My impression of Justice Alito is that his mindset is rigid, hierarchical, paternalistic, misogynistic, and somewhat religiously fundamentalist. He wants the Court to defer to whomever is in power, so that order and hierarchy are maintained. The law isn't to benefit the people, it's to maintain order and control - just like in authoritarian religions and countries.
I think that the answer to his question is the question of what if the president decides to execute members of the Supreme Court because he doesn't like their judgements. Does he have immunity then?
Also, ask the Press if it was worth the massive profits they gained in ad revenue to elect the biggest dictator who wants to execute members of the Press.
Exactly my thought. The media definitely elected TFG, and now they need to own up to it and then make it right. Report on his every failure, and showcase the current potus’ accomplishments.
Problem is faux news will never own up to their part in all this. They’ve been fined millions of dollars and they’re still spreading the lies bc the cult 😵💫 still believes every word! Now MSM, is another story! 😡
That's so funny. Do you recall Alito getting in a tizzy because someone made a statement against the court, (can't remember who) and Alito's response was "that put us judges in danger of assassination." Of course he failed to respond to whatever the original negative opinion was. And their vulnerability is laughably slight compared to most everybody else. And of course, the criticism that he'd heard hadn't been scandalous or any such thing.
Which is why I think that they and particularly him, need reminding that by giving Treacherous-treasonous-tantruming-traitor-Trump more powers they are giving the presidency power to kill them too with impunity. All he has to do is claim they committed treason by their actions. And they thought they were buying him time to get back in office at which point they planned to do whatever he wants. The first thing a dictator does is to get rid of the press and then the courts. Apparently they skipped over that in their history books. These are lessons that every economics, social sciences and history teacher should be teaching. Make sure the people don't know what is going on and then the dictator becomes the judge and jury. In fact, while there may be courts, they don't get to make decisions. So, a dictator can put just anyone in the role. Are they showing him that they are the loyal court of a ruthless dictator? It seems some of them are.
The press should remind people about Trump's extremism every day. He bragged about overturning Roe v Wade, he refused to peacefully transfer power, he's under multiple indictment etc. Don't let the public forget how corrupt he is.
The press sucks. The mainstream press does not seem to have too many journalists or editors who are up to the task of understanding the complexities of this election. If they do, their oligarchic ownership is interfering. Not just Sulzberger having a hissy fit because Biden would not sit down to a one-on-one, but all of these oligarchic owners prefer Putin to Biden. That is the problem. They all need to spend some time in Russia with Putin to understand that obscene wealth won't protect them from prison, poison or defenestration if they breath funny.
Day 1: cancel civil service regulations. Stuff the gov't. with rally-going fans! He'd do it and it would solve the problem quickly. Get some buses! They can buy the gas themselves, also the Big Macs on the way.
It's interesting that the press has largely forgotten how Trump administration job turnover rate was astronomical and that he continually staffed it with unqualified, incompetent sycophants. Think Jared Kushner et al.
He seemed to appoint a guy at the Interior who despised the EPA and at Educaation that woman who's income is from students who can't pay off their loans, and Sec. of the Treasury a marauding cuthroat. etc.
I read Project 2025, and did a series of posts comprised of excerpts from the plan. All department heads and their deputies will be political appointees.
I expect that if Trump gets re-elected there will be minions standing at the desks of career cicvil servants on inauguration day. Waiting for the end of the oath of office. When he officially becomes president these minions will deliver executive orders to the career department heads et al terminating their service.
Read project 2025. At least read chapter 3 on staffing the governmental agencies.
Chapter 28 on the FCC covers grievance about being booted off twitter and contains language referring to that act as illegal censorship etc.
Chapter 29 on the Federal Election Commission, written by Hans von Skakovsky, the only person ever denied a seat on the FEC. Harry Reid refused his appointment by Bush sr. Hans is an avid voter fraud advocate from the Heritage Foundation.
Essentially they want the FEC to go after Trump opponents while the FCC muzzles dissent. They want to staff the DOJ with sycophants who will then lend credibility to the bogus voter fraud allegations. In other words, say goodbye to freedom of speech, fair elections, and impartial justice. Not to mention a free press or political dissent.
Thanks for writing my suicide note, Bob. If I can make it, though, I have Canadian citizenship, which, at my age, pretty much assures that the rest of this crap won’t happen ‘til I croak.
Please don't forget about Alito's "Military service".
In 1969 Alito's draft number was 32, which was a death sentence for many, but not for our Sammy boy.
Instead of reporting for induction, he joined ROTC to dodge active duty. There is a 90 day active duty requirement of all service members (we referred to them, with disdain, as "90-day wonders").
He began his active duty requirement in September 1975.
Viet Nam officially ended 30 Apr 1975. Which, in my opinion, makes him a draft dodger.
He was promoted, pro forma, to Captain just before being released from the service. Officers time in grade requirements will get you captain's bars in 7-9 years, provided you don't get caught pissing in the potted palms at the officers club.
He wants the court to defer to, “whomever is in power?” More likely he wants to only support administrations like trump’s and all the horrors it shall bring forth upon a majority of Americans.
And considering that he might be deposed from his lofty position by an authoritarian has never once crossed his mind. T usually gets around to throwing everyone under the proverbial bus.
I volunteer going door to door trying to sign up possible voters then I arrange transportation for both early voting and same day voting. I have been working.
As I say, the hypothetical question that should be posed to SCOTUS is if a President decides to execute the SCOTUS members because they voted in a way he did not like, or claims is treasonous, should they be immune from consequences?
“Just to be clear,” Collins said, “you’re voting for someone who you believe tried to subvert the peaceful transfer of power, that can’t even achieve his own policies, that lied about the election even after his attorney general told him that the election wasn’t stolen.… You’re going to vote for someone who is facing 88 criminal counts?”
“The answer to the question is yes,” Barr said. “I think the real threat to democracy is the progressive movement and the Biden administration.”
<—- break —->
That theory is known as the theory of the “unitary executive,” and it says that because the president is the head of one of the three unique branches of government, any oversight of that office by Congress or the courts is unconstitutional, although in fact presidents since George Washington have accepted congressional oversight.
The theory took root in 1986, when Samuel Alito, then a 35-year-old lawyer for the Office of Legal Counsel in the Department of Justice, proposed the use of “signing statements” to take from Congress the sole power to make laws by giving the president the power to “interpret” them. In 1987, president Ronald Reagan issued a signing statement to a debt bill, declaring his right to interpret it as he wished and saying the president could not be forced “to follow the orders of a subordinate.”
<—- break —->
The idea that the United States must become a Christian nation has apparently led Barr to accept the idea that a man who has called for the execution of those he sees as enemies should be president, apparently because he is expected to usher in an authoritarian Christian state, in preference to a man who is using the power of the government to help ordinary Americans.
I'm reading Federalist #10 and #51 written by James Madison. Haven't read any analyses of either . Upon first read of #10, Jimmy boy, suggests that minority rule in a republic is preferable to democracy. Minority rule he claims will be less susceptalbe to corruption. Has he never heard of a tyrant?
The Court should be above the law and so should tRump is Alito’s view. His hypo wasn’t intended to let Biden behave like an autocrat, only the prior guy.
These are the guys who-- who are so shy around women BECAUSE women aren't in the heirarchy-- but actually apt to jump out at sensible men, and laugh and tease them! Just read what he writes.
When it comes to Alito and Gorsuch, what they are doing is following Orban’s instructions for how to make the USA a “Christian Democracy”. The writing has been in the wall for years.
Expect them to rule a President has absolute immunity. I’d be happily surprised if they didn’t but have no illusions about their intent. They’re a couple of f’in right wing christian fascists.
Expect Thomas and Kavanagh to be right there with them. Barrett “seems” to be on the fence. Perhaps Roberts will find a pair of cajones and stand up for democracy and the constitution, but don’t be surprised to find out Alito, Gorsuch, Thomas, and Kavanagh have them in a vice and are tightening that vice more and more every day. Then again it won’t make any difference what Roberts does if Barrett goes along with the Christian Fascists….
