Tag: Judicial Issues

Thomas Makes My Case

I have written many times about how the SCOTUS has crapped on the spirit of their position……and Thomas is making it more likely something needs done.

Him and his wife have got politically involved on several occasions…..involved in stuff that he has had a hand in crafting law. And now he proves my point….the next attack is on ‘marriage equality’ and gay rights.

Here is Thomas’ latest….

Attached to the Supreme Court’s majority opinion in overturning Roe v. Wade on Friday was a solo concurring opinion by Justice Clarence Thomas that suggested he’d like to also reconsider cases involving contraception, same-sex marriage, and other private sexual conduct. The pundit consensus has since deemed the chances of the majority of the high court ruling against birth control and gay rights as pretty low, but in her latest op-ed for the Washington Post, Ruth Marcus puts out a red flag over dismissing that possibility. The rights protected in those other mentioned cases are said to fall—just as abortion was, until last week—under a privacy umbrella within the “substantive due process” protections of the 14th Amendment. Marcus concedes that no other justice joined Thomas in taking aim at those other cases, so she poses the question on everyone’s mind: “Should everyone calm down?”

Her answer: “Yes—and no.” She notes it’s true that contraception and same-sex marriage just doesn’t touch the same nerve as abortion does. But she also points out the majority opinion highlighted that, when the 14th Amendment was ratified in 1868, there was no right to abortion recognized—and the same applies to those other cases, meaning the rights they protect could also be threatened in the future. “Thomas may be alone now, but who knows who will be willing to join him down the road?” Marcus writes, noting that what “starts as an extreme, outlier view can migrate into the conservative mainstream.” “When you pull on a thread, an entire garment can unravel,” she adds. “Thomas would like to see that happen, and he is tugging, hard, at the fabric of constitutional law. Who knows what will be left when he is done.”

Read her piece in its entirety here.

Thomas needs to recuse himself from any and all rulings that involve gay rights….he is biased and cannot not make a unbiased ruling.

If he cannot bring himself to recuse then I say impeach him and anyone else that shows a hatred for the Constitution.

But how could we impeach a sitting SCOTUS judge?

Colorado Secretary of State Jena Griswold, who explains to Molly and listeners what it would take to impeach a Supreme Court Justice, why she believes the conservative justices lied under oath, and what states can do ASAP to protect women.

“It’s so strange because we all knew this was coming and it still feels like just being punched in the gut. It’s devastating. It’s outrageous. I am personally outraged for the fact that the Supreme Court is no longer seeing American women as full people,” Griswold tells Molly Jong-Fast. “I support looking into the impeachment of several of these justices.”

“This is a fabulous notion, but I mean, how would that even work?” asks Molly.

“Basically Congress can impeach and there has to be a basis to do so. They have to have committed some type of legal offense,” explains Griswold, noting that she believes there have been offenses committed by some of the conservative judges to warrant said impeachment.

She points to Clarence Thomas as the first example: “Justice Thomas, who is now saying that marriage equality, that birth control, that all these rights suddenly are at risk, should be impeached for his involvement in election-related cases. He has breached the public’s trust. His wife literally was involved in the attempted violent overthrow of the U.S. government.”

https://www.thedailybeast.com/this-is-how-to-impeach-a-supreme-court-justice

I say impeach the bastards!

Then impose terms limits ion judges….no body should have a job for life.

I love the idea to hold the judges accountable for their words and deeds…..but I see a problem…the Congress does not work for the people of this country they are picked and employed by political hacks and any action against a judge would go through the Congress they will do nothing to protect the people only their asses.

Thomas and his 5 cohorts are nothing more than political hacks and none deserve the title ‘your honor’….

Any opinions on this this?

Watch This Blog!

I Read, I Write, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”

SCOTUS Does A First

For a change of pace let us go to our Supreme Court and a ruling to come…..

SCOTUS will be hearing a Roe v Wade petition….and it is not looking good for the pro side…..

A draft opinion in the closely-watched Mississippi abortion case that was leaked to Politico shows that the Supreme Court has voted to side with Mississippi and overturn abortion rights. Politico notes that nothing is final until the opinion is published, which will likely happen sometime in the next two months, and that justices could potentially change their votes during deliberations. However, the draft opinion written by Samuel Alito in February and circulated among the justices Feb. 10 minces no words in stating that, according to the majority of the justices, both Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey, which largely maintained the abortion rights established by Roe, should be overturned. If that happens, federal protection of abortion rights would end, and it would be up to each state to decide.

