Patrick Von Dohlen

Archives

Trump declares Roe v. Wade abortion anniversary to be ‘Sanctity of Human Life Day’

Trump declares Roe v. Wade abortion anniversary to be ‘Sanctity of Human Life Day’

President Donald Trump proclaimed Monday, January 22, 2018, “National Sanctity of Human Life Day.” The proclamation comes on the 45th anniversary of Roe v. Wade, the landmark decision that legalized abortion in the U.S. throughout the entire nine months of a mother’s pregnancy.

Trump made the proclamation on Friday, as hundreds of thousands of pro-life pilgrims converged upon Washington D.C. for the annual March for Life.

Sculley to earn $75,000 bonus

Sculley to earn $75,000 bonus

Another “performance” bonus awarded to SA City Manager Sherly Sculley. $75,000 bonus for 2017 and $67,000 bonus for 2016. This is a reward for her ability to create and manage debt effectively so as to maintain SA’s high financial rating. Why does anyone or any entity need a good financial rating? Only if you need to access money via a loan or a bond. Well, under Sherly’s leadership, the City’s debt has grown from just over $2 Billion to approximately $5.7 Billion. These numbers might be Plus or Minus a Billion or so… or does it debt really matter? How is that good financial management?

Is she irreplaceable because she’s the only one who knows how to rob Peter to pay Paul? Continue to bonus her to our debt?

There are thousands upon thousands of financial transactions within/between City departments and offices. One would have to spend almost all of their time just trying to keep up with how to shuffle money to hide assets and some in “off the books”/discretionary accounts.

That could possibly be why that during her tenure since 2005, she has had a string of mismanagement debacles that include but are not limited to:
• a lack of oversight the DiGiovanni downtown development scandal when he worked for the City
• and then again recently with the Centro embezzlement that she sits on the Board of and that DiGiovanni runs,
• creating and selling the story that the City was in the black in 2011 to pay for Non-Married Lifestyle (aka Domestic-Partner) Benefits for City Employees and then in 2012 said that the City was in the red and had to issue new municipal Bonds to continue to function and grow;
• an over year-long nationwide Chief of Police employment search that ended up with the City hiring the previous Police Chief with a fat raise,
• the improper zoning of the new “Planned Parenthood” abortion facility next to a residential neighborhood,
• her attempted promotion of the “Planned Parenthood” abortion medical director to the new SA Metro Health Medical Director,
• a dismal Police Contract (in which she argued that the Evergreen Clause was unconstitutional and then agreed to put it back in to seal the latest deal),
• using Police Officers to sweep the homeless of the streets directly around her condo downtown SA,
• the lack of a renewed, mutually beneficial Firefighter Contract,
• ever increasing water and utility bills and fees,
• the improper zoning of #GoogleFiberHuts in City Parks,
• serious neglect of road maintenance and repairs for years,
• the prearranged removal of the #ConfederateStatue from #TravisPark in which the actual cost continues to escalate,
• the mishandling of the 12 smuggled illegal aliens on Dec. 23, 2017,
• the escalating crime rate,
• a #TricentennialCommision in a state of disarray,
• and actually, sadly, there are more.

According to MySA, Sheryl Sculley, San Antonio City Manager compensation structure is:
Total compensation: $587,349.75
Base pay: $414,615.38
Other: $97,354.89
Additional benefits: $75,379.48

See photos to view the top 20 paid City employees. As the City celebrates its Tricentennial, we the people are going to get to pay on the City’s debt for another 300 years unless something changes.

To read more from My San Antonio, click here.

Ken Paxton Demands Evidence be Preserved in SAPD Smuggling Case

Ken Paxton Demands Evidence be Preserved in SAPD Smuggling Case

Ramping up a case against San Antonio for freeing illegal aliens, the Texas Attorney General’s Office is warning city officials not to destroy documents related to the release.

The mayor, police chief, city manager and city attorney were ordered by AG Ken Paxton to “preserve all relevant materials” connected with the release of a dozen illegal aliens over the Christmas holiday.

We should call Paxton’s office and tell him to check the body cameras of all the police officers involved in this case to review carefully who said what to whom during this investigation by the SAPD chief.

