Image 01 Image 03

Le·gal In·sur·rec·tion

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

Note: You may reprint this cartoon provided you link back to this source.  To see more Legal Insurrection Branco cartoons, click here. Branco’s page is Cartoonist A.F.Branco...

LATEST NEWS

An audit released by the Department of Veterans Affairs on Monday indicated that more than 57,000 veterans have been waiting three months or longer for their first appointment with a VA facility. From the Associated Press:
More than 57,000 U.S. military veterans have been waiting 90 days or more for their first VA medical appointments, and an additional 64,000 appear to have fallen through the cracks, never getting appointments after enrolling and requesting them, the Veterans Affairs Department said Monday. It's not just a backlog problem, the wide-ranging review indicated. Thirteen percent of schedulers in the facility-by-facility report on 731 hospitals and outpatient clinics reported being told by supervisors to falsify appointment schedules to make patient waits appear shorter. The audit is the first nationwide look at the VA network in the uproar that began with reports two months ago of patients dying while awaiting appointments and of cover-ups at the Phoenix VA center. A preliminary review last month found that long patient waits and falsified records were "systemic" throughout the VA medical network, the nation's largest single health care provider serving nearly 9 million veterans.
The report indicated that as part of its actions to address the problems identified, the VA would “critically review its performance management, education and communication systems to determine how performance goals were conveyed across the chain of command such that some front-line, middle and senior managers felt compelled to manipulate VA’s scheduling processes.”

The Wisconsin anti-conservative investigation by local prosecutors targeting numerous conservative activists and groups has resulted in numerous legal cases. The investigation is a round-about attack on Gov. Scott Walker, seeking to damage him politically and freeze his supporters out of the political process. Most prominently, in a federal lawsuit two of the targets obtained a preliminary injunction shutting down the investigation as a violation of their constitutional rights. There also are claims for damages individually against the investigators. A separate lawsuit was filed in state court against the Wisconsin Government Accountability Board for its role. The investigation has become the poster child for government abuse of process against conservative activists, as George Will wrote:
Last Tuesday, [Federal Judge] Randa halted the corruption being committed by people pretending to administer campaign regulations — regulations ostensibly enacted to prevent corruption or the appearance thereof. The prosecutors’ cynical manipulation of Wisconsin’s campaign laws is more than the mere appearance of corruption.
There were two important developments this afternoon. In the first and most important development, the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals upheld, pending appeal, the preliminary injunction halting the investigation (full order embedded at bottom of post):

The illegal immigration situation in this country seems to have gone from dreadful to utter chaos, with no end in sight. This is absolutely disturbing on so many levels it's hard to process. Also, as a side issue, are Jan Brewer and Arizona being punished by the Obama administration?:
Hundreds of migrants nabbed by the border patrol after illegally crossing the US-Mexico border through Texas have been flown to Arizona and left at Greyhound Bus stations in Tucson and Phoenix during the past month...Critics charge that released border-crossers will vanish into the woodwork. Immigrant advocates accuse the federal government of releasing migrants without providing enough basic necessities such as food and water on days that hover around 100 degrees F. Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer (R) calls it "another disturbing example of a deliberate failure to enforce border security policies and repair a broken immigration system" in a letter to President Obama.
Yeah, a letter! That'll do it. Although to be honest, I don't know what the remedy would be. Even impeachment wouldn't do it at this point, because fixing this would require that both parties be dedicated to tightening both border security and lessening the cornucopia of services available to illegal immigrants, which would require some harsh and extremely difficult decisions that I don't think our politicians are up to. The CS Monitor offers more background here on why the number of illegal child immigrants has been increasing during the last two years:

Jacksonville news broadcaster news4jax is reporting that a September re-trial date has been set for Michael Dunn, with jury selection to begin September 22. This past February Dunn was convicted of three counts of attempted murder for shooting at an SUV carrying Jordan Davis and three companions, all black teens.  Dunn himself is a middle-aged white male. The three convictions were for firing shots at the three surviving teens as they fled.  Davis was killed by the first three rounds fired, but the jury hung on the associated charge of first degree murder. Immediately upon the jury returning this finding Florida Attorney General Angela Corey announced that she should would be re-trying Dunn on the murder charge.  The date for that re-trial was initially set for early May, but as mentioned above has now been moved to late September.

We covered the "tranny" controversy at the University of Chicago in the Saturday Night Card Game, When everyone shuts up, we will have reached the “safe space”. The short story is that the student speech police attacked liberal gay activist Dan Savage for using the word "tranny" in discussing at a forum why he no longer uses the word "tranny."  More than that, they demanded that the word be banned from use at U. Chicago's Institute of Politics, where the event took place. Savage responded to the controversy (h/t Instapundit), by noting that the activists who attacked him refer to "trans" people as "it" -- a characterization Savage says is particularly offensive to the "trans" community.  I don't know if that's right or wrong, but it's a point. Andrew Sullivan writes, surveying this all this:
Yes, this occurred at the University of Chicago! Now, I’m not interested in defending Dan, because he can defend himself. And John Aravosis is right that there’s a potent and destructive strain in the LGBT world that aims more hate at someone like Dan Savage than at Rick Santorum (tell me about it). What I am interested is condemning this pathetic excuse for a student. This plea in a university to be free of hearing things that might hurt, offend, traumatize or upset you is an attack on the very idea of education itself. And don’t get me started about “trigger warnings.” So many things worth thinking about, grappling with, and chewing over can be offensive at first or second blush. That’s what a real education is about: offending your pre-existing feelings and prejudices with reason and argument and sometimes provocation. Education is not and never should be about making you more comfortable and more safe within your current worldview. It should not be about accusing someone with whom you might disagree of a hate crime.

