Archbishop L. J. Guillory with Nationwide supporters and followers has told his California supporters to once again support Kamala Harris. It was Guillory who lead to fight in Los Angeles County for Harris against Los Angeles District Attorney Steve Cooley. Archbishop Guillory, 28 years as a Republican gave his endorsement to Harris. "I have known Los Angeles D.A. Steve Cooley, for years and when it came time for the two of us to talk about what took place in the injustice to Inglewood's Mayor Roosevelt Dorn, Mr. Cooley refused to talk to the African American Community!" "Well, I can not stand up for a guy who refuse to come to the table and talk to the community when there are issues of his office using race as a bases for prosecution." With the Bishop's endorsement came 350 statewide teams that know how to get the votes Harris won Los Angeles County where Cooley was The District Attorney. "I Know That Harris the Right Choice for The U.S. Senate 2016 and I'm with her all the way!" Said Guillory.
“Our beautiful democracy and system of justice has said that when any one of us has been harmed, it is a harm against all of us. A crime against any one of us is a crime against all of us,” said Harris, a former San Francisco district attorney. “And so I think about that and bring that to bear in the work that I have done as district attorney of San Francisco, now as attorney general of California, and with my intention to become the next United States senator from the state of California.”
“I think about the real possibility that for the first time in our nation, we might have a woman as president of these United States ,” Harris said. “And so I say, as we celebrate these past 30 years, let’s rededicate ourselves to the next 30 years. And let’s take heed of Coretta Scott King, who famously said: ‘Freedom is never really won. You earn it and win it in each generation.’ And folks, we are that generation. Let’s win in 2016.”
"I think that California wants and needs a tough, practical and results-oriented approach and leader in the Senate," Harris said, "especially, frankly, given the atmosphere in Washington today."
Harris said she decided to run for Boxer's seat because many of the priorities she has had as attorney general — consumer protection, veterans, immigration, the environment — are issues she would like to tackle at the federal level.
"All, I think, are very connected, directly connected to the work that I've been doing and want to see through," Harris said.
"This is an Odious Attack on the Citizens Right To Record in Public. Most Paramount, at a time where Police Organizations Nationwide have the lowest level of Integrity in their interaction with the public this Bill if allowed to become Law will give corrupt cops a cover to hide under. In fact, time after time Citizens are being Shot and Killed Unjustifiably and the only 'Real' evidence and facts in the case are from Citizens who have recorded the wrong doings of the Cops! In many of those cases Cops have demanded that all recording cease or the person(s) recording will be arrested for interfering with a law enforcement officers." Said, Ombudsman General Archbishop L. J. Guillory.
Yes, Cops that are Being Paid from Taxpayer Public Funds to Protect the Public but, instead are Killing Citizens in Cold Blood! This Bill will Be Stopped By Those "Public Officials and/or By Texas Citizens" Who Know That Your First Job as A State Representative or Legislator is To Protect The Public Safety! Not To Gain Support and Money from Private Groups i.e "Police Unions and Law Enforcement Lobbyists."
National Ombudsman, will fight this Odious Bill and We Ask That You Join our Team:
Texas State Representative Jason Villalba (R-Texas) has found himself at the center of controversy after filing a bill that would make it a crime for bloggers and independent journalists — as well as regular citizens — to film police officers. Despite the backlash from free speech advocates, Villalba is insisting that his bill “does not infringe on constitutional rights” or “limit liberty in any way.”
The current law, Section 38.15(1) of the Texas Penal Code, makes it a crime if anyone “interrupts, disrupts, impedes, or otherwise interferes with a peace officer while the peace officer is performing a duty or exercising authority imposed or granted by law.”
The bill, HB 2918, adds to the definition of what constitutes “interfering” with an officer’s duties, and would make it a Class B Misdemeanor to film, record, photograph, or document the officer within 25 feet while that officer is performing his official duties. That distance is extended to 100 feet if the person is carrying a concealed handgun. There is an exception for news media, but the current language of the bill does not include bloggers, independent journalists, or private citizens, and it is not clear whether online media outlets would be included in the exception either.
Specifically, the types of “news media” that would be exempt from the restrictions on filming police officers include only these three categories:
(A) a radio or television station that holds a license issued by the Federal Communications Commission;
(B) a newspaper that is qualified under Section 2051.044, Government Code, to publish legal notices or is a free newspaper of general circulation and that is published at least once a week and available and of interest to the general public in connection with the dissemination of news or public affairs; or
(C) a magazine that appears at a regular interval, that contains stories, articles, and essays by various writers, and that is available and of interest to the general public in connection with the dissemination of news or public affairs.
Publications such as Breitbart Texas or The Texas Tribune that are published only online could argue they should be considered “newspapers” or “magazines,” but it is far from clear. What is clear is that someone who runs an independent blog, or an internet radio station or podcast, would not be included. As newsrooms across the country have scaled back staff in recent years, independent citizen journalists have often stepped forward to fill that void, especially when it comes to covering local politics and issues of civil and constitutional rights violations that have not yet captured the attention of the mainstream media.
Villalba’s bill would also make it illegal for private citizens to record their own interactions with police officers. In fact, the language is so broad, in prohibiting “documenting” the police officer’s activities, that taking notes during a conversation with an officer, about what was being said, the officer’s badge number, etc., could be construed as a violation. Besides the fact that law enforcement agencies themselves have acknowledged the role that cameras can play in reducing both incidents and false claims of police brutality — as evidenced by the rising support for police body cameras — this bill directly contradicts established case law precedent allowing citizens to videotape police.
In the 2011 case of Glik v. Cunniffe, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit ruled unanimously that a man named Simon Glik had the right to videotape police officers who were arresting a man on Boston Common. The officers had been arresting another man and were punching him, and Glik openly held up his cell phone and videotaped their actions. Glik stood about ten feet away from the officers, did not interfere with them, and did not speak to them until the suspect was in handcuffs and they spoke to him first.
In reaching its decision, the Court said that rapidly changing technology blurred the line between private citizens and journalists, and rejected calls to limit the right to publicly record police officers to traditional journalists. Being able to record police officers was an especially important right, noted the Court, because they have “substantial discretion that may be misused to deprive individuals of their liberties.”
In a press release announcing the court’s decision, David Milton, an attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union who represented Glik said, “Police officers must be trained to respect the right of people to openly record their actions in public,” noting that his client “did what we hope any engaged citizen would do, which was documenting what he thought looked like an improper use of force, and his action in no way interfered with the police.”
Breitbart Texas reached out to Villalba to get his comment regarding this bill, and spoke with him by phone Thursday evening. Villalba was adamant in his defense of HB 2918. “All we’re trying to do is get people to step back when the cops are doing their work,” he said, and “twenty five feet doesn’t seem unreasonable to me.”
Regarding the narrow news media exception in his bill, Villalba told Breitbart Texas that “there was no intention” to eliminate news sources like Breitbart Texas. “You’re intended to fall under the magazine definition.” When asked about independent bloggers, Villalba replied that his problem was that “we just don’t know what their intentions are…some are intending to interfere.” The issue, he said was the “fear and safety of police officers…they don’t know who is there to help and who is there to interfere.”
Villalba insisted that his bill was not an impediment to the work of bloggers and independent journalists, saying that it presented “no limitation whatsoever” on their ability to cover police activity and keep police accountable. “They can always step back 25 feet…all we’re saying is step back a few feet.” He did say that he was interested in hearing testimony from police officers regarding what they thought the proper distance should be.
Breitbart Texas specifically asked Villalba about the situation where an independent journalist is recording as part of a story and then is approached by an officer (as commonly happens in a variety of situations, including the work of Breitbart Texas reporters along the border, who are occasionally approached by Border Patrol or Texas Department of Public Safety officers). Under this bill, once an officer approached, it would be a crime to not immediately turn off the camera. Villalba was insistent that the solution was for the journalist to simply “step back a few feet.”
Villalba was also asked why he believed current law — under which a police officer already has the power to instruct people to move back, clear an area, etc. and can arrest anyone who does not comply — was an inadequate protection for the officers. Villalba told Breitbart Texas that “if you’ve seen these videos, sometimes in the heat of these operations, there’s no time to instruct the crowds to get back.” He described a scenario where there was only one officer on the scene and is getting physically assaulted by the perpetrators he is trying to arrest. “The officer’s trying to do his job, the officer can’t tell the perpetrators, ‘hey stop beating me, I’m going to tell these people to step back and stop filming,’ that just doesn’t occur.”
“They’re worried about their safety,” said Villalba. “This is a bill that is meant to protect law enforcement so that law enforcement can protect our families.”
“I stand by it, I believe strongly in this legislation, I think it will help police officers,” he continued. “We do believe that this is smart policy, good policy that does not limit or infringe constitutional rights, does not limit liberty in any way.”
Many did not share Villalba’s opinion that HB 2918 would “not limit liberty in any way.” Jay Syrmopoulos at The Free Thought Project blog wrote a scathing article, criticizing Villalba’s bill for “attempt[ing] to usurp citizens of the ability to hold law enforcement accountable for their actions by negating people’s ability to create an accurate and impartial record of police interactions,” and noting that the bill’s narrow definition of “news media” would allow “the marginalization of anyone that is not part of the old corporate media structure,” and also meant that “a citizen wouldn’t be able to record their own interaction with an officer.”
“What is important to point out here is that a person without a camera, can be within the distance constraints as described in the legislation and will not be in violation of any law,” continued Syrmopoulos. “The camera, the record of police conduct is what is made illegal in this bill. To deny that it is not a direct attack on free speech is asinine.”
Big Jolly Politics blogger David Jennings was even more direct, tweeting at Villalba, “What in the hell are you thinking? Holy crap dude, you need to pull this bill down. Embarrassing.” Empower Texans President Michael Quinn Sullivan called Villalba “dangerously stupid” for putting forward a bill like HB 2918:
POLITICAL HISTORY Dr. Willie Brown, Jr.
Served two terms as the 41st Mayor of the City and County of San Francisco
- January 8, 1996 to January 8, 2004
Speaker of the California State Assembly
- longest-serving Speaker in California history (1980 – 1995) and one of two African Americans.
Member of the California State Assembly
(1964 – 1995)
Re-Elected 16 straight times to the 13th Assembly District (D-San Francisco)
Chair, Committee on Ways and Means
(youngest in history of California and only African American)
Board of Trustees, California State University system (23 campuses and 350,000 students)
Regent, University of California
(10 campuses and 200,000 students)
Chair, Revenue and Taxation Committee
Board of Administration, CalPERS
Bachelor of Arts, San Francisco State University, 1955
Juris Doctor, Hastings College of Law, University of California, 1958
Admitted to practice law, State of California, all Federal Courts and Supreme Court
HONORARY DEGREES (partial)
Doctor of Law, Morehouse College, Atlanta
Doctor of Law, Atlanta University, Atlanta
Doctor of Law, University of Alabama, Birmingham
Doctor of Law, Golden Gate University, San Francisco
Doctor of Law, Lincoln University, San Francisco
Doctor of Laws, San Francisco State University, San Francisco
Doctor of Law, Jarvis Christian College, Hawkins, Texas
Doctor of Law, Wilberforce University, Wilberforce, Ohio
Doctor of Laws, Dominican University of California
Doctor of Science, California College of Podiatric Medicine
Fellow, Crown College, University of California, Santa Cruz
Juris Doctor, San Joaquin College of Law, Clovis, CA
Juris Doctor, Morgan State University, Baltimore, Maryland
Juris Doctor, Southern University, Baton Rouge
Juris Doctor, The City College of New York
Juris Doctor, Paine College, Augusta, Georgia
Juris Doctor, Lorenzo Patino School of Law, University of Northern California
Born on March 20, 1934 in Mineola, Texas
Married September 1957 to the former Blanche Vitero of Berkeley, California
Susan Elizabeth Brown, San Francisco
Robin Elaine Brown-Friedel, New York
Michael Elliot Brown, San Francisco
Sydney Minetta Brown, San Francisco
Besia Rose Friedel (Granddaughter), New York
Matea Rae Friedel (Granddaughter), New York
Mateo Michael Brown (Grandson), Oakland
Lourdes Isabella Brown (Granddaughter), Oakla
Unlike some people I refuse to endorse or support Hillary Clinton or Dr. Ben Carson, unless they start talking about working on the infrastructure of America.
We need to discuss the lack of jobs but most paramount this discussion must be a real authentic discussion and the jobs must be careers that will take care and pay for the increasing inflation that families are forced to pay each year.
We must have an African American Man, Attorney and/or Judge; nominated and confirmed to the Supreme Court after the 2016 election.
We must talk about College Loans for our children and an amnesty to forgive the college debts and college loans that is currently assassinating in the future of some of our brightness young people in this country.
I think that before we can truly discuss who should be the next presidential candidate of the United States, we must first address these issues!
Archbishop Guillory, says.
"Though there is a clear separation of church and state; nationwide that has not stop politicians from visiting no less than 13 churches on any given Sunday during an election cycles."
In fact, some political candidates have gone so far as to hire religious political consultants to try to ensure that the people of faith know who they are on election day.