Patterico's Pontifications

11/20/2018

If You Strike the Queen You Had Better Kill the Queen (in the Emersonian Sense, People)

Filed under: General — JVW @ 6:28 pm



[guest post by JVW]

Marcia Fudge failed to kill the Queen. For one brief nanosecond it appeared that Fudge, a five-term Democrat Congresswoman representing Cleveland, would pose a strong challenge to Nancy Pelosi’s ambitions of ascending back into the House Speaker’s seat. Yesterday media outlets reported that 16 renegade Democrats would refuse to vote for Pelosi as speaker, a number which could prevent her from receiving more votes than a unified Republican nominee in an open vote. Rep. Fudge had previously expressed a willingness to mount a campaign for the speakership, and the dictates of intersectionality suggested that if the Democrats were to dump an elderly white woman as party leader it would have to be for a minority woman (Rep. Fudge is black).

But earlier this evening, Rep. Fudge announced that she would not challenge Rep. Pelosi and instead threw her support behind San Fran Nan. What happened in the last 24 hours to change her mind? Perhaps it was the release of a three-year-old letter vouching for the character of a local Cleveland judge, Lance Mason, who at the time was being prosecuted for having savagely beaten his wife in front of their two small children. The Congresswoman characterized her friend as “a good man who made a very bad mistake,” and that his actions were “out of character and totally contrary to everything I know about him.” Mason would serve eight months in prison for his crime, and after he was released he would be hired by the Cleveland mayor to be the city’s minority business development director.

On Saturday, Frank Mason stabbed his estranged wife to death in her Shaker Heights, Ohio home.

– JVW

321 Responses to “If You Strike the Queen You Had Better Kill the Queen (in the Emersonian Sense, People)”

  1. Now the fault here is entirely on Marcia Fudge for endorsing the character of a man who quite obviously is pretty messed up. But one is left to wonder if it wasn’t people close to San Fran Nan who made sure the media became well-aware of the letter that Rep. Fudge wrote in support of her friend.

    JVW (42615e)

  2. And theoretically the 16 renegade Democrats could find a new hero to challenge Rep. Pelosi, but I wonder if things like this don’t give cold feet to any aspirants.

    JVW (42615e)

  3. one is left to wonder if it wasn’t people close to San Fran Nan

    You think?!

    Kevin M (a57144)

  4. … Mason surrendered. Officers searching his home at the time found smoke grenades, semi-automatic rifles, a sword, a bulletproof vest and more than 2,500 rounds of ammunition from the home.

    He must be one of them there crazed alt.right Stormfront KKK nationalist white supremacist Trump supporters that go around victimizing people of color.

    nk (dbc370)

  5. The GOP could pick one of the signers and say they’ll vote for them.

    Kevin M (a57144)

  6. He must be one of them there crazed alt.right…

    Probably just doesn’t like Jews.

    Kevin M (a57144)

  7. That’s just crazy but compared to San Fran Feinstein supporter Jim Jones it’s near beer, I know it was 40 years ago.

    Narciso (cc845e)

  8. Wait that’s certainly a firearms violation or two, where did he get them from ‘tong’ lee.

    Narciso (cc845e)

  9. JVW, I want to thank you for an epiphany I had with this post. There is one good thing about California’s one-party elections. Democrats are running against each other. (Yes, I know this was for the Speakership.)

    nk (dbc370)

  10. That was from his first arrest, before he was adjudged a felon, when he only smashed his wife’s face in, not killed her.

    nk (dbc370)

  11. A fellow I know lived in a district where fudge and Kucinich were competing he trusts the latter.

    Narciso (cc845e)

  12. That would have been around the time, he was dealing with lee.

    Narciso (cc845e)

  13. Lee. If he lived in California, this was the district of one of the stokes family.

    Narciso (cc845e)

  14. Louis stokes, but that was a long time ago.

    Narciso (cc845e)

  15. It’s important to know that our Adorable Dopey Marxist Niece joined Team Nan today.

    JVW (42615e)

  16. Just one happy family.

    Narciso (cc845e)

  17. You think?!

    Well, it was obviously a big story in Cleveland, and the local news did an article (linked in the post) about all the bigwigs who spoke or wrote on behalf of Mason, so there’s no chance that Rep. Fudge’s letter was going to be overlooked. But certainly you can bet that Pelosi’s allies made sure that wavering Democrats would know about it.

    JVW (42615e)

  18. It’s important to know that our Adorable Dopey Marxist Niece joined Team Nan today.

    She held out two weeks longer than Spanky…

    Dave (9664fc)

  19. Watching pelosi mentally deteriorate will not be joyous.

    mg (ef2c8e)

  20. The arquillians will find a pit crew.

    Narciso (cc845e)

  21. That was a good move by Trump, to keep the Speakership out of the hands of the communists. “Vote for the crook, it’s important!”

    nk (dbc370)

  22. There’s also that Nancy Pelosi’s father had put up a statue of Robert E. Lee in Baltimore when he was the mayor there. (Nudge, nudge, wink, wink, dogwhistle.)

    nk (dbc370)

  23. There s that kissinger line about the viciousness of academic politics.

    narciso (d1f714)

  24. Win-win:

    Fudge, who huddled with Pelosi in the Capitol on Friday, said Pelosi has offered to restore a defunct subcommittee on elections, and to make Fudge the chairwoman.

    The issue of voting rights has been a top priority of members of the Congressional Black Caucus (CBC), which Fudge used to lead, particularly since a 2013 Supreme Court decision scrapped key protections previously provided under the Voting Rights Act of 1965.

    Fudge is vowing to use her new gavel to restore those protections.

    “Leader Pelosi has granted me the opportunity to create the record necessary to satisfy the 2013 Supreme Court decision in Shelby County v. Holder, so that the protections of the Voting Rights Act will be reinstated and improved,” Fudge said in a statement.

    Dana (023079)

  25. You mess with teh bull you get teh horns…

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  26. The Art Of The Deal, Dana. Now if “the guy who wrote the book” could have done the same in the two years he wasted name-calling, threatening and driving out the members of his own party in the House, until he managed to lose the majority, the orange-skinned #$$%% @@#$ &^#! ….

    nk (dbc370)

  27. Jonathan Last at the Weekly Standard handicaps (probably paywalled) the Dems’ 2020 field as:

    (1) Bernie Sanders (trending down, though);

    (2) Kirsten Gillibrand (whose radical makeover is complete);

    (3) Kamala Harris (but it’s not clear that she has the ability to pop off the screen the way Obama did);

    (4) Sherrod Brown (old & white, but a winner who’d put the midwest back in play);

    (5) Elizabeth Warren (too late, she should have taken on Hillary in 2016);

    (6) Corey Booker (couldn’t manage the Spartacus routine); and

    (7-15) everybody else, including Beto O’Rourke.

    As early prognostications go, this isn’t bad. I think it doesn’t matter whether Harris has Obama’s charisma and that we’ll see the BLM protocols employed against Gillibrand, Warren, or anyone else who challenges her, and I don’t think any of them have an effective response to that. I wouldn’t call her a prohibitive favorite by any means, but I think she is the favorite based on things that have less to do with her than with the fact that she’s a young black woman senator from California who’s at the farthest fringes of her party. Her gesture of consolidation for the general election will be to pick Beto as her running mate.

    Regardless, it’s going to be a very entertaining Dem primary season.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  28. Except beto isn’t even in the Senate, but those media mash notes wont go to waste, as for Harris she’s not in the majority either.

    Now we know Corker had failed to declare 3 million in taxable income

    Narciso (cc845e)

  29. He actually thought trump would pick him for secretary of state, now that’s delusional considering his role as a fixer on the Iran deal.

    Narciso (cc845e)

  30. The dems understand no matter who is charge the agenda is clear, that’s why they win and we lose, comprende.

    Narciso (cc845e)

  31. So they were going to get national health care, by hook or by crook, this time around they bribed the insurance company they got motor voter, they liberalized the lending regulations by fiat.

    Narciso (cc845e)

  32. They didn’t care about the long term impact, their cord ran out on carbon taxes but they thought the EPA would bail them out.

    Narciso (cc845e)

  33. I never knew (until I read her Wikipedia bio five minutes ago) that Harris’s mother was from India.

    Haley vs. Harris would be quite the contest…

    Dave (9664fc)

  34. narciso… you belong in the Republican leadership, kicking asses and taking names.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  35. I meant that as a compliment.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  36. Thanks does it seem they could get a clue, after getting walloped with a two by four, they pick Kevin McCarthy, he was the one who was giving Kevin spacey tips while Ryan was getting fooled by Joe biden

    Narciso (cc845e)

  37. Dave, prior to the mids, I would have thought we would have to wait till 2024 for that matchup, but I think people will be coughing “dementia” and “be better than Reagan by realizing it before a 2nd term”.
    I think all those contenders are jokes and I’d actually not mind seeing a bald vs. bald matchup: Rick Scott (FL)vs. Tom Wolf (PA).

    urbanleftbehind (6b7c6c)

  38. Well in 1984 primaries they had the young white guy, the old astronaut the antideluvian
    Foghorn leghorn, doddering uncle, did I miss anyone

    Narciso (cc845e)

  39. Beldar (fa637a) — 11/20/2018 @ 8:35 pm

    It’s telling that the Dems seem to have no governors in contention.

    Governors, even liberal Dems, have to take care of business. But the business of a senator in the minority party is little more than posturing for the TV cameras.

    None of the people on Beldar’s (and the Weekly Standard’s) list has any appeal to white working class or rural voters. With the partial exception of Harris (who has a fairly respectable resume, despite her political views), it’s impossible to take any of them seriously.

    I continue to believe the Dems need a governor from a midwestern or southern state who will dust off Bill Clinton’s pseudo-populist stump speeches from 1992. If he or she is not an obvious slimeball like Bubba, so much the better.

    Dave (9664fc)

  40. Oh yes how could I miss the cat and the hat, the younger jive talker, now half of them are like that, but policy wise there was little daylight

    Narciso (cc845e)

  41. Probably the #metoo guy, brown from Ohio is their best bet, the others are more niche to a strawberry venti.

    Narciso (cc845e)

  42. I wouldn’t call [Harris] a prohibitive favorite by any means, but I think she is the favorite based on things that have less to do with her than with the fact that she’s a young black woman senator from California who’s at the farthest fringes of her party. Her gesture of consolidation for the general election will be to pick Beto as her running mate.

    I would guess she would go for Sherrod Brown instead. He will do more to help her in the midwest than O’Rourke will do to help her in Texas. Harris will focus on reassembling Obama’s coalition, so it will be smart of her to get a white Ohioan who can hopefully appeal to working class white votes, whom Harris will promise higher mandated wages and “free” health care.

    Regardless, it’s going to be a very entertaining Dem primary season.

    And I’m guessing it will start with some sort of Iowa straw poll in about three months. With money being such a huge factor, and with no Hillary in the race, I would think that every Democrat who wants to run should declare by this coming June in order to start raking in the bucks.

