» 2014 » January

Rule of Law

Monthly Archives: January 2014

Upheaval is a word that might describe America in 1860 as the mystic chords of memory began to fade, and Americans disconnected in ways neither reason nor fear could stop. Upheaval could describe Europe of 1914 as the old order began to split apart.

Upheaval, the new book by Lou Dobbs, plots America’s position at this moment in 2014. Dobbs does not predict the future course of the American experiment, but rather charts how the nation has lost its way and arrived at a moment of upheaval. The book traces the drift away from unifying principles and cultural norms that are necessary to sustain civilizations.

Dobbs writes:

We face an axis of upheaval, powerful dynamics set in motion over the course of the last half century, forces that have become far more powerful with the passing of each decade. Unchecked, these forces will overwhelm this nation and culminate in the failure of the great American experiment.


Assume for a moment the American experiment in limited government and diffusion of power were to fail. There are now those among us, those in positions of power, that articulate openly the wider irrelevance of that event to humanity. After all, America is no different than any other nation, they say. The Greeks have their Greek exceptionalism, and the British have British exceptionalism, the president lectured. But those who know the history of the world know that an upheaval in the United States has consequences for the future in every corner of the world. Upheaval catalogs how we’ve gotten off course, and no one captain, no single political party carries all the blame. Both Republicans and Democrats have failed and continue to fail the nation.

Dobbs also describes an organized effort to destroy the foundational principles of the nation. This organized and well-funded upheaval by extreme leftist ideologues seeks to restructure forever the mechanics of government and the relationship between individuals and the state.

Fifty years ago, large corporations would have stood against this type of quiet revolution. These days, however, chamber of commerce-types are active participants in the upheaval. The “opposition party” no longer seems to have the stomach for opposition.

After the Romney-led loss in the 2012 elections, the RNC conducted a self-examination. The results? Dobbs:

They even referred to the report as “the autopsy.” Publically. Time and time again, “The autopsy” basically concluded that the Republican Party wasn’t enough like the Democratic Party and therefore failed in the election.

What is the Republican Party’s response to the 2012 election catastrophe? More of the same. Look at who was running the ruinous tactics of the Romney campaign. Remember Orca, the GOTV computer system that gobbled millions of donor dollars and crashed into nothingness on Election Day? Look at all the Romney staffers now being hired by Republican Senate and House campaigns.

Wasn’t Romney’s top sell that he knew how to run a business organization? The festering Orca stunk up Romney’s most attractive selling point. Dobbs:

Republicans are particularly gifted when it comes to recycling. By recycling I mean recycling the same leaders, the same consultants, the same pollsters, the same media advisors election cycle after election cycle. It’s insanity. Pure insanity. A manager at your local 7-Eleven has a better track record of hiring responsible, competent people than some of these multi-million dollar political campaigns.

Regarding Romney himself, Dobbs writes:

The party chose the one candidate who lost the last time to the guy who lost to Obama the first time. … Somehow Republicans convinced themselves that Romney was a really good idea.

Perhaps we should catalog the names of those who thought so back then, so we know which opinions to avoid in 2016.

Upheaval plots the events which have pushed America off course. These include the salaries of tens of thousands of bureaucrats and officials in Washington, D.C. who make upwards of $160,000 plus generous benefits pushing the total near $200,000. Meanwhile, the median income of most Americans is hardly a quarter of that. These same bureaucrats are part of a bureaucracy skilled at explaining why they are so important and can never be cut, not by one penny.

Dobbs documents criminal behavior by bank executives at HSBC in laundering Mexican drug money in the United States, yet not one single bank executive/money launderer was indicted by Eric Holder’s Justice Department — Holder told Congress that HSBC was “too large” to mess with.

Who spends more on campaign ads: corporations, or unions? Upheaval has an answer: union, singular:

Teachers unions have spent nearly three times as much on campaign ads as all corporations combined.

No wonder the left hates Citizens United.

How many actual “green jobs” have been created since Obama spent billions on the issue? Upheaval has the answer — 4,700:

There are more people working in the executive branch of the Obama administration.

Perhaps the most frightening part of Upheaval describes the impact of falling birthrates on the American dream. Europe is already turning into a demographic wasteland, with an elderly population that dwarfs the young paying for the social safety net. In Japan, millions of males have lost interest in women and instead have electronic devices which are programed to simulate interaction with a girlfriend. They sleep all day and play video games all night. Mothers leave trays of food outside their bedroom door. Meanwhile, American elites praise the culture of relationships without children, sometimes elevating pets as a comparable substitute.

Even if the thought makes you uncomfortable, an economy and a culture that does not value and produce offspring will eventually collapse.

Pages: 1 2 | 22 Comments bullet bullet

I am a member of bar associations in two different states, so I get to compare and contrast how each state is run. I was shocked to learn today that South Carolina Supreme Court Justice Jean Toal is seeking re-election at the age of 70, even with her recent history of appearing in the news for matters other than court opinions. It’s time for South Carolina Chief Justice Toal to retire and let air breathe into the South Carolina judiciary.


Jean Toal is a former Democrat strong-arming legislator. Her legislative tendencies have from time to time carried over into her management of the bar and judiciary in South Carolina. She is not beyond calling a state trial-court judge on the phone to ride herd on a local nuisance which could impair her broader legislative agenda, even though she is no longer in the legislature. Some trial judges in the state who are not firmly in her camp have found themselves riding circuit to the far swampy corners of the state, many miles from their home base.

Simply, it’s time for South Carolina to a have a Supreme Court chief who behaves more like Chief Justice John Roberts and less like Huey Long.

I get materials from two different state bar associations mailed to me regularly. Nearly every piece of mail from the South Carolina Bar Association is stamped prominently with the face of Jean Toal — almost as if she is running a political campaign, which now, of course, she is. I reported on this phenomena in the local newspaper some years ago. Afterwards, bar mailings with her mug abated, for a time. But now they are back.

A typical South Carolina Bar direct mail piece.

A typical South Carolina Bar direct mail piece.

The legislature in South Carolina elects judges. The legislature is overwhelmingly Republican. (The Myrtle Beach Sun News reports on a hot race between Jean Toal and sitting Justice Costa Pleicones.)

Toal is famous for being reversed by the United States Supreme Court. One famous reversal was delivered by Justice Antonin Scalia in Lucas v. South Carolina Coastal Council – in that case, Toal ruled that South Carolina could prohibit a landowner from erecting an oceanfront house as long as a state deemed it improper to build, even if the landowner invested their life savings into the property for a home. Toal’s opinion reasoned that the owner could still enjoy some use of the property — like having picnics. 

Pages: 1 2 | 11 Comments bullet bullet

Dinesh D’Souza, fierce critic of the President, best selling author, and filmmaker has been indicted by Eric Holder’s Justice Department. The press release:

Former College President Indicted In Manhattan Federal Court For Campaign Finance Fraud

Preet Bharara, the United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York, and George Venizelos, the Assistant Director-in-Charge of the New York Office of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (“FBI”), announced today an Indictment charging DINESH D’SOUZA with violating the federal campaign finance laws by making illegal contributions to a United States Senate campaign in the names of others and causing false statements to be made to the Federal Election Commission in connection with those contributions. D’SOUZA is expected to be presented and arraigned tomorrow in Manhattan federal court before U.S. District Judge Richard M. Berman.

Manhattan U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara stated: “As we have long said, this Office and the FBI take a zero tolerance approach to corruption of the electoral process. If, as alleged, the defendant directed others to make contributions to a Senate campaign and reimbursed them, that is a serious violation of federal campaign finance laws.”

FBI Assistant Director-in-Charge George Venizelos stated: “Trying to influence elections through bogus campaign contributions is a serious crime. Today, Mr. D’Souza finds himself on the wrong side of the law. The Federal Election Campaign Act was written to limit the influence of money in elections; the FBI is fiercely committed to enforcing those laws to maintain the integrity of our democratic process.”

According to the allegations in the Indictment and statements made in court:

The Federal Election Campaign Act (the “Election Act”) is designed to limit financial influence in the election of candidates for federal office, including the Office of United States Senator, and provides for the public disclosure of the financing of federal election campaigns. In particular, the Election Act limits the amount and source of money that may be contributed to a federal candidate or that candidate’s authorized campaign committee. The Election Act specifically prohibits any person from making any contribution in the name of another, including reimbursing a third person, before or after that third person’s contribution, as inducement to make that contribution. The Federal Election Commission (“FEC”) is an agency and department of the United States with jurisdiction to compile and publicly report accurate information about the sources and amounts of election contributions.

In 2012, the Election Act limited both primary and general election campaign contributions to $2,500 for a total of $5,000 from any individual to any one candidate. In August 2012, D’SOUZA directed other individuals with whom he was associated to make contributions to the campaign committee for a candidate for the United States Senate (the “Campaign Committee”) that totaled $20,000. D’SOUZA then reimbursed those individuals for the contributions. By directing the illegal contributions to be made, D’SOUZA also caused the Campaign Committee to falsely report to the FEC the sources and amounts of those contributions to the campaign.

* * *

D’SOUZA, 52, of San Diego, California, is charged with one count of causing $20,000 in illegal campaign contributions to be made to a candidate for the United States Senate in calendar year 2012, which carries a maximum sentence of two years in prison. He also is charged with one count of causing false statements to be made to the FEC in connection with the illegal campaign contributions, which carries a maximum sentence of five years in prison.

The Indictment is the result of a routine review by the FBI of campaign filings with the FEC by various candidates after the 2012 election for United States Senator in New York. Mr. Bharara praised the investigative work of the FBI.

This case is being prosecuted by the Office’s Public Corruption Unit. Assistant United States Attorneys Carrie H. Cohen and Rebecca Ricigliano are in charge of the prosecution.

The charges contained in the Indictment are merely accusations and the defendant is presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty

PJ Media has obtained an email sent by Sherrilyn Ifill just before she was scheduled to appear on the Kelly File last week to discuss the nomination of Debo Adegbile, the lawyer who helped defend the cop killer Mumia Abu Jamal. Ifill is the head of the NAACP Legal Defense Fund, the organization once headed by Adegbile.



In the email, Ifill begs for prayers before she “put[s] the full armor on” to go on Fox News.  Notice she asks for “fervent prayers,” and find a link between her appearance the same day at a commemoration for To Kill a Mockingbird and talking about the Mumia Abu Jamal matter.  “I have to believe the 2 are somehow related.”

In To Kill a Mocking Bird, Atticus Finch defends an innocent man, Tom Robinson, from charges of rape.  Mumia Abu Jamal was found guilty of killing Philadelphia police officer Danny Faulkner.  Numerous appeals courts have affirmed the verdict.

Ifill ended up not appearing on the Kelly File to defend the NAACP’s role in the Mumia matter.

Ifill’s email:

>>> Sherrilyn Ifill 1/10/2014 12:45 PM >>>

It appears that I will be on FOX tonight (Megyn Kelly’s show) talking about the mounting right-wing campaign against the confirmation of a former LDF lawyer Debo Adegbile, who’s been nominated to serve as Asst. Atty General for Civil Rights.

The criticism is based on our representation of Mr. Mumia Abu-Jamal (while Mr. Adegbile was our litigation director). Mr. Abu-Jamal was convicted and sentenced to death of killing a police officer in Philadelphia in 1981. We did not represent Mr. Mumia at trial, but represented him 25 years later in a challenge to the process by which he was sentenced to death.

Attached is the statement we released today that explains LDF’s involvement in this case and our commitment to ensuring that race plays no role in the criminal justice system. The statement really explains our position and I encourage you to read it and circulate it.

I really do need your prayers tonight. I am going up into the camp and I need to put on the full armor! I plan to come out with more than I go in with, but I need you to surround me with your fervent prayers. The show will be at 9pm tonight.

Prior to the show I will be speaking at the NY Historical Society tonight introducing a showing of To Kill a Mockingbird. I have to believe the 2 are somehow related.

Sherrilyn Ifill

President & Director-Counsel

NAACP Legal Defense & Educational Fund, Inc.

40 Rector Street, 5th Fl.

New York, NY 10006

T. 212-965-2244


Debo Adegbile Is No John Adams

January 11th, 2014 - 6:18 am


A smiling and smarmy Hilary Shelton of the NAACP took to The Kelly File last night to compare Debo Adegbile to John Adams. Adegbile is President Obama’s radical nominee to head the Justice Department Civil Rights Division. While at the NAACP Legal Defense Fund, Adegbile oversaw the inexcusable defense of cop killer Mumia Abu-Jamal, among other radical policies.

Shelton and other NAACP officials are trying to repair the endangered nomination by comparing Debo Adegbile to John Adams. Adams, you see, represented British solider Hugh White who fired into the crowd in Boston, killing Americans. Adams took on the unpopular representation at White’s criminal trial.

Nice try, Hilary, but Debo Adegbile is no John Adams. While everyone has a constitutional right to a court appointed lawyer for trial, the NAACP’s representation of Mumia isn’t even close.

I was on Fox and Friends this morning to talk about the differences:

Mumia had been convicted and represented by counsel at his trial decades earlier. The NAACP was involved in a federal habeus corpus challenge to his conviction thirty years later.  This was a civil case, not a criminal one. At this stage of court proceedings, there is no constitutional right to counsel. This is particularly so when a murderer loses before the federal trial court, and appeals an adverse decision. Adams, in contrast, was representing White at the first stage of a criminal proceeding where we now believe the accused has a fundamental right to court appointed counsel.

But there are bigger and more toxic distinctions between John Adams and Debo Adegbile.

Pages: 1 2 3 | 14 Comments bullet bullet

Last night Republican Majority Leader Eric Cantor appeared on the Kelly File. He talked about legislation he is sponsoring to respond to Obamacare. The legislation requires DHS to send notice to anybody who had their identity stolen after signing up for Obamacare. When asked by Kelly how many people would benefit from the legislation, Cantor admitted that nobody has had their identity stolen as a result of signing up for Obamacare. Nevertheless, he said he believes the legislation is important. “Let’s start helping people,” Cantor suggested.



Today the Drudge Report covers the Justice Department’s racialist attack on school discipline policies. The DOJ policy is based on the idea that school discipline policies are racially discriminatory because black students comprise a greater percentage of students disciplined than their percentage in the general population. Call it exceeding the bad-behavior quota.

That this four-year-old federal policy exists wasn’t news. I covered it in my 2011 book InjusticeWhat is newsworthy is how these radical racialist education policies will outlast the Obama administration, and Republicans are ill-equipped to reverse it even if they win the White House.

As I wrote in Injustice:

The DOJ’s reasoning goes like this: if minorities face school discipline at rates greater than their overall percentage in the population, then the school is engaging in racial discrimination. As Civil Rights chief Tom Perez explained, “Black boys account for 9 percent of the nation’s student population, but comprise 24 percent of students suspended out of school and 30 percent of students expelled.” This preposterous racial bean-counting is an affront to the very concept of individual responsibility.

In January 2011, Perez announced that the DOJ would use a “disparate impact” analysis on school discipline cases to determine whether discipline policies were racially discriminatory. Thus, if blacks were disciplined in higher percentages than their share of the population, the DOJ would bring a lawsuit to stop the discipline policy. The new policy was on display at a DOJ conference on September 27 and 28, 2010, entitled “Civil Rights and School Discipline: Addressing Disparities to Ensure Educational Opportunity.” Attorney General Holder addressed the gathering and sought to “better understand the causes, and most effectively remedy the consequences, of disparities in student discipline.” Perez then complained that minority “students are being handed Draconian punishments for things like school uniform violations, schoolyard fights and subjective violations, such as disrespect and insubordination.”

Some might argue American schools have already allowed far too much disrespect and insubordination among students. That Tom Perez gives quarter for these acts illustrates the cultural demographic he and his fellow Obama political appointees seek to protect—the disrespectful and insubordinate.

We’ve come to expect this sort of policy from Eric Holder of protecting the lawless and misbehaving. The New Black Panther voter intimidation case dismissal was mere prologue.

Republicans in Congress have shown minimal skill in stopping these radical racialist programs.  Instead of defunding the components of the DOJ that perpetrate these lawless policies, they continue to vote for spending resolutions and budgets that fuel them.

And even if the GOP takes control of the Justice Department in 2017, it will take an attorney general willing to roll up his or her sleeves and clean out the mess inside the Civil Rights Division that is fueling these nutty and lawless policies.  Only a few GOP figures understand the scope of the problem and have the courage to correct it.  Among them are people like Representatives Louie Gohmert and Trey Gowdy and Senators Jeff Sessions and John Cornyn.

Here are three reasons why even these four would struggle in 2017 to reverse this lawless nuttiness:

Pages: 1 2 3 | 17 Comments bullet bullet