RSS Feed

Category Archives: Courts

Happy Birthday, America!

Posted on

 

Happy Birthday and Best Wishes to my Homeland.
I celebrate belonging to her culture of freedom and individualism. I rejoice in the Bill of Rights and the ideals of justice and republicanism. I am thankful for the very many warriors who have sacrificed time, flesh and blood, clear thinking and sometimes they make the ultimate sacrifice of life for America, for us, for our way of living and our values.
I am proud to be a patriot who loves her country complete with all of its incredible innovation and spirit of generosity, its diversity, its mistakes, its problems and its sins. We are not a perfect nation, or a utopia, we are a nation of people and there are now over 250 million of us. Too many of us were not brought up with respect for American Virtues and for too long the gangs have increased membership dramatically through illegal recruitment and passage. But we can fix our problems because America does not belong to the world or to illegal aliens, it belongs to us!

We try hard. Good has usually always won out over evil because Americans have always valued independence, free thinking, Judaeo-Christian virtues and hard work . We do try hard and one reason I love my country is because until now we have always eventually straightened things out and gotten it right. There has always been a creed and a belief that we try hard to follow:

We (your people) hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their creator (not the government or any court) with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

God Bless America and Happy Birthday!

Double Standard?

Posted on

Looking at the current judicial approach to President Trump’s Executive Orders on Immigration, the courts are very outspoken about their ability to rely on his statements made during the campaign in order to determine the intent of the Orders. It may violate judicial precedent and certainly is contrary to the facts of the case, nevertheless, reason and logic has not been allowed to intrude on these Federal Court Decisions (9th and 4th Circuits) unconstitutionally removing a legal power from the executive branch.

Whether they take it now or wait until the conclusion of the Circuit Courts’ legal proceedings, eventually this issue will be facing the Supreme Court. During the campaign, at about the same period of time as President Trump’s campaign statements, one of our SCOTUS justices spoke out publicly against candidate Trump. Justice Ginsburg made some fairly extreme statements indicating that she did not like him at all. http://nypost.com/2016/07/11/ruth-bader-ginsburgs-unhinged-assault-on-trump/

Since judges are required to recuse themselves in circumstances like these, and although Supreme Court Justices are exempted, there is really no good reason why this should be so. If anything, recusal should be mandatory for justices also. The cases they decide are far too important and affect far too many lives to be decided with any justice who is too biased, opinionated or Politically motivated to objectively evaluate the facts, weigh the merits fairly or render a logical Constitutionally based decision. It is bad enough that Justice Ginsburg actually feels such animus, but it is beyond concerning when she cannot keep her mouth shut about it in front of the media.

So, (to quote my grandparents) what’s good for the goose is good for the gander. Or maybe we should change judicial thought and say, what is said in the campaign stays in the campaign!

Give Me Liberty…..

Posted on

For as William Lloyd Garrison opined:
“I am aware that many object to the severity of my language; but is there not cause for severity? I will be as harsh as truth, and as uncompromising as justice. On this subject, I do not wish to think, or to speak, or write, with moderation. No! no! Tell a man whose house is on fire to give a moderate alarm; tell him to moderately rescue his wife from the hands of the ravisher; tell the mother to gradually extricate her babe from the fire into which it has fallen; — but urge me not to use moderation in a cause like the present. I am in earnest — I will not equivocate — I will not excuse — I will not retreat a single inch — AND I WILL BE HEARD.”

It seems to be of no significance which party wins any election. Regardless of outcome, all of the political debate, the government’s decisions and movements, the ways and means of making decisions, everything that actually makes the government tick is manipulated skillfully by the democrats. The republicans do not fight this manipulation, in fact, the louder the message is which originates with the Democratic Party and their “talking heads” the more likely the Republicans are to give in to the pressure. After seeing this machine in action since election night, it has totally changed my mind about that party and its motives. 

Although the Democratic Party presents itself as a great representative of the people constantly keeping the government honest and diligently pursuing justice, in truth democrats have shown themselves to be totally corrupt, mindlessly in pursuit of power and deliberately blind to the negative consequences. Furthermore, the democrats have demonstrated repeatedly that they do not care about this country, its Founding Documents, our history or our culture and traditions. 

