COVID Fear Isn’t The Kitchen Sink – But It’s Close…


Posted originally on The Conservative Tree House on October 3, 2020 by sundance

With 30-days left before the election perhaps it’s worthwhile remembering what all of this opposition is about…. Something 99% of American voters do not quite understand.

Congress doesn’t actually write legislation. The last item of legislation written by congress was sometime around the mid 1990’s. Modern legislation is sub-contracted to a segment of DC operations known as K-Street. That’s where the lobbyists reside.

Lobbyists write the laws; congress sells the laws; lobbyists then pay congress lucrative commissions for passing their laws. That’s the modern legislative business in DC.

When we talk about paying-off politicians in third-world countries we call it bribery. However, when we undertake the same process in the U.S. we call it “lobbying”.

CTH often describes the system with the phrase: “There are Trillions at Stake.” The process of creating legislation is behind that phrase. DC politics is not quite based on the ideas that frame most voter’s reference points.

With people taking notice of DC politics for the first time; and with people not as familiar with the purpose of DC politics; perhaps it is valuable to provide clarity.

Most people think when they vote for a federal politician -a House or Senate representative- they are voting for a person who will go to Washington DC and write or enact legislation. This is the old-fashioned “schoolhouse rock” perspective based on decades past. There is not a single person in congress writing legislation or laws.

In modern politics not a single member of the House of Representatives or Senator writes a law, or puts pen to paper to write out a legislative construct. This simply doesn’t happen.

Over the past several decades a system of constructing legislation has taken over Washington DC that more resembles a business operation than a legislative body. Here’s how it works right now.

Outside groups, often called “special interest groups”, are entities that represent their interests in legislative constructs. These groups are often representing foreign governments, Wall Street multinational corporations, banks, financial groups or businesses; or smaller groups of people with a similar connection who come together and form a larger group under an umbrella of interest specific to their affiliation.

Sometimes the groups are social interest groups; activists, climate groups, environmental interests etc. The social interest groups are usually non-profit constructs who depend on the expenditures of government to sustain their cause or need.

The for-profit groups (mostly business) have a purpose in Washington DC to shape policy, legislation and laws favorable to their interests. They have fully staffed offices just like any business would – only their ‘business‘ is getting legislation for their unique interests.

These groups are filled with highly-paid lawyers who represent the interests of the entity and actually write laws and legislation briefs.

In the modern era this is actually the origination of the laws that we eventually see passed by congress. Within the walls of these buildings within Washington DC is where the ‘sausage’ is actually made.

Again, no elected official is usually part of this law origination process.

Almost all legislation created is not ‘high profile’, they are obscure changes to current laws, regulations or policies that no-one pays attention to. The passage of the general bills within legislation is not covered in media. Ninety-nine percent of legislative activity happens without anyone outside the system even paying any attention to it.

Once the corporation or representative organizational entity has written the law they want to see passed – they hand it off to the lobbyists.

The lobbyists are people who have deep contacts within the political bodies of the legislative branch, usually former House/Senate staff or former House/Senate politicians themselves.

The lobbyist takes the written brief, the legislative construct, and it’s their job to go to congress and sell it.

“Selling it” means finding politicians who will accept the brief, sponsor their bill and eventually get it to a vote and passage. The lobbyist does this by visiting the politician in their office, or, most currently familiar, by inviting the politician to an event they are hosting. The event is called a junket when it involves travel.

Often the lobbying “event” might be a weekend trip to a ski resort, or a “conference” that takes place at a resort. The actual sales pitch for the bill is usually not too long and the majority of the time is just like a mini vacation etc.

The size of the indulgence within the event, the amount of money the lobbyist is spending, is customarily related to the scale of benefit within the bill the sponsoring business entity is pushing. If the sponsoring business or interest group can gain a lot of financial benefit from the legislation they spend a lot on the indulgences.

Recap: Corporations, mostly modern multinationals (special interest group), write the legislation. The corporations then contract the lobbyists.  Lobbyists then take the law and go find politician(s) to support it. Politicians get support from their peers using tenure and status etc. Eventually, if things go according to norm, the legislation gets a vote.

Within every step of the process there are expense account lunches, dinners, trips, venue tickets and a host of other customary financial way-points to generate/leverage a successful outcome. The amount of money spent is proportional to the benefit derived from the outcome.

