We won’t go through the numbers, which everyone with a brain to know already knows. Jack Kelly does the heavy lifting on this farce. Meanwhile, Carl Cannon asks a question regarding journalistic practice and malpractice which we paraphrase thusly: hasn’t Erdely watched even one of the 350 episodes of SVU? Finally, Heather MacDonald explains that it’s back to the future in Fun City, at least for a while.
Archive for the 'Law' Category
Wretchard says American politics has seemed to split in two, and it’s hard to argue with that. Right now the mobile cameras of CNN are cruising the streets of NYC with seemingly thousands of people in what appear to be highly organized protests. The CNN commentary is exactly what you’d expect. It’s the narrative at work that we were talking about the other day. Obviously the merits of each of these incidents will vary all over the place, but it seems like a sure thing, unless the ratings drop into the toilet, that a new and long-running reality TV show has been born. Our question is: what’s the end game? Unless the country has really lost its marbles, a new policy of police-duck-and-cover and crooks-do-what-you-want cannot end well for its proponents. Insane policies have a history of not ending well. So what’s the end game here after incident 50 or 75?
Update: media insanity unbounded.
Clarice Feldman looks at the most recent immigration mess, created for no good reason, and possibly with counterproductive results, even if you think you’re in the business of creating Venezuela North, with a Silicon Valley offramp. What a mess! Of course, it’s been a mess for a long time; we only have to look back to 2007 when the bipartisan geniuses of the senate produced a bill with no effective enforcement mechanism. This is going to be a mess at least until there’s effective border fencing and a mechanism to immediately get rid of people who fly in and overstay their visas.
Hey, what the heck, let’s go all the way back to the early 1970′s.
This is a little tongue in cheek, but not completely so, even though the matter is serious. Rick Perry’s statement on his ridiculous indictment was heavy on the gravitas and old man talk, blah, blah, blah. However, it included this howler: “It is outrageous that some would use partisan political theatrics.”
Are you kidding? — theatrics is a weapon. Perry missed a great opportunity to expand his base and get the kids to watch. He should have said a couple of sentences about the indictment and then said “getta load of this,” playing this youtube video at about the 1 minute mark on a big screen in the background. The fadeout music should have been she’s once, twice, three times the limit (HT: DB). That sure would have beaten harumphing for impact, and would have appropriately treated a clown, however her vile and abusive of the judicial process, as a clown.
(For those of you who are interested in the serious elements of this, we recommend Patterico via Ace, where perfidy is put on enjoyable and ignominious public display.)
Update: Perry has caught on to the theater aspect of things.
Too much to reprint, but this link leads to a longish piece outlining the agendas of the IS. It must be said that at this juncture, these fellows are motivated!! — and sure up for good times, ah yes, good times. A decade ago we hoped in vain that the West would deal seriously with the ideology of its enemy. Not doing so has made the West a worse enemy, one to be ridiculed for its cowardice. We’ve now entered phase two of what Jonah Goldberg and many others view as a very long war. Finally, James Lewis has a rather more excited piece on some of the same.
Bagpipers have expressed their fear over a new law which led to two US teenagers having their pipes seized by border control staff at the weekend. Campbell Webster, 17 and Eryk Bean, 17, both from New Hampshire had their pipes seized while travelling between Canada and the US, just two days before they were due to fly to Scotland for the World Pipe Band Championships. Mr Webster’s pipes, which were previously used by his father in his role as an official piper to the Queen, were confiscated by officials because they are made out of ivory.
New laws brought in earlier this year mean that owners of pipes containing ivory must get a Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES) certificate from the US Fish and Wildlife Service in order to transport their pipes across borders. And pipers hoping to travel to Scotland for the competition will have to make an appointment with officials at a “designated” port and make a declaration on their customs form. But pipers say the confusing rules, brought in at the end of June, are causing “significant concern” – with many unsure how the new laws work.