The simple question for SCOTUS is did President Trump fail to “protect, defend and honor the constitution” the answer is no. What President has not defended the constitution? Donald Trump. This is a singularity, not a general respected tradition. Thanks Joyce
Ivan, NOT having common sense and good judgement are characteristics of Trump and his followers. Who would have believed that lack of those traits would become the common thread of the tapestry of the Republican party and of the misguided souls who worship Trump.
Sycophants all. Duped by fear and false patriotism. Trump's failed businesses, from booze to university, are overlooked by the zeal of his supporters to give him money.
Check out Barb McQuaid's new book "Attack from Within", on mis-, dis-, and mal-information. A great read I highly recommend. It helped keep me sane while I was reading project 2025.
Thank you Joyce. I’m not feeling very optimistic between your thoughts on the Supreme Court, and Andrew Weissman, who on MSNBC,said we are one vote away from losing democracy. He was referring to the Chief Justice.
I read another piece (can’t remember where) that said the Justices are arrogant in their belief that Trump will not disregard them. Or replace them.
I don’t know… sometimes I think Leonard Leo, the Kochs, Mitch McConnell, and all those who have been playing the long game have won.
Indeed, proceeding with the appeal question on Trump's immunity with 'all deliberate speed' just as in Brown v. Board of Education. They are not independent: they were given their places on the SCOTUS by the puppet masters, and they know their place.
Bob, indeed. And we all need to say the quiet part out loud. In my opinion, this began with George H. W. Bush, Senior appointing Clarence Thomas. He was incompetent and filled the boxes
Thomas is a disgrace. I remember his confirmation hearings. He also vowed to stay on the court for 43 years to make liberals lives miserable.
There have been other bad justices prior to when Bush nominated Thomas, Andrew Jackson's nomination of Roger Taney comes to mind, but Thomas certainly ushered in the present republican bias on the court.
Bob, I didn’t realize he had said that he was making lives and miserable, but he certainly has. This, after his own education benefitted by Affirmative Action. And thanks to Politico, we know he has benefited in other ways, from being at the trough. He would have to resign if Ginny Thomas were indicted. I’m wondering how she is off the hook? I know she went to the January 6 committee with a big mea culpa: ‘I wish I could take the text messages back.’
And “there is no way I could influence my husband’s Juris prudence. He’s his own man and very stubborn.” what a bunch of malarkey. The question wasn’t ‘are you influencing him?”
The question should’ve been “is he influencing you?” And “why were you emailing members of the Arizona legislature that it was their constitutional duty to vote against confirmation of Biden?” and this was happening on November 9? A mere 6 days after the November 3, 2020 presidential election? She and the other insiders already had a plan in place. Why is Ginny being treated as an Innocent bystander? She’s showing over and over that she was an insiders’ insider.
How does Mea Culpa work with January 6 and DOJ when Ginny has never recanted her statements that “Trump won.“ She believes that and so does Clarence.
It never fails to amaze me that despite eight (8) years of very public demonstrations of trump's ensnaring, ruining, and demolishing of people who felt the need to help him, there still seems to be a steady stream of powerful people (not bankers, however) ready to wade into his ever-roiling swamp and be ruined (indictments, disbarments, bankruptcies, prison). They must think they can improve trump's situation and he'll reward them - but reality inevitably sets in, they discover they can't because everything he's done is built on deceit and is a house of cards. Are these foolish souls looking for greater personal power and/or even more money?
Also, I couldn't believe what I was hearing in the Scotus Immunity hearing. The conservatives were more concerned about a clearly trump-hypothetical politically ordered post-presidential prosecution than the single, simple (and dilatory) immunity question which was put to the Court. It didn't seem to faze them that trump's lawyer was again asserting that he should have immunity for an assassination. So, I wonder - will they feel safe living in a country where a "president" can devise some pretextual "public act" and commit, or order others to commit, whatever crime(s) he wants accomplished?
I expected the justices to look for some nuance of text as a way to delay giving a straight yes or no answer.
Their lack of an ethics code, much more, their unwillingness to submit to any self-regulatory or external checks and balances, speaks volumes of their corruption. I reviewed some of their confirmation hearings as a refresher to see their lying faces.
I too, tend to think the evil conservatives have won. They've already accomplished so many of their objectives, like getting those liars on the Court, overturning Roe, delaying Trump trials, establishing a permission structure where fascism is underestimated, intimidating trans people, and soooo many other shameful hings. And it's annoying as heck when pundits repeatedly say that the people have the power to stop Trump. Why? 1. It is not UP to fricking voters to punish Trump for his CRIMES. That function belongs to the judicial branch and the prosecutors and juries that work with it, BUT THEY HAVE PROVEN THEY ARE NOT UP TO THE TASK. 2. Trump got his first fricking term WITHOUT the popular vote and if he gets it again, it will, once again, almost certainly NOT be with the popular vote. So really, this is mainly up to people in a few swing states given the way the crazy Electoral College works. Nonetheless, we must fight back, but my goodness, patriotism about America seems rather unustified at this point. America no longer deserves much pride. Instead, the pride is in a SEGMENT of the American population, while another segment is a source of great shame for America, which could yet and definitevely prevail.
Cannon said the quiet part out loud and is proudly showing her stripes. She clearly doesn’t believe for her eyes what happened on January 6th, she takes in the MAGA Koolaid. She is an outright liar. She needs to recuse herself from the case or the 3rd District needs to do it for her!
She is a member of the 3 F’er club. F**kup, failure and fraudster. With assistance from another I replace, “failure” with Federalist. It means failure to an extreme.
Thank you Joyce, especially for those questions to Alito. I wish Alito and the other four men would come clean and just admit that no matter what crimes Trump committed they will not hold him accountable. I also wish the Democrats in the House of Representatives would file intent to impeach all five male members of the Supreme Court on counts of failure to uphold the Constitution as written, and specific failure to abide by Article 3 Section 1 "shall hold their offices during good behavior". One can hardly call upholding criminal behavior as found by the Grand Juries in all cases against Trump as being "good behavior".
File impeachment petitions against the 3 Trump appointees for lying under oath. All 3 clearly intended to withhold their true views on several subjects, most notably, abortion protections and how they absolutely supported starie decisis(let the decision stand?). Yet, they clearly decided ahead of time. Was Barrett even on the court more than a year before betraying her congressional testimony? She had the “mens rea” and completed her betrayal(actus rea), making the rest of her time on the court suspect for even more betrayal, lies, backstabbing, backbiting and religious fervor.
Please don't leave Clarence Thomas out. He's been asking for it for a long time, and as I recall, his confirmation hearing was no better than Kavanaugh's. The two were remarkably similar.
Thomas should never have been confirmed after saying the hearings are a "circus", following the furor over Anita Hill. She was vilified as he claimed victim status.
Hi Mr. D., I am for impeachment. I am for protests on the SCOTUS steps. To impeach, we need a 2/3 majority: I believe Biden will be re-elected (Trump will devolve and become the totally unelectable banana without the peel - but even without that, Biden will win); and it may be possible to have a blue bicameral congress. But protests this summer with threats to the MAGA Republicans of losing their seats may help an impeachment vote. Someone published a book recently with interview of Trump's former insiders who were in the room when he interviewed Amy Coney Barrett, and asked her 'Are you able to vote on the question?' (I'm paraphrasing, sorry, but this was on Dobbs). She responded 'Yes.' I will try to find that book title/author, but it was a credible source - someone who left Trump when he was no longer able to tolerate the nonsense. And if we could pressure for a hard look at Ginny Thomas for an indictment, Clarence would have to resign. He would not be able to stay. I'm wondering why her 'Mea Culpa, I wish I had never written these texts when I was so emotional?' That is totally disingenuous - she started emailing the Arizona legislators on November 9, shortly after Trump had lost the election on November 3. She was an insider. Clarence had to have known her role. The DOJ needs to request her cell phone and computer.
