Outrageous rhetorical assaults on the federal judiciary by partisan legislators have unfortunately become a progressive political norm. Such offenses invariably arrive along with proposals from such legislators to restructure the court system to achieve political ends. But 235 years after Alexander Hamilton famously explained why the judicial branch of our government must remain independent of the legislature, thank goodness most Americans still agree with him. That’s according to the latest Mason-Dixon poll commissioned by the First Liberty Institute, which advocates for religious freedom.
As for the rhetorical assaults packaged with partisan restructuring proposals, recently the staff of Sen. Ed Markey (D., Mass.) was kind enough to compile an illustrative collection in one slim volume. In the space of a mere press release calling for expanding the number of Supreme Court justices from nine to 13, the document attributes to Mr. Markey the despicable lie that Republicans have “stolen the Supreme Court majority,” then quotes Rep. Cori Bush (D., Mo.) falsely describing the court of duly confirmed Justices as “illegitimate” before appealing to the authority of a series of special-interest groups angered that the court hasn’t chosen to grind their ideological axes.
Fortunately the voters who are the real authority in this country don’t welcome such bullying from the legislature. The Mason-Dixon poll of 1,100 registered U.S. voters found that a full 91% agree with the following statement:
An independent judiciary is a crucial safeguard of our civil liberties.
As for the changes the bullies are seeking to enact, they are not exactly popular. Here are the results from Mason-Dixon on the overall question of structural reform:
QUESTION: Do you support or oppose amending the U.S. Constitution to change the structure of the U.S. Supreme Court?
SUPPORT 27%
OPPOSE 60%
UNDECIDED 13%
Here are the results on the particular reform the bullies have been pushing:
QUESTION: For over 150 years, the United States Supreme Court has had nine justices. “Court-packing” is generally defined as increasing the number of Supreme Court seats, primarily to alter the ideological balance of the court. Do you support or oppose “court-packing”?
SUPPORT 25%
OPPOSE 68%
UNDECIDED 7%
Mason-Dixon also queried voters on another change advocated by leftist legislators. Some may quarrel with the way this question was worded, though it’s hard to say that anything in the description of the issue is inaccurate:
QUESTION: Each branch of the federal government — the Executive, Legislative, and Judicial — is separate and co-equal. In recognition of the separation of powers and judicial independence, the judiciary has always established its own ethical rules for judges. Since 1973, the code of conduct and ethical rules for judges has been set by the Judicial Conference of the United States.
Now, some members of Congress are threatening to take over setting the rules for judges and forcing them to comply. Do you believe that Congress taking over and setting rules for judicial ethics would or would not violate the separation of powers and threaten judicial independence?
WOULD 69%
WOULD NOT 20%
NOT SURE 11%
Perhaps the overwhelmingly negative response to the idea has something to do with the framing of the question. On the other hand, maybe a lot of Americans just understand what’s at stake when legislators seek new powers over the judiciary. This column should offer the usual caveats about the imprecise nature of political polling. But it’s also worth noting that at least according to the FiveThirtyEight website, Mason-Dixon is among the country’s most accurate surveyors of public opinion.
Those opposing this potential violation of the separation of powers do have a lot of history on their side. “The complete independence of the courts of justice is peculiarly essential in a limited Constitution,” wrote Hamilton in Federalist 78. He noted the specific need for the judiciary to be independent of Congress in order to enforce limits on legislative power:
Limitations of this kind can be preserved in practice no other way than through the medium of courts of justice, whose duty it must be to declare all acts contrary to the manifest tenor of the Constitution void. Without this, all the reservations of particular rights or privileges would amount to nothing…
This independence of the judges is equally requisite to guard the Constitution and the rights of individuals from the effects of those ill humors, which the arts ofdesigning men, or the influence of particular conjunctures, sometimes disseminate among the people themselves, and which, though they speedily give place to better information, and more deliberate reflection, have a tendency, in the meantime, to occasion dangerous innovations in the government, and serious oppressions of the minor party in the community…
An independent judiciary is critical in protecting us not only from politicians like Ed Markey but also from the interest groups who manipulate him.
Here’s the juice: Given the choice to trust the words of Alexander Hamilton or Cori Bush and Ed Markey…
“Donald Trump was indicted Thursday by a grand jury in the investigation into his handling of classified documents at his Mar-a-Lago resort, marking the first time in history that the federal government has brought charges against a former president.
In a post on Truth Social, Trump said his lawyers had been informed of his indictment in connection with what he called the “Boxes Hoax.” Declaring his innocence, Trump said he had been summoned to appear Tuesday at the federal courthouse in Miami. “I never thought it possible that such a thing could happen to a former President of the United States, who received far more votes than any sitting President in the History of our Country, and is currently leading, by far, all Candidates, both Democrat and Republican, in Polls of the 2024 Presidential Election,” Trump said, adding, “I AM AN INNOCENT MAN!”
…the documents probe dates to early 2022, when the National Archives retrieved 15 boxes of documents and other items from Mar-a-Lago that should have been transferred from the White House, and found they contained more than 100 classified records. The Justice Department sought to recover all additional classified documents that might still be at the Florida property through a subpoena. After a Trump representative said the former president had turned over the remaining documents, the Federal Bureau of Investigation obtained evidence that more such papers were on the premises, and agents last August executed an extraordinary search warrant and recovered hundreds more.
Over ensuing months, Smith’s team interviewed nearly every employee at Trump’s Florida home as part of the documents probe, from top political aides to maids and maintenance staff, The Wall Street Journal reported. In recent months, Smith’s team has homed in on several key pieces of evidence, including an audio recording in which Trump acknowledged he kept a classified Pentagon document about a potential attack on Iran and extensive notes from one of his lawyers about the investigation, people familiar with the matter have said.
Trump’s lawyers met with Justice Department officials on June 5 to try to head off an indictment…”
We emphasize Trump’s boast about his 2020 vote total and current lead in the polls to highlight how the man, facing indictment overs crimes he likely committed, can only offer non-sequiturs in response; As if ballot tallies and polling results somehow excuse lying under oath and obstructing justice.
It’s worth reviewing this timeline of the documents fiasco to recall just how many times The Donald denied having highly-classified materials later found in his possession. That being said, neither Clinton nor Obama…or Biden for that matter…have or will ever face such scrutiny, but this undeniable double-standard doesn’t excuse Trump’s actions. Moreover, knowing all too well from over four years of personal experience such a double-standard existed, did he not understand he’d be subject to greater scrutiny than his predecessors?
Now, here’s The Gouge!
First up, courtesy Front Page Magazine via Nick, Daniel Greenfield informs us the…
“When I was working on the David Horowitz Freedom Center’s ‘Disloyal Military’ investigation, I predicted thatAir Force Chief of Staff Charles Q. Brown Jr. would be selected as the next Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. The media is now reporting that Biden will indeed pick Brown to replace Milley. And as bad as Milley was (Thank you, Donald J. Trump, Jr.!), expect Brown to be much worse.
Under Gen. Brown, the Air Force has become the most woke of the major service branches. Brown disgraced himself and his uniform during the Black Lives Matter race riots by releasing a video in which he “seemed to barely contain his rage” while ranting “that the ideals of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution ‘that I’ve sworn my adult life to support and defend’ have not always delivered ‘liberty and equality’ to all.”
What horrible acts of oppression did one of the most powerful men in the military experience that made him turn on America? In his own words to People Magazine, “When you get to senior levels, you have reserved parking spots around the base. I was in civilian clothes, I parked in a spot and someone came out and said, ‘That slot is reserved for the Pacific Air Force’s Commander.’ And I go, ‘Yeah, I know, because I am the Pacific Air Force’s Commander.’” Someone questioned Brown’s parking space once and all the white male officers must pay. What should we expect from Brown if he becomes the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff?
Last year, Brown, alongside Undersecretary of the Air Force Gina Ortiz Jones, the first gay and Filipino woman in her role, and other leaders, signed their names to one of the most shocking and destructive racist documents ever produced by the modern military. The topic of the Air Force memorandum was officer quotas set by race and gender. Similar quotas had been issued by political appointees in a politically correct military, but they had focused on slowly boosting minority officers rather than calling for a purge of white men.
