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 Amy Miller on January 30, 2015 6 Comments
Senator Kelly Ayotte (R-NH) appeared on Fox News this week to take the White House to task over its weak stance regarding evidence that one of the five former Gitmo detainees released in exchange for Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl has been in contact with Taliban operatives.
But Sen. Kelly Ayotte, R-N.H., in an interview with Fox News, raised concerns that the five freed fighters might indeed be planning to return to the battlefield in the coming months, particularly after strict monitoring in Qatar is over. "What happens then?" Ayotte asked. "Never mind that they're already attempting to re-engage and obviously making communications to do so." She said: "I think this was a bad deal." The senator pushed anew for legislation she has crafted that would suspend transfers of detainees assessed to be high- or medium-risk.
Watch:

LATEST NEWS

Posted by Amy Miller on January 30, 2015 12 Comments
Democrats trotted out a stunning lack of self-awareness at the House Democratic Caucus retreat in Philadelphia today, continuing their emphasis on "middle class politics" and testing the waters with a messaging strategy that will likely drive their 2016 campaigns. From CBS News:
“To state the obvious, the past six years have been really, really hard for this country,” said Biden. “And they’ve been really tough for our party. Just ask [former DCCC chair] Steve [Israel],” continued Biden. “They’ve been really tough for our party. But together – and together — we made some really, really tough decisions — decisions that weren’t at all popular, hard to explain.”
Together! TOGETHER, damn you! It's telling that Biden focuses on the "together" aspect of the fact that Democrats did a terrible job---if Obama goes down, they're all going down with him? Is that the goal? The past six years have been tough not because people don't understand what's happening in this country, but because they can see it reflected in their lives, and their pocketbooks, and they don't like it.

Posted by New Neo on January 30, 2015 30 Comments
Now that Romney has released a statement to his supporters announcing that he won't be running in 2016, the next question is, to whom will he throw his support and his proven ability to raise money? Many conservatives have long excoriated Romney for not being conservative enough---or not being conservative at all. But I've long thought that his instincts were actually more conservative than he allowed himself to be while the governor of the deep blue state of Massachusetts (although I agree that he's certainly not as conservative as someone like Ted Cruz.) But those wondering about Romney's present intentions might want to pay particular attention to this part of his message:
I believe that one of our next generation of Republican leaders, one who may not be as well known as I am today, one who has not yet taken their message across the country, one who is just getting started, may well emerge as being better able to defeat the Democrat nominee. In fact, I expect and hope that to be the case. I feel that it is critical that America elect a conservative leader to become our next president. You know that I have wanted to be that president. But I do not want to make it more difficult for someone else to emerge who may have a better chance of becoming that president. You can’t imagine how hard it is for Ann and me to step aside, especially knowing of your support and the support of so many people across the country. But we believe it is for the best of the Party and the nation... I believe a Republican winning back the White House is essential for our country, and I will do whatever I can to make that happen...

Posted by Amy Miller on January 30, 2015 10 Comments
Put down those homemade "I STILL BELIEVE IN AMERICA" signs, friends. Romney isn't running. Romney dropped the news on supporters and staff this morning over the course of two conference calls, reaffirming past statements about the 2012 presidential campaign being his last. From the New York Times:
In a second call to a larger group of supporters, Mr. Romney said, “After putting considerable thought into making another run for president, I’ve decided it is best to give other leaders in the party the opportunity to become our next nominee.” Mr. Romney said he believed he could win the nomination, but he expressed concern about harming the party’s chances to retake the White House. “I did not want to make it more difficult for someone else to emerge who may have a better chance of becoming the president,” he said. He added that it was “unlikely” that he would change his mind. Mr. Romney, who did not take questions and ended the call shortly after reading a prepared statement, said that his family had been gratified by the outpouring of support, but had decided that it was best for the Republican Party to step aside. Mr. Romney said he would have no leadership PAC and no exploratory committee.
Fellow candidate Jeb Bush left some nice words for Romney in a classy-yet-campaigney Facebook post:

LEGAL INSURRECTION QUICK TAKES

U. Michigan Student Faces Assault, Battery Charges After Attacking Jewish Activist

Washington State U. Bans Fall Rush for Fraternities, Sororities Starting in 2027

Illinois Teacher Union Boss Gets Substantial Pay Raise Despite Low State Reading Scores

