The New Orleans police have arrested the men responsible for a shocking assault in the French Quarter. Two tourists from Boston were viciously attacked and robbed — a crime captured on videotape. James Curran and Tim Byrne were attacked from behind and Byrne is in critical condition.
Continue reading “Four Arrested In Vicious New Orleans Attack”
The victory of the Trump Administration in securing the lifting of much of the injunction on the immigration order consumed much of the analysis yesterday. The Court voted unanimously to lift the injunction for every one except those with “bona fide relationships” in the United States. The latter exception was a bit incongruous with the overall deference to the Executive Branch and led three justices — Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, and Neil Gorsuch — to dissent. They would have lifted the ban without exceptions. What was most interesting however was what was not in the order: a hearing date for July. The reason is that it was not requested by the Trump Administration. Given the 90 days expiration of the order, that leads to the question of whether this appeal is a case of “planned obsolescence.”
Continue reading “Is The Supreme Court Immigration Appeal A Case Of Planned Obsolescence?”
Ivanka Trump is facing a difficult lawsuit over alleged theft of the designs of an Italian shoemaker, Aquazurra Italia, as part of their “Wild Things” line. The company filed a trademark infringement claim against her and her company in June 2016 and a court recently rejected motions filed on Trump’s behalf. Those motions included a claim that Ivanka Trump’s duties as a high-ranking government official made her participation in the litigation too difficult. The claim was rejected. Part of the court’s rationale for rejected her arguments are distinctly reminiscent of the litigation over her father’s immigration order.
The giant replica of Noah’s Ark built by Creationist Ken Ham appears to be a failure on a truly biblical proportion. Built with contributions from public funds, Ham is blamed the dismal sales of “intolerant secularists” and the media who have spread lies about the attraction. It is a curious excuse since the Ark is symbol of ignoring doubters and critics to prevail with divine intervention.
There is a new controversy involving an investigation of a professor for statements made on social media. Trinity College Professor Johnny Williams has fled Connecticut after receiving death threats over his postings, including an inflammatory reference to people considered bigots and how we should “Let Them. F**king Die.” Williams teaches classes on race and racism and clearly wanted to get others to read this hateful screed.
An 18-page investigation memorandum has been obtained by NBC News that raises some disturbing questions about the Nixon White House and specifically the role of former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger. The memo details the campaign of political violence by Nixon aides. The memo references a plot to have Daniel Ellsberg beaten up by surrogates of the Nixon Administration. Kissinger has been cited as one of those pushing Nixon to deal with Ellsberg.
Continue reading “Did Henry Kissinger Push Nixon To Assault Daniel Ellsberg?”
We have previously discussed the erosion of free speech rights in high schools as well as the expansion of discipline for students for discussions and postings outside of school. That conflict was vividly shown in Pennsylvania where Peter Butera was speaking to the graduating class of his high school when he criticized the lack of power in student government. The response from Principal Jon Pollard was swift. Butera’s mike was cut off and he was escorted stage.
I have the honor of participating this year in the special program benefiting the widely respected Shakespeare Theatre Company in Washington, D.C. Since 1994, the Mock Trial Series has been held to bring Supreme Court justices and members of the bar to join in a fun night in which Shakespeare figures are tried by leading members of the bar. This year, the three Weird Sisters from Macbeth will be in the dock. The bench will consist of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Justice Stephen G. Breyer, Judge David S. Tatel, Judge Sri Srinivasan, and Judge Patricia A. Millett, United States Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. The court marshal will be Pamela Talkin, of the Supreme Court of the United States. As the jurists deliberate the fate of the three sisters, I will take the stage with attorney Abbe Lowell to discuss the recent conviction of Michele Parker for encouraging the suicide of Conrad Roy III.
Another day, another leak. The Wall Street Journal is reporting that it has seen a memo written by Rick Ledgett, the former deputy director of the NSA, detailing a phone call in which U.S. President Donald Trump NSA Director Admiral Mike Rogers to state publicly that there is no evidence of collusion between his campaign and Russia. It is the latest high-level official reporting a concerted effort by Trump to dispel allegations of collusion. While the Special Counsel is reportedly seeking to interview Ledgett, I still remain skeptical of the current facts being used as the basis for an obstruction case. As I previously discussed, Robert Mueller has hired at least one senior lawyer known for his unsuccessful effort to expand the scope of obstruction. However, this memo does not necessarily change the narrative on both sides of the controversy. There remains an obvious defense to a conventional obstruction claim – assuming the definition of the crime is not stretched beyond recognition to change the meaning of “corruptly influence.”
