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 David Gerstman on May 04, 2014 7 Comments
It is hard to believe that it has been three months since Barry Rubin passed away. With all going on in the world, and especially in the Middle East, Barry's absence is pronounced as there are few who saw things as clearly as he did. Barry's essays and columns are not disposable, like those of some other columnists and analysts. He wasn't looking for some pithy phrase to describe a complex problem or looking for new evidence to support his ideology. He looked at events and facts and drew his conclusions. Consequently something Barry wrote could still be relevant or true, months or years later. Two recent stories illustrate this point. Barry had been a critic of the Obama administration's handling of Syria's civil war. The Times of Israel last week featured an interview with a Syrian dissident Kamal Al-Labwani, Israel is our last hope, indicates Syrian dissident. The point referred to in the headline is Labwani's belief that Israel could win over the moderate rebels in Syria and much of the population if it helped protect civilians.
“If you only helped us intercept low-flying [regime] helicopters by providing a limited amount of antiaircraft weapons, with American approval, it would have a huge effect, morally and militarily,” Labwani said. “There are a million ways such weapons can be given to recognized people [in the opposition]. These weapons have ‘fingerprints’ and deactivation modes.” Alternatively, he said, Israel could declare a no-fly zone in southern Syria, as NATO did in Libya in its bid to topple Muammar Gaddafi. Such a move would immediately cause a large segment of Syrian society to support peace and normalization with Israel.
But there's more to the interview. Labwani is not currently among the Western backed rebels. He explained why:

LATEST NEWS

Posted by Andrew Branca on May 04, 2014 36 Comments
Well, the media is still suffering from StandYourGroundPhobia., raising it in explanation of two recent killings by homeowners, that of Byron Smith in Minnesota (recently convicted and sentenced to life in prison) and Markus Kaarma in Montana. Naturally, all their scriblings truly reveal is their ongoing ignorance of what Stand-Your-Ground is (and isn't), and their perpetual obfuscation of Stand-Your-Ground with other discrete self-defense law doctrines, such as the Castle Doctrine, presumptions of reasonableness, defense of dwelling, and self-defense immunity (which they also do not understand). Indeed, some of these "journalists" have been reduced to writing euphemistically about the issue, using terms like "Stand-Your-Ground-like," in effect conceding the fuzziness of their understanding.  The latest event to spark media attention just happened in Montana, Man Who Set A Trap To Kill 17-Year-Old Intruder Invokes Stand Your Ground-Like Defense:
Seventeen-year-old Diren Dede lost his life Sunday, while in Missoula, Montana on a high school exchange program from Germany. He was shot dead at the home of Markus Kaarma, after Kaarma set a trap for intruders by intentionally leaving the garage open and placing a purse in clear view. After motion sensors detected someone in the garage, Kaarma shot Dede. And while he has since been charged with first degree murder, he is already invoking a Stand Your Ground-like defense.
KULR-8 Television, Billings, MT The first and most obvious error in attempting to apply Stand-Your-Ground to the Smith and Kaarma cases--indeed to ANY case taking place in or immediately around the defendant's home--is that Stand-Your-Ground is utterly irrelevant in that context.  Every state already has in place, by either statute or case law, the Castle Doctrine.  The Castle Doctrine eliminates any otherwise existing duty to retreat if you are in your home, or its curtilage (some states do suspend the Castle Doctrine if the person being defended against is also a lawfully present in the home). That's ALL the Castle Doctrine does--suspend an otherwise existing duty to retreat.

Posted by Mandy Nagy on May 04, 2014 3 Comments

Some links from across the web for your Saturday evening reading. Ripple effects of the Donald Sterling drama...

Posted by Mandy Nagy on May 04, 2014 2 Comments
I’m a sucker for these stories, so I couldn’t help but post about it when I saw it over at The Blaze. A veteran and the bomb-sniffing dog he worked with in the military were reunited this week, after the opportunity became available for the dog to be adopted by her former handler. The full story was covered by the Chicago Tribune, which also posted the video. Here’s an excerpt:
It was a sad parting when Sgt. Jason Bos left Fort Lee in Virginia nearly two years ago and had to say goodbye to MWD Cila M389, the bomb-sniffing chocolate Lab he called Cici. Over nearly five years, Bos and Cila — MWD stands for Military Working Dog, and M389 is the identification number tattooed in her ear — had forged a bond as they searched for roadside bombs and hidden weapons caches in Iraq, and screened sites for presidential visits across the U.S. Their partnership ended when a back injury forced Bos to leave the Army in 2012. Cila was just 5 years old, and still had time to serve as a military dog. While Bos headed home to Michigan, Cila remained on active duty. Bos, 33, did not know if he’d ever reunite with Cila. But a month ago, he saw on Facebook that Cila was due to be retired. He was thrilled when the kennel master at his former base contacted him to see if he wanted to adopt her. “I said ‘Yes. What do I have to do?’” Bos said.

Posted by Bryan Jacoutot on May 03, 2014 47 Comments
Appearing on CNN's Crossfire, Congresswoman Barbara Lee advocated for raising the national minimum wage to $10.10/hour, arguing it would increase worker productivity and decrease turnover. After discussing the national minimum wage, Newt Gingrich asked the Congresswoman whether she'd support an even higher hike than that. Via The Daily Caller,
“Let me ask you this question, you’re a good advocate for this,” Gingrich asked Lee. “The mayor of Seattle is proposing that the minimum wage ought to go up to $15 an hour.” “Good for him,” Lee responded. “In California — more than likely, from what I remembered — a living wage where people could live and take care of their families and move toward achieving the American dream was about $25, $26 an hour.” “So would you support that as a minimum wage for California?” Gingrich asked. “Absolutely I would support it for California. I think the regional factors –” “And you don’t think that’d have an effect on unemployment?” Gingrich interrupted.

LEGAL INSURRECTION QUICK TAKES

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

UT-San Antonio Student Apologizes for Gleefully Mocking Assassination of Charlie Kirk

SEE MORE

Posted by Mike LaChance on May 03, 2014 13 Comments

Republican Monica Wehby slightly ahead in recent poll for U.S. Senate...

Posted by William A. Jacobson on May 03, 2014 28 Comments
That's the observation of Sonny Bunch to the news that Condoleeza Rice is withdrawing as a Commencement Speaker at Rutgers after protests against her and threats to disrupt the festivities if she spoke: NRO reports that the following statement is to be released this morning:
Commencement should be a time of joyous celebration for the graduates and their families. Rutgers’ invitation to me to speak has become a distraction for the university community at this very special time. I am honored to have served my country. I have defended America’s belief in free speech and the exchange of ideas. These values are essential to the health of our democracy. But that is not what is at issue here. As a Professor for thirty years at Stanford University and as it’s former Provost and Chief academic officer, I understand and embrace the purpose of the commencement ceremony and I am simply unwilling to detract from it in any way. Good luck to the graduates and congratulations to the families, friends and loved ones who will gather to honor them.
Why are we always the ones concerned about distractions caused by other people? This is why we lost the campuses. We let the load mouths and bullies have their way. I blame Rice as much as the bullies. By withdrawing, Rice sends a message to other campuses that the tactic works. I also blame the President of Rutgers, who according to NRO, turned out to be a wimp:

Posted by Mike LaChance on May 03, 2014 3 Comments

Sometimes learning new things is uncomfortable. Jonah Goldberg Discovers a Clever Student Group at Williams College Sometimes certain words make people uncomfortable. Student Groups at Duke Appoint Themselves Word Police College ‘Trigger Warnings’ Get Noticed by the MSM Some people are made uncomfortable by religion. Man Says College Rejected Him Over...

Posted by William A. Jacobson on May 02, 2014 34 Comments
There is a difference between private and public communications.  The law, in its various aspects, often looks to the reasonable expectation of privacy when it comes to the legality of taping or interception of communications, whether by the government or private citizens. That distinction is eroding in an age not just of accessible technology, but the ability of people to swarm through social connections on the internet. And so it was with Donald Sterling, owner of the L.A. Clippers. Because his comments were indefensible, it's hard to defend the distinction between private and public conversations in such an instance even though there is an important distinction. Has none of us said something believing it to be private that we regret; or might have expressed regret for soon after we said it? Is pillow talk no different than a tweet? Is nothing private anymore, at least to the extent if offends societal notions of what is proper? I'm reminded of Gene Hackman in Francis Ford Coppola's The Conversation, where the privacy hunter became the hunted: Charles C.W, Cooke made good points in his post on the topic, The Shrinking Private Sphere:
It is difficult to work up much sympathy for the man — a billionaire with a history of rank intolerance and questionable business ethics. And that his remarks came from a conversation with a woman who is not his wife does little to help his cause. Nevertheless, one should be a little reluctant to applaud the recording and dissemination of a private telephone conversation simply because it has skewered someone unpleasant. At yesterday’s press conference, one especially earnest member of the audience asked whether the powers-that-be at the NBA intended to conduct an investigation to find out if anyone else involved with basketball had ugly views — an instinct that, when coupled with the performance-art outrage and glancing-at-the-cameras indignation that are the hallmarks of our age, carried with it a whiff of inquisition....

Posted by Mandy Nagy on May 02, 2014 15 Comments

Yep, he did it again. After House speaker John Boehner announced plans Friday to establish a select committee on Benghazi, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid responded with the following statement: “Republicans are showing yet again that they have nothing to offer the middle class. Republicans care more...

Posted by William A. Jacobson on May 02, 2014 57 Comments
Last night on Bret Baier's Special Report was a moment dudes will remember for ages. It summed up the smug, Washington D.C. insider's attitude as well as, dude, anything. It also gave rise the the hashtag, #ReplaceFamousQuoteWithDude Here are my contributions:

Posted by William A. Jacobson on May 02, 2014 26 Comments
We know Media Matters hates Rush Limbaugh. It's an obsession second only to the fixation on Fox News. Media Matters was behind the astroturfed Stop Rush campaign targeting advertisers, which ended in a complete failure. Nonetheless, the Limbaugh obsession continues at Media Matters. The latest iteration is an article published yesterday claiming that Rush Limbaugh's ratings are so bad, Limbaugh's taken to claiming ratings don't matter, After Getting Bad Ratings News, Limbaugh Tries To Prove "Ratings Don't Matter" Media Matters After Getting Bad Rating
Rush Limbaugh used CBS' decision to hire comedian Stephen Colbert as the new host of The Late Show as evidence that ratings are irrelevant following reports that the talk radio firebrands' own ratings have collapsed. On the May 1 edition of his radio show, Limbaugh declared that CBS' decision to replace David Letterman with Colbert is proof that "ratings don't matter in a lot of television." Limbaugh latched onto recent comments by CBS president Les Moonves to repeatedly gloat that he was right when he claimed that "it's not about ratings anymore" but rather about coolness. In fact, during the entire first segment of his show, Limbaugh repeated the phrase "ratings don't matter" a total of nine times....
Media Matters provided a 7 minute audio, and a partial transcript, to back up its claim. I happened to listen to that segment live when I was in the car yesterday, so I knew what Media Matters readers were not informed: The audio and transcript were edited to end just before Limbaugh made clear that the type of approach the networks can take for late night TV does not apply to him. Here's the part of the transcript Media Matters did not include:
MORE POSTS
Accessibility by WAH