Not quite. The House of Representatives files for impeachment, collect the evidence, and votes to impeach or not. If the accused is impeached the case then goes to the Senate for trial and the Senate has three choices, refuse to take up the impeachment, convict, or find innocent. If they vote to convict, the guilty party is removed from office and can never hold that office again. That is why Trump is the only President ever to be impeached twice with no consequences. Three Presidents have been impeached, none convicted. Andrew Johnson was the first President to have been impeached, Bill Clinton was next, followed by Trump 2X. 11 Federal Judges have been impeached and found guilty.
What happened to the SC only addressing, “the case in front of them?” Alito is another pompous ass whom believes he is smarter than all medical doctors, subject matter experts, legislators, other attorneys, hell, EVERYBODY.
Yep, we had Galileo facing the nut-crusher at Vatican (sort of a crude description but factual re the punishment of the day) and then Galileo's friend, Rene Descartes, recanting his own philosophical leanings based on his own truth (not that of the Pope)) that indicated (pre-revision) that he may have had a pre-life that determined his 'then' life. He re-wrote the 'I am thank you to the Pope' part and then headed to Scandinavia to live under protection in Sweden for the rest of his life. The right wing Christian evangelicals would have us back to the 16th Century Catholic Church.
And one answer that might have been given to Justice Alito is, "Err, you may have noticed that that's what happened last time, Your Honour. That's why we are here. Perhaps your brother Justice Thomas, or his wife, can explain it better than I."
Well said Joyce. I would ask Alito why do you completely ignore the facts and circumstances of this case which are that Trump acted almost entirely outside the scope of his official duties. He has no presidential duty to influence the Georgia Secretary of State to change the vote count. He has no official duty to participate in the Senate Hearing to certify the vote. He has no official duty to assemble the mob including racist Proud Boys etc and encitr the mob to violence at the capital. What official duties are you concerned that he was performing in this case?
“If an incumbent who loses a very close, hotly contested election knows that a real possibility after leaving office is not that the president is going to be able to go off into a peaceful retirement, but that the president may be criminally prosecuted by a bitter political opponent, will that not lead us into a cycle that destabilizes the functioning of our country as a democracy?”
I was confused at first, I don’t think of Alito as a comedian, and I thought him intelligent. Now I must decide what he could possibly mean by a statement like this. He paralleled 45’s exact situation, except he added, “…bitter political opponent,” which isn’t true for 45. That addition also takes it out of the comedy realm. So, is he actually stupid, amoral, or part of the current coup mob trying to destroy our constitution and democracy? Or was he trying to provoke a response from the other justices to such a ridiculous idea? If the latter, the response was inadequate.
I'm still not certain what to make of Justice Alito's question/statement.
I've been watching for some kind of explanation or narrative regarding a justification for placing the President outside of our legal system, immune to prosecution.
This is the only thing I've been able to conjure: "My name is Bond. James Bond. Agent 007. I have a license to kill. I am one of a kind. When I decide somebody needs to be dispatched, I alone -- along with my special Secret Service detail -- will go out into the world and knock off the rotter. And the world will be a better place for it..." Or some equally insane version of that scenario.
What rationale, in the name of anything that's holy, could possibly justify giving the POTUS an exclusive right or privilege to legally do what no other citizen can legally do? Is he the only person who can be trusted to do the right thing? Surely not. Is he being rewarded for getting himself elected, suggesting that a jury of his peers would likely have voted for him to be President, and therefore would acquit him at trial, so why not just skip all that legal rigamarole and just let him (it) get away with it up front?
I want Justice Alito -- or anyone else would surely do just fine -- to offer a cogent logical plausible explanation for why a President of the United States should be exempt from the law of the land.
Alito is not an independent thinker. He does not have independent jurisprudence and has not had from the time he was 'gifted' by the puppet master. (Nor does Clarence Thomas. And Amy Coney Barrett's 'gift' was membership in the elite conservative boys' club at the SCOTUS. She doesn't 'look' like them, but she can pretend she is 'in' by voting the way she has been instructed even before her name was given to Trump to nominate). Alito is trying to make his non sequitur argument fit the message he was given by his puppet master to 'figure out how to give Trump immunity.' That's crystal clear to me (and when one uses the lens of 'how can he make his response fit the instructions he has been given' it takes on a different character. We still think "He's a Supreme Court justice and makes independent decisions with intelligence" but not a one of those gifted with their appointments by Trump and the prior right wing Christian nationalist evangelicals - including the Bushes Senior and Junior - are independent decision-makers. They are pretending to be, but are not). But perhaps Joyce is posing the question to us because we can say what she cannot? So, we need to say it out loud: Justice Alito is doing nothing more and nothing less than trying to spew forth blatherskite to keep Trump from facing the music.
Wait, wait, you lost me. Who is the puppet master? I know it is hard to write these posts in the spur of the moment, but, I'm left with the impression you are saying Christ (?) or Christian evangelicals (?) have been behind over throwing our democracy for 25 years. I'm struggling to connect 45 to them 25 years ago... are you saying, they bet there purse of 45 and now are as stuck with him as the people are? Oh what tangled webs we weave...
Yes - The right wing Christian nationalist evangelicals have had a movement for 50 years to implant Christianity into the constitution. Indeed that is a complicated topic. But they made their deal with the devil Trump to put him in office in 2016. His job was to make the SCOTUS appointments - and in turn he got the presidency. The name of the game for the Evangelicals was to go after women’s rights first because that was easier than black and LGBTQ, but those rights are also on their agenda. Yes, they have been working to overturn Roe v. Wade for decades. Recall Nancy Reagan saying to young folks with hormones, raging out of control “just say no“ and Bush Junior implementing No Child Left Behind as an education policy that erased sex education. So here we are, and it’s been an effort by design.
They made the deal with the devil Orange Jesus. They told him he was the Orange Jesus and he’s now at his campaign rallies saying “I’m the chosen one. His lack of a moral core bothers us, of course, but the Republicans had planning meetings last summer, where women were interviewed by the New York Times and questioned as to whether the first E. Jean Carroll trial or reports of the hollywood access tape made a difference for them as women. They said absolutely not. The only thing they were concerned about was maintaining the republican party. However, the Republican party has driven off the cliff in its bus. The Orange Jesus is behaving like a banana without the peel in his courtroom experiences. I personally subscribe to the theory of the 37 psychiatrists who are writing/publishing, and giving interviews stating that they believe he will evolve into further dementia during this trial. See the Substack the big picture April 11, an interview with a psychiatrist on the condition of Trump’s brain/mental state. I don’t have a single bit of sorrow for any of the Evangelical leaders who are thinking they’ve made a mistake with Trump. They deserve every single thing they are getting from him. I hope we have four cycles of blue to restore our democracy and they can sit and think about what they’ve done. It began with Reagan or even before Reagan when they were doing lots of Evangelico tent meetings, filling Madison Square Garden. Reagan was a fraud of the first order. Are you still waiting for trickle down?
Valere, you have inspired me to add to your insights and observations. In addition to taking orders from a puppet master, there is a related phenomenon: a person with strong beliefs must occasionally wrestle with their personal views when the relevant case law and precedents point to a different decision about the instant case. Every candidate for Supreme Court, state and federal, knows what everyone wants to hear: I will set aside my personal beliefs and rule according to the facts presented in the case. Here in Wisconsin our newest State Supreme Court Justice, Janet Protasiewicz, announced during the election campaign that she firmly believes in a woman's right to govern her own body. She also said that she would not allow her personal beliefs to be substituted for the facts of the matter in any case where she must rule. The conservative Republicans -- but I repeat myself -- were livid, and threatened to impeach her. But to us, she was far more refreshingly honest than such people and Justice Kavanaugh, and others, who said they would not allow their personal beliefs to interfere with a case, without revealing their personal beliefs (as far as I know). And it appears that they were not honest about allowing their personal beliefs to interfere. I much prefer Justice Protasiewicz's approach.
