Tag Archives: Supreme Court

Recent Posts

The NYT

4 Comments

While the news of the day seems to be the 22 generals who have come out from under their rocks and spoke out against King Berger’s changes to my Corps. I’m sick of it. Yeah, I know they had to try diplomacy first and when Berger continued to march, they finally had to say something. Only three spoke out in favor of my “Open Letter to CMC Berger”; which to date has garnered >6,ooo hits and still going strong. The plea now is to write your elected criminals, as most are, and mirror their comments Hmm, I did that several months ago. Now even the liberal; Jim Webb spoke out; I was waiting for that one. It was a good, concise, on the mark article. Maybe some of his liberal friends in Congress will now pay attention since one of their own has spoke out. But I digress as that’s not what this post is about.

Once again, my friend and Marine brother hits the mark concerning this scumbag we all love to hate – Hunter Biden, and of course his beloved father. Both of whom are criminals and deserve to be in jail serving life. I fear once again that nothing, absolutely nothing will come about from the newest and greatest investigation. It’s a laugh. Our justice system is a system catered to the guilty, not you and me.

How about the latest nomination for the Supreme Court who was unable to define a woman when questioned by a Congresswoman.

I’m amazed that the infamous NYT is still publishing a newspaper. Who the hell buys it, do you? I love Greg’s comment about “All the news that fits.” LOL And how about Twitter and  Facebook? Does anyone still have accounts with those communist, socialist social medias? I do have a FB page where I only go to in order to add my posts; I’m amazed they have yet to censor me. And I sure as hell do not have a Twitter account, albeit they “think” I do as I get emails from them, which I reply to telling them where to go. In sum we are feed nothing but BS from the media, including the social media. I love Greg’s closing comment about the comparisons between Russia’s and our medias. Read and enjoy if you can.

Hunter’s Pandora’s Laptop

By: G. Maresca

The New York Times’ time-honored maxim: “All the news that is fit to print” finally conceded that Hunter Biden’s laptop’s emails are newsworthy as first reported by the New York Post in October 2020 – 16 months after the presidential election.

The conservative New York Post founded by Alexander Hamilton deserved a Pulitzer but will never see it.

The Times has relished their bloated reputation for decades while perfecting the art of falsehood and being left-wing. Some 90 years ago, their Moscow correspondent was Walter Duranty. While Stalin was executing his political opponents and starving millions of Ukrainians, Duranty’s dispatches rendered Stalin’s homeland a worker’s paradise. Duranty was double-dipping collecting from the Times and Stalin, who bribed him with money, booze, drugs, and prostitutes while being awarded a Pulitzer Prize in 1932.

Sounds like Duranty was Hunter Biden’s prototype.

When it was finally revealed that Duranty had lied, the Times refused to surrender the Pulitzer.

In Laurel Leff’s 2005 book: “Buried by The Times,” during World War II “the paper of record” suppressed news of Nazi atrocities against Jews because publisher Arthur Sulzberger was a Jewish assimilationist. The paper referred to the Jews as “refugees” to assuage how the Nazis were targeting a pogrom of European Jewry.

The difference between a conspiracy theory and the truth is nearly a year and a half provided you consider the Times an arbiter of truth. The Times must believe Biden is toast giving the paper nearly three years to bolster the next Democrat nominee.

If that wasn’t enough and despite no evidence, 50 government sleuths claimed that Hunter’s laptop was part of a Russian disinformation plot published in a Times op-ed piece. What remains unanswered is do these fabulous 50 maintain their employment and security clearances? You bet your bippy nothing will happen to these scum.

All the Times offered was an unconvincing admission buried deep inside their broadsheet. The Times did not just conceal the facts about Hunter Biden’s illicit dealings and his father’s 10% kickback, they bungled, beat, and buried the story with Jimmy Hoffa.

