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

LATEST NEWS

Posted by Amy Miller on December 05, 2014 9 Comments
Surprising absolutely no one, a Pew survey released last month reveals that not only to Americans by and large not trust the government, but that sentiment is nothing new. As of February of this year, only 24% of Americans said that they trust the government "always" or "most of the time. What's more, as trust has decreased (dark blue line), distrust has increased (light blue line): pew trust distrust This means that those who don't explicitly trust the government aren't just ambivalent about it; we're looking at active distrust from an electorate who has seen years of infighting, splits, and general intransigence where we should be seeing governance. When it comes to political parties, the trends are a little less clear; but even trust of the government amongst Democrats has stagnated well below 50%:

Posted by William A. Jacobson on December 05, 2014 44 Comments
Lee Stranahan of Rebel Pundit is in Louisiana covering Saturday's Senate runoff election between Mary Landrieu and Bill Cassidy:
On Monday in Baton Rouge, Louisiana the Black Conservatives Fund held a press conference to show a new video that exposed Opelousas Mayor Don Cravins telling a crowd of black Democrats: “If you early voted, go vote again tomorrow. One more’s not going to hurt and tomorrow we’re going to re-elect Earl Taylor as D.A., so he won’t prosecute you if you vote twice!” .... Landrieu’s first move to nip the story in the bud was to announce a press conference across town at the exact same time as the Black Conservatives Fund’s Monday presser. Divide the press and conquer. Nothing to see here. Not only did Landrieu hold a counter-press conference to try and stop the Black Conservatives, but the Democrats sent a group of protestors to try and shout down the conference on Monday. Here’s where I come in. The undercover video was shot by a Louisiana local, but I did some work on the final video presentations for the Black Conservative Fund. I flew down to Baton Rouge last Friday and I was at Monday’s press conference. After the event, I went outside to talk to the loud, chanting protestors. The real action starts about a minute into this video, where the Democrat operative hits my camera while I ask questions of a young woman who was the protest handler.
In his post at Rebel Pundit, Stranahan highlights that while questioning a female Democratic operative, a second female Democratic operative appears and smacks his camera (at 1:05). That second operative who smacked the camera is Kirstin Alvanitakis, Communications Director for the Louisiana Democratic Party.

Posted by New Neo on December 05, 2014 16 Comments
Rolling Stone has gotten a lot of attention with a controversial article alleging a rape occurred in 2012 at the University of Virginia, written by Sabrina Rubin Erdely and featuring some harrowing and disturbing details. The victim was identified only as "Jackie." Almost as soon as the story was published, doubts arose about its veracity, or at least about the journalistic standards of its author, who did not manage to interview the alleged perpetrators even though it would seem there were ways to have contacted them. Even worse, Erdely has not been forthcoming about the extent of her efforts to find them, and did not include any mention of any of this in the article. It has become evident that not only did Erdely demonstrate slipshod journalistic standards, but that the story itself could possibly be a fabrication by the alleged victim. This could be wrong, of course; there's no way to know at this point. But it seems fairly clear that Erdely did not fact check the story properly, and neither did Rolling Stone. Their excuses as to why seem inadequate, self-serving, and obfuscating. The article was not only about the alleged rape; it was critical of the UVA administration. But what did the administrators do wrong, exactly? They outlined all of Jackie's choices, and left it to her to decide what to do. Also, Jackie had only come forward to the administration close to a year after the rape supposedly occurred, and it's not clear from the article whether she named any names. But here's what is purported to have occurred when she did report it to the official in charge of such incidents:

LEGAL INSURRECTION QUICK TAKES

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

Maine School Administrator Objects to Dogs in the Classroom, Citing Muslim Views

SEE MORE

Posted by Amy Miller on December 04, 2014 16 Comments
The photograph featured above surfaced shortly after a grand jury in Missouri refused to indict police officer Darren Wilson for the shooting death of Michael Brown. In a sea of memes, photoshops, and Twitter commentary, the picture went viral alongside its companion photograph (courtesy of Politifact): politifact-photos-Ferguson_sign_original Two different photographs, one very clearly photoshopped to provide some social commentary on a quickly spiraling situation. Predictably, the photograph enraged some, delighted others, but no one with two brain cells to rub together believed that the "rob a store" version of the photograph was real. Politifact, however, dove in headfirst to provide us with an analysis no one asked for (emphasis mine):