Hillary Clinton's interview with Diane Sawyer is getting a lot of attention because Hillary explained the $100 million plus she and Bill have made giving speeches as necessitated by their near poverty upon leaving office:
SAWYER: You've made five million making speeches? The president's made more than a hundred million dollars? CLINTON: Well, you have no reason to remember, but we came out of the White House not only dead broke but in debt. We had no money when we got there, and we struggled to piece together the resources for mortgages for houses, for Chelsea's education. You know, it was not easy. Bill has worked really hard and it's been amazing to me. He's worked very hard. First of all, we had to pay off all our debts. You know, you had to make double the money because of, obviously, taxes, and then pay off the debts and get us houses and take care of family members.
The problem is not that the Clintons made a fortune. This is America, after all. People are entitled to make a fortune so long as they do so lawfully, and we've not yet reached the point where the law dictates when people have made enough. The problem is that Hillary is not being straight with the public.

Updates on Bergdahl story, Obama to issue executive order on student loans, parents outraged over photos shown in sex-ed class...

Do you remember David Chalian? He was a reporter for Yahoo! back in 2012 and while covering the Republican National Convention he was caught on tape smearing the Romneys and implying that they were racists as to blacks suffering from Hurricane Isaac:
"They're not concerned at all. They're happy to have a party with black people drowning..."
CNN just hired him as their new political director. Geoffrey Dickens of News Busters has the details:
CNN's New Political Director in 2012: Romneys Would Be 'Happy to Have a Party with Black People Drowning' On Friday, CNN announced that David Chalian would be named as their new political director. Chalian is most famous for making an obnoxious remark about Mitt and Ann Romney during the 2012 Republican National Convention. On August 29, 2012, in live video inadvertently distributed by ABCNews.com, the-then Yahoo! News Washington bureau chief claimed the Romneys didn’t care about New Orleans residents being hit by Hurricane Isaac as he blurted: “They aren’t concerned at all. They are happy to have a party with black people drowning.”
Here's the clip. Nick Massella of Media Bistro broke the story on Friday:

In the ever bizarre Mississippi Republican Senate Primary, three people were locked into the Courthouse where the primary ballots had been counted after hours. The three claimed they had entered through an open side door. The ballots themselves were locked in an inaccessible vault, and never in danger. The incident dominated the news cycle for about 48 hours because one of the three was a coalition coordinator for the campaign of Chris McDaniel. The Sheriff's department investigated, and determined that no crime was committed, as we wrote in Chris McDaniel courthouse break-in “scandal” is a nothingburger, quoting an MSNBC report:
“Based on our findings and subsequent conclusion, there is no reason to believe that the three individuals engaged in any criminal activity nor do we believe any laws were broken,” a statement by the Hinds County Sheriff’s office read on Thursday. According to the sheriff’s office, the three McDaniel supporters gained access to the courthouse through an employees-only side door that was not meant to be open. Once it closed behind them, they found themselves trapped and searched the building in hopes of finding an employee who could help them leave. They never had access to any ballot boxes, which were in a secure locked area, the sheriff’s office said.
Okay, case investigated and closed, right? No. Then a county supervisor asked the Hinds County District Attorney to investigate anyway, and the DA agreed, as reported in the Clarion-Ledger:

When Mahmoud Abbas's "moderate" Fatah movement first reached out to make an agreement with the terrorist Hamas movement, the response in the United State was "mostly nonchalant." Now that the two sides have announced the creating of a unity government, the response has continued to be muted. Certainly not outraged. Last week, of course, the administration didn't wait a day before endorsing the blatant violation of the American sponsored peace process. This was disappointing but hardly surprising given Barry Rubin's observation last September that the United States had gone to "backing the 'bad guys.'” In major American newspapers there was little initial editorial comment. However later in the week, the Washington Post endorsed the American response as did the New York Times. Though, surprisingly, the Times actually qualified their endorsement warning that "the United States has to be careful to somehow distinguish between its support for the new government and an endorsement of Hamas and its violent, hateful behavior," without actually offering a practical suggestion how distinguish that support. There are three main reasons why the administration was wrong to support the unity accord. 1) It is unpopular in the United States In the middle of May, The Israel Project conducted a poll of likely voters and their views on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. One question dealt with the formation of the Fatah-Hamas unity government. When those originally saying they were undecided offered an opinion, the poll showed a massive rejection of the Palestinian reason for the cooperation.