Hunter’s emails underscored how he was profiting from his father’s connections including being a board member of a Ukrainian gas company. According to the Wall Street Journal, Biden’s former business partner admitted the laptop’s contents had Biden profiting from a Shanghai company directly tied to the Chinese communists.

The Times was living their true creed: “All the news that fits – their agenda.” Twitter jumped on the suppression train by censoring their New York Post account, while Facebook algorithmically did their leftist duty in killing the story as Hunter’s laptop conveniently met the journalistic abyss on the cusp of Election Day. Censorship and abject lying are the core tenets of the left’s strategy, as there is no substance to their socialist agenda.

Rather than investigate, the mainstream media dismissed it or claimed Hunter Biden’s debauched escapades were fake news – case closed – until now.

A post-election survey of Biden voters said 10% would not have voted for him provided they aware of the illicit dealings of his son. Imagine what the Times would publish provided one of Donald Trump’s sons had impregnated a stripper like Hunter? How many articles about Joe’s grand baby in Arkansas have you read?

The news’ profession is infiltrated with plenty of bias editors who have no issue about using deliberate omission as suppression. News and its ensuing opinion pieces are affected as much by what is omitted as by what is covered. This column is just one example. And provided it disappears for a week or two, you know the deal.

When will the IRS investigate the Biden’s dealings? Indictments would open a Pandora’s box exposing Biden as the corrupt, incompetent lifetime politico he is. Biden is compromised, while his son possesses no shame after being captured on video snorting cocaine naked with a prostitute.

The complicit media was promoting false narratives to take down a sitting president, in Donald Trump, is the biggest story.

Corrupt politicians and their mainstream media cohorts are the rust corroding our liberties. The difference between the state media in Russia and what passes for news in the U.S. is the eight-hour time difference between the two nations.

If these stories don’t grow legs, the nation’s fourth estate is failing everyone.

I just have to post the following pictures about how far our military has gone in order to “positively impact diversity, equity, and inclusion.” –  both from our combat ready Air Farce.

Oh, and don’t forget about our Corps’ endeavor to impact the goals as well.

Isn’t this a great country or what? 

Originally posted 2022-03-26 14:50:48.

Current Events

Biden’s Briar Patch

Video 4 Comments

What is going on in the swamp these days? There is always so much going on among the creatures, tis hard to stay tuned up. Recv’d this missive from my good friend, fellow Marine Brother, Greg, this a.m. Biden just cannot stay out of trouble. To quote a famous Philosopher, “Stupid is what stupid is.” Why do so many of his remarks, promises, and decisions come back to bite him in the backside? Well, this one surely will. Stay tuned.

By: G. Maresca

With Republicans poised to win back the Senate after the November midterm election, Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer, who is the court’s second-longest serving member, announced his retirement at the end of the court’s term this summer.

Biden promised during the 2020 South Carolina primary that provided he was elected his first appointment to the nation’s highest court would be a Black woman. Biden prefers identity politics taking precedent over qualifications.

Perhaps Biden is trying to make up for the fact that when George W. Bush nominated Janice Rogers Brown, a black woman for the U.S. Court of Appeals, she was opposed and filibustered by Sen. Biden. Brown was eventually confirmed and then nominated by Bush for the Supreme Court but replaced by Samuel Alito due to Biden’s opposition. In 1987, Biden bashed renowned judge Robert Bork, a Ronald Reagan Supreme Court nominee, so maliciously that he transformed Bork’s name into a verb.

Biden weaves a long and sordid tale with Supreme Court nominees, so don’t be fooled by this latest “first” just ask Janice Rogers Brown.

Biden’s appointment record speaks volumes with Kamala Harris as Vice President and Jennifer Granholm as Secretary of Energy – pure ideological selections. Biden’s first year has been a disaster yet, he continues along the same path as he kowtows to the extreme elements of his party. By announcing his intention to only consider black women, Biden insults his nominee, the court and nation.

