Posted originally on Mar 22, 2024 By Martin Armstrong
There is a major case before the Supreme Court that has broad implications for EVERYONE’s civil rights. An agency arbitrarily demanded that fishermen pay for the agency’s decision to regulate them, which was not in the statute, is the facts before the court. In short, the fishermen are objecting to a regulation that requires them to pay observers to ensure their vessels comply with federal regulations while at sea. In other words, you have to pay for a government agent to follow you while working every day.
Cape May, New Jersey-based commercial fishing operations, run by Bill Bright, Wayne Reichle, and Stefan Axelsson, filed a suit, Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, which is backed became the lightning rod to overturn – Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., 467 U.S. 837 (1984). Can you imagine if you had to pay the salary of a government observer to ride with you in your car to ensure you do not speed just to drive your car?
Following the oral argument in a closely watched administrative law case that could have a major impact on limiting the government’s arbitrary actions, it appeared that some U.S. Supreme Court justices would be open to limiting the opportunities for lower courts to defer to federal agencies’ legal interpretations in disputes over rulemaking known as the Chevron case.
Questions posed by U.S. Supreme Court justices during oral arguments suggested that a compromise on Chevron’s deference may be in the works.
Fishing groups asked the Supreme Court to overturn its 1984 ruling in Chevron, which established that federal judges must defer to agencies’ reasonable interpretations of ambiguous laws in litigation over rulemaking. While some justices seemed receptive to such a move, others asked questions that indicated some reservations.
Completely overturning Chevron would eliminate a legal dictatorship for agencies. However, curtailing its conditions of use could accomplish many of the same aims without a high-profile rebuke of a 40-year-old precedent.
Justices Amy Coney Barrett and Elena Kagan appeared to be concerned about the effects of overturning Chevron. During oral arguments, they began exploring how the court might impose new guardrails around the use of the long-standing legal doctrine. Chief Justice John Roberts asked a few questions along the same lines, indicating he was perhaps hesitant about totally scrapping Chevron.
Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson supported maintaining the Chevron deference as it is since they are Democrats and love big government. Still, with Justices Barrett and Roberts potentially closer to the limiting rather than overturning option and Justice Kagan exploring the middle ground, it looked like a compromise was in the air.
Justice Barrett gave a clue to a path forward when she coined the term “Kisorize” during her questioning of Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar. This demonstrated her curiosity about whether the high court could restrict the use of the Chevron doctrine similarly to the way it curtailed the use of the Auer deference to agency interpretations of ambiguous regulations in 2019’s Kisor v. Wilkie. Kisor argued that Auer deference forced judges to blindly give weight to agencies’ interpretations of their regulations—regardless of how the judges would otherwise interpret the regulations in their own independent judgment. This deference doctrine, to me, is a violation of the Separation of Powers because an agency will ALWAYS interpret its regulation to its own self-interest. This deference has been rooted in a presumption that Congress intended for courts to defer to agencies when interpreting their own ambiguous rules. The Court adopted that presumption, which has created an arbitrary and unconstitutional practice of authoritarianism, denied judicial review.
We are talking about the very foundation of our nation. The Constitution is NEGATIVE and was intended to be a restraint upon government – not a means to expand powers. Sotomayor and Jackson need to move to the center and just for once realize the very foundation of our Constitution was to RESTRAINT government to preserve our liberty.
Since there did not appear to be a 5:4 vote for overruling Chevron, that leaves restricting its application, if a judge is to defer to an agency’s legal interpretation under Chevron, the agency must clear a two-step process. At step one, the judge must determine if the statute the agency relies on as authority for its rule is ambiguous. Then, in step two, the judge must determine if the agency’s interpretation of that ambiguity is reasonable. This is where our rights will still slip through the cracks.
The Court could instruct judges not to be too quick to find ambiguity and to better define reasonableness. This is still a gray area. Step two would instruct judges to make sure an agency is acting with the force of law and to look for other statutory indications that Chevron may not apply in that case. This fine-tuning would avoid the formal overruling of a prior precedent that would do what is right but unlikely since agencies will cry over a loss of arbitrary power. It should be where the “best” interpretation of a law wins in court, even if there is this claim that their interpretation is “reasonable.” That would be the correct decision, but there goes the agency’s absolute power. What they do now is infer that statutory silence concerning their controversial powers constitutes ambiguity requiring deference to the agency. That is an outrageous abuse of power.