To read more from the Immigration Reform, click here.

 

Complaint to the Texas Attorney General against the SAPD for their handling of the Dec. 23 human smuggling case

Complaint to the Texas Attorney General against the SAPD for their handling of the Dec. 23 human smuggling case

George Rodriguez of El Conservador has filled the following complaint against the SAPD with the Texas Attorney General office:

On or about Dec. 23, 2017, a truck carrying what is believed to be illegal aliens was detained by the San Antonio police in San Antonio. The matter seemed to be a case of human smuggling as the truck originated in Laredo, TX.

However, I am concerned with how the case was handled by the SAPD chief and that this case may have been compromised, and the public safety may be placed at risk as a result.

The truck driver is/should be a person of interest in a smuggling operation, and federal law enforcement is trying to develop a case against a smuggling operation. The detained driver is key in this investigation.

Also, there was a Black SUV’s that removed the majority of the people from the trailer and they should be considered dangerous suspects in the human smuggling case. It appears Bexar County District Attorney, Nico LaHood, disagrees with the Chief’s handling of the case and will seek testimony against the driver.

But where are the witnesses, the smuggled people or illegal aliens? They were “released” to a local nonprofit, and those people have disappeared. This has damaged a strong case against illegal alien immigration and human smuggling.

Also, because the illegal aliens were not processed or vetted, we don’t know who they are or if they are dangerous. They could be innocent people seeking the “American Dream” or they could be criminal aliens or terrorists. We will never know because they have disappeared into society.

Under Texas law anyone (including the smuggled person) that pays a smuggler can be charged as a party to a crime. Normally these defendants can be given immunity in exchange for their testimony.

Did SAPD Chief Bill McManus talk to SA mayor Ron Nirenberg that night?

Was Mayor Nirenberg involved in the decisions that night?

Did Mayor Nirenberg instruct the Chief in the handling of this matter?

Was Mayor Nirenberg on the phone with the Chief that night?

Did San Antonio’s actions impede the ICE or other federal investigation into the bigger smuggling operation?

Was there a heated exchange between the Feds and the City that night?

The Texas smuggled person statue states “Sec. 20.05. SMUGGLING OF PERSONS. (a) A person commits an offense if the person, with the intent to obtain a pecuniary benefit, knowingly:

(1) uses a motor vehicle, aircraft, watercraft, or other means of conveyance to transport an individual with the intent to: (A) conceal the individual from a peace officer or special investigator; or (B) flee from a person the actor knows is a peace officer or special investigator attempting to lawfully arrest or detain the actor; or (2) encourages or induces a person to enter or remain in this country in violation of federal law by concealing, harboring, or shielding that person from detection.”

Unfortunately, San Antonio has no statements from the alleged smuggled parties.

The DA might be left with a truck driver violating the taxi ordinances of San Antonio.

The real curiosity did San Antonio violate part 2) encourages or induces a person to enter or remain in this country in violation of federal law by concealing, harboring, or shielding that person from detection?

Where are the witnesses?

Who lost them?

Should the District Attorney investigate San Antonio’s handling of this case?

I am asking the Texas Attorney General’s office to investigate this matter because I feel my personal safety as a citizen has been jeopardized by the mishandling of this case by SAPD Chief William McManus.

See George Rodriguez’ press conference on his complaint here.

City manager has no plans to place San Antonio police chief on administrative leave

City manager has no plans to place San Antonio police chief on administrative leave

The San Antonio city manager Sheryl Sculley has announced her total support for SA police chief Bill McManus’ handling of the illegal alien case. The problem is the half million dollar a year city manager is not held accountable by the mayor or city council.

Unfortunately, the citizens and voters don’t seem to hold mayor or city council accountable either. Only 11% of the registered voters went to the polls in 2017 municipal elections.

Since the liberal social Democrats won most of the city council spots, we can assume that 6% of those voters in the mayoral race were liberal/leftists…and ONLY 5% were conservative, at the most. Think about that.

If we want a police chief who obeys federal immigration laws, we need a city manager who supports that idea, and a mayor and a city council who holds to those ideals. It starts and ends with patriots voting.

To read more from News 4 SA, click here.

