web analytics
a

Facebook

Twitter

Copyright 2015 Libero Themes.
All Rights Reserved.

8:30 - 6:00

Our Office Hours Mon. - Fri.

703-406-7616

Call For Free 15/M Consultation

Facebook

Twitter

Search
Menu

BREAKING: Todd Palin Files For Divorce From Sarah Palin

Westlake Legal Group sarahpalin BREAKING: Todd Palin Files For Divorce From Sarah Palin Todd Palin Sarah Palin Sad republicans Politics John McCain Front Page Stories Front Page Family divorce Breaking News

This is pretty shocking news.

After 31 years of marriage, Todd Palin has filed for divorce from Sarah Palin, who rocketed to national prominence after providing a much needed pick me up for John McCain’s floundering 2008 campaign as his vice presidential nominee.

This per Anchorage Daily News.

In a document filed Friday in Anchorage Superior Court, Todd Palin, 55, asked to dissolve the marriage, citing an “incompatibility of temperament between the parties such that they find it impossible to live together as husband and wife.”

The divorce filing uses initials rather than full names, but identifies the couple’s marriage date and the birth date of their only child who is a minor, Trig Palin. The filing asks for joint legal custody of the child.

Anchorage attorney Kimberlee Colbo is representing Todd Palin in the divorce. In a filing, Colbo said she would ask the court to designate the divorce confidential as it moves forward.

The proceeding will be confidential, as they should be, but no doubt people will start talking sooner rather than later.

Sarah Palin was of course savaged in the wake of the 2008 campaign by McCain’s own self-serving advisers and she would later go on to become a vocal Trump supporter, earning her more angst from the media at large (and some former RedState writers). She was continually painted as being mentally deficient despite no evidence of that. She’s largely been out of the news the past several years.

The viciousness with which the left and some on the right treated her was a preview of what would eventually manifest in 2016 and beyond.

————————————————

Enjoying the read? Please visit my archive and check out some of my latest articles.

I’ve got a new twitter! Please help by following @bonchieredstate.

The post BREAKING: Todd Palin Files For Divorce From Sarah Palin appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group sarahpalin-300x160 BREAKING: Todd Palin Files For Divorce From Sarah Palin Todd Palin Sarah Palin Sad republicans Politics John McCain Front Page Stories Front Page Family divorce Breaking News   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Jonathan Clark: Brexit. Is democracy at risk?

Jonathan Clark was a Fellow of Peterhouse; at Oxford, he was a Fellow of All Souls College; latterly he has been Visiting Professor at the Committee on Social Thought at Chicago, and Hall Distinguished Professor of British History at the University of Kansas. His latest book is a study of Thomas Paine.

Observers agree that this is the most impassioned episode in British politics for over a century. But it has been so under David Cameron, Theresa May and Boris Johnson alike. The last alone is not to blame. Why, then, is it so bitter? We ought to be able to debate whether GDP will be slightly higher or slightly lower in 15 years if we leave or if we remain in the EU without expulsions, mutual denunciations, threats, and lawfare. Other things are at stake, far beyond economists’ guesswork. At least two are at issue, for the Brexit crisis is at its heart a proxy war.

The first is democracy itself, for two conceptions of it are widely held in the UK, representative and direct. In 2019 they collide. What are they?

Representative democracy assumes that Parliament once seized sovereignty from the King, and the Commons then seized it from the Lords; or, alternatively, that if the People once had sovereignty, they surrendered it completely and for all time to members of the Commons, who, collectively, now have absolute authority. Being wise and restrained patricians, MPs rule in the national interest. This theory looks more unpersuasive the more one explores it.

Direct democracy assumes that sovereignty resides with autonomous individuals thanks to God’s gift or to Nature – thoughtful individuals who know all they need to know in order to govern, and who exercise their authority just as they please via universal suffrage. Again, this theory is not wholly plausible. Which of the two predominates is likely to depend on practice more than on theoretical argument.

Practice depends on logistics, and these continually develop. Representative democracy seemed obvious in days when communication was slow and expensive. Members of the Commons might visit their constituencies seldom. The franchise was restricted, newspapers reported little, the actions of most MPs at Westminster were seldom in the public eye. Members were unpaid, so normally had to be rich: they were seldom inclined to defer to the poor. But all that was long ago.

From the mid-1990s, and increasingly every year, the internet has transformed everything. For the first time, it is possible to conduct opinion polls in a shorter time than it takes MPs to file through the division lobbies. For the first time, I can watch my MP speak live in the Commons, or in a recording. I can monitor her every vote. I can email her almost instantaneously (I have even exchanged brief emails with one distinguished MP while he was in a debate). Thankfully, my MP is admirable, in her labours both in Parliament and in her constituency. But for voters who differ from their MPs, the potential for active involvement is far greater than ever before.

Kenneth Clarke speaks for the old school of Parliamentarians in insisting that the referendum of 2016 was merely advisory. But he is out of date. The European Union Referendum Act 2015, which made the arrangements, nowhere said that. Nor did the Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act 2000. No legislation has ever provided that votes cast in general elections are merely advisory either. On the contrary, the electorate decides things.

