Free Republic 1st Quarter Fundraising Target: $88,000 Receipts & Pledges to-date: $20,877
23%  
Woo hoo!! And the first 23% is in!! Thank you all very much for your continuing support!!

Posts by Another Kansan

Brevity: Headers | « Text »
  • Why did Clinton/DNC need attorney-client privilege for Trump Dossier?

    10/26/2017 4:43:05 PM PDT · 13 of 15
    Another Kansan to Another Kansan

    https://www.grassley.senate.gov/news/news-releases/chairman-rejects-fusion-gps-excuses-withholding-documents-dossier-history

    From Senator Grassley:

    Neither Fusion GPS, led by Glenn Simpson, nor Orbis, led by Christopher Steele, are law firms or attorneys. Fusion GPS also claimed it could not waive the attorney-client privilege, but clients in such a relationship can. So, it is unclear how attorney-client privilege could apply. The firm could not explain how its work was in preparation for litigation, which is required to obtain attorney work product protections. Moreover, given the firm’s efforts to share the dossier with journalists and members of Congress, it was clearly not the firm’s intention to keep the client-funded opposition research confidential.

  • Why did Clinton/DNC need attorney-client privilege for Trump Dossier?

    10/26/2017 4:36:41 PM PDT · 12 of 15
    Another Kansan to PCPOET7

    Very fact specific question, but DC Bar Rule 1.16(a)(1) requires a DC lawyer to withdraw from representation if the representation is a violation of the rules of professional conduct or the law. It is well established that if a lawyer breaks the law they can be prosecuted and or disbarred. Interesting things happen when the lawyer of someone who is under investigation also needs to get a lawyer because of his/her involvement in the matter, effectively making the lawyer and client co-defendants. This fact pattern doesn’t happen too often, but it has happened.

  • Why did Clinton/DNC need attorney-client privilege for Trump Dossier?

    10/26/2017 4:25:36 PM PDT · 11 of 15
    Another Kansan to Oshkalaboomboom

    Not sure the FEC is directly implicated here. If - and this is speculative - the goal was to put a sensational document in FBI hands while making it impossible for staff level special agents to find out anything beyond Fusion GPS, attorney-client privilege would be a pretty good stone wall.

  • Why did Clinton/DNC need attorney-client privilege for Trump Dossier?

    10/26/2017 2:03:13 PM PDT · 1 of 15
    Another Kansan
    Nobody is talking about attorney-client privilege, but that may be important. You hire non-legal consultants through big, expensive law firms principally so that attorney client privilege will attach to the non-legal work being done by the consultant. With CrowdStrike, it kind of makes sense, they had a major IT breach/leak and knew they wanted to control the results of CrowdStrike's inquiry. It doesn't make as much sense with Fusion GPS, unless the plan from early on was dirty deeds. It is NOT normal for a campaign to hire opposition research through a big law firm, since that would likely dramatically increase the cost, unless the paying client knew in advance that they wanted to shield their relationship from government inquiry. Lawyering up way, way before there was any reason to think there might be legal action isn't normal - it suggests a well laid plan anticipating a need to keep law enforcement out of what was otherwise a routine and not particularly well executed piece of opposition research. Something doesn't smell right here...
  • Raped at 12, victim lashes out at Hillary for defending attacker

    08/09/2016 8:50:20 PM PDT · 5 of 16
    Another Kansan to amorphous

    Hillary’s putting the girl on trial did lead (indirectly, and to her shame) to the enactment of Arkansas’ rape shield laws. The state legislature called her conduct a judicial emergency. Just over a year after the poor girl was violated, and shortly after the trial. Sec. 5 of Act 197 of 1977 declared Hillary’s conduct had “has kept many victims of sex crimes from testifying against their attackers, has obscured the facts in sexual assault cases to the extent that juries have often reached improper verdicts, and has greatly hampered the administration of criminal justice in Arkansas. Therefore, an emergency is hereby declared to exist...”
    So - she has done something for women!

    Full quote:

    SECTION 5. It has been found and is declared by the General Assembly of Arkansas that the introduction of opinion evidence, reputation evidence, and evidence of specific instances of the victim’s prior sexual conduct with the defendant or any other person, where such evidence does not directly pertain to the prosecution upon which the act is based, and the absence of a pretrial hearing on the admissibility of this evidence, has kept many victims of sex crimes from testifying against their attackers, has obscured the facts in sexual assault cases to the extent that juries have often reached improper verdicts, and has greatly hampered the administration of criminal justice in Arkansas. Therefore, an emergency is hereby declared to exist, and this Act being necessary for the preservation of the public peace, health, and safety shall take effect and be in force from the date of its approval.

  • Appoint a special Counsel for Lerner

    06/30/2016 11:32:54 AM PDT · 9 of 14
    Another Kansan to Balata

    Its a fair point, of course. I agree that Congress cannot force the Attorney General to appoint a Special Counsel, but it certainly is within Congress’ ability to get a GAO investigation rolling. Not as useful as a Special Counsel but how about some congressional pressure to fully document the failure of statutory safeguards? Under the Internal Revenue Code (26 U.S.C. 6103(p)(4) DoJ is required to have specific safeguards in place to protect tax return records. Subparagraph (p)(6)(A) provides that these safeguards are subject to audit by the Comptroller General. Normally, if the Chair of a committee of jurisdiction requests the GAO to conduct an inquiry, the GAO will do so.

  • Appoint a special Counsel for Lerner

    06/30/2016 10:17:02 AM PDT · 1 of 14
    Another Kansan
    DOJ cannot prosecute her without admitting it was a participant in an illegal act. Because DOJ was complicit in the illegal act, it creates a conflict of interest which under 28 C.F.R. §600.1(a) is sufficient to warrant appointment of a Special Counsel.

    28 C.F.R. §600.1 Grounds for appointing a Special Counsel.

    The Attorney General, or in cases in which the Attorney General is recused, the Acting Attorney General, will appoint a Special Counsel when he or she determines that criminal investigation of a person or matter is warranted and—

    (a) That investigation or prosecution of that person or matter by a United States Attorney's Office or litigating Division of the Department of Justice would present a conflict of interest for the Department or other extraordinary circumstances; and

    (b) That under the circumstances, it would be in the public interest to appoint an outside Special Counsel to assume responsibility for the matter.

  • Statutory Basis for Determining Whether Bernie Sanders is a Communist.

    02/09/2016 12:10:44 PM PST · 1 of 13
    Another Kansan
    Camp Clinton says Sanders is a communist. Interestingly, the question of whether someone is a member of the Communist Party is a question for a jury under the Communist Control Act of 1954, the relevant portion of which is still on the books as 50 USC 844. Perhaps only of interest as a curiosity, but interesting nonetheless.
  • ITAR Changes: Keeping Up with the Times or Backdoor Gun Control?

    07/17/2015 5:53:06 AM PDT · 1 of 3
    Another Kansan
    This article provides an interesting analysis of the actual regulatory changes proposed by the Department of State. Most of the other things I've seen are more opinion than actual analysis of the proposed text. Worth a close read.
  • Vacate the Chair

    03/03/2015 10:59:55 AM PST · 1 of 5
    Another Kansan
    Deposing the Speaker via a resolution to vacate the chair is described in Clarence Cannon's precedents, circa 1910.
  • Rumsfeld's War on Bureaucracy

    09/11/2013 5:12:24 AM PDT · 1 of 2
    Another Kansan
    9/10/01 Rumsfeld anounced his "war on Bureaucracy." The next day, someone else decided to declare war on his bureaucracy, which didn't sit as well. RIP, Tamara Thurman and Barbara Olsen.
  • 9/11 Remembrance Day, Where were you when you heard of the Attacks?

    09/11/2013 4:08:16 AM PDT · 2 of 87
    Another Kansan to US Navy Vet

    Pentagon 3E1034

  • On Syria: Donít strike; shame the perpetrators

    09/06/2013 2:18:25 PM PDT · 1 of 6
    Another Kansan
  • Obama's school advertizing to fill armed guard positions.

    01/17/2013 11:16:29 AM PST · 1 of 13
    Another Kansan
  • H.R.347 -- Federal Restricted Buildings and Grounds Improvement Act of 2011

    03/13/2012 10:02:25 AM PDT · 7 of 14
    Another Kansan to Whenifhow

    This does very little that hasn’t been law since the 70s. Before jumping to conclusions, look at the justification in the committee report and the previous statutory provision.

    From the committee report on H.R. 347:

    http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CRPT-112hrpt9/pdf/CRPT-112hrpt9.pdf

    BACKGROUND AND NEED FOR THE LEGISLATION
    The United States Secret Service provides protective services to the President, the First Family, the Vice President, former Presidents, visiting heads of state, and others. This protection covers not only the White House and its grounds but also any where a protectee may be temporarily visiting. The Secret Service also provides protection at events designated as ‘‘a special event of national significance.’’

    Current law prohibits unlawful entries upon any restricted building or ground where the President, Vice President or other protectee is temporarily visiting. However, there is no Federal law that expressly prohibits unlawful entry to the White House and its grounds or the Vice President’s residence and its grounds. The Secret Service must therefore rely upon a provision in the District of Columbia Code, which addresses only minor misdemeanor infractions, when someone attempts to or successfully trespasses upon the grounds of the White House or Vice President’s residence or, worse, breaches the White House or Vice President’s residence itself.