Bush-San Antonio alliance aims to move Alamo monument

Bush-San Antonio alliance aims to move Alamo monument

It seems the Cenotaph will be moved despite the conflicts-of-interest, opaque transparency, and other ethical problems surrounding the controversial  “re-imagined” Alamo plan. Contact your local and state elected officials and request more transparency and forthright information before the City moves the Cenotaph from its current location whereby it was placed with a federal grant and agreement stipulating it was to never be moved.

To read more from the Texas Monitor, click here.

Don’t Mess With The Alamo Cenotaph!

Don’t Mess With The Alamo Cenotaph!

“The Alamo is a place of reverence for Texans, both for natives and for those who decided to call Texas their new home.  Yet, it holds an even deeper meaning for those of us who are direct descendants of the brave men and women who settled, worked, struggled, fought, and in the case of the Alamo, died, for the dream of independence and the founding of a new nation.

The Alamo, and by extension the Cenotaph, is a symbol of our heritage, so when a handful of city councilmen and east coast consultants decide they want  to “re-imagine” the Cradle of Texas Liberty, we understandably get nervous.”

To read more from Carlton Soules, click here.

San Antonio becomes first city in Texas to raise legal age to buy tobacco to 21

San Antonio becomes first city in Texas to raise legal age to buy tobacco to 21

Breathing better after the passage of Tobacco21? To be consistent, the City needs to raise all Carcinogens and Abortions to age 21. The number of minority girls under age 21 and they’re under age 21 babies will be spared harm and even immediate human death.

Will the City now restrict all carcinogens for people under 21? Will the City now restrict abortion up to age 21?

Tobacco21 passed at the SA City Council today. SA is the first city in the state of TX to pass it. The Texas Legislature refrained from passing it in 2017 to avoid legislating adulthood. While it might feel good to some, 18 is the legal age to join the military, be drafted and vote. This new ordinance defies common sense. There is a myriad of contradictions that the City is guilty on show this Council’s progressive ideology. What other Level One Carcinogens does the City fail to protect those under 21 from? What other harmful lifestyle choices does the City fail to protect those under 21 from? What other harmful lifestyle choices does the City actually promote? There are many. Do you know them?

The only rational argument that could be made here would have to be predicated upon government run healthcare in which taxpayers paid for everyone to be a part of socialized medicine. Then the government might argue it had a right to legally regulate people’s lifestyle choices. Then ANYTHING unhealthy would need to be made illegal as unhealthy lifestyle choices inevitably drive up healthcare costs. That would be another unjust burden on taxpayers. This is not the case fortunately.

Is the City going to regulate unhealthy soda water drinks and their cups sizes next? Is the City going to regulate fried foods?

SA has an obesity problem. What is SA going to regulate to improve people’s health and overcome obesity.

Is this City decision consistent?

Did you know that the City actually distributes THREE (3) other forms of Level One Carcinogens via the Adolescent Healthcare Ordinance (Medicaid 1115 Waiver Program) to poor teen girls? By the way, teen girls means that they are under 21… So why can the City give (via taxpayer dollars) give out three types of carcinogens but teens can’t buy another type of carcinogen?

Did you know that the City of SA and its departments condones sex before marriage as health if a condom or other contraceptive is used? Ever heard of the City’s WrapCity campaign? Search it for yourself with the SA Metropolitan Health District (SAMHD). So why can the city restrict those under 21 from buying a carcinogen but condone (and in some cases, encourage) participation in other harmful lifestyle choices that harm most people, especially those under 21?

Did you know carcinogens cause various cancers?

Did you know that the City enables “Planned Parenthood South Texas” to skirt 5 objective local zoning laws to open its new abortion facility within 50 feet of family homes? The 1 controllable factor leading to Breast Cancer is elective surgical abortion? In 2015, the City made it easier for women and girls under 21 to procure a surgical abortion?

This becomes intellectually dishonest and politically expedient towards political correctness. The City needs to get back to the basics of public safety and infrastructure like roads and street repair to improve our quality of life. This is a parental issue and the City is not the parent. At age 18 and above, people have their free will to do good or do bad. It’s their responsibility to live out their choices. It’s called personal accountability.