“Roe was egregiously wrong from the start,” it states. “We hold that Roe and Casey must be overruled. It is time to heed the Constitution and return the issue of abortion to the people’s elected representatives.” In a separate piece, Politico looks at 10 key passages from the draft opinion here; the site says there’s an almost “mocking tone” to some portions of the draft opinion, as well as Alito’s signature “caustic rhetorical flourishes.” A source says Alito and the four other conservative justices (Clarence Thomas, Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett) stand behind the draft opinion, while the three left-leaning justices (Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor, and Elena Kagan) are working on dissents. It’s not clear how Chief Justice John Roberts will vote.

In a third piece, Politico looks at the exceptional rarity of a leak from the Supreme Court. For more on that, click here; for the 10 key passages, click here; for the Politico exclusive in full, click here. Hours before Politico published its piece, the Washington Post was out with a piece looking at “the next frontier for the anti-abortion movement.” According to the paper’s sources, if SCOTUS does in fact roll back abortion rights in the Mississippi case and Republicans take power in Washington, anti-abortion groups and their congressional allies are working on federal legislation that would ban abortion nationwide after the 6-week mark of pregnancy. Per AZFamily, Arizona will be the state most affected if Roe is overturned, followed by Michigan and South Carolina. In December, NPR looked at the 21 states likely to ban or significantly restrict abortions if Roe falls.

I think this is just wrong….we are talking about a personal decision that has no place being decided by SCOTUS.

What is next for the conserv court?

Which right will we be denied next time?

Turn The Page!

I Read, I Write, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”

Aubrey Vs Rittenhouse

More on the justice system ……

This time it is about the Aubrey case…..the latest trial of vigilante actions…..

After more than 10 hours of deliberations over two days, the jury has delivered its verdict in the Ahmaud Arbery case. Greg McMichael, 65 and his son Travis McMichael, 35, have been found guilty of murder in the 25-year-old Black man’s death, the New York Times reports. The McMichaels grabbed guns and chased Arbery in a pickup truck after they saw him running through their neighborhood near Brunswick, Georgia last year. William “Roddie” Bryan Jr., a neighbor who joined the chase in his truck and recorded video of Travis McMichael shooting Arbery, was also found guilty of murder.

Travis McMichael was found guilty on all nine counts, including felony murder and malice murder. His father was found guilty of felony murder and all other counts except malice murder. Bryan, 52, was also found guilty of felony murder but not malice murder. All three men will face minimum sentences of life in prison and it will be up to the judge the AP reports.

More thoughts on the trial and outcome…..

  • The verdict. Travis McMichael, who shot Arbery after he saw him running through his neighborhood outside Brunswick, Georgia, in February last year, was found guilty of malice murder and felony murder. His father, Greg McMichael, and neighbor William Bryan Jr., who helped chase Arbery down in his truck, were found guilty of felony murder. All three were also convicted on charges including aggravated assault and false imprisonment, the Brunswick News reports. The overwhelmingly white jury rejected defense arguments that the men were trying to carry out a lawful citizen’s arrest and that the younger McMichael shot Arbery in self-defense. Prosecutors said the men hunted Arbery down and killed him while he was jogging on a public road.
  • “Careful deliberation.” Bryan and the elder McMichael were found not guilty of malice murder. Georgia criminal defense attorney Page Pate tells CNN the verdict shows there was “careful deliberation.” In Georgia, malice murder means “you have an intent to kill someone,” Pate says. “Felony murder is you don’t necessarily want to kill someone but you’re committing a felony offense and someone dies as a result of it.”
  • Sentencing. The three men were taken to the Glynn County jail, where they will remain until they are sentenced, the Times reports. No sentencing date has been set. All three defendants could face a maximum sentence of life in prison without the possibility of parole.
  • Appeals planned. Lawyers for the McMichaels and Bryan say they plan to appeal. “I can tell you honestly, these men are sorry for what happened to Ahmaud Arbery,” said McMicheal attorney Jason Sheffield, per the AP. “They are sorry he’s dead. They are sorry for the tragedy that happened because of the choices they made to go out there and try to stop him.” Bryan attorney Kevin Gough, who plans to file new motions after Thanksgiving, said the team is “disappointed with the verdict, but we respect it.”

