{"id":110209,"date":"2023-06-11T20:37:20","date_gmt":"2023-06-12T00:37:20","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.thedailygouge.com\/?p=110209"},"modified":"2023-06-11T20:37:42","modified_gmt":"2023-06-12T00:37:42","slug":"the-daily-gouge-archive-friday-june-9th-2023","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.thedailygouge.com\/?p=110209","title":{"rendered":"The Daily Gouge Archive, Friday, June 9th, 2023"},"content":{"rendered":"

It’s Friday, June 9th, 2023…but before we begin, Best of the Web<\/em>\u00a0relates a ray of sunshine in an increasingly cloudy Socialist sky, that being…<\/strong><\/p>\n

\n

Americans Still Agree with Alexander Hamilton<\/span><\/span><\/a><\/h1>\n<\/div>\n

A new Mason-Dixon poll shows little support for congressional encroachments on the judiciary<\/span><\/a>.<\/span><\/h3>\n

 <\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

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\u2019s according to the latest Mason-Dixon poll commissioned by the First Liberty Institute, which advocates for religious freedom.<\/p>\n

As for the rhetorical assaults packaged with partisan restructuring proposals, recently the staff of Sen.\u00a0Ed Markey\u00a0(D., Mass.) was kind enough to compile an illustrative collection in one slim volume. In the space of a\u00a0mere press release<\/a><\/em><\/span><\/strong><\/span>\u00a0calling for expanding the number of Supreme Court justices from nine to 13, the document attributes to Mr. Markey the despicable lie that Republicans have \u201cstolen the Supreme Court majority,\u201d then quotes Rep.\u00a0Cori Bush\u00a0(D., Mo.) falsely describing the court of duly confirmed Justices as \u201cillegitimate\u201d before appealing to the authority of a series of special-interest groups angered that the court hasn\u2019t chosen to grind their ideological axes.<\/p>\n

Fortunately<\/em><\/span><\/strong> the voters<\/em><\/span><\/strong> who are the real authority<\/em><\/span><\/strong> in this country don\u2019t welcome<\/em><\/span><\/strong> such bullying from the legislature. The Mason-Dixon poll of 1,100 registered U.S. voters found that a full 91% agree<\/em><\/span><\/strong> with the following statement:<\/p>\n

An independent judiciary is a crucial safeguard of our civil liberties<\/em>.<\/p>\n

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:<\/p>\n

QUESTION: Do you support or oppose amending the U.S. Constitution to change the structure of the U.S. Supreme Court?<\/em><\/p>\n

SUPPORT 27%<\/em><\/p>\n

OPPOSE 60%<\/em><\/p>\n

UNDECIDED 13%<\/em><\/p>\n

Here are the results on the particular reform the bullies have been pushing:<\/p>\n

QUESTION: For over 150 years, the United States Supreme Court has had nine justices. \u201cCourt-packing\u201d 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 \u201ccourt-packing\u201d?<\/em><\/p>\n

SUPPORT 25%<\/em><\/p>\n

OPPOSE 68%<\/em><\/p>\n

UNDECIDED 7%<\/em><\/p>\n

Mason-Dixon also queried voters on another change advocated by leftist legislators. Some may quarrel with the way this question was worded, though it\u2019s hard to say that anything in the description of the issue is inaccurate:<\/p>\n

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.<\/em><\/p>\n

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?<\/em><\/p>\n

WOULD 69%<\/em><\/p>\n

WOULD NOT 20%<\/em><\/p>\n

NOT SURE 11%<\/em><\/p>\n

Perhaps<\/span><\/em><\/strong> the overwhelmingly negative response to the idea has something to do<\/em><\/span><\/strong> with the framing of the question. On the other<\/em><\/span><\/strong> hand, maybe a lot of Americans just understand what\u2019s at stake<\/em><\/span><\/strong> when legislators seek new powers over the judiciary. This column should offer the usual caveats about the imprecise nature of political polling. But it\u2019s also worth noting that at least\u00a0according to the FiveThirtyEight website<\/a><\/em><\/span><\/strong><\/span>, Mason-Dixon is among the country\u2019s most accurate<\/em><\/span><\/strong> surveyors of public opinion.<\/p>\n

Those opposing this potential violation of the separation of powers do have a lot of history on their side. \u201cThe complete independence of the courts of justice is peculiarly essential in a limited Constitution,\u201d\u00a0wrote<\/a><\/em><\/span><\/strong><\/span>\u00a0Hamilton in Federalist 78. He noted the specific need<\/em><\/span><\/strong> for the judiciary to be independent of Congress<\/em><\/span><\/strong> in order to enforce limits on legislative power<\/span><\/em><\/strong>:<\/p>\n

Limitations of this kind can be preserved in practice no other way<\/span><\/strong> 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<\/span><\/strong>. Without this, all the reservations of particular rights or privileges would amount to nothing…<\/em><\/p>\n

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 of<\/strong> <\/span>designing men<\/span><\/strong>, or the influence of particular conjunctures<\/span><\/strong>, 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<\/span><\/strong>, and serious oppressions of the minor party in the community<\/span><\/strong>…<\/em><\/p>\n

