Image 01 Image 03

Le·gal In·sur·rec·tion

/var/www/vhosts/legalinsurrection.com/httpdocs/wp-content/themes/bridge-child/readFeeds.incFALSE

LATEST NEWS

Remember Anthony Elonis? He was sentenced to four years in federal prison after he posted original rap lyrics and other content concerning his wife, co-workers, a kindergarten class, and even a federal agent. A lower court held that Elonis' posts constituted a "true threat" against those mentioned in his rants, and he served more than three years of his sentence before being released. At controversy in the ensuing lawsuit was the prosecutor's use of a low-hanging, "reasonable person" standard in his instructions to the jury. The Court had never specifically ruled on whether or not a prosecutor must show intent to carry out verbal or written threats in order to get a conviction; lower courts are split, with most requiring enough evidence to show that a reasonable person would see or hear the speech and believe that it is “a serious expression of an intention to inflict bodily injury or take the life of an individual.” In today's ruling, the Supreme Court held that requiring only negligence with respect to the communication of a threat, is not sufficient to support a conviction under the statute that governed Elonis' alleged crimes.

More Americans are finding certain behaviors morally acceptable that are nevertheless still widely considered unacceptable. In other words, approval (though still low) of these behaviors has been creeping up:
While a select few actions remain deeply taboo for much of the country, there has been an increasing shift to moral acceptability for some of these over time. Such actions include suicide (which 19% of Americans call "morally acceptable"), polygamy (16%) and cloning humans (15%).
Will they follow the route of once-disapproved-but-now-widely-approved behaviors such as premarital sex or gay/lesbian relationships? Or will they continue to remain in the dungeon like---and the low score of the following may surprise you, as it did me---adultery, which remains in the approval basement?:
On the other hand, "married men and women having an affair" has remained at the bottom of a list of 19 moral behaviors Gallup has measured, with only 8% considering it morally acceptable.
Not only is adultery at the bottom of the list, but I would wager it's the most highly disapproved behavior that is most widely engaged in.

Finally---a hostage crisis that didn't end in bloodshed. (Yet.) Today Houthi rebels released the first of several American hostages currently being held in Yemen. Casey L. Coombs was held by the Iranian-backed group for two weeks in the capital city of Sanaa before his family was informed of his successful transfer out of the country and into neighboring Oman. From the New York Times:
Mr. Coombs, who lived in Sana, Yemen’s capital, was arrested by Houthi militiamen there in mid-May, and traveled to neighboring Oman on Monday. He was scheduled to undergo a medical evaluation there before flying home to Seattle, his mother, Jill Marie Hammill, said in a telephone interview. Ms. Hammill said she had received a call from the International Committee of the Red Cross early Monday saying that Mr. Coombs was at the Sana airport and was preparing to leave Yemen. She was able to speak to her son on Monday afternoon, after he arrived in Oman. “I cannot describe how happy I am,” she said. Mr. Coombs has written for publications including The Intercept, The American Prospect and Time magazine. The Obama administration has said a number of Americans have been detained by the Houthis, a Shiite rebel group that took control of Yemen’s capital and forced the United States-backed Yemeni government from power earlier this year.

We're going to need a bigger stage, people. Today, Lindsey Graham stood up before an enthusiastic crowd in Central, South Carolina, and announced his bid for President of the United States, making him the ninth Republican to jump in the race. He focused mainly on highlighting his foreign policy and national security chops, taking swipes at Obama's disastrous foreign policy and Hillary Clinton's tenure as Secretary of State. Via Fox News:
"I'm running for president of the United States," Graham said. "I want to be president to defeat the enemies that are trying to kill us -- not just penalize them or criticize them or contain them, but defeat them." Graham slammed President Obama's policies for fighting terror, and said "radical Islam is running wild." He said the biggest threat remains Iran's nuclear ambitions. Graham said he has more experience on national security than any candidate in the race. He quipped, "That includes you, Hillary."
You can watch the announcement here, via C-SPAN.

Yesterday, I posed the conundrum of Rand Paul as an investment for major donors. From my perspective, the ratio of risk to reward tilts too heavily toward the former, and is a major cause of Paul's fundraising troubles. I floated the idea that, contrary to some commentary from the pro-Paul camp, these troubles aren't necessarily due to policy differences, but are a direct result of just how different Paul is from other candidates on a personal level. One of my commenters decided to keep it 150% more real when he said, Let me make this simple–he’s a jerk. I gave that a well-reasoned high five, because I don't feel like we give simple, decisive judgment calls like the one my friend in the comments made enough credit. It's easy to get carried away with a hyperanalysis of why a candidate succeeds, or fails, or loses relevancy in the middle of the pool---why not just say it? It's not us---it's you. Yesterday, Paul proved just how true that platitude rings when he accused his colleagues and peers on the Hill of "secretly wanting there to be an attack on the United States" out of spite over policy differences. The Daily Caller had it first. Watch:

Baltimore has been out of the national conversation for a couple of weeks. Freddie Gray is dead. Six police officer have now been indicted in his death. Last weekend, Memorial Day weekend, Baltimore was one of several cities that saw a spike in violence. At that point Baltimore had 35 homicides for the month of May, making it the deadliest month in the city since 1999. But the killings didn't stop. Late last week a 31 year old woman and her seven year old son were shot in the head in southwest Baltimore. Little information has been reported. Police have not released any speculation about the motive behind the slayings. With three more murders Sunday, the murder count in Baltimore stands at 43, the highest toll in 40 years. What's going on in Baltimore (and elsewhere as we saw last weekend) is part of what Heather MacDonald calls A New Nationwide Crime Wave (Google link). After seeing crime drop for nearly two decades, crime is rising. The reason isn't complicated. With politicians claiming that the main problem in law enforcement is policing, a theme echoed by many in the media, and police realizing that they can be prosecuted and vilified for doing their jobs; arrests are down and crime is up.

The history of the Lifeline (aka Obamaphone) program is often cited by progressives as a Republican scheme, and in some ways, it is.  As Daniel Greenfield explains:
At the same time it should be recognized that the roots of this monstrosity began under Bush when the [Universal Service Fund] USF was used to subsidize cell phones. The original purpose of the USF was to provide landline access to rural communities. That made sense because people who are 40 miles away from help need a lifeline. Then the ‘lifeline’ became a way for every housing project resident, who has a cop downstairs, to get a free cell phone. That’s why the lefty howls of “It’s a ReaganPhone” are lie. This was never supposed to mean free cell phones with every welfare check. But then it was and did.
This is one reason that I oppose almost all such federal programs; over time, they become bloated, wasteful, abused "rights" that no longer even remotely resemble the original program or its intent. Now, Obama's FCC plans to take the Obamaphone program to the next level: the internet.

Our journey off the usual tourist trail through Israel continued today with a visit to border areas near Gaza. Sderot is famous for being the closest Israeli town to Gaza, and the first and most frequent target. The Sderot Media Center has a wealth of information. Sderot Satellite Map North Gaza Because Sderot is so close, the town has only 15 seconds warning once a launch is detected. This video is from 2008: There are bomb shelters everywhere, including on the street (see Featured Image - "Shalom" painted on a bomb shelter) and in the playground, where the bomb shelter is in the form of a large caterpillar so as to make it more welcoming to children.

Rand Paul is in trouble. At least, it looks like Rand Paul is in trouble. When answering questions about fundraising posed by Politico last week, spokesmen from both the official campaign and America's Liberty PAC couched on their actual numbers. PAC spokesman Jesse Benton may have revealed much more than he intended when he said, “Results to date have been solid and give us lots of room for optimism as we continue. We also know this is a marathon, not a sprint.” Oof. Marathon-not-sprint is never where you want to be when other candidates are charming the multimillionaires who make national presidential campaigns tick. Part of me believes it shouldn't be this way. Paul has been making headlines as an anti-establishment pot-stirrer with his opposition to the impending PATRIOT Act extension. Back in 2013, an overwhelming majority of Americans stood in solidarity with Paul after he held a 13-hour filibuster protesting the use of drone strikes against American citizens. Senator Paul has been much more adept than fellow presidential contender Senator Cruz at influencing his colleagues on issues of policy without crossing the line into willful alienation---so what's the problem? The other side of my brain knows, though---and so do donors and strategists. More from Politico:

According to a recent poll from Rasmussen, a shockingly high number of Democrats think that non-citizens should be allowed to vote in America's elections:
Most Democrats Think Illegal Immigrants Should Vote Are voters ready to let illegal immigrants vote? A sizable number, including most Democrats, are. The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that one-out-of-three Likely U.S. Voters (35%) now believes that illegal immigrants should be allowed to vote if they can prove they live in this country and pay taxes. Sixty percent (60%) disagree, while five percent (5%) are undecided. Fifty-three percent (53%) of Democrats think tax-paying illegal immigrants should have the right to vote. Twenty-one percent (21%) of Republicans and 30% of voters not affiliated with either major political party agree.
The reason so many Democrats support this idea is obvious. It would increase their voter ranks immensely. It's stunning that any Republican would agree with such an idea.

Professor Jacobson has written extensively about the BDS movement and the effort to boycott the boycotters. Senator Ted Cruz has a new idea. Take federal funds away from schools that boycott Israel. He made the remarks at the Champion of Jewish Values International Awards Gala. Among attendees was Sheldon Adelson, an influential donor to Republican politicians. Katie Zezima of the Washington Post writes:
Cruz: Universities that boycott Israel should lose federal funding NEW YORK -- Sen. Ted Cruz said Thursday that universities that boycott Israel should lose their federal funding. Cruz's remarks were aimed at the boycott, divestment and sanctions (BDS) movement, which is gaining traction on college campuses. It calls for U.S. companies and universities to divest from Israel. Cruz has spoken against BDS but sharpened his tone Thursday. The nation needs a president who will ensure that "if a university boycotts the nation of Israel then that university will forfeit federal taxpayer dollars," Cruz said at the Champion of Jewish Values International Awards Gala here, where he received the Defender of Israel Award. "BDS is premised on a lie and it is antisemitism plain and simple."

"Don't you someday want to see a woman president of the United States of America?" That was a line from a speech Hillary Clinton recently delivered for a gathering of the pro-abortion PAC, EMILY's List. It was delivered with all of the warmth and charm we've come to expect from the former Secretary of State, which is to say none at all. "First woman president" is basically what Hillary Clinton's campaign will be, and the media will do all they can to help her across the finish line in order to accomplish that. Take the latest cover of the New Yorker for example: new-yorker-gop-hillary There's "First Woman President" candidate Hillary standing on the outside looking in. The lone woman staring into a locker room loaded up with white guys, right? The New Yorker had this to say about the group of potential GOP candidates in the photo:

Obama has famously (infamously?) long been enamored of the idea of fundamentally transforming America, and one of the foundational aspects of American culture that he has in his sights is the Second Amendment and Americans' firmly held belief in their right to keep and bear arms. His former attorney general, Eric Holder, went so far as to proclaim—back in the 1990's—that "we really need to brainwash people into thinking about guns in a vastly different way." At least he understood that it's the American people who resist infringement of this right.  The administration has tried to pass gun control legislation, most notably in the wake of the Sandy Hook shootings, but such attempts fail. Completing missing the fact that Americans are strongly supportive of their right to bear arms, Obama and his assortment of anti-Second Amendment zealots blame the NRA:
“But the power of NRA and the gun lobby in Congress is formidable,” Obama said. “And you know, we’re going to keep chipping away at this, but until you get intense public demands for this, it’s probably not going to happen because some special interests and lobbyists in Washington are really, really strong and their membership feels very intensely about the issue. Whereas the general public is concerned about it, but doesn’t make it their top priority.”
He also recognizes that Congress—even when Democrats held supermajorities in both houses—is unable to pass the sort of sweeping gun control legislation he seeks.  In his 2014 State of the Union address, he promised gun control "with or without Congress," and it seems he's working on multiple fronts to make that happen. From taxing bullets, to gun locks, to gun recalls / buyback programs, to targeting children's pop-tarts and otherwise controlling the narrative about guns, Obama and other anti-Second Amendment advocates are working overtime in their frantic bid to disarm the American people.

While presented as a means to protect drinking water and "hold[ing] polluters accountable," the Obama administration's latest EPA rule, Waters of the United States, is rather more far-reaching than many conservatives like. According to the document (full text embedded below), the rule itself is not intended as regulatory (that probably comes later), but is instead "a definitional rule that clarifies the scope of the 'waters of the United States' . . . ."  Essentially, almost all fresh water, including that in "water-filled depressions," is now under the federal government's purview and subject to government oversight and regulation. Politico reports:
On its face, the Waters of the United States rule is largely a technical document, defining which rivers, streams, lakes and marshes fall under the jurisdiction of the Environmental Protection Agency and the Army Corps of Engineers. But opponents condemn it as a massive power grab by Washington, saying it will give bureaucrats carte blanche to swoop in and penalize landowners every time a cow walks through a ditch. . . . "This rule will provide the clarity and certainty businesses and industry need about which waters are protected by the Clean Water Act, and it will ensure polluters who knowingly threaten our waters can be held accountable,” Obama said in a statement after the EPA released a final version of the regulation. “My administration has made historic commitments to clean water, from restoring iconic watersheds like the Chesapeake Bay and the Great Lakes to preserving more than a thousand miles of rivers and other waters for future generations. With today’s rule, we take another step towards protecting the waters that belong to all of us.”
Obama's emphasis is on safety and clean water; the rule, however, greatly expands the definition of what waters "belong to us all," including that on privately-owned property.

A protest at a Phoenix mosque was held late Friday afternoon in response to two Phoenix residents driving to Texas last month looking to engage in violence because of a "Draw Mohammed" contest that was going on there:
Police officers lined barricades separating protesters and counter-protesters who gathered outside a Phoenix mosque Friday evening in response to a planned "freedom of speech" demonstration where attendees were encouraged to bring weapons and "draw Mohammed," an act offensive to many Muslims. Police presence increased by 6:30 p.m. to physically separate the two sides outside the Islamic Community Center of Phoenix. About 20 cars and 15 motorcycles traveled from a protester meeting point at a nearby park to the mosque around 6 p.m., where people from the two sides used megaphones to yell at each other and were at times nose-to-nose. A large group of counter protesters held signs reading "Love not Hate," as others waved American flags and one man ripped the Quran in half.
The protest went off without any acts of violence. There were no fights and no riots. One area where even supporters of the protesters split was in the decision of some to carry firearms. Arizona is an open carry state, and some of the protesters were openly carrying firearms, including rifles that would naturally be mistakenly referred to "assault weapons" or "automatic weapons."