Pirate's Cove

Morning, y’all, Jebediah Murphy here, bringing the truth. And I sure like some grilled cheese

(Washington Times) The U.S. attorney whose office won convictions against two U.S. Border Patrol agents for shooting a fleeing drug-smuggling suspect in the buttocks yesterday described as "the big lie" accusations that the prosecutions were not justified.

During a rancorous Senate Judiciary Committee hearing, U.S. Attorney Johnny Sutton defiantly said agents Ignacio Ramos and Jose Alonso Compean, now serving lengthy prison terms, committed "serious crimes" in a case that was not about immigration issues or the Border Patrol but the rule of law.

"Agents Compean and Ramos crossed the line. They are not heroes," Mr. Sutton said. "They deliberately shot an unarmed man in the back without justification, destroyed evidence to cover it up and lied about it. A jury heard the facts and voted to convict.

Perhaps they did. No one will claim that they did wrong in destroying the evidence and covering it up. Yet, many border agents feel that Ramos and Compean should have been given administrative punishment, not prosecuted and sent to jail for shooting an illegal alien drug smuggler in the ass.

But Sens. Dianne Feinstein, California Democrat, and John Cornyn, Texas Republican, questioned whether the 11- and 12-year prison sentences handed to Mr. Ramos and Mr. Compean, respectively, were justifiable and whether the decision to grant immunity to drug-smuggling suspect Osbaldo Aldrete-Davila was properly handled.

Mrs. Feinstein, who chaired the hearing, asked whether the government’s priorities were "out of whack" when it made the immunity offer to "a drug trafficker," noting that Mr. Aldrete-Davila — who abandoned 743 pounds of drugs as he fled to Mexico — was "not an innocent who was caught in the wrong place at the wrong time."

Go DiFi. Some things transcend petty political bickering.

Feinstein questioned Mr. Sutton on why the government gave Mr. Aldrete-Davila unlimited and unescorted access to the United States as part of the immunity agreement and whether he might have transported a second load of drugs into the country during that time.

They said that Mr. Aldrete-Davila re-entered the United States on at least 10 occasions from March to November 2005 and that the documentation authorized by the immunity agreement allowed him to cross the border legally at any time without notifying anyone and being unescorted.

"I would like to hear more about the policy that allows for this kind of unsupervised passage into our country and why someone who was known to smuggle in drugs would be given such flexibility," Mrs. Feinstein said.

Mr. Sutton acknowledged that a "humanitarian visa" given to Mr. Aldrete-Davila as part of the immunity agreement may have been "a mistake" but said it is necessary for his office to have access to would-be witnesses in pending cases — some of whom live in Mexico.

Yes, Johnny, let’s hear why you gave all that to an illegal alien drug smuggler, a criminal on many levels, who, as Democrats would put it, harms our children. Let’s hear why you chose to listen to him over the guys who guard our border. Let’s hear why you didn’t jail Aldrete-Davila. It’s not as if he isn’t the focus of a DEA investigation or anything.

The whole thing is absurd. DHS investigators even went down to Mexico to find Aldrete-Davila and give him his free pass for his testimony. Plus free medical care at an Army installation.

You listening, President Bush?

Switching to a CNN report

WASHINGTON (AP) — Border Patrol agents should be allowed to shoot at fleeing drug traffickers, a Republican senator suggested Tuesday.

The patrol’s deadly force rules were questioned at a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing concerning the conviction of two agents who shot a fleeing, unarmed drug trafficker and covered it up.

"Why is it wrong to shoot the [trafficker] after he’s been told to stop?" asked Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Oklahoma.

Probably because their "civil rights" might be violated, Tom. You know, those things that progressives want to give to non-US citizens, including those who are here illegally.

Now, the law is the law, but there was no reason for Sutton to prosecate Ramos and Compean under the statutes he used. And especially not with civil rights violations. It was overzealous, and, as DiFi put it, an overreaction. If Bush can commute Libby’s sentence, he can certainly do the same, if not provide a full pardon, to Ramos and Compean.

If you haven’t signed, please do, and spread the word.