I seriously doubt that the Supreme Court should overrule Chevron outright. Once you hand any power to those in government, it becomes like Communism. You can vote your way in, but you have to shoot your way out. They just can’t bring themselves to ever hand power back to the people, regardless of what the Constitution had to say about it. They have turned the Bill of Rights, which is a NEGATIVE restraint upon government, into a positive right you have, and then they claim you can waive that right, thereby constructively amending the Constitution so it no longer exists as applied to you.
Haiti has been propelled into a downward spiral ever since the Clinton Foundation stepped in to “help.” They have successfully destabilized the nation. Haiti is now a lawless land ruled by a gang leader called BBQ for his brutal tactics, and yes, the reports of cannibalism among gang members is factual. Over 2.5 million residents in Haiti were living in extreme poverty without sufficient food, water, or shelter before the gangs toppled what remained of the nation in early March. It is too dangerous for humanitarian agencies to enter the country. The gangs released over 4,000 inmates from the prisons and ran the prime minister out of office. Where are people fleeing?
Florida. Florida boasts the largest population of Haitian migrants in all of the US. Haitians are now the 15th largest migrant population residing in America, and 49% reside in Florida. Governor Ron DeSantis is sending over 250 soldiers to “protect the state from the land, sea, and sky.” The federal government has refused to protect the borders and it is up to the state to protect their people.
Now let me circle back to the Clintons for a moment to explain how they successfully destabilized Haiti. Bill and Hillary spent a portion of their honeymoon and used that time to plot expanding their empire. Hillary Clinton became Secretary of State in 2009 and immediately state developing Haiti was one of her top priorities. Clinton wanted to attract foreign investment into Haiti, and appointed her husband, former President Bill Clinton, as the special envoy to Haiti from the UN.
As reported in the Washington Post on behalf of a correspondent from the Associated Press:
America became grossly involved in Haitian politics, and former Haitian President René Préval could not rule without approval from the US. For example, a law was implemented in 2009 that forced manufacturers to raise the minimum wage from 24 cents per hour to 61 cents. Manufacturing was slowly on the rise in Haiti and becoming the nations second most lucrative sector behind agriculture. Manufacturers stated that they could only afford a seven-cent increase to begin and the president supported Haitian businesses, but the US State Department paired with Haiti’s elite and demanded those manufacturers “appealed to the unemployed and underpaid masses.”Mass layoff ensued.
Haitians experienced a devastating earthquake in 2010 that claimed the lives of 160,000 people and displaced an additional 1.5 million. The people quickly realized the Clintons were only there for financial gain rather than humanitarian reasons. Bill Clinton led the Interim Haiti Recovery Commission (IHRC) that was supported by all of the elites in Washington. Former Presidents Obama promoted a fund created by establishment elites Clinton and George W. Bush known as the Clinton-Bush Haiti Fund, which FAILED after two years of operating. They declared that 100% of funding would go to relief efforts, but it is estimated that only 8%, at best, was spent on the earthquake victims.
“While other organizations in Haiti are using their resources to deliver immediate humanitarian aid, we are using our resources to focus on long-term development so that these crises are prevented,” the fund stated after receiving criticism for misusing aid. Do you think the 1.5 million displaced Haitians were focused on long-term investment strategies? This fund was intended solely to support the elites. They were able to use the guise of climate change (e.g, the earthquake) and disease (e.g., the cholera outbreak) to attract foreign investments aggressively.
Then there was the Interim Haiti Recovery Commission (IHRC) implemented in April 2010 co-chaired by the UN and Haitian elites. None of the recovery projects were properly funded. The mandate expired the following year on October 21, 2011, and Haiti’s corrupt government did not renew the measure. The IHRC managed to approve $1.6 billion in reconstruction projects, and every globalist humanitarian agency received their cut to “help” the people of Haiti. This was yet another money-grabbing scheme for the elite, and the nation was never restored to pre-2010 conditions.