We can only deduce the advisory status of referendums by implication, from the premise ‘Parliament is sovereign’. But no Act of Parliament can establish parliamentary sovereignty, any more than Kenneth Clarke can rise into the air by pulling on his shoelaces. Since the People elect members of the Commons directly, by binding votes, and of the Lords indirectly (via elected members of the Commons), it might plausibly be argued that the People are sovereign.

Yet representative democracy is widely championed, and here lies the second great point at issue: a culture war, over what might be called the recent hegemony of social democratic values. It was not so in 1962 when Anthony Sampson published his famous Anatomy of Britain; it shaped the subsequent understandings of ‘The Establishment’ as a closed social circle of the public school and Oxbridge educated who staffed the boardrooms, Parliament, the judiciary and the church.

But a wind of change has swept over Britain as well as over Sampson’s beloved South Africa. The public schools and Oxbridge are still there, but captured for other purposes. Rank derived from birth and class now derives from style and political correctness. The old boy networks are replaced by the luvvie networks. Sampson himself (Westminster and Christ Church) became a Social Democrat during the 1980s.

Set aside the party label; its opponents perceive a state of mind shared by larger numbers of people. They are the commentariat. They allegedly run the media, the universities, the civil service, the judiciary. They are not, indeed, socialist: that would be too uncool an ideology for the twenty-first century. But they are not democrats either, and instinctively reject the outcome of the largest democratic exercise in British history, the referendum of 2016. To them this is ‘populism’, the opposite of themselves.

In this sense, say their opponents with ever clearer definition, social democrats are ‘anywheres’ rather than ‘somewheres’: they have no particular loyalty to a country, let alone Bolsover or Sunderland. They encourage mass migration and multiculturalism. They have places in the sun. They countenance divorce, sex change, and gay marriage. They are secularists who favour religions that are loud against religious establishments. The EU suits them perfectly. Its Roman Law tradition fits their world view, since it works down from grand statements of principle; England’s common law tradition worked up, from specific concrete entitlements. In their eyes, social democrats champion correct, modern, enlightened values. These entail membership of the EU.

Against this perceived social democratic hegemony have developed two great protests: Momentum, and the Brexit movement. To simplify, Momentum wants real socialism; Brexit wants real democracy. They can only achieve either by championing an old ideal that now becomes a new one: the People are sovereign.

Both these conceptions of democracy are plausible, but flawed. They have historic force, but they are contradictory. A collision was inevitable sooner or later. What better ground on which to fight than the UK’s membership of the EU?

Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Did Ilhan Omar’s Husband Spill The Tea? He Reportedly Told Friends She WAS Married To Brother

Westlake Legal Group ilhan-omar-black-coffee-live-SCREENSHOT-620x344 Did Ilhan Omar’s Husband Spill The Tea? He Reportedly Told Friends She WAS Married To Brother Ilhan Omar Front Page Stories Fraud Featured Story divorce David Steinberg Abuse of Power

[Screenshot from BET & Twitter, https://twitter.com/choffmann10/status/1146505607157075970]

If they ever make a Real Housewives of Capitol Hill, I nominate Rep. Ilhan Omar to be the highly judgmental, weirdly aggressive, holier-than-thou scold who does all the finger pointing to hide the fact that she has a significant number of skeletons hiding in her own closet.

Thanks to some reporting by Powerline — which seems to have been ultimately partially confirmed by The New York Post — that’s going to be an easy casting decision.

According to Powerline, Omar’s current estranged husband Ahmed Hirsi (who is not related to her by blood), has been telling friends and associates that not only did Omar have an affair with an aide while paying him (Lord have mercy), but that she also, in fact, did marry her brother with intent to defraud.

Oh, and that he has no intention of going down for the Congresswoman.

According to sources, Hirsi is telling friends:

• that he will not go to jail for Omar;

• that while Omar did indeed marry her brother (Ahmed Elmi) for fraudulent purposes, Hirsi did not know at the time that she had married Elmi;

• that Omar is threatening Hirsi he would be in trouble along with her if the truth were to come out;

• that Omar has asked him to state publicly that all is well with their marriage even though it is completely done and finished; and

• that in fact they are living apart and have been divorced under Islamic law (although they remain legally married).

Having humiliated Ahmed Hirsi by her affair with Tim Mynett, Omar now wants Hirsi to perform public relations services for her to suppress the scandal. That is cold.

Hirsi has maintained his silence through all the scandals so far. One may infer that there is a good reason why Hirsi has never spoken up on Omar’s behalf in any of these scandals. Hirsi’s knowledge of Omar’s conduct is knowledge of her wrongdoing.

A new piece in The New York Post seems to confirm at least some of the Powerline blog post by detailing that Omar’s husband — who had initially declined to file for divorce — has now been reported to have started thinking about that process.

The congresswoman’s husband, Ahmed Hirsi, the source said, is poised to file for divorce after the revelation in a bombshell court filing that she allegedly had an affair with DC political consultant Tim Mynett.

The Minnesota congresswoman and her husband allegedly separated in March, and Omar asked Hirsi to divorce her around that time because she didn’t want to file the papers — but Hirsi refused, telling her if she wanted a divorce she should do it herself, said the source, who has known both parties for 20 years.

