Why Trump is Justified & Right in Choosing a New Supreme Court Judge NOW


Sentimental Statements on “Honoring” Ginsberg are Misplaced

Kelly OConnell image

Re-Posted from the Canada Free Press By  —— Bio and ArchivesSeptember 20, 2020

 

Why Trump is Justified & Right in Choosing a New Supreme Court Judge NOW

The battle to replace iconic 87-year-old Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg went white-hot as soon as she passed. Angry arguments against Trump’s immediate replacement now fill the airwaves. But Trump has a legal right to replace Ginsburg now. Since Democrats have gone native with proxies burning down half our cities, this is no time to lapse into sentimental blather about “honoring Ginsberg,” etc.

10 Reasons Why Trump MUST Replace Ginsberg Immediately

  1. Rules Allow Replacement

    Make no mistake, current rules regarding appointment of a supreme court justice ALLOW REPLACEMENT—even within months of a re-election. So it is LEGAL. See Section 2 of US Constitution.

  2. Stolen Years 

    Obscene Democrat lies falsifying charges against President Trump must now be punished. What better way than swift replacement of their leftist icon? Falsified “treason” before inauguration with the Russia “investigation” hasn’t been punished. Further, Dems still won’t cooperate, but doubled down with Ukraine “impeachment” while Biden’s son perversely profits from Ukrainian graft. Unpunished evil destroys a nation. Having stolen Trump’s reputation and subsequent opportunities, this alone justifies this legal act.  Replace Ginsburg NOW!!

  3. Ginsburg ‘Dying Wish’

    As Urban Folklore, claims Ginsburg made a dying wish days before death to wait for replacement is a crown jewel confabulation. Ginsburg supposedly whispered, “my most fervent wish is that I will not be replaced until a new president is installed,” to granddaughter Clara Spera, a fellow at the American Civil Liberties Union. Anybody smell a rat?

  4. 2016 “Precedent”

    Despite apparent precedent, the Senate blocking Judge Merrick Garland’s vote is different. The Republicans then controlled the Senate under Obama, didn’t want Garland, so the vote would have been a waste of time since Supreme Court Justices are chosen by simple majority.

  1. What Dems Would Do

    Does anyone doubt if Dems had a chance to replace Kavenaugh they would not do so immediately?

  2. Ginsburg Hated Trump 

    Even wildly liberal WA Post termed Ginsburg’s intemperate Trump criticisms “Inappropriate.” Terming Trump a “faker.”  Ginsburg didn’t bother to hide her animus against POTUS, one reason she became the judicial superstar of the so-called “Resistance.” Ginsberg should have recused herself from any cases involving Trump. She finally appologized, but the damage was done. For reasons of her absurd public bias, Ginsburg should be replaced NOW.

  3. To Winner Goes Spoils

    Trump ran on a promise of replacing judges with true conservatives.

  4. Avoidable Conundrum

    As a frequent cancer victim, aged almost 90, Ginsburg could have retired during Obama’s tenure, but chose not to. Whose fault is that? Ginsburg caused this dilemma, tainting her legacy.

  5. Dems Already Destroying US

    Democrats have supported the protesters/rioters and still resist condemning them, despite $1 billion in insurance claims, arson, assaults and murders. Another liberal SCOTUS member is an existential danger when America is fighting off liberal anarchy.

  6. Fighting for Survival

    America is fighting for survival, while one party pushes for radical change—like allowing mob violence without punishment, to stop enforcing “quality of life” laws, pushing racial division, defunding police and using riots to scare the middle class into standing down.

CONCLUSION

As America’s future hangs in the balance, while the Democrat party has given up all semblance of honor or honesty, Trump has an absolute duty to replace Ginsburg now to save the Republic. 

Who pays for the damage brought by Black Lives Matter/Antifa?


Question: What American political entity has that relationship to BLM/Antifa? 
Answer: The Democrat National Committee, et. al.  And you might as well sue Mao.

