Supreme Court Endorses Political Corruption

 

High Court Endorses Political Corruption

By Mustang

Chief Justice of the United States John Roberts was underwhelming in his acceptance of the so-called Obama Healthcare Plan. It is a tax, he said, and the federal government is permitted under the Constitution to tax the bejesus out of the American people. Well, no conservative he, and I personally think he was stretching a bit to find that the ACA was constitutional. It was, after all, far more than a tax. I conclude that Judge Roberts, like everyone in congress who voted for it, never read the law before he made his decision. Well, what did we expect? He was a Bush appointee.

But Roberts really outdid himself in the McDonnell Decision.

One may recall that while serving as Governor of Virginia, Bob McDonnell solicited a fifty-thousand-dollar loan from Jonnie R. Williams. He then texted an aide about making damn sure that Williams got the meetings he wanted with Virginia state officials. McDonnell didn’t stop there. He also accepted as a gift a Rolex watch, a $20,000 loan, and the payment for the catering bill for his daughter’s wedding. Mrs. McDonnell (Virginia’s first lady) was the individual who suggested to Williams that her husband needed a new watch —and, presumably, a Timex wouldn’t do. Well, and while she was at it,

Maureen could use a new wardrobe totaling $20,000. Considering all of Mr. Williams’ gifts, the McDonnell’s accepted $175,000.00. Most of us would conclude that there may not be a clearer case of political corruption: facilitating access to state officials in return for a very large chunk of change and a few trinkets. It sounds corrupt to me.

But this isn’t how Chief Justice Roberts viewed it.

The court ruled that the Virginia jury was wrong to think that Governor McDonnell’s actions constituted “official corruption.” The McDonnell conviction was overturned —and in the process, the Supreme Court established a new standard for determining the government corruption —a standard so narrow that it will, in the future, be difficult to convict any but the most incompetent of our politicians.

While an official act can still be illegal, the definition of that term has been excessively broad. Something as commonplace as an executive turning to an aide and telling him or her to make something happen or accepting a check and then having a quiet word with government regulators, or even a suggestion to subordinates that a door ought to be opened for an influence-buyer does not, in and of itself, represent an official act.

No, of course not.

Chief Justice Roberts opined that an official act “must involve a formal exercise of governmental power that is similar in nature to a lawsuit before a court, a determination before an agency, or a hearing before a committee.”

What?

Right —in the absence of a gavel, there is no bribery or corruption. I’ll call this the smoking gavel rule. Roberts said that bribery is “the kind of thing that can be put on an agenda, tracked for progress, and then checked off as complete.”

Well, I suppose the court is at least consistent. In the Citizens-United case, the court allowed rich people to purchase politicians. Now they are able to purchase office-holders as well. One pundit suggested that the high court was worried that if the McDonnell conviction was upheld, all of our politicians would begin to live in a state of fear (as opposed, to say, strutting around like the arrogant asses they are), sure that almost anyone could go to prison for being corrupt. God forbid that should ever happen.

Justice Roberts wrote, “Conscientious public officials arrange meetings for constituents, contact other officials on their behalf, and include them in events all the time.” If McDonnell’s conviction was upheld, it would “cast a pall of potential prosecution over these relationships.” He added, “officials might wonder whether they could respond to even the most commonplace requests for assistance, and citizens with legitimate concerns might shrink from participating in democratic discourse.”

Has America’s high court come to accept the premise that corrupt politics is simply how politics is done? It is certainly true that trading cash, favors, trips to Europe, expensive gifts and gifts of underage prostitutes is a common occurrence in our government today. Interestingly, during the court’s deliberations, it accepted a number of amicus briefs from White House lawyers who argued that the business of politics, as we know it, would be disturbed if the McDonnell decision were upheld. What White House lawyers? I don’t know their names, but it was during the Obama administration.

Bottom line: influence peddling as a form of corruption has been upheld by the highest court in the land. To everyone imagining that the Supreme Court was our last hope for a just America —think again.

