Image 01 Image 03
Sign In or RegisterLogout

November 2014

Posted by William A. Jacobson on November 02, 2014 9 Comments
The Judge in the trial of Rasmieh (Rasmea) Odeh has issued a second order addressing protests at the courthouse which may be part of attempts to influence the jury, Supplemental Order Regarding Public Conduct (full embed at bottom of post):
It has come to the attention of the Court that leaflets prepared by Defendant's supporters were passed out to individuals entering the courthouse prior to the hearing on October 28, 2014. Of course, contact with the jurors or prospective jurors is strictly prohibited. See Dkt. No. 110. Moreover, this Court has explicitly stated that no one shall "attempt in any way to influence or intimidate any juror or prospective juror through any means, including ... carrying any clothing, buttons or other items in the Courthouse that may be clearly visible to the jury that carry any message or symbol addressing the issues related to this case." ld. at 2. As such, passing out literature of the type passed out on October 28, 2014 to individuals entering the courthouse is STRICTLY PROHIBITED on November 4, 2014, since Defendant's supporters have no means of knowing whether an individual entering the courthouse on that day is a prospective juror for the trial in this matter.
Odeh is charged with lying on her naturalization application by failing to disclose she had been convicted in an Israeli military court in the late 1960s of planting a bomb in a supermarket on behalf of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine. Odeh claimed she was tortured into confessing, but there is evidence apart from her confession of her involvement in the bombing in question. The issue seems to be whether she planted the bomb (for which she was convicted) or only was involved in planning the bombing. Judge Drain may not be fully aware that, despite his multiple Orders to protect the jury from influence, there is a national effort by a variety of groups to organize street protests and to pack the courtroom. While these activities in themselves may not violate his Orders, there has been some suggestion that the activities are for the purpose of influencing the trial. The Rasmea Defense Committee has opened a Detroit office for the specific purpose of mobilizing:

Posted by William A. Jacobson on November 02, 2014 8 Comments
We have covered the academic boycott of Israel extensively, focusing on the American Studies Association. Recently, in connection with the ASA annual meeting this week in Los Angeles, we reported on ASA's discriminatory policy to bar attendance by representatives of Israeli Universities or any Israeli academic holding a representative title such as Dean or Rector. After a letter alerting the hotel hosting the ASA annual meeting, The Westin Bonaventure, to the hotel's legal obligations and potential liability, the ASA changed its position. The legal challenge was that hotels are bound by laws barring anti-discrimination in public accommodation, and therefore have a legal duty not to knowingly permit discrimination on the premises. In reaction, ASA denied that it ever had the discriminatory policy which ASA in fact published multiple times and had on its website. ASA even announced that it welcomed Bibi Netanyahu to the conference. In another development, as reported by Eugene Kontorovich at Volkokh Conspiracy at The Washington Post, The Times of Israel, and JNS, among others, the Rector [Dean] of the University of Haifa is taking up the challenge, and sending an official representative to the ASA conference. As part of my occasional and continuing efforts to access new audiences, I have a column about the ASA conference at the O.C. Register, Unfairly singling out Israelis. In the column, I examine how the public and the hotel would have reacted if the discrimination were directed at any national origin group other than Israelis. OC Register Unfairly Singling Out Israelis Here is an excerpt:

Posted by Casey Breznick on November 02, 2014 2 Comments
"Who is the most important politician in Miami? Fidel Castro." That's an old joke I've heard many times down in Miami, but it rings very true in one of the most-watched midterm House elections this cycle. In Florida's 26th district, which encompasses southwest Miami-Dade county and the Florida Keys, Hispanics are the majority and Cubans the plurality. Both incumbent Democrat Joe Garcia and Republican Carlos Curbelo, a Miami-Dade County School Board member, are sons of Cuban exiles. Recently, Roll Call changed the district from a Toss-up to a Toss-up/Tilts Republican district. This is has been part of the long-term trend that has seen Curbelos steadily gaining ground against Garcia after starting significantly down in a Lean Democrat district to now edging out ahead of Garcia. Readers can read my previous articles detailing the candidates life stories, platforms, gaffes, and controversies here and here. Oddly enough, though, the topic of U.S.-Cuban relations has only just seen its birth in this election. But now that the genie has been unleashed, it's become more than apparent how the election in FL26 is like no other in the country. The topic of Cuba elicits the most impassioned responses and emotions from Cuban-Americans, and that's why it is tread so carefully. Contrary to, perhaps, "outsider" perceptions of Cuban-Americans, there is no monolithic Cuban-American view of what U.S.-Cuban relations should be. Roughly, it is divided between the older and younger generations in that the older Cubans--born on the island and usually having escaped with at least some memories of life under the Communist regime--are vehemently against any type of detente; they oppose increased travel and remittances, too. Younger generations--either born in this country or having come over after the 1990s--want to see eased relations, an end to the boycott, more travel, etc.

Posted by Mike LaChance on November 02, 2014 7 Comments
Prof. Jacobson recently said "May a thousand Martha Coakleys bloom in the Democratic Party." As a Massachusetts resident, I'd like to second that statement. The Republican Governors Association recently put together the ultimate Coakley blooper reel. David Rutz of the Washington Free Beacon reported:
Hilarious RGA Ad Shows Martha Coakley ‘Stumbling’ to Campaign Finish Democratic Massachusetts gubernatorial candidate Martha Coakley’s numerous missteps and cringeworthy moments are captured in a new ad from the Republican Governors Association. In one exchange, Coakley repeatedly dodged a question on whether she would raise fees in lieu of raising taxes and was asked by a moderator if she would pledge not to raise them. When her Republican opponent Charlie Baker promised he wouldn’t, Coakley said, “Then I’m not going to raise fees either.” In another, Coakley was booed by a debate audience when she answered “I don’t know” to a direct, yes-or-no question about whether illegal immigrants should get driver’s licenses in the commonwealth. When Baker was asked, he immediately answered, “No.”
This is painful to watch: The Boston Globe's most recent poll has Republican Charlie Baker ahead by 7 points.

Posted by Amy Miller on November 01, 2014 13 Comments
Candidates still have plenty of time to get out the vote before Tuesday, but an eleventh hour report released by the Colorado Secretary of State has put Democrats on notice, and upped the pressure on Republicans to maintain their momentum heading into election day. Via the Associated Press:
A report from the Secretary of State on Friday showed that 104,000 more Republicans than Democrats had cast their ballots as the state conducts its first major mail-in election. ... Republicans usually lead in early returns in Colorado but rarely by such hefty margins. Democrats and some observers expect that lead to shrink by Election Day. But more than half the ballots are in and the filing suggests how difficult it might be for Democrats such as Sen Mark Udall to survive a year in which Republicans are highly motivated.
In a state where a high profile Senate race has come out to a toss up, a 9 point edge with over half of all eligible ballots already in the hopper is no guarantee of success, but it's also not insignificant. The Real Clear Politics Average has once-trailing Republican Senate Candidate Cory Gardner up 3.8 points over Democrat incumbent Mark Udall. This represents an almost mirror flip on the numbers since mid-September; a September 15 poll had Udall up 3.7 points, but by September 26, Gardner had closed the gap and gained a point over Udall. Colorado Republicans aren't breathing yet, though, because the gubernatorial race is much, much closer, with Republican Bob Beauprez enjoying (suffering through?) just a 0.3 point lead over Democrat incumbent John Hickenlooper. As Ed Morrissey at Hot Air notes, Republicans are dominating with demographics generally considered a sure thing for Democrats:

Posted by Andrew Branca on November 01, 2014 25 Comments
CNN reports that the Department of Justice continues to express frustration with the refusal of local Ferguson officials to hide from the Grand Jury and the public generally truthful information about the August 9 shooting of Michael Brown.  These same frustrations have been repeatedly echoed by the most hardcore of the Ferguson protestors, at increasing volume as they see the prospects for an indictment of officer Wilson rapidly fading. County Prosecutor Robert McCulloch has asked federal officials to coordinate on the timing of the announcement of the local Grand Jury outcome, in the interests of minimizing the potential for more rioting, looting, and arson.  It is widely expected that the local Grand Jury will decline to indict Wilson, because of a profound lack of evidence of criminal conduct. CNN's report shows that DOJ officials have declined to do so, arguing that it would "undermine their argument that the federal investigation is independent."  Of course, an official closure of the DOJ investigation would also not allow the Department to follow the strategy they have in the Zimmerman case of dragging  out their investigation for years.  This strategy pursued in the Zimmerman case allows for such politically expedient announcements, days before a major election, as the sudden convening of a Zimmerman Grand Jury based upon evidence of highly questionable credibility. The CNN article notes that the state and federal investigations are based upon separate and distinct statutes, and thus are not entirely identical.  Left unsaid is the equally obvious point that the state and federal investigations serve different political masters.

Posted by Mike LaChance on November 01, 2014 23 Comments
Democratic Senator Mary Landrieu of Louisiana made some stunning comments about her constituents this week. While speaking to NBC's Chuck Todd, she implied that if she loses her bid for reelection next week, it could be due to racism and sexism. The exchange was captured on video: Her remarks were certainly newsworthy but some people in the media saw a different angle to the story which was much more important; the Republican reaction. This happens quite often, as noted by Jim Treacher: The article in Treacher's tweet is by Melinda Deslatte of the Associated Press:
Sen. Landrieu's remarks on race anger Republicans Republicans are calling on Democratic Sen. Mary Landrieu to apologize after she suggested Thursday that President Barack Obama's deep unpopularity in the South is partly tied to race. In an interview with NBC News on Thursday, Landrieu was quoted as saying that the South "has not always been the friendliest place for African-Americans."
Isn't it strange how the very first word in the AP article is "Republicans?" Surely that's an isolated incident, right? Nope.

Posted by Andrew Branca on November 01, 2014 32 Comments
We wrote yesterday about the "October Surprise/Get Out the Vote" announcement by a flailing Obama administration that the Department of Justice will be holding a Grand Jury hearing next Wednesday regarding possible federal civil rights charges against George Zimmerman. The only named witness for Wednesday's hearing is Frank Taaffe, a self-declared "friend" for George Zimmerman. Earlier this year Taaffe suddenly announced that he believed Zimmerman had a racial, not merely self-defense, motive in killing Trayvon Martin. This would be more than two years after the shooting occurred. One wonders why Taaffe waited so long to speak to the FBI on this matter. Except that, of course, Taaffe had long ago spoken with the FBI on this matter, way back in May 2012 when he was interviewed by FBI Special Agent Oliver following the shooting. (h/t to Legal Insurrection commenter P4R4L3G4L for the reminder.) At that time he denied any racial discussions with Zimmerman, although he wasn't shy about expressing his own arguably racist sentiments.

Posted by Mike LaChance on November 01, 2014 10 Comments
Last Sunday, we told you about the Democratic Party's attempt to use the Federal Elections Commission to regulate free speech on the internet. Bill Whittle has put perspective on the issue in a new video from Truth Revolt. Here's an excerpt:
This smiling, normal-looking woman is Ann Ravel. She heads the FEC — the Federal Elections Commission. She’s a Democrat in a Democratic administration pursuing the Democratic party’s goal of intimidating, jailing and otherwise harassing their political opponents, who are mean because they don’t like being told what to do, or to think — the way nice people do. So she has been ordered to weaponize the government against unregulated speech — we don’t call it “free speech” any more because that term is archaic and also probably racist. It’s not like she doesn’t want to! As a typical progressive Democrat, Ann Ravel has two overriding psychological needs: First, regulate everything. How on earth with people like Ann Ravel and, for that matter, the President of the United States, ever be able to feel secure when the American people are just running around starting businesses willy-nilly, or irresponsibly making internet videos that don’t conform to the Official Truth, or reading news stories — “news stories!” — on places like Fox or the Drudge Report.
Watch the video: This actually dovetails perfectly with Professor Jacobson's new column at Townhall.com:

Posted by Andrew Branca on November 01, 2014 7 Comments
The Washington Post is reporting that the Department of Justice have found little legal basis on which to bring civil rights charges over the August 9 shooting of the black Mike Brown by white police officer Darren Wilson.  The reason:  the actual evidence simply doesn't support such a case.
Justice Department investigators have all but concluded they do not have a strong enough case to bring civil rights charges against Darren Wilson, the white police officer who shot and killed an unarmed black teenager in Ferguson, Mo., law enforcement officials said.... “The evidence at this point does not support civil rights charges against Officer Wilson,” said one person briefed on the investigation, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the case. Justice Department officials are loath to acknowledge publicly that their case cannot now meet the high legal threshold for a successful civil rights prosecution. The timing is sensitive: Tensions are high in greater St. Louis as people await the results of a grand jury’s review of the case.
This information is based on interviews with DOJ investigators on condition of anonymity, presumably to avoid punishment by their superiors.  On the record, Brian Fallon, a DOJ spokesman, maintains that the Federal investigation is ongoing, and the Post reporting is based on "idle speculation."

Posted by Casey Breznick on November 01, 2014 2 Comments
Earlier this month I reported on how Republican Carl DeMaio edged out incumbent Democrat Scott Peters in a district that is rated as a toss-up by most polling agencies. A week after their win, the DeMaio campaign was hit with a serious October surprise when the campaign's former policy director, Todd Bosnich, claimed DeMaio sexually harassed him on numerous occasions. Both Bosnich and DeMaio are openly gay, and DeMaio has fiercely denied all allegations of sexual misconduct. The timing of Bosnich's allegations, first made in a CNN interview, are questionable, considering that he was fired by DeMaio in May but waited three weeks before the election to make the allegations. Furthermore, DeMaio claimed Bosnich was fired for plagiarism, and that he suspected Bosnich was responsible for the May break-in of DeMaio's campaign headquarters days before the primary. This is not the first time DeMaio has been accused of sexual misconduct. On Wednesday, San Diego council member Donna Frye said, “What I believe is that there are other victims." Frye hasn't provided further context or clarifying information, other than, "Based on others I’ve spoken with recently where there is smoke, there’s fire," but what does that even mean? In any case, her statements are putting the DeMaio campaign in full-on damage control mode. Over the summer, the story in California's 52nd District House election was that of a "New Generation" Republican---openly gay and pro-choice but a strong fiscal conservative---embarking on a long-shot upset campaign against incumbent Democrat Scott Peters, who was billed as just another liberal progressive.
MORE POSTS
Accessibility by WAH