Lee Cary image

Re-Posted from the Conservative Tree house By  —— Bio and ArchivesSeptember 20, 2020

 

Who pays for the damage brought by Black Lives Matter/Antifa?

Three posts from July 23-August 8, from this author, compare China’s Cultural Revolution to Black Lives Matter/Antifa.  The series began with:

“The Chinese Communist Party’s Cultural Revolution (1966-1976) was the precursor to today’s urban protests involving Black Lives Matter (BLM) and Antifa. As America’s Cancel Culture spread into several Big Blue Cities, largely governed by Democrat politicians for decades, city officials stood back and let it happen.” (Links to parts 12, and 3.)

China: During the winter of 1978-79, many victims of the Red Guards’ violence against people and property led to “a spate of highly personalized appeals for redress of grievances written by (or on behalf of) ordinary citizens who had suffered abuse at the hands of Leftists during the Cultural Revolution.’’ (”Burying Mao, Chinese politics in the Age of Deng Xiaoping,” Richard Baum, Princeton University Press, ©1994, p. 76)

Frustrated by long delays in receiving any response from Beijing, “thousands descended upon Beijing personally to press their grievances.  With official channels clogged and response times painfully slow, many petitioners took to the streets, posting handwritten appeals (known as xiaozibao, or ‘small character posters’) at Xidan, Tiananmen, and elsewhere…Most of the petitioners who descended on Beijing were poor, many were in dire straits. Some had traveled long distances on foot, carrying their possessions in knotted bundles; others had hitched rides into the cities on freight trains or trucks…In all, more than 100,000 out-of-towners descended upon Beijing and Shanghai in 1979, hoping to have their cases reopened…Despite government pledges to review all appeals objectively and impartially, many petitioners complained of receiving unfair treatment.” (Baum, p.76)

The Chinese Communist Party (CCP), led by Chairman Mao Zedong, planned and launched the Cultural Revolution.

America: In the wake of the 2007-08 financial failure in America the saying that applied to the big banking institutions was: “Too big to fail.”
In the wake of the damage done by China’s Cultural Revolution, it was: “Too big to blame.”

What will we say when BLM/Antifa is over?

In the wake of the on-going damage to people and private property brought upon many of America’s Big Blue Cities (BBC) at the hands of (1) BLM street posters involving many white, both male and female, virtue-signalers between 17-27 years old, march through residential neighborhoods late at night, stall daytime traffic in downtown areas, and verbally intimidate evening diners in outdoor restaurants, paired up with (2) Antifa thugs dressed in all black who excel at destroying property and beating-up weaker people, we wonder: What will be America’s version of “The Petitioners’ Movement” in post-Cultural Revolution China?  

China: The Petitioner’s Movement happened when Chinese victims of the Red Guard sought redress for damages done to them and their property.  They eventually went to Beijing for redress, because they knew that’s where it all started.

The unspoken mantra for China’s Petitioners’ Movement was, essentially: “We can’t blame any one person, because that would mean blaming Chairman Mao. And he lives above blame.”

America: Can we count on the U.S. Department of Justice to prosecute and, when guilt is proven, punish those in the BLM/Antifa movement who injured persons and damaged private property?

Can we expect the Democrat-elected prosecutors in the BBCs to indict and try those who injured persons, and destroyed property? Perhaps a few—those not elected with Soros money.

So, who will hold those accountable for the carnage that continues to mount-up in the run-up to the General Election, and may escalate after November 3?

China: The CCP led by Mao Zedong gave the green-light to China’s Cultural Revolution.  Then stood back, and watched it unfold assuming a life of its own, free of any one person’s control.

It was to the CCP that many of the Cultural Revolution’s victims petitioned for redress for the physical and material damages they sustained. They knew the source, but prudence meant not saying it out loud.

America: Who will Americans petition for redress for the damages that BLM/Antifa brought into their communities?

Shall claims be directed at the big corporations, foundations, and wealthy individuals who seek to buy virtue by donating big money to the BLM/Antifa Movement? (Operationally, the organizations are two heads of the same snake.)

