Suppressed Facts About The Trayvon Martin Case

In all of the heat surrounding the verdict in the Martin/Zimmerman case, there are many facts that have been lost, or perhaps even suppressed.  How many of these facts have you never heard about?

1) Martin's school caught him with women's jewelry and a screwdriver in his backpack.  He refused to explain the jewelry and the security officers believed that the screw driver was a burglary tool.

2) Martin was suspended for graffiti.

3) He was also suspended for pot possession.

4) He had significant levels of THC - the drug in pot - in his system at the time of his death.

5) Martin's tweets, which can be found HERE, paint a picture of him that is far from the image of angelic little boy the MSM constant paints by interviewing his parents and using a five year old picture.  Ditto for the texts and photos on his phone, which show weed and guns.

So, before the incident ever took place, we see that Martin looks like a young man in trouble - and young man probably involved in crime and definately using illegal drugs.

Let's remember the two things Zimmerman was concerned about: Drug use, and possibly casing for a home to rob.  When you know these facts about Martin's past, it appears that Zimmerman's assessment was on point.

Again, without relying upon Zimmerman's statements, the following can be established concerning Martin's actions during the incident:

6) The time between George Zimmerman's call to the police non-emergency line ending and the first call reporting the disturbance was four minutes.  Martin lived about 300 feet away.  If he was afraid of Zimmerman, he had ample time to go home.  He chose not to do so,  Instead it appears that he chose to confront Zimmerman.

7) The only person to make a racist comment was Martin, not Zimmerman. 

8) Martin had two physical injuries: Cuts on his hands consistent with having repeatedly punched someone and the gunshot wound that ended his life.  Why is this important?  Simple: It proves that Martin was the aggressor.  He started the fight.  Martin had no wounds inflicted by fists and Zimmerman had no injuries to his hands.

9) The only eyewitness puts Martin on top of Zimmerman "raining down blows MMA style".  Let's stop and think about this for a moment.   Let's imagine for a moment that the police arrive 5 seconds before Zimmerman fires the fatal shot.  Based upon witnesses and Zimmerman's injuries what would the police have done?  Answer: They would have arrested Martin for felony assault.  Given that Zimmerman reported that Martin had told him he was going to die, he might have been charged with attempted murder - but my point is that before we even get to Zimmerman's testimony, the police would have had enough evidence to charge Martin with a felony.

This is important, because under Florida law anyone may use deadly force to resist a violent felony.  Even without Zimmerman's statement, there was enough evidence to acquit - because Martin was committing a violent felony.

Is the loss of a young man, who probably did not follow the teaching of his parents (who seem to be great people), a tragedy?  Absolutely.  Could Zimmerman have handled things better?  You bet.  Are there lessons we all can learn?  No question about it,  Yet, Zimmerman is clearly not guilty.

Both Zimmerman and Martin had every legal right to be where they were.  No laws were broken until someone decided to assault another person.  All of the evidence shows that the person who did so was Trayvon Martin.

Finally, consider Zimmerman's reaction - after having given his statement - when cops told him, "We have it all on tape?"  He said, "Thank God."  Does this sound like a lying racist, or someone who acted in self defense and is telling the truth.  Furthermore, Zimmerman's video taped statement and walk through dovetail nicely with all the witness statements and evidence, to which he had no access.  If you want to know how uncommon this is, hop on Netflix  and watch a few episodes of "The First 48".  This almost never happens.

The sad truth is that those who want to convict George Zimmerman of murder do so by ignoring or suppressing the facts.

Did President Obama Just Kill Immigration Reform?

Unlike many of my fellow conservatives, I favor comprehensive immigration reform that includes both securing our borders (and tracking visitors who overstay) and granting legal status to employed and otherwise law abiding illegal immigrants.  Sadly, president Obama may have just killed any chance of it passing.  Let me explain.

Last week, in of all things a blog post, the administration announced that it will not be enforcing the employer mandate portion of Obamacare until - surprise, surprise - after the 2014 elections.  Knowing this would be controversial  the blog was posted late last Wednesday - just before the 4 day weekend.

The reason for this postponement is blatantly political.  The mandate actually rewards employers who cut their employees hours to less than 30 per week.  Having apparently just figured this out (it must be one of the things in it Rep. Pelosi told us we would only know about after it passed), the administration acted to prevent massive Democratic losses in the 2014 mid-term elections.  Somehow, they thought that voters who had just had their hours cut because of Obamacare, might not vote Democratic........

Most of the discussion has focused on Obamacare and it's future - but another angle is: Did Pres. Obama have the legal authority to do this?

Article 2, Section 3 of the US Constitution states: "shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed".  Nothing is the Obamacare law permits a president to postpone implementation of any part of the law.  (Remember, they did not know who would be president today when they passed the law.)  Effectively, Pres. Obama is ruling by decree, changing a major provision of a law passed by the Congress and signed into law by himself.  There is a word for a political leader who does this: Dictator.

Now, if you think this is a strong word, consider what the reaction would be if Romney had won last fall and simply said, "I am voiding Obamacare.  None of its' provisions will be enforced."  Get my point now?

So, how does this have anything to do with immigration reform?  Well, it's all about trust.  A huge part of the compromise involves securing the border and restricting newly legalized immigrants:

• The border is supposed to be secured before any newly legalized persons get permanent status, much less citizenship.
• Before receiving permanent status, these persons are supposed to "learn English".
• These same people are supposed to pay fines.

These are just a few of the provisions that are under discussion.  There may be more.

The problem Pres. Obama has created in this: If he can effectively nullify a key provision in his own signature legislation, what prevents him from doing exactly all the same the same thing with the provisions of any immigration bill that becomes law?  Answer: Absolutely nothing.

In the House of Representatives Republicans, and even some Democrats, may be asking that very same question today.