    JVW (42615e)

  43. I want Alec Baldwin to run…
    Into a semi

    mg (ebf6c2)

  44. Dont mess with that chick in the GIF from the Twitchy post, she probably knows the same people that San Fran Nan’s baser relatives know.

    urbanleftbehind (6b7c6c)

  45. I continue to believe the Dems need a governor from a midwestern or southern state who will dust off Bill Clinton’s pseudo-populist stump speeches from 1992. If he or she is not an obvious slimeball like Bubba, so much the better.

    I understand that Colorado’s outgoing governor, John Hickenlooper, is very seriously considering making a run as a business-friendly but socially progressive Democrat. As a straight white male who is kind of boring, he has an extremely narrow path to the nomination; basically all of the lefties have to stand in a circular firing squad.

    JVW (42615e)

  46. It’s going to be J.B. Pritzker. He has all the money and all the vainglory of two Trumps. The avoirdupois, too.

    nk (dbc370)

  47. WIt he crashed into the police car, of the officer sent to investigate?

    Narciso (cc845e)

  48. Floridaman!!!

    https://www.miamiherald.com/news/state/florida/article221942870.html

    Ride, Sardo, ride upon your mini-horse
    Other guys will get their kicks out on a green golf course
    Ride, Sardo, ride upon your mini-horse
    YOU made her sing, you bought a ring and named her Mister Ed

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  49. There crazy up there,

    narciso (d1f714)

  50. Make that Jackie G

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  51. WTF… now the little miss has filed a restraining order…

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  52. Well, yeah, how else will she get herself some publicity? It doesn’t matter that Avenatti was already under a criminal domestic violence order of protection, he was hogging all the publicity and her name was not mentioned even once in the media.

    Dirty little Hollywood semi-pro whose sugar-daddy was not as sweet as she would like is my opinion. Maybe Avenatti is guilty of domestic violence and maybe he’s not, but he’s for sure guilty of serious lapses of judgment and hygiene.

    nk (dbc370)

  53. Well it does raise what exactly he was doing there, was he her agent (nudge nudge) this fellow I imagine was not so understanding.

    Narciso (cc845e)

  54. Good grief, Haiku, I should have stuck to my assumption that you were talking about Avenatti’s ride and not clicked your link. Yeesh!

    nk (dbc370)

  55. No avenatti is one of yours, yes we have crazy but we have them one at a time. Like the guy making tatp in his shed what could give wrong?

    Narciso (cc845e)

  56. That’s pretty amazing timing, that this guy would go off like that five days after an election.

    Paul Montagu (70fe18)

  57. 56…
    different strokes, for different folks
    and so on, and so on and scoobie hiho silver…

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  58. What he seemed stable in anyway to you,

    Narciso (cc845e)

  59. he’s for sure guilty of serious lapses of judgment and hygiene.

    Hold my beer…

    Dave (9664fc)

  60. Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 11/20/2018 @ 9:20 pm
    So tell me, Colonel, why are you calling me out? I actually agree with Rothman and Rumpf, but if there’s something in the Politifact link that you object to–aside from basic, boring ad hom–then by all means, dazzle me.

    Paul Montagu (70fe18)

  61. Hope the judge can boost that miniature ponies ego, Col.

    mg (ebf6c2)

  62. Is the reference to “Frank” Mason a typo meant to be to Lance Mason?

    Stephen J. (a3078c)

  63. how stupid are the idiot losers in charge of NASA?

    NASA is ordering a review of the workplace cultures of SpaceX and Boeing, two companies working with the agency to fly astronauts to the International Space Station, according to a report Tuesday by The Washington Post.

    The decision was reportedly prompted by SpaceX CEO Elon Musk’s appearance on the Joe Rogan Experience podcast in September, where he took a puff of a marijuana blunt during the live stream. The move didn’t sit well with NASA’s top officials, the Post said.

    this is what the sleazy cowardly astronaut trash at NASA do with our tax dollars when they’re not perpetrating the global warming hoax all up on young kids (bad touch NASA)

    good to know

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  64. “high as a kite” for rocket men is supposed to mean something else, mr. happyfeet

    melon musk is a dirty pot face who does rape on the wallets of people who buy his overblown golf carts

    nk (dbc370)

  65. we don’t have rocketmen we have trash like Mark Kelly anymore

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  66. Not sure this is the group that should be handicapping the Democratic race. There could be an egotistic billionaire out there who feels he/she can bankroll their own run, and get the vote that went for Bernie last time. Bloomberg doesn’t have the Trump media savy, so not him. Maybe some Hollywood figure. I’ve never seen Steyer — does he have the media presence of a Trump?

    Of the Last candidates, you can cross off Gillibrand. There is extreme resentfulness that she led the charge against Franken, who was seen as an effective Progressive champion. She wont get the Soros money. And there are other women in the race.

    Harris rings all the right bells — she’s what HR departments used to call a two-fer, plus she has not made a fool of herself, and has a decent history of state and national positions. You Californians cite a history she has with Willie Brown — would that be a problem? Also, she has not, to the best of my knowledge, made that inspiring speech, or positioned herself as someone who is going to soothe the social strains of the Trump era.

    Sherrod Brown sounds like the perfect candidate for a 2017 mindset. I think the Dems, by 2019-2020 are going to be so confident of victory, that they will vote with their hearts, and not with an eye to making MAGA people vote for them.

    The others? Warren is yesterday’s news. Sanders needed Hillary as a foil. O’Rourke hasn’t ever won anything, but has a very rich father in law. Booker has given himself a handy nickname.

    Appalled (c9622b)

  67. There could be an egotistic billionaire out there who feels he/she can bankroll their own run,

    See Comment 47.

    nk (dbc370)

  68. Well she’s madame laforge of the star chamber, it turns out this star chamber re Cavanaugh was even more fraudulent than I could imagine.

    Narciso (ac7ce2)

  69. 70 — The Democrats will like that she led the charge against Kavenaugh. If I recall correctly, she didn’t particularly distinguish herself, but she also didn’t do anything memorably stupid, like Booker.

    Appalled (c9622b)

  70. #47/69

    Hm. Is this guy remotely charismatic? I mean, if he can solve the Illinois budget/pension problem, he gets himself a platform. But I think he has to actually govern for a year or so to establish some credibility as a candidate.

    Appalled (c9622b)

  71. solve the Illinois budget/pension problem

    you funny

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  72. Charismatic is not what I’d call him, think Jeb Bush or John Kasich, but for a super-rich trust fund baby he knows how to pass himself off as a solid, middle-class man of the people. But I think you’re right. 2020 is too early for him to jump from a campaign for governor to a campaign for President.

    nk (dbc370)

  73. Recently re-elected Gina Raimondo (D Gov of R.i.) did what needed to be done pension reform wise, but she operates from a Snapchat of a state, not a megachurch pulpit. RI also lacked the poison pill of a IL state constitutional amendment not ever allowing diminishment of future benefits.

    urbanleftbehind (6b7c6c)

  74. One greasy Springfield late night meal might knock JB out…at least that’s one way (the LG-elect is a black lady) to heal the wound of Florida/Georgia hootenanny.

    urbanleftbehind (6b7c6c)

  75. Jebby boosh would make a great Democrat contender.

    mg (ef2c8e)

  76. Jonathan Last at the Weekly Standard handicaps (probably paywalled) the Dems’ 2020 field as:

    (1) Bernie Sanders (trending down, though);

    (2) Kirsten Gillibrand (whose radical makeover is complete);

    (3) Kamala Harris (but it’s not clear that she has the ability to pop off the screen the way Obama did);

    (4) Sherrod Brown (old & white, but a winner who’d put the midwest back in play);

    (5) Elizabeth Warren (too late, she should have taken on Hillary in 2016);

    (6) Corey Booker (couldn’t manage the Spartacus routine); and

    (7-15) everybody else, including Beto O’Rourke.

    As early prognostications go, this isn’t bad. I think it doesn’t matter whether Harris has Obama’s charisma and that we’ll see the BLM protocols employed against Gillibrand, Warren, or anyone else who challenges her, and I don’t think any of them have an effective response to that. I wouldn’t call her a prohibitive favorite by any means, but I think she is the favorite based on things that have less to do with her than with the fact that she’s a young black woman senator from California who’s at the farthest fringes of her party. Her gesture of consolidation for the general election will be to pick Beto as her running mate.

    Regardless, it’s going to be a very entertaining Dem primary season.

    Beldar (fa637a) — 11/20/2018 @ 8:35 pm

    I think Amy Klobuchar is the dark horse… She doesn’t seem pants on fire cray as some of her other colleagues.

    Harris/Klobuchar or Klobuchar/Harris would be quite formidable imo.

    whembly (b9d411)

  77. the stripper daughter didn’t understand you not opposed to use personal email

    this is just because she’s stupid but come on

    she’s still kinda smart for a stripper

    if she can do emails and stuff that’s really neat

    she’s like a role model for other stupid strippers

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  78. So back on the flash, it seems Kaitlin is a chip off the old block of ice (daddy was a metahuman)

    Narciso (ac7ce2)

  79. #79

    Are you talking about Ivanka?

    Appalled (c9622b)

  80. yes i’m talking about Ivanka

    she ruined thanksgiving with her stupid incontinent stripper emails

    she has to be punished now

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  81. That’s our pikachu always carrying a torch, to burn women with it.

    Narciso (ac7ce2)

  82. 82.

    If you ever come to Atlanta, you should go to the Clermont Lounge. You might find an incontinent stripper there.

    Appalled (c9622b)

  83. i never been to Atlanta i’d like to go and see where they invented the chik fil a

    and i never been to stone mountain

    i wanna go before the taliban blow it up

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  84. yes i’m talking about Ivanka

    she ruined thanksgiving with her stupid incontinent stripper emails

    she has to be punished now

    happyfeet (28a91b) — 11/21/2018 @ 7:37 am

    Erm… it’s just the dems whatabouting again. This is old news being rehashed for some reason.

    Equivocating Ivanka’s (and Jared don’t forget) private email practices early in this administration to what HRC and her staff did is beyond disingenuous.

    Yes Ivanka/Jared were hypocritical… but to claim its even in the same ballpark as maintaining private unsecured email server, bleachbit’ing subpoenaed harddrives, deleting over 30k subpoenaed email w/o oversight AND mishandled classified information is silly.

    To this day, I’m surprised that nearly zero attention was spent on even HOW classified information was sent to HRC’s email server in the first place. You can’t just click “send to clinton.email.com” classified information from within SCIFs.

    whembly (b9d411)

  85. you know who else did personal email all up in it was disgraced former army general/cia director David Petraeus

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  86. Because Panetta was doing it, the EPA chief even Obama were, in for an ounce in for a pound.

    Narciso (ac7ce2)

  87. you know who else did personal email all up in it was disgraced former army general/cia director David Petraeus

    happyfeet (28a91b) — 11/21/2018 @ 7:52 am

    I don’t think so…

    From what I remember he plead guilty in showing classified-SAP documents in his possessions to his mistress/biographer. While his mistress did have security clearance, she wasn’t read-in to view those documents.