The important part to remember is that the origination of the entire process is EXTERNAL to congress.

Congress does not write laws or legislation, special interest groups do. Lobbyists are paid, some very well paid, to get politicians to go along with the need of the legislative group.

When you are voting for a Congressional Rep or a U.S. Senator you are not voting for a person who will write laws. Your rep only votes on legislation to approve or disapprove of constructs that are written by outside groups and sold to them through lobbyists who work for those outside groups.

While all of this is happening the same outside groups who write the laws are providing money for the campaigns of the politicians they need to pass them. This construct sets up the quid-pro-quo of influence, although much of it is fraught with plausible deniability.

This is the way legislation is created.

If your frame of reference is not established in this basic understanding you can often fall into the trap of viewing a politician, or political vote, through a false prism.

The modern origin of all legislative constructs is not within congress.

“We have to pass the bill to, well, find out what is in the bill” etc. ~ Nancy Pelosi 2009

“We rely upon the stupidity of the American voter” ~ Johnathan Gruber 2011, 2012.

“If Congress isn’t going to convene until the bill is ready to vote on… who the hell is writing the bill?” ~ Tom Massie, 2020

Once you understand this process you can understand how politicians get rich.

When a House or Senate member becomes educated on the intent of the legislation, they have attended the sales pitch; and when they find out the likelihood of support for that legislation; they can then position their own (or their families) financial interests to benefit from the consequence of passage. It is a process similar to insider trading on Wall Street, except the trading is based on knowing who will benefit from a legislative passage.

The legislative construct passes from K-Street into the halls of congress through congressional committees. The law originates from the committee to the full House or Senate. Committee seats which vote on these bills are therefore more valuable to the lobbyists. Chairs of these committees are exponentially more valuable.

Now, think about this reality against the backdrop of the 2016 Presidential Election. Legislation is passed based on ideology. In the aftermath of the 2016 election the system within DC was not structurally set-up to receive a Donald Trump presidency.

If Hillary Clinton had won the election, her Oval Office desk would be filled with legislation passed by congress which she would have been signing. Heck, she’d have writer’s cramp from all of the special interest legislation, driven by special interest groups that supported her campaign, that would be flowing to her desk.

Why?

Simply because the authors of the legislation, the originating special interest and lobbying groups, were spending millions to fund her campaign. Hillary Clinton would be signing K-Street constructed special interest legislation to repay all of those donors/investors.

Congress would be fast-tracking the passage because the same interest groups also fund the members of congress.

President Donald Trump winning the election threw a monkey wrench into the entire DC system…. In early 2017 the modern legislative machine was frozen in place.

The “America First” policies represented by candidate Donald Trump were not within the legislative constructs coming from the K-Street authors of the legislation. There were no MAGA lobbyists waiting on Trump ideology to advance legislation based on America First objectives.

As a result of an empty feeder system, in early 2017 congress had no bills to advance because all of the myriad of bills and briefs written were not in line with President Trump policy. There was simply no entity within DC writing legislation that was in-line with President Trump’s America-First’ economic and foreign policy agenda.

Exactly the opposite was true. All of the DC legislative briefs and constructs were/are antithetical to Trump policy. There were hundreds of file boxes filled with thousands of legislative constructs that became worthless when Donald Trump won the election.

Those legislative constructs (briefs) representing tens of millions of dollars worth of time and influence were just sitting there piled up in boxes under desks and in closets amid K-Street and the congressional offices. Legislation needed to be in-line with an entire new political perspective, and there was no-one, no special interest or lobbying group, currently occupying DC office space with any interest in synergy with Trump policy.

Think about the larger ramifications within that truism. That is also why there was/is so much opposition.

No legislation provided by outside interests means no work for lobbyists who sell it. No work means no money. No money means no expense accounts. No expenses means politicians paying for their own indulgences etc.

Politicians were not happy without their indulgences, but the issue was actually bigger. No K-Street expenditures also means no personal benefit; and no opportunity to advance financial benefit from the insider trading system. Republicans and democrats hate the presidency of Donald Trump because it is hurting them financially.

President Trump is not figuratively hurting the financial livelihoods of DC politicians; he’s literally doing it. President Trump is not an esoteric problem for them; his impact is very real, very direct, and hits almost every politician in the most painful place imaginable, the bank account.