The husband allegedly changed his mind after Tim Mynett’s wife last week filed bombshell divorce papers claiming her spouse was having an affair with the Somali-born US representative — with Hirsi said to be angry he had been made to look the fool by the allegations of an extramarital affair.

Powerline also takes the opportunity to stick up for journalist David Steinberg, who has broken most of the Omar story over the last few years and been roundly ignored for his efforts while other outlets laid claim to the same information. The New York Post reporter who wrote the story insists she did not use the research of Steinberg for her piece. which he disputes on Twitter.

The post Did Ilhan Omar’s Husband Spill The Tea? He Reportedly Told Friends She WAS Married To Brother appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group ilhan-omar-stinkeye-300x153 Did Ilhan Omar’s Husband Spill The Tea? He Reportedly Told Friends She WAS Married To Brother Ilhan Omar Front Page Stories Fraud Featured Story divorce David Steinberg Abuse of Power   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

NY Post: Omar’s husband looking for a divorce over extramarital affair

Westlake Legal Group omar-sideeye NY Post: Omar’s husband looking for a divorce over extramarital affair tim mynett The Blog tax fraud MN-05 Minnesota immigration fraud Ilhan Omar divorce ahmed hirsi Ahmed Elmi

Could the strange, on-again-off-again marriage of Ilhan Omar and Ahmed Hirsi be heading for court? Perhaps in more ways than one, although the New York Post’s sources are sticking to the obvious route for now. Hirsi now plans to file for divorce, the paper reports, after allegations of an affair between the congresswoman and her political consultant went public in the latter’s own divorce action.

This would be the second split between Omar and Hirsi … officially, anyway:

The Minnesota congresswoman and her husband allegedly separated in March, and Omar asked Hirsi to divorce her around that time because she didn’t want to file the papers — but Hirsi refused, telling her if she wanted a divorce she should do it herself, said the source, who has known both parties for 20 years.

The husband allegedly changed his mind after Tim Mynett’s wife last week filed bombshell divorce papers claiming her spouse was having an affair with the Somali-born US representative — with Hirsi said to be angry he had been made to look the fool by the allegations of an extramarital affair.

“I’m surprised he hasn’t filed already,” the source told The Post, adding that Hirsi was “very confused” in the wake of the bombshell allegations but still loved his wife and was reluctant to expose their three children to a public divorce battle.

Hirsi and Omar wed in a religious ceremony — but not legally — in 2002, and then split up six years later. In 2009, she married Ahmed Nur Said Elmi, but that’s where the story gets interesting. Despite her marriage to Elmi, Omar continued to file joint tax returns with Hirsi, which is illegal for unmarried couples in Minnesota. Omar later claimed that the Elmi marriage was also only a “faith tradition” ceremony, but a legal civil marriage certificate exists for it. Omar moved back in with Hirsi in 2012 but didn’t divorce Elmi until 2017. She married Hirsi last year, but that doesn’t retroactively clear the criminal issues regarding Omar’s taxes.

That might not be the only criminal risk that Omar faces if Hirsi decides to play rough in a divorce. According to Scott Johnson’s sources on Omar, Hirsi might be ready to finally explain exactly who Elmi is, and why Omar might be vulnerable to an immigration-fraud prosecution:

In the past three weeks I have circled back to interview sources whom I have found to be highly reliable in the Omar saga. They open a window onto the scandals from the perspective of Ahmed Hirsi, her long-time partner and the father of her three children. According to sources, Hirsi is telling friends:

• that he will not go to jail for Omar;

• that while Omar did indeed marry her brother (Ahmed Elmi) for fraudulent purposes, Hirsi did not know at the time that she had married Elmi;

• that Omar is threatening Hirsi he would be in trouble along with her if the truth were to come out;

• that Omar has asked him to state publicly that all is well with their marriage even though it is completely done and finished; and

• that in fact they are living apart and have been divorced under Islamic law (although they remain legally married).

Having humiliated Ahmed Hirsi by her affair with Tim Mynett, Omar now wants Hirsi to perform public relations services for her to suppress the scandal. That is cold.

Assuming this is all true, Hirsi faces two big problems in this mess. He filed those taxes along with Omar. That makes him just as vulnerable to prosecution over the fraudulent claim of joint filing status. If he knew that Omar had married her brother to fraudulently provide him legal status in the US, he could be charged as an accessory. If Scott’s sources are accurate, Hirsi needs good legal representation and a willingness to cut a deal.

Omar, however, has far more headaches ahead of her if this is all true. Prosecutors won’t be looking to cut a deal with her, after all, and she can’t afford to take one even if they were. Her political career would come to a screeching halt if she admitted to tax and immigration fraud; even in Minnesota’s extreme-liberal 5th congressional district, that’s a few bridges too far. Minneapolis has other up-and-comers who can replace Omar, and likely provide a lot less embarrassment for her district, too.

Just how true is it? The court filings will give us some clue, but Omar’s political adviser is denying the affair in his:

Rep. Ilhan Omar’s alleged lover Tim Mynett has denied bombshell allegations that he left his wife for the Somali-born representative — accusing wife Beth Mynett in a counterclaim of waging a campaign to “ruin his career” after he left their unhappy marriage.