Should victims of the BLM/Antifa movement petition the U.S. Government for damages?  That would be like suing the United States Postal Service if one of their trucks hits your new car.

Perhaps those insurance companies that pay out tens-of-millions in damages to looted chain stores will consider recouping part of their loss by suits aimed at BLM’s growing financial assets?  But, no, that would tarnish their corporate image by putting the patina of white supremacists on their brand.

That leaves those small, independent businesses that sustained damage to seek redress at the local level. The same local level that let it happen.

Those physically and materially injured by BLM/Antifa may sue their local Blue government for not dispatching their tax-funded Police Departments to bring order to the chaos when it first began, instead of letting it get out of control. Perhaps some of the defunded police money could go to the destroyed small businesses. Or not.

Problem is, more than a few of those municipalities run perilously close to bankruptcy.  (See Chicago and NYC.)

To restate the question: How will America’s version of China’s “Petitioners’ Movement” seek to redress the damages done to persons and property by BLM/Antifa

In short, who pays?

In China, little was done for the victims of the Cultural Revolution. It was born a child of the one-and-only political party, and conceived in the mind of its near deity, Chairman Mao.

Question: What American political entity has that relationship to BLM/Antifa? 

Answer: The Democrat National Committee, et. al.  And you might as well sue Mao.

‘Climate arson’ and other wildfire nonsense


Real goal is to avoid responsibility for policies, and increase control over energy, lives, property

Paul Driessen image

Re-Posted from the Canada Free Press By  —— Bio and ArchivesSeptember 20, 2020

'Climate arson' and other wildfire nonsense

In what has become an annual summer tragedy, wildfires are again destroying western US forests. Millions of acres and millions of animals have been incinerated, hundreds of homes reduced to ash and rubble, dozens of parents and children killed, and many more people left missing, injured or burned.

Air quality across wide regions and entire states is so bad people are told to stay indoors, where many have hibernated for months because of the coronavirus, but indoor air is also contaminated. Acrid smoke and soot have been carried to Chicago and beyond. Firefighters are profiles in courage, as they battle the blazes for days on end, while all too many politicians are displaying profiles in opportunism.

Pelosi: “Mother Earth is angry”

“If you give a climate arsonist four more years in the White House, why would anyone be surprised if more of America is ablaze?” Joe Biden thundered. “Mother Earth is angry,” Nancy Pelosi pontificated. “She’s telling us with hurricanes on the Gulf Coast, fires in the West, that the climate crisis is real.”

Despite finally starting to thin out overgrown forests, California Governor Gavin Newsome resorted to the longstanding party line about his state’s wildfires: Manmade “climate change is real. If you don’t believe in science, come to California and observe it with your own eyes.” Washington Governor Jay Inslee agreed. “These are climate fires,” he said. “And we cannot, and we will not, surrender our state and expose people to have their homes burned down and their lives lost because of climate fires,”

It’s ideological nonsense, intended to deflect blame and avoid responsibility for decades of public policy errors and forest mismanagement – and to justify new laws that would multiply government control over energy, industries, jobs, living standards, lives, property, and freedom to choose where and how we live.

One could argue that people shouldn’t have built homes in and near these forests. That they should have been persuaded or compelled to live in crowded urban areas, where crime, riots and Covid run rampant. But they do live in rural areas – and our politicians, land managers and judges have a duty to implement policies and practices that protect their homes, communities and lives, as well indigenous wildlife.

Perhaps slightly warmer or drier summers have made the wildfires slightly more likely or frequent. But decades of laws, lawsuits, fire suppression policies and forest mismanagement practices have guaranteed the buildup of massive amounts of dead and diseased trees, dry brush and grass, and decaying leaves, needles and debris. With every wet spring spurring plant growth that dries up every dry summer, just one lightning strike, careless camper, gender-revealing pyrotechnic or angry arsonist can ignite an inferno.

Timber harvesting and thinning have been banned for decades

Because timber harvesting and thinning have been banned for decades, thousands of scrawny trees grow on acreage that should have just a few hundred full-sized mature trees. As of 2017, tens of billions of scrawny trees mix with 6.3 billion dead trees in 11 Western states; state and federal forests in California alone had over 129 million dead trees. Those numbers have most assuredly skyrocketed since 2017, while steadily increasing dry brush and debris now provide even more tinder for super-heated conflagrations.

Flames in average fires along the ground in managed forests might reach several feet in height and temperatures of 1,472° F (800° C), says Wildfire Today. But under conditions now found in western tinderboxes, flame heights can reach 165 feet (50 meters) or more, and crown fires can generate critter-roasting, soil-baking temperatures that exceed 2192 degrees F (1200 C). Wood bursts into flame at 572 F. Aluminum melts at 1220, silver at 1762, and gold at 1943 degrees F (1064 C)! 2192 degrees is hellish.

Most of this heat goes upward, but super-high temperatures incinerate endangered wildlife – as well as organisms and organic matter in thin western soils that for decades afterward can support only weeds, grass and stunted, spindly trees. Western conflagrations jump fire breaks because these ferocious fires are fueled by the unprecedented increase in combustibles that radical environmentalist policies have created.

These monstrous fires generate their own high winds and even mini tornados that carry burning branches high into the air, to be deposited hundreds of feet away, igniting new fires.

None of this has a thing to do with climate change. To say a 0.1, 0.5 or even 1.0 degree change in average global temperatures would alter these forest fire dynamics defies credibility. To say the monumental fuel buildups in our forests are irrelevant is like claiming a minimally furnished home will burn as easily and ferociously as one filled to the brim with furniture, books, old newspapers and cans of gasoline.

The solution is simple

The solution is simple, though expensive and time-consuming at this point. Cut the red tape. Remove some of that fuel, so that fires don’t get so big, hot, powerful, and destructive. Clear wider areas around buildings, homes and communities. Create more, wider fire breaks. Build more roads that let people escape the flames. Send the timber to sawmills, to create jobs and tax revenues, and American lumber for affordable homes. Clear out brush and grass under transmission lines – and upgrade the transmission lines. Bolster rapid-response airborne and ground-based firefighting capabilities.

Up to now, all this has been prohibited, litigated and shut down in states that now have horrific fires. Radical Greens have even blocked cattle grazing that would control grass and brush in national forests.

Still not convinced? Look at recent major fires that petered out when they reached managed forests.

For years, San Carlos Apache Indian Reservation foresters chain-sawed overgrown trees, harvested better timber, improved timber stands, and used controlled, prescribed burns, weed killer and other measures to keep their forests healthy, protect sacred sites, and preserve jobs and wildlife. They even turn scrubby trash trees into particle board and sell it for furniture, as part the tribe’s timber business.

In 2017, the Wallow Fire, the most destructive wildfire in Arizona history, burned 538,000 acres – but fizzled out when it reached the reservation’s well-managed forest. A year later, the Rattlesnake Fire torched more than 20,000 acres in the Apache-Sitgreaves National Forest – but likewise faded out when it reached the neighboring White Mountain Apache timberlands, which had also been managed responsibly and proactively, using the same management practices that guide San Carlos Apache foresters.

For decades, the Southern California Edison electric utility employed selective logging, prescribed burns and other management strategies in its Shaver Lake Forest

Similar success stories can be found in the most unlikely place: California. For decades, the Southern California Edison electric utility employed selective logging, prescribed burns and other management strategies in its Shaver Lake Forest. This year’s Creek Fire raged through treetops and several hundred thousand acres in the Sierra National Forest. But when it reached the SoCalEd timberlands, it dwindled into a low-intensity surface or ground fire – which doesn’t incinerate big trees and wildlife.

Back in August 2013, the monstrous high-intensity Rim Fire immolated 180,000 acres in the Stanislaus National Forest. Thankfully the National Park Service (NPS) had been employing prescribed burning and other proactive management practices for years in Yosemite National Park next door. When the wildfire reached the park, it turned into a far less destructive surface fire.