    While many thought that was a “slap on the wrist” punishment for Patraeus, the cynic in me believed that Democrat operatives pushed for this to take Patraeus out of the running for President, to pave the way for HRC.

    whembly (b9d411)

  88. Well blackmail re Benghazi, brennan wanted the job, and Johnson was rewarded for the leak from his office.

    Narciso (ac7ce2)

  89. dirty general david petraeus would leave secret stuff in his gmail for his chippies to log in with his password and find

    he was really sleazy this is why he was perfect to head up the cia

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  90. Betrayus, fbi, cia, doj are highly over rated. Along with congressional pos.

    mg (ebf6c2)

  91. yes yes very much over-rated but they all get big fat piggy pensions

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  92. remember this? this is how the sleazy corrupt US Army rolls anymore (third whirl joke military)

    The decision to allow retired Gen. David Petraeus to retain his four-star pension in retirement after a federal court convicted him of leaking classified documents was made after an informal review with no documentation by then-Army Secretary John McHugh, according to the Army.

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  93. Total betrayal by the brass in charge,happyfeet

    mg (ef2c8e)

  94. It will be Beto and he will win. Not saying he’s the most qualified. Just, after Obama the Dems will go back “mainstream,” (white) and he is young and telegenic, and that’s what tends to win.

    JRH (f51cae)

  95. I think the Democratic nominee will be Kamal-toe. Willie Brown’s machine will make sure any questions about her competence as San Fran DA and CA AG gets the Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind treatment. Bernie will get shoved off the stage as too old and too white. My guess is Harris will select Beto or Warren as her running mate. Tres intersectional, ya know?

    CygnusAnalogMan (9c66ec)

  96. I felt that the Beto experience was a long delayed resumption of the fall campaign RFK never got to run, skinny effeminate cool rich guy against a shady senator that didnt photograph well.

    Beto also should have went Wall rather than denounce it, if only to see how sincere Trump was about not undercutting Ted Cruz.

    urbanleftbehind (5eecdb)

  97. Klobuhar has been talked up and she can win the Driftless Region back (WI and IA back in the fold), not sure if that plays in the eastern plains (the Omaha-centric district in NE, KS!!!) and MI-OH-PA.

    urbanleftbehind (5eecdb)

  98. The Dems will be torn between two contradictory impulses: the desire for an ideologically pure candidate and the desire for a candidate who can ensure Trump is defeated. While a lot of the ideologically pure certainly want Trump to be defeated, they are immune to the fact that ideological purity won’t defeat him.

    If the GOP is lucky, the ideologically pure will win. If they don’t win out, expect an interested 2020 autumn.

    kishnevi (d764f4)

  99. If klobuchar wins you might as well elect the king of Saudi arapeia.

    mg (ebf6c2)

  100. The Dems will be torn between two contradictory impulses: the desire for an ideologically pure candidate and the desire for a candidate who can ensure Trump is defeated.

    which does not rule out a Joe Manchin, but his particular achilles heal is not so much his mix of positions on issues but his daughter having been the Epi-Pen Grinch.

    urbanleftbehind (5eecdb)

  101. mg, the Prince is the kind-of-President now anyways.

    urbanleftbehind (5eecdb)

  102. The interesting thing is a non-incumbent Democrat candidate for President has never been able to defeat an incumbent Republican President when the economy is humming. You can be your last peso that the MBM and Democrats will be doing everything in their power to badmouth the state of the economy and place the blame squarely on Trump.

    CygnusAnalogMan (9c66ec)

  103. Bet, not be…..

    CygnusAnalogMan (9c66ec)

  104. It’s a wonder what the press will crowd out well not really.

    Narciso (ac7ce2)

  105. 104. CygnusAnalogMan (9c66ec) — 11/21/2018 @ 9:06 am

    The interesting thing is a non-incumbent Democrat candidate for President has never been able to defeat an incumbent Republican President when the economy is humming.

    probably not the economy – it’s just taht when the ecoinomy is bad, and the opresident is oerceived to be helpless or uninformed about that,, it is treated as a form of incompetence.

    Now when did incumbent presddenmts lose bids for re-election?

    There was 1892 but Cleveland ran against then tariff. The economy actually got bad after the election. This was before Democrats were pereceived as better about the economy and Cleveland was regarded as aconservative later – a”Gold Democrart”

    1912: Taft. There was arecession in 1913 that could have turned intoa depression – CXpxey was ready to march again – but World War I abd British spending may have choked that off. This was 3 wauy race.

    1932: This is the classical loss of a re-eelction because of the economy, Although the head of teh DNC wanted to make Prohibition the issue.

    1948 – Truman won barely – it wasn’t recession that wa sthe problem but inflation – but it suddenly, and inexplicably to most economists vanished in October. Inflation was the thing the “Do-nothing” 80th Congress waa doing nothing about.

    1968. There were some other issues.

    1976. The economy was recovering but it had bene bad.

    1980. Yes the economy and other signs of incompetence.

    1992. The economy wasn’t bad but there was saconfusion about the meaning oif the woird “recession.”

    You can be your last peso that the MBM and Democrats will be doing everything in their power to badmouth the state of the economy and place the blame squarely on Trump.

    Sammy Finkelman (102c75)

  106. You can be your last peso that the MBM and Democrats will be doing everything in their power to badmouth the state of the economy and place the blame squarely on Trump.

    They have other issues.

    The tax law, which abolished SALT, was an issue in Orange County probably..

    Sammy Finkelman (102c75)

  107. “You come at the king, you best not miss”
    –Omar Little, The Wire

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r6l_9reaLz0

    Kevin M (a57144)

  108. 1992. The economy wasn’t bad

    In Southern California it was fracking depression, given that the aerospace industry had cratered after the USSR fell, and the remnants wound up in Georgia.

    It was a REAL good time to pick up beach property.

    Kevin M (a57144)

  109. 27. Three days remaining free of paywall I think.

    Sammy Finkelman (102c75)

  110. Well they learned their lesson:

    They’ve always been for importing cheap labor.

    Kevin M (a57144)

  111. Regardless, it’s going to be a very entertaining Dem primary season.

    If Kasich runs as an independent, it could get very strange. Kamala Harris on the spittle-throwing Left, Donald Trump on the Yosemite Sam Right, and Jar-Jar Kasich in the middle, splitting all the differences.

    Kevin M (a57144)

  112. In my mind there was zero chance that anyone other than Pelosi gets the Speaker position. It’s an inherently extremely political position, you’re not there to be liked, you’re there to get things done for your party. Same with the Senate majority leader. It’s also not a springboard for the Presidency. This is something that Pelosi, Boehner, Reid, and McConnell all know know, and that Paul Ryan (an idiot) did not.

    Davethulhu (519d49)

  113. In that scenario, I could see a third color being added to maps, although only to reflect any cult-like following/bureacracy army Kasich may have in the Buckeye State.

    urbanleftbehind (5eecdb)

  114. What did they know know and when did they know know it?

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  115. Michael Avenatti
    @MichaelAvenatti

    I thought I was clear about this previously but based on comments, evidently not. The allegations made against me are FALSE. I am innocent and I did not do what I have been accused of doing. I look forward to ALL of the facts and evidence coming to light. I will be vindicated.
    __ _

    Jim Treacher
    @jtLOL

    cc: Brett Kavanaugh
    __ _

    David Burge
    David Burge
    @iowahawkblog

    I sense an unhealthy display of defensive rage and anger there, which as I understand it is only more evidence of guilt

    harkin (a76a32)

  116. ….per the Romney Standard, of course.

    urbanleftbehind (5eecdb)

  117. Looking at his accuser, I’m inclined to believe him. But wow, what a dork and at his age, too!

    nk (dbc370)

  118. 78. California ex-Governor Jerry Brown, even at age 82, would beat them all. 2020 would be his chance. . And he’s moderate enough to not have too much difficulty in winning a general election.

    He failed in 1976 and 1992 because of a few factors including getting in too late, and his viced presidential choice in 1992.

    But he says he knows his age.

    But why can’t he reduce it by 20 years like that Dutch man wants to? A person now can change everything else on a birth certificate.

    Sammy Finkelman (102c75)

  119. 89. No the moles in the CIA got rid of their boss before he could get rid of them. They ahd discoverede the affair but in a way they were not supposed to, so they needed to start an investigation, which was started by creating hoax messages allegedly by his mistress.

    Sammy Finkelman (102c75)

  120. The Democratic Presidential nominee is most likely to be someone that most Democrats (or anyone) are not too happy with.

    Sammy Finkelman (102c75)

  121. nothing wrong with that:

    https://freebeacon.com/politics/espy-paid-off-267000-tax-debt-shortly-after-lobbying-for-ivory-coast-despot/

    they just debate with live ammunition,

    narciso (d1f714)

  122. @123. If our Captain weathers Typhoon Mueller and economic as well as world events keep sailing along as is, he’ll likely win another term. Voters won’t openly confess to pollsters they’ll vote for him, either. T’ain’t nobody evident- or young enough- on the Dems radar nearly as entertaining– ‘cept maybe Oprah.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  123. That Mississippi lady is like a post weight loss Claire McCaskill who finally got invited to rush.

    urbanleftbehind (7cb13e)

  124. yes i’m talking about Ivanka

    That’s Crooked Ivanka to you!

    In other news, suspected felon insults impeachment trial judge.

    Dave (1bb933)

  125. I read Trump’s tweet. Where’s the insult? Saying, “Sorry, I disagree”?

    I disagree, too. Federal judges, especially at the lower levels, are very political. For many, their seats are rewards for party fundraising. Others are nothing more than the alter egos of the Senators who blue-slipped them.

    nk (dbc370)

  126. @129. By the very nature of the medium, aren’t every ‘Trump Tweet’ essentially an insult?!

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  127. Shorter Roberts: Who you gonna believe, me or your lying eyes?

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  128. How about lawyers who read the law, and those that don’t care.

    Narciso (03346d)

  129. I read Trump’s tweet. Where’s the insult? Saying, “Sorry, I disagree”?

    He called the Chief Justice of the United States a liar.

    Dave (1bb933)

  130. Orange Man Bad!

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  131. No it’s an opinion, otherwise why go the trouble of picking judges (John Roberts is the answer to that question)

    Narciso (03346d)

  132. Roberts pretends to not know what forum shopping is. I’d call that a lie. Of Bush judges, he’s the most Bush.

    Munroe (57a73f)

  133. His benchmates’ job title is “Associate Justice of the Supreme Court,” but John Roberts’ job title is “Chief Justice of the United States,” to reflect that his is the only federal judgeship which is specifically referenced in the Constitution, and that he leads not just the SCOTUS but the entire federal judiciary. His general job responsibilities, and specifically Canon 1 of the Code of Conduct for United States Judges, oblige him to “Uphold the Integrity and Independence of the Judiciary,” and the commentary thereto provides:

    Deference to the judgments and rulings of courts depends on public confidence in the integrity and independence of judges. The integrity and independence of judges depend in turn on their acting without fear or favor. Although judges should be independent, they must comply with the law and should comply with this Code. Adherence to this responsibility helps to maintain public confidence in the impartiality of the judiciary. Conversely, violation of this Code diminishes public confidence in the judiciary and injures our system of government under law.

    Chief Justice Roberts’ comments were merely him doing his job, a part of constitutional checks and balances as between coordinate and co-equal branches of American government, and I strongly support both the substance of what he said and its timing and manner.

    The federal judiciary is not immune from criticism, but Trump already holds the principal constitutional check over that judiciary’s power, in the form of his power to appoint its new members. Congress has a powerful but clearly subsidiary role in checking the institutional power of the federal judiciary through its ability to create or abolish judgeships and judicial units; but the odds of legislation passing the next House to split the Ninth Circuit, for example, are now exactly zero, to about forty decimal places.

    His current comments are unsophisticated, but so is he and so, therefore, is damn near every other comment that comes out of his yapping mouth. Far worse, they’re likely to be counterproductive: If one assumes he’s correct, for instance, that the Ninth Circuit is a particularly problematic one, publicly attacking it is unlikely to do anything at all except persuade those life-tenured judges to be more biased against his administration’s positions. It’s a stupid fight for him to pick, but then, he’s an idiot and picks even very stupid fights because they keep his cult followers revved up.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  134. @ Munroe, who wrote (#136):

    Roberts pretends to not know what forum shopping is. I’d call that a lie.

    Quote and cite? I think you just pulled that factual assertion out of your ass and that it’s false, and that John Roberts has never so pretended except in your imagination.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  135. Excuse me, quote and link, please, Munroe.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  136. “What we have is an extraordinary group of dedicated judges doing their level best to do equal right to those appearing before them. That independent judiciary is something we should all be thankful for.”

    What we have is a Chief Justice who pretends that the judiciary is apolitical and neutral.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  137. Slappy Avenatti avoids felony charge.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  138. Democrats know a judge on the 9th circus is often a dead pipe cinch, consider John tigars non sensical decision, but nfib v. Sibelius was just that sort of stretch.

    Narciso (5ae54a)

  139. Shorter Roberts: Who you gonna believe… me or your lying eyes?

    Get real.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  140. “Excuse me, quote and link, please, Munroe.”
    Beldar (fa637a) — 11/21/2018 @ 4:47 pm

    Quote and link @128. (h/t Dave)

    Munroe (f14796)

  141. The word “forum” and the term “forum shopping” do not appear at that link, Munroe.

    Nor do they appear in the report of Chief Justice Roberts’ statement by the news organization to which he made it, the Associated Press.

    You made that up, Munroe, and it’s a lie.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  142. In my mind there was zero chance that anyone other than Pelosi gets the Speaker position.

    There is a 2% chance that some other Dem gets it, with GOP votes.

    Kevin M (a57144)

  143. He failed in 1976 and 1992

    800 numbers were too new. Now they’re too old.

    Kevin M (a57144)

  144. Those who want to re-write Chief Justice Roberts’ words can of course pretend that he’s said whatever they want.

    Pretending doesn’t make it true. Pretending just makes you a pretender, another idiot on the internet with an opinion and a nether orifice.

    The notion that John Roberts, or anyone else on the SCOTUS, needs instruction from Donald J. Trump about anything related to the Ninth Circuit — whose judges’ questionable rulings are vastly better known to them than to him — is too stupid for further comment. For all but brand new judges (say, those with less than a year on the bench), I would bet a testicle that John Roberts knows to a T exactly how well each of them manages the task of “doing their level best to do equal right to those appearing before them,” both in general and in specific cases. When I was clerking on the Fifth Circuit, I assure you that those appellate judges likewise knew exactly which district judges were, and were not, inclined to be led into error by some bias or failure of effort.

    Trump paints good judges and bad with the same broad brush. He’s an idiot, and pushback from the Chief Justice was appropriate. And the Chief Justice, now age 63, is a decade younger than Trump, and unlike Trump, he has life tenure. He does not work for Donald Trump, and his institutional responsibilities are not to the executive branch. He’s in the right here, and Trump’s just being his usual @sshole self.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  145. It’s a stupid fight for him to pick, but then, he’s an idiot and picks even very stupid fights because they keep his cult followers revved up.

    And this is my main problem with Trump — he is singularly ineffective but his supporters don’t care. As long as he “fights” in those tweets, they don’t care that he’s single-handedly destroying the machine the GOP built over 20 years. A machine built to let someone like a President Walker to overturn 60 eyears of Democrat excess.

    But no, just as things were all lining up, they chose Crazy Eddie. The Democrats should write them all a note of appreciation.

    Kevin M (a57144)

  146. I have wanted Trump to succeed. I still want him succeed. But it seems like he doesn’t care, or he’s too fracking stupid to know how to get stuff done. Even if I agreed with everything he said, I’d still wish he wasn’t President as he’s the worst GOP president in history. Grossly incompetent and counter-productive.

    Every time he opens his mouth the GOP gets weaker and we all get poorer.

    Kevin M (a57144)

  147. Well the 9th circus is obvious, how about that Maryland judge, who denied the immigration pause, those in the 3rd circuit who upheld Daca, those in the 7th who upheld the Chisholm witchhunt,

    Narciso (5ae54a)

  148. And when w didn’t speak and he rode down to 37% approval, what was that about.

    Narciso (5ae54a)

  149. The progs have a plan, regardless of who holds the title, our side can’t buy a clue, therein lies the difference. It doesn’t matter which cigar store Indian they put forth, they will put in a plan advantageous to them, and since the press referees it doesn’t see anything amiss.

    Narciso (5ae54a)

  150. @65. ‘Token’ review, Mr. Feet; NASA always likes to likes to fly high. In fact, they’ll attempt to land INSIGHT on Mars, Monday, Nov., 26. Bring your own munchies.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  151. Every time he opens his mouth the GOP gets weaker and we all get poorer.

    Welcome to the party, pal!

    Dave (ce6cdd)

  152. He didn’t lie, but he omitted that was a possible cinsideration

    Narciso (5ae54a)

  153. Allahpundit makes a good point along the same lines as Beldar:

    I look forward to the next chapter of this spat between the most powerful policymaker in the U.S. government and, uh, the president. Exit question: Why would Trump, a guy who’s convinced that judges rule based on petty personal/partisan considerations, want to pick a public fight with the new swing vote on the Supreme Court?

    The answer is pretty obvious – because he’s a drooling idiot.

    Dave (ce6cdd)

  154. Slappy Avenatti avoids felony charge.

    Those LA County district attorneys are notoriously soft on crime…

    /sarc

    Dave (ce6cdd)

  155. looks like Justice Roberts started a robust conversation about how he’s a disingenuous idiot

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  156. It’s much like the argument clinic, yes one shouldn’t say Sotomayors third circuit appeals often were not worth the candle.

    Narciso (5ae54a)

  157. “Grievance Monger Plays Race Card

    Trump’s midterm strategy summed up in four words.

    April Ryan is off-base on the racism thing though – Spanky’s contempt for women is universal.”

    http://patterico.com/2018/11/10/april-ryan-when-you-tell-me-to-sit-down-when-its-not-my-turn-thats-racist/#comment-2167043

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  158. Ask Kirsten powers about that. I thought being married to a copt would have brought some understanding, nope

    Narciso (5ae54a)

  159. They omitted the Tijuana backlash and the swalwell dr. Strangelove moment,

    Narciso (5ae54a)

  160. Roberts is another baby ruth left in the pool by boooosh

    mg (ebf6c2)

  161. Filed under “‘two wrongs don’t make a right’. But at the same time, ‘don’t dish it out if you can’t take it.'”

    Hawaii congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard took to Twitter on Wednesday to excoriate Donald Trump for his decision to apparently pardon Saudi Arabia for the killing of journalist Jamal Khashoggi, labeling the president the “bi[a]tch” of the authoritarian kingdom. “Hey @realDonaldTrump,” Gabbard tweeted, “being Saudi Arabia’s bi[a]tch is not “America First.”

    We’re officially a Banana Republik now?

    Tillman (61f3c8)

  162. I like Tulsi but I don’t forget her sponsor in Syria were the folks that blew up Bashir gemayel about 36 year, the ssnp.

    Narciso (5ae54a)

  163. Letelier was blown up in a DC thoroughfare, in 1976, lambrakiz was beaten to death, this was the 67 coup, galindez was rendered to Dominican republic and never seem again in 1957

    Narciso (5ae54a)

  164. Roberts will definitely vote with RBG and the female supremes.

    mg (ebf6c2)

  165. Flip of a coin, that was before 67, the atrocity exhibits are pretty full.

    Narciso (5ae54a)

  166. “You made that up, Munroe, and it’s a lie.”
    Beldar (fa637a) — 11/21/2018 @ 5:10 pm

    … he says, as his pants erupt in flames.

    Munroe (e0f08c)

  167. Tulsi Gabbard is everybody’s b!tch all the time and she is not even a real American. What were they thinking in 1959 to give statehood, and representation in Congress, to a place where 70% of the population hates America?

    nk (dbc370)

  168. They still resent 1893 over there, if you are a haoli.

    So it seems they are heck bent on ruining the potter franchise.

    Narciso (5ae54a)

  169. I’d say your correct in your assessment, nk. The natives are on something.

    mg (ebf6c2)

  170. Trump is the new super Saudi Agent 00007

    mg (ebf6c2)

  171. Yeah, and we’re selling bombs to these people:

    Intense criticism of airstrikes on civilians led the [Obama] administration to halt the sale of nearly $400 million in precision munitions guidance systems to Saudi Arabia in December 2016, at the end of the Obama administration. Three months later, the Trump administration reversed that decision and approved a resumption of weapons sales.

    Since then, weapons produced by American companies have been tied to some of the worst episodes of civilian casualties.

    That’s just sickening.

    Tillman (61f3c8)

  172. Sumtahms, y’all gotta ax: “Cui bono?” Who profits from all this fuss about Trump not being as mean to Saudi Arabia as some people say he should be? It’s not America, that’s for sure.

    nk (dbc370)

  173. We’re talking about our arms killing innocent women and children and nk’s over here talking ’bout “profits.”
    So, how many bucks would you say a innocent child’s life is worth there nk? $10,000? $5,000? $50? What?

    Tillman (61f3c8)

  174. It little profits to engage a person who disingenuously pretends to know only one meaning of the verb “profit”.

    nk (dbc370)

  175. Then what kind of profit are you referring to? It seems that the money is all that Down ‘n Dirty Donnie talks about.

    Tillman (61f3c8)

  176. After he handed 150 billion to Iran, mostly in cash, which they transferred in part to Yemen Syria it al, as well as their nuclear program.

    Who benefits from the kingdom in turmoil, brennan and Co, care about Yemen there’s been war there off and on since 1934. Its the kingdoms versiom of Cyprus.

    narciso (d1f714)

  177. So who benefits well putin does, that’s why he knew Hillary was a pushover

    https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-11-21/opec-s-worst-nightmare-the-permian-is-about-to-pump-a-lot-more

    narciso (d1f714)

  178. So, how many bucks would you say a innocent child’s life is worth there nk? $10,000? $5,000? $50? What?

    Hmm, we never did pin that down from that Planned Parenthood abortionist who was saving up for a Lambo, did we? When you baby-killers stop killing a million unborn American babies a year, I’ll take your “compassion” for “little brown babies”* seriously.

    *Ingrid Bergman, “Murder On The Orient Express”

    nk (dbc370)

  179. “Profit” is a also a synonym for “benefit”, like in Tennyson’s “It little profits that an idle king, By this still hearth, among these barren crags, Match’d with an aged wife, I mete and dole Unequal laws unto a savage race ….”

    nk (dbc370)

  180. Stem cell Express is the kind of company wolfram and heart would represent (originally a wheedon property, but it became darker)

    Narciso (5ae54a)

  181. You have no answer, so you cowardly try to change the subject nk.

    Tillman (61f3c8)

  182. Khashoggis uncle knew the deal, he outfitted the SAS in Yemen, then armed the combatants I’m the Lebanese civil war, like Syria a growth opportunitt.

    Narciso (5ae54a)

  183. nk, even top Republicans are against your dumb, soulless Leader on this one:

    Key Senate Republican says Trump’s Saudi response ‘took our nation to a very low level,’ demands Hill briefing

    Tillman (61f3c8)

  184. Getting back to Lebanon, the maronites used the Bashir assassination as a reason to settle scores with the Palestinians that was sabra and shatila of course Friedman botched that story and he failed upwards

    Narciso (5ae54a)

  185. This latest chapter vi, of the war in Yemen, is much like the Iran Iraq war, that went on for 8 years.

    Narciso (5ae54a)

  186. Scratch that last comment of mine, that was only Corker, not top Republicans plural. But I have read elsewhere that many Republicans are not happy with this latest stunt by Donnie-Do-Wrong.

    Tillman (61f3c8)

  187. Roberts will definitely vote with RBG and the female supremes.

    To be fair, mg, everything looks liberal from your bunker.

    Kevin M (a57144)

  188. Ah Corker who sprung for the 500 million to the Syrian rebels who defected when their checks cleared, that’s the cover story anyways.

    Narciso (5ae54a)

  189. Questions answers anyone care for a mint, the cutahoga matter reminds me of a case with less fatality but more impact, a fmr police and city manager who had some contracts selling equipment with a certain incentive everything was fine till his partner in the scheme had an attack of conscience and killed hikself, revealing the incriminating tapes.

    Narciso (5ae54a)

  190. No, I’m still on the subject. Just calling out fake bleeding heart liberal hypocrisy. You are evading the question: Who benefits from all this fuss about Trump not being as mean to Saudi Arabia as some people say he should be? It’s not America, that’s for sure.

    nk (dbc370)

  191. So Corker is a “key Senate Republican” to CNN? As in, he’ll be turning over the key to his office to Marsha Blackburn in a month? 😉

    nk (dbc370)

  192. Corker is chairman of the Senate foreign relations committee. I’d say that makes him an important person until he leaves office.

    Dave (1bb933)

  193. Corker is chairman of the Senate foreign relations committee. I’d say that makes him an important person until he leaves office.

    Ah! So he can, for example, ….

    nk (dbc370)

  194. Ridiculously lame cover given to a lame duck.

    Silly goose.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  195. “You have no answer, so you cowardly try to change the subject”

    This sure smells like a personal attack, Tillman.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  196. If the Left supports something, it’s the Rule – not the Exception – that it is against the best interests of America.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  197. Never mind, Haiku. I was meaner to him than he was to me.

    nk (dbc370)

  198. Thanks all, this is like the fractious thanksgiving feast we don’t get at home.

    Venezuelan Americans largely turned out for gillum, can you believe it,
    https://spectator.us/trump-right-saudi-arabia/

    narciso (d1f714)

  199. Ah! So he can, for example, ….

    … point out when the president disgraces the country by excusing cold-blooded murder.

    Dave (1bb933)

  200. What it looks like to me is that the Saudis butchered Khashoggi but the Democrats, the media, and people who want to embarrass Trump at the expense of America, are eating him. It’s Thanksgiving, folks! Have some turkey!

    nk (dbc370)

  201. You got that notion from the clueless liberals at Columbia pictures.

    Narciso (ffa127)

  202. Way back in April of this year, Donnie Boy was singing a completely different tune – he was literally up at arms and bombed Syria over murdering civilians:

    “I’d like to begin by condemning the heinous attack on innocent Syrians with banned chemical weapons,” Trump said. “It was an atrocious attack, it was horrible. You don’t see things like that as bad as the news is around the world, you just don’t see those images.”
    “We are very concerned, when a thing like that can happen, this is about humanity. We’re talking about humanity. And it can’t be allowed to happen,” he added.

    But now that doing the right thing will cost us some money (*queue clutching pearls*), this character flips? How cold-blooded. Donnie’s got to be senile.

    Killing civilians is not acceptable, no matter what weapon is used. So Saudi Arabia’s blatant disregard for human life must be challenged.

    Tillman (61f3c8)

  203. Innocent civilians, the ones Obama did nothing for, because the Iran deal was involved it was just another chapter of Hamas rules, why Friedman said we should trust assad.

    Narciso (ffa127)

  204. BREAKING: Cadet Bonespurs is showing our troops overseas how much he cares by bravely holding a Thanksgiving conference call with them from Mar-A-Lago!

    Dave (1bb933)

  205. Uncle Dave, have a Turkey leg:

    https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2018/11/205967.php

    Narciso (ffa127)

  206. 205, it was the SoFla Jewish vote that did Bradley on Gillum, and the non-Cuban latino vote that did Bradley on Nelson.

    urbanleftbehind (1d5bec)

  207. Dave, the conference call is the way to go, although I might have eaten with a mixed CBP/Army contingent near the border i/o the Florida regency. I think they’d be mad at whatever forward base their at if he interrupted the football games.

    urbanleftbehind (1d5bec)

  208. Here’s something for the Orange Man Bad-types to chew on:

    “Climate change, we’re going to have to come up with some new technologies to solve the problem as much as we need to. Although even on something like that, right now I could take off the shelf existing technologies, we could reduce carbon emissions by let’s say 30 percent, without any, you know it’s not like we would have to go back to caves and you know live off, you know, fire.”

    —- Barack Obama

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  209. He’s the gift you can’t back to target, of course he won’t be inconvenienced in his kalorama manse.

    Narciso (ffa127)

  210. Obama’s gone back to the intoxicating blasts of stupefaction… possibly some edible schiff.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  211. The classic liar lines like your dr you can keep your dr. No new taxes. Shock and awe…. sh!t
    Mission accomplished.

    mg (ef2c8e)

  212. So the Saudis continue to run their country like the Mafia. A long tradition… BIG surprise!

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  213. Be thankful for the privilege of being an American! Be thankful for all of the blessings the Good Lord has given you. Be caring for those less fortunate. Find a shelter or kitchen where the hungry are served food and help them have a happy day.

    Stop your b*tching.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  214. Justice Roberts is the turkey of the year what a Cowardice piece of trash.

    mg (ef2c8e)

  215. All your spewing doesn’t add up to much, Dave.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  216. Venezuelan Americans largely turned out for gillum, can you believe it,

    Yes, totally! Socialism in sh!thole countries did not generate spontaneously like pre-Pasteurian putrefaction. It exists because the lazy and indolent population wants it. Venezuelans have no problem with living off other people’s money. Their problem is that they’re not getting enough of it (mainly because others before them already took the lion’s share). So they come to America where the streets are lined with welfare checks and EBT cards.

    nk (dbc370)

  217. Amen, nk.

    mg (ebf6c2)

  218. i’m thankful that utah rejected dirty mia love and her dirty politics of hate

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  219. Munroe, on this Thanksgiving, I’m entirely satisfied to have the entire world — or the tiny, tiny portion of it that finds its way to this blog, this post, and your and my respective comments about what Chief Justice Roberts did or did not say — judge my veracity as compared to yours. Have a Happy Thanksgiving in the parallel universe you inhabit.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  220. “judge my veracity as compared to yours. Have a Happy Thanksgiving in the parallel universe you inhabit.”
    Beldar (fa637a) — 11/22/2018 @ 9:06 am

    Quite simply, you seized on my use of the well-known phrase “forum shopping”, took issue with it, and turned it into the straw man that I somehow claimed Roberts used the exact words “forum” and “shopping”. Hence, you dispatched said straw man with most impressive alacrity, and threw in an accusation of “lie” to boot. So, let’s avoid some unpleasantness on this day of thanks and skirt the issue of your veracity.

    I truly wish you and all here a Happy Thanksgiving and, despite our differences, I am thankful of the people here who engage in thoughtful discussion, yourself included it should go without saying.

    Munroe (cc590d)

  221. No, as part of an assertion by you that Chief Justice Roberts is a “liar” — and that’s where that particular word got into our discussion, sir — you made a claim, Munroe, that Chief Justice Roberts pretended not to know what “forum shopping” was.

    He didn’t use those words; he didn’t refer to the concept. That was something Trump talked about, which you then said — falsely — that Chief Justice Roberts had talked about. He didn’t; you made that up; it’s a complete fabrication, and you’ve now tripled-down on it.

    When you insult people whom I respect, falsely calling them liars when you yourself have fabricated the basis for your claim, I’m likely to call you out about it, Thanksgiving weekend or not.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  222. i’m thankful that utah rejected dirty mia love and her dirty politics of hate

    I see nothing BUT hate in your posts.

    Kevin M (a57144)

  223. “Rake!!” – ‘Forest’ Trump.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  224. nonono i make the comments of love

    you have to know that

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  225. Since Chief Justice Roberts has shown himself vulnerable to public pressure before, it is wise of President Trump to marshal all possible public pressure against him at all times to get him voting properly just as Obama did. Obama had the press to help though.

    Ingot9455 (7ba6f5)

  226. Mia lost because she screwed up and raised money for a primary election that wasn’t held. She was fairly comfortably ahead until that scandal arose, at which point her polling tanked.

    It’s crazy, but in Utah they seem to care about the integrity of the people they send to Washington.

    Dave (1bb933)

  227. 230. Chief Justice Roberts implied that picking judges (which is forum shopping) according to who appointed them would make no sense. He didn’t imply that forum shopping made no sense. Now according to appointed them is a more crude measure than what evaluating judges according to how they rule would be.

    Sammy Finkelman (102c75)

  228. 220. Clonel Haiku (2601c0) — 11/22/2018 @ 7:34 am

    So the Saudis continue to run their country like the Mafia. A long tradition… BIG surprise!

    They even have the black halo over their heads,

    like old time Mafiosi used to wear

    until Jack Ruby shot Lee Harvey Oswald, 55 years ago tomorrow, while wearing one of those hats.

    https://www.gettyimages.com/photos/mohammad-bin-salman

    Not every male on Saudi Arabia has that. I saw a picture of Mohammad Bin Salman and three otehr men, but he was the only one with a black halo over his head.

    Jamal Khashoggi also sometimes wore it. I saw a picture of him with it but his was ruumples, and in another case, partially concealed.

    * I think dressing like businessmen started with Al Capone, who dressed his men in suits and ties and hats.

    Sammy Finkelman (102c75)

  229. 205. narciso (d1f714) — 11/22/2018 @ 6:03 am

    Venezuelan Americans largely turned out for gillum, can you believe it,

    Yes, Thats because of Trump’s position on immigration.

    Although Hillary Clinton has almost joined him on that:

    https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/22/world/europe/hillary-clinton-migration-populism-europe.html

    “I think Europe needs to get a handle on migration because that is what lit the flame,” Mrs. Clinton said in the interview with The Guardian, which was conducted before the United States midterm elections this month.

    “I admire the very generous and compassionate approaches that were taken particularly by leaders like Angela Merkel, but I think it is fair to say Europe has done its part, and must send a very clear message — ‘we are not going to be able to continue provide refuge and support’ — because if we don’t deal with the migration issue it will continue to roil the body politic,” she said….

    Mrs. Clinton’s remarks to The Guardian drew criticism and a dose of surprise from an array of scholars, pro-immigration advocates and pundits on both the left and right, some of whom were so perplexed by the comments that they wondered aloud whether Mrs. Clinton had perhaps misspoken. Mrs. Clinton, many said, has a long history of supporting refugees — a track record seemingly at odds with her recent remarks. Her immigration platform in the 2016 presidential election boasted that “we embrace immigrants, not denigrate them.”

    A spokesman for Mrs. Clinton did not immediately reply to an email seeking comment on Thursday night.

    (This was in an interview before the election, but released now)

    Sammy Finkelman (102c75)

  230. Its mot a halo, its called an aghal, it holds on to the headdress, called the ghutra

    narciso (d1f714)

  231. “Chief Justice Roberts implied that picking judges (which is forum shopping) according to who appointed them would make no sense. He didn’t imply that forum shopping made no sense.”
    Sammy Finkelman (102c75) — 11/23/2018 @ 10:02 am

    OK, so two weeks ago we all could’ve predicted how Judge Jon Tigar would’ve leaned heavily in his ruling, and that prediction would’ve been for reasons having nothing to do with him being appointed by Obama — because, that would make no sense.

    What reasons were those, exactly?

    Munroe (1cb4ee)

  232. Because he’s a prog:

    https:/www.washingtonexaminer.com/washington-secrets/avenatti-backed-pac-helping-espy-in-miss-despite-assault-charges

    Narciso (9f144f)

  233. chief justice Roberts spoke disingenuously

    i would have said naively if not for the fact that he is the chief justice of the united states with supervisory authority over all the federal judges and fifteen years experience on the bench and knows just about every federal judge

    he tried to fool us

    nk (dbc370)

  234. 242. Munroe (1cb4ee) — 11/23/2018 @ 11:04 am

    OK, so two weeks ago we all could’ve predicted how Judge Jon Tigar would’ve leaned heavily in his ruling, and that prediction would’ve been for reasons having nothing to do with him being appointed by Obama — because, that would make no sense.

    What reasons were those, exactly?

    You know is general leanings. ZThat’s abetter predictor than who appointed him, Nixon appointed Blackmun. Ford appointed stevens. GHWB appointed Souter. JZFK (in 1961) appointed Byron White.

    But the truth here is that practically any judge would ahve ruled the way Judge Jon S. Tigar ruled, although maybe not all would have issued a nationwide temporary restraining order.

    What brought about ROberts’ outburst is that he agreed wiiuth Tigar. A predidnet cannot unilaterally rewrite immigration and asylum law. Even if you thik it is broken or defeated.

    Only Congress can change that.

    Nixon made the same argument about the budget with impoundment which he started in January, 1973.

    The fact that some “problem” is not taken care of, doesn’t give the president the right to fix it. If it is really universally regarded as a problem, Congress will fix it.

    Trump, by the way, backed down with regard to Vietnamese non-citizen cri,minals who arrived before 1995.

    https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/22/world/asia/vietnam-trump-immigrants-deport.html

    The thing about Trump’s policy is, if he ever sees achance to act against immigrants, or eould-be immigransts he does.

    Last year, the administration began rounding up long-term immigrants from Vietnam, Cambodia and other countries and preparing to deport them. Some of the targeted immigrants had green cards but had not been naturalized as citizens, and the vast majority of them had at some point committed crimes — roughly 7,700 of the 8,000 or so of the Vietnamese immigrants who were classified as deportable, according to the Department of Homeland Security.

    But specifically in Vietnam’s case, that country and the United States had signed an agreement in 2008 that Vietnamese who had arrived before July 12, 1995 — the date the formerly warring countries re-established diplomatic relations — could not be deported. Most of those immigrants had come to the United States as a result of the Vietnam War.

    The Trump administration unilaterally decided to reinterpret the agreement, saying that people convicted of crimes were not protected, according to American officials. The administration began pressing Vietnam to take back some of the pre-1995 arrivals.

    The decision outraged the American ambassador to Vietnam, Ted Osius, who was removed from his post last fall and then resigned from the State Department. He characterized the deportation effort as a broken promise to South Vietnamese families who had been allies of the United States during the war and would not be safe in Vietnam…

    ..Still, many of the immigrants targeted for deportation have been kept in detention for months by Immigration and Customs Enforcement, or ICE. Three branches of Asian Americans Advancing Justice began organizing a class-action lawsuit against the Trump administration to oppose the detentions, aided by two pro bono law firms, Reed Smith and Davis Adams.

    In a ruling partially certifying the class action, Judge Cormac J. Carney of United States District Court for the Central District of California said the Trump administration had told the court that it reached an agreement with Vietnam in August under which “the removal of pre-1995 Vietnamese is not reasonably foreseeable.”

    He said the administration had told the court that it would start releasing many of the people who had been detained and in some cases held for months pending approval of their deportation. Judge Carney’s office declined to comment on the case.

    Though the Trump administration may have dropped the deportations, it was not for lack of trying.

    A spokeswoman for the Department of Homeland Security, Katie Waldman, confirmed that the deportations of these Vietnamese immigrants were off the table for now. But she characterized resistance to the policy as dangerous, saying “dangerous loopholes and misguided court decisions” were forcing the government to release “violent criminal aliens” rather than deport them.

    Here we have criticism of corts too, although not linked to the president who appointed them,

    Tigar’s

    Sammy Finkelman (102c75)

  235. It’s surprising how many books published in 2005, 2006 2007 or 2009 have afew words about Donsald Trump.

    Sammy Finkelman (102c75)

  236. 245, is that a step 1 toward winning back the OC?

    urbanleftbehind (c40159)

  237. @ Ingot9455, who wrote(#234):

    Since Chief Justice Roberts has shown himself vulnerable to public pressure before, it is wise of President Trump to marshal all possible public pressure against him at all times to get him voting properly just as Obama did. Obama had the press to help though.

    I’ve seen this sentiment expressed lately by several other folks, including some whose views I generally respect. I profoundly disagree.

    No one but Chief Justice Roberts knows what motivates his various rulings and what influences him, but the people who’re positing this opinion about him are focusing on a very, very small handful of votes he’s cast in a tiny, tiny percentage of the cases he’s considered. Usually they’re talking about three opinions or fewer, and they’re focusing exclusively on the outcome — and what it means for “their team versus the other team” — rather than the actual written opinions and reasoning contained within it. I think that’s not only unfair to him, that’s also a guarantee of a skewed and inaccurate appraisal of the man.

    I haven’t been a SCOTUS justice nor a clerk for one, but I have had the privilege of spending a year as a clerk for a judge on the Fifth Circuit; I have close friends who’ve clerked, including at the SCOTUS level; and I’ve been doing this job long enough to see people I’ve practiced with and even helped to train as lawyers become federal judges. The notion that “public pressure” is outcome-determinative of their rulings on the bench is shallow, glib, and more wrong than right, even with respect to individual judges or justices about whom I feel most confident making predictions about.

    @ nk, who wrote (#244) that “Roberts spoke disingenuously” and that “he tried to fool us”: I disagree with this too. I’d say, rather, that Roberts’ push-back against Trump’s criticisms of the federal judiciary painted with the same width of brush that Trump himself had just used, and it is Roberts’ constitutional responsibility to do so as the head of that co-equal branch of our tripartite government.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  238. Once these guys and gals secure a lifetime gig and slip on the robes, for the most part, they want to do what they chose to do in life: the law. There are easier paths to attempt influencing the transients in our ever-changing society as it progresses forward.

    Roberts is a good egg. End of story.

    Our Captain has lashed out at the free press, the military, long honored national traditions, world leaders, Mother Nature and now the judiciary. His compass is spinning as Typhoo Muller approaches– so, crew, keep your lifejacket handy.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  239. “Forum selection” is something every lawyer, in every new case, must consider. Typically there may be several “permissible” forums in which a case might properly be brought. It’s entirely appropriate and ethical for a lawyer to consider convenience, proximity, docket congestion, and yes, even the past tendencies of a particular forum’s trial and appellate judges and jury pool in choosing among permissible venues. In fact, any lawyer who doesn’t consider such factors when selecting among multiple available forums is committing malpractice.

    “Forum shopping,” by contrast, generally refers to an attempt to find a forum where venue is not technically proper under the venue statutes and rules, typically with an eye only to such perceptions regarding likely biases.

    The case in which Judge Tigar entered his temporary restraining order is styled East Bay Sanctuary Covenant v. Trump. The four co-plaintiffs are all alleged in their initial complaint to be nonprofit organizations whose goals include the assistance of political refugees. Three of the four are incorporated under California law, and East Bay is based in Berkeley, within the Northern District of California.

    The complaint relies upon 28 U.S.C. § 1391(e)(1), which provides that in cases against the federal government “may, except as otherwise provided by law, be brought in any judicial district in which (A) a defendant in the action resides, (B) a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claim occurred, or a substantial part of property that is the subject of the action is situated.”

    Whether these organizations have legal standing to sue on behalf of the political asylum seekers they purport to be representing and assisting is a distinct question, about which I have serious doubts. Likewise, whether there is a ripe case or controversy is another threshold that these plaintiffs must meet, and about which I have serious doubts.

    However, if they do have standing, and if their claims are ripe for ruling, then the Northern District of California, and the San Francisco Division thereof, is assuredly one of many “proper” venues in which they could have filed suit.

    Accordingly, in its 36-page opposition to the temporary restraining order, the Department of Justice does indeed argue that the plaintiffs lack standing and that their claims are not (yet, anyway) justiciable. But the DoJ did not dispute the plaintiffs’ venue allegations, nor did the DoJ directly object to venue in the Northern District of California.

