Sanctuary Policy's Rotten Core

Is it really any surprise to discover that accused child rapist Henry Sanchez-Millian, 18—and his father Adolfo Sanchez-Reyes, 43—are both illegal aliens? Perhaps the state of Maryland—so concerned with family unification of other nation's citizens on American soil—can arrange a holding cell for father and son to share? After all, that's the convoluted reasoning behind their sanctuary practice (that actively subverts federal immigration law). Therefore, by their logic, a communal living arrangement behind bars is the most humane thing to do. At any rate, the son has been charged with first-degree rape and two counts of first-degree sexual offenses. If convicted, he faces the penalty of life imprisonment. On the other hand, his father contends with the comparably mild rebuke of deportation. That means separation of the two for the foreseeable future, if not forever. An ironic outcome given what started this mess in the first place.

This situation definitively demonstrates the domino effect of lawlessness. A dreadful chain of events that began with our porous southern border—the choices of a Guatemalan father and son to border jump—and Barack Obama's eyes closed catch-and-release program that reunified the pair! Speaking of two lawbreakers, Sanchez-Millian's wingman in that bathroom tryst with a 14-year-old at Rockville High School, is El Salvadorian Jose O. Montano, 17. (Reportedly, he was sent to Maryland to join an uncle.)

Complicating matters is federal law (U.S. Supreme Court decision in Plyler vs. Doe (457 U.S. 202 (1982)) that mandates school age illegals are entitled to a public education same as citizens. For their part, the local school administration enrolled these two wrongdoers—not as a junior and senior respectively—but in ninth grade classes. That's how this duo of older, Spanish speaking foreigners had access to this much younger female (among many). (The sexual assault occurred on school property at approximately 9 AM on Thursday, March 16.) Specifically, how else would Montano have met her, or been present to push her into that boys' bathroom? His attorney, David Wooten stated, “This was a consensual act. It was preplanned.” Wooten bolsters his claim by asserting that the victim texted “explicitly compromising images of herself”. Said last week and repeated Monday, Sanchez-Millian's lawyer Andrew Jezic reiterated, “All parties were willing participants.” If you're wondering why both narratives so tightly correspond, both men work together at the same firm!

All potential mitigating factors, if legitimate, have yet to be determined. Meanwhile, per Maryland state law the age of consent is technically 17, but persons aged between 14 and 16 may consent to sex given a small age difference of not more than 4 years for the older party. That's immaterial here as her assailants, near or just beyond maturity, have both been charged as adults. So, Sanchez-Millian and Montano may have gotten away with flouting our immigration laws, but they will likely get no pass for their brutal bathroom misadventures involving gang-raping and sodomizing a fellow ninth-grader.

This egregious circumstance is one of many cautionary tales. How American society is being destroyed within by the wrongheaded embrace of the undocumented under the guise of dogmatic “tolerance” and multiculturalism. The actual problem isn't America's systemic discrimination of foreigners. By any measure, what country celebrates diversity, or differences, more fully than us? The wholesale rejection of illegals has nothing to do with their superficial attributes such as ethnicity or country of origin, as pro-illegal proponents laughably insist. Indeed, their knee-jerk demonization of objectors as “racists” are lame attempts at distraction: a subject-changing excuse to justify their bizarre advocacy of naked lawlessness.

In that regard, if our laws are so draconian, why do so many clamor to live here (by any possible means)? Historically, as today, America remains a melting pot with one modern caveat: a person with legal status is warmly welcomed here; one who doesn't, isn't. Likewise, would any sensible person open their private residence to cohabitate with total strangers? Is America not the beloved “home” of her legal inhabitants?

In truth, illegal aliens are criminals: an invading underclass of squatters. They're the ones that don't respect our laws and customs—not vice versa as their supporters loudly proclaim. Therefore, a wildly chaotic influence is exerted, like acid upon our culture's social fabric. As important building blocks of that foundation are our public school systems, witness the snowballing uproar caused by this outrage at Maryland's Rockville High School! The additional revelation that Adolfo Sanchez-Reyes is also undocumented is yet more salt to a whole community's open wound. After all, it's obvious Sanchez-Millian's father acted as a familial magnet, didn't he? A butterfly effect of what was, what could have been avoided, and what should have been prevented.

From every angle, this specific incident is intolerable. These affiliated troublemakers including Montano and his uncle (whose legal status is unclear) should have been immediately expelled, not permitted to enter and reside within the United States. But, they were and a radiating cascade of escalating crime, loss and disruption is the predictable result. Most tragically, would the unnecessary suffering of a violated 14-year-old child and her aggrieved family—sacrifices upon the altar of politically correct multiculturalism—happened otherwise? Worrying about the fate of foreign lawbreakers while ignoring the rights of victimized citizens explains the topsy-turvy nature of our mixed-up, rather than mixed, society.

Twitter: @DavidHunterblog

http://patriotpost.us/commentators/446

http://www.americanthinker.com/author/david_l_hunter/

http://canadafreepress.com/members/74987/DavidLHunter/976

http://newstex.aci.info/authors/15977720f5100100002

Horror Within “Sanctuary” School

“Part of the reason the president has made illegal immigration and [a] crackdown such a big deal is because of tragedies like this. Immigration pays its toll on our people if it's not done legally. And this is another example.” – Sean Spicer, White House Press Secretary, on March 21, 2017

What was 18-year old Henry E. Sanchez-Milian—a full-grown adult from Guatemala—doing in the ninth grade at Maryland's Rockville High School? Likewise, his El Salvadorian partner in crime, Jose O. Montano, 17. Both now stand accused of carnal crimes so depraved that they're almost too graphic to describe. For their sheer brutality against a fellow 14-year old student, their assault has risen to the president's attention. Even this eventuality—and their swift, same day arrest due to the girl's immediate report—is ultimately little consolation. Clearly, her life has been forever changed.

Around 9 AM last Thursday March 16, the two suspects approached the victim in a remote hallway near the gym. Per court documents released that Friday, the girl stated she knew Montano but not Sanchez-Milian. Montano asked for a hug, grabbed her buttocks, and requested sex but was refused. After being rebuffed a second time, he pushed her into a boys' bathroom. She resisted, held onto a sink, but was overpowered into a stall. Montano then stripped her. The possibility of escape was nullified by Sanchez-Milian who swiftly joined his co-conspirator. Cornered, trapped like prey—her cries, begging and screams ignored —they took turns restraining her, forcing her to perform oral sex before gang-raping and sodomizing her. So much for her right to autonomy as a U.S. citizen. What of this child's reasonable expectation to safety in a public school?

A fundamental truth that neither the school system in Maryland nor U.S. Border Patrol in Texas want to acknowledge: if this duo of illegal aliens had not been present in the school (or for that matter, the country), this outrage would not have happened.

Two of Barack Obama's “Dreamers” have visited a nightmarish hell upon an innocent. Recall, these young men were raised elsewhere during their formative years. They've only been stateside for roughly seven or eight months. How could they understand our cultural norms? Therefore, it's beyond naive to assume that these illegal foreigners on—or just beyond—the cusp of manhood, would instantly or instinctively acclimate to our customary respect for female minors. Indeed, they were the fox in Montgomery County's underage hen house. Its doors thrown open by do-gooder school authorities in the name of “diversity” and “inclusiveness”. Rather than being the farmer who protects his defenseless, the school abetted her assault by creating the environment in which such a calamity occurred.

Sanchez-Milian's path to infamy started as so many other border jumpers do. After all, what true incentive does any lawbreaker have to embrace our cultural standards, or heed our laws? As background, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement spokesman Matthew Bourke said:

“In August 2016, Henry Sanchez-Milian was encountered by a border patrol agent in Rio Valley Grande, Texas, who determined the individual had unlawfully entered the United States from Mexico. Sanchez-Milian was issued a notice to appear [Barack Obama’s de facto ‘catch and release’ policy] in front of an immigration judge, which is currently waiting to be scheduled.”

In hindsight, was it wise to cut this individual loose to disappear into the wild? In any case, he will never make that Texas immigration hearing now (whenever the system gets around to holding it). Ironically, Sanchez-Milian might get his wish of a permanent stay. He's charged as an adult (same as Montano) with first-degree rape and two counts of first-degree sexual offenses. These crimes carry the possibility of life imprisonment. Subsistence in an American cage. A fate that's somehow too good for him.

At the moment, that's cold comfort to the violated 14-year old student. She has been utterly failed by every level of the government the new president has inherited. As we have seen, a systemic problem in which various local, state and federal elements share culpability. Still, the underlying trouble is a bureaucratic mind-set epitomized by Montgomery County Council President Roger Berliner:

“To the extent we are quote coddling—we are coddling people who have been in this community for 25, 20 years and have never done anything wrong other than work one, two or three jobs, raise a family and be part of our community. They have done nothing wrong other than be here quote undocumented.”

That's convoluted thinking of the highest order. So, as long as this shadowy underclass of squatters doesn't defy our other laws everything is kosher? Make no mistake—simply by being present within our borders without permission—is already a criminal act. Thus, at best, the undocumented induce resource-draining chaos into our society if not outright danger as demonstrated here. The virtue of an underage girl obviously doesn't matter to two criminals who savagely took what they wanted, but it certainly should matter to the powers that be in Maryland.