I would not get too excited for this will happen again and again…..it is far from over…..period.

This is a justice for one but how many have gone without justice for their deaths?

Vigilantism will rise….that we can wager on.

Watch This Blog!

I Read, I Write, You Know

“lego ergo scribo

“Qualified Immunity”

A term that is once again in the news as the 4 other policemen prepare to go to trial for the murder of Floyd in Minnesota…..

This is a process where the police because they wear a inform are protected from accountability…..

A narrow judicial principle created by the US Supreme Court, qualified immunity protects police from lawsuits unless plaintiffs can show police have been previously found to have violated a person’s rights in exactly the same manner. As a result, many cases never come to court and those that do are often dismissed.

Qualified immunity permits law enforcement and other government officials to violate people’s constitutional rights with virtual impunity. Today, we hear about police shooting after police shooting where officers are rarely if ever held accountable by the criminal legal system, either because prosecutors decline to charge, because grand juries decline to indict, or because juries decline to convict.

Qualified immunity takes away the other avenue that victims of police violence should have available to hold police accountable. But while stories like Brooks’s—abuses of authority that go completely unremedied—occur every day in our legal system, there is a coalition building against qualified immunity, and there is reason to be optimistic that things will change.

That means, where prosecutors often avoid bringing criminal charges against police, recourse through the civil courts for people whose rights were violated is often blocked.

The International Association of Chiefs of Police, an advocacy group based in Alexandria, Virginia, defends qualified immunity, saying it allows police to “make split-second decisions, and rely on the current state of the law in making those decisions”.

Yada….Yada….Yada….

I have made my thoughts on this statue……https://lobotero.com/2021/05/07/end-qualified-immunity/

I do not believe that because a person wears a uniform does not allow them to act as they see fit and when they act recklessly they are protected from the law.

The term will be used more and more as the trial of the 4 police officers that stood by and did NOTHING to prevent the murder of a suspect will get some sort of protection.

They did NOTHING then they are GUILTY of accessory to murder….and should pay for their CRIME.

This needs to stop….if police reform is truly needed then the beginning is here…..

Then there is the problem of militarized police….that as well needs to end and there is a guide for us citizens on how to help bring about this obscenity….

In an effort to curtail police militarism, anti-war group Win Without War on Thursday released an activist guide titled Stop Militarizing Our Communities: 5 Things You Need to Know About the 1033 Program.

The activist guide was authored by Tanaya Sardesai, a student at Pomona College and a former intern at Win Without War, and centers on the Department of Defense’s 1033 program, which is responsible for supplying military weaponry to domestic law enforcement.

“Foreign policy and domestic policy are intertwined,” said Sardesai. “Violence committed against communities of color abroad fuels violence against communities of color at home. We must end state violence and knee-jerk militarism, wherever it occurs. Ending the 1033 program is a small but necessary step toward that.”

https://www.commondreams.org/news/2021/04/29/anti-war-group-releases-activist-guide-end-militarized-policing-us

Be part of the solution not the problem!

Turn The Page!

I Read, I Write, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”

Guilty! Guilty! Guilty!

The post is for all those that live under a rock.

The jury is in and the fate of Officer Chauvin is in!

Former Minneapolis police officer Derek Chauvin learned his fate as a tense nation watched Tuesday. The jury found Chauvin guilty on all three counts he was charged with in the May 25 death of George Floyd—second-degree unintentional murder, third-degree murder, and second-degree manslaughter. The most serious charge, second-degree murder, carries a maximum sentence of 40 years in prison, NBC reports. The judge ordered Chauvin remanded to custody until a sentencing hearing in approximately eight weeks. The 45-year-old’s bail was immediately revoked and he was taken away in handcuffs, reports the AP.

Outside the heavily guarded court building in Minneapolis, there were cheers and chants of “All three counts” from the crowd as the verdicts were read, the New York Times reports. CNN reports that jurors deliberated for four hours after closing arguments were delivered Monday and resumed deliberations at 9am ET today. The court was notified Tuesday afternoon that they had reached a verdict.

Reactions of relief…..

Derek Chauvin showed little emotion as the three guilty verdicts against him in the death of George Floyd were read out Tuesday, but there was jubilation outside the Minneapolis court building. The AP reports that there were cheers among hundreds of people gathered in a nearby park and people flooded downtown streets, some waving banners as drivers honked their horns. Philonise Floyd, one of Floyd’s brothers, was in the courtroom and hugged prosecutor Jerry Blackwell, the Star Tribune reports. More:

  • “Painfully earned justice.” “Painfully earned justice has arrived for George Floyd’s family and the community here in Minneapolis, but today’s verdict goes far beyond this city and has significant implications for the country and even the world. Justice for Black America is justice for all of America,” Floyd family attorney Ben Crump said in a prepared statement after Chauvin was found guilty of murder and manslaughter. Crump said the verdict is “a turning point in American history for accountability of law enforcement and sends a clear message we hope is heard clearly in every city and every state.”
  • AG praises community members. CNN reports that Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison praised the “simple yet profound acts of courage” of those who recorded Chauvin putting his knee on Floyd’s neck for more than nine minutes. “What happened on that street was wrong,” Ellison said. “We owe them our gratitude for fulfilling their civic duty and for their courage in telling the truth.”
  • “One important step.” Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey and Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz were among numerous leaders who welcomed the verdict but said much work remains to be done, the Washington Post reports. The verdict “won’t change the fact that George Floyd’s family has been rendered incomplete,” Walz said, but it “marks an important step in our pursuit of racial justice in Minneapolis—one important step on a much longer journey.”
  • Floyd’s girlfriend: “Thank God for this moment.” George Floyd’s girlfriend, Courteney Ross, called the decision a “moment to celebrate” before the fight for racial justice resumes, the Guardian reports. “Floyd was one man,” she said. “George Floyd is a movement.”
  • Police federation speaks out. “There are no winners in this case, and we respect the jury’s decision,” the Police Officers Federation of Minneapolis said in a statement after the former officer was found guilty, per the Star Tribune. “We need the political pandering to stop and the race-baiting of elected officials to stop.”

Even Pres. Biden has stepped up with a speech…..

The verdict against Derek Chauvin “can be a moment of significant change,” President Biden said in a White House speech Tuesday, hours after a jury found the former Minneapolis police officer guilty of murder and manslaughter in the death of George Floyd. The Black man’s death “was a murder in the full light of day and it ripped the blinders off for the whole world to see” systemic racism and “the knee on the neck of justice for Black Americans,” Biden said, per CNN. Biden, Vice President Kamala Harris, and first lady Jill Biden called Floyd’s family moments after the verdict, reports the AP. “Nothing is going to make it all better, but at least now there is some justice,” he said in video of the call tweeted by attorney Ben Crump. “We’re all so relieved.”

Biden and Harris both urged Congress to pass the George Floyd Justice in Policing Act, Politico reports. Biden described the decision in the Chauvin case as “much too rare” and said “it took a unique and extraordinary convergence of factors”—including bystander video of the killing and police willing to testify against a former officer—”for the judicial system to deliver a just, just basic accountability.” Chauvin will be sentenced at a hearing in around eight weeks. He faces a maximum sentence of 40 years in prison on the most serious charge and federal charges are still possible, the Washington Post reports. In a statement Wednesday, Attorney General Merrick Garland said the jury had “fulfilled its civic duty” after the trial on state charges. He said the federal civil rights investigation is “ongoing.”

So said them all!

Yes it is good news….but sadly this will probably change nothing.

Turn The Page!

I Read, I Write, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”

Judiciary Impeachment Hearing–Day One

I watch this stuff so my readers does not have to…..they will thank me in the long run.

The whole impeachment thing has gone from the Intel Committee to the Judiciary……the report released by the Intel to lead the way…..https://lobotero.com/2019/12/04/lets-go-to-the-house-impeachment-report/

A summary of the day’s theatrics….

  • The Constitution lays out somewhat vague standards for presidential impeachment. Look for much discussion about the passage at issue: “The President, Vice President, and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.” How Nadler’s committee applies those words and ideas to the Intelligence Committee report will determine the fate of Trump’s presidency.
  • As for the sentiment going into the hearing, Kathryn Krawczyk puts it like so at the Week: “President Trump either did everything wrong or not much at all, depending on who you ask.” Four constitutional lawyers will testify today: for the Democrats, Noah Feldman of Harvard Law School, Michael Gerhardt of the University of North Carolina School of Law, and Pamela Karlan of Stanford Law School; for the GOP, Jonathan Turley of George Washington University, reports Politico. You can read their opening statements here.
  • Gerhardt said Trump’s actions have been “worse than the misconduct of any prior president.” He also offered what the Washington Post calls one of the day’s most “memorable lines” thus far: “I just want to stress that if what we’re talking about is not impeachable, then nothing is impeachable. This is precisely the misconduct that the framers created a Constitution including impeachment to protect against.” He also argued if Trump ends up getting a “pass,” future presidents will have a green light to imitate his actions.
  • The Hill reports Feldman referenced the afterlife: “Someday we will no longer be alive, and we will go wherever it is we go, the good place, or the other place, and we may meet there [James] Madison and [Alexander] Hamilton, and they will ask us, when the president of the United States acted to corrupt the structure of the Republic, what did you do? Our answer to that question must be that we followed the guidance of the framers, and it must be that if the evidence supports that conclusion that the House of Representatives move to impeach him.”
  • Turley hammered home what he sees as flawed timing in his opening statement. “This impeachment would stand out among modern impeachments as the shortest proceeding, with the thinnest evidentiary record, and the narrowest grounds ever used to impeach a president.” The Guardian reports he later said, “Fast is not good for impeachment. Fast and narrow impeachments have failed,” and later, “If you rush this impeachment, you’re going to leave half the country behind. This is not an impulse buy item.”
  • At CNN, Chris Cillizza called Turley a “very good witness for the GOP,” noting that his explanation at the beginning that he didn’t vote for Trump and didn’t agree with Trump’s view that his July 25 call with Ukraine’s president was “perfect” served to make “his insistence stronger that there wasn’t enough evidence yet to impeach Trump and that the whole process would be better if everyone slowed down, took a deep breath and thought of the ramifications of their actions.”
  • The Hill reports Karlan didn’t stick with her script. In her opening remarks she took GOP Rep. Doug Collins to task for suggesting that today’s witnesses wouldn’t have read the 300-page report or all of the witness transcripts. She addressed the committee’s top Republican by name, saying “Mr. Collins … I read transcripts of every one of the witnesses who appeared in the live hearing, because I would not speak about these things without reviewing the facts, so I’m insulted by the suggestion that as a law professor I don’t care about those facts.”
  • Karlan also mentioned the president’s 13-year-old son, Barron, after she was asked about the framers’ fears of a monarchy taking hold in the US. “Kings could do no wrong, because the king’s word was law,” she explained, but “contrary to what President Trump has said, Article II does not give him the power to do anything he wants. The Constitution says there can be no titles of nobility. So while the President can name his son Barron, he can’t make him a baron.” Melania Trump was not pleased: “A minor child deserves privacy and should be kept out of politics,” the first lady tweeted. “Pamela Karlan, you should be ashamed of your very angry and obviously biased public pandering, and using a child to do it.”
  • The AP reports Republicans on the Judiciary Committee have used their five-minute allotments to criticize the impeachment process and defend Trump, rather than ask questions of the law professors. Louie Gohmert of Texas complained the committee hasn’t had enough time to review the House Intelligence Committee’s report on impeachment; Ohio Rep. Steve Chabot called the impeachment process a partisan exercise and said impeachment pushed by Democrats is inevitable because they don’t like Trump.
  • As for Republican Rep. Matt Gaetz, he used his time to criticize Karlan, who he noted has donated to Democrats in the past, CNN reports. He painted her as a liberal elite with a “contempt” of conservatives, and asked her about an appearance she made affiliated with a podcast called Versus Trump. During the event, he said, she had joked that conservatives spread out geographically “perhaps because they don’t even want to be around themselves.” Of her mention of Barron, he said, “when you try to make a little joke out of referencing Barron Trump, that does not lend credibility to your argument. It makes you look mean. It makes you look like you’re attacking someone’s family. The minor child of the president of the United States.” He did not give her time to respond.
  • GOP Rep. Tom McClintock followed that up by asking the four professors who they voted for in the 2016 presidential election. Karlan protested; ultimately none of the witnesses raised their hands when asked if they voted for Trump, but Feldman said, “Not raising our hands is not an indication of an answer, sir.”

That is day one…..I think it was a good idea for the law professors to talk since the whole process of impeachment has been so clouded with bullshit that it needed to be clarified for the Congresspeople….they have spent many months of obfuscation….the professors were a needed touch.

