Trump Has Executed 43 People Without Arrest Or Trial

Robert Reich tells the truth about Donald Trump's murder spree:

The United States is now executing people on the high seas whom Trump calls “enemy combatants.” He’s doing so without a declaration of war, without input from Congress, and without any findings that they pose a threat to the United States.

 

At this moment, Secretary of Defense (or Secretary of War, as Trump prefers) Pete Hegseth is positioning warships, including an aircraft carrier, and planes in waters off Latin America.

Hegseth has already bombed 10 boats, eight of them in the Caribbean and two others this week in the eastern Pacific. 

So far, the death toll is 43.

Neither Trump nor Hegseth has offered any evidence to support their claims that the vessels have been smuggling drugs to the United States or were “operated by” Tren de Aragua, a group that Trump has designated as a terrorist organization.

It is illegal, under domestic and international law, to deliberately target civilians who are not directly participating in hostilities — even if they are suspected criminals.

Before Trump, the United States dealt with suspected maritime drug smuggling by using the Coast Guard, sometimes assisted by the Navy. If the suspicions proved accurate, the boat’s crews were arrested. They might then stand trial. The penalty for being convicted of drug trafficking was prison time. 

Now, Trump is summarily executing people suspected of being drug dealers, without any proof. 

Trump claims that the attacks are not murder because he has “determined” that the boats are smuggling drugs, that they are being run by drug cartels, that drug trafficking by cartels constitutes an armed attack on the United States, and that the United States is now engaged in a formal armed conflict with the cartels. 

As a result, he reasons, the boat crews are “enemy combatants” and can be executed. 

Every step in this so-called logic is questionable. 

It’s also dangerous. What if Trump “determines” that anyone he dislikes — immigrants, Democrats, student protesters — is an “enemy combatant?” 

He has already referred to the “enemy within” the United States — in characterizing domestic political opponents, including government officials, critics, activists, and protesters. 

In his September 30 speech to the U.S. military’s top brass, Trump discussed using the military against this so-called “enemy from within.” 

Who’s the “enemy within?” He told members of the Navy and Marines to “take care of this little gnat on our shoulder called the Democrats.” He has called Democrats “vermin,” “scum,” and, yes, “the enemy within.” 

Trump has sent troops into Washington, D.C., Los Angeles, and Chicago — whose inhabitants overwhelmingly vote for Democrats — and he’s done so over the objections of mayors and governors. He plans to send more troops into more cities. He claims he’s doing it to deal with crime or to protect ICE agents or to protect ICE facilities. Again, the evidence is flimsy or nonexistent. 

ICE now holds 59,762 people in detention. Some of those detained have been American citizens. ICE made a mass arrest of 15 New York state elected officials. It has arrested members of Congress, active-duty firefighters, a child it accused of being a convicted adult in the MS-13 gang, a disabled military veteran, and a United States marshal — all of whom were shown to be U.S. citizens wrongfully held by ICE. 

Trump’s Justice Department is now prosecuting people Trump has ordered it to prosecute — people who have tried to hold him legally accountable, such as New York Attorney General Letitia James and former FBI director James Comey. 

Put it all together. Let me ask you, honestly: How close are we to Trump ordering the execution of Americans he considers his political opponents? 

Do We Want Our Government Executing Criminals Without A Trial?

From Axios.com,
 

This Was NOT Law Enforcement - It Was Murder!

On Tuesday, the Trump administration blew up a boat in international waters and killed its 11-member crew. The administration claimed it was gang members carrying drugs from Venezuela that were destined for the United States. But they have provided no proof of that. And Secretary of State Rubio said it would happen again in the future.

The Trump administration claimed the attack was justified because the people on the boat were "terrorists". But that's a pathetic excuse for the illegal action. Drug dealers (if that's what they were) may be criminals, but they are not terrorists - and calling them terrorists does not make them that.

Even if we ignore the fact that the attack happened in international waters, and assume that those on the boat were indeed trying to smuggle drugs into the United States, murdering them was still wrong - and it was murder. According to U.S. law, criminals should be arrested, detained, and given a fair trial.

How would this be any different than killing those found smuggling drugs across our southern border, or killing those found selling drugs on American streets? 

I am not trying to defend criminal behavior. But our democracy has laws, and the government violating those laws is no better than the criminals doing it. In fact, it may be worse because when the government violates our laws then we no longer have a system based on the rule of law.

Trump seems to think he has the power to do whatever he wants, including labeling people as terrorists and murdering them. He doesn't. And decent people in this country must make it clear that our laws matter.

The United States Is In Bad Company

The chart above was made from information provided by Amnesty International and printed in the British newspaper, The Guardian. One nation was left off of the chart -- China, because they are believed to have executed thousands of people in 2012 (and that would have made the chart unreadable).

Note that the United States had the fifth largest number of executions of any nation in the world last year (43) -- and was one of only eight countries to have a double-digit number of executions. And the state with the highest number of executions every year is Texas -- which has now executed 500 people since re-instituting the death penalty (and has several more executions scheduled this month).

Also note the company this puts the United States in. All of the nations with double-digit executions are nations that have terrible human rights reputations. Is this really the kind of company we want to keep? Why can't we join the growing list of civilized countries that realize killing is wrong -- even when it is done by a government?

12 Texas Executions Set For Next 4 Months

Texas has long been the most blood-thirsty state in the union, but even though they continued to lead the nation in executions, the number of executions carried out in the last couple of years fell off rather sharply. In 2011 only 13 executions were done, and in 2012 the figure was 15. I had hoped that my home state was gradually coming to its senses, and that soon that number might be down to single digits (or even none at all).

But it looks like Texas officials are putting an end to any speculation like that. They now have at least 12 executions scheduled over the next four months -- 6 in April, 3 in May, and 3 more in July. That should significantly jack up the number of state-sanctioned murders for 2013.

Don't get me wrong. I am not for releasing violent criminals to once again prey on the law-abiding public. Assuming their guilt (something not assured with our broken justice system), these death row inmates have considered some horrible crimes -- and I don't think they should ever walk Texas streets again. But isn't spending the rest of their lives behind bars enough?

It might be different if we could be assured that our justice system worked as it is supposed to (and as too many believe it does). But the fact is that in recent years at least 18 people have been released from death row because DNA proved they were innocent. How many more innocent people are sitting on death row -- some of them unable to be exonerated by DNA (because no DNA was left at the crime scene)? If there is even one, that is far too many -- and no state can ever justify the execution of a single innocent person.

When was the last time a rich person was executed? I don't remember it happening at all. While we like to think that justice is blind, and all criminal defendants are treated equally in our courts -- it is simply not true. Money and race are big factors in the outcomes of many trials, and our system will not be fair until that is no longer true. How can we justify condemning people to death, when we know that our system of justice is not fair? What kind of society does that make us?

------------------------------

Let me also take this opportunity to give a pat on the back to my own alma mater -- Texas Wesleyan University. As a part of their Willson Lecture series, they have scheduled Sister Helen Prejean (pictured above), author of Dead Man Walking: An Eyewitness Account of the Death Penalty in the U.S. and a noted opponent of the death penalty, to speak at the university on April 11th at 7:00pm. The event will be held at the University Methodist Church sanctuary (on the southeast corner of the TWU campus). It is free, and it is open to the general public. If you live in or near the Dallas-Ft. Worth Metroplex, I urge you to consider going to hear this lady speak.

Executions Are Becoming Rare In U.S.

The above map is from Think Progress, and it shows the states that still have the death penalty and those that don't. They printed the map because it looks like Maryland will soon become one of the states that has abolished the death penalty.

I was intrigued by the numbers in the white blocks of each state -- the number of executions that the state has carried out since 1976 (when the constitutionality of the death penalty was clarified). Note that only 9 states have averaged at least 1 execution per year in the last 36 years (Texas-481, Virginia-109, Oklahoma-98, Florida-73, Missouri-68, Alabama-55, Georgia-52, North Carolina-43, and South Carolina-43). The other 41 states have averaged less than 1 execution each year -- most of them far less than that.

And only four states have averaged at least 2 executions each year (Texas, Virginia, Oklahoma, and Florida). The fact is that executions are becoming more rare in this country with each passing year. Even in Texas, which has carried out a third of all executions since 1976, the number of death penalties given by juries and carried out by the state has dropped sharply in the last few years.

This brings up an interesting question. As the death penalty becomes more rarely used in the United States, how rare will it have to be before it is deemed to have become a "cruel and unusual" punishment (which would make it unconstitutional)? It is already used less than once per year by four-fifths of the 50 states. How much lower must it get before reaching the definition for "cruel and unusual"? Can only four states carry the burden of keeping it constitutional?

These are questions that need to be answered. But it is a question that can only be answered by the Supreme Court, and with executions becoming more rare all the time (even in blood-thirsty Texas) the question might well have to be answered by that court in the next few years.

Texas Still Leads The Nation In Executions

We are finishing up the final few days of 2012, and that means it's time for the Texas Coalition to Abolish the Death Penalty to release its annual report. And as usual, it shows that Texas still leads the nation by a long shot. Here are the executions done in the United States in 2012:

Texas...............15
Mississippi...............6
Oklahoma...............6
Arizona...............6
Ohio...............3
Florida...............3
South Dakota...............2
Indiana...............1
Delaware...............1
Total...............43

Note that Texas executed about 35% of all the people murdered by the state killing apparatus in the United States this year, and more than twice as many as any other state. Now don't get the idea that Texans think this is justice, or will prevent future capital crimes. They know better. They just don't care. This is all about revenge, and an unnatural taste for blood. If the state were to vote on whether to keep the death penalty or not, keeping it would win hands down.

But that may be changing. Killing only 15 inmates is a rather low number for Texas, nearly as low as last year's number of only 13. Here are the number of executions in Texas for the last six years:

2007...............26
2008...............18
2009...............24
2010...............17
2011...............13
2012...............15

But even though the executions seem to be slowing down, Texas still has not registered a year in which they killed less than one person a month, or even averaged only one person a month (although 2011 came close). There is a small bit of good news though -- Texas juries are not handing down death sentences as much as they used to (although even one is too many). This means it is likely that the number of executions may fall further in the future. We can only hope. Here are the numbers of death penalties for the last 11 years:

2002...............37
2003...............28
2004...............24
2005...............14
2006...............11
2007...............14
2008...............12
2009...............9
2010...............8
2011...............8
2012...............9

But while the number of death penalties seems to be dropping, that doesn't mean they are being passed out on a fairer basis. Texas would still rather kill a minority person than a white person, especially if that minority person is black. While African-Americans make up only 11.8% of the Texas population, they have made up about half of the people executed in the last five years (45.7%). Hispanics made up 28.3% and whites made up 26.1%.

While I am happy that the number of executions seems to be dwindling somewhat, I still don't really understand why the state has to execute anyone at all. Are there heinous criminals out there who deserve to never walk among us ever again? Of course. But giving them life without parole will effectively accomplish that. And if we later discover a mistake was made (they are innocent), they can be released -- but you can never take back killing an innocent person.

Frankly, as a Texan, I am ashamed that my home state still thinks it is OK to kill people to prove that killing people is wrong. That doesn't even make sense.

Texas Still The Most Bloodthirsty State

Even though hundreds of innocent people have been freed from the nation's prisons in the last few years, and several dozen in the state of Texas alone, the state of Texas continues to kill people in the name of the people of Texas. And last year the state once again finished first in the nation in the number of people they killed. Here are the states that executed the most people in 2011:

Nationwide...............43
Texas...............13
Alabama...............6
Ohio...............5
Georgia...............4
Arizona...............4
Oklahoma...............2
Florida...............2
Mississippi...............2
Five other states had one execution each.

The good news is that the number of executions has been getting smaller each year -- both nationwide and in Texas. Here ate the numbers for both for the last few years (with Texas executions in parentheses):

2011...............43 (13)
2010...............46 (17)
2009...............52 (24)

But there is bad news as well. Texas has six executions scheduled for the first three months of 2012 -- a rate that could mean the state will reverse that downward trend this year, and possibly execute more people than in either of the last two years. And this is in spite of the fact that it was learned last year that Texas had executed an innocent man (Cameron Willingham).

Most states would have suspended executions after learning an innocent man had been executed, but the governor of Texas had a different reaction. Rick Perry just did his best to cover it up. He's running for president and decided if he suspended executions (even for a little while), it would make him look weak on crime to the Republican Party's teabagger base. Getting votes is more important to Perry than the idea that another innocent man might be executed.

Texas is undoubtably the most bloodthirsty state in the nation, and it looks like those in state leadership positions want to keep that dubious title.

A Day Of Executions

Today, Iran will be showing the world just what a backward nation they really are. They will be publically executing 30 people. Executions in Iran are carried out by hanging the person from a large crane (see picture above).

Some of the people being executed have committed serious crimes such as murder, kidnapping, armed robbery and smuggling arms. Sadly though, others are being executed for far less serious crimes such as selling drugs or alcohol. Some will be executed for activity that would not even be considered a crime in most countries, such as adultery.

Last year Iran executed 317 people. Only China executed more people (470). The United States executed 42 people, most of them here in Texas. I don't know about the rest of you, but I don't like the company we're keeping on this issue.

I think it's time we joined the rest of the civilized world, and outlawed government-sanctioned killing.

A.B.A. Group Supports Freeze On Executions

The American Bar Association believes there are serious problems with how the states handle death penalty cases, and these problems affect the fairness of trials and death penalty verdicts.

The ABA's Death Penalty Moratorium Implementation Project conducted a review of how the death penalty operates in Alabama, Arizona, Georgia, Florida, Indiana, Ohio, Pennslyvania and Tennessee. They found several problems, including:

* Spotty collection and preservation of DNA evidence.

* Misidentification by eyewitnesses.

* False confessions from defendants.

* Racial disparities that make death sentences more likely when victims are white.

Stephen F. Hanlon, chairman of the group, said, "After carefully studying the way states across the spectrum handle executions, it has become crystal clear that the process is deeply flawed. The death penalty system is rife with irregularity."

The problem is not whether the death penalty is right or wrong. The problem is that our system of justice cannot guarantee fairness. This fundamental problem with fairness makes the rightness or wrongness of the death penalty a moot point. Even if the death penalty can be justified on moral grounds, that justification can only exist in a fair system.

Perhaps one day we can have the debate over whether the death penalty is right or wrong, but that day is a long way off. Right now, we must have a moratorium on the death penalty until we can guarantee the fairness of our system.

Without a fair system, we are sure to execute some innocent people. The execution of even one innocent person is an unforgivable and morally reprehensible act. It cannot be defended.

Regional Public Defender Office To Be Created

Texas has just executed it's 400th person. Personally, I wish we would just do away with the death penalty, but that doesn't look like it's going to happen anytime soon. In the meantime, our Death Row seems to be populated with indigent inmates. The rich and middle class are able to afford good attorneys, who either get their clients off or at least get the death penalty off the table. The poor are not so lucky.

Capital cases require a lot of time, work, and special knowledge for an attorney. Too often in our state, the poor get an attorney who is either not knowledgeable in capital cases or doesn't have the time to do the case justice. There have even been cases where the attorney slept through crucial parts of the trial. The result is that the defendant winds up on Death Row, whether he deserves to be there or not.

There is now a move to set up a Regional Public Defender's Office in West Texas. This office would have five specially trained attorneys that would handle the area's capital cases. The Task Force on Indigent Defense is approving a $2.6 million grant to be paid over five years to help fund the office. This state funding would gradually decrease over the five years, and the 85 counties in the region would gradually assume more of the cost. The cost for each county would be determined by it's population and a 10-year average of it's number of capital cases.

I don't know if this is the answer, but at least the state is trying to do something to right the current wrong. Too often in rural counties such as these, there are few attorneys with experience in defending capital crimes and even fewer who can afford to donate the time neccessary for one of these cases.

At least now, the indigent defendents will get an attorney specially trained for this kind of case, and with a small enough caseload to dedicate the neccessary time to each case. That's a start. If it works out, the concept could be instituted in other areas of Texas.

The concept is not bad. Now we'll have to see if it is properly done. It's bad enough to have the death penalty. It's downright criminal to give it to a defendant who didn't have adequate representation.