The Clintons also demanded that the Haitian government remove or reduce all tariffs on agriculture coming into the US, worsening the situation for the nation’s main sector. Haiti’s own government was unable to run a fair election in 2011 when Fanmi Lavalas, the most popular candidate at the time, was removed from the ballot.
Haiti was a corrupt nation before the Clintons’ involvement, but they successfully dismantled Haiti’s agriculture and manufacturing sectors. In 2009, Haiti’s economy was estimated to have a GDP of $8.4 billion in PPP, with a fiscal deficit of 2.8% of GDP. Haiti’s GDP grew to $32 billion by 2023, with the average growth rate contracting by -2% in the past four years. Haiti has the 22nd largest economy in the Americas. Yet the nation remains in a third-world state with insufficient food, water, medical care, and basic supplies.
So when you hear of these climate change initiatives targeting underdeveloped nations, their ultimate plan is to cash in and leave. None of these agencies actually care about the people or humanitarian efforts. What the Clintons did merely scratches the surface of how the globalist elites ensured Haiti would never have a chance to succeed. And now the virtue-signaling leftists believe America should accept the people, the very people who hate America for what our government did to them in recent history?
Posted originally on the CTH on March 18, 2024 | Sundance
For some reason CBS Sunday Morning put Christine Blasey-Ford back into the media cycle with an interview about her life after accusing Supreme Court Justice Kavanaugh of sexual assault. {Full Interview Here} The CBS motive appears to be restimulating the gender vote in an election year.
Blasey-Ford comes across as she did in the original 2018 fiasco; detached from the information and regretting she ever participated. For those who know the entire deep weeds backstory of the Rehoboth “beach friends,” former and current DOJ people who are now constructing political Lawfare, it is well accepted Blasey-Ford was a tool for their use. Heck, the accuser never even penned the letter she was conscripted to write to the Senate Judiciary Committee. [Hook, WATCH]
The resurfacing of Blasey-Ford may be intended to stimulate the gender vote, but has the potential to backfire if people start to dig deep into this prior storyline. Within the 2018 background, and with the application of hindsight, all of the Lawfare “beach friends” become visible.
Names like Mary McCord, David Laufman, Monica McLean and Michael Bromwich all swirl around the construct that used Blasey-Ford as the vessel for their hit against Donald Trump’s supreme court nominee. The Senate investigation into the Blasey-Ford accusations was quickly dropped by the media after the investigative staff began to discover the network and connections.
The Senate Judiciary Committee has released a lengthy report in November of 2018 (full pdf below) containing the investigative material from the senate investigation of the Kavanaugh accusations.
On page #27 of the report the senate committee notes their intent to continue investigating the role of retired FBI Agent Monica Lee McLean, who appears to have been ‘handling‘ accuser and best friend, Christine Blasey-Ford:
It always seemed curious how the Senate committee never redacted the name Monica McLean when first releasing the investigative material containing her involvement.
In a letter from a former boyfriend of Christine Blasey-Ford, there was a name curiously not redacted. The name of Monica L McLean; revealed as a life-long friend who Ms. Ford helped with polygraph preparation.
The media focused on the letter from the perspective of it outlining a lie told by Ms. Ford during her congressional testimony… But the backstory to Ms. Monica Lee McLean appeared an even bigger story.
In addition to boyfriend noting Ms. Monica L McLean in the current letter, Ms. Monica Lee McLean was also one of the signatories of another letter from the Holton-Arms class of 1984 bolstering the credibility of her friend, Ms. Blasey-Ford.
Some research into Ms. Fords life-long friend from school, Ms. Monica Lee McLean (DOB 03-15-66), reveals an almost guaranteed likelihood the polygraph assistance had something to do with the career path Ms. McLean would take.
Monica Lee McLean was admitted to the California Bar in 1992, the same year Ms Ford’s boyfriend stated he began a six-year relationship with her best friend. The address for the current inactive California Law License is now listed as *”Rehoboth Beach, DE”. [*Note* remember this, it becomes more relevant later.]
According to her LinkedIn background, Ms. Monica Lee McLean, was a 24-year employee of the Department of Justice and FBI from 1992 to 2016. According to public records Ms. McLean worked in both Los Angeles, CA and New York, NY.