In the pre-Trump process there were millions upon millions, even billions that could be made by DC politicians and their families. Thousands of very indulgent and exclusive livelihoods attached to the DC business model. At the center of this operation is the lobbying and legislative purchase network. The Big Club.

Without the ability to position personal wealth and benefit from the system, why would a politician stay in office? It is a fact the income of many long-term politicians on both wings of the uniparty bird were completely disrupted by Trump winning the 2016 election. That is one of the key reasons why so many politicians retired in 2018.

When we understand the business of DC, we understand the difference between legislation with a traditional purpose and modern legislation with a financial and political agenda.

When we understand the business of DC we understand why the entire network hates President Donald Trump.

Lastly, this is why -when signing legislation- President Trump often says “they’ve been trying to get this through for a long time” etc. Most of the legislation that is passed by congress, and signed by President Trump in his first term; is older legislative proposals, with little indulgent value that were shelved in years past.

Example: Criminal justice reform did not carry a financial benefit to the legislative bodies, and there was no financial interest funding the politicians to pass the bill. If you look at most of the bills President Trump has signed, with the exception of a few economic bills, they stem from congressional construction many years, even decades, ago.

Think about it carefully and you’ll see it. The “First step act”, “Right to Try”, etc. were all shelved by Boehner, Pelosi, Ryan, McConnell, Reid and others before them. When the value of legislation is measured by the financial underwriting and payoffs behind it, what type of legislative calendar does that require?….

Repeal the 17th amendment and watch what happens.

.https://www.youtube.com/embed/cKUaqFzZLxU?version=3&rel=1&fs=1&autohide=2&showsearch=0&showinfo=1&iv_load_policy=1&wmode=transparent

.

Mexican President Notes Central American Caravan Timed to Interfere With U.S. Election…


Posted originally on The Conservative tree House on October 2, 2020 by sundance

There are trillions at stake…

As a consequence there are a myriad of ideological efforts underway, simultaneously with increased intensity, intended to influence the 2020 election.  Pelosi/Soros Inc. working earnestly on mail in ballots. Big Tech continues efforts to disconnect the voices of their political opposition.  Big Media continues efforts to frame anti-Trump narratives to assist their political allies.  The big Wall St. multinationals, including the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, are pouring money into efforts to block the re-election of President Trump.

Foreign money is pouring in from China and overseas interests who are negatively impacted by the America First national economic agenda. Regional politicians and their various special-interest groups are being funded to keep fueling antagonisms; and Hollywood influencers are ‘all-in‘ once again to assist the effort.

We can all see it; this time they are not trying to hide… Eyes wide open.  Cue the coordination with the open-border immigration lobby:

GUATEMALA CITY/MEXICO CITY (Reuters) – Mexico’s president on Friday said he suspected political interference behind a new migrant caravan in Central America, promising to keep his country out of the U.S. presidential race as the group splintered and some began turning back.

More than 2,000 migrants, many wearing face masks against the coronavirus, barged past Guatemalan troops at the Honduras-Guatemala border on Thursday. Some said they were seeking to escape poverty aggravated by the pandemic.

President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador, who has taken steps to curb illegal immigration so as to avoid entanglements with his U.S. counterpart Donald Trump, suggested that the caravan’s departure from Honduras had been timed to provoke.

“It is very weird, very strange,” Lopez Obrador told a news conference. “It’s a matter that I believe is linked to the U.S. election.”

He said he did not have definitive evidence to support that claim, but his words turned up pressure on the migrants. (read more)

Obama speaking at National Council of La Raza

Devin Nunes: Current U.S. Election Status, Combined with U.S. Intelligence Community, Equals a “Banana Republic”…


Posted originally on The Conservative Tree House on October 1, 2020 by sundance

House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI) Ranking Member Devin Nunes appears with Lou Dobbs to discuss the 2020 U.S. election as contrast against the known weaponization of the intelligence apparatus.

.

Keep in mind this is a member of the United States Intelligence Oversight group, the “gang of eight” saying the U.S. election is being manipulated by the U.S. intelligence community and political allies.

Bloomberg’s Think Tank Plotting the Election


Posted Oct 3, 2020 by Martin Armstrong

Michigan Supreme Court Rules Comrade Governor Gretchen Whitmer Exceeded Her Powers in COVID Compliance Lockdown…


Posted originally on The Conservative Tree House on October 2, 2020 by sundance

The supreme court in Michigan has ruled that Governor Gretchen Whitmer exceeded her constitutional authority under state law in the arbitrary enforcement of her unilateral decrees to mitigate the COVID-19 virus. [pdf here] As the court wrote in the opinion rebuking the governor:

“The people of this state have been denied a voice and a seat at the table in decisions that have impacted every facet of their lives and their futures over the past eight months. They deserve to have their representatives bring their voice and their concerns into this decision-making process.”

At the heart of the governor’s legal argument was a 1945 law allowing the governor to declare a state of disaster or emergency if she finds one to exist and it remains in place for 28 days, unless the Legislature extends it. The legislature did not extend the declaration, yet the governor continued to restrict the citizens without any representative voice.

MICHIGAN – […] In the 4-3 ruling, the court determined the governor did not have the authority under state law to issue any additional emergency declarations pertaining to the pandemic after April 30. That was the last date when the legislature allowed the governor to declare an emergency.

“The governor’s declaration of a state of emergency or state of disaster may only endure for 28 days absent legislative approval of an extension. So, if the Legislature does nothing, as it did here, the governor is obligated to terminate the state of emergency or state of disaster after 28 days,” said the majority opinion, written by Judge Stephen Markman.

[…] “Put simply, and our criticism is not of the Governor in this regard but of the statute in dispute — almost certainly, no individual in the history of this state has ever been vested with as much concentrated and standardless power to regulate the lives of our people, free of the inconvenience of having to act in accord with other accountable branches of government and free of any need to subject her decisions to the ordinary interplay of our system of separated powers and checks and balances, with even the ending date of this exercise of power reposing exclusively in her own judgment and discretion,” the majority wrote.

“It is in no way to diminish the present pandemic for this Court to assert, as we now do, that with respect to the most fundamental propositions of our system of constitutional governance, with respect to the public institutions that have most sustained our freedoms over the past 183 years, there must now be some rudimentary return to normalcy.”  (more)

Here’s the full ruling:

https://www.scribd.com/embeds/478479186/content?start_page=1&view_mode&access_key=key-WL6tNitMQGS2BzrkWvGKView this document on Scribd

.

Share this:

Biden digs his own grave in ninety minutes


Biden gaffes that will cost him millions of votes

Re-Posted from the Canada Free Press By —— Bio and ArchivesOctober 1, 2020

 

The bruising brawl over six rounds of fifteen minutes each—advertised as the first Presidential Debate—saw Joe Biden:

  • Alienate a large part of his voter base by denigrating Bernie Sanders and repudiating the 110 page Biden-Sanders Unity Task Force Recommendations (“Manifesto”)
  • Hold the voters in contempt by refusing to answer whether he would pack the Supreme Court with his nominees if he won the election and Democrats became the majority in the Senate.

Biden’s readiness to demean Sanders and abandon the Manifesto during the following exchange was breathtaking—and Trump was quick to take advantage:

BIDEN: My party is me.

TRUMP: And socialist health care.

BIDEN: Right now, I am the Democratic Party.

TRUMP: And they’re going to dominate you, Joe, you know that.

BIDEN: I am the Democratic Party right now. The platform of the Democratic Party—

TRUMP: Not according to Harris.

BIDEN:—is what I, in fact, approved of. What I approved of…

… TRUMP: Joe, you agreed with Bernie Sanders’s far left on the manifesto, we call it.

BIDEN: Manifesto? Look…

TRUMP: And that gives you socialized medicine.

BIDEN: Look, hey, I’m not going to listen to him. The fact of the matter is I beat Bernie Sanders…

TRUMP: Not by much.

BIDEN: I beat him by a whole hell of a lot. I’m here standing facing you, old buddy.

TRUMP: If “Pocahontas” would’ve left two days early, you would’ve lost every primary.

BIDEN: All he knows how to do is hurt…

TRUMP: On Super Tuesday, you got very lucky.

BIDEN: Look, here’s the deal. I got very lucky, I’m going to get very lucky tonight as well. And tonight I’m going to make sure because here’s the deal.

BIDEN: There is no manifesto, number one.

WALLACE: Please let him speak, Mr. President.

BIDEN: Number two…

TRUMP: You just lost the left.

BIDEN: Number two…

TRUMP: You just lost the left. You agreed with Bernie Sanders on a plan that’s absolutely…

(CROSSTALK)

TRUMP: … socialized medicine.

Biden insulted the voters’ intelligence by refusing to disclose his intentions on packing the Supreme Court:

WALLACE: All right. I have one final question for you, Mr. Vice President. If Senate Republicans—we were talking originally about the Supreme Court here. If Senate Republicans go ahead and confirm Justice Barrett, there has been talk about ending the filibuster or even packing the court, adding to the nine justices there. You called this a distraction by the president, but in fact it wasn’t brought up by the president; it was brought up by some of your Democratic colleagues in the Congress.

BIDEN: I’m saying…

WALLACE: So my question to you, is you have refused in the past to talk about it. Are you willing to tell the American people tonight whether or not you will support either ending the filibuster, or packing the court…

BIDEN: Whatever the position I take on that, that will become the issue. The issue is the American people should speak. You should go out and vote. You’re in voting now. Vote and let your senators know how strongly you feel. Vote now. Make sure you in fact let people know.

TRUMP: He doesn’t want to answer the question.

BIDEN: I’m not going to answer that question because…

TRUMP: Why wouldn’t you answer that question?

BIDEN: The question is…

(CROSSTALK)

TRUMP: The radical left…

BIDEN: Would you shut up, man?

Trump won’t be shutting up—that’s for sure.

Neither will the Republican Party as they swamp the media with ads featuring these two major Biden gaffes that will cost him millions of votes.

 

Forget Science – subscribe to Nihilism instead – NOT REALLY!


By education, I mean a system of teaching a broad curriculum with the basics of the major fields of knowledge, from history to modern technologies that also fosters critical thinking and curiosity

Re-Posted from the Canada Free Press By —— Bio and ArchivesSeptember 30, 2020

 

As it appears, simply destroying statues of explorers, statesmen, or other notables from centuries past no longer satisfies the current lust for mayhem of the “forward-looking progressive minds.”

Now, even park benches in memory of entirely non-political scholars of the past are deemed to be inappropriate to sensitive woke minds. One example is a park bench, dedicated to the memory of one of the greatest biologists/naturalists of the distant past, namely Carl von Linné (1707-1778).

Homo sapiens

Poor Carl, a simple park bench—with his name mentioned on the back—may become another victim of the modern Zeitgeist. You may wonder, what exactly was Carl’s claim to his (current) infamy? He created the term “Homo sapiens”—what a crime!

This Latin term simply means something like “wise human.” You might think of that as being good, or normal, or even as “modern.” As it appears, the local political powers in Oslo, Norway, have concluded otherwise. It could be interpreted as an affront to less modern or wise inhabitants. And that, as you, my Dear Readers will recognize instantly—and indubitably, I presume—as a great faux pas!

It’s perfectly OK to use modern instant communication facilities to chat with your like-minded nihilists,  but anyone that may have labored hard in past centuries to build the knowledge base that such facilities relies on are to be damned and forgotten.

Most likely it’s of little consolation to Linné and other scholars of the past, like philosopher David Hume (1711-1776), and explorers, cartographers, politicians and other notables of former times that they are similarly being degraded now. Without their attention to detail and perseverance against many obstacles to their work and dedication, our world would not be where it’s at now.

In fact, none of the modern engines that power the world and none of the many other conveniences would ever have come into existence. What the “Snowflakes” would do without instant access to the latest social media info, news and videos from far corners of the Earth (or even the Universe) on their “smart phones —I wonder.

Affordable Energy & Food—when it’s needed

However, there’s another dimension to modern accomplishments besides gadgets and living conditions in general. That’s the availability of on-demand energy and nourishments at an affordable cost.

Ever since Homo sapiens learned to behold the heat of fire, life improved. Gathering the fruits from the environment gave way to developing weapons like the atlatl, bow and arrow, and gunpowder that led to the rise of towns and cities as are now found across the entire world. Having access to abundant energy allowed more time for more productive work not just a continuous struggle for survival. It enabled more efficient planting and harvesting of agricultural products with increased yields, thus more people to get fed better.

That elevated productivity also encouraged curious minds to observe the results of experiments and invent all kinds of new insights and systems that propelled each other further “up the hill.” Of course, making any of such ideas widely known was a critical point of inflection. It came with the invention of the printing press by J. Gutenberg (1400-1468).

That ushered in a period of extraordinary development in any field of exploration. This period became known as the Renaissance. The discovery of the Americas by C. Columbus (1451-1506) was just the beginning of this long journey of discovery.

Really, there are too many milestones and important inventions to list them here. Just let me mention a few: namely the steam engine (J Watt, 1736-1819) and others, often expanding on past knowledge, like the internal combustion engine (N. Otto, 1832-1891), the (safe to handle) explosive compound dynamite (A. Nobel, 1833-1896), the recognition of antimicrobial lotions (Paracelsus, 1493-1541), and many other (at the time) revolutionary insights and discoveries.

From the Renaissance to Nihilism

The human race certainly went on a binge of innovations, ever since. But times are a’ changing—not necessarily for the better.

Now, I think, we seem to enter a retro-period. The signs are all around. As it appears, some of the aforementioned inventions are about to be heaved onto history’s scrap heap, lock, stock and barrel. This is a kind of nihilism, change for change’s sake.

For example, the “carbon-fuel” based internal combustion engines (ICEs) are ordered to become obsolete in the not too distant future. As reported, the California Governor, G.Newsom, just signed an executive order that aims to ban the sale of new internal combustion engine cars in the state by 2035. Just so, by the wisdom of the state.

The order did not specify what was supposed to take the ICEs place. Presumably the idea is to replace them with (battery-powered) electric vehicles. Or, perhaps the new European “grand idea” of hydrogen-fueled cars or “hybrids” of some sort.

Believe me, the world’s energy demand is much greater than what could be created from wind, solar, or biomass (wood- or agricultural products-burning) systems and certainly not without obliterating much of the world’s forest and food producing areas. The path forward is not IN returning to the past. It is to wisely use the accumulated wisdom OF the past to decide on where to go in the future.

The Future is in Education

By education, I mean a system of teaching a broad curriculum with the basics of the major fields of knowledge, from history to modern technologies that also fosters critical thinking and curiosity.

It’s vital to the ”survival of the fittest.”

Project Veritas Exposes Corruption in Harvesting People’s Ballots


 

Biden’s False Claims About his Past – Are they Lies or Fantasies?


The real question with Biden is we no longer know if he is lying or fantasizing about his past. Biden’s claim about attending historically black Delaware State has been refuted by the university itself. Biden declared last year that he began his academic career at Delaware State University, which is a historically black college. But the university flat outright says sorry — no way. The Democrats seem to need someone to be president to push their globalist agenda and to surrender sovereignty on climate to the United Nations. They even proposed to hand $3 trillion to the IMF to fund this globalist agenda. It just seems that any real president would never agree to such a thing regardless of their party. It is just becoming increasingly suspicious as to why the Democrats would put forward a man who might not be all there?

Appointees to the Supreme Court Are Not Required to Appear Before the Judiciary Committee under the Constitution


We now have this nonsense put forth by Schumer that McConnel is destroying the institution of the Senate by appointing a justice to the Supreme Court before the election. He is calling McConnel’s, equally absurd argument he made when Justice Antonin Scalia died in February of 2016 nine months before the election.

McConnel argued that President Barack Obama should not appoint a new justice because he couldn’t run again. The seat should not be filled in an election year, McConnel claimed and refused to hold hearings to consider Obama’s eventual nominee, Judge Merrick Garland. McConnell said that not since 1888 had the Senate confirmed a Supreme Court nominee by an opposing party’s President to fill a vacancy that arose in an election year.

To make this very clear, there is ABSOLUTELY no requirement by the Constitution to withhold a vacancy to the Supreme Court because of politics. This is not law, and it was not even a rule. It was politics.

Indeed, candidates for the Supreme Court never appeared before the Senate until 1925. They were reviewed solely on their qualifications with no questioning. So all this argument over destroying the institution of the Senate is also total nonsense. On January 5, 1925, President Calvin Coolidge had nominated Attorney General Harlan Fiske Stone to a vacancy on the U.S. Supreme Court. Almost everyone agreed that Stone’s character, learning, and temperament eas excellent for the job. However, a complication arose that threatened Stone’s chances for an easy Senate confirmation. The source of the controversy was Senator Burton K. Wheeler, a progressive Democrat.

The previous year, Wheeler had launched an investigation to determine why Stone’s predecessor, Attorney General Harry Daugherty, had failed to prosecute government officials implicated in the Teapot Dome oil-leasing scandal. As a result of Wheeler’s probe, Daugherty resigned in March 1924.

After about a month in his new position as attorney general, Stone saw a federal grand jury in Montana indict Senator Wheeler on charges related to the conduct of his private law practice. Seeing the indictment as an effort to discredit his continuing investigation of the Justice Department, Wheeler asked the Senate to examine the charges against him. Following a two-month inquiry and without waiting for the Montana court to dispose of the case, the Senate outright exonerated Wheeler which of course was against the law to interfere in a legal matter of that nature.

The Wheeler case tormented Attorney General Stone for months. Influential friends of Wheeler urged Stone to drop both the Montana case and new information that led Wheeler’s opponents to seek a second indictment. Stone explained that he felt honor-bound to pursue the second indictment. Legally, this was absolutely correct. Stone made it clear that the Senate “is just not the place to determine the guilt or innocence of a man charged with crime.”

On January 24, 1925, five days after the Senate Judiciary Committee had recommended Stone’s confirmation, Senator Thomas Walsh—Wheeler’s Montana colleague and legal counsel, managed to convince the Senate to return the nomination to the committee for further review.

President Coolidge refused to withdraw the nomination. However, this was the background to these Senate appointments to the Supreme Court. It was Coolidge who agreed to an unprecedented compromise. He agreed to allow Stone to become the first Supreme Court nominee in history to appear before the Senate Judiciary Committee. On January 28, 1925, Stone’s performance during five hours of public session testimony cleared the way for his confirmation.

Senator Wheeler soon won the acquittal of all charges. Not until 1955, however, did the Senate Judiciary Committee routinely adopt the practice, based on the precedent established by the Stone nomination, of requiring all Supreme Court nominees to appear in person.

Schumer has called this the McConnel Rule because he said the next Supreme Court justice should be chosen by the next president when Scalia died. That was really no such rule and it was not the position of the Constitution – just politics. This illustrates my position that I believe Ben Franklin’s recommendation that appointments to the Supreme Court should be made by the American Bar Association – not politicians.  Ben Franklin wanted to create a legal system based upon the Scottish model where judges were nominated by lawyers and not politicians. He lost that argument and we have been paying dearly ever since.

Kings_Bench_(1808)

Most people assume that the Framers of the Constitution simply relied on the English judicial system. On the contrary, the Scottish judicial system provided an important component, although it remains overlooked even today. The Scottish system was part of the model for the Framing of Article III in crafting the Judiciary. Unlike the English system of overlapping and primarily original jurisdiction with Chancery (Equity) and the King’s Bench (law), the Scottish judiciary featured a hierarchical, appellate-style judiciary, with one supreme civil court sitting at the top and an array of inferior courts of original jurisdiction below.

We, unfortunately, blended Equity and Law into the same court which was a MAJOR mistake, yet the Scottish judiciary operated within a constitutional framework which we adopted. The corruption in the English judiciary was widespread. Charles Dickens wrote in his introduction to Bleak House;

This is the Court of Chancery ..• Suffer any wrong that can be done you, rather than come here!

Under the Constitution, Trump should be appointing the next Justice and NOW! What McConnel did before was UNCONSTITUTIONAL. Personally, I believe we should adopt Ben Franklin’s model taken from Scotland. This claim that we should be voting for presidents to twist the law one way or another is in itself WRONG!

There are far too many aspects of the law that are NOT in the Constitution and the number one issue tearing the country apart is IMMUNITY they created for prosecutors and police which takes away any responsibility to act within the law. The abortion issue was founded on the Right to Privacy which is implicitly within the Constitution. However, then there is the definition of life to justify an abortion v murder. It becomes a fine line just as the legal age for sex. There has been a prosecution of an 18-year boy now labeled as a child molester because his girlfriend was under 18 and the father did not like the boy in Texas (see report). Unfortunately, these things tend to be arbitrary and decided by culture. The legal age varies greatly around the world from 12 to 18 with the United States being the highest.