Mr Webster, from Concord, New Hampshire, had his £6,000 bagpipes taken off him by US Border Patrol in Vermont just two days before he was due to fly to Scotland. The teenager said he had a CITES permit but was told he needed it amended to allow him to travel through smaller border crossings…
He said: “My friend and I both had our pipes seized by the US government Sunday night. “We were told we were never going to see them again.” “There is no way to describe the feeling watching border patrol agents seizing your bagpipes right in front of you.” Campbell’s vintage 1936 silver and ivory Robertson pipes previously belonged to his dad Gordon Webster – pipe-major with the 1st and 2nd Battalion Scots Guards and once an official piper to Queen Elizabeth II.
It’s an ISIS versus SISSI world. One group makes snuff videos and beheads or crucifies its opponents, and the other harasses bagpipers, guitar makers, and boy scouts. Who will win in the coming showdown?
According to CNBC, the DOJ and FBI are investigating Herbalife, an MLM company, so, knowing that, you’re already forewarned as an investor. The company’s auditor is PWC, which we’ve used and found to be straightforward and highly professional. And we’re also a decade removed from Enron and Arthur Andersen, so one presumes the toleration of shoddy accounting practices in controversial companies is not common in what were once the Big 8. Finally, storied investors are on all sides of the Herbalife trade.
We were introduced to cash flow and revenue recognition problems in the ancient case of Stirling Homex‘s bankruptcy, which featured something called “unbilled long-term receivables.” Points for creativity, Mr. Stirling! In the case of Herbalife, it would be very interesting to know the length of the cash cycle from product creation to payment by the final consumer of the product, not just one or two L’s in the MLM. (Herbalife’s auditor is a successor to that of Stirling Homex.) So there is plenty of history to such issues and plenty of real experts on the case; hence it seemed an odd use of time for additional federal employees. Then again. Hmmmm.
A company says it
believes both in equality and freedom of speech. Equality is necessary for meaningful speech. And you need free speech to fight for equality. Figuring out how to stand for both at the same time can be hard.
If the spring of popular government in time of peace is virtue, the springs of popular government in revolution are at once virtue and terror: virtue, without which terror is fatal; terror, without which virtue is powerless. Terror is nothing other than justice, prompt, severe, inflexible; it is therefore an emanation of virtue
There certainly are a lot of angry people in the upper crust today. There are many reasons to dislike corporations, government, and crowds of all sorts.
intentional discrimination occurs when a school has a discipline policy that is neutral on its face (meaning the language of the policy does not explicitly differentiate between students based on their race), but the school administers the policy in a discriminatory manner or when a school permits the ad hoc and discriminatory discipline of students in areas that its policy does not fully address. Such intentional discrimination in the administration of student discipline can take many forms. The typical example is when similarly situated students of different races are disciplined differently for the same offense. Students are similarly situated when they are comparable, even if not identical, in relevant respects. For example, assume a group of Asian-American and Native-American students, none of whom had ever engaged in or previously been disciplined for misconduct, got into a fight, and the school conducted an investigation. If the school could not determine how the fight began and had no information demonstrating that students behaved differently during the fight, e.g., one group used weapons, then the school’s decision to discipline the Asian-American students more harshly than the Native-American students would raise an inference of intentional discrimination. Selective enforcement of a facially neutral policy against students of one race is also prohibited intentional discrimination. This can occur, for example, when a school official elects to overlook a violation of a policy committed by a student who is a member of one racial group, while strictly enforcing the policy against a student who is a member of another racial group. It can occur at the classroom level as well. The Departments often receive complaints from parents that a teacher only refers students of a particular race outside of the classroom for discipline, even though students of other races in that classroom commit the same infractions. Where this is true, there has been selective enforcement, even if an administrator issues the same consequence for all students referred for discipline. Intentional discrimination also occurs when a school adopts a facially neutral policy with the intent to target students of a particular race for invidious reasons. This is so even if the school punishes students of other races under the policy. For example, if school officials believed that students of a particular race were likely to wear a particular style of clothing, and then, as a means of penalizing students of that race (as opposed to as a means of advancing a legitimate school objective), adopted a policy that made wearing that style of clothing a violation of the dress code, the policy would constitute unlawful intentional discrimination.
Yes, we heard from Amy Chua that the fight above was about getting extra adderall so some could study a full 26 hours a day. Seriously, common sense is all but illegal in this country; Larry elder explains. HT: PL
The NSA says that Congressmen are just as unsurveilled as any other American:
NSA’s authorities to collect signals intelligence data include procedures that protect the privacy of U.S. persons. Such protections are built into and cut across the entire process. Members of Congress have the same privacy protections as all U.S. persons
Comforting, yes? It’s nice when left and right can agree. Meanwhile, the author of the Looming Tower asks other disturbing questions about NSA surveillance and government competence. Our POV: if 4 of the 9-11 hijackers were in the US on expired visas, and even NPR notes that half of vias holders overstay their legal welcome, wazzup with collecting massive data on every American when there are so many people left to do illegal things on a daily basis?
Take the top 14 companies in the Fortune 500. These include such diverse names as GM, GE, Wal-Mart, AT&T, Exxon, McKesson, Fannie Mae, and CVS. Imagine that some government genius came up with a clever scheme that you can sign up online to access services from all these companies, and that the companies will be able to seamlessly communicate with each other, and that this will all be done through a centralized government hub linking diverse federal departments, and done all at once without beta testing. Yes, it’s an imperfect analogy to the ACA, but apt in that the combined sales of these corporate behemoths approximates the size of the broadly defined US healthcare industry.
So the insane scheme would be a gigantic disaster in the regular corporate world and its proponents would be run out of town on a rail, or more likely in prison for multiple frauds and other felonies. And it’s a disaster that naturally metastasizes as the initial screw-ups propagate much more complex screw-ups down the line, and the improvised attempts at fixes create the impossibility of stability and long-term planning that are critical to running any enterprise. So at the moment the tiny problems only include doctors with scalpels aready unable to get authorization to operate, people are leaving ER’s due to cost uncertainties, and babies that can’t be added to coverage in the simple old ways. (Note in the linked US pieces that the MSM are still covering for these idiots.)
Stay tuned for worse. The many errors and omissions will continue to propagate faster than they can be fixed, since (among other things) the whole edifice was built on the frauds that (a) the young will subsidize the old by buying illogical, expensive products; and (b) the thousands of errors in the Rube Goldberg machine will cease propagating new and novel errors that we can’t even imagine today. Centralization simply can not keep up with the billions or trillions of individual decisions made by hundreds of millions of people in a swiftly moving technology and IT environment.
Centralization can do some things well, as Cuba, the USSR, North Korea, Mao’s China, and so on have demonstrated over the last hundred years. It can grind things to a halt and create chaos, which is what is happening. The really bad news is that once all the existing, stable systems (as awful and imperfect as they have often been) are disabled, and professional routine and the collective knowledge of doing things according to habit have been lost, all you’ve got is Humpty Dumpty.
only 26 percent with divorced parents move up, compared with 42 percent born to unmarried mothers…and 50 percent who grow up with two married parents…Daniel Patrick Moynihan, then–assistant labor secretary, won fame — and vicious criticism — for his report lamenting that 24 percent of black births were to unmarried mothers. By 2009, that rate had risen to 72 percent — and the rate of unmarried births to all American mothers was 41 percent…Go back…to the years around 1900, and Americans were marrying later, and larger percentages than today never married at all.
We find the 42% number above to be curious. However, at a recent family gathering, we learned that, despite years of trying and locating volumes of documents, no one has been able to find any proof that grandma and grandpa were married. We figure it was a shotgun wedding without the wedding, with grandma moving from MA to RI just ahead of the stork. If they never actually married, it was a well kept secret.
In this way the 42% makes sense, if a substantial number of the children of unmarried mothers are growing up with 2 parents. We agree with Charles Murray that the numbers look awful, but it would be very interesting to know how many unmarried 2 parent households there are today.
AP via ABC:
Thamsanqa Jantjie said in a 45-minute interview with The Associated Press that his hallucinations began while he was interpreting…”What happened that day, I see angels come to the stadium…I start realizing that the problem is here. And the problem, I don’t know the attack of this problem, how will it come. Sometimes I get violent on that place. Sometimes I will see things chasing me,” Jantjie said. “I was in a very difficult position,” he added. “And remember those people, the president and everyone, they were armed, there was armed police around me. If I start panicking I’ll start being a problem. I have to deal with this in a manner so that I mustn’t embarrass my country.” Asked how often he had become violent, he said “a lot” while declining to provide details.
It could have been a lot worse for him. He could have been a six year old in today’s USA.
Robert Blatt, a technology consultant in Ventura County, said he didn’t appreciate receiving an email Thursday from a local agent asking him about his unfinished application with Covered California. He said it violates his privacy, and he wondered what other details on his application were shared with the agent. “You can’t do this,” Blatt said. “For a government agency to release this information to an outside person is a major issue.” In the email Blatt received, the local agent said, “your contact information was provided to me by Covered California since your application is not yet finalized, however, you have been determined as eligible by Covered California.” Blatt said he wasn’t interested in getting coverage through the exchange anymore
There’s no need for hackers when the government will just give out your information.
California is cancelling another 1.1 million people…Through mid-November, Covered California has enrolled about 80,000 people.
Let’s see. 80,000 “enrolled” though there have been no actual invoices or payments, versus 1,100,000 cancelled. You’re going to need a high number of good news stories to deal with a ratio like that. Ah yes, but the MSM have a lot invested in their fantasy world.
The split between lawmakers and the White House reflects the dilemma the president finds himself in as he seeks to follow through on last week’s acknowledgment about his incorrect promise on health care coverage. Hundreds of thousands of people have received cancellation notices from health insurance companies
The interesting thing about this is that it’s a news story, not an editorial. The editorial board used the word misspoke. Imagine the discussions among the editors and reporters to come up with “incorrect promise,” a phrase that apparently has never made it into the Times before. Good fun!
neither the federal insurance exchange nor the federal subsidies paid to insurance companies on behalf of low-income people are “federal health care programs.” The surprise decision, disclosed last week, exempts subsidized health insurance from a law that bans rebates, kickbacks, bribes and certain other financial arrangements in federal health programs, stripping law enforcement of a powerful tool used to fight fraud in other health care programs, like Medicare.
Surprise decision? Apparently the NYT hasn’t been paying attention to the MO of these characters.
the caller sounded so official that she agreed to meet him the next day at her home in Sherman Oaks, Calif. He told her the law meant she would have to update her Medicare card. Ms. Mirzayans, a retired small-business owner, was grateful that the government was taking such interest in her insurance coverage. Over glasses of pomegranate juice last month, Ms. Mirzayans divulged to her visitor crucial Medicare, Social Security and personal information.
Not to worry. Such things affect 5% of Americans at most.
Fraud is a serious federal felony, usually punishable by up to 20 years’ imprisonment — with every repetition of a fraudulent communication chargeable as a separate crime. In computing sentences, federal sentencing guidelines factor in such considerations as the dollar value of the fraud, the number of victims, and the degree to which the offender’s treachery breaches any special fiduciary duties he owes…
Justice Department guidelines, set forth in the U.S. Attorneys Manual, recommend prosecution for fraud in situations involving “any scheme which in its nature is directed to defrauding a class of persons, or the general public, with a substantial pattern of conduct”…
For a fraud prosecution to be valid, the fraudulent scheme need not have been successful. Nor is there any requirement that the schemer enrich himself personally. The prosecution must simply prove that some harm to the victim was contemplated by the schemer. If the victim actually was harmed, that is usually the best evidence that harm was what the schemer intended.
To be more illustrative, let’s say our schemer is the president of a health-insurance company, and that it was clearly foreseeable to him that his company’s clients would lose their current insurance plans if the company adopted his proposal of a complex new health-insurance framework…
The concept of fraudulent deception, like the concept of perjury and other forms of actionable false statement, often entails not only affirmative lies — e.g., the general manager who tells a baseball player, “I will not trade you if you sign the contract,” and then proceeds to trade the player after he signs; the concept also commonly involves the omission of material facts (what’s called “material omission”)
McCarthy’s piece has a political slant, but there’s potentially another, if we’re reading him correctly. By the middle of 2010, the CEO’s of publicly traded insurance companies must have known that up to tens of millions of their customers would be canceled by their companies. Arguably, the willful concealment of this information affected the price of their stock. Was their silence about material facts affecting share prices and their own compensation permissible under SEC disclosure rules? We don’t know. Just asking.