Biden did his nominee a disfavor and thus put her judicial qualifications in question for the remainder of her career. The search will be limited to roughly 2% of the national lawyer consortium, which narrows the pool tremendously, while handcuffing the best candidates.

Biden’s nominee will not change the court’s balance of power but it will make it much younger.

The nation deserves a robust debate about the nominee, whether Black, Hispanic White, Asian, man, or woman. Diversity does not afford one to accurately read the law better. The increasing acceptance that gender and race, rather than individual merit, is the most important characteristic no matter how well-intended, should raise fervent alarm.

Even if the nominee was the best, she is denigrated by being chosen for race and gender rather than capabilities and credentials. She will certainly not get the disgraceful grilling that Kavanaugh received at his nomination hearing. Nor will she be asked why does any accomplished Black woman stoop to being played as a political pawn?

Biden was reminded that nominating Diana Ross to the Supremes happened a long time ago and he should select Kamala Harris already a torchbearer as the first woman who was Jamaican and Indian to become a Black woman.  Oh yeah, do that Biden, good choice. Wait, stop, watch this short video.

Replacing Harris with a competent vice president would enhance Biden’s ticket should he run again, or who can lead the ticket if he is unable.  

Biden said he will miss Breyer, as he is especially fond of his chocolate ice cream. Wait, stop, sorry to interrupt again, but watch this short clip of our clear thinking president

Naturally, any criticism of Biden’s pick will be treated as racist and misogynistic.

Once upon a time in America, Martin Luther King’s dream had relevance: “I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.”

Many who observe King’s legacy embrace racism and sexism and fool no one.

Rather, they threaten and intimidate.

Biden treats the Constitution as a mere suggestion rather than the nation’s foundational law while failing to live up to his oath to faithfully uphold it.

Democrats run government by quota, rather than merit. Meritocracy is dead as race, gender, religion or lack thereof, is what characterizes contemporary America and not for the better.

This fall, the Supreme Court will hear arguments regarding race discrimination in admissions at Harvard and the University of North Carolina. Biden’s nominee, who gained her seat by race and gender, will now adjudicate such cases.

Breyer’s last line of his resignation letter reads: “Throughout, I have been aware of the great honor of participating as a judge in the effort to maintain our Constitution and the rule of law.”

That should be priority one.

Sadly, it is anything but.

Ice Cream anyone?

 

Originally posted 2022-02-03 09:18:11.

Current Events

Supreme Strikeout

3 Comments

Good day Folks. Before I talk about today’s post allow me to admit to a gross screwup. I posted earlier in the week an oath I believed  was the commissioning oath at USMA. However, had I done my due diligence, I would have discovered it was the Oath of Admissions given to newly joined cadets. Therefore, I removed it. I apologize profusely as I should have done my research as I always do, but failed to this time. I shall not do so again. That is my literary  responsibility.

However, even though it was their admissions oath, I still take exception to its wording. It is very telling about what the USMA plans to teach these young sponges.  If you goggle it and listen to it carefully, I suspect you will find it “strange” to whom they are pledging allegiance.

Now to the post. Once again Greg comes through with a barn burner. Makes me wonder why we even have a Supreme Court if they cannot answer the mail in a manner that solves the issues instead of leaving them open to further interpretation and litigation. Roberts has always been and continues to be a weak Justice in my book. He was appointed by the young Bush.

By Greg Maresca

Supreme Court decisions are national news but a 9-0 decision in today’s world of partisan politics is an anomaly. Fulton v. City of Philadelphia was based on discrimination of the Free Exercise Clause of the Constitution’s First Amendment and although unanimous, religious liberty still hangs in the balance.

In 2018, despite a critical need for foster families, the city of Philadelphia prohibited Catholic Social Services (CSS) from providing foster care. CSS had been at it for over two centuries long before fostering was a government service. Holding fast to Catholic moral teaching, CSS excluded gay couples from participating. Moreover, CSS will not place children with unmarried heterosexual couples either.