Faculty Senate at Northwestern Calls for Restrictions on ICE Access to Campus

Oregon State Instructor Reports Student for Arguing There are Only Two Sexes

University of San Francisco Ditching Mascot Over Student Complaints

SEE MORE

Posted by Andrew Branca on January 30, 2015 38 Comments
Despite all the hate directed at George Zimmerman for having successfully defended his life against a vicious ambush attack by Trayvon Martin, and numerous encounters with law enforcement both before and after that fateful night, he has yet to be convicted of any crime whatever. That trend continues with the dropping of the latest charges brought against him of aggravated assault.  Prosecutors have now declined to pursue these charges after Zimmerman's ex-girlfriend accuser recanted her testimony, reports the Associated Press (h/t @AaronWorthing). Zimmerman had been arrested and charged last month after his girlfriend was pulled over during a traffic stop, during which stop she told police that days prior Zimmerman had thrown a bottle of wine at her.  We reported on that arrest and surrounding details here:  Deja Vu: George Zimmerman Charged with Aggravated Assault. The Orlando Sentinel has the lastest details:

Posted by Mike LaChance on January 30, 2015 23 Comments
Every once in a while, John McCain does the exact right thing. This was one of those times. During a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing yesterday, leftist Code Pink activists disrupted the session to verbally assault Henry Kissinger who was there to testify on national security issues. John McCain was having none of it and even received applause for shutting the protesters down. Alexander Mallin of ABC News:
Senator John McCain Calls Out Protesters Who Swarmed Henry Kissinger Sen. John McCain earned some applause inside a Senate Armed Services hearing this morning after he erupted at protesters of former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, calling them “low-life scum.” “I've been a member of this committee for many years, and I have never seen anything as disgraceful and outrageous and despicable as the last demonstration that just took place,” said McCain, R-AZ. Protesters from the group CodePink swarmed behind Kissinger as he arrived alongside two other former Secretaries of State, Madeleine Albright and George Shultz, for a hearing on U.S. national security strategy. They held up signs calling Kissinger a criminal and chanted “arrest Henry Kissinger for war crimes” -- citing some of his more controversial decisions during the Nixon and Ford administrations. “You know, you're going to have to shut up, or I'm going to have you arrested,” McCain said as Capitol Hill Police tried to remove the protesters. “Get out of here you low-life scum.”
CSPAN captured the entire exchange on video:

Posted by Amy Miller on January 30, 2015 25 Comments
By now we're all aware that the race for 2016 started before the ink was dry on the race for 2014. Even before President Obama delivered his already-partially-failed State of the Union slate of promises, we knew that he was going to attempt to pivot away from his party's disastrous performance in the midterms with a renewed commitment to populist platitudes; what we didn't know is whether or not his oft-divided party would follow his lead. Follow his lead they have, according to statements from high-ranking Democrats gathered this week in Philadelphia to talk strategy. From AP's Big Story:
Their newly appointed chief of messaging, Rep. Steve Israel of New York, said House Democrats are "absolutely unified on three essential messages going forward. And it's middle class, middle class and middle class." Israel acknowledged that Democrats talked a lot about the middle class in last fall's elections. But world calamities distracted voters, he said, and Democrats failed to show that their economic policies would directly benefit working class families. Riffing on a campaign line of President Bill Clinton in 1992, Israel said the Democrats' new theme will be, "It's MY economy, stupid." Many Republicans scoff at Democrats' talk of better messaging. "Updating the packaging doesn't help if the product is still lousy," said Michael Steel, spokesman for House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio.
Fortunately for Representative Israel, most of voting America isn't yet paying attention to the fact that he's mistaken global calamities for the ones Democrats caused at home. If they were, they'd be calling him on it, because even people who don't live in our political bubble know that the rebel siege on Ukraine isn't responsible for skyrocketing health care costs and larger grocery bills.