Time after time the Democratic Party has openly displayed its character for all to see, putting forth Hillary Clinton for president even when there was enough evidence made public to convict her of numerous federal violations, no republican could have, or ever would have, used the IRS to target democratic organizations in an effort to damage the opposing party, what president has ever just ordered that our borders not be enforced and that illegals be allowed in? There were so many things that Obama did that upset and distressed conservatives, republicans, libertarians, independents and free thinkers. In addition to what I have mentioned already there is “fast and furious”, Clinton’s State Department access for pay scandal, Clinton’s uranium deal with Russia, the lies told about the Iran treaty and hiding all of the secret side deals from the Congress and the people and etc.

Yet, except for Benghazi, not one investigative committee convened. No hordes of republicans took to the streets burning cars and smashing out building Windows. No republicans formed groups to attack democrats. Obama’s cabinet nominees were approved relatively quickly as were his decidedly liberal Supreme Court Judges. On most legislation, but not all, Republicans either worked with, negotiated with or just gave in to Democrats. Obama’s threatened veto on any potential bill was mighty indeed!

President Trump seems to be treated differently by the media and certainly by the Democratic Party. A Harvard Professor just finished a study and reported that the way in which the media has gone after Trump, trying to destroy him, is literally unprecedented! Never before has the media machine operated in concert together with such a singular purpose of the personal destruction of a legitimately elected president. He is denigrated, obstructed, laughed at, misrepresented and misquoted. His words are deliberately lifted out of context and twisted out of all relationship to what he originally meant. He is presumed a liar and a cheat while he is working nonstop to make America a better place for her citizens. To add insult to injury, his own party is not being all that helpful in Congress.

President Trump is making an excellent start on his term. He has signed new trade deals bringing jobs to our shores and has also issued executive orders which get rid of onerous and excessive government regulations and this too means more jobs. He has worked hard to promote American Industry, reform the tax code which will hopefully pass soon, to straighten out the health system and to turn back the tidal wave of illegal immigrants flooding across our southern border. 

President Trump has certainly shown a talent if not pure genius in foreign affairs. Trump may be unappreciated at home, but our allies absolutely do appreciate him and seem to understand him much better than we do. Isn’t it interesting that the president who our media fawned over constantly managed to damage our relationships with almost every ally. The Saudi Arabians said that they had been waiting for Trump for eight years. The judges (read Democratic Party and liberal) in the two circuits that claim Trump’s Executive Order on Immigration was issued because he was biased against Muslims should feel like total idiots now!

Always, though, facts will be ignored, buried, covered up or otherwise twisted or changed. The Democratic Party is perfectly willing to lie, threaten, destroy and commit fraud to win elections. How then can we not acknowledge that they have become more of a criminal enterprise than a political party? We cannot allow this continuing manipulation of the dialogue through the media, the persistent changing of the values and the belief systems of our young people through the liberal teachings of academia and the ever increasing rise of liberal intolerance for any other point of view. No one will stop this, no one will save us, no one is responsible for maintaining our freedom but us! In the end, each generation must fight to preserve the Liberty that we all consider our birthright. As the disaster in Venezuela has so brutally demonstrated, tyranny with all of its misery and suffering is never more than a generation away. (I wish I could remember who said that!)

We should not be watching Trump fight for us on TV. We should do whatever we can do to help!

The Truth

Posted on

I just watched Sally Yates’ testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee. This post is a response to her statements that she had the authority to determine the intent behind the Executive Order on Immigration (EO), that she had the authority to act on that determination as if it were fact. I question her definition of “truth” and believe that she acted inappropriately by refusing to support the president.

The Justice Department enforces the law. However, it fulfills many other functions including pursuing and arguing cases on the government’s behalf. The Justice Department is not a private law firm and if there is a problem with a case the White House is envolved with there would usually be close collaboration and a working solution. This outlandish declaration and public grandstanding on behalf of an opposing political party is just intolerable!

In the Hearing, Ms. Yates had no problem with the Constitutionality of the EO as written. Her sole argument was that it was unconstitutional because the intent of the president was to discriminate against Muslims. This determination of intent was not hers to make. Ms. Yates stated that religious discrimination was the only truth possible for this EO. A reasonable person capable of any sort of logic should be able to understand that there can be other rational explanations for such an EO. In fact, these reasons and objectives have been widely published and are the reason why the EO had such broad public support. It is frightening to see an unelected temporary administrative employee try to block the president!

Ms. Yates’ definition of absolute truth is very interesting. Truth is. Ms. Yates’ definition of truth is what her mind determines it to be. She discounts other opinions, inconvenient facts and ignores what she doesn’t know. She shuts out the voting public and boldly declares her opinion to be THE TRUTH.

I am merely thankful that Sally Yates is no longer employed with our Justice Department.