The kicker is no gay couple has ever asked CSS for foster service because 27 other organizations throughout Philadelphia already do. As other Philadelphia foster care Christian ministries surrendered to the city’s demands, CSS chose to fight claiming their First Amendment rights were violated.

CSS lost at the Third Circuit but were vindicated last month by the Supreme Court.  All nine justices agreed Philadelphia violated the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment.

Chief Justice John Roberts wrote CSS’s work is not “public accommodation,” since “certification as a foster parent . . . is not readily accessible to the public.” Philadelphia’s fault was not in excluding a ministry that follows biblical morality, but not considering it to be “public accommodation.”

Herein lies the crux of the issue.

Justices Thomas, Alito and Gorsuch panned the vulnerability of Robert’s words since it fails to answer the greater question of religious liberty protections for Christian ministries. All three justices are constitutional originalists.

Roberts has routinely sought unanimous consent while deciding on specifics and diluting principle. Such jurisprudence only guarantees future litigation. Roberts is so bound to legal precedent that writing clearly on Constitutional matters is nearly impossible. His fear of originalist context would rule Dred Scott as still relevant.

This is what morally confused thinking produces.

There is much to be said for distinct moral clarity when laws are written and adjudicated.

The powers that be are too willing to compromise on principle to make it appear fair to both sides. Eventually, there will be no principles left worth defending.

Roberts is arguably one of the weakest chief justices in the court’s history.

The unanimous ruling has little significance, as Alito wrote, “This decision might as well be written on the dissolving paper sold in magic shops. The City has been adamant about pressuring CSS to give in, and if the City wants to get around today’s decision, it can simply eliminate the never-used exemption power. The Court has emitted a wisp of a decision that leaves religious liberty in a confused and vulnerable state.” In its future dealings in foster contracts, Alito asks, “What if it simply deletes the exemption clause? Voilà,” Alito writes, “today’s decision will vanish, and the parties will be back where they started.”

The Court has once again struck a glancing blow for religious liberty rather than establishing a rock-solid precedent.

Just last week the court refused to hear Arlene’s Flowers, Inc. vs. Washington, another case where fighting for one’s religious liberty ends without justice while damaging one’s livelihood. Colorado baker Jack Phillips is still a target after he won his Supreme Court case and the Little Sisters of the Poor have had to make two court appearances.

Given the left’s enmity to religious liberty, the nation is in desperate need of a Supreme Court that must boldly defend it.

How pathetic that any of these cases had to petition the Supreme Court, let alone make a trip to court at all.  Throughout this litigation, the charitable works of CSS were partially derailed hurting the very people the leftists in Philadelphia claim to care about.

How many times does the Supreme Court have to decide in favor of the religious before the harassment ends?

The Supreme Court whiffed a grand opportunity to protect religious liberty more convincingly.

Here’s hoping they will not miss the next one because there will be a next one.

Such proceedings only underscore how our ultimate trust lies not with the Supreme Court, the Congress, or who sits in the Oval Office, but in Divine Providence.

Amen

 

Originally posted 2021-07-08 16:12:42.

Recent Posts

A Star-Spangled Misfire

2 Comments

I have been remiss from posting any gobbly gook from the swamp creatures of late, but with good reason. We just returned from a weekend in Tuscaloosa, Alabama to witness our granddaughter graduating from the University. WOW.  Impressive is an  understatement! I’m sure some of you attended a university as large and impressive, as Alabama, but I had not. I was awestruck. At my granddaughter’s suggestion, I even had a “Yellow Hammer,” actually I had three, and I might add suffered the entire next day. LOL

But then I digress. Great article from my favorite presenter. Although growing up only 30 miles from D.C., and having been stationed there for two years, I must admit I really did not know much of  its history. Oh I knew it it was not a state, but beyond that I have to claim ignorance. Just in case you fall into the same category, please copy and paste the link below for a very good explanation of D.C. and why it is not a state from the Encyclopedia Britannica. 

https://www.britannica.com/place/Washington-DC

Then read Greg’s excellent article about Biden’s attempt to simply expect Congress to make it a state.