Posted by William A. Jacobson on January 29, 2015 35 Comments
It pains me to come to the conclusion that Loretta Lynch should not be confirmed as our next Attorney General. As I wrote before, Lynch was a law school classmate. While we were not "friends," we were acquaintances. I have only good memories of her, and it does not surprise me that she has accomplished so much. Lynch is not Eric Holder, in so many ways. Holder was the consummate political being, who leaves a history of shattered constitutional and other principles in his wake.  Lynch assured the Judiciary Committee that she could say "No" to a president. http://youtu.be/mH8iSJvN3D0 That sequence, and so much of the testimony at the confirmation hearings, was more about Holder than Lynch. And it was devastating. Jonathan Turley, who supports Lynch, gave another stinging indictment of the Obama-Holder constitutional legacy:

Posted by Kemberlee Kaye on January 29, 2015 17 Comments
Last year, Mohamed Elibiary was let go amidst allegations he misused classified documents, and also for his long history of extremist views. And he's not shy about his views. Last year, while still serving as a DHS advisor, Elibiary tweeted that the return of the Caliphate was inevitable. A Tweet that ISIS supporters seemed to love. Regularly taking to Twitter to voice his interesting opinions, yesterday Elibiary mocked Christians and called Governor Jindal a "bottom feeder." Mind you, Elibiary self-identifies as a Republican. Here's a picture of his Twitter profile.

Posted by Amy Miller on January 29, 2015 26 Comments
Legal Insurrection is not a media "watchdog"-type blog. We understand that the New York Times operates on a bias, and that 90% of what is said on MSNBC is generally garbage that should be ignored. This, however, cannot be ignored. I think that by now we've all seen the liberal freakout that has dominated in the wake of the fantastically successful release of "American Sniper." We acknowledge the reality of the divide between conservatives and some progressives over the need for armed conflict, and its resulting debates. But what's been happening with regards to the narrative about this movie as it relates to Chris Kyle's legacy is beyond shameful. Check out what this guest on MSNBC's "Morning Joe" had to say about what troubles him regarding the spotlight that has recently been shone on "American Sniper" protagonist Kyle:

Posted by William A. Jacobson on January 29, 2015 22 Comments
Earlier today we reported that controversial former professor Steven Salaita had filed a federal lawsuit over his non-hiring. I identified what I saw as a glaring defect in the Complaint. The University of Illinois has responded with a Statement which previews how the case will be defended. The defense hones in on what I saw as a glaring defect in the Complaint, namely that Salaita never claimed that anyone -- much less anyone with authority -- promised him that Board of Trustees approval was not needed or waived. As such, Salaita will have a more difficult time converting a contingent offer into an enforceable agreement. Similarly, much like the official faculty committee, the University views the tweets in the context of Salaita's fitness, citing a tweet from June, before the Gaza fighting:
Specifically, Dr. Salaita began making a series of statements via social media on precisely the subject matter that he proposed to teach at our University. For example, on June 19, 2014, after three Israeli teenagers were reported kidnapped and presumed dead, Dr. Salaita posted a statement on Twitter which read: “You may be too refined to say it, but I’m not: I wish all the f**king West Bank settlers would go missing.” Dr. Salaita continued to post this comment even after the three teens were found murdered later that month.... These statements and many more like them demonstrate that Dr. Salaita lacks the judgment, temperament and thoughtfulness to serve as a member of our faculty in any capacity, but particularly to teach courses related to the Middle East.
The University denies that donor pressure influenced the decision. Presumably, as Chancellor Wise said in an interview recently, the university constantly gets donor complaints on a variety of issues, including sports. Those among Salaita's BDS supporters -- who have driven the protests -- who thought that Salaita had a strong case may be in for a rude awakening. They want to put the university, the Chancellor and the donors on trial, but Salaita may find himself on trial. As someone who handled employment cases as a large part of my private practice prior to joining academia, almost always for the employee, the Salaita case will be no easy win, no matter how much supportive websites with an anti-Israel agenda and pro-BDS faculty tweet out support and urge Salaita on. When this story first broke on August 6, I asked the following question to readers:

Posted by Leslie Eastman on January 29, 2015 10 Comments
ISIS sure has been busy recently, between the prisoner swapping and executions. However, it looks like some of their members had some time for sightseeing. Sadly, they took some high explosives with them.
Nineveh (IraqiNews.com) A Kurdish official revealed on Tuesday evening that the ISIS organization had bombed large parts and tracts of the ancient Nineveh wall, indicating that such an act violates the right of human culture and heritage. The media official of the Kurdistan Democratic Party (KDP) in Mosul, Saed Mimousine said in an interview for IraqiNews.com, “ISIS militants blew up today large parts and expanses of the archaeological wall of Nineveh in al-Tahrir neighborhood,” explaining that, “The terrorist group used explosives in the process of destroying the archaeological fence.” Mimousine added, “The Wall of Nineveh is one of the most distinctive archaeological monuments in Iraq and the Middle East,” adding that, “The fence dates back to the Assyrian civilization.” Mimousine stressed that, “Bombing the archaeological monuments by ISIS is a flagrant violation of the right of human culture, civilization and heritage,” calling the international community to “take a stand to curb the destruction of historic monuments.”
Frankly, for ISIS, the violation of human rights is more of a feature instead of a bug in its operating system. For example, the group also destroyed the Tomb of Jonah. And Nineveh, one of the oldest and greatest cities in antiquity, is an Iraqi treasure. But, I digress. I recently noted that Egypt's cultural treasures were now safe from the country's Islamic extremists. However, its citizens are a target for ISIS.