I appreciate your pointing out that Justice Alito is not a deep thinker. I have long found it interesting to ponder the extent to which the law of the land depends so much on the vagaries of the dispositions, temperaments, training, belief system, intellect, etc of the members of the Court. We suspect that the Roberts Court will be studied in law school for a long time, although not for their soaring judicial reasoning. They will be known for how their contemporary political climate colored their opinions, when they could have been doing the heavy lifting, the sifting and winnowing (as we like to say here in Wisconsin), whereby the American experiment advances toward a more perfect union.
Thank you for your thoughtful reply David. I do believe Alito drummed up a response to cover for Trump - and he was doing as he was told. No one at the level of a Supreme Court Justice could possibly do something so apparently biased unless they had marching orders to do so. Alito’s bias shows in everything he does. My opinion about his low intelligence comes from his use of AI for writing briefs. While I recognize that law clerks write the briefs, Alito (as is Thomas) is beefing them up with AI and that’s really not smart. All questions input to AI are traceable - and do not belong to the writer and it shows he’s (and Thomas) not doing organic writing and researching. Indeed, you have a justice in Wisconsin who respects transparency. SCOTUS has lost all credibility. We have had lots of Supreme Court justices who were conservative and had credibility. This crew simply took a job to join a club. They didn’t deserve the appointments. And they don’t have the integrity to resign.
Perhaps the person in question has the emotional development of a child with a persecution complex. We should hope that a Supreme would rise above the fray and offer some plausible semblance of an argument based in law and precedent. And if there is no law or precedent, as in the case of the conjured "unitary executive", then at least tell some kind of story to illustrate the alleged benefit to society of giving the President carte blanche, to do whatever, no questions asked.
They are clearly on Trumps side.( im sure you suspect this as well) Their outrageous behaviors need to be addressed and dealt with.
What scares me is even With Biden winning there will be a coup where tyere is a revolt claiming that tye election was rigged and could be thrown to the supreme court to decide snd they hand the presidency to Trump
The Christian Nationalists only need to simultaneously assassinate POTUS & VPOTUS: MAGA Mike becomes POTUS, pardons the assassins and hands the election to Adolf Trumpler.
Constitution wouldn’t allow it? They do not care about the Constitution.
“Just to be clear,” Collins said, “you’re voting for someone who you believe tried to subvert the peaceful transfer of power, that can’t even achieve his own policies, that lied about the election even after his attorney general told him that the election wasn’t stolen.… You’re going to vote for someone who is facing 88 criminal counts?”
“The answer to the question is yes,” Barr said. “I think the real threat to democracy is the progressive movement and the Biden administration.”
Aye, thank you, Joyce. With respect to The Robes' refusals to address the question before it, namely the Appellate Court ruling on tRump's criminality; Andrew Weissman's statement this weekend that we are perhaps only one (1) vote away from the end of our democracy, stands as the most terrifying take that I've ever heard (yet).
The Robes on the right call to mind the expression "normalization of deviancy".
This sure sounds to me that Alito is saying that a bitter opponent (Biden) is prosecuting Trump. (Note that Alito says the “opponent” is doing the prosecuting). In other words, he may not have been talking about the future at all.
Unless he can come up with a violation of another NY statute allowing stiffer financial penalties, Merchan's hands are pretty much tied under the state contempt law. Short of confinement, however, he can make things difficult procedurally where he has a good deal of discretion, as we saw when he allowed the government to withhold who they initially planned to call as witnesses. This can be very effective. He's savvy enough to walk that line between discretion and due process grounds for appeal. We shall see.
I believe that the radical right wing of the Supreme Court is looking for reasons to justify what they already plan to do, which is to let Trump off the hook until at least after the election. Their motive is easy to discern. They are far right “Christian” conservatives and want to enact an entire program that includes outlawing abortion, removing regulation against big business, lowering taxes, vastly shrinking government, the list goes on. Helping Trump get re-elected means that program will continue unabated and that there will be no expansion of the Supreme Court to defang them. They are corrupt politicians in robes.
We have good evidence to support my damning conclusion. Although an appointment to the Supreme Court is a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity, a person of high integrity would not accept that appointment flowing from the corrupt and cynical machinations of Mitch McConnell to refuse a hearing for President Obama’s nomination of Merrick Garland, and of ignoring his own unwritten rule to get Amy Coney Barrett seated. There is also the sworn testimony of the recent reactionary appointees recognizing the established precedent of Roe V. Wade and then deciding the Dobbs case. So they had no ethical qualms about taking a stolen seat or grabbing one at the opportunity or lying to get on the Court.
Hear, hear Gary S. Exactly my take. From that lens, the 'confusion' around Alito's questions/position is crystal clear: "How do I make my non sequitur argument here at the SCOTUS fit the already decided upon direction from our puppet master who is threatening to turn off the spigot to the trough?" This is it: spot on. And Amy Coney Barrett answered Trump's question 'yes' when he interviewed her. Trump asked: "Are you able to vote for the question?" (Dobbs). She responded 'yes' (according to a former staff member present in the room. Wish I could recall who was interviewed for that - a book written - perhaps by the Atlantic reporter?
Alito is a terrified, paranoid man that feels like he’s always being unfairly attacked by unscrupulous feminists and liberal critics for his vote to end Roe and who are exposing Alito’s ethics violations. Trump feels that he is always being unfairly attacked too.. What we’re seeing is the Maga cult, mind-meld mysoginist virus infection of whining, frightened men on SCOTUS being revealed. All the cowardly men on SCOTUS, plus Trump and the men in Trump’s cult, are deeply terrified of women having the power to challenge their abusive authority. The SCOTUS men fully identify with Trump at an unconscious level. It’s really that patheticllly simple.
My impression of Justice Alito is that his mindset is rigid, hierarchical, paternalistic, misogynistic, and somewhat religiously fundamentalist. He wants the Court to defer to whomever is in power, so that order and hierarchy are maintained. The law isn't to benefit the people, it's to maintain order and control - just like in authoritarian religions and countries.
I think that the answer to his question is the question of what if the president decides to execute members of the Supreme Court because he doesn't like their judgements. Does he have immunity then?
Also, ask the Press if it was worth the massive profits they gained in ad revenue to elect the biggest dictator who wants to execute members of the Press.
Exactly my thought. The media definitely elected TFG, and now they need to own up to it and then make it right. Report on his every failure, and showcase the current potus’ accomplishments.
Problem is faux news will never own up to their part in all this. They’ve been fined millions of dollars and they’re still spreading the lies bc the cult 😵💫 still believes every word! Now MSM, is another story! 😡
That's so funny. Do you recall Alito getting in a tizzy because someone made a statement against the court, (can't remember who) and Alito's response was "that put us judges in danger of assassination." Of course he failed to respond to whatever the original negative opinion was. And their vulnerability is laughably slight compared to most everybody else. And of course, the criticism that he'd heard hadn't been scandalous or any such thing.
Which is why I think that they and particularly him, need reminding that by giving Treacherous-treasonous-tantruming-traitor-Trump more powers they are giving the presidency power to kill them too with impunity. All he has to do is claim they committed treason by their actions. And they thought they were buying him time to get back in office at which point they planned to do whatever he wants. The first thing a dictator does is to get rid of the press and then the courts. Apparently they skipped over that in their history books. These are lessons that every economics, social sciences and history teacher should be teaching. Make sure the people don't know what is going on and then the dictator becomes the judge and jury. In fact, while there may be courts, they don't get to make decisions. So, a dictator can put just anyone in the role. Are they showing him that they are the loyal court of a ruthless dictator? It seems some of them are.
The press should remind people about Trump's extremism every day. He bragged about overturning Roe v Wade, he refused to peacefully transfer power, he's under multiple indictment etc. Don't let the public forget how corrupt he is.
