Bush Grants Clemency

According to Fox News:

On his last full day in office, President Bush commuted the controversial sentences of two former Border Patrol agents convicted of shooting a Mexican drug runner in 2005.

The imprisonment of Ignacio Ramos and Jose Alonso Compean had sparked outcry from critics who said the men were just doing their jobs and were punished too harshly. They had been sentenced to 11- and 12-year sentences, respectively.

Their sentences will now expire on March 20 of this year.

Finally. Now we'll have to see if anything happens with Johnny Sutton. If you aren't familiar with the story, check out my previous posts on the matter.

An Illegal Alien Drug Dealer Also Lied?

Big news in the ongoing saga of imprisoned U.S. Border Patrol agents Ignacio Ramos and Jose Compean. Yesterday, their appeal came before the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals:

From the Dallas Morning News:

Judge E. Grady Jolly, one of three judges from the 5th U.S. Circuit Court
of Appeals hearing the case of Ignacio Ramos and Jose Alonso Compean, questioned
whether the two agents would have been charged if they had reported the
shooting.

"For some reason, this one got out of hand, it seems to me," he said of
the agents' prosecution.

And from the El Paso's Newspaper Tree:

U.S. officials also admitted that confessed drug dealer Osvaldo
Aldrete-Davila lied under oath.

"He told some lies on the stand," Attorney Mark Stelmach was quoted as
saying. Stelmach is representing U.S. Attorney Johnny Sutton, who prosecuted the
two agents, in front of the Appeals Court.

Wow. First off, to the comment in the Dallas Morning News about "if they had reported the shooting," I've shared before the fact that there were 7 agents and 2 supervisors at the scene of the shooting when the casings were being picked up, and that an oral report is all that was required - no written documentation. But then you get to the fact that the prosecution's star witness, the illegial alien drug dealer, committed purjury. And it's taken more than a year since Ramos and Compean were convicted for the prosecution to disclose that Aldrete-Davila lied under oath?

Glenn Beck spoke with a handful of people about this latest development on his radio show today:

• Tara Setmayer from Congressman Dana Rohrabacher's (CA) Office and Congressman Ted Poe (TX)
• David Botsford, appeals attorney for Ramos
• Sara Carter, Washington Times writer who has been following this story for quite some time

Aldrete Davila Arrested

Osvaldo Aldrete Davila, whose testimony sent two U.S. Border Patrol agents (Ignacio Ramos and Jose Compean) to prison, was finally arrested and indicted on drug smuggling charges yesterday, just over 2 years after using a "border pass" from the Department of Homeland Security to smuggle drugs across the Mexican border.

The El Paso Times has two stories about the arrest:

• Man shot by Border Patrol agents arrested at bridge
• Smuggler shot in '05 taken to court today

U.S. Attorney Johnny Sutton, who prosecuted Ramos & Compean, released a statement about the arrest, closing with the following:

Just as Aldrete’s alleged illegal conduct did not excuse the crimes committed by Compean and Ramos, likewise, their crimes will not excuse his. Compean and Ramos had their day in court and received justice in accordance with well established laws. Now, Aldrete will have his day in court and my office will work tirelessly to ensure that justice is done.

Are you kidding me Mr. Sutton? You were responsible for building the case on the testimony of an illegal alien drug smuggler, and giving him immunity, and yet you have the gall to say that Compean's and Ramos's "crimes will not excuse his"? Of course not, you excused his. If not for Aldrete's continued drug smuggling and illegal entry into this country, he would still be a free man today.

This whole case continues to make my blood boil. What the heck is going on? Not to beat a dead horse, but why would the U.S. government take the word of an illegal alien drug smuggler over up to nine U.S. Border Patrol agents? Why would the reports of the September/October 2005 drug loads led by Aldrete not be admissible evidence?

Some Good News

Who knows where or how this will end up, but I liked reading this, courtesy of WorldNetDaily:

The House of Representatives has attached two amendments to spending bills intended to free Border Patrol agents Ignacio Ramos and Jose Compean from prison and prohibit the Department of Transportation from spending any funds on the development of NAFTA Superhighways.

Several congressmen are discussing a third amendment, designed to shut down the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America working groups in the Department of Commerce, but as yet no sponsor has been finalized.

Taken together these memos evidence a growing resistance in the House to open borders, prosecutions of law enforcement on the border, and the increasingly evident drive by the Bush administration to push North American integration.