We already have an escalating crime issue? This can drive up the petty crime rate. Some under 21 will be made criminals for buying tobacco products. Local officials are reducing the action taken on criminal marijuana incidents and now local officials are increasing the legal age for tobacco and criminalize 18-20-year olds. Tobacco is a Level One Carcinogen and unhealthy, but marijuana/weed is even worse, and it is a gateway drug that is addictive and opens people up to harder and harder drug experimentation.

Current City business is off track. Encourage your elected officials to get back to the basics and be consistent in application of policy.

These progressive elected officials voted for Tobacco21: Mayor Ron Nirenberg, Councilman Roberto Trevino (District 1), Councilman William Cruz Shaw (District 2), Councilman Rebecca Viagran (District 3), Councilman Rey Saldana (District 4), Councilman Shirley Gonzales (District 5), Councilman Ana Sandoval (District 7), Councilman Manny Palaez (District 8) and Councilman John Courage (District 9).

The only two opposition votes were cast by Councilman Greg Brockhouse (District 6) and Councilman Clayton Perry (District 10).

It is worth noting that in 2015 after “Planned Parenthood South Texas” improperly secured their new Ambulatory Surgical Center abortion business next to a residential neighborhood, an abortion facility restriction ordinance called the Gallagher Amendment was taken through a long process and passed on December 17, 2015. It was passed to prevent another future abortion facility to be able to move in adjacent to family homes. The people who voted against this prudent ordinance were Ron Nirenberg (then District 8 Councilman), Roberto Trevino (D1), Rey Saldana (D4), Shirley Gonzales (D5), and William Cruz Shaw (then Zoning Commission Chairman who voted on it when the amendment came before the Zoning Commission in the process). William Cruz Shaw stated today that he supports the Tobacco21 plan and that it is a moral issue to him. He refused to acknowledge that the abortion facility restriction amendment was a moral issue. To her credit, Rebecca Viagran voted for the Amendment.

On September 21, 2017, the Adolescent Healthcare Ordinance under a Medicaid 1115 Waiver Program which uses taxpayer money to distribute the drugs, Depo Provera and Nexplanon and the IUD mechanical device, to poor teen girls who qualify for Medicaid to chemically sterilize them. Both drugs are very harmful to a girl’s body. After two year of use, Depo Provera causes irreversible bone density loss leading to the early onset of osteoporosis. The program was originally passed by the City Council on February 6, 2014.

The elected officials who voted for the City distribution of these drugs to females under 21 were Mayor Ron Nirenberg, Councilman Roberto Trevino (District 1), Councilman William Cruz Shaw (District 2), Councilman Rebecca Viagran (District 3), Councilman Rey Saldana (District 4), Councilman Shirley Gonzales (District 5), Councilman Ana Sandoval (District 7), Councilman Manny Palaez (District 8), Councilman John Courage (District 9) and Councilman Clayton Perry (District 10).

The only good and opposing vote was cast by Councilman Greg Brockhouse (District 6) who is considering a 2019 run for Mayor.

We are in Dream Week now. Keep MLK’s dream alive by preserving the health of a pregnant minor female and protecting an unborn minority child who is under age 21 too!

LGBT Community Fails to Raise Funds for Rainbow Crosswalks

LGBT Community Fails to Raise Funds for Rainbow Crosswalks

CoSA Council Governance Committee that includes Mayor Nirenberg and Councilman Treviño previously approved giving $20k of tax payer money for a “Rainbow Crosswalk” to tell the homosexual community that they approve of their lifestyle. This diverts from common sense public safety as crosswalks are standardized for exactly that, safety.  Now, since the LGBTQ community hasn’t raised the other $30,000, District 1 Councilman Trevino suggests “not to worry” as the money will be found… Its dangerous to change the standard crosswalks, imprudent to start allowing ANY special interest group their own customized crosswalks, possibly a violation the City’s own “Non-Discrimination Ordinance,” and a flagrant abuse of tax payer money for $20,000 much less the whole PROJECTED cost of $50,000. Consider letting Councilman Trevino, Mayor Nirenberg and the rest of the Governance Committee know this is ideological politics and not in the best interest of public safety or the community as a whole and a waste of tax payer dollars.

To read more from Out in SA, click here.