Posted by William A. Jacobson on January 29, 2015 11 Comments
Steven Salaita, the controversial former professor who was denied a tenured job at the University of Illinios at Urbana-Champaign, has filed a lawsuit against the university trustees and unnamed ("John Doe") donors who allegedly pressured the university. The one trustee who voted in favor of hiring, James Montgomery, was not named as a defendant. Chancellor Phyllis Wise also was named as a defendant. The lawsuit was filed in the Northern District of Illinois, rather than the Central District where the campus is located, based on the Trustees having voted not to hire Salaita at a meeting in Chicago. Strategically, Salaita presumably prefers a Chicago jury, if it gets to that. More details and an embed of the Complaint to follow (now full embed at bottom of post). Steven Salaita v Christopher Kennedy et al - Complaint Cover Page

Posted by William A. Jacobson on January 29, 2015 34 Comments
Claims by anonymous sources that the Obama administration is deeply offended by a "breach of protocol" in the planned appearance by Benjamin Netanyahu at a joint meeting of Congress are increasing. The New York Times quotes an unnamed official as saying the anger goes beyond John Boehner and Netanyahu, to the Israeli Ambassador:
The Obama administration, after days of mounting tension, signaled on Wednesday how angry it is with Israel that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu accepted Republican leaders’ invitation to address Congress on Iran without consulting the White House. The outrage the episode has incited within President Obama’s inner circle became clear in unusually sharp criticism by a senior administration official who said that the Israeli ambassador, Ron Dermer, who helped orchestrate the invitation, had repeatedly placed Mr. Netanyahu’s political fortunes above the relationship between Israel and the United States.
William Kristol argues that Obama views Netanyahu as an impediment to appeasement of Iran, much as Churchill was viewed with regard to the rise of fascism in Germany:
It is Obama's failures that explain his anger—his failures, and his hopes that a breakthrough with Iran could erase the memories of failure and appear to vindicate his foreign policy. Israel stands in the way, he thinks, of this breakthrough. Prime Minister Netanyahu stands in the way. And so Obama lashes out.

Posted by Mike LaChance on January 29, 2015 15 Comments
Remember when Harry Reid and other Democrats thought they could retain control of the Senate by demonizing the Koch brothers? In November of 2014 that strategy proved to be a loser---but Democrats learned nothing. Sean Sullivan and Anne Gearan of the Washington Post reported yesterday:
Democrats see new chance to attack Kochs after $1 billion spending announcement Forget Jeb, Rand and Ted. For Democrats, it’s all about Charles and David. The announcement this week that the vast political network backed by the wealthy industrialist Koch brothers aims to spend nearly $1 billion on the 2016 elections has reignited Democratic hopes of casting the brothers as electoral villains and linking them closely to Republican candidates. It’s a campaign strategy that yielded little success for the party in 2014, a banner year for the GOP. But Democratic officials and operatives say they are hopeful that their anti-Koch message will have more potency in a presidential election year.
Sally Kohn, who somehow has a job writing for CNN, jumped right on the bandwagon:
A better way for the Kochs to spend their millions Here comes spendageddon! To influence the 2016 elections, oil barons Charles and David Koch have pledged that their political network will spend $889 million, media reports say. Basically -- wrap your head around this if you can -- the ultra-conservative Koch brothers want to keep their business and personal taxes as low as possible and keep regulations on the energy industry as low as possible. And if they get their way, that $889 million in money donated by the Kochs and others to the groups they founded, will turn out to be just a drop in the bucket, a small investment for which they stand to gain much more in tax breaks and free pollution.
I fail to see how the libertarian Kochs, who favor gay marriage and the legalization of marijuana, qualify as "ultra-conservative"; but I'm clearly not as smart as Ms. Kohn.
MORE POSTS
Accessibility by WAH