Opus 2025-179: Dear Judge

It is time for you to police your own house.  It’s time not only because you are endangering our entire legal system but the judicial branch is undermining the Republic.  And then there’s that aspect of the possibility of vigilante justice if enough American citizens become aware of your betrayal.

I offer a suggestion because I believe that the judicial establishment is like every other part of government or business.  Most of the judges and other people involved in applying the laws are probably decent, hard-working, good faith laborers in the field.  They might have even read the Constitution.  I accept the fact that most of you are doing the best you can in a difficult situation.  I accept the possibility that you were just as upset about what you see going on with these rouge judges as I am.

The possibilities for the average citizen to clean up this mess are almost nonexistent.  The fact that you have the power to issue judicial fatwas means that the established checks and balances listed by the Founders can be stopped in their tracks.  Reforming your system from the outside, becomes either impossible or an invitation to violence.

It is time.

For the good of the country judges need to start talking amongst yourselves and using the ability you have to censor your colleagues and get this thing back on track.  Much of the paperwork coming out of the judicial system against the Trump administration is blatantly partisan and going against the spirit of the country, let alone the letter of the Constitution.

If you don’t care about the Republic, at least start reforming for your own benefit.

I would say thanks for your time, but I doubt if you will give me any.

homo unius libri

Opus 2025-052: Pardon My Thoughts

I don’t know why I am so angry about the pardons that Joe Biden gave to all of his criminal allies and family.  It fits.  It’s so appropriate.  Why was I surprised?  I guess I thought there might be some decency buried under the piles of garbage, but I was wrong.

As I was thinking about these pardons, and if there was any way around them and still follow the rule of law, my thought went to other cases where I couldn’t understand what was going on.  I thought of how O.J. Simpson was declared not guilty of murdering his wife.  I didn’t agree with the verdict but I had not followed the celebrity case.  I was willing to grant that the jury knew something I didn’t.  I was shocked when the family of his ex-wife was allowed to sue him in a civil court.  I thought there was this thing about double jeopardy in the Constitution.  Evidently the people who are trying to destroy the protections of the Constitution decided that even though you are not guilty of the criminal charges you could still be guilty of a civil violation.  They have done the same thing using civil rights as an excuse.  It still seems like double jeopardy to me.  There were other cases where this happened.

Because of our system of common law, which is based on precedent, it would seem that it is now possible for us to use this to move towards justice.  OK.  All these criminals are pardoned from their crimes.  What about all the money that they have stashed as they betrayed the country?  Would that not be a safe target of a civil trial?  If it works for O.J. Simpson, why not for Andrew Fauci?

The left is continually perverting protections given to us by the law.  Joe Biden distorted the power of the presidency with his executive orders.  Executive orders have been a standard tool of the president to get things done.  It is simply a name for the directions being given out.  Under Democrat presidents they became tools for going around Congress.  We can continue to look at ways in which they have perverted law.  They are continually changing the rules.  The senate filibuster is either good or bad, depending on who’s in power.  They have changed the rules on judges and the budget.

We need to take the precedents that they have established and use them to try and reinforce what the Constitution is all about.  Meanwhile, the legislature should be clarifying just exactly what the law is.  My understanding is that they can limit what the court can control and explain how the law is to be understood.  They need to do their job.

There should be a way to achieve justice before the vigilantes start coming out of the woodwork.

homo unius libri

Opus 2023-220: Weaponize the Supreme Court

For a few searches I was afraid that Google had forgotten about Andrew Jackson.  Every response I got brought back references to the current justice who does not know what a woman is.  Eventually I found what I wanted.

Among other impeachable offenses of Joe Biden, we have seen him openly ignore the ruling of the United States Supreme Court.  He is not the first to do so.  When the Cherokee Indians, with the mistaken idea that Democrat presidents were required to follow the law, sued to keep their land in Georgia, the Supreme Court sided with the Indians.  Andrew Jackson removed them anyway.