The press sucks. The mainstream press does not seem to have too many journalists or editors who are up to the task of understanding the complexities of this election. If they do, their oligarchic ownership is interfering. Not just Sulzberger having a hissy fit because Biden would not sit down to a one-on-one, but all of these oligarchic owners prefer Putin to Biden. That is the problem. They all need to spend some time in Russia with Putin to understand that obscene wealth won't protect them from prison, poison or defenestration if they breath funny.
Day 1: cancel civil service regulations. Stuff the gov't. with rally-going fans! He'd do it and it would solve the problem quickly. Get some buses! They can buy the gas themselves, also the Big Macs on the way.
It's interesting that the press has largely forgotten how Trump administration job turnover rate was astronomical and that he continually staffed it with unqualified, incompetent sycophants. Think Jared Kushner et al.
Only the best people.
He seemed to appoint a guy at the Interior who despised the EPA and at Educaation that woman who's income is from students who can't pay off their loans, and Sec. of the Treasury a marauding cuthroat. etc.
I read Project 2025, and did a series of posts comprised of excerpts from the plan. All department heads and their deputies will be political appointees.
I expect that if Trump gets re-elected there will be minions standing at the desks of career cicvil servants on inauguration day. Waiting for the end of the oath of office. When he officially becomes president these minions will deliver executive orders to the career department heads et al terminating their service.
Read project 2025. At least read chapter 3 on staffing the governmental agencies.
Chapter 28 on the FCC covers grievance about being booted off twitter and contains language referring to that act as illegal censorship etc.
Chapter 29 on the Federal Election Commission, written by Hans von Skakovsky, the only person ever denied a seat on the FEC. Harry Reid refused his appointment by Bush sr. Hans is an avid voter fraud advocate from the Heritage Foundation.
Essentially they want the FEC to go after Trump opponents while the FCC muzzles dissent. They want to staff the DOJ with sycophants who will then lend credibility to the bogus voter fraud allegations. In other words, say goodbye to freedom of speech, fair elections, and impartial justice. Not to mention a free press or political dissent.
Thanks for writing my suicide note, Bob. If I can make it, though, I have Canadian citizenship, which, at my age, pretty much assures that the rest of this crap won’t happen ‘til I croak.
Re Project 2025, I posted this on my FB fee the other day. https://www.stopthecoup2025.org/unpacking-the-propaganda
The Wikipedia article on P2025 does a good job of summarizing it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_2025
Please don't forget about Alito's "Military service".
In 1969 Alito's draft number was 32, which was a death sentence for many, but not for our Sammy boy.
Instead of reporting for induction, he joined ROTC to dodge active duty. There is a 90 day active duty requirement of all service members (we referred to them, with disdain, as "90-day wonders").
He began his active duty requirement in September 1975.
Viet Nam officially ended 30 Apr 1975. Which, in my opinion, makes him a draft dodger.
He was promoted, pro forma, to Captain just before being released from the service. Officers time in grade requirements will get you captain's bars in 7-9 years, provided you don't get caught pissing in the potted palms at the officers club.
He's contemptuous.
He's such a patriot!
He wants the court to defer to, “whomever is in power?” More likely he wants to only support administrations like trump’s and all the horrors it shall bring forth upon a majority of Americans.
And considering that he might be deposed from his lofty position by an authoritarian has never once crossed his mind. T usually gets around to throwing everyone under the proverbial bus.
S.C.A.N.D.A.L. =
Supreme Court’s Alito Now a Dumb Ass Loser
Cute? Yes. Effective, no. Let’s get to work.
I volunteer going door to door trying to sign up possible voters then I arrange transportation for both early voting and same day voting. I have been working.
Yep, spot on Mr. D.
As I say, the hypothetical question that should be posed to SCOTUS is if a President decides to execute the SCOTUS members because they voted in a way he did not like, or claims is treasonous, should they be immune from consequences?
Read Project 2025.
Alito should reread the Gettysburg address “government of the people, by the people and for the people”
Check his military service.
From HCR this morning:
“Just to be clear,” Collins said, “you’re voting for someone who you believe tried to subvert the peaceful transfer of power, that can’t even achieve his own policies, that lied about the election even after his attorney general told him that the election wasn’t stolen.… You’re going to vote for someone who is facing 88 criminal counts?”
“The answer to the question is yes,” Barr said. “I think the real threat to democracy is the progressive movement and the Biden administration.”
<—- break —->
That theory is known as the theory of the “unitary executive,” and it says that because the president is the head of one of the three unique branches of government, any oversight of that office by Congress or the courts is unconstitutional, although in fact presidents since George Washington have accepted congressional oversight.
The theory took root in 1986, when Samuel Alito, then a 35-year-old lawyer for the Office of Legal Counsel in the Department of Justice, proposed the use of “signing statements” to take from Congress the sole power to make laws by giving the president the power to “interpret” them. In 1987, president Ronald Reagan issued a signing statement to a debt bill, declaring his right to interpret it as he wished and saying the president could not be forced “to follow the orders of a subordinate.”
<—- break —->
The idea that the United States must become a Christian nation has apparently led Barr to accept the idea that a man who has called for the execution of those he sees as enemies should be president, apparently because he is expected to usher in an authoritarian Christian state, in preference to a man who is using the power of the government to help ordinary Americans.
https://open.substack.com/pub/heathercoxrichardson/p/april-28-2024?r=5k7fz&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=email
I'm reading Federalist #10 and #51 written by James Madison. Haven't read any analyses of either . Upon first read of #10, Jimmy boy, suggests that minority rule in a republic is preferable to democracy. Minority rule he claims will be less susceptalbe to corruption. Has he never heard of a tyrant?
The Court should be above the law and so should tRump is Alito’s view. His hypo wasn’t intended to let Biden behave like an autocrat, only the prior guy.
You betcha'. Rules for thee but none for me.
These are the guys who-- who are so shy around women BECAUSE women aren't in the heirarchy-- but actually apt to jump out at sensible men, and laugh and tease them! Just read what he writes.
“Somewhat religiously fundamental?” How about he is right up there with Putin’s Russian Orthodox Church supporting a criminal minded leader?
When it comes to Alito and Gorsuch, what they are doing is following Orban’s instructions for how to make the USA a “Christian Democracy”. The writing has been in the wall for years.
Expect them to rule a President has absolute immunity. I’d be happily surprised if they didn’t but have no illusions about their intent. They’re a couple of f’in right wing christian fascists.
Expect Thomas and Kavanagh to be right there with them. Barrett “seems” to be on the fence. Perhaps Roberts will find a pair of cajones and stand up for democracy and the constitution, but don’t be surprised to find out Alito, Gorsuch, Thomas, and Kavanagh have them in a vice and are tightening that vice more and more every day. Then again it won’t make any difference what Roberts does if Barrett goes along with the Christian Fascists….
somewhat?!?
The simple question for SCOTUS is did President Trump fail to “protect, defend and honor the constitution” the answer is no. What President has not defended the constitution? Donald Trump. This is a singularity, not a general respected tradition. Thanks Joyce
I think you want to say the answer is “yes”. Drumpf did fail.
Your right!
You can use the edit button....
Christopher - Your post makes "too much sense" for the legal minds of the Trump lawyers and some members of the Supreme Court. It is GREAT ... THANKS!
Ivan, NOT having common sense and good judgement are characteristics of Trump and his followers. Who would have believed that lack of those traits would become the common thread of the tapestry of the Republican party and of the misguided souls who worship Trump.
Sycophants all. Duped by fear and false patriotism. Trump's failed businesses, from booze to university, are overlooked by the zeal of his supporters to give him money.
Check out Barb McQuaid's new book "Attack from Within", on mis-, dis-, and mal-information. A great read I highly recommend. It helped keep me sane while I was reading project 2025.