    (The DoJ did argue, way back on page 33, that depending on the scope of the relief under consideration, the trial court might run afoul of the exclusive venue and remedy provisions of 8 U.S.C. § 1252(e)(3), which gives the D.C. Circuit exclusive jurisdiction over appeals from deportation orders; Judge Tigar, however, has not entered any order purporting to resolve an appeal from a deportation order, and a motion to dismiss or transfer for improper venue based on section 1252(e)(3) would be even more premature than the DoJ says these plaintiffs’ lawsuit is.)

    Trump knows or cares about none of this, and neither do 99.9% of the people presently arguing about this being an example of “forum shopping.”

    Beldar (fa637a)

  240. In my quote from 28 U.S.C. § 1291(e)(1) above, I mistakenly left out one of the two subsections upon which the plaintiffs rely: In addition to section 1291(e)(1)(B), which authorizes venue where a “substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claim occurred,” they rely in section 1291(e)(1)(C), which also authorizes venue where “the plaintiff resides if no real property is involved in the action.” Mea culpa.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  241. Beldar, I agree that Trump knows less about “forum shopping” than he does about clearing underbrush and dry weeds. But his supporters know even less than he does, so the phrase pushes their button.

    I also agree that Roberts is a good egg. I only disagree with his assertion that all federal judges are impartial Solomons regardless of which party they came from or which President appointed them.

    nk (dbc370)

  242. That’s not what he said, nk, nor even a fair paraphrase. He said — referring to them collectively and not individually — that “we have … an extraordinary group of dedicated judges doing their level best to do equal right to those appearing before them.”

    Roberts certainly knows that individual judges in particular cases do have biases that they’re unsuccessful in putting fully aside.

    But Trump’s statements treat federal judges as though they’re no different from what Trump imagines cabinet secretaries ought to be — mere extensions of the will of the POTUS who appointed them. That’s more false than it would be to assert that all federal judges are impartial Solomons.

    I’m guessing we’ve both appeared before judges, including federal judges, who are outright crooks. But for every one of those, I’ve probably appeared before ten who’ve merely been methodically unsuccessful in putting aside their biases. And a large majority of the federal judges before whom I’ve appeared, even the very predictable ones, are mostly successful, most of the time, in putting aside enough of their biases to characterize what they’re doing in the way Chief Justice Roberts did.

    One can also ask, “As compared to what, or whom?” I’m unaware of any country whose judiciary is substantially less biased, or more independent, than America’s federal bench, and that includes even our common-law cousins in Canada or the UK.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  243. we have seen the example of the immigration pause, where a series of judges, not merely on the 9th circuit, but also in the one pertinent to Maryland, ignored plain statutory construction, for nearly a year and a half, we have seen how they ignored statutory language to craft the flores settlement, contrary to the intent of legislation, then further restricted the scope of said legislation,

    narciso (d1f714)

  244. Pretending is what it is. Pretending so many of these judges are above it all, apolitical and neutral.

    I call bullschiff.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  245. Beldar, I respect your legal knowledge, and even your stringent requirements on the usage of the term ‘preponderance.’

    But I was there for the Obamacare battle, and I was reading the papers and the articles at the time. And I distinctly remember the articles that came out as Obamacare was being decided which mentioned the date upon which the first Supreme Court vote on Obamacare would be taken, and how secret it was, and how such votes never leak, and the members of the Supreme Court never break silence and never tell. How they would then decide who writes what portions of the decision to one another from there, and so on.

    And then, suddenly, after that date, came a full court press for Oamacare, against Justice Roberts. Dire threats were made – rumors against his family, against his life, against the institution of the Supreme Court itself and how the country would never again respect it for daring to go against the progress of history. And so on. You were there too. Obama, all his minions, all the mainstream press, united.

    Suddenly, right after that supposed vote that no one outside the Supreme Court would ever know about.

    And then Roberts finds his ‘saving construction.’ Yes, I know the justification of it. I know how it’s laid down. But finding a ‘saving construction’ when previously you had said you ‘just call balls and strikes’ is not the way things go. It’s moving a ball into the strike column.

    And I just can’t hold the timing of that vote, and then the full court press, and the ‘saving construction’ apart. I know that Roberts is elected for life and isn’t supposed to be threatenable. But he can be and his family can be and his way of life can be.

    I might even say that the preponderance of the evidence is clear that Chief Justice Roberts caved under pressure.

    Ingot9455 (7ba6f5)

  246. now mind you among the folks the dhs could not account for, was a Islamic state hitman who had done his deed, after he had been admitted to the us, and another fellow who was party to the kidnapping of a contractor,

    narciso (d1f714)

  247. how can an illegal alien, be granted political asylum, I know that the sinisphere, would find a way, but seriously,

    narciso (d1f714)

  248. Speaking of judges, Chucky Schumer needs to work on his intellectual consistency.

    Paul Montagu (70fe18)

  249. “Dire threats were made – rumors against his family, against his life, against the institution of the Supreme Court itself and how the country would never again respect it for daring to go against the progress of history.”

    You’re “remembering” conspiracy theories floated by wingnut punditry.

    https://www.theblaze.com/contributions/was-supreme-court-justice-john-roberts-blackmailed

    Davethulhu (519d49)

  250. how can an illegal alien, be granted political asylum, I know that the sinisphere, would find a way, but seriously,

    Easy peasy. Immigration status does not impinge on the right to claim asylum. By both US law and treaties, anyone who is physically present has the right to claim asylum, and the legality of their presence can be disregarded in evaluating that claim. It’s those people claiming asylum while not here who present the conundrum. That was the underlying logic of the wet foot/dry foot distinction in the case of Cubans. Once they made it ashore they could claim asylum, but not before.

    From what I know about it, Trump’s asylum ban has the same basic flaws as Obama’s DACA orders; an unconstitutional attempt by POTUS to overtly usurp the legislative power of Congress.

    Kishnevi (7ee5f0)

  251. if they haven’t even been admitted into this country yet,

    narciso (d1f714)

  252. if they haven’t even been admitted into this country yet,
    I said that is the conundrum. At present they have the right by statute but not by treaty to do so, and if that is to change, it is up to Congress, not POTUS, to do so.

    Kishnevi (7ee5f0)

  253. Actually wet foot dry foot was an excessive restriction of the spirit if not the letter of the Cuban adjustment act. One might say it was driven by the animus of the them governor of Arkansas, re ft. chafee the point is there are established channels and procedures unless you’re a demicrar than you make things up as you go along,

    Now is one followed said procedures it took six, nine, even 12 years to get a visa from that accursed isle.

    narciso (d1f714)

  254. You know who got into the country by being granted political asylum? The Boston Bombers.

    You know who got a green card by investing one million dollars (Click it! Click it!) in a business in the United States? George Soros.

    nk (dbc370)

  255. Oh yes… he’s teh Chief Pretender…

    Prof. Robert P. George
    @McCormickProf
    “There are many judges–state and federal–who act on ideological motives, not neutral principles impartially applied. (The late Stephen Reinhardt is an egregious example.) There are even prominent theories justifying their doing it. It’s no use (or help) pretending otherwise.”

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  256. Yes if the revised flores settlement,

    You who expedited the asylum claims of the tsarnaev clan

    narciso (d1f714)

  257. @ Ingot9455, who, after a gracious introduction, wrote in part (#257):

    … And I distinctly remember the articles that came out as Obamacare was being decided which mentioned the date upon which the first Supreme Court vote on Obamacare would be taken, and how secret it was, and how such votes never leak, and the members of the Supreme Court never break silence and never tell….

    ….

    … And I just can’t hold the timing of that vote, and then the full court press, and the ‘saving construction’ apart….

    I’m not quite sure what your first phrase addresses. The justices of the SCOTUS, like those of other appellate courts, are famously public with their votes and the written rationales therefore, beginning with the moment the results in a given case are announced; before that, they’re notoriously close-mouthed, and ethically must be.

    I don’t want to put words in your mouth, but if you are suggesting that Chief Justice Roberts had somehow publicly pre-committed to vote to strike down Obamacare, and then changed his vote based on public pressure, I am very certain that you are wrong about the first, which is a matter of public record; and as to the second, you’re engaging in mind-reading, and then using that guesswork by you to indict Roberts’ integrity.

    If you’re saying something else, then I’m still not following it, and encourage you to try again to explain your argument to me in some different words.

    I’ve written before, somewhere in the vasty depth of this blog’s comments I think, my own theory as to why Roberts strained so hard to uphold Obamacare’s constitutionality. I can quote you paragraphs from his confirmation hearings which signposted that likelihood, and I can point to previous Chief Justices, going back to the beginning of the Republic, who’ve displayed more sensitivity to questions of the SCOTUS’ perceived institutional role than their Associate Justice bench-mates. I wasn’t particularly surprised by Roberts’ vote; as in a very small handful of other opinions by him, I found that particular opinion unpersuasive, and Justice Beldar would have declared Obamacare unconstitutional. But I absolutely, positively reject as unbelievable — in my personal, subjective opinion about Roberts — any suggestion that Roberts was instead driven by outside pressure expressed by politicians, press, or public, instead of by the reasons he crafted in a very competent and detailed judicial opinion.

    And again, you’re indicting him on the basis of one case. Do you have, say, another five or six, out of the thousands in which he’s participated, to support your imputation to him of a weakness to public pressure? Why are we to accept your psychoanalysis of Chief Justice Roberts’ inner workings on the basis of such a microscopic slice of his work on the bench? Even if I agreed with you about his vote in the Obamacare case, I would reject the suggestion that that one decision could possibly be a basis to judge his intellectual and judicial integrity.

    The bottom line is that I certainly respect Chief Justice Roberts enough to take his written decisions at face value, rather than projecting onto him some dramatic and plastic mindset typical of a TV sitcom caricature of an appellate judge. I don’t think that’s how Chief Justice Roberts in particular, or SCOTUS Justices in general, or even appellate judges in general, make their decisions and reach their rulings.

    But these ultimately are matters of speculation and opinion. Your mileage may vary. Thanks again for the civil engagement.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  258. The press and the Left would love for us to think they are powerful enough in their public efforts to overbear, behind closed doors and within the minds of the Justices of the SCOTUS, those individuals’ own exercise of legal judgment, and their voting and writing on the basis thereof.

    Don’t believe them. They are not that powerful. That’s the rooster pretending he made the sun rise.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  259. I never believed that blackmail stuff about Roberts, either. I think his vote in Obamacare, like his vote in the children-eating-French-fries-in-the-subway case that you wrote of, Beldar, was a reminder that the essential qualities of all government officials, judges included, are statism and authoritarianism.

    nk (dbc370)

  260. I think it was widely reported (after the decision) that Roberts originally intended to vote to overturn, and did change his mind. I also recall that what became the dissent seemed in places to have been written as a majority decision to overturn and then edited to reflect the actual outcome.

    Also, it was Justice Alito, during oral argument on whether the individual mandate was allowed under the Commerce Clause, who asked:

    JUSTICE ALITO: Can the mandate be viewed as a tax if it does impose a requirement on people who are not subject to the penalty or the tax?