He is credited with a quote, which is claimed to be apocryphal, “John Marshall has made his decision, now let him enforce it.”  We have come back to the day when this seems to be the theme song of the Democrat party.  The Department of Justice should enforce the law as interpreted by the court.  They seem to be shrugging their shoulders and seeing what else they can get away with.

We need to form a SWAT team for the Supreme Court.  They could be sent out to deal with recalcitrant government officials.  They could enforce, with prejudice, the decisions of the court.

Another idea might be to remove the Marine Corps from the President’s chain of command and assign them to the Chief Justice.  That could get some action.

Until such day dreams become reality we should impeach, defund and sue most members of the administrative state.  It would seem to me that if Georgia can indict Donald Trump then any state could sue Merrick Garland.

Let us get creative.  There are many things that can be done before it comes to Lexington and Concord.

homo unius libri

Opus 2021-326: Headlines: Probably Ignored

I will not be spending a lot of time on the Ghislaine Maxwell trial.  It isn’t that it is unimportant.  It is.  We are dealing with blatant sexual crimes and perversion.  If justice is served then there will be a lot of rich and powerful people locked up for a long time.  Maybe there would even be executions.  If even a fraction of the accusations are true then there should be a lot of brown outs near the prisons.  If I thought my support would further those causes I would cling to the progress of the trial.  There are reasons I am not going to spend much time on it.

The system may be so corrupt that the outcome is already determined.  I am being generous and saying “may.”  It is possible that there are a lot of honest judges doing all they can to keep disputes fair and legal.  Those judges will most likely be relegated to municipal courts dealing with jaywalking and drunk drivers.  I do not expect to see a Rittenhouse result in this case.  I will hope for the best and serve on a jury when called.  I will advocate jury nullification.  Other than that, I will stay off the radar.

I can’t believe much of what I read and digging out the truth is very time consuming.  I know where the media’s heart is and don’t find that encouraging.  Even people on the side of liberty and the angels get carried away.  I will look past the obvious click bait but it is hard to find unimpeachable sources today.

It is sad.  Let justice be done.  In case it isn’t maybe we could start a new American Colonization Society.  I would suggest some possibilities.  We could load Proregressives* on rocket ships and send them to start colonies on Mars.  We could experiment with underwater bubbles and make them volunteers.  We could help them sneak into the socialist country of their choice.  I am open to anything that would remove the pollution from our country.

*(Liberals, educators, the media, socialists, communists, crony capitalists, elites, Rinos, Democrats, leftists, Never Trumpers, Antifa, BLM, MSM, Deep State, etc.  Synonym for swamp dwellers)

homo unius libri

Opus 2021-250: What, Me Worry?

The Proregressives* all want Justice Breyer to resign while they control both the Senate and the White House.  It seems he is in no hurry and I think he has good reason not to worry about it.

At this point he has had plenty of time to observe how the Trump appointees are making decisions.  The direction is clear.  They may not be as liberal as he is but he knows the liberal majority is in no danger.  So why should he exit while Biden is on the throne?  He can hang on with no risk to his part in destroying the republic.

He plans on pulling a Ginsberg.  

homo unius libri

Opus 2021-148: Headlines: OJ #2

Who was on trial in Minneapolis?  

Maybe “what” is better than “who”.  The American justice system was on trial.  Again.  The American justice system failed.  Again.  I understand that I was not in the courtroom and did not see all the evidence.  All I really needed to know was Floyd was overdosed with a deadly drug, he complained about not being able to breathe before he was held down, being unable to breathe evidently did not keep him from fighting arrest vigorously, Chauvin was using the technique taught him by the police department.  Are there any questions?  

The “who” is the American people.  I know you were not on the jury but we see this kind of thing time and again.  I assume the jury was from the city of Minneapolis and the surrounding area.  These Americans elected the local politicians who made all this possible and they will reelect them.  Keith Ellison was elected by the people of the state of Minnesota.  Maxine Waters, the congresswoman who came and stirred up the mob even more than they were, was elected by the people of California.  Both Ellison and Waters will be reelected if they decide to run.  This is not just an indictment of the jury.  I can understand their fear at proclaiming justice.  This is an indictment of a nation that seems to be willing to put up with this.

George Floyd was a piece of human trash.  The world is better off without him.  With the drug overdose he committed suicide.  I am not sure that Derek Chauvin is any better.  That, however, is not what this trial is supposed to be about.  It was not a personality contest between two men.  It was supposed to be the application of the law in an unbiased way.

We have OJ revisited.  

Stay off the radar.

homo unius libri

Opus 2021-136: Should-a-Beens: Court Packing

I have heard from two lawyers with integrity endorsements that the packing of the Supreme Court is not going to happen.  In their eyes it is just a ploy to distract the peasants while they pass all the other damage to destroy the republic.  We will see if they are worthy prophets.

How worried should we be if it does pass?  I got to thinking about a Proregressive* dream team for the last court of appeal.

Let’s start with Barak Hussein Obama.  You know it would happen.  He is the man who was so blessed that he could go around the Constitution with executive orders.  I think his words were something to the effect that if congress wouldn’t do what he wanted done then he would do it himself.  Just imagine what he could do to improve the world from the bench.

Then of course we would need to have Hillary.  It is possible she might be too old but age discrimination is unconstitutional.  Imagine what would happen to the view of ethics in this country if she were appointed.

That is two.  We need two more.  How about a Shiff/AOC tag team?  You think people are starting to laugh at the Supremes now, just think how it would go if these two were wearing the black robes.  It might make it worth televising hearings and billing it as reality TV.

I am sure we could come up with a lot more from Nadler to Beto.  

God help us.

homo unius libri

Opus 2020-293: Justice and Justices

What is going on in the minds and souls of the five Supreme Court Justices who have not sold out to the dark side?  We tend to look at result but we can’t see into the struggles.  Every case they hear has consequences for someone.  There are also the unintended consequences down the road.  Others are obviously important for millions.  

It is hard for me to believe that the nine people on the Court are not aware of what has been going on.  They must be able to see that the very foundations of the Republic are under attack.  They must know it will effect the entire world if the Progressives are allowed to steal an election so blatantly.  It would be scary to think that my decisions would have so much weight.

Three of the Justices have long been members of the America hating elite.  They were appointed with that understanding.  Roberts was either a sleeper, a convert or coerced.  We have four members that are poison to our liberty, not to mention or lives and pursuit of happiness.  What is frightening is that they represent a sizable minority in our country, Romney’s 47%.

I assume that in the next few days the Supreme Court will get involved in the election fraud that has been going on.  They will either accept the cases and save the country or surrender our future to the Venezuela dream.

homo unius libri

Opus 2020-276: Be Careful What You Wish For

The Supreme Nine are back up to strength.  As of now that seems to be something to rejoice about.  Barrett is as close as humanly possible to what we want in a Supreme Court Justice.

But we need to gird our loins for what is to come.

The fear, of course, is that she will join the drift to the left.  How many times have we thought we had a true believer in the Constitution only to have them move left.  It could happen again.  That is why I only put a limited amount of confidence in government agencies.  With the election results the concern is real.  Sin in real.  Sin is seductive.  In Star Wars terminology, the dark side has a lot of attraction.

The caution is that we don’t get into the “die heretic” mode.  Conservatives have a tendency to be so focused on their primary goals that they throw anyone under the bus if they are not in total agreement.  If you are old enough to vote you have at least begun to understand that no one will agree with you totally.  I have already heard people expressing concern that she will be too “rigid”.  If it comes to following the law and having a strict interpretation of the Constitution, then I can live with rigid.  

What we often mean by “rigid” is that the person will not have the nuances that we have.  We tend to be people of principle except in those few areas that concern us.  Thus everyone will agree that Social Security is in trouble but they don’t want any solutions that will cost them money.  Everyone is willing to cut the budget as long as their line items are not eliminated.  On the left we have all those people willing to raise taxes on the rich because they don’t realize that the Progressives* define the “rich” in third world terms.  If you have air conditioning and flush toilets, you are rich.

So get ready to be disappointed.  I hope we are disappointed because she is rigid.  We need a little bit of backbone in our view of the law.

*(Liberals, educators, socialists, communists, elites, Rinos, Democrats, leftists, Never Trumpers, Antifa, etc)

homo unius libri

Opus 2020-245: A Matter of Perspective

Ruth Bader Ginsburg has died.

This is a good time to observe reactions and take notes.  You will find three general categories of response.

One group will be the Passionate.  These people will speak with great enthusiasm for or against.  Their emotions will drown out anything of value that they might add except for their kindred spirits who want even more.  She will be portrayed as either Joan of Arc or your ex-wife.  Unless you agree with them and want a rush, don’t waste your time.

Another group will be the Courteous.  Many of us were told that if we could not say something nice we should not say anything at all.  These people will increase their chance of stroke or heart attack trying to restrain themselves.  For those who are into Latin, nolite detrahere de mortuis.  Wikipedia tells me that means “Don’t speak ill of the dead.”  I thought President Trump gave a good example of that when the press blind-sided him with the news of her death.  They will not praise her but they will also be polite.

The last group will be the Factual.  In their hearts they are trying to speak clearly, control their passion maintain a level of decorum.  They have opinions but they are backed up by documented evidence.  A good example of this is found at American Thinker.  Andrea Widburg says that she read Ginsburg’s opinions when doing legal research.  She goes into detail but if you don’t have time to read her article I think this sums it up.

“The worst thing about her decisions, though, was how she misused case authority to create new principles out of whole cloth. Nothing shows that more than in her determination to bypass our American Constitution and law and look to foreign constitutions, laws, and customs.”

The “whole cloth” comment I would not be able to judge but the use of international law to trump the Constitution I was aware of in my non-legal reading.  

As I opened I suggested taking notes.  This is a good time to learn if you can rely on people’s opinions.  One blogger that I have enjoyed reading had this to say,

“Though I disagreed with some of her decisions, she was passionate, honourable, articulate, and her legal decisions were well-thought.”

I will continue to read what he has to say but will begin to question if he is of sound mind.  There will be others.  Most people writing are not emotionally involved.  If I were reading a statement by a family member I would make allowances.  Most people will be held to a higher standard in my world.  

But who cares what I think?

homo unius libri

Opus 2020-238: The Price of Seeing Justice Done

Should I lie to get on a jury?

I don’t know if you have ever been called for jury duty.  If you make it into a court room they start the process of jury selection.  It is a frustrating experience.  It is obvious that the lawyers are looking for a group of people stupid enough to be deceived.  I know I will not make it through the sifting as soon as they bring up a charge of drunk driving.  Since I don’t drink the defense does not want me on the jury.  I also have known police officers and my home has been broken into.  I am an undesirable.  

I guess I could lie.

A further point of frustration is the instructions that the judge gives the jury.  He has the position to pull out selected laws and tell you what your options are.  As I asked the judge the one time I got that far, “If you are going to tell me that, what do you need a jury for?”

This comes to mind because the federal government is finally getting in the business of justice and prosecuting insurrectionists.  We also see Kyle Rittenhouse being prosecuted as a judicial hate crime.  There are some juries I would be glad to join but I will never get a chance.

Unless I lie.

What price justice?

homo unius libri

Opus 2020-126: Election 2024: Platform, Address the Rogue Courts

One of the major problems facing our republic is the judicial system.  At the same time it is one of our great blessings.  How do we fix it without destroying it.

One problem to address is something I have heard called “tort reform”.  Not being a lawyer I don’t know how to deal with this.  It has to do with the abuse of our system through ridiculous lawsuits and outrageous settlements.  It gets to the point where insurance companies pay out large amounts just to avoid going to court.  I am sure there is a creative way to deal with it.

A bigger problem is the rogue judges.  These are people who have certain preconceived notions about how the country should be run.  They cannot win elections or pass anything through legislation so they do it by judicial decree.  At the present time one federal judge can defy the Constitution and throw out just about any law he wants.  It is making a joke of the law.  State judges can often be dealt with by the voters but federal judges have lifetime tenure.  At the present time it is mainly liberal judges who are trying to destroy our republic.  I would concede that historically that might not always be the case but the problem is real. 

Congress set up the courts and has the power to reform the courts.  They need to do so.  The Republican party should go into this election with a clear proposal on how to discipline these black robed tyrants.

We also need to remember the Principle of Unintended Consequences.  We may come up with a solution that we think is good but we forget that the law is a sword that cuts both ways and the guys on the other team are known to cheat.  We need to understand that people with no ethics will eventually control congress and the White House so they can run wild. 

If the judicial system is not fixed it could be the end of the great experiment called the United States.

homo unius libri

Opus 2018-215: Election 2018: An Insight from Sowell

One of the books on my “everyone should read” list is Conflict of Visions by Thomas Sowell.  He discusses the two dominate philosophies trying to guide culture in the West.  He labels them the constrained and the unconstrained visions.  The Constitution and the American Revolution are products of the constrained vision.  It maintains that man is not to be trusted and thus we have the checks and balances in our system of government.  The French Revolution was an example of the unconstrained vision.  Because they had a more humanistic view of the nature of man they did not think something like the Reign of Terror or the emergence of a Napoleon to be possible.  It is a bit simplistic but you might call the current stand of the liberals in favor of a living Constitution are unconstrained.  Those who believe in the original intent of the Constitution are constrained. 

Judicial activism as we observe it today is part of the unconstrained vision.  We have Ruth Bader Ginsberg openly calling on the precedents of  international laws to settle issues in the Untied States Supreme Court.  You have a long history of new rights carved out of the imaginations of the liberal justices.  Sowell describes it thus,

“Yet those who argue for deliberate law making through judicial activism do so not on the basis of having a democratic majority, even in a given generation, but rather on having an intellectually and morally superior process for decision making.” p. 54

We need to understand that there are elites in the world who think they know what is best for us and want to limit our options.  They do this in a genuine belief in their own wisdom and our lack of same.  This is the big issue at stake in the current confirmation battle over Bret Kavanaugh.  The progressives are concerned that he will interpret the Constitution as it is written instead of the way that the liberals want us to understand it.  The unconstrained vision believes that some people are so pure and superior that they will make the right choices.

The midterm elections are coming.  Ponder what kind of Supreme Court you want and vote accordingly.

Sowell, Thomas, A Conflict of Visions, New York:  Basic Books, 2007.

homo unius libri

Opus 2018-168: Headlines: A Sparkling Nomination

We have a nomination.  Next step is a confirmation.  I don’t know if I should be rejoicing or mourning.  It depends on whom you read and what they think they know.  We are all familiar with Nancy Pelosi’s famous statement that we need to pass the bill so we can find out what is in it.  For a legislature that is pure ignorance, arrogance or manipulation.  Or it may be all three.  In the case of a Supreme Court Justice that is the way it needs to be.

At the press conference everyone said the right things.  All we know at this point is that Brett Kavanaugh claims to believe that the Constitution should be understood to mean what it says, not what the current justice says it means.  We heard the same thing from Chief Justice Roberts and Clarence Thomas.  In one case it was a smoke screen, in the other it was genuine.  The problem is that we will not know until the proof hits the pudding.

So far Trump has done his homework.  I am willing to have hope for the future because he seems to be showing where his heart is.  I am convinced that Trump believes that Kavanaugh is the genuine article.  Only time will tell. 

Another reason that I have hope is because I believe with the Founding Fathers that the rights we have are endowed by our Creator.  God is in charge.  If we can survive eight years of Obama doing everything he can to destroy the country with the aid of the media, education system and RINOs, we can trust God to see us through.  It is more important that we live in righteousness than who sits on the Supreme Court.  Remember that Sodom would have been spared if there had only been a few particles of salt and a couple of sparks of light.

So get out there and sparkle.

homo unius libri

Opus 2018-156: Headlines: Misplaced Euphoria

I would not get too excited about Justice Kennedy stepping down. 

Everywhere I see that the left is going into the Blue Screen of Death mode and the right is giggling themselves silly.  They assume that President Trump will nominate a judge who believes in the Constitution and will interpret it instead of advancing their own personal opinions.  I believe he will try.  I believe the judge nominated will meet those requirements.  I don’t believe that it means a lock on the future.

I don’t want to rain on our parade.  I have high hopes.  I am expecting a sterling selection.  Then we have to get it past the Flake on the Judicial committee and the McCain on the floor.  Both are big challenges.  We can deal with the Democrats.  What we have trouble with are the RINOs.

Take Chief Justice Roberts as an example.  He met all the criteria when he was selected.  We were overjoyed.  We felt we were holding our own.  Then he stabbed us in the back on Obamacare.  How many other justices have been nominated because they believed in the Constitution but the kool aid they serve in the Supreme Court lunchroom started to do its work?  I could see Roberts stepping into Kennedy’s slot as ego building swing vote.

So don’t stop praying for a Justice to reign up.  Don’t stop being salt and light.  Don’t stop agitating and demanding either, if that is your strong point.  Keep in mind that a faithful remnant can keep God from giving up on the United States.  If not, we face the Sodom Solution.

And as several bloggers say, “Pass the popcorn.”

homo unius libri

Opus 2017-364: New Terms: Scootered

As we watch the joke on justice being played out by the Special Prosecutor Meuller we hear the rumors about an indictment.  Of course there will be an indictment.  If you dig deep enough and ask enough questions eventually someone will make a mistake and you can play gotcha.  It is what happened to Scooter Libby.  Did he commit any of the crimes they were investigating?  Of course not.  Then why did he go to jail?  Because in the course of the intimidation, threats and questioning he got mixed up on an answer so he went to jail for lying to the investigators.

Will there be an indictment?  You bet your sweet liberal saliva there will be.  Will there be a conviction?  That depends on how well they chose their judge, but keep in mind that liberals are really good at railroading justice.  Someone will be convicted of something and the media will hoot it up like it was a house giving out See’s candy on Halloween.

One interesting difference will come up.  George Bush did not stand my his man.  He let Libby twist in the wind and then commuted his sentence.  Trump will be a different kettle of fish.  He probably has a pardon already filled out except for the name.  Remember Sheriff Joe. 

I have not checked the headlines yet so I don’t know who the rumors are about.  In a perfect world the one being indicted would be Hillary or one of the series of conspirators who tried to set Trump up with the Russia nonsense.

The country should get so lucky.

homo unius libri

Opus 2017-292: Headlines: Collusion? I’ll Show You Collusion

I read a point somewhere about the collusion between the judges in Arizona regarding the conviction of Sheriff Arpaio but I could not find it later.  I came across it again in the Washington Times Monday morning.  The sheriff was doing his job but the liberals didn’t like it so they got a judge to issue an order for him to stop dealing with illegal aliens.  When he did not stop he was sited and put on trial in another example of a kangaroo court. 

I don’t know if he waived his right to a jury trial but the decision was made by a judge, not a jury.  One judge did it as a favor to another judge.  If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck then it is probably real live collusion, not the manufactured type about Russia.  Why do the liberals have their panties in a wad? 

“It short-circuits the case against Mr. Arpaio, who was convicted this year of criminal contempt of court. The judge who convicted him said he willfully ignored another judge’s 2011 order halting the sheriff’s traffic-stop program, which identified illegal immigrants who were then turned over to federal deportation authorities.”

Notice how the two judges gave a one-two punch.  They had each other’s backs.  Unfortunately for them the president was not in the mood for the game.

Contempt of court is becoming the norm.

homo unius libri

Opus 2017-287: Headlines: A Pardon for Joe

As you may have heard, the president has pardoned Sheriff Arpaio.  A couple of points of interest maybe lost in the hysteria of the left.  It is the president’s first pardon.  It is for a misdemeanor.  The man was not convicted of grand theft, extortion or treason.  He did not wipe his illegal server or take millions in bribes while secretary of state.  He did not riot in the streets, burn buildings or throw urine at the police.  He was guilty of contempt of court.  In that regard he joins a lot of Americans.

Some interesting tidbits from the Washington Times story.

People on the left need to go back to their government classes, only this time have the class taught by someone who has actually read the Constitution.  This one demonstrates ignorance on steroids.

“Anger went beyond just immigrant-rights groups, however, to encompass the entire liberal alliance — including environmentalists, who said the pardon was a strike at the core of the Constitution.”

The power to pardon is part of the Constitution. 

The reason that pardons were included in the powers of the president was to short circuit just the kind of political shenanigans by activist judges as we are seeing more and more today.  It is the last refuge for justice from courts that are trying to make up law instead of interpret it.  Another example of this is the actions of Judge Gloria Navarro who did everything she could to get men involved in the Bundy case thrown in jail.  About half way through the article on AZCentral you find the title “Judge's restrictions on the defense” and this interesting paragraph.

“Navarro also restricted defendants from raising constitutional arguments, or mounting any defense based on their First Amendment rights to free speech and their Second Amendment rights to bear arms. In her rulings, Navarro said those were not applicable arguments in the case.”

Picture this.  A federal judge saying that arguments regarding the First Amendment and Second Amendment were not to be allowed.

Fortunately in this case the jury was awake.  The president will not need to use the power of the pardon here.  Of course the same leftists who call the pardon “a strike at the core of the Constitution” will feel the same about a jury verdict they disagree with. 

So pay attention.  If you are ever on a jury remember that you are the one with the last word, not the judge.  That is why we have juries of our peers.  And remember that judges are usually appointed.  Elections matter.

Vote the sucker out.

homo unius libri

Opus 2017-272: Headlines: Pardon You

When I saw the headline at a humor site I thought it was a spoof but the Washington Times confirms that President Trump is considering a pardon for Sheriff Arpaio.

I have not followed the trial but I know how the progressives and their pet judges work the legal system.  I think that the key point made in the article was this:

“He faced repeated civil-rights complaints for immigration crackdowns, and was ordered to halt traffic stops that critics said amounted to illegal racial profiling and unconstitutional searches. A judge ruled that he failed to comply with that order, resulting in the misdemeanor contempt conviction.”

Notice that it is a “misdemeanor contempt conviction”.  The judge ordered him to stop doing his job and then threw the book at him.  I realize that is simplistic but so is their version of justice.  My opinion is reinforced by the way the ACLU criticized the idea of a pardon.  That is what the pardon is for, counteracting convictions by corrupt political machines.  It is not for rewarding contributors to your campaign as Clinton did.

homo unius libri

Opus 2017-169: Headlines: Channeling Jackson

If you get past the screaming headlines based on Trumphate you see a man who is pushing forward on what he promised to do.  I went past the lead article at the Washington Times and saw another that implied Trump was reducing the immigration flow in spite of all the court tantrums. 

The left wing syncopates of the court keep doing everything they can to cripple Trump.  One court said he could not do what the law says he can do.  He rewrote his executive order to allow for their concerns.  They found another judge to continue the judicial harassment.  He has found a way to work around it.  He has not reduced the potential terrorists as much as he wanted, but it is still better than it would have been under Obama.  The numbers they give are:  Obama wanted 110,000, Trump called for 50,000 and, in spite of the courts, he will still get it down to 60,000.

It reminds me of Andrew Jackson.  The Supreme Court told him he had to act a certain way.  His response is reported to have been,

"John Marshall has made his decision, now let him enforce it."

And President Jackson quietly went about his business.  The article seems to imply that the current administration is quietly going about its business.  Donald Trump is getting a lot done.  Unlike the politicians who preceded him, he is actually working to fulfill his campaign promises.  The screams you hear are the people who did not vote for him trying to return to the Days of Obama.

I keep waiting for the other shoe to drop and for Trump to turn on us.  Meanwhile I am enjoying the tears and frustration of the media.

homo unius libri