The 2014 quotas had looked for an 80 percent white, 10 percent black and 8 percent Asian officer corps. While choosing officers by any racial category rather than merit is racist, wrong and illegal under civil rights legislation, this fell short of Brown’s proposed racist purge. Brown’s quotas limit the number of white officers to 67% and cut white men down to 43%.
The Air Force officer corps is currently 77% white: getting it down to 67%, a reduction of 10%, would require serious effort to purge white officers and bar the doors to any new ones. Reducing the number of white men in the officer corps to a minority, 43%, would cripple the service and wipe out generations of talent: especially when 86% of pilots are white men. What do you do with those 86% of white male pilots?
Gen. Brown and his radical allies who are destroying the Air Force and endangering national security claim that their racist and illegal policy is necessary because “diversity and inclusion” are the “key to the success of any organization”. And that requires 7% multiracial officers. But if that’s the case then why have Air Force readiness rates continued to drop even as the service became more diverse? Brown’s focus on “diversity and inclusion” has been a disaster…”
Brown reminds us of the security guard in Vacation:
As we recorded in an earlier edition, to borrow a phrase from Frank Herbert, Brown has a long history of taking a general (no pun intended) garment, and claiming it’s cut to his fit, seeing racism in everything and anything, everyone and anyone. Like there’s no possible alternative explanation OTHER than racism why an individual might have advised him not to park in the Pacific Air Force’s Commander space; You know, like, perhaps, just maybe they didn’t recognize Brown in his civvies, or perhaps didn’t know Brown at all.
And if you thought things might be better….
…unfortunately, in an item from RealClear Defense forwarded by Breeze Gould, Brent Ramsey offers a significantly less than optimal comparison between…
“A conflict with China is likely in the near term and fundamentally that conflict will be maritime in nature. China’s geography dictates the conflict will be at sea. Chinese early objectives are conquest of Taiwan, Japan, and the Philippines. Thus, China’s provocative actions are manifest against those nations. Non-kinetic skirmishes are already so commonplace that they barely excite attention in the West. Tensions are vastly different on the other side of the world. Asian nations are buying billions in advanced U.S. weaponry to get ready for the inevitable. The Middle Kingdom views its manifest destiny is to rule the world and that starts with conquering its nearest neighbors.
Navy leadership should be laser focused on preparing for the coming conflict. They are not. In recent years from Obama’s Presidency to the present, the Navy has gone woke in a big way and is rudderless in preparing for the coming challenges. First let us examine the new woke Navy. Then, we will examine Navy basics like ships, leadership, and readiness…”
Though the article is well-worth reading in its entirety, for those pressed for time, here’s the Cliff Notes answers: The new woke Navy, many of its ships and most allof its leadership are about as useful as a…
“The Metropolitan Police Department in Washington D.C. has confirmed to Congress that it had plainclothes officers at the Capitol during the Jan. 6 riot and that at least one was captured on video exhorting the crowd, a key House investigator told Just the News. Rep. Barry Loudermilk, R-Ga., the chairman of the House Administration Subcommittee on Oversight, said in wide-ranging interview Wednesday night that MPD body cam video that leaked onto the video platform Rumble is authentic and confirms that officers in plainclothes were at the riot. You can view that video here.
“We know that it is one of their officers and at one point he is encouraging, and it appears he’s encouraging, he’s definitely helping people climb the scaffolding, and he’s telling them go, go, go,” Loudermilk told the Just the News, No Noise television show. “Why is an officer encouraging people to climb the scaffolding and go into the Capitol? And secondly, why did the MPD Metropolitan Police support department decide to put undercover officers in the crowd? Was there intelligence that they had that was or was not passed on to the Capitol Police and what did the Capitol police do with that evidence, if they got it?” he added.
On May 16, Loudermilk wrote a letter to the MPD police chief requesting additional information about the officers that were present including the original body cam footage from all officers that were on-site at the Capitol that day and “all officer and department after action reports and after incident reports concerning the attack on the Capitol on January 6, 2021.” He also requested “a list identifying all MPD officers on duty on January 6, 2021, who were engaged in activities concerning the restoration of civil order at or concerning the U.S. Capitol Complex, including their unit and any information on their assignment, and whether they were in uniform or plain clothes in their role as a law enforcement officer on January 6, 2021.”
According to committee staff, the MPD is cooperating with Loudermilk’s requests but additional details about the presence of the officers is not yet available for public disclosure…”
Two thoughts immediately come to mind: (i) The officer either “is” encouraging the crowd, or they “appear” to be encouraging the crowd; and, (ii) Why are we only learning of this now, considering the January 6 committee had some 18 months to bring it to light. Couldn’t be that they knew about it, but ignoredit as it didn’t fit their insurrection narrative.
Moving on, here’s another sextet of special selections certain to pique the interest of inquiring Conservative minds:
(2). NRO‘s Noah Rothman records the realization Biden agreed to the resumption of student loan interest accrual and repayments, one of the few bright spot in the otherwise terrible, horrible, no good, very bad deal Kevin McCarthy cut, has sent some progressives activists into an inchoate rage spiral. Ya gotta love snowflakes melting into a puddle of paroxysm over the prospect of having to abide by contractual obligations they assumed freely and without mental reservation.
(4). With this decision, Brett Kavanaugh demonstrates why he wasn’t worth the trouble, while John Roberts confirms he’s simply worthless, another bequest from the Bush family, the gift that keeps on givin’…provided you’re a Progressive. Funny, the SCOTUS hasn’t held any districts gerrymandered by the Dimocrats to their advantage to be unconstitutional.
(5). If this incident in Baltimore is any kind of harbinger, good luck hiring social workers to stand in force armed police officers:
A lot of PGA Tour players jumped to the Saudi tour, for big paydays. One of those players was Phil Mickelson — who made an interesting admission to his biographer: “They’re scary motherf***ers to get involved with. We know they killed Khashoggi and have a horrible record on human rights. They execute people over there for being gay.”
Pressed on this question in an interview, Greg Norman, the Saudis’ CEO for their tour, said, “Every country has got a cross to bear.”
“…Amari Ty-Jon Pollard, 19, of Henrico, Virginia, was arraigned on two counts of second-degree murder, Richmond’s top prosecutor Colette McEachin said in an email to The Associated Press. Pollard said he intends to hire an attorney, so the court adjourned the case to a date later this month, McEachin wrote. Pollard was ordered held without bond. Court records did not yet list an attorney who could speak on his behalf, according to the AP.
Online detention records show Pollard remains in the custody of the City of Richmond Sheriff’s Office. following the deaths of 18-year-old Shawn Jackson and Jackson’s stepfather, 36-year-old Renzo Smith.
…At a press conference Wednesday morning, Interim Police Chief Rick Edwards said the suspected shooter had attended the Huguenot High School graduation ceremony, hosted at the state capital’s city-owned Altria Theater, across the street from a large park and in the middle of the Virginia Commonwealth University campus. He opened fire after exiting the theater, and was apprehended in the area by VCU Police, Edwards said.
Police believe the suspect knew at least one of the victims, but have not disclosed a potential motive.
A total of seven people were shot, including the two deceased. The five others were all males between ages 14 and 58, police said. A 31-year-old man remained in critical condition with a life-threatening wound, Edwards said, while the other four victims had injuries not considered life-threatening…”
While we share Bob Gorrell’s sympathy for the victims of this senseless violence…
…and am frankly saddened a young man will likely spend the rest of his life behind bars, it bears mentioning no White man, living or dead, had anything to do with this horrible crime, nor did the inanimate object used to commit it. The sooner Progressives acknowledge these immutable truths the sooner a solution to the scourge of Black on Black crime can be formulated.
Magoo
Video of the Day
Konstantin Kisin highlights the truth, when it comes to two-party politics, there are NO solutions, only trade-offs.
Tales of The Darkside
Dave Rubin records what happens when a 5th-grade teachers schools transgender “activists” on the realities of basic biology.
On the Lighter Side
This is what happens when the tangled webs liars weave finally ensnare their makers whose intent was to deceive.
Loading ...
You must be logged in to post a comment.