An independent judiciary is critical<\/em><\/span><\/strong> in protecting us not only<\/em><\/span><\/strong> from politicians like Ed Markey but also<\/em><\/span><\/strong> from the interest groups who manipulate him.<\/p>\n

Here’s the juice: Given the choice to trust the words of Alexander Hamilton or Cori Bush and Ed Markey…<\/strong><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

…we’re going with Hamilton.<\/strong><\/p>\n

Now, here’s…<\/strong><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

As the WSJ<\/em> informs us…<\/strong><\/p>\n

Trump Indicted in Classified Documents Case<\/span><\/a><\/span><\/h1>\n

Former president says he has been summoned to federal court in Miami over handling of government documents at Mar-a-Lago<\/span><\/a><\/span><\/h3>\n

 <\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

“Donald Trump\u00a0was 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<\/em><\/span><\/strong> that the federal government has brought charges against a former president.<\/p>\n

In a\u00a0post on Truth Social<\/em><\/strong><\/span>,<\/a>\u00a0Trump said his lawyers had been informed of his indictment in connection with what he called the \u201cBoxes Hoax.\u201d Declaring his innocence, Trump said he had been summoned to appear Tuesday at the federal courthouse in Miami. \u201cI 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<\/em><\/strong><\/span>,\u201d Trump said, adding, \u201cI AM AN INNOCENT MAN!\u201d<\/p>\n

…the documents probe dates to early 2022, when\u00a0the National Archives retrieved 15 boxes<\/a><\/em><\/span><\/strong><\/span>\u00a0of documents and other items from Mar-a-Lago that should<\/em><\/span><\/strong> have been transferred from the White House, and found they contained\u00a0more than 100 classified records<\/a><\/em><\/span><\/strong><\/span>. The Justice Department sought to recover all<\/em><\/span><\/strong> additional classified documents that might still be at the Florida property through a subpoena<\/span><\/em><\/strong>. 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\u00a0an extraordinary search warrant<\/a><\/em><\/span><\/strong><\/span>\u00a0and recovered hundreds<\/em><\/span><\/strong> more.<\/p>\n

Over ensuing months, Smith\u2019s team interviewed nearly every employee at\u00a0Trump\u2019s Florida home<\/span>\u00a0as part of the documents probe, from top political aides to maids and maintenance staff, The Wall Street Journal reported. In recent months, Smith\u2019s team has homed in on several key<\/em><\/span><\/strong> pieces of evidence, including an audio recording<\/em><\/span><\/strong> in which Trump acknowledged<\/em><\/span><\/strong> he kept a classified Pentagon document about a potential attack on Iran<\/em><\/span><\/strong> and extensive notes from one of his lawyers about the investigation, people familiar with the matter have said.<\/p>\n

Trump\u2019s lawyers met with Justice Department officials on June 5 to try to head off an indictment…”<\/p>\n

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.<\/strong><\/p>\n

It’s worth reviewing this timeline<\/em><\/span><\/a> of the documents fiasco to recall just how many times The Donald denied having highly-classified materials later found in his possession.\u00a0 That being said, neither Clinton nor Obama…or Biden for that matter…have or will\u00a0ever<\/em><\/span> face such scrutiny, but this undeniable double-standard doesn’t excuse Trump’s actions.\u00a0 Moreover, knowing all too well<\/em><\/span> from over\u00a0<\/em>four years of personal experience<\/em><\/span> such a double-standard existed, did he not understand he’d be subject to greater scrutiny than his predecessors?<\/strong><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

Now, here’s The Gouge<\/em>!<\/strong><\/p>\n

First up, courtesy Front Page Magazine<\/em>\u00a0via Nick, Daniel Greenfield informs us the…<\/strong><\/p>\n

Next Joint Chiefs Chair Wants White Male Officers to be a Minority<\/span><\/a><\/span><\/h1>\n

Milley was bad, Brown will be much worse<\/span><\/a>.<\/span><\/h3>\n

 <\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

“When I was working on the\u00a0David Horowitz Freedom Center\u2019s<\/em>\u00a0\u2018Disloyal Military<\/a><\/em><\/span><\/strong><\/span>\u2019\u00a0investigation, I\u00a0predicted that<\/a>\u00a0Air Force Chief of Staff Charles Q. Brown Jr.<\/a><\/em><\/span><\/strong><\/span>\u00a0would be selected as the next Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. The media is now reporting that Biden will indeed<\/em><\/span><\/strong> pick Brown to replace Milley. And as bad<\/em><\/span><\/strong> as Milley was (Thank you<\/span>, Donald J. Trump, Jr.!<\/em>)<\/strong><\/span>, expect Brown to be much worse<\/em><\/span><\/strong>.<\/p>\n

Under Gen. Brown, the Air Force has become the\u00a0most woke<\/a><\/em><\/span><\/strong><\/span>\u00a0of the major service branches.\u00a0Brown disgraced<\/a><\/em><\/span><\/strong>\u00a0himself and his uniform during the Black Lives Matter race riots by releasing a video in which he \u201cseemed to barely contain his rage\u201d while ranting \u201cthat the ideals of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution \u2018that I\u2019ve sworn my adult life to support and defend\u2019 have not always delivered \u2018liberty and equality\u2019 to all.\u201d<\/p>\n