In a Perfect World….

Posted on
  1. Everyone would realize that what the Constitution actually says is what should control the government, not what a Congressman or government official says the Constitution says.
  2. Nobody would believe anything the media reported without checking on it!
  3. Political party affiliation would be secondary to patriotism.
  4. Every single office, branch and department of the federal government would be audited yearly and this would be available to the public for inspection.
  5. Democrats would not be able to get away with theft, collusion, selling favors to foreign governments, associating with terrorist groups, funding radical orgs that support and encourage rioting and violence, etc.
  6. The opinions of a Senator or House Member are fairly unimportant and all would ignore them.
  7. The House and Senate would have to live by and suffer under the laws that they pass for the rest of us!
  8. The Congress would travel and recess less and work more!!
  9. Congress would not vote themselves ever more money and automatic pay raises and perks!
  10. Everyone would judge Trump fairly without the hype OR the lies and defamation. Just fairly.
  11. There would be at least one ethics course required in every high school, two semesters.
  12. Proper American History would be taught in every school, including the very many black warriors who made a difference in the revolutionary war and every war thereafter. Let’s start comming together by teaching our children that we have much to be proud of together.
  13. People would hear what is actually said, not what they expect to hear.
  14. Judges would never legislate from the bench!
  15. People would never litter.
  16. Every citizen would be a patriot armed with common sense.
  17. Civil discourse and common courtesy would be taught to and expected from everybody.
  18. Cursing would be considered the choice of those with small minds and limited vocabularies.
  19. Only citizens would vote in elections, and they would only vote once.
  20. Facebook and Google, and the other net nasties, would be stopped from collecting data and spying on people.
  21. There would be strict controls on immigration and border control.
  22. Federal agencies would be almost non-existent, there would be no entrenched fourth branch of government.
  23. All foreign leaders, kings, dictators, etc. would at least be sane and reasonable
  24. We would still have a basic respect for life and the property of others.
  25. Why not…….. There would be world peace!

I know there is more and I wish I knew how to open the list up so anyone could add to it!

    On Lawyers….

    It seems incredible to me, but much of the media and most of the democrats have very little understanding of the legal profession in general. Perhaps it would be a good idea to review.

    Lawyers do not spontaneously write briefs and argue cases because they have personal interest in the subject matter. I realize that is going to be a shock to the media, but attorneys have clients (people who pay them to take care of a particular problem or issue) or they work for an employer (a company or the government). In both instances the lawyer is being paid for his work product, not his personal belief system. His/her knowledge and experience is being utilized exactly as one would a CPA or a Stockbroker. There are, of course, rules of ethics and every lawyer has personal standards.

    The important point that the liberal media needs to understand is that:

    1. Just because a lawyer argues a case does not mean that he agrees with or supports his client or employer.
    2. When an employer tells an attorney to find supporting law, that is not a request for that lawyer’s opinion!
    3. The brilliant arguments and persuasive reasoning in briefs and arguments are NOT from a lawyer’s heart. They are straight from the brain and many many hours of difficult research. They are nothing more than work product.
    4. If a lawyer wins a case it does not mean that he necessarily approves of the outcome, but he was paid to work for that outcome.
    5. A judge does not make law.
    6. A judge does not change a law he does not like or feels is unfair or unreasonable.
    7. A judge takes the law cited by the attorneys and applies that law impartially and without bias to the facts of the case (when not in a jury trial).

    There is almost certainly more than one thing I neglected to mention. I apologize for whatever I left out. I just hope that people stop trying to credit or blame lawyers for work product! We have enough rotten practitioners, we really don’t need for the honest lawyers to be unjustly accused.

      60% of Refugee Arrivals Since Judge Halted Trump’s Order Come From 5 Terror-Prone Countries

      By Patrick Goodenough | February 16, 2017 | 4:20 AM EST

      60% of Refugee Arrivals Since Judge Halted Trump’s Order Come From 5 Terror-Prone Countries

      (CNSNews.com) – Sixty percent of the refugees admitted into the United States since a federal judge halted President Trump’s executive order designed to prevent “foreign terrorist entry into the United States” originate from five of the seven countries identified by the administration and its predecessor as most risky.