Now on to day two and the process continues……

Watch This Blog!

I Read, I Wrote, You Know

“Lego Ergo Scribo”

Courts Mash-Up

You have with this president we have seen some juvenile attacks and immature rantings from Our Dear Supreme leader…..most are so funny that most of us can hardly stand them without peeing a little when laughing…..

The most recent mash-up out of the mind of Trump is the 9th Court of Appeals…..he has a hard on for them because they are in his words, liberal……and his rantings caused the Chief Justice of SCOTUS to enter into the discussion (if we can call a Twitter storm a discussion)…..

When the AP asked John Roberts for a comment about President Trump’s criticism of a federal judge, the chief justice delivered in a headline-making way. “We do not have Obama judges or Trump judges, Bush judges or Clinton judges,” said Roberts in a statement released Wednesday. “What we have is an extraordinary group of dedicated judges doing their level best to do equal right to those appearing before them.” And on the eve of the holiday, he added: “That independent judiciary is something we should all be thankful for.” The AP notes that it’s the first time Roberts has “offered even a hint of criticism” of Trump, while the New York Times characterizes it as a “direct rebuke.” (Read Trump’s response here.)

The controversy revolves around US District Judge Jon Tigar in San Francisco, an Obama appointee who ruled against the White House plan to restrict asylum-seekers at the border, per Politico. After the ruling, Trump belittled Tigar as an “Obama judge” and further called the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit a “disgrace” with a liberal bent. “Every case that gets filed in the Ninth Circuit we get beaten,” he said. At the conservative RedState site, Andrea Ruth found Roberts’ comments to be surprising: “It’s not all that rare for sitting Supreme Court justices to speak out on issues but I cannot remember a time when a justice flat out blasted a president for comments he made about the judiciary.”

Of course when taken to task by someone smarter than Trump he punches back with stupidity……

It didn’t take long for President Trump to respond to a rare rebuke from the chief justice of the Supreme Court. After John Roberts criticized the president for belittling a federal judge who ruled against the White House, Trump took to Twitter to make his case. “Sorry Chief Justice John Roberts, but you do indeed have ‘Obama judges,’ and they have a much different point of view than the people who are charged with the safety of our country,” he wrote. Trump also continued his criticism in particular of the 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals, which is based in San Francisco. Trump asserted that the court tilts to the left so much that opponents of his polices make a point to file appeals there.

If the court were truly independent, they “why are so many opposing view (on Border and Safety) cases filed there, and why are a vast number of those cases overturned,” he asked. “Please study the numbers, they are shocking. We need protection and security—these rulings are making our country unsafe! Very dangerous and unwise!” Earlier, Roberts took issue with the president’s criticism of 9th Circuit Court Judge Jon Tigar, who ruled against the White House plan to stop asylum-seekers at the border. Trump called Tigar an “Obama judge.” The 9th has blocked multiple Trump initiatives on immigration and national security, notes the Hill.

Okay this is a stupid thing to be an argument…….does the 9th have a liberal bias?  No more so than the 5th has a conservative bias……you see when conservs need to go to court they choose the 5th to file their papers….why is that?

This is a moronic thing to rattle on about……but that is what Our Dear Supreme Leader does best….fire off his mouth before his brain is in gear……and this courts thing is a prime example.  A mindless accusation.  A silly diversion!

Closing Thought–08Oct18

One more thought on the ugly process of judicial confirmation.

Yes, Irene we have a new judge for SCOTUS!

After the vote that confirmed that alleged drunkard to the highest court in the land and after the old men of the Senate took their mandatory hourly pee break the swearing in began…..

Brett Kavanaugh was sworn in Saturday night as the 114th justice of the US Supreme Court, after a wrenching debate over sexual misconduct and judicial temperament that shattered the Senate, captivated the nation, and ushered in an acrimonious new level of polarization—now encroaching on the court that the 53-year-old judge may well swing rightward for decades to come, the AP reports. The bitterly polarized US Senate narrowly confirmed Brett Kavanaugh to join the Supreme Court, delivering an election-season triumph to President Trump, per the AP. The near party-line vote was 50-48 capped a fight that seized the national conversation after claims emerged that Kavanaugh had sexually assaulted women three decades ago—which he emphatically denied.