Christopher, Alito would argue that there is no law that makes it a crime to break your oath
Thank you Joyce. I’m not feeling very optimistic between your thoughts on the Supreme Court, and Andrew Weissman, who on MSNBC,said we are one vote away from losing democracy. He was referring to the Chief Justice.
I read another piece (can’t remember where) that said the Justices are arrogant in their belief that Trump will not disregard them. Or replace them.
I don’t know… sometimes I think Leonard Leo, the Kochs, Mitch McConnell, and all those who have been playing the long game have won.
The GOP has been on this path since at least the 1970's, possibly since Brown v. Board of Education. Fear of the future, fear of The Other.
Well they definitely succeeded, via unethical practice (Mitch McConnell), unfortunately.
Indeed, proceeding with the appeal question on Trump's immunity with 'all deliberate speed' just as in Brown v. Board of Education. They are not independent: they were given their places on the SCOTUS by the puppet masters, and they know their place.
It's disgusting.
Bob, indeed. And we all need to say the quiet part out loud. In my opinion, this began with George H. W. Bush, Senior appointing Clarence Thomas. He was incompetent and filled the boxes
Thomas is a disgrace. I remember his confirmation hearings. He also vowed to stay on the court for 43 years to make liberals lives miserable.
There have been other bad justices prior to when Bush nominated Thomas, Andrew Jackson's nomination of Roger Taney comes to mind, but Thomas certainly ushered in the present republican bias on the court.
Bob, I didn’t realize he had said that he was making lives and miserable, but he certainly has. This, after his own education benefitted by Affirmative Action. And thanks to Politico, we know he has benefited in other ways, from being at the trough. He would have to resign if Ginny Thomas were indicted. I’m wondering how she is off the hook? I know she went to the January 6 committee with a big mea culpa: ‘I wish I could take the text messages back.’
And “there is no way I could influence my husband’s Juris prudence. He’s his own man and very stubborn.” what a bunch of malarkey. The question wasn’t ‘are you influencing him?”
The question should’ve been “is he influencing you?” And “why were you emailing members of the Arizona legislature that it was their constitutional duty to vote against confirmation of Biden?” and this was happening on November 9? A mere 6 days after the November 3, 2020 presidential election? She and the other insiders already had a plan in place. Why is Ginny being treated as an Innocent bystander? She’s showing over and over that she was an insiders’ insider.
How does Mea Culpa work with January 6 and DOJ when Ginny has never recanted her statements that “Trump won.“ She believes that and so does Clarence.
It never fails to amaze me that despite eight (8) years of very public demonstrations of trump's ensnaring, ruining, and demolishing of people who felt the need to help him, there still seems to be a steady stream of powerful people (not bankers, however) ready to wade into his ever-roiling swamp and be ruined (indictments, disbarments, bankruptcies, prison). They must think they can improve trump's situation and he'll reward them - but reality inevitably sets in, they discover they can't because everything he's done is built on deceit and is a house of cards. Are these foolish souls looking for greater personal power and/or even more money?
Also, I couldn't believe what I was hearing in the Scotus Immunity hearing. The conservatives were more concerned about a clearly trump-hypothetical politically ordered post-presidential prosecution than the single, simple (and dilatory) immunity question which was put to the Court. It didn't seem to faze them that trump's lawyer was again asserting that he should have immunity for an assassination. So, I wonder - will they feel safe living in a country where a "president" can devise some pretextual "public act" and commit, or order others to commit, whatever crime(s) he wants accomplished?
Oh I think the bankers are there to see he gets elected. They just won loan him anything but the country.
I expected the justices to look for some nuance of text as a way to delay giving a straight yes or no answer.
Their lack of an ethics code, much more, their unwillingness to submit to any self-regulatory or external checks and balances, speaks volumes of their corruption. I reviewed some of their confirmation hearings as a refresher to see their lying faces.
Is there a For Sale sign on the SCOTUS website?
We have a 14th amendment to purge traitors from our government. It should be vigorously applied to clear congress.
Getting rid of supreme court justices is more problematic.
Biden should expand the court, nominating 6 new justices to make a 9-6 liberal court.
The solution to pollution is dilution.
The games not over!
You’re right! I do have faith Biden will win in November, and will have no choice but to address the SC.
I too, tend to think the evil conservatives have won. They've already accomplished so many of their objectives, like getting those liars on the Court, overturning Roe, delaying Trump trials, establishing a permission structure where fascism is underestimated, intimidating trans people, and soooo many other shameful hings. And it's annoying as heck when pundits repeatedly say that the people have the power to stop Trump. Why? 1. It is not UP to fricking voters to punish Trump for his CRIMES. That function belongs to the judicial branch and the prosecutors and juries that work with it, BUT THEY HAVE PROVEN THEY ARE NOT UP TO THE TASK. 2. Trump got his first fricking term WITHOUT the popular vote and if he gets it again, it will, once again, almost certainly NOT be with the popular vote. So really, this is mainly up to people in a few swing states given the way the crazy Electoral College works. Nonetheless, we must fight back, but my goodness, patriotism about America seems rather unustified at this point. America no longer deserves much pride. Instead, the pride is in a SEGMENT of the American population, while another segment is a source of great shame for America, which could yet and definitevely prevail.
Cannon said the quiet part out loud and is proudly showing her stripes. She clearly doesn’t believe for her eyes what happened on January 6th, she takes in the MAGA Koolaid. She is an outright liar. She needs to recuse herself from the case or the 3rd District needs to do it for her!
She is a member of the 3 F’er club. F**kup, failure and fraudster. With assistance from another I replace, “failure” with Federalist. It means failure to an extreme.
You forgot Federalist.
Perfect. Thank you.
Read Project 2025
From your lips to Gods ears🙏🏼🙏🏼🙏🏼
Oops my bad, this thought Cannon said this, it was Alito! My comments still stand, maybe he can eventually be impeached and removed.
Check Alito's military service for a glimpse at his character.
The 11th in Atlanta
Debi, wouldn't the court be the 11th Circuit?
Thank you Joyce, especially for those questions to Alito. I wish Alito and the other four men would come clean and just admit that no matter what crimes Trump committed they will not hold him accountable. I also wish the Democrats in the House of Representatives would file intent to impeach all five male members of the Supreme Court on counts of failure to uphold the Constitution as written, and specific failure to abide by Article 3 Section 1 "shall hold their offices during good behavior". One can hardly call upholding criminal behavior as found by the Grand Juries in all cases against Trump as being "good behavior".
File impeachment petitions against the 3 Trump appointees for lying under oath. All 3 clearly intended to withhold their true views on several subjects, most notably, abortion protections and how they absolutely supported starie decisis(let the decision stand?). Yet, they clearly decided ahead of time. Was Barrett even on the court more than a year before betraying her congressional testimony? She had the “mens rea” and completed her betrayal(actus rea), making the rest of her time on the court suspect for even more betrayal, lies, backstabbing, backbiting and religious fervor.
Please don't leave Clarence Thomas out. He's been asking for it for a long time, and as I recall, his confirmation hearing was no better than Kavanaugh's. The two were remarkably similar.
Thomas should never have been confirmed after saying the hearings are a "circus", following the furor over Anita Hill. She was vilified as he claimed victim status.
Interesting way to hide actually being a victimizer. That's how I see him, and always have.
Typical projection. Something the GOP has adopted as the only plank of their platform.
Too true!
Hi Mr. D., I am for impeachment. I am for protests on the SCOTUS steps. To impeach, we need a 2/3 majority: I believe Biden will be re-elected (Trump will devolve and become the totally unelectable banana without the peel - but even without that, Biden will win); and it may be possible to have a blue bicameral congress. But protests this summer with threats to the MAGA Republicans of losing their seats may help an impeachment vote. Someone published a book recently with interview of Trump's former insiders who were in the room when he interviewed Amy Coney Barrett, and asked her 'Are you able to vote on the question?' (I'm paraphrasing, sorry, but this was on Dobbs). She responded 'Yes.' I will try to find that book title/author, but it was a credible source - someone who left Trump when he was no longer able to tolerate the nonsense. And if we could pressure for a hard look at Ginny Thomas for an indictment, Clarence would have to resign. He would not be able to stay. I'm wondering why her 'Mea Culpa, I wish I had never written these texts when I was so emotional?' That is totally disingenuous - she started emailing the Arizona legislators on November 9, shortly after Trump had lost the election on November 3. She was an insider. Clarence had to have known her role. The DOJ needs to request her cell phone and computer.