In a 2000 Los Angeles FBI declaration Ms. McLean describes herself as a Special Agent of the FBI, Associate Division Counsel, in the Los Angeles Division Legal Unit:
Sometime between 2000 and 2003, Ms. Monica L McLean transferred to the Southern District of New York (SDNY), FBI New York Field Office; where she shows up on various reports, including media reports, as a spokesperson for the FBI.
There was a family death in 2003, and Monica McLean then shows up with an address listed in Washington DC in 2003; so it would appear Ms. McLean spent about 10 years in California, and then returned to the east-coast.
…”according to Monica McLean, spokeswoman for the FBI’s New York office.” [2009 citation]
After 2003, Ms. Monica L McLean is working with the SDNY as a Public Information Officer for the FBI New York Field Office, side-by-side with SDNY Attorney General Preet Bharara:
According to her LinkedIn profile, Ms. McLean retired from the FBI in 2016, after 24 years of work. [*It should be noted that Ms. McLean’s PIO partner in New York, Jim Margolin, is still currently employed there; and coincidentally attached to the case against President Trump’s former lawyer, Michael Cohen.]
It did not appear that Ms. Monica L McLean ever married. On the east coast her historic addresses are Current: Rehoboth Beach, Delaware; and Former: Bethesda, MD; Potomac, MD; Washington, DC; Malibu, CA; Los Angeles, CA; Laguna Beach, CA; Marina Del Rey, CA and Laguna Hills, CA respectively. All addresses coinciding with her employment and transferred assignments therein.
In an April, 2016, article in the Delaware Cape Gazette, Mrs. McLean shows up at a wine tasting event; and is pictured within the publication:
Enjoying the tastes are In back (l-r) Kelly Devine and Nuh Tekmen. In front, Monica McLean, Karen Sposato, Catherine Hester, Sen. Ernie Lopez, R-Lewes, and Jennifer Burton. BY DENY HOWETH
Ms. McLean is pictured above with the large pink handbag. This article confirms the location of Monica McLean in relationship to the numerous public record citations of her Delaware residence.
Here’s where things get really interesting.
Ms. Monica Lee McLean and Ms. Christine Blasey-Ford are life-long friends; obviously they have known each other since their High School days at Holton-Arms; and both lived together as “roommates” in California after college. Their close friendship is cited by Ms. Fords former boyfriend of six years.
Ms. Monica McLean retired from the FBI in 2016, apparently right after the presidential election. Her current residence in 2018 was listed at Rehoboth Beach, Delaware; which aligns with public records and the serendipitous, printed article.
Now, where did Ms. Blasey-Ford testify she was located at the time she wrote the letter to Dianne Feinstein, accusing Judge Brett Kavanaugh?
MITCHELL: The second is the letter that you wrote to Senator Feinstein, dated the — July 30th of this year. MITCHELL: Did you write the letter yourself? FORD: I did. MITCHELL: And I — since it’s dated July 30th, did you write it on that date? FORD: I believe so. I — it sounds right. I was in Rehoboth, Delaware, at the time. I could look into my calendar and try to figure that out. It seemed… MITCHELL: Was it written on or about that date? FORD: Yes, yes. I traveled, I think, the 26th of July to Rehoboth, Delaware. So that makes sense, because I wrote it from there. MITCHELL: Is the letter accurate? FORD: I’ll take a minute to read it.
So, we have Dr. Blasey-Ford in Rehoboth Beach, DE, on 26th July 2018. We’ve got her life-long BFF, Monica L McLean, who worked as attorney and POI in the DOJ/FBI in Rehoboth Beach, DE…. Apparently at same time Ford wrote letter to Senator Dianne Feinstein.
Ms. Blasey-Ford and Ms. McLean, the BFF she coached on lie detector testing, together for the four days leading up to the actual writing of the letter. July 26th to July 30th. It would appear that Ms. Blasey-Ford was with Ms. Monica L McLean, the retired FBI agent and former New York field office spokesperson, at the time she wrote the letter to Senator Feinstein.
That would certainly begin to explain quite a bit about who exactly was handling Ms. Ford; and how there would be an intentional effort, from a subject matter expert, on how to best position the attack against Brett Kavanaugh.
Who better to help scrub the internet history, and know what processes and people to enlist in such preparatory work, than a retired lawyer who worked deeply inside the FBI?
