We have been discussing the controversy of the use of unmarked cars by federal officers to arrest people in Portland. As I have written, the use of unmarked cars and (even those these officers worn police markings) plain clothes is a common practice and not unconstitutional. Now an arrest by the NYPD using an unmarked carhas led to similar objections. MSNBC host Chris Hayes even declared that the view below constitutes a “kidnapping.” It isn’t. It is not even illegal or improper to use an unmarked vehicle. The basis for the arrest can be challenged but the rhetoric of the coverage is outstripping the reality of the law. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) has declared the video to be evidence of an authoritarian takeover.
Category: Politics
The City of Portland has demanded that the federal government take down a fence that has separated both protesters and rioters from the federal courthouse, including those who have repeatedly tried to burn down the courthouse. Now Portland Commissioner Chloe Eudaly is imposing a $500 fine every 15 minutes until the fence is removed even though the federal officers believe the removal would cause far greater damage and injuries on both sides. The question is whether a city can impose such a fine against the federal government.
There is an interesting fight brewing between the lawyers for Covington Catholic High School student Nichola Sandmann and CNN. We recently discussed how the Washington Post reached a settlement with Sandmann and how many in the media are still abusing this teenager despite the fact that he was not, as reported, the aggressor in an incident with a Native American activist in front of the Lincoln Memorial. The posting notes that CNN also reached a confidential settlement. Now, however, CNN’s chief media correspondent Brian Stelter and its legal analyst Asha Rangappa have commented on the settlement — dismissing it as involving just a small payment to end a nuisance lawsuit. Sandmann’s counsel Lin Wood has cried foul that this is a violation of the confidentiality terms which bar public comments on the agreement. Yet, Stelter and Rangappa are put on the air to discuss public controversies. These agreements are designed particularly to prevent comments to the media, but what if the party is the media? This is a major public controversy. The question is whether analysts discussing a news story is the same as CNN as an entity discussing terms of the agreement or disparaging the settlement. Wood clearly believes so.
Continue reading “Did CNN’s Stelter Shatter The Sandmann Confidentiality Agreement?”
The State University of New York-Binghamton is the defendant in a new lawsuit over its failure to protect College Republicans and a leading conservative economist in public events last year. The Binghamton University College Republicans and the Young America’s Foundation (YAF) is suing Binghamton University President Harvey Stenger, Vice President for Student Affairs Brian Rose; Chief of Binghamton University Police Department John Pelletier, the College Progressives, and Progressive Leaders of Tomorrow (PLOT) for the denial of First and Fourteenth Amendment violations.
Below is my column in The Hill on the recent disclosure of a document showing that the FBI used an agent to gather information for Crossfire Hurricane during campaign briefings of Trump during 2016. The document directly contradicted the long-standing denial that the investigation to Russian collusion was ever used to gather intelligence on Trump or his campaign. At the same time, the credibility of the Steele Dossier was further undermined this weekend with the release of new information that Steele misrepresented the sources and information used as the basis for this report, which was funded by the Hillary Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee. The source for the most alarming allegations was revealed as Igor Danchenko, 42, as confirmed to The New York Times, He was not the “Russian-based” source claimed by Steele and the FBI learned that Steele took third-hard rumors and presented them as hard intelligence in the report used to help justify the Russian collusion investigation. This source was used in the last two renewal applications to the FISA court as a “truthful and cooperative” and “Russian-based,” according to the Justice Department Inspector General report found. So it turns out that the primary “source” of Steele’s dossier was “not a well-connected current or former Russian official, but a non-Russian-based contract employee of Steele’s firm.”
None of this has made any difference to the coverage. On ABC Sunday, George Stephanopoulos had Chris Christie as a guest but his involvement in the very meeting discussed in the document did not merit a single question from the host. In the meantime, Democratic leaders, who once mocked the idea of any investigation of Trump or targeting of the campaign, now say that it really doesn’t matter. Rep. Eric Swalwell says that it was actually “the right thing to do.”
Here is the column: Continue reading “Willful Blindness: New Damaging Information On The Russian Investigation Is Promptly Unseen By The Media”
As I discussed in a column this weekend, Democratic members have spent years mocking allegations that there was any spying or surveillance of Trump or his campaign by the FBI. That was just a conspiracy theory. Now however there is proof that the FBI used a briefing in August 2016 of then candidate Trump to gather information for “Crossfire Hurricane,” the Russia investigation. It turns out that it did not really matter after all and Rep. Eric Swalwell did not miss a step. He simply declared that such targeting of the opposing party and its leading presidential candidate was the right thing to do. That’s it. A conspiracy theory suddenly becomes a commendable act. Continue reading ““They Were Right To Do It”: Swalwell Praises FBI For Using Campaign Briefing To Investigate Trump [Updated]”
Like many, I have criticized Speaker Nancy Pelosi for calling federal officers in places like Portland “stormtroopers.” It is highly offensive on a myriad of different levels and serves to fuel attacks on federal officers who have suffered significant levels of injuries in the rioting. However, the recent statement from Ken Cuccinelli, acting deputy secretary of Homeland Security, on the possibility of libel lawsuits is unsustainable under current tort law.