The DC political consultant, who has been working for Omar, denied accusations leveled by his physician wife in her divorce filing that he was having a love affair with Omar and said he hadn’t been in a relationship with any other woman during their six-year marriage, according to the counterclaim filed in DC Superior Court.

“Since the time of Mr. Mynett’s departure from the marital home, Ms. Mynett began a negative campaign against Mr. Mynett, seemingly in an effort to ruin his career and permanently damage his relationship with William and his step-daughter,” read the court papers.

Mynett might have other reasons for issuing a denial. Omar’s campaign spent a lot of money on Mynett, which might create some issues of campaign-finance violations if it turns out that the purposes of that were personal. Those would most likely be civil violations rather than criminal, but that distinction won’t help Omar’s political career — even if she survives the tax and immigration investigations that might soon be coming.

The post NY Post: Omar’s husband looking for a divorce over extramarital affair appeared first on Hot Air.

Westlake Legal Group omar-sideeye-300x173 NY Post: Omar’s husband looking for a divorce over extramarital affair tim mynett The Blog tax fraud MN-05 Minnesota immigration fraud Ilhan Omar divorce ahmed hirsi Ahmed Elmi   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Turns out, despite the combat, marriage helps prevent dementia

Westlake Legal Group GodfatherWeddingPic715 Turns out, despite the combat, marriage helps prevent dementia wedding The Blog pets mental health marriage health study Health divorce Dementia

Sometimes, married life seems to invite disagreements, disputes, arguments, the silent treatment, all sorts of personal discord and turmoil.

At least that’s what a friend tells me.

But, it turns out, the good news is that marriage also seems to help prevent dementia, that ominous omnibus diagnosis that covers memory loss, personality and behavioral changes and disorienting loss of reasoning skills.

The bad news is that divorced individuals are more than twice as likely as marrieds to develop dementia, especially the men.

This is no minor concern. Experts on aging estimate nearly six million Americans currently live with Alzheimer and related dementias and their treatments cost some $290 billion annually

The new study was conducted at Michigan State University and is among the first such population-based U.S. research of variations in dementia diagnoses based on marital status.

The study sample consisted of 15,379 respondents — 6,650 men and 8,729 women. All were at least 52 years old in 2000 and symptom-free and examined every two years.

Researchers closely looked at four categories of non-marrieds — separated/divorced, co-habiters, widowed and never married. The divorced came out the worst for dementia.

The study’s head researcher, Hui Liu, noted, “Marital status is an important but overlooked social risk/protective factor for dementia.”

She added:

This research is important because the number of unmarried older adults in the United States continues to grow, as people live longer and their marital histories become more complex.

Other studies have shown that unmarried individuals have a higher risk of death from heart disease. One of those authors, Dr. Arshed Quyyumisaid, of Emory University said:

I was somewhat surprised by the magnitude of the influence of being married has. Social support provided by marriage, and perhaps many other benefits of companionship, are important for people with heart disease.

That companionship theme may have some under-appreciated health advantages. Previous studies have shown that owning a pet like a dog can extend human lifespans by promoting more social interaction and physical activity and reducing depression.

Elderly people with dogs, especially single elderly, were 33 percent less likely to die early. Quick plug for adoption: Google “pet rescue” with your Zip for the nearest shelter for dogs and cats. They’re lonely too.

The post Turns out, despite the combat, marriage helps prevent dementia appeared first on Hot Air.

Westlake Legal Group GodfatherWeddingPic715-300x163 Turns out, despite the combat, marriage helps prevent dementia wedding The Blog pets mental health marriage health study Health divorce Dementia   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

How to talk to your kids about divorce (and when to get help)

Westlake Legal Group Divorce-Feature How to talk to your kids about divorce (and when to get help) psychology parenting marriage kids Family Features Family divorce counseling chantilly
© fizkes / stock.adobe.com

It’s not just taking off the ring.

As Amy Poehler puts it in her book Yes Please, “Imagine spreading everything you care about on a blanket and then tossing the whole thing up in the air. The process of divorce is about loading that blanket, throwing it up, watching it all spin and worrying what stuff will break when it lands.”

Often times one of the things couples are worried about, beyond the marriage itself, are their kids. When it’s time to let them know that you’re taking steps toward separation, how do you tell them?

We spoke to Kristi Guadagnoli, Psy.D. and co-owner of MindWell Psychology in Chantilly, about how divorce can be managed with everyone’s best emotional interests in mind. Highlights from our conversation are below.

What would be your first step when talking about a divorce with your children?
It always has to start with the parental communication. Parents need to be having really in-depth conversations about what kinds of messages they will be giving to the children. For couples navigating divorce, there tends to be more animosity especially, in terms of communication, but if you can agree on how you are going to talk about it, you can also agree on the reasons why the divorce is happening in the first place. If parents are having a difficult time agreeing on why the divorce is happening, they should seek out a counselor to practice discussing what decision they’re making and the impact it’s going to have.

What would you say to divorcees who may be against getting help?
A lot of folks say they don’t need to see a therapist because they’re splitting up, but they’re really going to be connected for their whole lives because of the children. And studies have shown that the better they deal with the divorce determines how well their children will do in the future. And there’s so much more that you can get help with than just that initial discussion and understanding your children’s emotions. You can figure out how you’re going to navigate splitting logistics, finances and unexpected challenges. And the better your communication is from the beginning, the smoother the whole situation will be.