Posted by Amy Miller on December 04, 2014 5 Comments
U.K Treasury Treasury Chief George Osborne is looking at his budget for the next year, and he doesn't like what he sees; namely, that overseas corporations are making a killing in his country. He's proposed a new tax in an effort to make sure “big multinational businesses pay their fair share" in exchange for access to a budding tech market. Some tech companies like Google and Facebook have been using creative procedures to lower their tax bills on operations based in the U.K., which means that without a new regulatory structure, U.K. officials will essentially be leaving millions of dollars on the table. The Wall Street Journal explains why European officials like Osborne want this tax to happen:
“Some of the largest companies in the world, including those in the tech sector, use elaborate structures to avoid paying taxes,” he said. “That’s not fair to other British firms. It’s not fair to British people either. Today we’re putting a stop to it. My message is consistent and clear: low taxes, but low taxes that will be paid.” The tax, dubbed a “Google tax” by the British press, is expected to raise more than £1 billion ($1.56 billion) over five years, Mr. Osborne said. It’s still unclear exactly what will constitute taxable activity in the U.K. and how it might change the tax bill of companies like Google GOOGL +1.05% and Facebook FB +0.40%. Representatives from several tech companies weren’t immediately available to comment. Google and other companies have been targeted by France and other European governments for not paying enough taxes. The issue is complicated by the companies’ setup: They can have sales representatives in one country selling online services, like ads, that appear in others, while the company’s residence for taxation purposes might be elsewhere still.
Meanwhile, the Eurozone at large is in an all-out war over who should have the authority to regulate these tech giants. What's making the decision so difficult to hammer out? They simply have too many agencies to choose from:

Posted by Kemberlee Kaye on December 04, 2014 3 Comments
Tuesday I sat down to chat with Thomas LaDuke of FTR Radio fame. We chatted about the weather, the greatness of Texas, Ferguson protests, and how the new media and and the conservative blogosphere have changed over the last few years. I met LaDuke at my first political soirée in Denver in 2011. We were attending Blogcon when Occupy Denver crashed the conference. Later, I went to check out the police removal of Occupy from a Denver park, only to end up with a riot gun about six inches from my nose. It was a blast. Since then, new media has changed. Conservative media has changed. In some ways the changes I've seen have been very positive, other changes concern me. The Conservative movement has harnessed new media and made incredible strides. Concerning though, is the notion that we must be like the left to beat the left. It's simply not true. We are not the left and never will be, and thank goodness for that! The long game of cultivating an American culture that thrives on freedom requires we find our own identity as a Conservative movement, one that draws people to us. Tactics like those Alinsky employed are divisive and ultimately, only hinder our progress towards a reasonably unified freedom force.

Posted by Kemberlee Kaye on December 04, 2014 46 Comments
Last week,49-year-old Larry McQuilliam went on a ten minute shooting spree in Austin, Texas. The only fatality was the shooter himself, when a mounted Austin police officer dropped McQuilliam from 312 feet with a single, strong handed, shot. McQulliam unleashed approximately 100 rounds in an attempt to shoot up a federal courthouse and Mexican Consulate. He had the words "Let Me Die" written on his chest in marker. According to CNN:
He said investigators found a map that included 34 locations marked as targets in McQuilliams' possessions. The majority of the locations were either government buildings, including the ones that he attacked, or financial institutions, Acevedo said. The map included two churches. Investigators also found a book, "Vigilantes Of Christendom," the police chief said. Inside the book was a handwritten note that discussed McQuilliams' rank as a "priest in the fight against anti-God" people, Acevedo said. According to Christopher Combs, special agent in charge of the FBI's San Antonio division, McQuilliams had mentioned to some people that he was upset because he couldn't find a job and because, in his view, immigrants were able to get more services than he was. Authorities believe McQuilliams acted alone.

Posted by William A. Jacobson on December 04, 2014 30 Comments
One of Hillary's problems is the perception of inauthenticity, someone who will assume whatever persona she needs to assume at any given moment. Like when she assume a southern accent. So what do Hillary supporters at Stand With Hillary do to convince the public Hillary is authentic? Create the most inauthentic video ever created in the history of the human race (h/t @MichelleMalkin / Twitchy):

Posted by Mike LaChance on December 04, 2014 24 Comments
Rep. Jim Jordan of Ohio appeared on Greta Van Susteren's program last night to discuss a new fold in the ongoing scandal at the Internal Revenue Service. Would it surprise you to learn that the IRS shared confidential taxpayer information with the White House? Video courtesy of the Gretawire blog: Not to worry America. We're living under the most transparent administration in American history. Or maybe not.

Posted by Amy Miller on December 03, 2014 9 Comments
Ask and you shall receive, conservatives---we're suing the President again! Texas Governor-Elect Greg Abbott is leading a 17-state coalition in a lawsuit challenging the legality of President Obama's plan to grant executive amnesty to millions of illegal immigrants currently residing within our borders. There are three main parts to the lawsuit: first, that Obama's Executive Action violates the power-limiting "Take Care" Clause of the Constitution; second, that the Administration ignored required rulemaking procedures; and third, that if allowed to go into effect, the order will "exacerbate the humanitarian crisis along the southern border, which will affect increased state investment in law enforcement, health care and education." Both Texas Governor Rick Perry and Governor Elect Abbott have experience dealing with both the problems illegal immigration presents to the country, and suing the Executive over federal overreach. Via the Associated Press:
Abbott said Obama's actions "directly violate a fundamental promise to the American people" and that it was up to the president to "execute the law, not de facto make law." Republican presidents, including Ronald Reagan, have issued past executive orders pertaining to immigration. Abbott said those were in response to actions by Congress — unlike Obama, who Abbott said acted in lieu of congressional approval. ... Potential 2016 presidential candidate and current Texas Gov. Rick Perry, who leaves office in January, also spoke out against the executive order earlier Wednesday, saying it could trigger a new flood of people pouring across the Texas-Mexico border and create chaos that could be exploited by drug- and people-smugglers.

Posted by Amy Miller on December 03, 2014 23 Comments
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits sex discrimination against pregnant women, but how far does Title VII require an employer to go to accommodate pregnant workers who develop conditions limiting their ability to do their jobs? We already know an employer can't use a pregnancy to fire an employee, cut her pay, or deny her health benefits, but should they be forced to go so far as to offer up alternative work during the duration of the pregnancy? This morning, the Supreme Court will tackled Young v. United Parcel Service, which asks whether, and in what circumstances, the Pregnancy Discrimination Act, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e(k), requires an employer that provides work accommodations to non-pregnant employees with work limitations to provide work accommodations to pregnant employees who are “similar in their ability or inability to work.” Bloomberg has the facts of the case:
Young worked out of a UPS facility in Landover, Maryland. Her job required her to load packages onto vehicles and deliver them to their destination. Although she says the vast majority of those packages were envelope-size, her job description required her to lift parcels of up to 70 pounds. In 2006, Young became pregnant after in vitro fertilization, and her doctor and midwife said she shouldn’t lift objects weighing more than 20 pounds during the first half of the pregnancy or more than 10 pounds for the rest. She says UPS refused to accommodate her needs either by adjusting her job responsibilities or by temporarily assigning her to a position that didn’t require heavy lifting. There were “many, many jobs” she could have performed at the Landover facility, including those that required only handling phone calls or addressing packages, she said in an e-mailed response to a reporter’s question. She also said she would have worked in a nearby facility if the company preferred. “I was flexible,” Young said. “I just needed my job.” She went on an unpaid leave of absence and returned to work after her baby was born. She later left UPS.
End game aside, it's a fair question: if you have another, similar group you're accommodating with lighter work during a temporary disability, why not include into the mix pregnant women who develop similar disabilities?

Posted by Kemberlee Kaye on December 03, 2014 8 Comments
Yesterday, the Washington Post published a story about Donny Ray Williams, Jr. Williams is a convicted serial sexual abuser and former Democratic Senate aide. Ah what magic that little 'D' affiliation possesses. There was no story on Good Morning America, no major network news coverage of a serial rapist who will not be serving jail time, just a short form piece in the Washington Post. That's it. Mind you, the Washington Post and other media scalped Elizabeth Lauten, the Republican Congressional aide who was mildly critical of the Obama daughter's scant wardrobe choice on her personal Facebook page. Likely at the behest of the White House, WaPo assigned foreign policy reporters to cover Lauten. They began digging into her college papers, sealed juvenile record, and staking out her parent's home. Lauten quit and is currently in self-imposed exile. Credible sources indicate the White House was actively pitching the story of Lauten's unforgivable indiscretions to their favorite media outlets. Amazingly, the obscure Tennessee Congressman who employed Lauten was left completely out of the fray. Forgoing the "guilty by association" schtick, it was Lauten with the glowing red dot on her back. Make an example of Lauten and no one will dare throw shade at the Obama's again, seems to be the message in all of this. Nothing else explains the disproportionate use of force. Watching the inequity in media coverage got me all riled up (as we say in Texas). So I took to Twitter.
MORE POSTS
Accessibility by WAH