Mestizo Texan Accused of Sexually Assaulting Five Foster Children Took in 180 Girls

MIGUEL BRISENO. ALLEGED PEDOPHILE FOSTER PARENT.

In the Tex-Mex culture, and I believe in Mexico, the male of the household has a right to sex with any female who happens to be around, including his daughter. Age is no barrier either.

This story is not just a story of an adult having sex with teens, but also a story of government corruption.

You should know that San Antonio is located in Bexar County. Medina County is just west of Bexar County. Both counties are about half Mexican.

My San Antonio

A Medina County man accused of sexually assaulting five former foster children, including several in Bexar County, took in more than 180 young girls over a five year period, officials said.

That leads investigators to believe there could be numerous other victims who have yet to come forward.

“It’s not a question about whether there are more,” said Medina County Sheriff Randy Brown. “It’s just about how many.”

One additional victim has already come forward since news broke Wednesday of 58-year-old Miguel Briseno’s arrest, Brown said, bringing the unofficial total to six victims. A charge has not been filed in the sixth alleged case.

Briseno, who is currently being held in the Medina County Jail on a $500,000 bond, was a licensed foster parent from 2005 through 2010, Brown said. During that time he lived in both Bexar and Medina counties.

Over the course of the five years, more than 180 girls passed through his care, Brown said. At various times, Briseno was reportedly taking care of up to 12 girls at once.

Brown said Child Protective Services contracted with a third-party company, who has not yet been publicly identified, to place the girls in Briseno’s home.

“Those girls were taken from some environment and then you have some jackass like him abusing these girls that already have troubles,” Brown said. “I’m aggravated at the whole system. I’m aggravated at the company that placed these girls. It was a money-making deal, the way they were running those girls through there like livestock. It wasn’t about making a better world for them. They were making a profit off them.”

Representatives of Child Protective Services could not immediately comment on the relationship with the company.

Two of the charges against Briseno are out of Medina County, and the remaining three originated in Bexar County. Brown said Briseno first became a foster parent while living in Von Ormy, where the alleged assaults occurred, and later moved to Devine, Texas, in Medina County.

Wednesday’s arrest was not the first time Briseno was arrested on child sex abuse charges. In April 2013, the Medina County Sheriff’s Office arrested him on a charge of solicitation to commit sexual assault of a child. The arrest came after one of Briseno’s foster children said he had sexually assaulted her in August 2012, when he no longer had a foster license, Brown said.

It is not clear why Briseno did not have a license after 2010 and how Briseno still had foster children in his care two years later, though investigators discovered Briseno had attempted to move his foster parent license into his wife’s name, Brown said.

“It’s not a loophole, it’s just downright wrong,” Brown said.

Briseno pleaded guilty in September 2015 to a reduced charge of attempted assault, a Class B misdemeanor. Brown said investigators and prosecutors had difficulty securing testimony against Briseno. He was sentenced to 180 days in jail, though county officials couldn’t confirm how much time he was actually incarcerated.

Brown said his office, as well as other investigating agencies like the Texas Rangers, plan to look into the unnamed third-party company responsible for placing the children in Briseno’s care. They’re also working to determine whether his wife could be held criminally responsible.

All of Briseno’s reported victims were teenagers at the time of the alleged abuse. They’re now in their 20s. For investigators, the next step is to identify the dozens of remaining girls who were ever in Briseno’s care.

“We don’t know where they’re at,” Brown said.

“If you’ve stayed at that house, if you were a foster child [in Briseno’s care], please contact us,” he said. “Whether you feel something inappropriate happened or not, we’d still like to talk to you.”

Victims are asked to call 210-335-8477 if they have any information on Briseno’s alleged abuse.

It’s the mark of a system out of control that the Mexican could run 180 girls through his home in just five years. That must have been quite a party for him.

I did some research on how much a foster parent is paid to take in a child. In Texas it’s $675 per month per child. For the creep in this story that adds up to $97,200 per year. I’m not certain whether that income would be tax free or not, but believe me, it’s way more than the average Texan earns.

The corruption that everyone knows is integral to Mexico is now firmly entrenched in the U.S. It’s a hidden cost of diversity that is increasingly not so hidden.

Did the Russians Do This?

Seen at Jeff Giesea’s Twitter

Jeff Gisea wrote: “Dear @BenSasse,

Russia didn’t create this trendline. Sitting politicians like you did.”

Who controls those politicians? (((You know who.)))

France: No ‘first lady’ title for Brigitte Macron after petition over her status

I see that Andrew Anglin is advocating that French President Emmanual Macron divorce his wife to make room for a younger babe. You can read his throughts here and here.

Because the president’s wife is 64, some 25 years older than Monsieur Macron, Anglin views the marriage as no different than that of Macron to a another man or a dog. I understand that Anglin is trolling in order to work up his readers against the twin ideas of love and loyalty to a spouse.

If Anglin thinks that younger men’s sexual interest in older women is freakish, someone should tell him that “granny porn” is one of the top five porn genres. The Jews who control the flow of porn are quite willing to exploit the young white male’s granny interests. I’m not going to call it a fetish because those same young white men are also consuming teen porn.

Before we get to the serious issue of the role of Mrs. Macron and the French budget, let’s detour into a short photo essay showing several granny porn models that popped up during a Google image search. In the interest of decency, I’ve had to avoid some of the much older women because I could find no nonnude photos. I have no idea who these ladies are and their names don’t matter anyway.

This last one brags about having slept with 1,000 men:

Now that we’ve established that men are interested in older women, how about a word of praise for Macron for showing some loyalty to his wife. Really, when I see them together, I see nothing askew. It’s much better for France that Macron’s spouse be a true Frenchwoman rather than a dark Muzzie or Heaven forbid, an African.

By the way, kudos to Macron for two things.

1. The Macrons welcomed the Trump family to France on Bastille Day.

2. Macron has already seen his popularity ratings plunge because of his (rather mild) stand for French nationalism.

Excerpt from The Guardian

The French president’s wife, Brigitte Macron, will not be given an official “first lady” title or her own budget, the French government has said following a petition against a proposed change to her status.

A “transparency charter” will be published in the next few days to clarify the position of Emmanuel Macron’s wife, but presidential aides insist her role will be strictly public and not political.

The Élysée has made no official announcement, but officials were forced to react after the petition opposed to the president’s spouse having an official title, status and budget was signed by more than 275,000 people in two weeks.

During his election campaign, Macron promised to “clarify” his wife’s role to “end the hypocrisy” over the situation. One of Macron’s first actions after taking power was to set up a working party to examine the “first lady” position.

A YouGov poll for the French edition of the Huffington Post in May suggested 68% of the French public was opposed to the head of state’s spouse being given an official role.

The issue has sparked particular controversy at a time when French parliamentarians are facing a new “morality law” banning them from employing their spouses or family members.

The proposed charter to clarify Brigitte Macron’s status will define a clear role for the president’s spouse and make public for the first time the precise number of staff working for her and the total cost to the French taxpayer.

At present, neither the French constitution nor protocol establishes any rules and previous presidents’ spouses made it up as they went along. Their public and charity work is financed out of the Elysée’s annual budget of €5m-€7m (£4.5m-£6.3m).

Presidential staff insisted the apparent change of heart was not prompted by the petition but by the reflections of the working group.

Christophe Castaner, the government spokesman, tweeted: “Brigitte Macron has a role and responsibilities. We are looking to be transparent and to outline the means she has at her disposal.”

“No modification of the constitution, no new funding, no salary for Brigitte Macron. Stop the hypocrisy!” Castaner wrote in a series of tweets.

“She receives more than 200 letters a day … and keeps a link with the French public with the greatest discretion.”

In an interview with France2 television, Castaner said: “We are not talking about a job; we’re just talking about her status. A job is remunerated. The wife of the president of the republic receives no remuneration and will receive no remuneration for her action, even though she is continually present at her husband’s side.

“This is just a question of transparency.”

Macron, whose popularity has plunged after only three months in office, is also facing a challenge from defiant politicians who threaten to scupper a vote on his “morality law” curtailing certain privileges, including the right to employ relatives.

Macron may end up as Trump’s best friend in standing up to globalism. Let’s give the guy, and his wife, a chance.

FOIA Dump Reveals Collusion Between Comey’s FBI, Loretta Lynch, and Media to Cover Up Tarmac Meeting Between Lynch and Bill Clinton

The mainstream media isn’t covering the following story. Only a very few Americans will see it and understand. Bill Clinton met with the Attorney General of the United States, one of his old pals, Loretta Lynch, and surely instructed her to make the investigation of Hillary go away. That meeting was supposed to be a secret, but an alert local news crew stumbled upon it and reported it.

After that, the Obama administration worked tirelessly to stifle reporting about the meeting.

They’re all corrupt and they’re all in it together, up to and including Obama himself.

Zerohedge

Back on June 29, 2016, Obama’s Attorney General, Loretta Lynch, tried to convince us that the following ‘impromptu’ meeting between herself and Bill Clinton at the Phoenix airport, a private meeting which lasted 30 minutes on Lynch’s private plane, was mostly a “social meeting” in which Bill talked about his grandchildren and golf game. It was not, under any circumstances, related to the statement that former FBI Director James Comey made just 6 days later [4] clearing Hillary Clinton of any alleged crimes related to his agency’s investigation.

The following local news video of the airport runway meeting has been seen by over 350,000 people.

But, according to a new DOJ FOIA dump just released by the American Center for Law and Justice [5] (ACLJ), it looks increasingly as if nothing reported about this “social meeting” between Lynch and Clinton was grounded in fact…shocking, we know.

First, the new FOIA documents seemingly confirm that the FBI and DOJ simply lied in response to the ACLJ’s initial FOIA request filed back in July 2016. Here is what the ACLJ was told at the time after sending requests to both the Comey FBI and the Lynch DOJ asking for any documents related to the Clinton-Lynch plane meeting:

That said, documents released today by the ACLJ reveal several emails between FBI and DOJ officials concerning the Lynch/Clinton meeting primarily related to how they should go about explaining the train wreck that had just been unwittingly played out on live television courtesy of a local Phoenix affiliate station. Here is a recap from ACLJ:

The documents we received today from the Department of Justice include several emails from the FBI to DOJ officials concerning the meeting. One with the subject line “FLAG” [7] was correspondence between FBI officials (Richard Quinn, FBI Media/Investigative Publicity, and Michael Kortan) and DOJ officials concerning “flag[ing] a story . . . about a casual, unscheduled meeting between former president Bill Clinton and the AG.” The DOJ official instructs the FBI to “let me know if you get any questions about this” and provides “[o]ur talkers [DOJ talking points] on this”. The talking points, however are redacted.

Another email [8] to the FBI contains the subject line “security details coordinate between Loretta Lynch/Bill Clinton?”

On July 1, 2016 – just days before our FOIA request – a DOJ email chain under the subject line, “FBI just called,” [9] indicates that the “FBI . . . is looking for guidance” in responding to media inquiries about news reports that the FBI had prevented the press from taking pictures of the Clinton Lynch meeting. The discussion then went off email to several phone calls (of which we are not able to obtain records). An hour later, Carolyn Pokomy of the Office of the Attorney General stated, “I will let Rybicki know.” Jim Rybicki was the Chief of Staff and Senior Counselor to FBI Director Jim Comey. The information that was to be provided to Rybicki is redacted.

Also of note several of the documents contain redactions that are requested “per FBI.”

It is clear that there were multiple records within the FBI responsive to our request and that discussions regarding the surreptitious meeting between then AG Lynch and the husband of the subject of an ongoing FBI criminal investigation reached the highest levels of the FBI.

Then comes a series of emails between DOJ officials and several mainstream media outlets that appear to reveal collusion to effectively ‘kill the story.”

The first such email involves a Washington Post writer who tells the DOJ’s Director of Public Affairs that he’s hoping to “put it [the story] to rest.”

The next email came from Mark Landler of the New York Times who almost apologizes for even inquiring about the Lynch/Clinton meeting saying that he had been “pressed into service” to write about the topic.

Finally, here is an email where ABC apparently told the DOJ they “aren’t interested” in the Lynch/Clinton story, “even if FOX runs with it.”

Can you imagine all of the stuff we would have learned over the past 8 years if the press pursued the Obama administration and/or the Clinton investigation with even 1/10th of the vigor with which it is currently pursuing Trump?

Latina Judge Arrested, Handcuffed, Led from Court

JUDGE LETICIA ASTACIO LED FROM COURTROOM.

This story isn’t just about an arrogant third world mind residing in the body of a judge. It’s also about a fuxated legal system that seemingly cannot bring the Latino bitch at its center under control.

Although Leticia is not allowed to sit on the bench and judge people (the horrors of being in her damn court), she continues to be paid her $173,000 a year salary.

USA Today

ROCHESTER, N.Y. — An embattled City Court judge was escorted Monday from judicial chambers in handcuffs.

Rochester court deputies and city police officers executed a bench warrant issued for Judge Leticia Astacio’s arrest last week after she missed a Tuesday court appearance related to an August drunken-driving conviction.

Astacio, a Rochester City Court judge, smiled and said hello to the gaggle of reporters waiting for her at the fifth floor elevator bank of the Monroe County Hall of Justice where officers marched her off to be processed at the nearby Rochester Public Safety Building. She returned later to the courthouse for an arraignment before Judge Stephen Aronson of Canandaigua City Court, who issued the warrant and is overseeing her drunken-driving case.

He ordered her held without bail in Monroe County Jail until a Thursday hearing. The reason she missed her court appearance last week was because she had been living in a temple with monks in the mountains of Thailand since May 3, she had texted to her lawyer.

OBVIOUSLY ONE OF AMERICA’S GREAT LEGAL SCHOLARS.

Continue reading

Roger Stone: The Incredible Mr. Comey

Washington insider Roger Stone exposes the truth about fired FBI Director James Comey. Weaving together stories of narcissistic Comey’s bad behavior, Stone makes a convincing case that the nation is better off with him out of power.

Lew Rockwell

Former FBI director James Comey has a long and telling career; telling much about his rise to FBI director. Although Comey speaks stoically about following the “rule of law”, and “following in the spirit of our founding fathers”, he has shown time and again that his actions speak louder than his words. In recent times, he came under criticism for his handling of the investigation of Hillary Clinton. Certainly his announcement in October 2016 that there were new Clinton emails which warranted further investigation was a serious breach of protocol. Coming so close to the elections some say, damaged her chances and could have possibly cost her the nomination. I guess we won’t blame Comey for Hillary’s loss as long as we have Trump and the Russians to blame. In fact in July 2016 Comey came under fire for giving Hillary Clinton a pass explaining there “was no intent.” His decision not to prosecute Clinton even though she was in fact guilty was generous if not curiously suspicious. Mr. Trump was severely disappointed in Comey’s decision.

Why was Comey not following his “rule of law?” It wasn’t the first time he had given a pass to the Clintons. In the mid-1990’s Comey joined the Senate Whitewater Committee as deputy director. The Clintons were being investigated for fraud in connection with a real estate deal. The Clintons were given a pass while two of their closest friends and business partners, Jim and Susan McDougal along with Arkansas Governor Jim Tucker were convicted and received prison time.

MARTHA STEWART ARREST. COMEY DID NOT GIVE HER A PASS.

Continue reading

Breaking! Sweden Drops Rape Investigation of Wikileaks’ Julian Assange

Time

(STOCKHOLM) — Sweden’s top prosecutor said Friday she is dropping an investigation into a rape claim against WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange after almost seven years.

The Swedish Prosecution Authority said in a statement Friday that Marianne Ny “has decided to discontinue the investigation.”

Assange took refuge in Ecuador’s embassy in London in 2012 to escape extradition to Sweden to answer questions about sex-crime allegations from two women. He has been there ever since, fearing that if he is arrested he might ultimately be extradited to the United States. Last month, President Donald Trump said he would support any decision by the Justice Department to charge Assange.

WikiLeaks tweeted after the Swedish announcement: “UK refuses to confirm or deny whether it has already received a US extradition warrant for Julian Assange. Focus now moves to UK,”

Friday’s announcement means Assange is no longer under any investigation in Sweden. But the Metropolitan Police said Assange is still subject to arrest for the “much less serious offense” of jumping bail in 2012.

The 45-year-old Australian computer hacker was wanted in Sweden for questioning over a rape allegation stemming from a 2010 visit.

“This is a total victory for Julian Assange. He is now free to leave the embassy when he wants. We have won the Assange case. He is of course happy and relieved. He has been critical that it has lasted that long,” Per E Samuelsson, his lawyer in Sweden, told Swedish Radio. Samuelsson was not immediately available for comments.

Assange still can’t leave the Ecuadorian embassy without being arrested:

Related: Iceland believed the FBI wanted to frame Assange.

Assange supporters fear that he will be extradited to the U.S. and put on trial.