    GENERAL VERRILLI: I think it could, for the reasons I — I discussed yesterday. I don’t think it can or should be read that way. But if there’s any doubt about that, Your Honor, if there is — if it is the view of the Court that it can’t be, then I think the right way to handle this case is by analogy to New York v. United States, in which the — the Court read the “shall” provision, shall handle low-level radioactive waste, as setting the predicate, and then the other provisions were merely incentives to get the predicate met, and so –

    Because the government’s taxing power is essentially unlimited, and would render any Commerce Clause objections moot, at this point an incredulous Scalia interrupts:

    JUSTICE SCALIA: So you’re saying that all the discussion we had earlier about how this is one big uniform scheme and the Commerce Clause, blah, blah, blah, it really doesn’t matter. This is a tax, and the Federal Government could simply have said, without all of the rest of this legislation, could simply have said everybody who doesn’t buy health insurance at a certain age will be taxed so much money, right?

    GENERAL VERRILLI: It — it used its powers together to solve the problem of the market not –

    JUSTICE SCALIA: Yes, but you didn’t need that.

    GENERAL VERRILLI — providing affordable coverage for –

    JUSTICE SCALIA: You didn’t need that. If it’s a tax, it’s only to –

    GENERAL VERRILLI: It used its –

    JUSTICE SCALIA: Raising money is enough.

    The clueless Solicitor General finally catches on:

    GENERAL VERRILLI: It used its — it is justifiable under its tax power.

    JUSTICE SCALIA: Okay. Extraordinary.

    I remember watching on TV at the time. Scalia’s “Extraordinary” was basically a polite way of saying “You’re an idiot for not making this obvious argument from the outset.”

    (The exchange quoted begins on page 53 of the transcript)

    Dave (1bb933)

  261. The whole argument against Roberts — by his conservative critics, anyway, and they are by far his loudest critics; lefties are genuinely amused by it, precisely because it’s so badly misplaced — is based on the notion that someone, be it the political right or the party of the POTUS who nominated him somehow had a vested expectancy that he’d vote “their way,” which is to say, against Obama and the Dem-dominated Congress that had passed Obamacare.

    And so they felt betrayed.

    But John Roberts never made that promise; no one has any such expectancy. Treating him like a bad husband who’s betrayed his vows is convenient and emotionally satisfying: “How could he do this to us, when we trusted him to undo at the SCOTUS the fight we couldn’t win in Congress and the White House on Obamacare, nor undo when we took over Congress and the WH? Doesn’t he understand how much this means to me?!? He’s another David Souter, boo-hoo-hoo! Stone him!”

    Beldar (fa637a)

  262. Dave, suppose you’re right, and suppose one of the law clerks for one of the Associate Justices was told how Roberts voted in the post-argument conference, and that that’s not just fantasy and rumor-mongering.

    It is altogether common, an extremely frequent occurrence, for appellate judges to reconsider their conference votes when they see another’s draft opinion or begin drafting one themselves. Conference votes are supposed to be private precisely to preserve the independence of mind that such appellate judges must maintain.

    So if we suppose that Roberts did change his mind between the post-argument conference and the announcement of the decision, that is not in any way remarkable. It absolutely, positively fails to establish that the press or any other outside effort had any impact at all on that change from the conference vote.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  263. Because the court should take extraordinary care not to actually damage institutions as with hollingsworth (the institution of marriage) and sibelius, (the entire health insurance sysyem) unless precedent doesn’t mean a farthing.

    Narciso (8139ac)

  264. John Roberts is a fool. His actions open himself up to charges of being a useful idiot.

    He is very smart. He is a good man. He loves our country.

    He can’t, or won’t, see the forest for the trees. His “tax” decision was outcome-, not fact-based.

    Let’s just see how he handles the usurpation of Executive authorities on immigration. These are outrageous. Will he have the guts and the vision to drastically inhibit the nationwide injunctions imposed by single Districts? This abuse did not begin under his watch, to be sure. The invasion of thousands at a time has. We are in constitutional crisis. Right now.

    I sincerely hope and pray CJUS rises to meet the challenge.

    Ed from SFV (6d42fa)

  265. I’m concerned he doesn’t understand the responsibility of insuring that this is a state with definable borders

    Narciso (8139ac)

  266. Trump has had one year and ten months, with a Republican Congress, to amend the Judiciary Act and take away nationwide jurisdiction from the District Courts. Instead, he worked to make Nancy Pelosi Speaker of the House.

    nk (dbc370)

  267. “Because the government’s taxing power is essentially unlimited…”

    I will jump in to say….except for the case of a direct tax, then it must satisfy the apportionment requirement….which is where I thought the Obamacare tax failed. I think it somewhat bizarre that the NFIB opinion clarified that the Obamacare questionable FORM of tax was definitely not a direct tax (even though there was little to no actual discussion of the matter during oral arguments)…since it declared a direct tax is ONLY a federal property tax or head tax. A tax on not purchasing a product became some sort of novel excise tax…or more appropriately a “Robert’s tax”. The federal government should not have been given a get-out-of-jail card to avoid unconstitutionally regulating economic inactivity….by enlarging its power to tax economic inactivity….with the delicious invented proviso that the tax had to be less than the desired economic activity. Certainly the government will not attempt to wield that cudgel too often….as we the people don’t like to be bullied….generally….but I still wish that if the tax power was intended, that the government would have at least tried to tax the purchase of health care without qualifying insurance….that would have made the national debate a bit more interesting…and honest.

    AJ_Liberty (165d19)

  268. 278… a minor correction… and take away nationwide jurisdiction from the District Courts…

    Should read “and take nationwide jurisdiction away from the District Courts”…

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  269. Actually, “away” is redundant in both our constructions.

    nk (dbc370)

  270. It’s revoltin’ too…

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  271. Roberts buys into the booooosh doctrine of one America from Tierra del feugo to the North Pole. We need 1 more conservative appointment by our fearless leader,

    mg (ebf6c2)

  272. We was Suetered with the appointment of miss roberts

    mg (ebf6c2)

  273. If he recuses himself because of this public spat he will sit in his chambers lol with a 4-4 decision. And his liberal buds will praise him in The NY Times.

    mg (ebf6c2)

  274. So this is how an activist Supreme Court justice acts. Pitiful

    mg (ebf6c2)

  275. In which of his rulings so far during calendar year 2018 has Chief Justice Roberts shown himself to be a fool, Ed from SFV?

    Beldar (fa637a)

  276. harvardslurp john roberts turned the supreme court into a hyperpolitical joke court (third whirl joke court)

    this is why sleazy trash from harvard shouldn’t get nominatered (obvious conclusion)

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  277. Yes, half the Justices should be clones of Anthony Kennedy and the other half clones of Elena Kagan. We can clone them, can’t we?

    nk (dbc370)

  278. we can indeed

    the prohibition against cloning harvardslurp uglybutts was lifted by the papal encyclical of 1981 (thank you jesus)

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  279. I’ll tell you, Beldar, the biggest pitfall on the internet is that someone cannot voice a mild criticism of someone they generally admire and respect, without some people (hint, hint) using it as an excuse to say outrageous nonsense that makes you wish you had kept your own piehole shut in the first place.

    nk (dbc370)

  280. jingle bell chime in jingle bell time

    we have to save christmas for america!

    run run rudolph

    and hurry down my chimney tonight

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  281. I think his decisions have been reasonable this term but there was a disappointing one, was it the one from wisconsin,

    Narciso (a428c1)

  282. He was from Syria and he was brokering technology to iran

    https://www.foxnews.com/us/ncis-agents-affair-with-terror-suspect-damaged-fbi-probe-authorities-say

    Narciso (a428c1)

  283. So if we suppose that Roberts did change his mind between the post-argument conference and the announcement of the decision, that is not in any way remarkable. It absolutely, positively fails to establish that the press or any other outside effort had any impact at all on that change from the conference vote.

    I agree.

    Dave (1bb933)

  284. So he did this injury out of ignorance not coercion, that makes me feel better:
    https://www.patheos.com/blogs/standingonmyhead/2018/11/does-dna-prove-noahs-ark.html

    Narciso (a428c1)

  285. Heh! Just like I said above. I’ll bet that now Mike Lee regrets tweeting that after seeing how garbage peddlers like Salon picked it up as a cudgel against Mike Lee and the GOP generally.

    nk (dbc370)

  286. Salon, the new home on Tom Nichols and max boot?

    Narciso (a428c1)

  287. On episode 5 of Get Shorty on Netflix. Very funny stuff!

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  288. Just a coincidence
    Blame the President who issues unconstitutional orders, not the judge who notices they are unconstitutional.

    If you want to complain, complain about Obama not getting the same treatment…although I don’t have statistics in front of me to know how well his orders fared.

    Kishnevi (1fe800)

  289. I knew a color of DeSantis’ margin could be black; I erred in thinking it would be Florida’s “jockocracy” fearful of a state income tax.

    urbanleftbehind (c40159)

  290. Trump may have tricked Cotton into publicly stating a point of difference that will rule him out not only with the red pill walkaways but also the less than sterling oOpioid-American community.

    urbanleftbehind (c40159)

  291. Cottons a smart guy, you trust these people not to overreach, I don’t as a general rule.

    Narciso (d004a7)

  292. I agree with Cotton, and yes many of our mass kill calamities are the fruit of the union of liberal “mainstreaming”and fiscal conservative “saving state dollars”. I’m saying Trump rightly eyes Cotton as a younger more try conservative rival with military experience whom he can point to as the guy who killed ‘yer sentencing reform, witness the lead pipe he lent the Blunt faction against Greitens.

    urbanleftbehind (c40159)

  293. what ever became of that carp fest, did he speak out against greatens,

    narciso (d1f714)

  294. in other news, mark Hamill has lost his ever loving mind,

    narciso (d1f714)

  295. No, but he didnt call out the St.Louis DA like he called out Abrams, Gillum or April Ryan. And the establishment MO GOP was all to eager to let him drown.

    urbanleftbehind (111d3a)

  296. Well then go ahead and cast the Bud (Cosby Show) lookalike from Black Panther as true Luke since JEJ is really Vader and Fett the black community claims as their own.

    urbanleftbehind (111d3a)

  297. Indeed, it can’t be proven that the full court Obama and press pressure which coincided with the apparent ‘switch’ ’caused’ it. They merely coincided.

    I suppose I’ll wait to see how Robert’s his on a firearms case.

    Ingot9455 (7ba6f5)

  298. I suppose I’ll wait to see how Robert’s his on a firearms case.

    Robert’s hied jis’ fine in DC v. Heller (2008) which held that the Second Amendment is an individual right. and in McDonald v. City of Chicago (2010) which held that it applied to the States as well as to the federal government. If ya’ll so knowledgeable ’bout all things Robert’s, how’s it ya’ll din’ know this?

    nk (dbc370)

  299. My gripe was probably re thr redistricting cases, where the progs stole at least one base, admittedly he was not part of the snail mail speed trap

    Narciso (ab2c32)

Leave a Reply

Comment moderation is enabled. Your comment may take some time to appear.


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.7206 secs.