Not only did Ms. McLean possesses a particular set of skills to assist Ms. Ford, but Ms. McLean would also have a network of DOJ and FBI resources to assist in the endeavor.
A former friendly FBI agent to do the polygraph; a network of politically motivated allies?
Does the appearance of FBI insider and Deputy FBI Director to Andrew McCabe, Michael Bromwich, begin to make more sense?
Do the loud and overwhelming requests by political allies for FBI intervention, take on a different meaning or make more sense, now?
Standing back and taking a look at the bigger, BIG PICTURE….. could it be that Mrs. McLean and her team of ideological compatriots within the DOJ and FBI, who have massive axes to grind against the Trump administration, were behind this entire endeavor?
Considering all of the embattled, angry, institutional officials (former and current); and considering the recently fired DOJ and FBI officials; and considering the officials currently under investigation; and considering the declassification requests which will likely lead to the exposure of even more corruption…. Could it be that these elements wanted to do something, anything to get back at the executive branch; and possibly change the tide?
If so, and I think the likelihood is pretty good, doesn’t everything known just easily reconcile if you think of Ms. Blasey-Ford as a tool for those ideologues?
If Ms Monica Lee McLean and her allies wanted to strike, she couldn’t be the visible face of the confrontation because she was retired FBI. It would be too obvious. She would need a patsy; a friend who could deploy the hit on her/their behalf. It would need to be someone she could shape, easily manage and guide etc. Someone who could be trusted, and at the same time would be trusting of them.
It was quite likely Ms. McLean selected/recruited her life-long best friend, Ms. Blasey-Ford.
Oh, and Ms. Monica Lee McLean’s attorney was, wait for it,….. David Laufman.
Ms. McLean’s lawyer, David Laufman, said in a statement: “Any notion or claim that Ms. McLean pressured Leland Keyser to alter Ms. Keyser’s account of what she recalled concerning the alleged incident between Dr. Ford and Brett Kavanaugh is absolutely false.” (continue reading)
If there was any doubt the “small group” of connected DOJ and FBI officials were behind the use of Ms. Ford, we put that doubt away as soon as Ms. Ford’s handler, Monica McLean, enlisted David Laufman as her legal defense.
They were not even trying to hide it any more.
Michael Bromwich is representing Ms. Ford, and David Laufman is representing Ms. McLean. The concentric Lawfare gang is working overtime, likely pro-bono. 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.
David Laufman was the Department of Justice – National Security Division, Deputy Asst. Attorney General in charge of counterintelligence, cyber security, counterespionage and export controls. He was inside the DOJ-NSD when the FISA application against Carter Page, and by extension the Trump campaign, was constructed, submitted and approved.
As most people are now aware the epicenter of the DOJ/FBI Clinton-Steele operation against candidate Trump stemmed from a collaborate “small group” effort of Main Justice officials within the National Security Division (John P Carlin – head, who was replaced by Mary McCord to finish the FISA application); and officials within the FBI Counterintelligence Division (Bill Priestap – head).
David Laufman abruptly resigned from his DOJ position on Wednesday February 7th, 2018, without notice – citing “personal reasons.” {Go Deep} Mr. Laufman was one of the “small group” who interviewed Hillary Clinton, July 2nd, 2016, during the FBI email investigation.
Additionally, In his former DOJ-NSD position, Laufman would have held knowledge of the FISA “Title-1” surveillance program initiated on Carter Page and the “incidental” Trump campaign officials. Laufman would also have close contact with former Asst. Deputy Attorney Bruce Ohr; husband of Fusion GPS employee Nellie Ohr.
To see Ms. Fords life-long best friend, FBI agent and influencer, Monica McLean, represented by Mr. Laufman would indicate even more evidence of the “small group” motive. Again, as previously presented, each of these DOJ/FBI officials are defending their interests -and controlling their risk exposure- from current congressional probes into the activity of a corrupt DOJ and FBI in 2015, 2016 and 2017.
These internecine relationships are likely why staffers for Senate Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley sent a follow-up demand letter to the lawyers for Ms. Blasey-Ford, requesting additional information to include the communications between the legal team and the witnesses surrounding Ms. Ford’s claims:
[…] I urge you once again, now for the third time in writing, to turn over the therapy notes, polygraph materials, and communications with The Washington Post that Dr. Ford has relied upon as evidence.
