Tuesday, January 16, 2018
Violent clashes between locals and migrants erupt in Saxon town
Two of the Germans were gravely injured by stab wounds to the upper legs, police announced on Saturday. Additionally, three people in the asylum seeker accommodation in Dresdner Straße were lightly injured, police spokesman Andreas Loepki told the Leipziger Volkszeitung.
Police currently cannot rule out a “xenophobic” motive but have not responded to other reports that the migrants at the centre were armed during the confrontation, while the Germans were not. Already last year, police had to intervene in clashes between asylum seekers and Germans.
The skirmishes lasted for about an hour and triggered a large reaction by the police. Some 30 to 40 officers were deployed at the scene. Witness accounts say it all started with a verbal argument between the two groups at the park at the train station, followed by a series of assaults. The asylum seekers then withdrew into their residence in Dresdner Straße. „
“Subsequently, two Germans walked up to the residence, banged on the door, and damaged a glass“, according to Loepki. The two Germans were then chased by the migrants. They eventually found themselves surrounded by a group of 30 locals.
Probably twelve inhabitants, “armed with knives and clubs”, says Loepki, then attacked the unarmed Germans. In the ensuing clash, the two suffered knife wounds to the upper thigh. A taser was used, too, apparently. Several Germans then stormed the residence where further clashes occurred.
To keep the rival groups apart, all patrol officers from the Grimma precinct were summoned, and forces from Leipzig were called to Grimma. The officers asserted the identities of those involved on-site, but there were no arrests made.
The police say it is still unclear who had committed the attacks. This needs to be proven in each individual case, says Loepki. Witnesses are being questioned about the incident, he said.
State Protection, too, has become involved in the case, to probe possible “extremist and racist” motives.
Already in June last year clashes between Germans and asylum seekers in Wurzen led to a large police operation.
Back then, approximately 100 persons had congregated in the town’s market square, and had shouted slogans in front of a residence in Wenceslaigasse. Prior to that, residents of the centre had physically attacked....
There’s A Big Difference Between The Trump and Obama Administrations When It Comes To Testifying
While multiple members of the Trump administration and campaign have appeared before congressional investigators for what the president has repeatedly described as the “witch hunt” Russia investigation, several officials in the Obama administration plead the Fifth Amendment’s right against self-incrimination when called to testify regarding a multitude of scandals.
Perhaps the most high profile instance of this was former IRS director of tax-exempt organizations Lois Lerner, who did so on two separate occasions when called before congressional committees to address the targeting conservative groups by her department.
In 2015, former State Department employee Bryan Pagliano plead the Fifth to the House Select Committee on Benghazi rather than answer questions related to his setting up of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s private, unsecured, unauthorized email server.
Patrick Cunningham, chief of the criminal division of the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Arizona, also invoked the Fifth Amendment in 2012 when called to testify before the House Oversight Committee in relation to Operation Fast and Furious.
Former Department Veterans Affairs officials John Sepulveda, Diana Rubens, and Kimberly Graves all plead the Fifth instead of testifying before Congress regarding major problems at the VA.
Additionally, former Attorney General Eric Holder consistently stonewalled congressional committee inquiries to the point where the entire House voted to hold him in contempt of Congress in 2012. The vote was 258-95, with 21 Democrats crossing over to vote with Republicans on the resolution, Politico reported.
In contrast, Attorney General Jeff Sessions and White House aide Jared Kushner are among the notable Trump administration officials who have...
Justice Scalia Endorsed Trump Shortly Before His Murder
According to top confidant Bryan Garner, Justice Scalia found Trump’s unfiltered and candid approach to politics “very refreshing.”
Conservativetribune.com reports: “Justice Scalia thought it was most refreshing to have a candidate who was pretty much unfiltered and utterly frank,” Garner said.
Garner said Scalia thought highly of Wisconsin Republican Gov. Scott Walker, who also ran for the GOP nomination in 2016, but was very impressed with Trump’s style and ability to push back against the establishment.
“But he was fascinated by the fact that Trump was so outspoken in an unfiltered way, and therefore we were seeing something a little more genuine than a candidate whose every utterance is airbrushed,” Garner said.
In his upcoming memoir “Nino and Me,” which is a nickname he had for Scalia, Garner revealed a story in which Trump said he owed his victory, in part, to promising to nominate a successor “very much in the mold of Justice Scalia.”
By nominating Neil Gorsuch to take Scalia’s seat on the Supreme Court, Trump honored his commitment to the GOP base and shored up a conservative-leaning majority on the nation’s highest court.
Garner told the story about how Scalia, who sometimes offered the same sarcastic and candid opinions Trump typically does, wanted to criticize an opinion from Justice Anthony Kennedy in the case that legalized gay marriage across the country.
“I’m thinking about criticizing a colleague’s writing style,” Garner recalled Scalia saying. “Do you think that sort of commentary is permissible?”
“‘Nino, for a stylist like you, it’s almost irresistible,’ I said, ‘as it would be for me. That’s especially so if the bad writing you’re criticizing reflects bad thinking,’” he said.
“‘I’m thinking about saying I’d rather put my head in a bag than join in such a badly written opinion,’” Scalia said, not revealing which case or colleague he was referring to.
When the Supreme Court delivered its ruling in June 2015 in the case Obergefell v. Hodges, as Business Insider reports, Scalia included the phrase “head in a bag” in his dissent.
“He was a man of pugnacity, and he just couldn’t help himself when he thought he had a knockout punch,” Garner said.
Garner’s story of Scalia wanting to push back against something he vehemently disagreed with is similar to ...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)