Why then is local politician Roger Berliner outspoken about the wrong thing? His priority, as expressed previously at a meeting of county department heads early last month, is: “We’re fearful they’re [illegals] going underground in a way that will cause harm to them.” Cause harm to them? Tell that to last week's brutalized 14-year-old child! Today, rather than accept responsibility, Berliner publicly passes the buck, “One of two individuals [Sanchez-Milian] was stopped by ICE in Texas and released. How is this on us?” It's on him and his cohorts because of their collective failure to protect a student under their care while on school property. If she was Berliner's daughter, would he still be so blasé and obtuse?

Unfortunately, Berliner's nonchalant attitude is not unique. It's widely shared by many similarly insulated decision-makers who shape the public institutions that contributed to this wretchedness. For context, imagine the firestorm if one of the Obama girls had been in her shoes! Of course, that would never happen due to Secret Service protection. Still, the rule-makers responsible—specifically the former president—can afford to send their children to uber-safe private schools. Those places of privilege are not obligated to educate anyone who walks through the door, no questions asked. Thus, theirs are the real sanctuary schools. You know, the same ones the troublemaking Sanchez-Milians of the world—who jump borders and cross state lines—will never gain access to.

Twitter: @DavidHunterblog

http://patriotpost.us/commentators/446

http://www.americanthinker.com/author/david_l_hunter/

http://canadafreepress.com/members/74987/DavidLHunter/976

http://newstex.aci.info/authors/15977720f5100100002

Next POTUS: a Rapist's Laughing Lawyer?

“In individuals, insanity is rare; but in groups [read: Black Lives Matter], parties [read: Democrats], nations and epochs [the Obama years], it is the rule.” ― Friedrich Nietzsche

Clearly Mr. Nietzsche never met corrupt American politicians (and specifically today's progressives).

In 1975, current Democratic front-runner, then Hillary Rodham, was already a demonstratively corrupt 27-year old lawyer. What was this purported “great champion” of women's rights doing then? She was successfully defending Thomas Alfred Taylor, a 41-year old sexual predator accused of raping a 12-year old girl. What did she do shortly after that? This lucky lady married a fellow cad, her “Prince Charming” Bill. She also became a staff attorney for the House Judiciary Committee during the Watergate investigations—a post she was later fired from for unethical practices like lying! (Indeed, today, with a well established reputation as a habitual fibber, does this longstanding pattern of immoral conduct surprise anyone?) However, back then her misbehavior was obviously disconcerting to chief counsel Jerry Zeifman, Hillary's supervisor. Of his reason for her termination (and his further rare refusal to write a recommendation letter), he said:

“Because she was a liar,” Mr. Zeifman said in a March of 2008 interview. “She was an unethical, dishonest lawyer. She conspired to violate the Constitution [by redrafting rules related to the president's right to counsel], the rules of the House, the rules of the committee and the rules of confidentiality.”

In hindsight, it appears that Hillary has always viewed “the rules” as something that only apply to the “little people”—everyone else—but never herself. Decades later, this dynamic is plainly apparent in light of her own rogue actions and Nixonian style wrongdoing: the Server-gate scandal (in which a private server was set up and used to restrict and control the flow of government information—and state secrets—in clear violation of federal law).

For context and comparison, it was, in part, the Watergate audio tapes which compelled Richard Nixon resignation in 1974. In 2016, will the same be true of Hillary (assuming she gets that far)? I coyly refer Hillary's taped 1980 interview with Arkansas reporter Roy Reed in which she repeatedly cackles like a magpie at the lenient sentence given the man she defended of the rape of a minor. Will Mrs. Clinton continue to get a complete pass for this shockingly brazen and pathologically unfeeling 1980 voice recording? Or will this supremely arrogant figure at the nexus of federal investigations related to Server-gate, Charity-gate and Benghazi finally meet her well deserved Nixonian fate? Certainly, one wonders what it will take for the American electorate to finally wake up to the clear and present danger of this insider creature of Washington; a “for sale” amoral power broker who fully expects a queenly return to the White House in 2017?

This 40 year travesty adds to the stench of multiple his-and-hers scandals which have dogged the Clintons from seemingly the inception of their political lives—so many scandals who can keep track of them all? Ultimately, however, the kick in the head is not what the Clintons repeatedly get away with, it's why any sane person would support crooked Hillary's presidential aspirations.