      Of the total 2,576 refugees resettled in the U.S. from around the world since U.S. District Judge James Robart’s February 3 restraining order, 1,549 (60.1 percent) are from Syria (532), Iraq (472), Somalia (363), Iran (117), and Sudan (65). No refugees have arrived from the other two applicable countries, Yemen and Libya.
      Of the 2,576 refugees to have arrived since Feb. 3, 1,424 (55.3 percent) are Muslims – 817 Sunnis, 132 Shi’ites, and 475 refugees self-identified simply as Muslims, according to State Department Refugee Processing Center data.
      Of the refugees hailing from the specified countries of terrorist concern, Muslims accounted for the overwhelming majority of those admitted in all cases except for Iran.

      Muslims comprised 99.6 percent of the admissions from Syria; 73.5 percent of those from Iraq; 99.7 percent of those from Somalia; and 93.8 percent of those from Sudan. Of the Iranian refugees admitted, by contrast, only 9.4 percent were Muslims, while just under 60 percent were Christians of various denominations. Trump’s Jan. 27 order barred entry to the U.S. of all refugees for 120 days; prohibited entry to refugees from Syria indefinitely; and blocked all entry – immigrant and non-immigrant – by nationals of Syria, Iraq, Iran, Somalia, Sudan, Libya and Yemen for 90 days. (The order does not itself name the seven countries, referring instead to “countries referred to in section 217(a)(12) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1187(a)(12).” 

      That law, signed by President Obama in Dec. 2015, required additional security for arrivals from Syria, Iraq, Iran, and Sudan and any other country designated by the Department of Homeland Security as a source of legitimate terrorism concerns. Two months later Obama’s DHS added Somalia, Yemen and Libya to the list of “countries of [terrorist] concern.”)
      In the week between Trump’s inauguration and his Jan. 27 executive order, a total of 2,090 refugees were admitted to the U.S., of whom 918 (43.9 percent) were from the identified countries: 296 from Syria, 218 from Iraq, 211 from Somalia, 155 from Iran, 37 from Sudan, one from Yemen and none from Libya.

      The following seven-day period – from the day of the executive order to the day before the judge’s restraining order – only 19 refugees were admitted from the countries of concern (18 Somalis and one Iraqi, all but two arriving on the actual day of the order). Those 19 comprised just 2.2 percent of the total 861 arrivals over that period.

      The next week, from Feb. 3 to Feb. 9, saw 1,180 refugees arrive, 882 (74.7 percent) of whom were from the countries of concern.

      Last Saturday, Trump tweeted that 77 percent of refugee admissions since Robart’s ruling, which was subsequently upheld on appeal, “hail from seven suspect countries.” (The actual figures at that time, according to the Refugee Processing Center data, were 402 refugees from Syria, 340 from Iraq, 155 from Somalia; 115 from Iran; 38 from Sudan; and none from Yemen or Libya, amounting together to 71.7 percent of the total admissions.)

      Since then the proportion of refugees from the countries of concern has declined somewhat, although the countries continue to account for a disproportionate number of the total contingent of refugees admitted since Feb. 3.
      While those five countries alone – Syria, Iraq, Iran, Somalia and Sudan – have provided 60.1 percent of the refugee arrivals from Feb. 3 until today, another 22 countries have together accounted for the remaining 39.9 percent.
      Those 22 countries are Afghanistan (25), Bangladesh (2), Bhutan (96), Burma (147), Burundi (2), Central African Republic (12), China (1), Cuba (17), Democratic Republic of Congo (347), El Salvador (23), Eritrea (48), Ethiopia (15), Honduras (3), Moldova (10), Pakistan (24), “Palestine”(2), South Sudan (6), Russia (22), Tanzania (1), Uganda (4), Ukraine (213) and Vietnam (8).

      Apart from the majority of 1,424 Muslims, other religions represented among the refugees admitted since Feb. 3 include Christians, (including Catholics, Protestants, Orthodox and evangelicals, from countries including Iraq, Iran, DRC, Ukraine and Burma), Buddhists (mostly from Bhutan), Hindus (from Bhutan), Baha’i (from Iran), Yazidis (from Iraq) and Ahmadis (from Pakistan).

      A Backpack , A Chair and A Beard

      Think of all the beauty still left around you, and be happy

      Classic, Not Contemporary

      Reviving classical life in a modern world

      larrysmusings

      This WordPress.com site is for insights, observations and comments on random issues. We are part social critic, part philosopher, part dreamer, and part seeker after elusive truths.

      A swede's take on America

      politics, islam, usa, sweden, muslims, middle east, world politics

      The Rouser

      Wake up. Ask Why?

      Reclaim Our Republic

      Knowledge Is Power

      SMALLGOVREPORT

      Always question the premise

      %d bloggers like this: