The whole thing, of course, begs the question (as usual) about whether or not it’s about science and exploration. And Chomsky’s economic insanity shines through, as always.
She thinks there is no such thing as an innocent man being falsely accused:
She’s suggesting that the criminal justice system isn’t easy enough for accusers. Police and juries won’t throw someone in jail based on nothing but an accusation. Therefore, a kinder, gentler justice system needs to exist to do just that. It is that kind of thinking that has prompted more than 70 male students to sue their universities after being expelled and treated like criminals without evidence — and sometimes with evidence that points to a false accusation.
Ashe Schow is doing yeowoman’s work in continuing to spotlight these Kafkaesque anti-male fascists.
The small town lawyer used to loom large in the American psyche. When an American of a certain age pictured a lawyer he thought of Abraham Lincoln, Atticus Finch, Perry Mason, or Matlock.
These lawyers were regular guys who took the business that walked in the door. If you went to law school expecting to be Perry Mason or Matlock you were certainly disappointed by how boring your life was, but not by what you earned.
After L.A. Law and The Firm Americans stopped thinking of lawyers as solo practitioners and somehow decided that all lawyers were good looking, interesting, and super, extra rich. This drew a whole new wave of confused history majors from college to law school, and floated a thirty year boom in the number of law schools, the number of law students, tuition, and profits. This was awesome news for law schools, less so for everyone else.
It didn’t help that it was subsidized by the student-loan program.
More false memories of it. I guess Mike thinks that if you repeat a falsehood often enough, people will start to believe it. I have never seen a study that justified, or even attempted to technically/economically justify SLS.
As I’ve often noted, these people are neither liberal, or progressive. They don’t believe in freedom of expression, they don’t believe in freedom of contract, they don’t believe in freedom of conscience, they don’t believe in liberty, period. They are racist fascist leftists, as they’ve always been, and I will continue to fight to take back the language.
[Update a few minutes later]
Here’s a great example: “Shut up,” he explained.
…it seems likely that this is the end of the National Raisin Reserve, because I doubt the government will be interested in maintaining a program that actually costs taxpayers’ dollars to run, rather than just farmers’ raisins. It may also have an impact on the 20 other crops that are subject to market orders, from almonds to spearmint, though it seems safe to bet that these will be litigated, with the government strenuously arguing that the market orders for these crops are nothing like that nasty, unconstitutional, wrinkly old National Raisin Reserve.
More broadly, this is a welcome move to limit the government’s generally expansive notions of when it may take your property without payment. However, don’t get too excited, because it doesn’t do too much to limit eminent domain where compensation is offered, or “regulatory takings” in which government rules make your property practically worthless, but not quite so worthless that it has to pay you for the lost potential uses.
There’s a lot more work to do, particularly on civil forfeiture.
It isn’t pretty.
A new video from Christina Hoff Sommers on how they threaten freedom:
I recently encountered fainting couchers at Oberlin College and Georgetown University. I visited both campuses to give talks on the need to reform feminism and correct exaggerated victim statistics. In the past, activist students who disagreed with me came to my lectures to spar and debate. Today, they issue trigger warnings and accuse me of giving them PTSD. At both Oberlin and Georgetown, activists organized safe spaces were where students could flee if they were panicked by my arguments. While I spoke at Oberlin, 35 students and a therapy dog sought refuge in a safe room. (I feel badly that I triggered a dog.)
Clearly, she is history’s greatest monster.
The legality of executive action, if the government loses.
Bottom line: The road to fixing this legislative atrocity goes through Congress. But of course, the Democrats will blame Republicans, none of whom voted for it, for this mess.
Busted: Proof she didn’t turn them all over.
It’s not like her withholding evidence is anything new. It goes all the way back to the Rose Law Firm.
Also, In addition to continuing to pressure the thugs at the IRS, Judicial Watch continues to go after Huma:
Revelations that Hillary Clinton used a secret email account to conduct official business while serving as secretary of state has led to more decisive action today by U.S. District Judge Emmet G. Sullivan. Judge Sullivan issued a decision to reopen a Judicial Watch Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit seeking records about Huma Abedin, the former deputy chief of staff, to Hillary Clinton.
This is actually the second Judicial Watch FOIA lawsuit that has been reopened because of Hillary Clinton’s hidden email records. Judicial Watch is aware of no prior instances of closed FOIA cases being reopened by federal courts.
Judge Sullivan ruled that the “changed circumstances” of the discovery that Hillary Clinton and members of her State Department staff used secret email accounts to conduct government business warranted “reopening” the lawsuit.
In asking Judge Sullivan to reopen the lawsuit, Judicial Watch cited a federal court rule (Rule 60(b)(3)) that allows a party to reopen a case due to “fraud (whether previously called intrinsic or extrinsic), misrepresentation, or misconduct by an opposing party”:
The State Department had an obligation under the Federal Records Act to properly preserve, maintain, and make available for retrieval records of its official functions. In fact, it is the obligation of the head of every federal agency to do so. Secretary Clinton plainly violated her own legal obligations. Doing so was misconduct.
The State Department originally agreed with Judicial Watch’s request but later changed its mind and asked the Court to reopen the lawsuit because of “newly discovered evidence.” In today’s ruling, Judge Sullivan simply reopened the case, rather than “spilling ink” on whether Hillary Clinton and the State Department committed fraud, misrepresentation or misconduct.
Good for them, and the judge. These people don’t deserve a term in the White House. They deserve a term of twenty to forty in Club Fed.