Speaking of which, the first person who should get his head professionally examined forthwith is Washington Post “fact checker” Glenn Kessler. His dubious relationship with truth is as tenuous as his colleague's, fellow propagandist Hillary-defender Ruth Marcus. Precisely as she, Mr. Kessler shamelessly manipulates facts—and misconstrues history—as overt political cover for Mrs. Clinton's gleefully inappropriate reaction to her previously mentioned 1975 slick lawyering. To this Orwellian “fact checker,” the victim in this tale isn't the defenseless 12-year old child, it's Hillary (taken to task by the National Republican Senatorial Committee who accurately produced a political ad on this subject last month.) Moreover, all the important details are spun to be misleading. For example, Mr. Kessler implies that defendant Taylor was entitled to “replace his male court-appointed lawyer with a female attorney.” He wasn't: public defenders are the luck of the draw (usually determined by caseload). Therefore, any change is at the discretion of the individual judge. Second, while a judge or a prosecutor can recommend a given attorney, neither could have compelled an “unwilling” Hillary to accept a client truly abhorrent to her. Notice Mr. Kessler's intentionally misleading summary of the situation: “In other words, Clinton was a court-appointed attorney, given the case despite personal objections.” In the same vein, earlier in the piece, he scribbles, “The judge went through the list of a half-dozen women practicing law in the county and picked Clinton.” All of this verbiage wrongly implies arm-twisting where there is none.

Upon close examination of the actual facts, Mr. Kessler's fictional interpretation is at odds with Mrs. Clinton's own recollection: “The prosecutor called me a few years ago, he said he had a guy who had been accused of rape, and the guy wanted a woman lawyer,” said Clinton in the interview. “Would I do it as a favor for him?” By definition, a favor is a voluntary kindness, not something one “must” do. Why then this propagandist spin of events? To promote a false narrative that Hillary wanted no part of this infamous case. Follow this sycophant's slippery logic: as an “unwilling” party, she's not responsible for the domino effect of its consequences. Mr. Kessler's fallacious underlying theme is Hillary Clinton as “victim” of Republicans now, and the legal system then, as a young attorney.

In any case, the long-nosed Mr. Kessler is more than worthy of his own four Pinocchio scale—and then some. After all, if what this intrepid columnist claims is true why would Hillary call this tragic circumstance (by any rational measure) “fascinating?” In truth, the voice on that audio tape indicates the kind of person who likely enjoys pulling the wings off of helplessly beautiful things, like butterflies. Or perhaps someone who would not give a second thought to exploit a little girl's trauma for another's legal benefit. Worse, Hillary's tone is secretive and almost conspiratorial: the naughty whisper of something wrongly done, and jubilantly gotten away with.

What Mr. Kessler clearly ignores is that Mrs. Clinton relished in the challenge of getting her client exonerated, and was giddy about the questionable nature of some of the details:

“I had him take a polygraph, which he passed—which forever destroyed my faith in polygraphs,” she deadpans before a breezy laugh.

Moreover, this “feminist icon” peels with laughter throughout her disclosure that the crime lab accidentally destroyed DNA evidence that tied Taylor to the crime. Even more despicably, this hero of the left re-victimized the young girl through the legal process by attacking her credibility via an affidavit she wrote which stated:

“[T]he complainant is emotionally unstable with a tendency to seek out older men and to engage in fantasizing.”

Even if true—which is highly doubtful—a 12-year old cannot legally give consent for sexual activity with a 41-year old adult. Therefore, the child's alleged “fantasizes” at that time are irrelevant. More sleazy Clintonian style evasion (“It depends on what the meaning of the word 'is' is”) to cast doubt on the veracity of an innocent by a person who has grave issues with truthfulness herself—to this very day.

Given all the mishaps, which were many—like the mishandling of the bloody underwear—Slick Willie's wife pulled a real fast one. She finagled a plea deal that reduced the charges from first-degree rape to unlawfully fondling of a minor younger than 14. That's not sexual assault—that's inappropriate touching. In other words, the result of the trial was nothing more than a legal slap on the wrist:

Roy Reed: “How did it turn out? What...”

Hillary Clinton: “Oh, he plea bargained! Got him off with time served in the county jail, he'd been in the county jail about two months.”

Considering the source, unsurprisingly, that last bit isn't quite true either. Per The Washington Free Beacon: “Taylor was sentenced to one year in jail, with two months off for time served. He had been facing 30 years to life in prison for first-degree rape.” Yet, in the final analysis, so distasteful was her dishonorable accomplishment, she crowed proudly about it (above) to the press five years later!

By the victim's own admission, Mrs. Clinton put “me through hell.” More honest words of warning are rarely spoken. Is this really the caliber of person this country wants as the next U.S. president?

Twitter: @DavidHunterblog

http://patriotpost.us/commentators/446

http://www.americanthinker.com/author/david_l_hunter/

http://canadafreepress.com/members/74987/DavidLHunter/976