What should not be discussed about the divorce around children?
Anything that is an adult-based issue should only be discussed with adults. Pick-ups and drop-offs should be pleasant, and kids should not be communicating for their parents. That can happen frequently when the kids are still living in the house with both parents. And remember that it’s painful for both the adults and the children. As an adult, you want to have a safe space, and if you aren’t working out your own feelings, you could empty them out into your children.

Even after the initial conversations or after the divorce is finalized, how do you keep communication lines open between you and your children?
I am a firm believer in family dinners and having that time to connect and really talk about the day with your kids, even if it’s about current events in the world, what’s going on at school and getting a daily check-in. This would be a great place to check in on how they’re doing emotionally and make sure they can communicate their feelings to you. If they can’t, it’s important to note that kids that shutdown continue to shutdown, and kids who open up tend to keep opening up as long as you continue to encourage communication.

What do you suggest to do if what your child has to say is hard to hear?
Part of being a parent is being able to hear what they have to say to us. We have to have the tolerance. We have to be able to say we’re sorry and that we don’t know exactly what we’re doing sometimes, but that we’re going to try harder. There is no perfect parent. And when you let them know that you’re trying to be better and that they are heard, it teaches them that they can speak about their feelings in a situation where they are hurt, angry, upset, etc. Kids also model themselves after what you do as a parent. If they have access to empathy where they know how to listen and can actually hear what people are saying, they can model themselves after that.

What do you do if you think your child needs counseling services?
They may need their own space to understand what’s happening because they don’t have the verbal understanding yet to explain it outright. When kids are really young, sometimes the more expressive things in therapy can be helpful. Any Google search should be able to bring up someone in the area, and make sure it’s someone who is close to you and convenient. If they’re not, the will to get the help tends to drop and you’re less likely to continue going for help.

For more information on MindWell Psychology, visit mindwell.us. // 14110 Robert Paris Court, Chantilly

Want more family and health stories? Subscribe to our weekly newsletters.

Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Woman Fearful for Her Life Turns Over Her Estranged Husband’s Guns to the Cops. She Gets Arrested for Grand Theft

Westlake Legal Group courtney-irby-arrested-theft-SCREENSHOT-620x369 Woman Fearful for Her Life Turns Over Her Estranged Husband’s Guns to the Cops. She Gets Arrested for Grand Theft Violence Uncategorized law joseph irby Guns Front Page Stories Featured Story divorce crime courtney irby battery Allow Media Exception

[Screenshot from Rep. Anna V. Eskamani via Twitter, https://twitter.com/AnnaForFlorida/status/1142441348676706304?]

 

An odd case, indeed — one on about which I’d like your opinion.

Florida couple Joseph and Courtney Irby were going through a rough divorce.

On June 14th — having just completed a divorce hearing — the two got into a fierce argument. As Courtney was leaving the courthouse, Joseph rear-ended her; she was on the phone with the cops, and he was trying to run her off the road.

Allegedly, of course..

That resulted in Joseph being taken into custody and held overnight for domestic aggravated battery.

Purportedly fearing for her life, Courtney did some proactive protectin’ — she went to Joe’s apartment, searched and found his guns, and took ’em with her.

Ain’t nobody shootin’ her!

She drove the firearms to the Lakeland Police Department and told the boys in blue she didn’t trust her soon-to-be-ex-husband to turn them in.

She explained that she’d taken them from his residence, which resulted in this from the officer:

“So, are you telling me you committed an armed burglary?”

Add to that grand theft of a fiream.

The cops called Joseph at the jail, and he said he’d like to press charges.

Courtney was arrested.

She spent 5 nights in jail.

Strange case…or is it? There’s been a bit of public outcry over a woman afraid for her life taking matters into her own thievin’ hands. Some believe she shouldn’t be punished.

That group includes Democratic state Rep. Anna Eskamani:

What do you think? Should Courtney be prosecuted? She indeed took things from another person’s residence; but they were not fully divorced…are the guns half hers? What about the protection element of all this?

I look forward to hearing your thoughts in the Comments section.

Joseph and Courtney are due back in divorce court on July 16th. I’m sure a fun time will be had by all.

-ALEX

 

See 3 more pieces from me:

Burger King Gets Shut Down For ‘Cultural Insensitivity,’ & It Only Proves Even More What The World Is Missing

Upping The Idiot Ante: Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Comes Up With A New Excuse For Her Blaccent

WATCH: Insane WWE-Style Fight Explodes In The Middle Of A Casino. But The Hulkamaniac Gets A Surprise

Find all my RedState work here.

And please follow Alex Parker on Twitter and Facebook.

Thank you for reading! Please sound off in the Comments section below. 

If you have an iPhone and want to comment, select the box with the upward arrow at the bottom of your screen; swipe left and choose “Request Desktop Site.” If it fails to automatically refresh, manually reload the page. Scroll down to the red horizontal bar that says “Show Comments.”