The ferocious Rough Fire of 2015 roared through California’s Sequoia and Sierra National Forests, totally torching 150,000 acres. But it too became a ground fire when it reached Sequoia National Park, where the NPS had also used prescribed burns and other good management practices for decades.

A final point. The raging fires in our long mismanaged forests are not natural. They are not what used to burn with regularity through America’s forests. A century of fire suppression and fuel accumulation means they turn into superheated infernos. Manage them properly first. Then let nature work again.

The lesson? Regardless of what Earth’s climate may do – regardless of who or what may be responsible for any fluctuations – we must take responsible, appropriate, effective measures now. Doing so will save habitats, wildlife, homes and human lives today, and tomorrow.

We cannot and must let more megafires incinerate forests and people for decades to come, under an hubristic, misguided, ideological belief that we can eventually end global fossil fuel use and control planetary climate and weather conditions, thereby somehow making monster wildfires a dim memory.

Whatfinger News: Leading the Battle To Save America From Socialism


Drudge and the Fake News industry,seems intent on destroying the GREATEST President of our lifetime. We all know the battle that is ahead…. It’s fight time… Let us all fight with our keyboards and spread the word.

Judi McLeod image

Re-Posted from the Canada Free Press By  —— Bio and ArchivesSeptember 20, 2020

Whatfinger News: Leading the Battle To Save America From SocialismIn the midst of gruelling Election Campaign Blues where the majority of mainstream and social media seem to be backing the Democrat transformation of America over to a complete misery-causing Socialist State, comes great News: Whatfinger News is gaining significantly on the Fake News disseminated daily by the once Conservative-leaning Drudge Report.

That’s the kind of WOO-HOO NEWS that has passionate lovers of America, including Canada Free Press (CFP) over the moon!

‘Whatfinger News Is Now Larger Than Almost All Aggregates Under Us Combined! ONLY Drudge is larger’… Sgt. Pat, Whatfinger, Sept. 20, 2020.

WhatFinger and the fight to save America from soul-killing socialism

This is the true story about how two veterans—who not only love their country, but served it—rose up from the bottom of the pile climbing up to the top of the hill, throwing everything they had into the fight to save America from soul-killing socialism.

“As of September 19, 2020, Whatfinger News is now approximately 25.3% of the size of the Drudge Report… making us larger than almost all aggregates below us combined.”-Sgt. Pat.

This is how Sgts. Pat and Mike did it (Whatfinger, Sept. 20, 2020)

When it comes to saving America, no one’s home any more over at Drudge.  Matt Drudge, who rode to fame on the hem of Monica Lewinsky’s blue dress, doesn’t seem to be there any more.

Even President Donald Trump is aware that Drudge has fled the Save America Arena:

“President Trump is right…. Drudge is declining and Whatfinger is taking up the slack. If our President gave us such a note on his Twitter…. We would grow far far faster, which would help him greatly as we are his greatest friends in the news industry…”, notes Sgt. Pat.

“To Our readers: THANK YOU for voting the way you did. Letting us show the world our true size. Together now, we can take on Drudge and help educate as many people as possible, and just maybe help Trump win even more states come November. Please spread the word, and every time you see some site claiming to be a ‘Drudge killer’ knowing now that you can add up all other’ Drudge Killers’ and still they do not match Whatfinger News in page views, please let them know. Help us spread the world. We’re fighting for this nation to stay free, and up against the leftist media, this is a fight for survival so spread the word…. be a keyboard warrior and help us help our nation and President Trump…

“Below is Google Stats, which Similarweb bases their own stats ons in page views:

Google Stats

Whatfinger is now not only the number 2 aggregate after Drudge

“What this now means… Whatfinger is now not only the number 2 aggregate after Drudge, but our monthly rate as well as daily rate bests the combination of all aggregates below us. ALL OF THEM…

“Drudge Report: 63 million Page views per month.