Johnny Sutton

FoxNews.com has this story about Johnny Sutton, the U.S. Attorney for the Western District of Texas. Sutton, you may recall, was the prosecutor of U.S. Border Patrol Agents Ignacio Ramos and Jose Compean, which I've been following. Sutton continues to stand his ground, basically saying they got what they deserved. A while back, I pointed to the transcript of an interview Glenn Beck did with Sutton, but didn't take the time then to break it down at all. Here's some of the interview:

BECK: Let`s start with the alleged cover-up. The two agents go, and they shoot at the drug smuggler...

SUTTON: Fifteen times.

BECK: ... 15 times, they shoot at him. He`s running away. He`s shot in the butt. Forensics show that it looks like he may have been turned around, which shows that he was running. They go and pick up the shell casings, right?

SUTTON: Yes.

BECK: OK. There are two agents -- I`m sorry, seven agents and two supervisors there. What kind of cover-up is going on when they`re picking up the shell casings with seven -- or, I`m sorry, nine other people?

SUTTON: Right, and that`s another big part of the misinformation here. At the time of the shooting, there were not seven agents. There was three. And that`s Compean, Ramos and Agent Juarez, who is standing right there. I mean, they have this drug dealer in a ditch with his hands in the air. All they had to do was put the handcuffs on him. And, instead, someone yells in English, "Hit him," and Compean tries to hit him with the shotgun.

BECK: According to the drug smuggler.

SUTTON: No, no, Juarez says that, and Compean says that. I`m sorry, the drug smuggler and Compean say somebody said, "Hit him," in English. I mean, Compean admits that in his own testimony.

BECK: But you said -- I`ve heard you on several problems -- you said the real problem here is the cover-up. So, again, I`ve got nine agents, including two supervisors, there, watching people pick up the...

SUTTON: No, all those people show up later.

BECK: Really?

SUTTON: All those people show up later. And even Compean and Ramos admit that the supervisors weren`t there. They admit that in their own testimony at trial, supervisors weren`t there. There were agents who were involved in a cover-up. Agent Vazquez picked up the shell casings with Compean. Compean only found nine of his 14 shots, so he was missing five shells. Vazquez went back and picked those up and threw them away and called them on his cell phone.

If you read that closely, you can see Sutton twisting his responses to avoid the facts that Glenn received from official government documents regarding the case. Glenn is asking where the cover-up is when there are seven agents and two supervisors there when the casings are being picked up. Sutton's response is to say that those agents weren't there at the time of the shooting. So to clear this up, there were three agents there at the time of the shooting, then by the time the casings were picked up, there were seven agents and two supervisors there.

So if Ramos and Compean are being prosecuted for the cover-up, Sutton's got some explaining to do about why the other five agents and two supervisors weren't prosecuted as well. Sutton himself says that Vazquez was involved in picking up the casings, but Vazquez (or Juarez as Sutton previously referred to him) was not prosecuted.

And I don't get the "somebody said, 'Hit him,' in English" argument. So an agent who sees his partner with his firearm ready, and thinks the suspect is armed and ready to shoot, cannot say "Hit him"? Or can he just not say it in English? But I do continue to appreciate the U.S. Government building a case on the testimony of an illegal alien drug smuggler. That's nice.

Here's some more:

BECK: ... Let me give you -- this comes from the Department of Homeland Security. This is the actual report. You didn`t have the FBI. You had the Department of Homeland Security investigate this. So this is from their actual report, that they were on location during the shooting incident or of the shooting incident. They assisted in destroying the evidence of the shooting and/or knew or heard about the shooting, and it lists all of them, including the two supervisors.

SUTTON: Everyone agrees, including Compean and Ramos, their supervisors were not on the scene. And even their own testimony says, "We didn`t tell our supervisors. We just assumed someone else did."

Look, when you shoot somebody, you`ve got to say that you shot somebody. You don`t have to incriminate yourself, but you at least have to explain that guns were fired so the investigation. And, by the way, Ramos is on the sector evidence team, so he knows, whenever there`s a shooting, you`ve got to mark it, you`ve got clear it off, you`ve got to pick up the evidence.

BECK: Sure. But you don`t write a report, do you?

SUTTON: No, you do write a report.

BECK: No, you report to your supervisor orally, I understand.

SUTTON: Right, what you do is you must report within one hour of a shooting. And then you don`t have to...

(CROSSTALK)

BECK: And if your supervisors were coming to the scene, you would just assume that it...

(CROSSTALK)

SUTTON: You`re supposed to tell them that, "I shot 15 times at a guy who pointed a gun at me."

BECK: So is that 10 years for assuming that nine people there on the scene pretty much understood it? Is it 10 years...

SUTTON: No, 10 years is for committing a number of serious crimes. When you shoot an unarmed guy in the back.

Again, there's Sutton twisting the timeline, in addition to forgetting what the reporting procedure is. I find it extremely believable that Ramos and Compean didn't tell their supervisors "I shot 15 times at a guy who pointed a gun at me" because they were there while the casings were being picked up. To me, that's a bit like going into your boss's office each day to tell him that you're at work. It's not like they needed documentation - it's supposed to be an oral report, remember Johnny?

One final portion:

SUTTON: Then it becomes a debate about punishment. And that is a different -- I have a lot of sympathy for those who say, look, punishment is too high, you know, 10 years. I agree. Punishment in this case is extremely...

BECK: Really? You agree?

SUTTON: I agree it`s extremely high.

BECK: Have you written the president? Have you written your good friend, Gonzales, about this?

SUTTON: What I say about that is the punishment is set by Congress. They set...

BECK: So you have no discretion, you can`t write the president and say, "Come on"?

SUTTON: I do have discretion.

BECK: Have you made that? Have you written it?

SUTTON: And we have discretion at the beginning of the trial with regard to plea bargains and things like that. And what people have said...

(CROSSTALK)

BECK: So you can`t make a recommendation?

SUTTON: We have no interest. We have no interest.

BECK: You can`t make the reconstruction?

SUTTON: With regard to a pardon or clemency, at some point, the Department of Justice will probably ask for my recommendation. And when that comes, we`ll make one.

Another great part. I love the "I have a lot of sympathy ... the punishment is too high ... I have discretion ... We have no interest ... at some point they'll probably ask for my recommendation" part. This is what I hate about politicians - and yeah, I consider this guy a politician. If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, I call it a duck. Stop talking out of both sides of you butt, say what you mean, mean what you say, and stand up for your convictions!

Miscellaneous Beck

Just wanted to post a couple links to things that Glenn Beck has covered recently. I hoped to spend some time reading through them myself and writing more about them, but I haven't yet taken the time and wanted to be sure to at least point you in the direction if you're interested.

First, last Friday (May 18) Glenn's CNN Headline News show aired a "Spotlight on Immigration Reform" that featured interviews with Congressman Ted Poe & Dana Rohrabacher regarding the imprisonment of former U.S. Border Patrol Agents Jose Compean and Ignacio Ramos. Beck also spoke with "U.S. attorney for the western district of Texas and the man behind the prosecution of the border agents, Ramos and Compean, Johnny Sutton." The interview with Sutton (about halfway down the transcript) is interesting.

Second, Glenn broke down some of the numbers from the Pew Research Center's report on Muslim-Americans. Luis Lugo, director of the Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life, says the report shows that "Muslim Americans are very much like the rest of the country. They do not see a conflict between being a devout Muslim and living in a modern society." Among some of the interesting facts & figures:

• U.S. Muslims have only a 2% higher rate of low income than the general public - while the average of Britain, France, Germany, and Spain is more than 10 times as high.
• 76% of US Muslims are either very or somewhat concerned about the rise of Islamic extremism around the world, including 85% of long term immigrants (came here before 1990).
• 61% of US Muslims are either very or somewhat concerned about the rise of Islamic extremism in America.
• 71% of Muslims believe most can get ahead with hard work (including 76% of young Muslims), compared to 64% in the general public.
• Muslims here believe Jews and Palestinians can coexist---only 16% say no---in comparison in Morocco 90% say no.
• Only 1% of US Muslims say suicide bombings are "often" justified.
• 7% say suicide bombings are "sometimes" justified.
• 5% say suicide bombings are "rarely" justified.

What's shocking about the justified suicide bombing numbers are that this wasn't just about suicide bombings in general but "suicide bombings against civilian targets ... to defend Islam." So 13% of U.S. Muslims think there's justification for killing "innocent" civilians to defend their religion.

Hearing Set For Next Month

From KFOX-TV in El-Paso, Texas:

Congress will take a closer look at the case of two U.S. Border Patrol agents imprisoned in connection with the shooting of an illegal immigrant who was running across the Mexican border.

A U.S. House committee has announced it will hold a hearing next month to investigate the prosecution of agents Jose Compean and Ignacio Ramos.

Congressional Hearing

From the Las Cruces Sun-News:

EL PASO — Jailed El Paso Border Patrol agents Ignacio Ramos and Jose Alonso Compean are one step closer to getting a long-promised congressional hearing looking into their case, U.S. Rep. Dana Rohrabacher, R-Calif., said.

Rohrabacher said the chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on International Organizations, Human Rights and Oversight, U.S. Rep. William Delahunt, D-Mass., has granted Rohrabacher's request for a hearing.

A date has not yet been set for the hearing.

Private Eye

Just when I was wondering what was going on in the case, Glenn Beck had a link to a little more news concerning Jose Compean & Ignacio Ramos:

A private investigator who was hired by former U.S. Border Patrol agent Ignacio Ramos during his trial on allegations he fired at a fleeing drug smuggler says he doesn't think prosecutors made any significant effort to find the smuggler, later identified as Osvaldo Aldrete-Davila.

Freddie Bonilla told WND that his investigation of the Feb. 17, 2005, incident was straight-forward, and led him quickly to Aldrete-Davila's identity, and he believes the federal government should have been able to do the same thing.

Here's where Bonilla's investigation started, Aldrete-Davila's abandoned van:Surely that amount of drugs doesn't really mean anything. Just a little weed to take the edge off.

Another Real Border Patrol Story

This past week, Glenn Beck shared the story of former U.S. Border Patrol agent David Sipe. An editorial from Wednesday's Washington Times explains:

On duty in April 2000 near Panitas, Texas, Mr. Sipe, his partner and two other agents responded to a disrupted motion sensor to find between 12 and 15 illegal aliens crossing the border. Most of the illegals followed the agents' instructions and surrendered, but several attempted to flee, running into a patch of tall dense reeds. What happened after Mr. Sipe pursued three men into the reeds is, as court documents note, disputed.

In the course of making the arrest, Mr. Sipe struck one of the border crossers, a Mexican national named Jose Guevara, in the head with his flashlight. He said it was necessary, but the U.S. Attorney's office said it wasn't. In 2001, Mr. Sipe, who had no previous complaints against him, was convicted for using excessive force, and dismissed from the Border Patrol. The story doesn't end there, and when the conduct of the prosecuting attorney's office came to light Mr. Sipe was tried again and acquitted.

It turns out that three illegal aliens who testified against Mr. Sipe -- that is, Mr. Guevara along with two others who had fled into the reeds -- received a very nice gift package. The Washington Times reported Monday that the three illegals got Social Security cards, witness fees, travel expenses, living expenses and the use of government telephones to call relatives in Mexico, and were allowed to travel to and from Mexico and to North Carolina. The government offered everything to the three who had broken the law, all to obtain testimony against an agent who had enforced the law.

The U.S. Attorney's office, moreover, covered up the generous benefits it had handed out. It failed to disclose the fact that all three illegal aliens had been living together in the months preceding the trial. Nor did prosecutors reveal that when Border Patrol agents stopped Mr. Guevara, again traveling with illegal aliens, they let him go when he flashed the "get out of jail card" he got from the prosecutors. "His arrest with illegal aliens was evidence that he was a transporter," wrote the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals in ordering a new trial, "as well as evidence of the extent of the government's support accorded him in order to obtain his testimony."

Mr. Sipe's felony conviction has been overturned, and despite the way he was treated he is working to rejoin the Border Patrol. But the repercussions of such zealous and aggressive prosecution go well beyond his case. The message to Border Patrol agents, who are assigned to the difficult and dangerous job of protecting our borders, is to worry less about the execution of their duties and more about how things could be made to look in court. Agents, like the rest of us, are not above the law, but government prosecutors must not lose sight of who the criminals are.

Call for Mistrial

The attorney for U.S. Border Patrol agent Ignacio Ramos is calling for a mistrial, arguing that the prosecution violated the "Jencks Act requirement," which "requires prior statements of a witness be turned over to the defense before the defense begins cross-examination." The defense for Ramos was never shown a Department of Homeland Security memo by Special Agent Christopher Sanchez, which may have served to prove the agents' innocence.

As previously reported by WND, the memo lists seven Border Patrol agents and two supervisors who were on the scene of the Feb. 17, 2005, shooting incident for which Ramos and Compean are now in federal prison, sentenced to 11 and 12 years respectively.

Mary Stillinger, the attorney for Jose Compean, adds:

"What the Sanchez memo proves is that if Ramos and Compean were guilty that day, then the other Border Patrol agents who were there and their two supervisors were equally guilty."

"At the trial, the prosecution acted like it was the most ridiculous thing in the world for my client to have assumed the other agents heard the shooting. Yet here you have a DHS special agent investigating the shooting, and Christopher Sanchez came to the conclusion Ramos came to."

Border Update

More news about lying:

Osbaldo Aldrete-Davila, the Mexican drug smuggler given immunity to return to the United States and testify against two Border Patrol agents, was involved in smuggling a second load of marijuana into the United States after he was given court protection, records have confirmed.

As part of his immunity, Aldrete-Davila received a "multiple-use border pass signed by Homeland Security Special Agent Christopher Sanchez." He then apparently lied about his drug smuggling escapades during the trial that sent agents Jose Compean and Ignacio Ramos to prison.

Evidently perjury and drug-smuggling were not violations of his immunity deal?

Border Update

From this WorldNetDaily article:

The Mexican Consulate played a previously undisclosed role in the events leading to U.S. Attorney Johnny Sutton's high-profile prosecution of Border Patrol Agents Ignacio Ramos and Jose Compean, who are serving 11 and 12 year sentences for their role in the shooting of a drug smuggler

...

In the case of agents Ramos and Compean, WND has obtained notes made by a congressional staff member who attended the Sept. 26, 2006, meeting with three investigators from the Department of Homeland Security's Inspector General's office.

The staff member's notes indicate the Inspector General's office briefed the congressmen that the Mexican consul had also intervened in the Ramos and Compean case.

According to the notes obtained by WND, the congressmen were told:

Several weeks later (after the February 17, 2005
event near Fabens, Texas), the Mexican Consulate
contacted the U.S. Consulate in Mexico saying that
they have a person who claims to have been shot
by a Border Patrol agent. On March 4, 2005, the
U.S. Consulate contacted the U.S. attorney.

DHS investigative reports filed by Special Agent Christopher Sanchez document that March 4, 2005, is the date on which DHS initiated the Ramos-Compean investigation.

WND can find no evidence the Border Patrol, DHS, or U.S. Attorney Sutton had started any investigation of Ramos or Compean concerning the events of Feb. 17, 2005, prior to March 4, 2005.

(HT: Glenn Beck)

Border Patrol Update

I previously wrote (here and here) about two U.S. Border Patrol agents who were sentenced to prison for shooting a drug smuggling illegal alien in the butt. The whole story sounded extremely fishy, including the Department of Homeland Security giving the drug smuggler immunity to testify against the agents.

I thought there must be something more to this story. Today I found out that there is more to this story, only it wasn't anything that I expected to hear.

Last September 26, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Inspector General's office met with four Republican congressmen from Texas to discuss the case and DHS's investigation. Accoring to WorldNetDaily (see here), the following evidential claims were made at that meeting in regards to the Border Patrol agents, Ignacio Ramos and Jose Compean:

• Ramos and Compean confessed to knowingly shooting at an unarmed suspect. Again – they claim the two agents knew he was unarmed when they fired their weapons.
• Ramos and Compean stated during the interrogation that they did not believe the suspect was a threat to them at the time of the shooting.
• Ramos and Compean stated that day they "wanted to shoot a Mexican."
• Ramos and Compean were belligerent to investigators.
• Ramos and Compean destroyed evidence and lied to investigators.

Yesterday, DHS Inspector General Richard L. Skinner testified before the Homeland Security Subcommittee of the House Appropriations Committee (see story here). Texas representative John Culberson was questioning Skinner about the September 26 meeting with DHS officials. When Culberson asked Skinner about the investigative reports to back up their claims, which supposedly included eye-witness accounts and signed affidavits, Skinner admitted that DHS in fact did not have any such reports:

"The person who told you that misinformed you," Skinner reportedly replied.

It took DHS four months of failing to produce the reports for the congressmen before ultimately admitting that the reports never existed. You can be sure we haven't heard the last of this, especially with this news coming on the heels of a report of agent Ramos being assaulted in prison by illegal aliens. The story is still fishy - why would DHS go to such extremes to prosecute these men and lie about evidence? What's the story with the drug smuggler? Why would DHS grant him immunity to testify against two U.S. Border Patrol agents for shooting him in the butt?

Border Security

Here's a bit of an update from the story I referenced the other day, courtesy of WorldNetDaily:

Congressmen concerned about the convictions and stiff prison sentences of two Border Patrol agents who injured a Mexican drug dealer they were pursuing say Homeland Security officials told them the pair were "out to shoot Mexicans."

The White House and federal officials have been getting heat for offering the drug dealer immunity to testify against the two lawmen -- Ignacio Ramos and Jose Compean – both of whom are Mexican-Americans.

"Getting heat"? No kidding! Why would they expect otherwise? Yeah, let's take the word of an admitted drug dealer over the word of two border patrol agents. I know common sense is dead, but do we have to keep beating it like a dead horse?

The agents were convicted in March of shooting admitted drug smuggler Osbaldo Aldrete-Davila in the buttocks as he ran away from them near the Rio Grande River in February 2005. Ramos and Compean were sentenced last week to 11 and 12 years, respectively.

...

Aldrete-Davila, a Mexican, is now suing the Border Patrol for $5 million for his injury and violation of his rights.

"Violation of his rights"? What rights does a drug-smuggling illegal alien have in our country? You sneak across our border with 743 pounds of marijuana, and you expect to be treated as if you're a law-abiding citizen? You're neither!

So far, the White House has resisted calls for reopening the investigation and dismissed questions about a pardon raised by WND White House correspondent Les Kinsolving. Even asking whether the two agents should be pardoned was "nonsensical," in the words of Bush spokesman Tony Snow.

"That's an unanswerable question, Les," said Snow earlier this week. "The president is the person who is responsible for pardons. You can tell the network, which made you ask that question, that it is nonsensical."

Can anybody help me out on this one? What is Snow trying to say here? Seriously, I don't get it. Is he trying to say that Kinsolving should ask Bush directly about pardoning the agents? Why, as Bush's spokesman, can't Snow answer that? Why is it "unanswerable" or "nonsensical"? I've got an answer for you, Tony. In fact, I've got several options: "Yes." Or "No." Or "Maybe." Or "I haven't spoken with the president about that yet." Or "Hot Pocket!" (Okay, so maybe that last one isn't a good answer, but it would at least be kind of funny.)

Maybe something went on here that we don't know about, and things were handled correctly. I just can't understand how an admitted drug dealer who's smuggling a large shipment of drugs into our country is able to put away the very people responsible for keeping him and his drugs out of our country. It seems like they just did their job.

The Real Border Story

Glenn Beck devotes a page of his website, as well as a segment of his CNN Headline News show, to The Real Story. Here's Monday's real story:

The Real Story: Border Injustice
Updated October 23, 2006

The White House announced on Friday that President Bush will meet with President-elect Felipe Calderon of Mexico in a couple of weeks. In the statement announcing the visit, they say that the two will, "discuss a range of global, regional, and bilateral issues, including... competitiveness, free trade, economic growth, and security in North America."

Does anyone else notice the one thing not mentioned here? I grew up in an alcoholic family so I recognize the disease. The Real Story is that there's an 800 pound gorilla in the room and her name is illegal immigration. Anybody else want to recognize it?

Today, instead of talking about the typical illegal immigration issues, I want to update you on a story about Jose Compean and Ignacio Ramos, two U.S. border patrol agents, that I first brought you a few weeks ago.

In early 2005, they were in pursuit of an illegal immigrant, who was also a suspected Mexican drug smuggler, when the suspect suddenly ditched his van near a canal and began to flee on foot. Agent Ramos, who was behind his partner, hears guns shots up ahead; sees his partner down on the ground and then, through the dust, sees the suspect turn around with what looks like a gun. Ramos fires at him; the suspect flees; and the two agents head back to the road to search the van.

Inside they found 743 pounds of marijuana. Two weeks later, a Department of Homeland Security investigator tracked down the drug smuggler in Mexico and offered him full immunity in exchange for testifying against the Border Patrol agents who shot at him. Turns out the smuggler had been hit by Agent Ramos' bullet.

By March of this year, the agents had been convicted on felony charges including assault with serious bodily injury and assault with a deadly weapon. Last Thursday they were finally sentenced. Are you ready for this? Agent Ramos -- an agent who last year was nominated for the Border Patrol Agent of Year Award was sentenced to 11 years in prison; Agent Compean got 12.

You might remember another high-profile sentencing last week...Lynne Stewart, an attorney convicted of helping her terrorist client communicate with his extremist followers from prison was given a whopping 28 months. What kind of system do we have where someone who actively put American lives at risk gets just over two years while people actively working to serve and protect us get five times more?

I'm definitely with Glenn on this one. I don't get how or why the Department of Homeland Security would work to effectively weaken our borders by making sure border agents do not have or use any authority.