Clarence can claim Ginny was hysterical. The old standard insult that absolves men.
Yes!
The senate has to do that
Not quite. The House of Representatives files for impeachment, collect the evidence, and votes to impeach or not. If the accused is impeached the case then goes to the Senate for trial and the Senate has three choices, refuse to take up the impeachment, convict, or find innocent. If they vote to convict, the guilty party is removed from office and can never hold that office again. That is why Trump is the only President ever to be impeached twice with no consequences. Three Presidents have been impeached, none convicted. Andrew Johnson was the first President to have been impeached, Bill Clinton was next, followed by Trump 2X. 11 Federal Judges have been impeached and found guilty.
The House impeaches, the Senate convicts.
Fay, we need a blue bicameral congress. And the impeachment needs to be by a 2/3 vote, yes?
Yes, or if not solid blue, at least no magats. Some Republicans are still Americans, not trumpsters.
What happened to the SC only addressing, “the case in front of them?” Alito is another pompous ass whom believes he is smarter than all medical doctors, subject matter experts, legislators, other attorneys, hell, EVERYBODY.
With their 16th century intelligence, the religious zealots of the time thought they were smarter than the astronomers and scientists.
Yep, we had Galileo facing the nut-crusher at Vatican (sort of a crude description but factual re the punishment of the day) and then Galileo's friend, Rene Descartes, recanting his own philosophical leanings based on his own truth (not that of the Pope)) that indicated (pre-revision) that he may have had a pre-life that determined his 'then' life. He re-wrote the 'I am thank you to the Pope' part and then headed to Scandinavia to live under protection in Sweden for the rest of his life. The right wing Christian evangelicals would have us back to the 16th Century Catholic Church.
And one answer that might have been given to Justice Alito is, "Err, you may have noticed that that's what happened last time, Your Honour. That's why we are here. Perhaps your brother Justice Thomas, or his wife, can explain it better than I."
Well said Joyce. I would ask Alito why do you completely ignore the facts and circumstances of this case which are that Trump acted almost entirely outside the scope of his official duties. He has no presidential duty to influence the Georgia Secretary of State to change the vote count. He has no official duty to participate in the Senate Hearing to certify the vote. He has no official duty to assemble the mob including racist Proud Boys etc and encitr the mob to violence at the capital. What official duties are you concerned that he was performing in this case?
SCANDAL = Supreme Court’s Alito Newest Dumb Ass Loser
“If an incumbent who loses a very close, hotly contested election knows that a real possibility after leaving office is not that the president is going to be able to go off into a peaceful retirement, but that the president may be criminally prosecuted by a bitter political opponent, will that not lead us into a cycle that destabilizes the functioning of our country as a democracy?”
I was confused at first, I don’t think of Alito as a comedian, and I thought him intelligent. Now I must decide what he could possibly mean by a statement like this. He paralleled 45’s exact situation, except he added, “…bitter political opponent,” which isn’t true for 45. That addition also takes it out of the comedy realm. So, is he actually stupid, amoral, or part of the current coup mob trying to destroy our constitution and democracy? Or was he trying to provoke a response from the other justices to such a ridiculous idea? If the latter, the response was inadequate.
I'm still not certain what to make of Justice Alito's question/statement.
I've been watching for some kind of explanation or narrative regarding a justification for placing the President outside of our legal system, immune to prosecution.
This is the only thing I've been able to conjure: "My name is Bond. James Bond. Agent 007. I have a license to kill. I am one of a kind. When I decide somebody needs to be dispatched, I alone -- along with my special Secret Service detail -- will go out into the world and knock off the rotter. And the world will be a better place for it..." Or some equally insane version of that scenario.
What rationale, in the name of anything that's holy, could possibly justify giving the POTUS an exclusive right or privilege to legally do what no other citizen can legally do? Is he the only person who can be trusted to do the right thing? Surely not. Is he being rewarded for getting himself elected, suggesting that a jury of his peers would likely have voted for him to be President, and therefore would acquit him at trial, so why not just skip all that legal rigamarole and just let him (it) get away with it up front?
I want Justice Alito -- or anyone else would surely do just fine -- to offer a cogent logical plausible explanation for why a President of the United States should be exempt from the law of the land.
Trump has been saying that Biden is personally persecuting him so perhaps Alito is repeating that train of thought.
What a depressing thought, that we have a supreme court justice unable to think a larger notion than parroting 45. You may be right Hope.
Alito is not an independent thinker. He does not have independent jurisprudence and has not had from the time he was 'gifted' by the puppet master. (Nor does Clarence Thomas. And Amy Coney Barrett's 'gift' was membership in the elite conservative boys' club at the SCOTUS. She doesn't 'look' like them, but she can pretend she is 'in' by voting the way she has been instructed even before her name was given to Trump to nominate). Alito is trying to make his non sequitur argument fit the message he was given by his puppet master to 'figure out how to give Trump immunity.' That's crystal clear to me (and when one uses the lens of 'how can he make his response fit the instructions he has been given' it takes on a different character. We still think "He's a Supreme Court justice and makes independent decisions with intelligence" but not a one of those gifted with their appointments by Trump and the prior right wing Christian nationalist evangelicals - including the Bushes Senior and Junior - are independent decision-makers. They are pretending to be, but are not). But perhaps Joyce is posing the question to us because we can say what she cannot? So, we need to say it out loud: Justice Alito is doing nothing more and nothing less than trying to spew forth blatherskite to keep Trump from facing the music.
Wait, wait, you lost me. Who is the puppet master? I know it is hard to write these posts in the spur of the moment, but, I'm left with the impression you are saying Christ (?) or Christian evangelicals (?) have been behind over throwing our democracy for 25 years. I'm struggling to connect 45 to them 25 years ago... are you saying, they bet there purse of 45 and now are as stuck with him as the people are? Oh what tangled webs we weave...
Yes - The right wing Christian nationalist evangelicals have had a movement for 50 years to implant Christianity into the constitution. Indeed that is a complicated topic. But they made their deal with the devil Trump to put him in office in 2016. His job was to make the SCOTUS appointments - and in turn he got the presidency. The name of the game for the Evangelicals was to go after women’s rights first because that was easier than black and LGBTQ, but those rights are also on their agenda. Yes, they have been working to overturn Roe v. Wade for decades. Recall Nancy Reagan saying to young folks with hormones, raging out of control “just say no“ and Bush Junior implementing No Child Left Behind as an education policy that erased sex education. So here we are, and it’s been an effort by design.
They made the deal with the devil Orange Jesus. They told him he was the Orange Jesus and he’s now at his campaign rallies saying “I’m the chosen one. His lack of a moral core bothers us, of course, but the Republicans had planning meetings last summer, where women were interviewed by the New York Times and questioned as to whether the first E. Jean Carroll trial or reports of the hollywood access tape made a difference for them as women. They said absolutely not. The only thing they were concerned about was maintaining the republican party. However, the Republican party has driven off the cliff in its bus. The Orange Jesus is behaving like a banana without the peel in his courtroom experiences. I personally subscribe to the theory of the 37 psychiatrists who are writing/publishing, and giving interviews stating that they believe he will evolve into further dementia during this trial. See the Substack the big picture April 11, an interview with a psychiatrist on the condition of Trump’s brain/mental state. I don’t have a single bit of sorrow for any of the Evangelical leaders who are thinking they’ve made a mistake with Trump. They deserve every single thing they are getting from him. I hope we have four cycles of blue to restore our democracy and they can sit and think about what they’ve done. It began with Reagan or even before Reagan when they were doing lots of Evangelico tent meetings, filling Madison Square Garden. Reagan was a fraud of the first order. Are you still waiting for trickle down?