“Whatfinger News is now at 16 million Page views plus per month…
CFP is at 6.019 million pages
Bongino is at 3.37 million pageviews per month
The Lib. Daily is at 3.228 million pageviews per month
Rantingly is at 851,000 per month
Revolver is at 352,000 per month
Total for all sites below Whatfinger News is 12,820,000 pageviews per month.”

“What this means is Whatfinger News is at present the ONLY true competition for Drudge.”

Way to go, Whatfinger!

Says Sgt. Pat: “All of those clicks you all do on our advertisers we’ll be putting to good use to grow faster so we can be a force against The Drudge Report, and the rest of the fake news industry, which seems intent on destroying the GREATEST President of our lifetime. We all know the battle that is ahead…. It’s fight time… Let us all fight with our keyboards and spread the word. Refute the lies of the fake news media and help Whatfinger grow… Together we will help save this nation so that we never need to witness a real revolution, something the left wants to try. Once they try gun confiscation in a Biden Administration, all bets are off and America will see that Second American Revolution. So we MUST do everything we can to stop them.”

Semper Fi!  God Bless America.

Why the Left loathes Tucker Carlson


Fox News host reports that Nashville’s Democrat mayor was caught red-handed intentionally obstructing economic recovery

John Eidson image

Re-Posted from the Canada Free Press By  —— Bio and ArchivesSeptember 20, 2020

Why the Left loathes Tucker Carlson

Using absurd claims that Tucker Carlson is a racist, white supremacist, bigot, etc., etc., etc., the Left has furiously attempted to have his prime-time Fox News show taken off the air. The opening segment of the September 17 edition of Tucker Carlson Tonight is a perfect example of why the left hates his guts.

Citing a breaking report by a local TV station, Carlson revealed that, acting in concert with other high level members of his administration, Nashville’s Democrat mayor intentionally withheld from the public encouraging Covid-19 data that showed an unexpectedly low infection rate at the city’s bars and restaurants. By concealing that information, Mayor John Cooper was able to justify keeping Nashville’s restaurant industry under a virtual lockdown, thus suppressing the city’s economic recovery until after the election. Please watch Tucker’s explosive report, and consider sharing it with your friends. (See Below)

From coast to coast and border to border, Democrat governors and Democrat mayors are making coronavirus decisions that have next to nothing to do with public health, and everything to do with using their official powers to rig the election against President Trump.

When the June jobs report showed the economy was undergoing a brisk recovery, with 4.8 million new jobs added, Democrats panicked. Since then, Democrat mayors and governors have surreptitiously done what Nashville’s mayor did: cook the coronavirus books in ways that retard local economic recovery between now and the election. Much to the delight of Democrats, by August the number of new jobs had fallen from 4.8 million in June to 1.4 million, a drop of 64%. Mission accomplished.

The same kind of disgraceful tactics are being used to delay school openings. Acting in concert with Democrat-controlled school boards, blue city health officials are blocking pre-election school openings to tamp down rising employment numbers by making it difficult for parents with school-aged children to go back to work. No better example of that can be found than in California, where Los Angeles County Health Director, Dr. Barbara Ferrer recently told the press that it’s “not realistic” to open the county’s schools “until after the election.”

Of things that matter to Democrats, public health and economic recovery take a distant back seat to their insatiable desire for ironclad political power.

Leaked files Expose $2.7 trillion Money Laundering by Big Banks


The leaked files have revealed that about $US2.7 trillion in suspected dirty money moving through the global financial system. Because bankers are never prosecuted individually, they will do whatever they can without worry that they will ever be prosecuted and in the meantime, they get huge personal bonuses. If they get caught, the bank pays a fine not them personally. Here the records show that the five main global banks, JPMorgan, HSBC, Standard Chartered Bank, Deutsche Bank, and Bank of New York Mellon, have continued to engage in these practices despite US authorities have previously fined these financial institutions for previous similar dealings in dirty money. As long as the shareholders pay fines and there is never any responsibility for the bankers personally, we should not be surprised by the continued dealings in money laundering.

