Due to popular demand, I’ve decided to give y’all a taste of Flava Flav’s single “Unga Bunga Bunga” from his Hollywood album.

To hear it, click here. 

•    According to a recent poll of eligible voters, it looks like Mark McGwire will not make the Hall of Fame cut this year. This is extremely disappointing given Big Mac’s career production (583 HRs) and his role in resuscitating the sport of baseball in the late 1990s. Of course, the expected snub is directly connected to the recent steroid scandals that have transformed McGwire from hero to pariah. Although I’m glad that the league and government cracked down on steroid usage, I still find it problematic that the league is punishing players for its own negligence. After all, McGwire and his peers didn’t actually break any league rules by taking ‘roids. Hopfully, this isn’t a sign of what’s to come for Barry Bonds after he retires.
•    Yao Ming is a beast! Before his injury last year, Yao was playing the best basketball of his career and clearly became the league’s best center outside of Miami. Now, with Shaq injured again and Yao thriving, the league is his for the taking. Unfortunately, people are still reluctant to give him the credit that he deserves. Maybe 82 games of 23 and 10 will change their minds.
•    Bill Parcells is gangsta. In preparation for the Cowboys’ playoff push, Parcells fired kicker Mike Vanderjagt, who happens to be the most accurate kicker in football history. Although 2006 was by far Vanderjagt’s worst year –he was only 13-18 on field goals this season—I’m not sure how this move will affect team chemistry. Besides, Vanderjagt’s replacement, Martin Gramatica, is far from his prime and not likely to fare any better. This move may just come back to bite the Cowboys in the end.
•    As many people predicted, the Ben Wallace experiment is failing in Chicago. In addition to his relatively low performance (only 9 rebounds and 1.5 blockes per game) and impact (the Bulls are 4-9), Big Ben is quickly becoming a $60 million headache for Scott Skiles and the rest of the team. Recently, the two clashed over Wallace’s defiant decision to wear a red headband despite Skiles’ explicit prohibition. As a result, Wallace was suspended and has become even more isolated and despondent. While the beef itself may be petty, it speaks to a bigger issue about Wallace being the wrong fit for Chicago.
•    Now that Isaiah Thomas is coach of the Knicks and directly on the hot seat, his once friendly relationship with Stephon Marbury has deteriorated. According to sources, the two are barely on speaking terms. This, of course, is a far cry from last year, when the duo teamed up to run Larry Brown out of town and buy Thomas another year of employment. Don’t be surprised if Marbury is traded soon after the New Year.

Prison reform advocates say that the new Democratic majority in Congress may end America’s sentencing policy which has black defendants receiving substantially more prison time for drug possession.
Democrats Could End Discriminatory Prison Sentencing Rules
By Jackie Jones

A new Democratic majority in Congress may finally be able to push through a recommendation from the U.S. Sentencing Commission to end the disparities in crack versus powdered cocaine sentencing, reform advocates say.

Critics of the current sentencing policy say it discriminates against black defendants who get substantially more prison time for possession of much smaller amounts of crack than those convicted of possession of powdered cocaine.

A conviction for possession of 500 grams of cocaine carries a mandatory five-year prison sentence, but it only takes five grams of crack cocaine to get the same sentence.

“Over-incarceration within black communities adversely impacts those communities by removing young men and women who could benefit from rehabilitation,” Carmen Hernandez, president-elect of the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers testified before at a commission hearing two weeks ago. “Drug amounts consistent with state misdemeanors become federal felonies, resulting in disenfranchisement, disqualification for important public benefits, including student loans and public housing, and significantly diminished economic opportunity. As a result, many of these persons become outsiders for a lifetime, and their families suffer incalculable damage and suffering.”

The Commission held a daylong public on Nov. 14 at Georgetown University Law Center in Washington, D.C., with testimony from judges, lawyers, law enforcement officials, the ACLU, the NAACP and the Fraternal Order of Police. The commission has recommended three times to Congress that the sentencing gap be narrowed.

A bill pending in Congress, sponsored by Rep. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.) would reduce the penalty for crack cocaine and raise the penalty for powder cocaine and would also shift the emphasis from the quantity of the drug possessed to the type of criminal conduct related to possession.

For the rest of the story, click here.

What would the case against George Bush for intelligence fraud in the leadup to the war in Iraq look like? A former federal prosecutor lays out her case to an imaginary grand jury, and all she needs is the evidence available in the public record to make her case.

The United States vs. George Bush
By Elizabeth de la Vega

“Elizabeth de la Vega, appearing on behalf of the United States.” That is a phrase I’ve uttered hundreds of times in twenty years as a federal prosecutor. I retired two years ago. So, obviously, I do not now speak for any U.S. Attorney’s Office, nor do I represent the federal government. This should be apparent from the fact that I am proposing a hypothetical indictment of the President and his senior advisers — not a smart move for any federal employee who wishes to remain employed. Lest anyone miss the import of this paragraph, let me emphasize that it is a disclaimer: I am writing as a private citizen.

Obviously, as a private citizen, I cannot simply draft and file an indictment. Nor can I convene a grand jury. Instead, in the following pages I intend to present a hypothetical indictment to a hypothetical grand jury. The defendants are President George W. Bush, Vice President Richard Cheney, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, and former Secretary of State Colin Powell. The crime is tricking the nation into war — in legal terms, conspiracy to defraud the United States. And all of you are invited to join the grand jury.

We will meet for seven days. On day one, I’ll present the indictment in the morning and in the afternoon I will explain the applicable law. On days two through seven, we’ll have witness testimony, presented in transcript form, with exhibits.

As is the practice in most grand jury presentations, the evidence will be presented in summary form, by federal agents — except that these agents are hypothetical. (Any relationship to actual federal agents, living or deceased, is purely coincidental.)

On day seven, when the testimony is complete, I’ll leave the room to allow the grand jury to vote.

If the indictment and grand jury are hypothetical, the evidence is not. I’ve prepared for this case, just as I would have done for any other case in my years as a prosecutor, by reviewing all of the available relevant information. In this case, such information consists of witness accounts, the defendants’ speeches, public remarks, White House press briefings, interviews, congressional testimony, official documents, all public intelligence reports, and various summaries of intelligence, such as in the reports of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence and the 9/11 Commission. I’ve discarded any evidence, however compelling, that is uncorroborated.

For the rest of the story, click here.

Today’s video of the day is a classic hip-hop track and one of my favs. Shout out to Philly!