Valere, you have inspired me to add to your insights and observations. In addition to taking orders from a puppet master, there is a related phenomenon: a person with strong beliefs must occasionally wrestle with their personal views when the relevant case law and precedents point to a different decision about the instant case. Every candidate for Supreme Court, state and federal, knows what everyone wants to hear: I will set aside my personal beliefs and rule according to the facts presented in the case. Here in Wisconsin our newest State Supreme Court Justice, Janet Protasiewicz, announced during the election campaign that she firmly believes in a woman's right to govern her own body. She also said that she would not allow her personal beliefs to be substituted for the facts of the matter in any case where she must rule. The conservative Republicans -- but I repeat myself -- were livid, and threatened to impeach her. But to us, she was far more refreshingly honest than such people and Justice Kavanaugh, and others, who said they would not allow their personal beliefs to interfere with a case, without revealing their personal beliefs (as far as I know). And it appears that they were not honest about allowing their personal beliefs to interfere. I much prefer Justice Protasiewicz's approach.
I appreciate your pointing out that Justice Alito is not a deep thinker. I have long found it interesting to ponder the extent to which the law of the land depends so much on the vagaries of the dispositions, temperaments, training, belief system, intellect, etc of the members of the Court. We suspect that the Roberts Court will be studied in law school for a long time, although not for their soaring judicial reasoning. They will be known for how their contemporary political climate colored their opinions, when they could have been doing the heavy lifting, the sifting and winnowing (as we like to say here in Wisconsin), whereby the American experiment advances toward a more perfect union.
Thank you for your thoughtful reply David. I do believe Alito drummed up a response to cover for Trump - and he was doing as he was told. No one at the level of a Supreme Court Justice could possibly do something so apparently biased unless they had marching orders to do so. Alito’s bias shows in everything he does. My opinion about his low intelligence comes from his use of AI for writing briefs. While I recognize that law clerks write the briefs, Alito (as is Thomas) is beefing them up with AI and that’s really not smart. All questions input to AI are traceable - and do not belong to the writer and it shows he’s (and Thomas) not doing organic writing and researching. Indeed, you have a justice in Wisconsin who respects transparency. SCOTUS has lost all credibility. We have had lots of Supreme Court justices who were conservative and had credibility. This crew simply took a job to join a club. They didn’t deserve the appointments. And they don’t have the integrity to resign.
Perhaps the person in question has the emotional development of a child with a persecution complex. We should hope that a Supreme would rise above the fray and offer some plausible semblance of an argument based in law and precedent. And if there is no law or precedent, as in the case of the conjured "unitary executive", then at least tell some kind of story to illustrate the alleged benefit to society of giving the President carte blanche, to do whatever, no questions asked.
Perhaps the person in question is 'on the take.' Follow the money.
I don't usually think about the money. The money makes things so much more complicated.
Citizens United is frustrating -- and corrupt. Vox Populi gets overwhelmed by the roar of vast sums of money.
Money is inarticulate. Money has no conscience. Money is amoral. Money can be used for good or ill.
It would be better for America if money were not substituted for the voice of reason.
How can the vast numbers of Americans living at or near the poverty level compete with the thunder of vast sums of money?
They are clearly on Trumps side.( im sure you suspect this as well) Their outrageous behaviors need to be addressed and dealt with.
What scares me is even With Biden winning there will be a coup where tyere is a revolt claiming that tye election was rigged and could be thrown to the supreme court to decide snd they hand the presidency to Trump
Iam traumatized. And that is no exaggeration.
The Christian Nationalists only need to simultaneously assassinate POTUS & VPOTUS: MAGA Mike becomes POTUS, pardons the assassins and hands the election to Adolf Trumpler.
Constitution wouldn’t allow it? They do not care about the Constitution.
Agreed 💯. Who would ever think this would be happening here. The thought makes me even more traumatized
From HCR this morning:
“Just to be clear,” Collins said, “you’re voting for someone who you believe tried to subvert the peaceful transfer of power, that can’t even achieve his own policies, that lied about the election even after his attorney general told him that the election wasn’t stolen.… You’re going to vote for someone who is facing 88 criminal counts?”
“The answer to the question is yes,” Barr said. “I think the real threat to democracy is the progressive movement and the Biden administration.”
https://open.substack.com/pub/heathercoxrichardson/p/april-28-2024?r=5k7fz&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=email
Aye, thank you, Joyce. With respect to The Robes' refusals to address the question before it, namely the Appellate Court ruling on tRump's criminality; Andrew Weissman's statement this weekend that we are perhaps only one (1) vote away from the end of our democracy, stands as the most terrifying take that I've ever heard (yet).
The Robes on the right call to mind the expression "normalization of deviancy".
Jesus wept.
Thanks for setting the stage for Tuesday. Perspective and context help.
This sure sounds to me that Alito is saying that a bitter opponent (Biden) is prosecuting Trump. (Note that Alito says the “opponent” is doing the prosecuting). In other words, he may not have been talking about the future at all.
That was my take as well, Audrey!
Present tense?
Both was and is, yes.
My take as well
Unless he can come up with a violation of another NY statute allowing stiffer financial penalties, Merchan's hands are pretty much tied under the state contempt law. Short of confinement, however, he can make things difficult procedurally where he has a good deal of discretion, as we saw when he allowed the government to withhold who they initially planned to call as witnesses. This can be very effective. He's savvy enough to walk that line between discretion and due process grounds for appeal. We shall see.
I believe that the radical right wing of the Supreme Court is looking for reasons to justify what they already plan to do, which is to let Trump off the hook until at least after the election. Their motive is easy to discern. They are far right “Christian” conservatives and want to enact an entire program that includes outlawing abortion, removing regulation against big business, lowering taxes, vastly shrinking government, the list goes on. Helping Trump get re-elected means that program will continue unabated and that there will be no expansion of the Supreme Court to defang them. They are corrupt politicians in robes.
We have good evidence to support my damning conclusion. Although an appointment to the Supreme Court is a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity, a person of high integrity would not accept that appointment flowing from the corrupt and cynical machinations of Mitch McConnell to refuse a hearing for President Obama’s nomination of Merrick Garland, and of ignoring his own unwritten rule to get Amy Coney Barrett seated. There is also the sworn testimony of the recent reactionary appointees recognizing the established precedent of Roe V. Wade and then deciding the Dobbs case. So they had no ethical qualms about taking a stolen seat or grabbing one at the opportunity or lying to get on the Court.
Hear, hear Gary S. Exactly my take. From that lens, the 'confusion' around Alito's questions/position is crystal clear: "How do I make my non sequitur argument here at the SCOTUS fit the already decided upon direction from our puppet master who is threatening to turn off the spigot to the trough?" This is it: spot on. And Amy Coney Barrett answered Trump's question 'yes' when he interviewed her. Trump asked: "Are you able to vote for the question?" (Dobbs). She responded 'yes' (according to a former staff member present in the room. Wish I could recall who was interviewed for that - a book written - perhaps by the Atlantic reporter?
Alito is a terrified, paranoid man that feels like he’s always being unfairly attacked by unscrupulous feminists and liberal critics for his vote to end Roe and who are exposing Alito’s ethics violations. Trump feels that he is always being unfairly attacked too.. What we’re seeing is the Maga cult, mind-meld mysoginist virus infection of whining, frightened men on SCOTUS being revealed. All the cowardly men on SCOTUS, plus Trump and the men in Trump’s cult, are deeply terrified of women having the power to challenge their abusive authority. The SCOTUS men fully identify with Trump at an unconscious level. It’s really that patheticllly simple.
Spot on