In addition to the evidence I requested in my October 2 letter, in light of recently uncovered information, please turn over records and descriptions of direct or indirect communications between Dr. Ford or her representatives and any of the following: (1) U.S. Senators or their staffs, particularly the offices of Senators Feinstein and Hirono, other than your communications with me and my staff in preparation for the September 27 hearing; (2) the alleged witnesses identified by Dr. Ford (Leland Keyser, Mark Judge, and Patrick “P.J.” Smyth); and (3) Debbie Ramirez, Julie Swetnick, or their representatives. (Read Full Grassley Letter)
It would appear that staffers for Senator Grassley could see the outline of the Lawfare group who orchestrated the smear campaign against Judge Brett Kavanaugh; and they began going directly to those who framed the campaign for answers….
Perhaps, just perhaps, that’s why Ms. McLean’s name was never originally redacted.
Posted originally on Mar 17, 2024 By Martin Armstrong
The absurd decision that Fani Willis is not disqualified after meeting with the Vice President and having her lover appointed the prosecutor over Trump, who was also meeting with the Department of Justice, demonstrates that the legal system is just a political charade. A judge is supposed to be recused when a reasonable person might question their impartiality. This is all political, and the entire world knows it. The emails I get from overseas have been thoroughly disgusted at how the Biden Administration has weaponized the legal system to ensure its policies influenced by the Soros Conspiracy have waged war on the people of the United States.
The United States has lost any credibility in the eyes of the world. It is no longer the land of the free and home of the brave. The new interpretation is that the government is free to do as it likes and intimidate private enterprises to censor free speech, which they are prohibited from doing by the Constitution directly. There is no longer any question. The United States will be unable to survive this as a union. Political corruption has stopped to a new low, and when any nation has gone that far down the slope of corruption, it cannot stand.
Historians agree on one point. The reign of Commodus (180-192AD), who followed his father, Marcus Aurelius, is where the line is drawn for the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire. He abused the law just as the Biden Administration is doing currently. Commodus ordered his sister Lucilla’s execution after a failed assassination and coup attempt when she was about 33 years old. Commodus was eventually assassinated.
What followed Commodus’s death was another Civil War. The Praetorian Guard proclaimed Pertinax emperor, the son of a freed slave. He attempted to root out corruption by restoring discipline among the Praetorian Guard. They did not accept his attempt to drain the swamp, so Pertinax was assassinated by the Guard. After that, the Praetorian Guard actually auctioned off the throne to the highest bidder. Two rival bidders presented themselves – Titus Flavius Sulpicianus (father-in-law of Pertinax) and Marcus Didius Julianus. Didius’ bid was 25,000 sestertii per man, which was the highest bid, and he was duly declared Emperor.
The Year of the Five Emperors was 193AD, during which five men claimed the title of Roman emperor. Rome was plunged into civil war again after the death of Nero in 68 BC, the assassination of Caesar in 44 BC, and Caesar’s crossing of the Rubicon to drain the swamp in the Roman Senate in 49 BC.
Will History Repeat Again?
When the Rule of Law Collapses – Nothing can Possible remain Standing
Better off with Joe Biden 33%. Better with Donald Trump 45%. Trump +12
With independent voters the margin jumps to Trump +22 (25/47)
If this type of sentiment holds true through November (it should), this puts the election vote result beyond the reach of the AME Church Network election and polling officials to change them.
Brutal Honesty – Illegal alien names and registered identities will create fraudulent 2024 ballots. However, a voting margin of more than +6% for Donald Trump makes the ballot harvesting operation of BLM and the progressive activists very difficult. As a consequence, when they hand off the unlawful ballots to the AME group at the precincts, even double and triple counting Biden ballots in high density urban areas cannot offset this scale of Trump vote.
I have created this site to help people have fun in the kitchen. I write about enjoying life both in and out of my kitchen. Life is short! Make the most of it and enjoy!
This is a library of News Events not reported by the Main Stream Media documenting & connecting the dots on How the Obama Marxist Liberal agenda is destroying America
Centinel2012 