed this entry claiming ” Attack Page”.  Wikipedia is a poor source being that the controlling editors lean politically left.  As a editor at Wikipedia I have challenged  it’s removal.  Although it’s an uphill battle, I still spend time trying to “balance” the level of political bias on wikipedia.  I encourage others to get involved.


Continue reading

Please follow and like us:

Share and Enjoy !

0Shares
0 0 0
 

Multnomah County receives grant to evaluate the “pre-trial system” from foundation with ties to Soros

This guy is ALWAYS involved in messing with our criminal justice system (and not in a good way).

KATU reports that Multnomah County (Portland, Oregon) is planning to change the way it looks at those arrested for a crime. They are to receive a $2M grant from the MacArthur Foundation to study the pre-trial system (aka “bail reform”), which decides who goes to jail and who is released.

MacArthur Foundations’ ties to Soros? See here, here and here.

From the KATU report:

“The county received this funding from the MacArthur Foundation, and staff tell KATU moving forward they only want people who pose a flight risk and a risk to public safety to be put behind bars.

“We have an assessment that shows how our system works: how it works well and the lots of spaces where there is room for improvement. We’ll be using these funds to determine what types of staff we can hire, probably some data capacity and some more project folks and some attorneys to help us figure out how the new system can be built,” said Abbey Stamp with the Local Public Safety Coordinating Council.

Jay Scroggin is the Adult Services Division Director for the county’s Department of Community Justice. He said they’ll spend the next two years creating a system based on science and risk.

What crime they did, and how much money they have in their pocket — which is our current system — does not predict whether they are likely to show up to court or likely to commit a crime while released,” Scroggin said.

Ultimately, Stamp said this could improve safety.”

Read the whole story here.

DCG

Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!

Please follow and like us:

Share and Enjoy !

0Shares
0 0 0
 

Virginians form sanctuaries and militias against governor & state legislature gun grab

Virginia was a “swing” state in presidential elections.

On Tuesday, November 6, 2019, however, the state became a solid “blue”. With Democrats already holding the state’s three highest offices (governor, lieutenant governor and attorney general), after two years of Republican control of the state House and Senate by single-seat majorities, the voters of Virginia saw fit to give Democrats full control of the state government for the first time since 1994 by giving Democrats majority control of the state legislature as well. 

Gun control was the Democrats’ major theme in the November 6th elections. They received $2.5 million in funding from 2020 Democrat presidential candidate (((Michael Bloomberg)))’s Everytown for Gun Safety. The four Virginia prosecutors who won on Nov. 6 were also funded by another billionaire leftist, George Soros.

Virginia’s pro-abort Gov. Ralph Northam (D), 60, wasted no time in pushing his gun control agenda. The morning after the election, Northam told CNN he would reintroduce a package of gun control laws in January, including universal background checks, “red flag” laws, and bans on bump stocks and high volume magazines. Northam said: “I’m convinced, with the majority now in the House and the Senate, they’ll become law.” See “Elections have consequences: ‘Blue’ Virginia goes whole hog for gun control”.

Democrats in the Virginia State Senate also hit the ground running:

  • 12 days after the election, on November 18, 2019, 79-year-old pro-abort state senator Dick Saslaw (D) introduced a bill, SB 16, effectively to confiscate “assault firearms” and “certain firearm magazine” by outlawing their possession. See “‘Blue’ Virginia State Senate bill to confiscate ‘assault firearms’”.
  • Three days later, on November 21, 2019,state senator Louise Lucas (D) introduced a bill, SB 64, that violates the U.S. Constitution’s First and Second Amendments by criminalizing instruction and training in using firearms and in self-defense, “assembling” with others to target shoot, as well as march or parade while carrying a firearm. See “‘Blue’ Virginia senate bill to ban firearm and martial arts instruction”.

In response, Virginians who jealously guard their liberty, especially our Constitutional right to “bear arms,” are fighting back by forming Second Amendment sanctuaries and militias.

(1) Second Amendment sanctuaries

To begin, more than 80 counties in Virginia have adopted Second Amendment sanctuary resolutions declaring that county police will not enforce state-level gun laws that violate Second Amendment rights.

As examples, Halifax county overwhelmingly passed a resolution opposing any new gun control legislation that might be passed in the coming state assembly. In southwestern Buchanan County, residents signed a statement demanding the resignation of Gov. Northam.

Sanctuary resolutions, however, have failed to gain support in the urban and densely-populated counties of Virginia, such as Roanoke, Richmond, Arlington, Loudon and Henrico. In Roanoke, as an example, a resolution was defeated at a meeting of the all-Democrat Roanoke City Council where more than 50 gun rights supporters had voiced concerns before Mayor Sherman Lea.

Virginia is not the first state where counties have passed Second Amendment sanctuary resolutions. Similar measures have found success in Illinois, Alaska, Wyoming, and Oregon over the past decade.

In response to the populist movement of Second Amendment sanctuaries, Virginia’s Democratic officials are resorting to threats and intimidation (Washington Examiner):

  • Democratic Virginia Rep. Gerry Connolly threatens to prosecute county police who refuse to enforce future gun control measures, saying: “I would hope they either resign in good conscience, because they cannot uphold the law which they are sworn to uphold, or they’re prosecuted for failure to fulfill their oath. The law is the law. If that becomes the law, you don’t have a choice, not if you’re a sworn officer of the law.”
  • Democratic Virginia Rep. Donald McEachin suggests cutting off state funds to counties that do not comply with any gun control measures that pass in Richmond: “If the sheriff’s department is not going to enforce the law, they’re going to lose money. The counties’ attorneys offices are not going to have the money to prosecute.” McEachin also said that Democratic Virginia Gov. Ralph Northam could call the National Guard, if necessary: “And ultimately…the governor may have to nationalize the National Guard to enforce the law.”

The threat to sic the National Guard on sanctuary counties led to this defiant statement from a member of the Virginia National Guard. He told Law Enforcement Today, referring to Rep. McEachin:

If you and your fellow Constitution-hating hacks continue to push an agenda of gun banning, forfeiture and confiscation, I can almost assure you that you might meet more than one requirement for enacting martial law.

If you force local law enforcement to start violating peoples 2nd Amendment rights by taking their guns, you will wind up with temporary emergency due to an occupied territory.

There are people who will dig in. They will fortify their habitations. They will stand firm in their resolution to exercise their un-infringed right. And it will get ugly….

And oh, by the way, plan on seeing the vast majority of the Virginia National Guard become Conscientious Objectors. It will be really hard for them to arrest cops and confiscate guns when none of them will carry the necessary arms to enforce said arrests and confiscations.

How do I know this? I am one of them and will be one of the first to lay down my gun and walk away.

I will not be a pawn in a tyrannical game of human chess. Neither will most of the men and women I serve with.

(2) Militia

On December 20, 2019, Law Enforcement Today (LET) reports that a “growing number of people” have told LET they’re joining the militia. Significantly, these “growing number of people” aren’t just the traditional “three percenters,” but are “a melting pot of people who have had enough” — cops (both active and retired), military veterans, moms, blacks, whites, straight and gay.

For reporting on the “growing number” of Virginians who say they’re joining militias, LET received an anonymous threat from someone who claims to be a member of Congress. The note says:

“Your reporting about the growing numbers in the militia create a clear and present threat to America.  As part of Congress, I’m giving you fair warning that this is the equivalent of shouting ‘fire’ in a movie theater. If your reporting incites violence, or can even be tied to it, we will make sure to charge your editors with felonies.”

One of the militias being formed is in Tazewell County.

Law Enforcement Today (LET) reports that on December 10, 2019, by unanimous votes of its board of supervisors and to the cheer of more than 200 citizens, Tazewell County passed two resolutions. The first declared the county to be a Second Amendment sanctuary; the second resolution officially formed a citizens’ militia to defend the Constitution.

The resolutions also:

  • Remove funding for any law enforcement department that infringe residents’ right to keep and bear arms.
  • Call for concealed weapons training for any resident of the county who can lawfully own a gun.
  • Call for schools to adopt firearms safety training programs.

“Within hours” of reporting that Tazewell County’s formation of a militia, LET was “flooded” with thousands of emails from people across the state – police officers, veterans, and patriotic Americans – who said they are joining. “And it’s a movement that’s gaining traction across the state.”

Virginia is shaping up to be the place where the battle for our Constitutional rights will begin. Molon Labe!H/t CSM, Anon and John Molloy

~Eowyn

Drudge Report has gone to the dark side. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by a military veteran!

Please follow and like us:

Share and Enjoy !

0Shares
0 0 0
 

George Soros banned from 6 countries

Though he is 89 years old, George Soros — through his Open Society Foundations, to which he’s donated more than $32 billion — continues to foment turmoil, unrest and mischief across the world.

In the United States, Soros has/had his hand in the Antifa, the Ferguson race riots, the “caravans” of Central American “migrants,” and the “whistleblower” who ignited the Demonrats’ current efforts to impeach President Trump. In Europe, Soros is behind the flood of “refugees” and “migrants,” Ukraine, “climate change” activist Great Thunberg, and the Brexit chaos.

Some countries, however, have taken steps to expel and ban Soros, his operatives, and his Open Society. In chronological order, the six countries are:

  1. Pakistan
  2. Poland
  3. Turkey
  4. Russia
  5. Hungary
  6. Philippines

While not outright banning him, the Israeli government has said Soros is not welcome there.

The only question is why Soros still has not been banned from the United States.

Since August 2017, there is a “White House petition to declare George Soros a terrorist and seize all of his related organizations’ assets under RICO and NDAA law,” which has been signed by 197,385 people — enough to get a response from the White House. To sign the petition, go here.

~Eowyn

Drudge Report has gone to the dark side. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by a military veteran!

Please follow and like us:

Share and Enjoy !

0Shares
0 0 0
 

We The Voters Are Being Impeached

Not just President Trump

I call it the “Inevitable Outcome” strategy

This is a psyop pointed directly at the American people. You know the trick: Al Gore loses an election and throws a tantrum by demanding a recount that stretches for months. Al Franken loses a senatorial election and demands recounts until he has found enough (fraudulent) votes to “win.” Hillary Clinton loses the presidential election and launches an army of deep state operatives bent on driving President Trump out of office. Frankly, it wearies me.

The real attack is on the voters

As each new day comes, with the Demonrat’s Bolshevik Impeachment Circus carrying on, the sense of being personally attacked grows stronger. It’s not just an attack on a politician (President Trump), it is an attack on the American people and the Constitution of the United States.

Like a school yard bully, they will threaten to hurt you if you don’t give them your lunch

That threat hangs in the air with every move we make to restore our nation. Appoint a conservative judge, and expect a bunch of liars to come out of the woodwork mercilessly attacking the candidate with false accusations. Take a conservative stand on air and expect be doxed and to see a screaming mob outside your home.

The one thing the Left wants is power

If we do not give them what they demand, we can expect to see their tantrums escalate until we give in. If we do give in to their demands, the tyranny will become perfect for the hundred year anniversary of the Russian Revolution. There are things worse than death; we must stand against them at all costs.

Where we are now

The Leftist Politicians, together with the News and Entertainment Media, Leftist Academia, Tech Giants, Atifa, and all their hordes are rushing in at us. But as they fully commit and show their true colors, they are unknowingly exposing themselves to the scrutiny of the watching world. They are permanently discrediting themselves from serious consideration of their views in the future.

They have gotten away with this for a long time, but that was largely because they had not been unmasked. Walter Cronkite, “the most trusted man in America,” was not known for his true allegiance to the devil.

Thankfully now, they have unmasked themselves

…and their ability to deceive will be greatly diminished.

~ TD

Please follow and like us:

Share and Enjoy !

0Shares
0 0 0