The post Woman Fearful for Her Life Turns Over Her Estranged Husband’s Guns to the Cops. She Gets Arrested for Grand Theft appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group courtney-irby-arrested-theft-SCREENSHOT-300x179 Woman Fearful for Her Life Turns Over Her Estranged Husband’s Guns to the Cops. She Gets Arrested for Grand Theft Violence Uncategorized law joseph irby Guns Front Page Stories Featured Story divorce crime courtney irby battery Allow Media Exception   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

No, Women are Not Happier Being Unmarried Despite What a Misinformed Study Shows

Westlake Legal Group traditional-marriage-620x413 No, Women are Not Happier Being Unmarried Despite What a Misinformed Study Shows study single parents misinformation Media marriage Happiness Front Page Stories divorce Culture children Allow Media Exception

Right now the mainstream media is circulating a study that showed women are happier being single or divorced than they are being married, however, some experts are saying that the study has been completely misunderstood, and the current conclusion is literally fake news.

It all started when a professor of behavioral science at the London School of Economics, Paul Dolan, was giving a presentation on his book “Happily Ever After.” Dolan was discussing his findings on data from an American Time Use Survey from which he gathered his findings.

Within the survey asked whether there was a spouse present or absent. According to the findings, women said there wasn’t one around, and answered subsequent questions about how happy they were. Dolan took the data he saw and came to a conclusion.

“We do have some good longitudinal data following the same people over time, but I am going to do a massive disservice to that science and just say: if you’re a man, you should probably get married; if you’re a woman, don’t bother,” said Dolan.

The Guardian was in the room during Dolan’s presentation and off it went, spurring on a whole host of articles from various media sites like the New York Post and The Independent, proclaiming that women and marriage just don’t mix. It circulated like wildfire.

However, as some looked into the data itself, they realized that Dolan simply misunderstood the findings because he misunderstood the question.

UVA Professor W. Bradford Wilcox quickly pointed out where Dolan went wrong.

“…Dolan appears to have misread ATUS survey questions regarding whether or not spouse was in the household to refer to whether or not the spouse was present for the interview–and thereby drew incorrect conclusions about marrieds’ happiness, especially wives’ happiness,” tweeted Bradford.

To back up the fact that Dolan reached the wrong conclusion, he posted the findings from a study by the General Social Survey by the Institute for Family Studies, which showed married people being far more happy than divorced or single people by leaps and bounds.

Adjunct professor and time use researcher Gray Kimborough also called out the spread of misinformation based on Dolan’s misinterpretation of the information, by noting that the numbers Dolan cites weren’t even part of the ATUS interview, but were asked of couples by a CPS interview some months prior. A closer look at the question shows that the survey was asking if a spouse was present in the room during the time of the asking.

“These are the values that the marital status variable takes,” tweeted Kimborough. “When I calculate mean “happiness” values over these, they roughly line up with the book figure. So it isn’t measuring a spouse’s presence for the interview, or even for any activities–just presence *in the household*.”

The General Social Survey by the Institute for Family Studies does provide more of a look into the happiness levels of those who are married vs. those who are divorced or never married. The study was conducted over a period of eight years from 2010 to 2018, giving us a near decade of information to work with.

“The story is straightforward: married respondents are much happier. And consistent with prior research, parents are a little less happy than non-parents, provided they are unmarried. In addition, the results don’t look that different when limited to female survey respondents,” said the IFS in their study.

The IFS even found that unhappiness is much higher in divorced or single people, specifically those who have children.

So the truth is that marriage does make people happier. Children do reduce the happiness factor, but only slightly, and married parents are still far and away happier than those who are divorced or single, especially when children are involved in their lives.

The media got it wrong again, and now we’re left with the question of why the media was so ecstatic to report the false narrative that marriage makes women miserable.

 

 

The post No, Women are Not Happier Being Unmarried Despite What a Misinformed Study Shows appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group traditional-marriage-300x200 No, Women are Not Happier Being Unmarried Despite What a Misinformed Study Shows study single parents misinformation Media marriage Happiness Front Page Stories divorce Culture children Allow Media Exception   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Bill Maher to Democrats: Impeach Trump or stop talking about it

Westlake Legal Group BillMaher Bill Maher to Democrats: Impeach Trump or stop talking about it The Blog real time with bill maher President Trump Melania Trump impeachment HBO divorce Bill Maher

Bill Maher has some advice for Democrats in Congress: “Do something” or just “stop talking about it” when it comes to all the talk of impeaching President Trump. Maher outlined a couple of ways for Democrats to remove Trump from the White House. One way was reasonable, though ultimately impractical, and the second way was just nonsensical.

During his HBO show Real Time with Bill Maher Friday, Maher voiced an opinion much like that of many Trump supporters and conservatives – either go ahead and start the impeachment process or drop it. For more than two years, some Democrats have made clear their intentions to impeach Trump as a way of nullifying the last presidential election. It began back in 2017 when two Democrats tried to initiate the process in the House of Representatives, Rep. Al Green and Rep. Brad Sherman. The drumbeat for impeachment has slowly grown with time. When the Mueller report was released, finding no evidence of collusion with Russia by the Trump campaign, Democrats latched onto the obstruction of justice charges listed in the report. Mueller did not recommend moving forward and prosecuting the president but did leave that part of his report dangling, apparently in an effort to toss it to Congress. Mueller punted on the obstruction of justice charges. Now it is almost impossible for a Democrat to appear on a cable news show without being asked about impeachment. Rep. Green even went so far as to say that he’s afraid that if Democrats don’t move to impeach President Trump, he will be re-elected.