By Greg Maresca

In May 2008, presidential candidate Barack Obama announced during a campaign stop that he had been to 57 states. Such an embarrassing blunder was glazed over like a Crispy Cream donut. In retrospect, it was perhaps a Freudian slip. Provided Democrats get their way, they will get closer to 57 by adding Washington D.C. as the 51st state with Puerto Rico waiting on deck.

As president, Obama must regret not going for broke with the whole socialist agenda when he had the chance. President Biden has certainly wasted no time in picking up the slack in his first 100-days in office.

Provided you need to be reminded: elections have consequences.

In Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution, the Founding Fathers created a special federal district for the sole purpose of not being a state. Writing in The Federalist No. 43, James Madison clarified that without a separate federal district, the federal government “might be insulted and its proceedings be interrupted with impunity.” It is obvious the Founders did not want to subject the federal government to the sway of any state government.

Moreover, D.C. statehood would violate the intent that states have substantial land mass. Aside from the original 13 states, no state was smaller than 30,000 square miles until Hawaii entered the union in 1959. However, with a total of 137 islands and over 10,000 square miles, Washington D.C. does not even come close.

If that’s not enough, the 23rd Amendment enfranchised D.C. residents in presidential elections with three Electoral College votes, tenured its venue and size, designating it as the “seat of Government.” The amendment established that the only way to repeal a constitutional amendment is with another amendment.

It was no oversight that the nation’s capital is not a state, but rather an exclusive territory under the absolute authority of Congress, where elected representatives and senators from every state in the union could meet on neutral ground to conduct the nation’s business.

The nation understands D.C.’s unique constitutional status. A 2020 Gallup poll said 64% of Americans opposed DC statehood vs. just 29% in favor. Sorted by party and region, there were “no major subgroups of Americans voice support for DC statehood.”

If the city’s denizens do not appreciate their longstanding historical significance, they can always vote with their feet and move. This legislation symbolically labeled H.R. 51 would turn the District into exactly what the Founders rebuffed.

In a dichotomy of the times, Democrats desire to localize what the Constitution explicitly has federalized, while at the same time trying to federalize everything else. The statehood push is ultimately a power play for Democrats who want to turn D.C. into a city-state as the deep blue District will guarantee them two seats in the Senate changing the chamber’s partisan composition in their favor. With the Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee wanting to pack the Supreme Court, adding two additional Senators via D.C. is a Democrat two-fer.

Democrats’ carry-on like this because they know Republicans will not put up a fight. Here is yet another version of Democrat unity and healing where the end goal is a one-party totalitarian centralized state.

This legislation is nothing but a power grab in the first-degree. If it were truly about statehood and the fabricated mantra of “taxation without representation,” Democrats would introduce legislation for D.C. to become part of Maryland from which it was initially ceded. But that doesn’t work as it would not obtain the desired two additional Senate seats.

Without missing an opportunity to race bait, New York Democrat Rep. Mondaire Jones, called arguments against D.C. statehood “racist trash.” Naturally, if you oppose D.C. statehood on any level be it Constitutional, historical, you name it; you are to be smeared as a racist because a majority of its residents are black.

With the Senate filibuster requiring 60 senators to advance any legislation, the odds of D.C. statehood are formidable. Democrat Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia said he will not support the legislation or efforts to eliminate the filibuster. “If Congress wants to make D.C. a state, it should propose a constitutional amendment,” Manchin suggested.

Manchin is one Democrat who actually gets it.

Perhaps more will join him.

What  did surprise me was the  29%  who were in favor of making it a state. I wonder how many of those were ignorant, as I, about its history?

Originally posted 2021-05-06 14:13:55.