The attack on the Syrian airfield has sent the polls for President Donald Trump into a sharp rise and he has been praised by various Democrats. Others have called for the commitment of thousands of troops. No one seems interested in speaking of the absence of congressional authorization. Indeed, when Sen. Rand Paul objected to the lack of congressional consent, Sen John McCain denounced him as a non-entity in the Senate who does not listens. Below is my column on the mounting attacks on Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D, HI) from Democrats after she called for the release of evidence on the culpability of the Syrian government in the recent gas attack on a village. Even though some (including a recent MIT professor) have questioned the evidence, Gabbard’s desire to see the evidence was viewed as inexcusable. It appears that war, like Saturn, devours its young.
Category: Media
There has been an abundance of discussion of Kendall Jenner’s “social justice” Pepsi ad that proved a disaster for the company after Black Lives Matter objected that (even though no signs in the commercial referred to BLM) the commercial trivialized BLM. The commercial showed people marching with signs saying things like “Join the conversation” and Jenner giving a police officer a Pepsi. When I saw it, I just thought it was sappy and shallow. It was an effort of another major company to sell its product on a social justice theme. Even if you want your Pepsi with a side of social justice, companies want to be praised as having a conscience without actually saying anything controversial or edgy. To corporate and media officials, Jenner wiping off her make up was a brave and edgy moment. (Apparently a starlet taking off her makeup is a brave and inspiring thing to behold). The commercial however has raised a legal question that returns to a prior subject discussed on this blog: copyright and trademark laws. It appears that not only did BLM hate the commercial, so did the police. The San Francisco Police have threatened a lawsuit stating the image of a badge looks like their official badge, and used without their permission. Once again, I do not know how we allowed Congress to put us in this place where showing a police badge (or in this case a badge resembling a police badge) can get you sued.
Pakistan continues to remind the West that it remains a country struggling with Islamic extremists — encouraged by the country’s lack of separation between mosque and state. The latest victim of such extremism is a college student named Mashal Khan who was accused of merely sharing a message on social media deemed blasphemous. The response of these self-professed godly men in the northern city of Mardan was to beat the victim to death in the name of Islamic morality. What is even more distressing is that the culprits appear to be fellow students. They no doubt learned this particular lesson from the government itself (and our ally) which still makes blasphemy a capital offense.
Continue reading “Pakistani Student Mob Beats Fellow Student To Death For Blasphemy On Social Media”
Below is my column on the unfolding future of the Supreme Court after the confirmation of Justice Neil Gorsuch and the elimination of filibusters in the selection of Supreme Court nominees. For years, commentators have been discussing the timing of the retirement of our older justices, including Justice Ginsburg. There was rising concern when Ginsburg decided to stay on the Court past the midterm mark of the second Obama term. Those concerns have now been magnified and realized with the Trump election and filibuster elimination. Of course, the same concerns are raised by the possible retirement of Justice Anthony Kennedy, the swing vote on the current Court. New rumors have arisen this week about Kennedy. However, of all of the older justices, it is replacement of Ginsburg that could produce the most profound changes for the country.
Continue reading “The Ginsburg Gamble and the Future of the Supreme Court”
In a major tactical victory for the Trump Administration, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit has agreed to expedite the review of appeal of a Maryland district court judge in blocking the immigration order of President Donald Trump. The Fourth Circuit will hear the appeal en banc rather than leave the matter to a three-judge panel. That decision favors the Administration and will reduce the time for appeal.
Continue reading “Fourth Circuit Agrees To Hear Appeal En Banc Over Trump Immigration Order”
We previously discussed the falling enrollments at the University of Missouri after their Black Lives Matters (BLM) protests. The closure of dormitories has continued with three additional undergrad residence halls being shuttered. There are now seven such closed dormitories on campus.
Continue reading “University of Missouri Closes Four More Dormitories”
Below is my recent column in The Hill Newspaper on the Rice controversy. Media spins for Rice continue including MSNBC “AM Joy” host Joy Reid describing the softball interview with Andrea Mitchell as a type of “Government for Dummies” lecture: “She was on with our own Andrea Mitchell yesterday trying to explain how government works, for those that don’t know.” Of course, unmasking political opponents (if the allegations are proven to be true), would not be how the government is supposed work. Nor is alleged lying about knowing nothing about the unmasking in prior interviews — a curious conflict with Reid’s take that Rice was trying to explain how government works. This was Rice’s second or third explanation.
The controversy occurs after the Washington Post gave Rice a retroactive “Four Pinnochios” for her claim that the Obama Administration got rid of all chemical weapons in Syria. (That is not the first time that Rice has been accused of false statements on national security issues, as discussed below). None of this seems to matter in the coverage of the most recent controversy involving Rice. It appears that Trump is the temptation that many journalists simply cannot resist. It is a Faustian bargain: media is so intent on pursuing Trump that they have lost any sense of their own navigational beacons of objectivity and neutrality.
Continue reading “The Rice Controversy: Is The Media Proving Trump Correct?”
We have been discussing the alarming rollback on free speech on United States campuses with the active or passive support of university and college administrators (with the exception of schools like University of Chicago). Students now treat free speech as itself a threat and seek to prevent other students from hearing from speakers with whom they disagree. The latest such example is at Claremont McKenna College where students succeeded in preventing other students from hearing from Heather MacDonald due to her pro-police views.
Continue reading “Claremont McKenna Protesters Disrupt Pro-Police Speaker”
I have been discussing how the Congress is again willfully ignoring its constitutional duty on the declaration of war as our intervention in Syria expands. Democratic leaders like Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer have fallen over each other to praise the attacks even though Congress never authorized the action. Hillary Clinton was calling for attacks in Syria just hours before the attack, as she did in Iraq, Libya and other past conflicts. The United States just attacked a foreign nation that had not attacked the United States. It was done with little consultation and no authorization from Congress. However, as with prior wars, the attacks remain politically popular so Congress is silent with the exception of a few members like Sen. Rand Paul. Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) however has gone further to denounce Paul as simply “wrong” and virtually mock him as a nonentity in calling for such congressional authority. He is alone in the Senate, McCain insisted, in his demand that Congress fulfill its Article I duties. It is a sad moment for those who believe in a textualist or formalist approach to constitutional powers. All of those textualists who proudly embraced Neil Gorsuch are now apparently living constitutionalists as the subject turns to yet another war.
The Trump Administration has proven to be something of a perpetual motion machine churning out novel ethical and constitutional issues from emoluments to nepotism. The latest involves Dan Scavino, the White House social media director, after he went to his personal twitter account to call for the defeat of Michigan Rep. Justin Amash as a “liability” to the GOP. Amash was one of the conservative members of the Freedom Caucus to bar the effort to replace Obamacare. The tweets have raised questions under the Hatch Act as a form of political advocacy from the White House — a position endorsed by Richard Painter, a chief White House ethics lawyer under President George W. Bush. I am less convinced.
I have written about my mixed views of coverage of President Donald Trump. On one hand, he has caused much of the negative coverage with sensational and insulting tweets — as well as unforced errors by his White House staff. On the other hand, I have never seen more biased coverage by some major outlets which fail to offer counterarguments in favor of Trump or ignore developments supporting his claims. The recent disclosure that the unmasking of Trump aides may have been ordered by President Barack Obama’s national security adviser Susan Rice is a case in point. The most recent story was published by Bloomberg News. The startling disclosure was all but ignored by major outlets and networks or given only passing attention. As I have said on air, the unmasking allegation is a serious one and it is made all the more serious by the denials of Rice that she had any knowledge of any unmasking. [Update: Rice has gone on air and, while refusing to address the requests to unmask these individuals, she insisted that such requests are not unusual and, if done, were not done for political purposes. She did not deny that she was indeed the person asking for the unmasking of the individuals.]
Below is my recent column in The Hill Newspaper on the increased U.S. involvement in the fighting in Syria and Yemen. As usual, there is little concern (beyond Sen. Rand Paul) over the sending of troops into foreign conflicts without congressional approval or anything resembling a specific declaration of war. Indeed, when members insist that modern national security threats do not make specific declarations or authorizations practical, they sound much like “living constitution” advocates. Yet, we have now engaged in hundreds of military actions with only a small number of declarations and a small percentage of authorizations. As the Framers feared, war has become a continual and unilateral exercise of executive authority.
Continue reading “Textualists and Originalists Are Again AWOL in Wars on Syria and Yemen”
In Kentucky, United States District Court Judge David J. Hale has ruled that President Donald Trump’s statements at a campaign rally could be viewed as incitement to violence. At a March 2016 rally, Trump told supporters to :get ’em out of here” in reference to protesters. Supporters proceeded to assault protesters Henry Brousseau, Kashiya Nwanguma, and Molly Shah who filed this action. Hale rejected the claims that the lawsuit violates President Trump’s free speech protections. They are suing for incitement to riot, vicarious liability, and negligence.
Continue reading “Federal Court Rules That Trump May Have Incited Violence At Kentucky Rally”
Today I discussed how people should not assume that former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn has committed a crime or is turning on President Trump because his lawyer is seeking an immunity deal. Lawyers often seek immunity as an added protection, particularly in cases with powerful political interests. Moreover, some immunity deals are based on a witnesses information and not necessarily a witness’ culpability. It would seem that one person who would have to be convinced of that fact is Flynn himself. Flynn is shown below in 2016 saying that if someone gets immunity it probably means that you committed a crime.
We recently discussed the shocking effort by a California Democratic legislator to curtail free speech in a reckless effort to combat “fake news.” Now the Democratic California Attorney General Xavier Becerra has brought an equally chilling criminal case against two anti-abortion activists responsible for the videotapes that triggered national protests against Planned Parenthood. The 15 felony counts against David Daleiden and Susan Merritt are breathtaking and even warranted a rebuke from the Los Angeles Times. The prosecution could represent a radical shift toward prosecuting activists from environmentalists to animal right activists to pro life/pro choice protesters in their effort to record alleged abuses or violations.