Democrats are facing a turning point. Do they go forward and accelerate the impeachment process in Congress and please their base? Or, do Democrats keep their powder dry and wait it out until the 2020 presidential election? Either choice alienates a portion of the party membership. The far left and party loyalists are the ones who will get out and vote in the primary races. The moderates and Independent voters are not interested in putting the country through impeachment. Speaker Pelosi and Democrat leadership in the House know impeachment is a political loser for the party that initiates it. Recent polling shows a lack of interest in impeachment from Independents and Republican voters, the voters that Democrats must convince to vote for a Democrat candidate in 2020. Simply put, impeachment is not at the top of voters’ priorities.

The latest Harvard CAPS/Harris Poll survey found that 65 percent of respondents oppose impeachment proceedings. A majority of Democrats polled, 56 percent, support impeachment, however, only 32 percent of independents and 14 percent of Republicans are in favor.

A majority of respondents, 58 percent, said it’s time to turn the page on the Russia investigations, including 60 percent of independents, although two-thirds of Democrats want to see further investigations.

Impeachment ranks fourth on the list of priorities voters have for the Democratic-controlled House, behind addressing the status of immigrants in the country illegally, stimulating the economy and strengthening ObamaCare.

So, in this case, Bill Maher is right. Democrats are faced with making the decision between beginning the impeachment process or letting it go. It’s time that the decision is made. What to do, what to do.

Maher offered a second way to remove the president and that involves First Lady Melania Trump. This is the nonsensical option I mentioned above. He said Melania could leave her husband and take their son, Barron, with her.

“Melania Trump must do what dozens of buildings around the world have done and take the Trump name off,” Maher said during tonight’s New Rules segment. “President Hellboy has proved to be impervious to facts, reason, shame and the law, but maybe if you left him for another man he would implode on his own.”

He went on: “You can end this reign of terror and all you have to do is channel your Taylor Swift and walk out the door: Kick him to the curb, slap away that hand for good.”

And: “No more public embarrassment, no more porn stars, no more stealing your make-up. Tell him, ‘I’m leaving you and I’m taking our child.’ He would be stunned.” Then in his Trump voice: “We have a child?”

Maher went on to suggest that Melania buddy-up with her friend Jerry Hall, a.k.a. Mrs. Rupert Murdoch, because both of their husbands are ruining the world, you know. As an added bonus, he included a reference to Game of Thrones. I don’t watch the show so I’ll leave the relevance of the reference to those who do.

“You two have a lot in common,” Maher said, appealing directly to the wives. “Your husbands are ruining our world.” Murdoch, he suggested, is doing to the world what Jerry left Mick for doing to “anything that moved.” But Maher was more graphic.

The comedy bit worked its way toward Maher’s more serious point when he lambasted Trump and Murdoch’s Fox News as being on an “insane feedback loop” (like “that couple who keeps giving each other herpes”).

And for good measure, there was a Game of Thrones reference: Murdoch and Trump, Maher said, are like the Night King, “only instead of commanding an army of brain dead zombies…okay, they’re exactly like that.”

It should be noted that Maher brought in some truthful questioning of Rep. Tim Ryan, one of 347 Democrats running to be the party’s nominee in the 2020 Democrat primary. The Ohio Democrat was caught off-guard when Maher talked about feeling owned by the woke crowd on social media. The host said whoever is willing to stand up to the Twitter mob will be victorious at the polls.

“I’m looking for the Democrat who’s gonna stand up to the Twitter mob. Are you willing to do that, to stand up to the people who are ‘woke?’” Maher asked, which sparked applause. He reacted, “Look at that, even an LA audience wants to stand up to the woke.”

The HBO star later pointed to recent polling from the Morning Consult that showed 65 percent of adults say “people should be able to say what they really think, even if it offends people,” 81 percent say “people are offended to easily” and that only 10 percent of Twitter users are responsible for 80 percent of all tweets.

“It’s not who we are, it’s not who liberals are,” Maher said. “The Democrat, I’m telling you, who stands up to that clack will win,” adding “my vote anyway.”

As the congressman launched into standard Democrat talking points downplaying the success President Trump’s policies have brought to the U.S. economy, Maher pushed back.

But Ryan stood his ground. “I know where the economy is going,” he told Maher.

“Where?” the host asked.

“Right now, nowhere,” Ryan answered.

The liberal comedian then, intentionally or not, went to bat for Trump.

“C’mon, the economy’s not horrible,” Maher told Ryan. “Four-point-four percent is the unemployment rate in Ohio. It’s kinda hard to run against the economy in Ohio, isn’t it?”

“No,” Ryan responded, “because the average wage has only gone up 20 bucks a week.”

At that point, Maher reminded Ryan that Trump has been president for more than two years and he’ll be running on his success with the economy. Ryan may not be willing to admit it but Americans vote with the economy in mind. On this issue alone, President Trump clearly has the edge in the upcoming election. Sometimes Bill Maher gets it right.