    H.R. 347 remedies this problem by specifically including the
    White House, the Vice President’s residence, and their respective grounds in the definition of restricted buildings and grounds for purposes of Section 1752.

    The bill also clarifies that the penalties in Section 1752 of title 18 apply to those who knowingly enter or remain in any restricted building or grounds without lawful authority to do so. Current law does not include this important element. The bill makes other technical improvements to the existing law. In the 111th Congress, the House approved similar legislation (H.R. 2780) by voice vote on July 27, 2010.

    The prior statutory provisions are here:

    http://uscode.house.gov/uscode-cgi/fastweb.exe?getdoc+uscview+t17t20+874+1++%28%29%20%20AND%20%28%2818%29%20ADJ%20USC%29%3ACITE%20AND%20%28USC%20w%2F10%20%281752%29%29%3ACITE%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20

  • People for the American Way Identifies Photo of Westboro Demonstrators as Tea Party Members

    01/11/2012 4:32:47 AM PST · 4 of 11
    Another Kansan to Tolerance Sucks Rocks

    Never forget that Fred Phelps (the leader of the Westboro lunatics) and his family are Democrats. Phelps has run in Democratic Party primaries five times. These included races for governor in 1990, 1994, and 1998, for Senate in the 1992, and Mayor of Topeka in 1993 and 1997. He was a delegate to the 1988 Democrat National Convention. He ran Al Gore’s campaign for president in Eastern Kansas in 1988. He was invited to the 1992 AND 1996 presidential inagural. I don’t know if they ever attended a tea party event or not - they attend a lot of events merely to protest, and it would not be a surprise if they protested at Tea Party events the same way they protest at funerals of deceased servicemen and women.

  • OccupyDC Taking Suggestions for Manifesto - Oh please FREEP this!

    10/12/2011 10:10:37 AM PDT · 17 of 18
    Another Kansan to Libloather

    That young woman should cut the government a check. Right away! As much as she doesn’t want - heck, send it all!

    http://www.fms.treas.gov/faq/moretopics_gifts.html

    A new twist on our “voluntary” tax system.

  • OccupyDC Taking Suggestions for Manifesto - Oh please FREEP this!

    10/12/2011 1:54:38 AM PDT · 1 of 18
    Another Kansan
    Brilliant opportunity for the majority who pay taxes to submit their grievances against the failures of the system. Why not join the protest briefly, and drop something in their suggestion box! Some modest suggestions for consideration:

    1) Fannie Mae and irresponsible lending to people who can't pay their debts, causing the financial system to collapse;

    2) Excessive regulation stifling job creation;

    3) Irresponsible fiscal polices leading to unsustainable deficit spending;

    4) Excessive taxation stunting productive areas of the economy, and promoting unproductive areas;

    ...All can play!

  • Sanford Says He's Forced to Sign Stimulus Request (Forced? I didn't see no gun to his head)

    06/08/2009 8:45:52 PM PDT · 21 of 37
    Another Kansan to fieldmarshaldj

    In the interest of full disclosure, I worked for Mark once upon a time. So the personal endorsement is that he is a good man and deserves the benefit of the doubt. As an attorney, I think I should also say that when the court says he has no choice, then good government requires he sign the thing. It is not healthy to foster a constitutional crisis, and I think Mark deserves credit for standing tall in a very difficult environment. Not many have put their back to the wall in the way Mark has, and staked their reputation in court for a conservative cause, so you all should cut him some slack here. For myself, I am proud to have worked for him, and would be proud to do so again. So Mark, if you’re reading this, lo these many years later, thanks for the opportunities, and keep giving them hell! You have a lot of people who know you well and believe in you.

  • Philip J. Berg is Appealing to the U.S. Supreme Court

    10/25/2008 4:29:28 PM PDT · 81 of 486
    Another Kansan to Danae

    The only really important part of the court’s ruling is:

    “The question, therefore, is straightforward: Does the Natural Born Citizen Clause create a federal right the violation of which results in a cognizable [Sec.] 1983 claim? We think not…Like the Supremacy Clause and the foreign affairs powers, the Natural Born Citizen Clause does not confer an individual right on citizens or voters. Therefore, Plaintiff cannot state a cognizable [Sec.] 1983 claim.”

    So, the Eastern District of PA has just found another part of the Constitution that has no meaning, and cannot be enforced. Great. Wonderful. So glad that the courts are so eager to protect their role as the sole interpreter of the constitution by ignoring it. Yes, the constitution is the highest law of the land. A law so high that none can claim it in their defense...

    How can it be that the plain words of the constitutional requirements for anyone seeking the presidency cannot be enforced, because of a lack of constitutional standing on the part of the governed? It turns everything upside down!