Continue reading “No, Pelosi’s “Stormtrooper”Attack On Federal Officers Is Not Libel”
U.S. District Judge James Robart issued an order Friday night that blocked a Seattle law prohibiting police from using pepper spray and other anti-riot weapons. While described by the court as “very temporary,” it is also very dubious from a constitutional standpoint. I do not see the authority of a federal judge to stop the City of Seattle from determining what gear and devices may be used by its own officers, particularly in response to the federal government objecting to the state policy. The court in my view does not have the authority to make such a policy decision, even on a “very temporary” basis. Update: A different federal judge issued a more credible ruling in rejecting the demand of the Oregon Attorney General to put limits on the federal officers. The Oregon Attorney General’s filing was long on rhetoric and short on the law.
Growing up in Chicago, the giant Christopher Columbus statue was a well-known feature in Grant Park. It is now gone. Mayor Lori Lightfoot moved to end the violent protests through an act of surrender. She unilaterally ordered the removal of statue. Problem solved? No, the problem was mob action to remove the statue and Mayor Lightfoot just yielded to violence which left many police officers injured in its wake as well as a number of protesters. Indeed, before the removal, Lightfoot’s own home was targeted after she spoke with President Donald Trump about the use of federal officers to deal with the crime surge in the city. The protesters were demanding the defunding of the Chicago Police Department. My concern is that this was an act that confirmed that rioting and violence can prevail. In the end, it was not the statue but the rule of law that was at issue in Grant Park. Both were lost in the dead of night.
We recently discussed a Vermont principal who was told that she would have to retire after expressing her opinion of Black Lives Matter on her personal Facebook page. Now, a popular social studies teacher and baseball coach at Walled Lake Western High School in Michigan has been fired after tweeting his support for President Donald Trump and reopening the schools. For free speech advocates, the firing of Justin Kucera, 28, raises concerns that he might be another teacher terminated for expressing unpopular views outside of the school. The District denies that it fired Kucera over his support for Trump but that means that someone is lying: either Kucera or the District. For his part, Kucera said that it was the tweets that were raised by the District, not some other ground for termination. Continue reading “Was This Michigan Teacher Fired After Tweeting Support For Trump and Reopening Schools?”
Below is my column in the Hill on a variety of proposals that could rekindle the debate over “reverse discrimination” in the federal courts. Many of the proposals seek to adopt exclusive racial classifications that will collide with existing precedent under both statutory and constitutional law. If this movement is to result in lasting reforms, these threshold legal challenges should be considered.
Here is the column: Continue reading “New Proposals Revive Debate Over “Reverse Discrimination””
We recently discussed the false tweet sent out by CNN’s White House reporter Jim Acosta that mocked White House press secretary Kayleigh McEnany for saying that “the science should not stand in the way of this.” That quote was artificially clipped to leave the diametrically opposite impression from what actually said. The clip suggests that McEnany was dismissing science when she was actually highlighting scientific work supporting the position of the White House. While Acosta later sent out another tweet noting the real meaning and his colleague Jake Tapper corrected the false narrative on the air, Chuck Todd on Meet the Press decided to play the misleading clip not once but twice on Sunday. It was not just running an overtly misleading clip but defiantly doing so after other journalists have challenged the erroneous impression left by the clip. The misleading quality of the clip clearly was not the problem but the appeal for Meet the Press.
The Washington Post recently made an interesting find when it sought the person responsible for recent extreme right actions like the appearance of heavily armed citizens at Gettysburg on Independence Day. Two members of the House Intelligence Committee, Rep. Raja Krishnamoorthi, D-Ill., and Rep. Peter Welch, D-Vt., demanded that government investigate and identify who was behind the Gettysburg hoax and similar false claims in nine other cities this summer. While there has been evidence of extreme right groups fueling violence in the recent protest, the Post found instead Adam Rahuba, a part-time food-delivery driver and supporter of Sen. Bernie Sanders. Rahuba said he supports the ant-fascist movement Antifa, a loosely organized group that I have criticized in the past for its anti-free speech agenda. Rahuba, 38, was trying to make chumps out of the far right but some have suggested possible criminal liability for the hoaxes.
There was a telling moment of dissonance on CNN this week, a network that is now unrelenting in its negative and highly partisan coverage of the Administration. CNN’s White House reporter Jim Acosta has been repeatedly called out for such bias and sent out a clearly misleading tweet bashing White House press secretary Kayleigh McEnany. Meanwhile, CNN host Jake Tapper set the record straight in fairness to McEnany. While I have occasionally criticized Tapper, I have more often praised him for his professionalism and intellect. This is why. This is what CNN was once and, with the help of figures like Tapper, it could be again: an honest and objective news organization.
I have recently been highly critical of reports that Rep. Iihan Omar (D., Minn.) has given up to one million dollars in campaign funds to her own husband’s company, one of the long-standing loopholes for corruption in Washington. Omar has been highly controversial for her positions and statements but this should be a matter that unifies people across the political spectrum. However, the attention of her colleagues has not been on closing this loophole but instead on lashing out at her recent call for the “dismantling the whole system of oppression” in the United States from its economic to political structures. A resolution, introduced by Rep. Andy Biggs (R., Ariz) would denounce Omar for having “a documented history of expressing anti-American sentiments.” The resolution is a mistake that undermines both free speech and democratic values. It should be withdrawn. Continue reading ““Anti-American”? House Members Move To Condemn Rep. Omar In Resolution”