Last week, CNN filed a lawsuit seeking the famous Comey memos from the FBI, which is discussed in the column below in The Hill newspaper. The lawsuit could produce an official characterization of the status of the memos as either personal or FBI information. After this column was posted, Judicial Watch also filed a lawsuit seeking the memos which it maintained were the property of the FBI. The lawsuit states “Upon learning that records have been unlawfully removed from the FBI, you then are required to initiate action through the Attorney General for the recovery of records.” These lawsuits could prove vindicating or implicating for Comey. [Update: other news organizations have added additional lawsuits]
Here is the column:
Democrats are clamoring for the resignation of Attorney General Jeff Sessions this week in the wake of his testimony before the Senate. I fail to see the good-faith basis for these calls, particularly after his testimony. Sessions shot down the claims of a third meeting with Russians that was the subject of breathless media reports for days. He also did an excellent job in explaining the steps that he took in recusing himself, including declining to play any role in the Russian investigation long before his formal recusal. He was also on good ground in declining to discuss conversations with the President in the Oval Office. Despite the shock expressed by Democratic Senators, he is in a long line of cabinet members declining to disclose such presidential communications. Nevertheless, the Democrats were right that you should have a formal invocation of executive privilege before declining to answer questions from Congress. However, as discussed in the column below, that is not uncommon.
Yet, the Administration had just gone through a controversial hearing with top intelligence officials refusing to answer such questions and clearly knew that these questions were coming. What did not make sense in the testimony of National Security Agency director Adm. Mike Rogers and National Intelligence Director Dan Coats was their refusal to answer on the ground that it would be “inappropriate.” That makes no sense in isolation without an indication that the questions will be reviewed and addressed by White House counsel in whether executive privilege will be invoked. The same problem arose with the testimony of Sessions (which was magnified by the fact that the White House has been pummeled over the earlier hearing).
The White House should have simply invoked the privilege with regard to presidential communications in the Oval Office in advance while stating an intention to try to answer as many of the questions of the Committee as possible within those long-standing constitutional confines. It is not unheard of to decline to answer questions pending review but Sessions did not promise to have questions reviewed. If he does not secure an invocation (or permission to disclose), he would simply be refusing to answer questions of Congress which constitutes contempt of Congress. This is not necessary. The White House Counsel should have sent a letter in advance of the hearing either invoking or waiving privilege. Alternatively, he needs to send a letter to address the outstanding questions. Congress has a right to have its questions answered unless the White House claims privilege. Even with an invocation, Congress can overcome the privilege with a proper showing to a court. The process requires a firm answer from the White House on the basis for refusing to answer questions and it cannot be a categorical denial based on unease or discomfort.
Here is the column in the Hill Newspaper.
Continue reading “Both Sessions and the Senators Were Right in the Fight Over Executive Privilege”
New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie (R) is close to reaching a statistical zero for support. According to a new poll, Christie is supported by only 15 percent of voters. Given the error rate of standard polls, Christie is rapidly reducing his support to his immediate family. This is the lowest approval rating “for any governor in any state surveyed by Quinnipiac University in more than 20 years.”
This includes a now 81 percent disapproval rating. Yes, you read that correctly. Eighty-one percent disapproval.
President Donald Trump has pledged to reduce red tape and regulations for businesses in the United States. It is a worthy goal, but it has led to some curious decisions. For example, the Administration just tossed a new rule intended to limit the numbers of endangered whales and sea turtles getting caught in fishing nets. This rule however was supported by the fishing industry. Thus, this was a rare case where conservationists and corporations agreed. It was the Trump Administration that did not agree. Not only was the rule proposed by the Pacific Fishery Management Council had proposed the new regulation in 2015, but the federal government has been implementing the plan.
I was in Fox studios in Washington this morning when the news came out of the shooting of House Majority Whip Steve Scalise, Rep. Roger Williams and others at a baseball field in Alexandria. It was a horrific story made all the more surreal by the fact that I used to take my kids to that field when I lived in Alexandria. This is a very peaceful area where families gather regularly near the Del Rey neighborhood. There is still differing accounts of whether the shooter is dead. If he is alive, there are specific federal offenses for this type of act that makes this a federal offense as well as a state offense. Such an assault on a member is deemed attempted assassination under the federal law due to the status of the victim (and likely motivation of the crime).Continue reading “House Majority Whip and Others Shot During Baseball Practice [UPDATED]”
Missouri Representative Mike Moon (R-Ash Grove) takes a more literal meaning to the classic political pledge of a “chicken in every pot.” In a truly bizarre video below, the Republican legislator decapitated a chicken while discussing a special session and then pulled out its heart.