As long as the New York Department of Justice and the Southern District of New York continue to protect the bankers personally, we will NEVER see and end to this practice. Why should we when the bankers keep their bonuses and the shareholders are the ones who have to pay the fines? Why do the prosecutors and judges allow this to go on?

The government is corrupt for prosecuting the bankers personally does not produce huge fines. It’s all about the money.

United Nations Trying to Influence US Election Against Trump


It should come as no surprise that the United Nations is seeking to expand its power to a worldwide government as numerous countries turn to the UN to impose this be Great Reset so they can claim it is not them. The United Nations has scheduled Climate Week NYC which starts tomorrow and is intended to run alongside the UN General Assembly to try to tell the world that Trump has to go to save the planet. They are seeking to intensify the focus on climate change to inject this into the US presidential election. This is exactly what the Democrats accused Russia of doing. This time it is the United Nations-supported by the big Tech companies and Bill Gates with his coconspirator – Klaus Schwab from the World Economic Forum.

Perhaps they will be mugged now that crime is up and they have chased much of the smart wealthy out of New York.

Judge Amy Coney Barrett on the Short-List


Appellate Judge Amy Coney Barrett is at the top of the list for replacements for Justice Ginsberg. Like hydroxychloroquine, simply because Trump nominates her she will be vilified. She is a Catholic and already the Democrats are preparing to tear her apart based on her religions. After graduating from the University of Notre Dame’s law school at the very top of her class. In fact, in 1997, she graduated first in her class, which earned her the Hoynes Prize, the Law School’s highest honor which was very impressive with respect to her thinking process.

Amy then worked as a law clerk for Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia who was a strict constructionist. It was Scalia who pushed for reform in the way the courts were treating those charged. The jury was not determining every fact, and Scalia saw this as unconstitutional and argued this position until the rest of the court saw his constitutional argument. Finally, in APPRENDI v. NEW JERSEY No. 99—478. Argued March 28, 2000–Decided June 26, 2000, Scalia defended the citizen’s right to a jury trial which had been eroded by the procedure.

In the Spirit Justice Ginsberg, Amy was the only female law clerk in the Supreme Court at that time. Besides being sitting on the court of appeals, she was also a University of Notre Dame law professor. Ironically, because she has been a dedicated mother of seven, her Catholic faith was turned against her by California Sen. Dianne Feinstein who questioned whether or not she could separate her religious faith from her duty as a judge. “The dogma lives loudly within you,” Feinstein said during the confirmation hearing for the Court of Appeals hearing. Barrett insisted that her professional beliefs and her religious beliefs would be kept separate. Ironically, the right to an abortion is deeply entangled with the right to privacy. In the recent case involving the anti-abortion law in Louisiana(1), even conservative Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. struck it down saying that respect for precedent compelled him to do so.

Roe vWade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973), was a landmark decision of the U.S. Supreme Court in which the Court ruled that the Constitution of the United States protects a pregnant woman’s liberty to choose to have an abortion without excessive government restriction. To understand the foundation of Roe v Wade and why it cannot be overturned without jeopardizing our right to privacy in the face of this contrived pandemic is critical. In 1965, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down a law banning the distribution of birth control to married couples, ruling that the law violated their implied right to privacy under the U.S. Constitution, GRISWOLD v. CONNECTICUT, 381 U.S. 479 (1965). How do you enforce that a married couple illegally used a condom during sex? Does an FBI agency have to watch? And in 1972, the Supreme Court struck down a law prohibiting the distribution of contraceptives to unmarried adults. Again, there is no way to enforce such laws without a government agent observing every sexual act.

To overturn Roe v Wade, would mean that the government can order you to take vaccines that violate your religion that even alter your DNA. While I would never condone an abortion personally, my personal belief cannot blind me to support overturning Roe v Wade opening the door to absolute tyranny. To do so would allow someone like Bill Gates to bribe politicians to pass laws to compel women to have Chips inserted to prevent pregnancy. It would be just one tiny step to then compel you to obtain permission from the government to have a child. They could just as easily impose an IQ test and determine you are not qualified to have children. Gates has already funded remote control birth-control by implanting chips into women. He is obsessed with population control.

