Image 01 Image 03
Sign In or RegisterLogout

Le·gal In·sur·rec·tion

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

Posted by New Neo on June 05, 2014 35 Comments
Nothing about the Bergdahl/Taliban affair should have been surprising to people who have studied Obama over the years. Not Obama's audacity, nor his disregard of prior bipartisan warnings in Congress or from the intelligence community, nor his aides' attempts to discredit those from Bergdahl's unit who are calling Bergdahl a deserter or worse, nor Obama's refusal to offer any apologies whatsoever for his actions in this affair, nor his lies and broken promises, nor the fact that quite a few Democrats are lining up to defend him like the good party hacks that they are. An intellectual reaction is one thing. But there's still an emotional reaction---what Peter Wehner referred to as a visceral reaction---which is to be stunned, disgusted, outraged, and full of trepidation about both the long-term effects of this move and what Obama will be doing for a series of encores. I've been wanting to know what the American electorate thinks of it all. Today I read that the results of a Fox News poll showed Americans evenly split on the subject, and that news surprised me, too, although it probably shouldn't have.

LATEST NEWS

Posted by William A. Jacobson on June 05, 2014 12 Comments
The investigators in the "John Doe" proceeding against conservative activists in Wisconsin are appealing the federal District Court's injunction shutting down the investigation, as we previously detailed in numerous posts. That injunction is part of a lawsuit by Eric O'Keefe and the Wisconsin Club for Growth also seeking damages and other relief directly against the investigators, who are also local prosecutors, for violating the activists' constitutional rights. A separate lawsuit has been filed in state court against the Wisconsin Government Accountability Board. As part of the appeal in the federal case, yesterday the investigators filed a redacted copy of the original Petition for Commencement of John Doe Proceeding (full embed at bottom of post), detailing the reasons why the investigators sound the sweeping secrecy provisions of Wisconsin's John Doe procedure. Among the reasons was a cryptic and redacted reference to the targets of the probe having "well placed" ties to the blogoshpere (transcription via Wisconsin State Journal):
“I believe it is reasonable to expect that any public filing about the existence of this investigation will generate substantial publicity, both from traditional (e.g., print and broadcast journalism) and non-traditional (e.g. Internet blog) information sources. This is because the individuals involved in this investigation are well-placed,” it reads. The rest of that sentence was blacked out and was not visible in public court records.
Here's the relevant portion of the Petition (highlighting added, redaction in original):

Wisconsin Petition for Commencement of John Doe Proceeding re blogosphere highlighted

I think new media has arrived when the government is more afraid of the blogosphere than the blogosphere is of the government.

Posted by William A. Jacobson on June 05, 2014 7 Comments
Who among us is surprised by this report by Alana Goodman at The Washington Free Beacon about Team Billary trying to impress upon the NY Times the importance of LEAVE HILLARY ALONE! Hillary to New York Times: Back Off:
Some of Hillary Clinton’s closest aides blasted the New York Times for what they said was unfair coverage of the former first lady during a recent secret meeting with the paper’s Washington bureau, the Washington Free Beacon has learned. Sources said the meeting included Clinton advisers Philippe Reines and Huma Abedin, as well as Times Washington bureau chief Carolyn Ryan and national political reporter Amy Chozick, who has been on the Clinton beat for the paper. During the closed-door gathering, Clinton aides reportedly griped about the paper’s coverage of the potential 2016 candidate, arguing that Clinton has left public office and not be subjected to harsh scrutiny, according to a source familiar with the discussions.
Even CNN mocked control freak Billary (via IJR Review):

Posted by New Neo on June 05, 2014 26 Comments
There's a growing sense that, at least for now, the Bergdahl/Taliban exchange and its fallout has the left spooked. Maybe Obama will wriggle out of this mess, too, either by way of the same tricks that have extricated him from so-called "scandals" such as Benghazi, or by distracting us in some new and horrific way. Or maybe there will be a hurricane somewhere that can provide a serendipitous photo-op to impress those Americans who have political attention-deficit disorder. But at the moment this story, probably more than any other incident of Obama's presidency, is one that makes him look bad. It appears to simultaneously expose his disregard for the safety of America and Americans, his sympathy for fundamentalist Islamist governments, his failure to do his homework, his drive towards greater executive power, his disregard for Congress (including some members of both parties) and the law itself, his mendacity, and the stupidity and collaboration of his advisors in all of the above. I may have left something out, but you get the idea. The military men and women who served with Bergdahl and on whom Obama counted to keep their mouths shut are (unlike the diplomats in Benghazi) speaking up and telling what they know. The NY Times and Time and other organs that normally can be counted on to carry Obama's water are spilling it all over the place. That leaves lonely folk such as TNR's Brian Beutler and Esquire's Charles P. Pierce doing their level best to convince the world that it's only vile Republicans complaining about the swap, and that their carping is motivated by petty politics and a cold attitude towards the suffering of prisoners of war.

LEGAL INSURRECTION QUICK TAKES

Minneapolis's 'ICE Watch' Network is Getting People Killed

College Board Bans Wearing of Smart Glasses While Taking the SAT

Student Government at Stanford Endorses Anti-ICE Walkout

U. Cincinnati Students Arrested After Breaking Into School Arena, Stealing Alcohol

Quinnipiac U. Reports Case of Norovirus in Residence Hall

NH Lawmaker Pushing Campus Carry is Also a Student at UNH

SEE MORE

Posted by Mandy Nagy on June 04, 2014 43 Comments
The U.S. military indicates it will conduct a new review into the circumstances of Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl's disappearance and captivity. From USA Today:
The U.S. Army said Tuesday it will launch a new review into the circumstances surrounding Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl leaving his post and subsequent capture by the Taliban now that he has been released and can be interviewed. The new investigation comes amid mounting allegations by fellow soldiers and politicians that Bergdahl deserted his post and the search for him put additional troops at risk. The review "will include speaking with Sgt. Bergdhal to better learn from him the circumstances of his disappearance and captivity," Army Secretary John McHugh said in a statement. The Army had already completed an earlier review that involved speaking with soldiers in his unit. Separately, Gen. Martin Dempsey, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said in a Facebook posting that Army leaders would "not look away from misconduct if it occurred" in connection with the capture of Bergdahl.
A statement posted Wednesday at the Dept. of Defense website from Chief of Staff of the Army Gen. Raymond T. Odierno also promised a "thorough, transparent and complete review of the circumstances surrounding [Bergdahl's] capture." Fellow soldiers who claim to have served with Bergdahl have been speaking out in recent days, many of them critical of the circumstances surrounding Bergdahl’s disappearance and of the possible impact of subsequent search efforts. Some say the deaths of other soldiers could have been indirectly related to those search efforts.

Posted by David Gerstman on June 04, 2014 11 Comments
David Horovitz, the editor of the Times of Israel has written a scathing critique of the Obama administration's treatment of Israel. In the aftermath of the administration's acceptance of the Fatah/Hamas unity government in defiance of the letter of American law, Horovitz wrote yesterday,  12 ways the US administration has failed its ally Israel. Horovitz's criticisms can be broken down into three categories: mistakes in proceeding with the peace process, primarily blaming Israel for the failure of the peace process and other breaches of faith with Israel regarding Israel's enemies in the Middle East. In that last category (the last three of Horovitz's examples) he observes that rather than keeping quiet about reported Israeli air strikes against Syrian arm shipments to Hezbollah, the administration attributed the strikes to Israel risking possible Syrian retaliation against Israel and blasts the administration for "rushing to support Islamic extremists ... when they come to power in a neighboring state," referring to the Muslim Brotherhood's brief stint as rulers of Egypt. But he's harshest in his criticism of the Obama administration for its handling of Iran arguing that "[t]he central goal of US policy in this regard should not be merely denying Iran nuclear weapons but denying Iran the capacity to build nuclear weapons." Regarding the peace process Horovitz faults the administration for looking to solve the conflict in just nine months instead of just working on trying to build a climate of trust:

Posted by William A. Jacobson on June 04, 2014 4 Comments
I've covered many campaigns over the past several years here at Legal Insurrection. The campaign of Martha Robertson, challenging incumbent Republican Tom Reed, is one of the most bizarre so far. They are completely non-responsive. Even when I write to them or call seeking a statement so I can present their side of a story, there's silence. Even before I exposed problems with the campaign's communications and positions, they were non-responsive. It's just plain weird. Robertson also is hard to find on the campaign trail. If not for her stop at Cornell, I don't think I ever would have been able to get any response from her or her campaign on the issue of the campaign's false claim that GOP operatives hacked her website during a key fundraising period. Even then, her response was non-responsive. Maybe it's me? Maybe I've offended them by asking questions and trying to find out the campaign's position on important issues, like her support for Obamacare as a stepping stone to single payer and her complete misunderstanding of the Veterans Administration scandal. No, it's not just me, as this campaign ad just released by Congressman Tom Reed demonstrates: Reed's campaign issued the following statement, via Communications Director Kathering Pudwill:

Posted by Leslie Eastman on June 04, 2014 4 Comments
When I voted in California's June primary, I chuckled when I turned to the "Secretary of State" race and found a familiar name: Leland Yee. Yee  did not make it to the general election (under California's rules, the top two regardless of party compete in the general election). But it's a sad commentary on the quality of California politics that Yee managed to pull nearly 10 percent of the vote! California Secretary of State Primary results 6-3-2014 Legal Insurrection fans may recall that Yee is California's former state senator who was recently charged in a federal gun-trafficking case. As I mentioned that Mexican authorities were reported to be giving former US Marine Andrew Tahmooressi the legal treatment reserved for gun-runners, I thought it was time to check up on what was happening to a potentially real one. The federal judge handling the case issued a gag order on the evidence:

Posted by William A. Jacobson on June 04, 2014 1 Comment
We previously wrote about a partial victory at the Modern Language Association House of Delegates during the annual meeting in January.  An anti-Israel resolution regarding alleged travel restrictions on academics was significantly watered down, and another resolution defending the American Studies Association's academic boycott of Israel was rejected. The Executive Council of MLA decided to send the travel resolution to the membership for an online vote.  The final travel resolution read:

Resolution 2014-1

Whereas Israel has denied academics of Palestinian ethnicity entry into the West Bank; Whereas these restrictions violate international conventions on an occupying power’s obligation to protect the right to education; Whereas the United States Department of State acknowledges on its Web site that Israel restricts the movements of American citizens of Palestinian descent; Whereas the denials have disrupted instruction, research, and planning at Palestinian universities; Whereas the denials have restricted the academic freedom of scholars and teachers who are United States citizens; Be it resolved that the MLA urge the United States Department of State to contest Israel’s denials of entry to the West Bank by United States academics who have been invited to teach, confer, or do research at Palestinian universities.
There were complaints that the MLA leadership was not evenhanded in distributing materials to the membership, to the prejudice of pro-Israel members. Also, an online chat forum was disclosed in which gross anti-Israeli and anti-Semitic statements were made by MLA members. The results of the vote were just posted, and it failed to pass because less than 10% of the 30,000+ members voted.   Any resolution must be ratified by a majority vote in which the number of those voting for ratification equals at least ten percent of the association’s membership, which was 2,390 votes this year. There were 1,560 votes in favor of ratification and 1,063 votes against ratification. This is, in many ways, even more devastating than a simple loss.  It shows that the anti-Israel agenda of some radical academics simply isn't of much interest to the broader academic community.  The lack of interest by the overall membership is most telling of all. Prof. Cary Nelson of the University of Illinois issued the following statement on behalf of MLA Members for Scholars' Rights, a group opposing the resolution:

Posted by Leslie Eastman on June 04, 2014 10 Comments
Despite the fact that when half-Asian Elliot Rodger went on his murder spree, he knifed three of his victims to death, the response of progressives has been primarily focused on two topics: "White Male Privilege" and "Gun Control". Legislation to outlaw either being white or male cannot be proposed...yet.  However, one of the most progressively activist of all of California's elected representatives offers a new set of gun control rules: The "Pause for Safety Act". Fascinating, I think, that "gun" does not appear in the title of Senator Barbara Boxer's latest masterpiece. Her proposed rules would do the following:
• One, it would help ensure that families and others can go to court and seek a gun violence prevention order to temporarily stop someone close to them who poses a danger to themselves or others from purchasing a firearm. • Two, it would help ensure that families and others can also seek a gun violence prevention warrant that would allow law enforcement to take temporary possession of firearms that have already been purchased if a court determines that the individual poses a threat to themselves or others. • Three, it would help ensure that law enforcement makes full use of all existing gun registries when assessing a tip, warning or request from a concerned family member or other close associate.
According to Boxer: “We have a function here not to allow someone who is unstable or violent to get a weapon." So, how would this legislation have prevented Rodger from gaining access to knives? And, by the logic that produced this chestnut, perhaps we should regulate the distribution of hot coffee?:

Posted by William A. Jacobson on June 04, 2014 11 Comments
The Taliban have released a video of Bowe Bergdahl being released to U.S. Special Forces soldiers who arrived by helicopter. Five high ranking Taliban members were released from Gitmo in exchange. The release of the video is part of the Taliban victory lap: (full propaganda video here) Statements from Bergdahl's fellow soldiers about the circumstances of his departure from his base are very troubling, as are the Obama administration's ridiculous refusal to acknowledge the issues. There are heroes in this video. The Special Forces soldiers who risked their lives landing into what could have been a trap, in order to rescue someone who may turn out to be a deserter who caused the deaths of other Americans searching for him. The image of these Special Forces soldiers reminds me of men like Johnny "Mike" Spann, a CIA officer who was the first American killed in the Afghan war during a prisoner uprising.  We have written of Mike Spann several times before, Remembering Johnny “Mike” Spann:
The story of this small band of men has been told, but not told enough. Spann was killed during the Battle of Qala-i-Jangi when Taliban prisoners gained access to weapons and attacked.

Posted by William A. Jacobson on June 03, 2014 14 Comments
UPDATE -- Chris McDaniel won by less than 1% of the vote, but didn't break 50% so there will be a runoff election on June 24. ------------ The key race we are watching is the Mississippi Republican Senate Primary between incumbent Thad Cochran and Chris McDaniel.  Polls close at 7 p.m. Central. The race has been marked by a bizarre scandal of McDaniel supporters taping Cochran's wife in a nursing home.  Because the Cochran campaign waited at least two weeks to go to authorities, the scandal broke relatively close to the election.  We don't know what other shoes -- if any -- might drop.  We also don't know if the McDaniel campaign will be completely exonerated; as of now there is no evidence linking it to the taping.  I also never got an answer to the question, What did the @NRSC know, and when did it know it? We will post results as soon as meaningful numbers come in, so refresh your screen every 5 minutes or so. If not one gets 50%, there will be a runoff held June 24. You can follow the Twitter feed below:

Posted by William A. Jacobson on June 03, 2014 8 Comments
Martha Robertson, the Emily's List-backed, DCCC "red to blue" challenger to Republican Tom Reed in NY-23, is a big supporter of single payer healthcare, although she's dodged the issue during her campaign. Robertson has stated openly prior to running that she see's Obamacare as a stepping stone to single payer:
"We'll get to single payer soon, but in the meantime, [Obamacare] is what we need to do."
The Veterans Administration scandal poses a problem for Robertson, as it raises fears of what healthcare will be like if the government gains total control. Robertson appeared recently with Nancy Pelosi, and was interviewed on local television. Robertson blamed the VA scandal on what she called decades of underfunding (emphasis added):
“And we see it’s not a matter of the care that they get once they get access to the care,” said Robertson. “There’s no question that they’re getting quality care and responsive care once they’re in the system. This is a problem of decades of underfunding the system altogether.”
Robertson could not be more wrong. The VA's problems are systemic, inherent to government bureaucracy running healthcare, not funding. According to a recent budget submission for fiscal year 2015, VA funding has increased dramatically year-over-year:
MORE POSTS
Accessibility by WAH