The post Bill Maher to Democrats: Impeach Trump or stop talking about it appeared first on Hot Air.

Westlake Legal Group BillMaher-300x159 Bill Maher to Democrats: Impeach Trump or stop talking about it The Blog real time with bill maher President Trump Melania Trump impeachment HBO divorce Bill Maher   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Potemkin legislation

Westlake Legal Group Screen-Shot-2019-04-17-at-07.25.35 Potemkin legislation Work Women and equality Women wages Treasury ToryDiary Stella Creasy MP sport Sam Coates (The Times) Sajid Javid MP rent Public Sector Northern Ireland NHS Local government and local elections Local Elections (general) Liz Truss MP Julian Assange jobs James Brokenshire MP immigration housing Home and family Highlights healthcare Health football Family and relationships exports employment Elizabeth Truss MP Economy DUP divorce disability Diane Abbott MP David Gauke MP David Blanchflower Conservatives Abortion

The ten most recent subjects covered by the Conservative Party’s Twitter feed are as follows: record employment, the provision of free sanitary products in primary schools, Conservative councils recycling more than Labour ones, more statistics about work and wages, record women’s employment, workers’ rights, an exports increase, more disabled people in employment, an end to no fault evictions, Conservative councils fixing more potholes than Labour ones, banning upskirting, funding more toilets at motorway service areas to help people living with complex disabilities, Sajid Javid criticising Diane Abbott over Julian Assange, kicking out racism in football, and a new law to protect service animals.

One might pick out three main themes, local election campaigning aside.

The first is the vibrancy of Britain’s jobs market and the country’s robust recent record on employment.  The aftermath of the Crash and the Coalition’s slowing of public spending growth, a.k.aa “austerity”, didn’t bring the five million unemployed that David Blanchflower believed possible.  The Government has to keep shouting about our employment rates because people have got used to them.  A generation is growing up that cannot remember the mass unemployment of the 1980s.

Then there are a battery of announcements aimed disproportionately at younger women voters, who were more likely to switch to Labour at the last election.  Those of a certain disposition will argue that some of these are trivial, and that women and men both want government to get on with addressing big issues: Brexit, health, the economy, immigration, education and so on.  But part of the point of banning upskirting, say, or providing more free sanitary products is gaining “permission to be heard”, in order to make some voters, in this case younger female ones, more receptive to what Conservatives are doing more broadly and widely.

Which takes us, third, to law-making – not admitttedly the only means, or even necessarily the main one, by which government can act, but indispensable none the less.  Under which category we find a new law to protect service animals and the proposed end to no fault evictions, about which James Brokenshire wrote on this site recently.  The two may seem to have nothing in common but, on closer inspection, tell part of the same story.

Namely that, as Sam Coates keeps pointing out, the Government can’t get any plan which is remotely contentious through the Commons.  Only the most uncontested ideas, such as providing police and other service dogs with more protections, can make it through the House. And this new service animals measure isn’t even Government leglislation.  It came about through a Private Members Bill tabled by Oliver Heald and then backed by Ministers.

Meanwhile, the proposal to end no fault evictions isn’t contained in a Bill at all.  The headline on gov.uk about the plan refers to an “end to unfair evictions” and “the biggest change to the private rental sector for a generation”.  But the text of the announcement refers to “plans to consult on new legislation” and refers to an earlier consultation, on Overcoming the barriers to longer tenancies in the private rented sector, to which it has now published a response.

As with housing, so with divorce.  On ConservativeHome today, Frank Young makes the point, in his article on the Government’s plans to ensure that no fault divorce can take place more frequently, that “it remains to be seen if the Justice Department’s enthusiasm for new legislation will be matched by government business managers and the ability of the current government to get any legislation through”.  For David Gauke has unfurled not a new Bill, but a White Paper.

Ditto Liz Truss’s announcment on a £95,000 cap on exit payments when public sector workers leave their jobs. “Six-figure taxpayer-funded public sector exit payments to end,” gov.uk’s headline declares.  The sub-heading is more candid than the one beneath the housing headline.  “A consultation has been launched outlining how the government will introduce a £95,000 cap to stop huge exit payments when public sector workers leave their jobs,” it says.  The Treasury confirms that legislation will be required.

Now think on.  As Sam goes on to say, Theresa May’s successor may take against these ideas or indeed all of them.  In which case, they will doubtless be quietly put to sleep.  And that successor may be in place soon.  (Regretfully, we have to add: as soon as possible after European Parliament elections, assuming these happen, please.)

Conservative MPs don’t want a general election.  Nor do we.  But the more one ponders the state of this Parliament, the more one sees why one is the natural solution to this impasse – and would be knocking on the door, were it not for the Fixed Terms Parliament Act.  These recent announcements are Potemkin Legislation.  They cannot be put to the Commons without risk of them being amended out of their original intention.

Nor can the Government legislate easily elsewhere.  Consider any proposals affecting women – to take us back to near where we started.  Up would pop Stella Creasy, looking for a means of changing the abortion laws in Northern Ireland.  Which would further strain the Conservatives’ relationship with the DUP, such as it is.  Prepare, when Brexit isn’t before the Commons, for many more Opposition Days.

Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com