The US Supreme Court actually upheld the eugenics views of the in Buck v. Bell, 274 U.S. 200 (1927), where the United States Supreme Court, written by Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr., actually ruled that a state statute permitting compulsory sterilization of the unfit, including the intellectually disabled, “for the protection and health of the state” did not violate the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution.

The Supreme Court actually wrote: “Three generations of imbeciles are enough.” The Supreme Court has never expressly overturned Buck v. Bell,  274 U.S. 200 (1927). This case has not been overturned, but if it were challenged, then the same right to privacy from which Roe v Wade stands would come into play. Overturn that case, and a lot more tyranny will follow. The only possible way to overturn Roe v Wade must involve the Due Process Right to life and liberty without somehow overturning the right to privacy. That can be a real Pandora’s Box.

Suspension and Delegation Amy Coney Barrett

After reading some of her decisions and this article she wrote regarding the Suspension Clause, I believe she would NOT overturn Roe v Wade simply because of her religion. Here she clearly states that she believes that the statutes involved, which have never been activated since the Civil War domestically, delegate too much discretion to the President. Her reasoning falls in line with Strict Construction championed by Scalia, and therefore I would support her.  I believe the far more important question turns on her view of the power of government. She is not a rubber stamp and that is vital to our liberty in the future. I will note, for those who will say I support here only because she is a conservative nominated by Trump, I reviewed the decisions of Brett Kavanaugh and stated on this blog that I would have voted against his nomination.

POLITICO, the leftist view, as usual, states: “Barrett has stated that “life begins at conception,” according to a 2013 Notre Dame Magazine article. She also said that justices should not be strictly bound by Supreme Court precedents, a deference known as stare decisis, leaving open the possibility that she could vote to overturn Roe v. Wade if seated on the court.” Their view is to hell with every other issue, it’s all about abortion exclusively.

Meanwhile, Nancy Pelosi who is in the House, not the Senate which decides appointments to the Supreme Court, has bluntly stated that she doesn’t rule out impeachment to delay Trump’s picks for the Supreme Court. She is so out of her mind and is clearly engaging in the Obstruction of Justice. She is in the House – not the Senate. The House does not preside of these appointments. As a matter of law, she or any senator is not allowed to ask a judge how they would vote on abortion. The Senate is not permitted to nominate a person based upon a prearranged vote. Chief Justice Roberts, a conservative appointed by President Bush, upheld Obamacare. It is often a matter of constitutional law and trying to guess how Barrett will vote exclusively on abortion is impermissible constitutionally. This assumption is discrimination based upon the fact that she is Catholic and has 7 children, two of whom are adopted from Hati.

Diane Feinstein is running again and she 87 while Nancy Pelosi is 80. These two women liberationists from the 60s no longer represent women today. They are traditionally anti-religion and Feinstein’s question of Barrett before illustrates her hatred of not just religion, but the fact that Barrett even has 7 children which she finds obviously disgusting.


  1. JUNE MEDICAL SERVICES L. L. C. ET AL. v. RUSSO

President Trump Talks to Mark Levin…


President Trump sits down for an extensive interview with Fox News host Mark Levin.

 

Sunday Talks – Jim Jordan Discusses Potential SCOTUS Replacements for Justice Ginsburg and Other Issues With Durham Probe of FBI/DOJ Conduct…


Representative Jim Jordan gives his perspective and analysis on the passing of Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg and his thoughts on her replacement.  Additionally, Jordan discusses the ongoing material in the background of the Durham probe and the potential for investigative findings to surface prior to the election.

.

The SCOTUS pick will be important not just for long-term legal direction, but also for anticipated legal challenges likely to surround ballots, dates, votes and the 2020 election.

Challenges to recent ballot decisions in Pennsylvania and Michigan will likely fast-track to the Supreme Court.  Any 4-4 tie vote in SCOTUS means the lower court ruling will stand.  As expected this is shaping up to be a very interesting election year…

 

.