After all this drama and a presidential speech to his slobbering throngs….the head of the Senate Judicial Committee tells why of the vote went as it did….(would my female readers read this part closely)……

“It’s a lot of work—maybe they don’t want to do it.” So says Sen. Chuck Grassley on why the Senate Judiciary Committee that supported Brett Kavanaugh’s Supreme Court nomination had no female Republicans, per the Wall Street Journal. “My chief of staff of 33 years tells me we’ve tried to recruit women and we couldn’t get the job done,” adds Grassley, the committee’s chair. But the 85-year-old Republican later walked back his remarks, saying the committee’s workload made it less enticing to male and female senators alike: “We have a hard time getting men on the committee. It’s just a lot of work whether you’re a man or a woman, it doesn’t matter.”

What exactly makes it so hard to get senators on board? “Well, I love it. I’ve been on it 38 years,” the senator responded. “On average, any woman in the United States Senate, whether they’re on Judiciary or any other committee, probably works harder than the average man.” Continuing his apparent change of heart, Grassley said the Supreme Court should have more women: “Probably five would be about right.” All Republicans on the committee are male, while the Democrats have ranking member Sen. Dianne Feinstein and three other women, per the Huffington Post. In fact Republicans haven’t had a single female member since the committee was established in 1816, Vox notes.
There has NEVER been a female member….NEVER….and why is that?  Workload?  Bullshit!  Women are just as capable or more so than most of the old farts on that committee.
Ladies…..don’t get made….think vote and be heard….then think bench removal!
I promise to move on…that is until this tool makes his next screw up and I think he will do just that…

Brett Needs To Go Away

The SCOTUS is suppose to be a neutral arena for the decisions on laws in this country…..granted all judges have a partisan side but they keep it to themselves because of the rulings they will be asked to hand down…….Kavanaugh has taken the step that will taint every decision he gives…..

He made sure that he let it been known that these were his words and no one influenced his composition of statement….

Brett Kavanaugh admits he “might have been too emotional at times” when he testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee last week—but he says he will be an impartial judge if confirmed to the Supreme Court. “I was very emotional last Thursday, more so than I have ever been,” he writes in a Wall Street Journal op-ed. “I know that my tone was sharp, and I said a few things I should not have said,” Kavanaugh writes, explaining that he was “forceful and passionate” because of his “overwhelming frustration at being wrongly accused … of horrible conduct completely contrary to my record and character” and at the “unfairness” of how the sexual assault allegations had been handled.

Kavanaugh, who was criticized for the partisan tone of his testimony and his angry responses to Sen. Amy Klobuchar, among others, says he will be continue to be “hardworking, even-keeled, open-minded, independent, and dedicated to the Constitution and the public good.” As a judge, he says, “I have always treated colleagues and litigants with the utmost respect.” The Supreme Court “must never be viewed as a partisan institution,” he writes, promising to “strive to be a team player” if confirmed. “I revere the Constitution,” he writes. “I believe that an independent and impartial judiciary is essential to our constitutional republic.” (More than 1,000 law professors signed a letter to the Senate saying Kavanaugh lacks “judicial temperament.”)

Playing to the lowest denominator Brett has proven that he is not fit to be a judge appointed for life.  He is a partisan hack…..not judicial quality.

The accusations be damn……the reality of his temperament shows that he is a petty person that does not belong on the highest court in the land.

If confirmed then a possible impeachment should be considered.  PERIOD!

Closing Thought–30Sep18

Here is the perfect example of American justice and how uneven it is spread around our society……

In 2008 the big banks tanked our economy billions were lost, many people lost their retirements, it was a disaster……and of all those bankers that tanked the economy none were made to pay for the treachery….and then you read a story like this……

Ten years after the behavior of over-leveraged and fraudulent banks created a global financial disaster that resulted in hundreds of billions of dollars in losses; a multi-trillion bailout using public money; and millions of people losing their homes to foreclosure, but saw not one high-level financial executive go to jail, a man in Florida has been sentenced to a 20-year prison term for stealing $600 worth of cigarettes from a local convenience store.

https://www.commondreams.org/news/2018/09/24/ten-years-after-not-one-high-level-banker-sent-jail-tanking-global-economy-man-gets

Are you surprised at this?  I am not…..if you are not wealthy then you are crap under the boots of the elites….but that is okay for things will change with the next election….or is it the one after that……maybe later?

Oh yeah….I believe the cigarette guy was black….go figure!