Advertisements

Congratulations America and to Justice Brett Kavanaugh

 

Congratulations Just Maga — not tired of winning yet!

One heck of a ride!

UPDATE: Senator Collins is getting thousands of hate letters. We need you to send a thank you  note. E-mail immediately to Katie Brown her  chief-of-staff at katie_Brown@collins.senate.gov

 

 

kav

 

 

 

Posted in Supreme Court. Tags: . 26 Comments »

Ford’s FBI friend McClean pressured witness to change statement and testimony

 

With our Republic hanging by a thread, we would do well to dig into the FBI McClean  connection to Ford. We have a chance to nail a whole slug of them and let’s not miss, asking Mr. Sessions. The Conservative Tree House has done terrific work on the deep deep connections. It’s a Saturday. Take the time.

 

Leland Ingham Keyser says she has no recollection of EVER BEING AT A PARTY with Brett Kavanaugh and does not know him.

Ms. Keyser is a lifelong friend of Christine Blasey Ford and was one of her best friends in high school.

Christine Ford’s friend Leland Keyser said on Friday she was pressured by Democrats to change her story on Brett Kavanaugh and lie to the US Senate.

 

 

Leland Keyser told the Wall Street Journal she was pressured by former FBI agent and Ford friend Monica McLean — and offered proof to FBI investigators.

Picture credit to Conservative Tree House:

It is beyond obvious now that Ms. Christine Blasey-Ford was not just some random ancillary high school acquaintance of Brett Kavanaugh; Ms. Ford appears to have been selected by a group of politically connected FBI and DOJ officials for the purpose of targeting Judge Kavanaugh.

All of these DOJ and FBI people are part of a tight network.

 

Via The Wall Street Journal:

Leland Keyser, who Dr. Ford has said was present at the gathering where she was allegedly assaulted in the 1980s, told investigators that Monica McLean, a retired Federal Bureau of Investigation agent and a friend of Dr. Ford’s, had urged her to clarify her statement, the people said.

[…] On Thursday, a day after sending to the White House the report on its investigation into the allegations against Judge Kavanaugh, the FBI sent the White House and Senate an additional package of information that included text messages from Ms. McLean to Ms. Keyser, according to a person familiar with the matter.

The full read and a must is over at the The Conservative Treehouse who reported on McLean and her attorney — a person with deep connections to the DOJ and FBI.

H/T: Gateway Pundit

Kavanaugh – The cost of taking on the Clintons

 

Kavanaugh claimed that the Clintons were included behind the orchestrated attacks upon him. An unwise move? Now Hillary comes out with the “I am a victim of the vast Right Wing conspiracy” trope. Her remarks made at the Atlantic Festival. The memo written by Kavanaugh in 1998 should prove my point that the Clintons have a long memory.

Why would that be? Kavanaugh spared no mercy for Bill during the Starr impeachment investigation. Especially because he went after Bill and his sexual proclivities. It was no doubt unwise to raise the Clinton name. Awakening the beast from the underworld. But they were no doubt already about the business of aiding and abetting the destruction of one Brett Kavanaugh.

 

 

The Clintons don’t forget. Ever. And how just like the Clintons to help orchestrate a character smear against Judge Kavanaugh for things that never happened because Mr. Kavanaugh was in 1998 adamant that then-President Clinton answer for things that actually did take place.

 

Mentioning the Clinton name gave Hillary the opening once again, its just that vast right wing conspiracy raising it’s ugly head. Apparently if one has a different political view it’s simply a conspiracy. Rare indeed.

The Clinton’s are users.

Yet there’s another dimension to their chronic crookedness, and it gets insufficient attention even though it might be more important to the nation’s well-being.

“Wherever they go, whatever they do, ethics are trashed and suspicions of criminal conduct follow them like night follows day.”

It is that, in addition to being personally corrupt, the Clintons are corrupters. They are piggish users, with the people and institutions around them inevitably tarnished and sometimes destroyed even as the Clintons escape to their next scam. NY Post

 

Hillary in this clip extends her views regarding the vast Right Wing conspiracies. A real laugh-a-rama.

 

H/T: DC Whispers

 

 

Ex-boyfriend: Ford had no fear of flying, coached polygraph test

 

Christian Martyrs Last Prayer

An interesting find in the quicksand of the faltering Ford Circus Maximus. So much to choose from, so little time. I chose this little item to show that prosecutor Mitchell, in her supposedly failed questioning of Ford, had plenty of information prior to her go at Ford.

Let’s get on with the show:

 

The alleged ex-boyfriend also claims that Ford frequently flew, including in small propeller aircraft, without complaint over the course of their relationship and had no fear of small spaces or rooms with only one exit. Ford’s claims that phobias of these things have plagued her since the early 1980s as a result of a 17-year-old Kavanaugh attacking her have been central elements of her story.

In that time, he claims to have witnessed Ford, then studying psychology, coach a close friend as she prepared for government administered polygraph exams.Further, the man claims Ford never mentioned being a victim of sexual assault in the eight years they knew each other and never once mentioned Kavanaugh’s name. Finally, he claims their relationship ended amid infidelity and credit card fraud on her part. He does, however, claim that he “finds Ford believable” and did not “want to become involved” with the investigatory process.

Note her attorney tries to cut off the questioning.

More at  Breitbart

 

 

 

Prosecutor who questioned Ford, shreds her case against Kavanaugh in memo

 

I for one, dismissed the Prosecutor, Rachel Mitchell, out of hand regarding her questioning of Ford. It appeared Mitchell wandered to no point but I missed it entirely. Looking back, that is what prosecutors do. Lead them on then slam the door. I was not alone. Many thought she acted as if it were a deposition. Nope. Do read the whole thing over at the Daily Wire. I am dismayed that this isn’t getting the attention it so richly deserves. The party line is that we are sure something happened to her, it just wasn’t Kavanaugh. Read this.. it won’t disappoint. Two posts today, earlier catch Mustang’s post: Do You want to live forever?

 

Rachel Mitchell, the prosecutor who questioned Christine Blasey Ford last week during a hearing in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee, wrote a five-page memo that was released on Sunday that outlines why she would not bring criminal charges against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh.

Mitchell’s memo notes nine significant problems with Ford’s testimony and underscores that her case is “even weaker” than a “he said, she said” case.

“A ‘he said, she said’ case is incredibly difficult to prove,” Mitchell states. “But this case is even weaker than that. Dr. Ford identified other witnesses to the event, and those witnesses either refuted her allegations or failed to corroborate them. For the reasons discussed below, I do not think that a reasonable prosecutor would bring this case based on the evidence before the Committee. Nor do I believe that this evidence is sufficient to satisfy the prosecutor.

1. Dr. Ford has not offered a consistent account of when the alleged assault happened,

She lays bare why she thinks so.

The following 8 points are even more devastating.

Read the whole thing here at the  Daily Wire

Convicted Felon Testifies Against Kavanaugh

 

 

Post by Mustang.

Does anyone recall John Dean?  He was former White House Counsel under President Richard M. Nixon and played a key role in the 1973 Watergate scandal.  Now, long after Nixon passed away, Dean likes to tell folks that he warned Mr. Nixon that there was a “cancer” growing on the presidency. 

Of course, how can we ever know what he may (or may not) have said to Nixon?  He may have had that conversation in the same way that Senator Blumenthal from Connecticut was a hero from the Vietnam war.  But facts are inconvenient things, and John Dean ended up spending four-months in prison for obstruction of justice.  Yes, only four months.  It must have been the deal of the century for the rat who participated in unlawful behavior and then turned state’s evidence.

In any case, Dean added his two cents to Christine Ford’s three cents during the Senate Judiciary—Brett Kavanaugh hearing.  He is now warning the senate that confirmation of Brett Kavanaugh will lead to a White House takeover of the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS).  We’ll examine this testimony in a moment, but first let’s take a look at Dean after serving four (4) months in prison in 1973.

Shortly after serving in prison for his role in Watergate, Dean became an investment banker, an author, and a lecturer.  There is serious money to be made on the lecture circuit; if you don’t believe me, just ask Billy Clinton.  In his books and lectures, Dean chronicles his experiences in the White House.  In 1976 he wrote a book titled Blind Ambition (actually written by someone else), and this was made into a TV mini-series in 1979.  So, life was good for Dean after becoming a felon.  Oh, Martin Sheen played the part of Dean in the series.  Of course.

Mr. Dean, in appearing before the committee, warned the senate that conservatives have constructed a court that is overly deferential to executive power, particularly since Republicans control both the House and Senate.  Dean said, “Under Judge Kavanaugh’s recommendation, if a president shot someone in cold blood on Fifth Avenue, that president could not be prosecuted while in office.”

Yes, he said that.  It is at this point that one begins to wonder how Dean became White House Counsel in the first place —or how he ever got to appear in front of such a powerful committee.  Crikey!  But GOP Senator John Kennedy (R-LA) did push back when he told Dean, “I think you and your co-conspirators hurt my country,” and then noting that Dean ultimately did the right thing after Watergate, added, “you only did it when you were cornered like a rat, and it’s hard for me to take your testimony seriously.”

Well okay, there is plenty of room in this country for divergent views, but I think Dean is seriously off track.  He seems to overlook the fact that if the Senate and House are in the hands of the GOP, it is only by the will of the people.  If the President of the United States is a Republican, it is by the will of the people. 

And if a Republican president nominates justices to the SCOTUS who view their role as interpreting the Constitution (as opposed to legislating), then it too must be —by extension— the will of the people.  I guess what stymies me with Dean and others is that how does a well-educated man get to be obtuse when it comes to fundamental American civics?

Whether the SCOTUS is gaining too much power, or relinquishing its power to the presidency, is a matter of debate.  Senator Ben Sasse was recently eloquent when he argued that the US Congress have become lazy and ineffective, too willingly sending to the court matters that are actually the responsibility of the legislature.  Apparently, SCOTUS nominee Kavanaugh agrees: his role, he said, is not political—it’s judicial. 

Democrats think the US government should take over everything … including health care.  In evaluating Kavanaugh, Democrats assembled a slate of witnesses who argued about the impact Kavanaugh would have on such “hot-button” issues as voting rights, access to abortion, and gun control.  Ah, the Democrats.  What a bunch of clowns. 

One might recall when Democrats controlled both houses of congress and the presidency, they passed Obama-Care in the middle of the night and sent it straightaway to the president for his signature.  No one in Congress read the measure before it was signed into law, and “We the People” were unaware that the law was less of a health care measure than it was a massive tax.  (Side note: If there was any justice inside the beltway, every member of Congress would be forced into the kind of health care system employed in the United Kingdom).

In spite of what John Dean thinks, the American Bar Association offers Judge Kavanaugh high ratings.  A consensus of his peers, involving 120 interviews and contacts with 500 people, rates Kavanaugh as “well qualified” for the SCOTUS.

Once more speaking about how the Congress doesn’t want to do its job, or the manner in which it passes off its own responsibility to others, how well does it sit with you that Democratic members of the Senate Judiciary Committee have relied on the testimony of a dangerously psychotic/delusional female and a convicted felon to help them decide whether or not to support the nomination of Brett Kavanaugh.  That isn’t all … they also invited a 13-year old child who suffers with asthma who warned the senators that Kavanaugh wasn’t friends with the environment. 

Gad … we must be living in interesting times.

John Dean. February 17, 2017 Published. Just laying the predicate.

%d bloggers like this: