940 Comments

Who is this person whom the most corrupt court in the land takes seriously?

Lying sleazebag. Cheat. Grifter. Con man. Traitor to America.

Suck-up to dictators. Rigger of medieval theocrats to the nation’s highest court so individual states may arrogate, dictate women’s personal choices.

Racist. Vilifier of refugees. Stoker of violence. Stochastic terrorist. Purveyor of hate, divisiveness.

Thief of American archival documents. Violator of the Constitution’s emoluments clause. Violator of the Constitution’s insurrection clause.

Mocker of the disabled. Insulter of armed service personnel. Serial rapist and braggart of grabbing women in most personal of places.

Waddling obese. Orange, bronze make-up layered, encrusted, caked on his fat, fat, greasy face.

Expand full comment

Oh, come on, Phil! You've only just scratched the surface.

Expand full comment

And, Anne-Louise, such a scabrous, oily, loathsome, reeking, foul surface.

Expand full comment

Uh-huh. Yes, the picture forms.

Expand full comment

There… that’s the cherry on top!

Expand full comment

Thanks for the chuckle. Clever you all. We all need a chuckle after hearing those traitorous so-called Supreme Justices. They are a disgrace to their formerly-honourable office. They have no honour. They have sold their honour to the most dishonourable president to ever hold the office. How can they look at themselves in the mirror? Shame!

Expand full comment

I want to 🤮🤮🤮 any time I catch a glimpse of him!!!

Expand full comment

Scratch the surface and you’ll burst the over-full Depends®️ diaper and start an EPA SuperFund investigation.

Expand full comment

Let’s not forget SCOTUS which has become a joke. The people need to raise “objections” to them.

Expand full comment

Clarence is the worst of them in my opinion.

Expand full comment

In a sad, sad post-democracy trump world, we posters of such observations would be tried and convicted of "being mean to twumpie," a newly codified capital offense, and flung from windows of trump tower.

Expand full comment

The fatty, greasy, putrid surface at that!

Expand full comment

DJT..... a walking, ranting orange blob of the most foul smelling excrement ever that originated in the most filthy cesspool on the planet wearing a suit and tacky ass red tie. Makes me wonder the dollar amount of the bribes these corrupt and immoral Kangaroo court judges are being paid? Impeach all four of the blatantly corrupt a-hole male judges and sentence them to life in prison without the possibility of parole and replace them with competent Dem leaning female judges.

Expand full comment

We are all on a roll today.

Expand full comment

Anger does that.

Expand full comment

And don't forget the female Supreme Court Republican judge Trump appointed.

Expand full comment

It’s up to you 🫵 VOTE 💙

I became near nauseous listening to the KB-J /Alito stand-off debacle, shut it off. Sister Ketanji you were brilliant ! Alito took SCOTUS to the new reversal -‘forever high disapproval ‘ rating/no recusal from Thomas -is anyone surprised….the rest of the world?… STHs 🤦‍♀️

Sister Ashley Judd and lawyer’s focus is as concise a sum up of where WE are all at.

The system has got to change . ITS NOT A JOKE…ITS BROKE

The youth ,which is going to run our country, is protesting our long and far too faint cry .

War has to stop. Equality has to wear all the hats, and be color blind. The innocents will no longer take the bullet and 🗣️sisters, mothers, me too… MAKE IT KNOWN at the ballot box!

It’s up to you🫵

VOTE BLUE 💙

Expand full comment

If and i think likely Dems win in 2024, get rid of the fillibuster and change the SC composition etc as already suggested earlier today.

Expand full comment

I’m on that road too Frank, 👍 thank you.

Simon Rosenburg has a real great post today too regarding this, approaches, suggestions, sites to bounce to guiding further places to support, donate, etc.

I advocate and share as much as I can here in blood red WV to offer , educate, change a mind. We have truly been giving one helluva lesson to WAKE UP, as much as the antidisestablishmentarianism movement back in my (our?) day premiered -A Change Is Going To Come- a LOT needs done, if it isn’t clear now -it will be too late! So many arenas exposed . I’m actually excited for it, in my last trimester but feeling the old college try can be mustered still. 😉

I love your posts and so many others. So blessed to be a part of this large community along with 5-6 others.

Thanks again….everyone🫶

Expand full comment

Ashley Judd?

Expand full comment

MLMinET ..I made a ‘sum it up statement’ referring to need for change, this whole period so screams need for change , things overlooked, justice stepped aside, rights abused by neglect or a head turned.

Expand full comment

Yes, she was on CBS This Morning in a lovely dress just articulate and all encompassing. It was eloquent as well as beautiful. Did I say the wrong last name? Apology if so.

Expand full comment

Harvey Weinstein!

Expand full comment

Dt is the complete image of the shadow side of our country. All the things we’d like America to not be. But he’s here and we are too. We can’t just wish him away; there’s work to be done to bring light and understanding.

Expand full comment

He’s the sewer we drain into.

Expand full comment

Phil Farting Fornicater!

Expand full comment

You have such a way with words

Expand full comment

Since Patrick Henry’s extortion to “…Give me liberty or give me death,” should not an American citizen, who obeys the laws under a president who could conceivably assassinate his opponent with immunity as president, also assassinate him as well since our 2nd amendment seems to give us this modern right to kill anyone we please? Why relegate this immunity to only a president. So I’m taking this absurd logic to the extreme, of course.

I believe this whole lexicon twisting is symptomatic of the ending of democracy as we have known it. It is exposing the limitations of language since more often than not, we can and do take any grouping of words and create a false definition based on the direction one wishes to lead.

The solution is to win this election by re-electing Biden. But it’s not that simple when Biden has shown inability to as I say, get dirty and practical. It’s known that the border is the big elephant in the room which Biden is being rightfully (in my opinion), accused of ignoring. His homeland security secretary when asked why an executive order hasn’t been made, said it wouldn’t hold up in court. This rankles me to no end because this border issue is poison to this administration. Let me repeat, ITS POISON TO THE ADMINISTRATION.

They better get a hold of themselves and resolve this issue. Trump has no problem turning any issue into an asset even if it’s a fake or false issue.

Yikes.

Expand full comment

Agreed. The border is the Achilles heal, imho. We need to hear more from Pres. Biden as to what the administration is actually doing about it.

Expand full comment

Is the border issue Biden's responsibility? Isn't it up to Congress to find a way fix what problems there are with immigration? They have been unable to for many years.

Expand full comment

Right, Sen. Lankford (R) negotiated with the Dems who promised to rebuild the wall (the demand of the conservatives) but in the House they rejected the bill anyway! But I wish we'd hear more about that from the Pres. I wish he'd point out (over and over) how the R's shut down the deal at Trump's urging.

Expand full comment

In my humblest of opinion, Biden should take executive action even if it is for show. This is how the popularity contest works. But even besides this, it’s my conviction that the border is a mess whether you want to believe it or not. It’s a bloody mess and Biden is doing nothing and we are facing Armageddon. It’s not business as usual this year. It’s the big one as Fred Sanford used to say.

Expand full comment

Kathy , you misunderstand. It doesn’t matter who who who… it only matters what the optics are and Biden is losing big time on this one issue. I know we are supposed to be positive here but I have never made a good chairleader. I tell it like I see it.

Expand full comment

He ain’t doing shit - excuse my Italian.

Expand full comment

Let's write, call, and email the President for God's sake!

Expand full comment

You keep talking that like and you’ll never be on a jury for a Trump trial!

Expand full comment

AND, it would seem, Keith, Phil, John T, Hoyt and Bruce, you travel down the same path of name-calling as the Orange One without doing much to advance or explore any of Heather's reporting about the shocking nature of questions from the reactionary Supreme's who seem to not recognize their own loss of moral, ethical or even legal compass. Where is the chief Justice when the court really NEEDS someone to call it back to the job it was created to do?!!

Expand full comment

All these adjectives are in the realm of human possibility for every human. Seems like people are trying to cast off possible demons that lurk. Yes Trump is an embarrassment to manliness if you will, so now it's demonstrated. So now we can move on, yes?Statements of contempt are registered, time to remove ourselves from the downward spin and not be spinning too. 7 years of shock value is enough. My question is what is each of us doing and in community to reclaim and renew the ground we stand on.

Expand full comment

This is a message I received today that is instrumental in saving my sanity and preventing me from succumbing to the slow boil of anger:

Sometimes you have no choice other than to fight, but fighting is not a good long-term strategy. Because whatever you fight against almost always grows stronger.

What is a good long-term strategy? Building a more desirable alternative.

Working in favor of a specific outcome is always more effective than fighting against its opposition. And whenever there's something to fight against, there's always a cause to work in favor of.

Many factors pose a threat to all that makes life good. You can never hope to eliminate all those threats.

What you can do is work to make the good things in life more robust, more enduring, more sustainable and preferable. You cannot prevent all falsehoods, yet there's no need to do so when the truth is compelling, accessible and self-evident enough.

Invest yourself in what's good, not in tearing down what's bad. With sufficient goodness, negativity can crumble into dust.

The Daily Motivator Copyright (c) 2024 Ralph S. Marston, Jr., All rights reserved.

Expand full comment

Venting helps before getting down to work

Expand full comment

Apparently he’s as corrupt as the other men there.

Expand full comment

Thanks, John. Yes, I so much rather read our contributors' "take" on the supposed dilema that the conservative SC justices have focused on. I understand the need to vent, but. . .

Expand full comment

I wouldn’t make it either

Expand full comment

You forgot smelly, sleepy, farting and incontinent plus terrorizer of innocent judges, juries and election officials. The list of things done and undone is much longer than Joe's long list of accomplishments for ALL Americans. Oh, anarchy, where are you when we really need you.

Expand full comment

That’s him, exactly. The idol of the traitors, our Nero

Expand full comment

Jeri, well, we could send him out to sea in a collapsable ship and this time no one will swim ashore......maybe during a hurricane.

Expand full comment

My imagination runs wild. After the 2020 election, my fondest wish was that he would just become irrelevant and invisible.

Expand full comment

you missed the Scottish barb......tiny fingered, Cheeto colored ferret wearing shit gibbon

Expand full comment

Yes, but...

Expand full comment

"Yes, but it turns out I CAN stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot someone!"

Expand full comment

His apologists, suck-ups on the Clarence court would just call it an "official" action.

Expand full comment

Your command of adjectives is impressive.i bow to you. Let it all out.

Can we make this not a bumper sticker but a magnetic decal? Great for places you're stuck in traffic.

Expand full comment

🔥 ♨️🌡⚡️🌋

Expand full comment

🤯

Expand full comment

Best roast EVER. You forgot demagogue wanna-be, lol.

Expand full comment

Phil, but tell us what you really think! Ha ha.

Expand full comment

During the Nam war, Stanley, I was a year-long army enlistee at Fort Myer, South Post.

Doesn't exist anymore. North Post has library, the stables, the musicians for ceremonial events, and the housing for three-star generals.

I lived there, South Post (between the Pentagon and the Arlington Memorial Bridge) Nov. 1969 to Nov. 1970. Learned Vietnamese. Became U.S. Army translator-interpreter.

But as I was doing so, I often walked the cemetery grounds. No fences then. No gates. I could read the inscriptions of the names and dates of life of the men (mostly men) who'd served in America's wars.

I really think, Stanley, that I love the country. I used to hitch-hike everywhere (coast to coast). Loved the photos, the books, the music, the films. Trusted the people. The elites? They always got so much wrong. (Exhibit A, the Nam war.)

They're still effed-up, the elites. But now that they've got their billionaire hooks in the schools, too many tens of millions are also effed-up.

Expand full comment

So I’ll tell you a little story about that period the Vietnam war years. I was a hippie protestor from the earliest. At the tender age of 14, I boarded an overnight Amtrak from CT to DC to participate in the huge anti war March I 1967. Along on the train sitting across from my buddy were 3 sailors returning to base in Newport. We got friendly with them. They knew what we were doing but it didn’t matter. We were on opposite sides or were we. No. We were just youthful comrades. We all just wanted an end to that war. Just a few decades ago, I visited the Wall in DC. So as you walk along, you see up ahead a group of family members doing something as you approach, you hear sniffles and you see a piece of paper being used to etch the name of a loved one long deceased embedded in the granite. And as you leave this now hallowed ground, you understand that no one leaves dry-eyed no matter which side you were on.

Expand full comment

Bill, you’ve written a very powerful message. Thank you.

Expand full comment

Both Arlington and the Wall evoke strong emotion......I know.

Expand full comment

Oh boy …thank you 👏

Expand full comment

While I wouldn’t dispute your descriptions of Trump, I think what the Letter highlights is that his being brought to justice will be prevented by the first corrupt Supreme Court (majority) in the country’s history.

Expand full comment

Phil, while I do not match your vitriol, I must say that I am sympathetic with the feelings and many facts as they are amplified in your comments. Apologies for piggy-backing, I thought this comment might be helpful. Am I free riding or am I sticking with the winners? You make the call. Of course, if you find this free-riding to be annoying, I understand, utterly.

====

A VERY LATE COMMENT POSTED ELSEWHERE (i.e., 'Daily Kos') FOR WHAT IT IS WORTH.

https://constitutioncenter.org/blog/anniversary-of-united-states-v-nixon

As an erstwhile Republican and a conservative by temperament, I find this situation to be appalling. While the Court focussed on Fitzgerald versus Nixon, I kept remembering the United States of America versus Nixon (1974), a case and precedent that strikes my uneducated eye as more relevant.

🤔

That ruling squashed the first round of presidential immunity: executive privilege. This case strikes me as a ‘brand-extension’ strategy of President Nixon’s argument, uniformly rejected in his 1974 case. What turns my stomach is that . . .

🤢

. . . in the 1974 case, Justice Rehnquist recused himself owing to a prior role in the Nixon Admin.

. . . U.S. versus Nixon was as consequential a case as this one.

. . . the Court decided unanimously after deliberating just fifteen days.

. . . five of the eight Justices, who joined others in unanimity, had been appointed by Republican Presidents.

. . . President Nixon turned over the evidence that ended his presidency.

😢

None of these examples of placing principles ahead of politics are happening now nor are they likely to. Justices Thomas and Alito — questionable use of honorifics, here -- should be impeached and removed for a shocking level of corruption; not likely to occur.

✂️

Consequently, I sure wish that President Biden, if results favour the Democratic Party in November, would appoint two more Justices to the Supreme Court, for an eleven Justice head-count, starting with Attorney General Merrick Garland, a gentle and genteel man who honours his honorific.

⚖️

That would restore the one vote Republican majority that would be in place today had Senator McConnell and Trump not packed the Court. Until then, we have to hope that Justices Roberts and Coney-Barrett — if neither Justices Gorsuch nor Kavanaugh — do the right thing by our republic, just(ice) as their Republican forebears did fifty years ago.

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2024/4/29/2237479/-Trump-immunity-case-shows-why-we-need-to-reform-the-Supreme-Court

Expand full comment

Amy Coney Barrett and John Roberts could return some decency, Ned.

Otherwise I agree with your take, right up to your conclusion on expanding court to 11.

Only one thing you leave out -- the possibility of the court yet ruling to enforce Article 14, section three. The Constitution clearly mandates what it says in plain English.

Expand full comment

Thank you for your patience with my free-riding on your popularity, Phil. 🤝 Thank you, as well, for the timely lesson on the 14th Amendment Sexion-3. ✌️ My tuition check is in the mail. 😉

Expand full comment

I have heard it said that all the judges are intimidated by the failed former president. And I hear that some Supreme Court judges entertain the possibility that the actions of the then president were within the scope of his official duties, on J6.

Really? Well then , if you are intimidated maybe it is time to shake that feeling. You accepted the appointment to the bench and now the going gets tough and you are afraid to uphold, protect and defend the constitution? You are allowing yourself to be bullied by a defendant and his lawless followers. Just get over it and do your job.

January 6 was not within the scope of the presidents duties because telling a big lie and then inciting a mob to forcefully halt the election procedures, just isn’t presidential at all. It is not credible that a justice of the highest court in the land believes that the former president acted in good faith. You know this. Just stop bowing down to the defendant that keeps violating his terms of release. Have you no sense of duty? Have you no respect for yourself and the law?

What we saw today was the setting up of a legal basis for a fascist takeover.

Expand full comment

This might be an unpopular perspective here, but: I do not think the conservative Justices' primary motivation is fear or appeasement of Von Tweeto. I don't think they care much for him one way or another. Neither he nor the specifics of his case were more than briefly touched on in arguments today.

They just get off on having as many opportunities as possible to prove they are the kings of everything, and to remind us that they are the most smartest and special-est of all the smart-and-specials. They relish the chance to arbitrarily rewrite the next generation of law in the world's most powerful nation to their whims. *That* is their primary and secondary motive, and this presents them a doozy of an opportunity, wouldn't you say?

Expand full comment

We are in a fascist takeover attempt and some on the SCOTUS are in favor of that. They avoid facts that would verify what they are up to right now. They are hiding their own fascist tendencies and they shift the discussion to a fantasy of the future. Why should we worry?

Expand full comment

It looks like at least half not just some, maybe even 2/3. 😳😳

Few thousand more votes for Hillary in a few key states we would be avoiding ALL of this 💩💩💩

So enraging.

Expand full comment

But Christy, your mind is in the past, just as Will's mind is in the future. Jack's mind is in the present. Heather's letter is a perfect description of what is happening now, as bizarre and hard to believe as it seems.

Expand full comment

The past is something to respect because if we are sane and intelligent beings we should be able to learn from our mistakes. Heather is a historian. She is very skilled at showing us a path forward to a better way of being if only we can learn from our past mistakes.

Expand full comment

Quite true, and I loved her Thomas Paine quote. I love her letters, and often don't even read the comment section. I'm just trying to get beyond the academic right now.

Expand full comment

True enough what you say, Will.

But then again, these justices really are sucking on him, sucking up to him.

Exactly as their (or some of theirs and their predecessors') 2010 Citizens United licensed the billionaire classes to their total corruption.

Exactly as the regimes of standardized testing licensed the numberers-of-life and the commodifiers to gut the schools of humanities for a clearer field of predation by the billionaire classes.

They have such contempt for democracy, Will. Such open eagerness to get some of them right now declared above the law, above all the best in American history, above the rights of the people to individual, personal lives. and the skills and institutions to preserve that.

Expand full comment

6 out of 9 are Christian Dominionists.

How did that happen just 250 years after a revolution for freedom of religion and freedom from the tyranny of Kings?

How were we lulled asleep by our great freedoms?

Expand full comment

The handcuffing of elementary education and the power of propaganda over those uneducated

Expand full comment

That’s a small part of it. It’s multifactorial. Citizen’s United, ALEC, hijacking of religion, vouchers, deregulation, Putin, Fox, lack of liveable wages, lack of social support for young parents, I’m sure people can add to the list on and on.

I strongly believe that the educated should stop calling the uneducated stupid and making fun of grammatical and spelling errors.

Start seeing our education as a privilege no matter how hard we worked for it. Not everyone has parents that read to them.

Expand full comment

Their intent was to create an uneducated population. They have enough “uneducateds” soaking up propaganda to swing elections that ensconce Justices who make rulings that tip the Balance of power away from The People by allowing the billionaire class to subvert the Mudsills

Its a multi-layered long term effort

Making fun of grammar seems like a futile endeavor

Expand full comment

And what's scariest of all is that these justices are breaking the rules in broad daylight without a trace of compunction. The two most drunken with power, Thomas an Alito, thumb their arrogance, hypocrisy, and impartiality in our our faces with glee. Can't Congress do something about this?

Expand full comment

They can be impeached, but only in theory given the make up of the House and Senate.

Expand full comment

...and isn't "odd" that those SCOTUS members have completely "forgotten" about precedence...

Expand full comment

…and weakening the Voting Rights Act was a Roberts’ precursor!

Expand full comment

Yes, Janet, they're monsters. Serving the billionaires. Or (and) the hate-filled theocrats.

Expand full comment

They are using him.

Expand full comment

Won't SCOTUS, and all other courts for that matter, be made irrelevant by a president being able to dictate law? If these people are as ego driven as you say, and half as smart as they think, they must see this.

Expand full comment

The invalidating of the judiciary is a blueprint created by Orban and Erdoğan sought by Netanyahu and Trump. Modern path to tyranny.

Expand full comment

They see, they like and they are on board

Expand full comment

But it should be obvious to the “justices” that just like the revolving door of his cabinet members, king manbaby would put a revolving door on the Supreme Court.

Expand full comment
Apr 26·edited Apr 26

But he's the devil they know...and owe

Expand full comment

This. Right here.

Expand full comment

... And he has "dirt" on them. A primary reason for taking home treasure troves of classified data, was to further his 'modus operandi' of using "dirt" to manipulate others. Perhaps, and who knows, secondarily to peddle for treasure / debt satisfaction.

Expand full comment

They think because they supported tfg, they are in the clear. We have seen him turn on every.single.person eventually. They won’t be spared.

Expand full comment

The corporatists of 1930s Germany thought that, too. Things did not end well for them.

Expand full comment

History repeats or rhymes again here Lex; Whom do you think has the bankroll for all of this ?

Expand full comment

Exactly! Oh they thought they could control that clownish man and use him. Some of them landed in the death camps.

Expand full comment

Ah Jack so right. But these tycoon criminals behave like any powerful criminal, and imagine that "they" are far more powerful, smart, etc., and have created the foolproof 'mousetrap,' far better and well executed than any in the past they've learned from. All powerful, all mighty, and recidivism self - feeding loops of self affirmation.

Expand full comment

They want Christian Dominionism. That is and has been their plan.

Expand full comment

Bingo

Expand full comment

He is NOT a Christian neither are his puppets.

Expand full comment
Apr 26·edited Apr 26

Sorry if it’s hard to hear, but there has never been a purity test for calling yourself Christian. There is a never ending list of malevolent people who do so

Expand full comment

Maybe ask if a person is a Jesus Christian or a Republican Christian? 🤷🏼‍♂️

Expand full comment

Self righteous christians, and 'god' is only on their side, owing to their righteousness. But that's only one piece of the "coalition." They are on their own new "Crusade" - banners, standards, crosses, and all.

Expand full comment

A White Christian multi national coalition of power, is their vision for the future. Leading to wars based on religion and race. Fun, fun, fun!

Expand full comment

.. Along with others who've agreed, that for now, "The enemy of my enemy is my friend: for now."

Expand full comment

When the Supreme Court received the appeal of the 5th Circuit's highly-regarded unanimous opinion that a president doesnt enjoy unlimited immunity, it should have sent it back as affirmation.

It did not.

When Jack Smith asked for a timely hearing in December on the matter, the Court instead scheduled it to be heard in April, at about the last possible date on the calendar.

I think we can see where this is headed, folks.

Originalists indeed. As Will points out (with a slight correction), they are pompous king-makers.

Expand full comment

Hypocrisy and hubris Doug; that's all it is. Any notion of originalism was designed to *imply* itself as 'special' and worthy to peddle as some *new substantial insight*, when all it is and was is a 'bright shiny new thing' for crows, shallow thinkers, and self-righteous to cling to, raise banners, and a coalition to agree that any means justifies an end, even opposed to law, truth, honor.

Expand full comment

The Supreme Court Gang of 6 is poised to destroy the Rule of Law. These are intelligent people doing unintelligible things. This is not a mistake in justice, its the absence of justice They pretend to be scholars, yet they are as corrupt as the definition allows. Its the Frat Party Club they fantasized about in their peak hormonal years, come to fruition

Expand full comment

"Laws" that 'they' don't like.

Expand full comment

Will, I agree about them not being particularly afraid of the Orang One and am reminded of a recent observation that Clarence Thomas' "superpower" was his complete absence of conscience or capacity for introspection.

Expand full comment

Will, you have a good point, but I also think that the justices believe that Trump is guilty and consequently are doing what they can to push his trials to after the election. Just the act of agreeing to hear the immunity issue and then slow-walking each step proves this to me. If the conservative, trump-appointed, justices felt he was being wrongly accused, you would expect them to want to rapidly prove his innocence.

Expand full comment

Y’all be out here pretending like this wasn’t all decided on Harlan Crowes back deck.

Expand full comment

Although that hasn't been mentioned specifically until now, I think that many here take that as a given, with Leonard Leo's involvement also assumed without articulation.

Expand full comment

The arrogance and pomposity were indeed on FULL display.

Expand full comment

Don't forget the hypocrisy Maryanne - there's that in spades.

Expand full comment

It is indeed, D4N!

Expand full comment

It is odd that the so called “originalists” on the court seem poised to create a presidential immunity doctrine out of whole cloth, without any basis in history or law. And do we think there will be immunity for the guy who will be ordered to make a president’s problem (whatever it is) go away? Unlikely. No, in this world they are creating, the little guy is expendable.

Expand full comment
Apr 26·edited Apr 26

The conservative SCOTUS are carrying out the bidding of those that anointed them for the Supreme Court: Leo Leonard, the Federalist Society and the billionaires who fund it. They Leonard’s phone calls and vote the way they are ordered to.

Expand full comment

Exactly. Many folks here would know that all successful and large companies make at least 10 year plans. What might a coalition of them do ? Too big to fail ?

Expand full comment

I hope you don't mean this literally, because if so that would be the sort of purely emotion-driven conspiratorial thinking that I would hope readers of HCR would be above, considering her devotion to plain fact and veracity of sourcing. The federal court system has certainly been corrupted but not in as obvious a way as this, and to pretend like it is keeps us distracted from the more insidious nature of the problem.

Expand full comment

It was too early in the morning for me... I wrote Heritage Foundation, I meant Federalist Society. That said, I'm not conspiratorial minded, I like evidence and facts. However, these justices were brought on by LL and the FS and I wouldn't be surprised if there was a quid pro quo... They were anointed to the highest judicial position in our land, but have to vote the way the FS expects them to. Not that they wouldn't anyway, but some of their arguments are highly suspicious.

Expand full comment

Oh, we are on the same page in what we are concerned about. I guess I just see "They're getting paid off!" as a recurring motif among my progressive companions that is reached for a bit too quickly. I think it is easier for us to imagine that someone sold out for cash and fame than it is to admit they may genuinely believe all the crap they purport to. Federalist Society is essentially a recommendation machine that finds the looniest right-wing fantasists with a law degree and works to promote them. Why spend the money to buy off people who don't have to listen to you anyway when you can save the money and just let the crazies do their thang?

Expand full comment

I'm no fan of conspiracy theories either; my own mental habit is to take them apart with logic.

Expand full comment

Where is the funding coming from Will ? What I will not do is rule them out.

Expand full comment

Will, I think your point is quite important and not mutually exclusive of Jack’s.

Expand full comment

Dave Fake News reports that the Gang of 6 is really just trying to protect President Biden “from” a vengeful Trump. “We know what he’s capable of”, claimed Injustice Alito

Expand full comment

Trump is only as capable as the lower courts will allow him to be, despite multiple violations of his terms of release nobody has held him to account. All the judges are afraid of him. Poor babies.

Expand full comment
Apr 26·edited Apr 26

Right on Will. He is their useful fool

Expand full comment

Will, I think there's a lot of truth in your assessment here.

Expand full comment

BS intimidated!! They are in on the plan to change our US of A into an autocracy. Wake up everyone. This is intentional and in progress for years!! Stop giving them the benefit of the doubt!!!!!

Expand full comment

For some time I’ve done that - allowed them the benefit of the doubt, telling myself the Court would do the obvious right thing at the most critical moment. I felt optimistic about how they would see this case. That illusion was shattered yesterday.

Expand full comment

And their religion, as they read it in their narrow way, is their idea prop, the realm of men dictating assigned roles for the purpose of dominating the Earth.

Expand full comment

Gorsuch's anti-democracy comments reminded me of his mother's anti-environmental ones when she was director of the EPA. I heard hers firsthand from my dad who represented The Chemical Manufacturers Association, working directly with her and Rita Lavelle to create Superfund. Dad was astounded (but he thought little Neil was cute.)

Expand full comment
Apr 26·edited Apr 26

Thank you for saying this. He was born, bred and dyed in the wool. His momma would be proud. Me, not so much. Since I despise everything about him, especially his self-righteous fervor, like from his devoted mom.

Expand full comment

Gorsuch was promoted to the Supreme Court by Colorado based billionaire manipulator Phillip Anschutz…oil and gas, oil and gas, oil and gas. He lobbied Republican politicians to nominate Gorsuch to the federal appeals court after employing him as his (Washington law firm ) lawyer back in the early 2000’s. (NYT2017/03/14)Anschutz has long called the shots for Gorsuch, as long as he plays “cute little Neil”. Wonder what “the criminal” and McConnell walked with in return.

Expand full comment

I find your comment an interesting piece as it seems to tie in to the way Gorsuch was employed and heavily promoted by Colorado based, “publicity shy” billionaire oil and gas OWNER, Phillip Anschutz… who also owns the Washington Examiner, stock in Coachella, etc etc

A NYT article, published 3/14/2017, reveals some history of their relationship. Especially troubling to me was Gorsuch’ membership in the Walden Group, who collectively owned 40 acres at the headwaters of the Colorado River. This River feeds the west its water.

It was sold to Greenberg-Traurig CEO Brian L Duffy, (according to Politico 4/2023) in 2017. Gorsuch has ruled heavily in favor of the clients G-T litigated. But Gorsuch and Duffy say they’ve “never met”.

Expand full comment

In my dad's case, HE, representing the polluting industries, had to convince Anne Gorsuch and Rita Lavelle to follow the letter of the new EPA law! Dow Chemical was actually ahead of other industries in pollution control by then (after napalm and Agent Orange PR nightmares).

Expand full comment

Especially troubling. Thanks, I think, for these insights.

Expand full comment

Right MaryPat ! The lobbies of commerce of all sorts. Whom do you think hog every waking hour of our representatives ? I can guarantee the answer to that question - I've 'tried' it. If you are not an "A" list'er, you will likely never get past their "firewalls." Add to that the purposeful contact chaos orchestrated by their challengers who flood their phones and emails. *And, let me add this question; What is conspiracy for profit ? Well, the answer we will hear, is that it is simply "Good, common, acceptable business practice." *Once upon a time in my life - check that, 'many times' in my life, I have allowed my logic to blind me just as easily as 'feelings.' I have learned to at least seek some balance. I've also found a truism that rings in my head as I write this, ,, "A knife all blade, makes bleed the hand that wields it." - (paraphrased perhaps) by Rabindranath Tagore

Expand full comment

My father was a member Grade 1 of the American Chemical Society. In the 1960s, I was taking chemicals namely LSD. Har.

Expand full comment

That conjures some memories Bill - oh my. I have to note though, that the people living near Parkersburg WVa and downstream, are still getting dosed with Teflon and more; however it's not intentional, nor recreational.

Expand full comment

No decency whatever.

Expand full comment

Anatomy of Fascism - Robert Paxton

Strongmen - Ruth Ben-Ghiat

How Democracies Dies and Tyranny of the Minority - Steven Levitsky & Daniel Ziblatt

Origins of Totalitarianism - Hannah Arendt

The Conspiracy to End America - Stewart Stevens

and of course the document that planted the seed of the conspiracy: Lewis Powell Memo which was one of the first of many CONservative accusations of liberals where they confessed what they wanted to do which is rule by law, not follow the rule of law.

Expand full comment

This crowd doesn’t have time to read, and ponder options. It’s kick arse time.

Expand full comment

Jeri continues to state the truth of the matter in a fraction of the words I might use. I'm a fan. Tell 'em, Jeri!

Expand full comment

Oh… ohh… let not forget, “Donald’s Vanity Tantrums.” A very worthwhile book to read. Truly.

Expand full comment

So many to add to this list. Include "The Death of Public School" by Cara Fitzpatrick.

Expand full comment

He is their useful fool. Mitch picked them to destroy any democratic vibes. They are well on their way to doing just that. Are cowards our majority these days. Well, duh

Expand full comment

AND, Jack, a frank dereliction of duty! ...from a court without the sense or courage to set up their own ethical requirements to which EVERY OTHER COURT IN THE LAND is subject!

Expand full comment

If these justices are intimidated by that worthless blob of excrement, they should resign or retire immediately. I just do not understand why anyone would be intimidated by that worthless sub-human criminal. President Joe Biden sure isn't intimidated by him, and Liz Cheney sure isn't intimidated by him, neither is Adam Shiff. DJT is a weak little spoiled brat man child.

Expand full comment

That’s just it. I think at least two WANT TO retire, but dare not do it with a Democratic president in office. And they won’t have Uncle Mitch to protect their seat for a Republican heir like he did in 2016 and 2020.

Expand full comment

Republicans believe the danger of one of “theirs” (trump) is not as bad as one of “ours” (the people).

Expand full comment

You nailed it, Jack.

Expand full comment

No doubt whatsoever, Jack!

Expand full comment

Interesting that it is the women on the court, including the tentative Amy Coney Barrett, that agree with you....

Expand full comment

Some are acting on behalf of their wealthy benefactors.

Expand full comment

See my comment above. Waived?

Expand full comment

These justices are kowtowing to the Trump supporting Federalist Society. Most in the GOP support fascism, power is everything.

Expand full comment

As I surmised a very long time ago, we are on new ground; Ground that demands my actions, rather than academic debate, should, could, or mights. The moment and trembling ground we approach, or, are at is when i (intentionally 'small, tiny i' ) must ask myself, "What are you willing to do .... How far am i willing to go" ? Trust me when i tell you, if you will or can, that this is 'not' the first time I've had to ask myself that, because I've always known that i could think any problem to death and recognized that as a sort of inertia; my actions count for far more and in fact can lead me to the next correct action - and eventually, my too busy, fearful brain will follow.

Expand full comment

Guys, one more time, please, I beg of you: do not ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever trust these people for a second. I'm not saying don't ever expect them to do the right thing, I'm saying always expect them to do the most wrong thing. If they ever occasionally appear do the right thing, it is a distraction for the many overwhelmingly wrong things they are about to do, on top of the infinitely wrong things they have already done.

Look, I get it. Everyone here is either a lifelong liberal or a *true* conservative. Most of us are educated, and all of us are open-minded and empathetic. Our first and final instinct is to attempt to see the best in people, give the benefit of the doubt, give credit where due, believe people can change, never give up on finding common ground, etc etc etc. My advice: give that up real quick! At least when it comes to people who have clearly demonstrated they do not mean their fellow citizens well. It is your Achilles heel, it is being exploited and will continue to be exploited.

Who CAN you have faith in? **US!!!** As it stands at this moment, the balance of power in our country still must answer to We the People, and we in the pro-truth, pro-intellect, pro-democracy community are the most engaged and determined group imaginable. We have been winning, and will continue to win the good fight if we stay engaged and determined. No one else will save us, but we don't need anyone to.

Expand full comment

“I am in shock that a lawyer stood in the U.S. Supreme Court and said that a president could assassinate his political opponent and it would be immune as ‘an official act,’” lawyer Marc Elias, whose firm defends democratic election laws, wrote today on social media. He added: “I am in despair that several Justices seemed to think this answer made perfect sense.”

Why is no one stating the obvious here? The SC justices are above the law!!

We already know that Thomas committed income tax evasion when he didn't declare the Crowe loan as income when he defaulted. He's had 10+ years to make that right and never has.

And are we to believe that Alito's tax reporting is lily white? Please!!

We are asking 9 judges who have absolute immunity to determine the fate of the Presidency who they may determine also has absolute immunity.

And every single one of the Republicans running for re-election voted for Kavanaugh, Gorsuch and Comey-Barrett. (Susan Collins didn't vote for Comey-Barrett but did vote for Kavanaugh and Gorsuch.

Expand full comment

I disagree on one point, Gary. Supreme Court and all Federal Justices DO NOT have immunity. Article 3, Section 1: "The Judges, both of the Supreme and Inferior Courts, shall hold heir offices during good behavior," I agree that good can mean different things to different people, but I believe most of us would agree that "good" does not mean ignoring the Constitution, or pretending that the written words are not what was meant and they alone, can "interpret" the true meaning - such as interpreting Amendment 1 :Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion" as written to really mean they wanted to establish a Christian National Religion.

All it takes is the willpower (and getting rid of at least 25 maggots in the House of Representatives and impeaching those Supreme Court Justices who insist on interpreting the Constitution to agree with their own prejudices and religious biases in opposition to the Constitution they are sworn to uphold. It won't even take much investigation, they have done us the favor of putting it all in writing available to the public.

Expand full comment

I’m with you Fay on beginning the impeachment process on Gorsuch right away. He is so dirty on this issue as his connections to Colorado’s billionaire Phillip Anschutz, the Bush admin, Brian Duffy and the Greenberg-Traurig law firm are sus.

Just a guess, but they are using him to demolish the EPA like his mother before him. Trump (or his VP) is in line to do just that.

Expand full comment

Good for you Jeanie, In response to an article by ooldandintheway I wrote letters to Roberts, Alito, and Thomas requesting them to resign. As soon as this election ends I'm going to start pressuring my excellent Congressman to begin impeachment against Alito and Thomas and to assist in enacting a universal code of ethics. I'm waiting until after the election as his concentration no will be focused on winning his seventh term - he is that good. We need all our public servants to be honest, refuse bribes, work for the good of their constituents - all of us, not just the wealthy or friends, not to commit fraud, and anything else we can think. Also the universal code of ethics needs to be solidly enforced, retraining, dismissed from service, charged for criminal behavior - in ascending order,.

Expand full comment

Again.... where is the double like button ? Brava Fay ~

Expand full comment

Yes!

While this insanely corrupt court currently has our attention, let's remember how we WILL win in November.

Women's rights to control their bodies, their health, the size of the families, their economic well being, the health and education of the children they have already....all that has been robbed by this court. I BELIEVE that most women will vote to support a restoration of a woman's right to choose.

James Carville is famous for saying "It's the economy, stupid". And if you have a limited source of income and can't imagine supporting another child...having a government tell you you MUST have a child is a bridge too far. A freedom stolen by old white guys who pound their bibles.

Bonus outrage: all the sad and horrific stories of women turned away from medical facilities due to problematic pregnancies! Really? In America? Healthcare denied in a health crisis - because of those same old white guys pounding their bibles?

I must suggest that Republicans will rue the day they ignored a woman scorned. The pendulum will swing back to modern civilization - but it will take channeling this outrage into votes.

This is the most powerful campaign tool ever gifted by the fascist opposition. Let's use it to its full potential.

Expand full comment

It isn't even just a matter of our right to control our own bodies and choose whether or not to bear a child; it's a matter of LIFE AND DEATH for us. The Repubs, the Court, and Repub laws are literally killing us!

Expand full comment

Yes, of course. And this position is held by those that describe themselves as "pro-life". Hypocrisy knows no limits, eh?

Expand full comment
Apr 30·edited Apr 30

One has to wonder that once they prevent all birth control measures, will mandatory reporting to involuntary impregnation centers be far behind..and abolition of all rape laws...

Expand full comment

Are you channeling Margaret Atwood?

Expand full comment

My belief that women will vote in the best interest of themselves and those they love is what keeps me from despair.

Expand full comment

Thank you Will- always!

Expand full comment

I’ll sign on. Do we have any choice. The battle is at our door.

Expand full comment

Will, I only trust them to follow the instructions they have been given. Period.

Expand full comment

If this stands, at least it will be easy for historians like HCR and myself to date the exact day of the fall of the American Republic: April 25, 2024.

Expand full comment

25 April: in Italy it's a public holiday commemorating the end of fascism (Liberation Day).

In Australia it's a public holiday for Anzac Day, the anniversary of the ill-fated landing at Gallipoli. There were actually more French soldiers killed at Gallipoli than Australians and New Zealanders, but nobody mentions that because it was the first time Colonial Australia (population 4.9 million) had been taken seriously as a nation. Or little New Zealand, where women had already had the right to vote since 1893.

Expand full comment

25 April: Portugal marks the 50th anniversary of the Carnation Revolution army coup that brought democracy

Expand full comment

Really? It's quite a date.

Expand full comment

I was in Firenze on that date a few years ago. I took the opportunity to visit the American Cemetery outside Firenze where I learned, for the first time, about the heroism of the Japanese-American division of the SEGREGATED US Army! Shame on us!

Expand full comment

The Segregated US Army! That's breathtaking. What fine young men they must have been, in all respects. I've never heard about that. I lived in Firenze for a while, but as I'm not American I knew nothing about the American Cemetery.

Expand full comment

The 442nd Regimental Combat Team wasn't a division (but that's a "technical" glitch). It was the most decorated US Army combat unit of the war, participated in the liberation of Dachau, and was composed of Japanese-Americans from Hawaii and those who volunteered out of the "relocation samps."

Expand full comment

Thank you for the clarification and additional information.

Expand full comment

The 442nd Infantry Regiment.

Expand full comment

Firenze is my 2nd home away from home. I ran off to Europe in 1977 and stayed in Firenze for 2 years living in Via Santa Spirito and Via Monte alla Croce.

Expand full comment

I love Firenze. I’ve been there several times and have spent a month at a time. South of the Arno is a favorite place to stay. Both areas in which you stayed are out of the tourist center. I loved visiting the Jewish Synagogue. After a while I want to see other than gorgeous Cathedrals. I liked to wander down side streets and take in the local sights and food. So love Italia!

Expand full comment

In April of 1977, I took up residence in Firenze for 2 years. I should have stayed.

Expand full comment

Firenze è un albero fiorito... Where did you live?

Expand full comment

Well I think the date is when the ruling is made but I agree with you. Every law school dean should be writing a letter in unity and publishing it now - before these clowns put absolutism in power. McConnell needs to be condemned.

Expand full comment

Steve, who'd have predicted 10 years ago that the so-called party of Lincoln would be responsible for the crumbling of the Republic and the decimation of democracy?

The only answer to this is as I said yesterday: VOTE BLUE this November, up and down the ballot. Then a Trump trial can take place (unless SCOTUS defangs Jack Smith's case. And if that happens, then a suitable Dem majority MUST add 4 more justices to the Court, to counter the 5 to 6 MAGAists.

Expand full comment

*raises hand*

I lived in New York City in the early 1980s. I knew exactly who Trump was, I knew what he would attempt, I knew the number and power of the people who would aid and abet him, I knew that the craven and debased GOP would elevate him. My wife, a Germanist and a mental-health professional, has, since 2015, predicted Trump's actions and effects accurately in even more detail. Depressing and scary.

Expand full comment

My uncle was in real estate in NY city and hated him. Said he was the biggest crook ever!

Expand full comment

The party? Totally agree but from 2015

on I was convinced Trump would go down the evil road. I thought McConnell would stop him (impeachment). At that point I did jump on your band wagon about the party. I am still weighing the plus and minus of an expanded court. When RBG was alive I argued against term limits. Now, I am in favor of them for Scotus. Now I can empathize with people in the mid 1800’s when Tanner did his evil. I have always voted the person not the party - I am an independent. Being from Mass. I often voted and very much liked our Republican governors like Charlie Baker (but he was actively anti Maga). Now I am with you 100%. Even during the 60’s I had a higher opinion of America than I do now. I do have hope but I am also very angry.

Expand full comment

Well, Judge Luttig (sp?) And about 25 other judicial scholars submitted an amicus brief a couple of months ago. Many many other lawyers have, too.

You'd think they'd listen to Luttig at least, ant find a more well respected conservative icon.

Expand full comment

Susan, we were told by countless legal scholars and lawyers that the Defendant didn't have a case before the Supreme Court -- they were surprised they took it at all, but most said he didn't stand a chance given the foundational principle that no man is a king nor above the law in this country.

I'm not an attorney, but have great respect for and interest in the profession. How Sauer could stand in front of SCOTUS and say that a president may assassinate a rival or stage a coup -- and not get robust pushback from the justices -- is an absolute horror.

Let's hope that the weight of that suggestion forces them to say, "wait, what did we just do???" and come put on the side of the Declaration of Independence and a faithful reading of the Constitution they've sworn to uphold.

Expand full comment

I does not matter to them , they are all in for a fascist takeover. Luttig is too honest, too serious about his oath, to be listened to.

Expand full comment

Thanks forgot that fact

Expand full comment

And to be factual Laurence Tribe has also. But this is a time for not just the greatest Constitutional expert to weigh in, or 25 scholars, it is a moment where there needs to be maximum scholar pressure, such as from the deans of all major law schools.

Expand full comment

Thats a great idea. Flood them with people they can't dismiss. I'm heartened to have learned that they definitely pay attention to media.

Can't imagine what it feels like to be Jackson, Kagen or Sotomayor.

Expand full comment

Totally agree about those three and yet I hope they do not go silent into the night- meaning they need to call out the divine righters in the strongest ways permissible. The divine righters are not your “brethren” of the court.

Expand full comment

As much as some sweet, sweet cries of "Guilty!" emanating from the jury box toward tfg will make the world feel a bit less topsy-turvy, we need to stay focused here. We are dealing with a fascist cult of personality here, and very few of its members will see the brand of being a convicted felon as a disqualifier rather than a bizarro confirmation of martyrdom. Similarly, most non-cult members have for quite some time seen the man for the charlatan he is, and no result from this particular case will change that.

Von Tweeto will likely get 45% of the vote even with a conviction, but will mightily struggle to get more than (or even up to) 47% regardless of outcome. Having multiple trials is not a silver bullet to a satisfactory 2024 outcome, and not having multiple trials does not portend the opposite. A Repub victory in Nov would mean constitutional crisis and likely dictatorship, so the cases would have ended up immaterial. A Dem victory in Nov (more likely, per historical precedent), means the cases will continue unabated. Yes, they *should* be moving faster, because the public *should* get closure before the cycle is through. But...

Eyes on the prize, people.

P.S. Regarding the top comment yesterday being another bit of "behind in the polls!!!" alarmism: not only is this unhelpful, but it is factually untrue. Most reputable polls show stronger Biden numbers the last few weeks, and it is all public record and easily accessible online. Confidence, people! Please!

Expand full comment

Thank you Will. The trials (and tribulations) of the Great Grifter are a circus. Perhaps in the very long run, the discussions by the fascist members of the Extreme Court will be important to reflect on. I don't think we have seen the last of the potential revelations of how these "justices" have been renumerated and influenced by Leo and Company. And maybe, someday, we will have an AG and an IRS with the intestinal fortitude to address their blatantly obvious corruption.

But it is all a side show in the greater circus. All that matters is a Blue Wave (Tsunami!?) on November 5th. "Eyes on the Prize" indeed.

Expand full comment

Thanks, Will!

“A newly released NBC News poll, which has been among the best Trump polls of late, found Biden gaining 3 points since their last poll. It’s yet another poll showing meaningful recent movement to Biden. Here is how many points Biden has gained in a selection or recent polls (all polls via 538):

8 pts - Marquette

7 pts - Echelon

6 pts - Morning Consult

4 pts - NYT/Siena, HarrisX/Forbes, Redfield and Wilton

3 pts - Big Village, NBC News

2 pts - Ipsos/Reuters

The 2024 election is changing, things are clearly moving in our direction now. We have a long way to go and a lot of work to do but in every way imaginable I much rather be us than them right now.”

https://www.hopiumchronicles.com/p/keep-making-calls-for-ukraine-more?r=fqsxl&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web

Expand full comment

Polls can help raise morale, but it's the VOTES that actually count. GOTV

Expand full comment

👍 That is exactly what Hopium Chronicles/Simon Rosenberg is all about ! 💙

✍️📲🚶🏻💲📣

🌊🌊🌊

Expand full comment

Will, for the last week, I have had hope that Trump's behavior in and out of court, his lawyers' vain and lame attempts to clear him from all charges, the revelations by Pecker, and the Judge's strong hand, would finally convince some of his followers that he is not who they thought he was. I really felt better about what I have worried about for eight years.

Then, I hear about the Supreme Court's conservative bunch who apparently don't see what I and so many others see and understand- ordinary people, scholars, military leaders,

journalists, and Democrats who HAVE seen the truth about Donald Trump's attempts to take over America.

My hopes are dashed, but I can't linger on the negative. I suppose I can feel positive that Trump is falling more and more into the valley of derangement. If only others could see that and change their minds about him.

Expand full comment

I'd like to think the legal facts matter. But one aspect of the current trial is having quite an impact, and that's the pictures of tfg sleeping in the courtroom, and looking older and more frazzled and worn down. It's quite visible. And a bit shocking. He blows himself up a bit for his post- trial rants, but they're shorter and less bombastic than last time around. He truly appears diminished, physically and thats a lot of his hold on people. I think the daily pictures coming out are eroding some of his power and charisma. Much as we insult him ourselves, his real but shrinking numbers of followers see him as a charismatic figure. Don't just dismiss it.

Expand full comment

Susan, I realized long ago that no matter what outlandish, illegal, immoral things that Trump has done or said, his followers still belief he has been sent from God to save the country from the evilness of the Democrats. They DON'T care if he goes to jail. They WOULDN'T care if he did shoot someone on the street.

They are his cult members and it will be almost impossible to persuade them that he is a charlatan and a most dangerous, unhinged man.

I certainly have never dismissed them.

Expand full comment

Definitely to all that. I hate saying tfg has charisma, but he does. Hard to think of a person so disgusting having charisma. But Hitler did too. Tfg has charisma for some people, he's larger than life.

Thats the part I resisted acknowledging for a long time.

Expand full comment

When he was first elected and he started saying and doing ludicrous things, I kept thinking, now, his supporters will see him as he really is!! I kept waiting, until I realized that he had his supporters in his hands and they didn't want to let go.

So disheartening, and I had to stop dwelling on the absurdity of all of it. Dwelling on bad people and events drains one's energy and leads to depression, so I tried to dwell on the good things that Biden was trying to do.

Expand full comment

That conservative bunch see and know exactly what we see and know. They are acting according to plan.

Expand full comment

Lord, I’m trying...

Expand full comment

Will, I agree with everything you say here, but fear what will transpire when von Cheeto loses. He is quite literally fighting for his life, and should he lose the election he will be like a rabid animal. I frankly don’t see any possibility of avoiding violence should he lose.

Expand full comment

Will, I generally agree, with a slight correction: as I understand it, a Dem victory in November will NOT mean that Defendant Donny's (federal, at least) trials continue unabated. It depends upon SCOTUS' ruling -- a majority seems likely to agree that he is at least somewhat immune from prosecution, AND THAT IS A DANGEROUS PRECEDENT GOING FORWARD.

One positive that may come from this is, regardless if Biden wins in November, details of Jack Smith's cases may yet emerge *without a trial beforehand*, per Andrew Weissman. He posits that if SCOTUS remands the case back to Judge Chutkan to determine public vs private acts, she can hold an open bench hearing and demand to see whatever evidence she needs to make a ruling on. That hearing could be held quickly without waiting the 80+ days she previously reserved before an actual trial happens, and the evidence would be available to the public. That would be a further dagger in Defendant Donny's miserable atrophied heart come November.

A massive coronary would also work (but that would then absolve him of any guilt.)

Expand full comment

Unfortunately, it looks like more and more of our younger voters may stay home and not vote (or mail their ballots). Trump may still lose the popular vote, but I am concerned about the Electoral College count.

Expand full comment

Janet, please provide evidence for this claim. Do you have a reputable survey showing such a reaction is likely, or are you basing this on assumptions, social media posts, noise from fringe activists, etc? The gold-standard Harvard Youth poll out this month showed voter interest among under-30s to be exactly the same as it was in the record-setting 2020 cycle. The midterms showed an astonishingly low drop-off in youth participation, and in the swing states it was strongest. I could go on.

As an engaged person of this demographic, I am getting more tired by the day of hearing that we are the problem area when there is no evidence to prove it to be true.

Expand full comment

Exactly right on all points, Particularly the "top post" from the Professional Bed-Wetter yesterday. The people who agreed with that message from Earth XXIII are embarrassing to have to call them "fellow Democrats."

Expand full comment

"It seems like I keep falling further behind! How is this always happening to me?!?" cried the reigning champion marathon runner, tears streaming down his face, as he visibly pulled ahead of the competition close to the finish line.

It is annoying enough to hand-wring, but super-duper annoying when there is no actual impetus to.

Expand full comment

Thank you Will!

Expand full comment

Laws without law enforcement are meaningless. The Republican Supreme Court Judges have just abolished law and law enforcement in our Republic. This is either renewal or the fall of our Republic. Those judges need to be impeached.

Expand full comment

If historians still exist.

Expand full comment

They'll continue - they'd be like the Irish shannachies, teaching rebellious ideas from the hedges, or perhaps like Ray Bradbury's bookleggers, spreading forbidden knowlege in secret.

Expand full comment

Hah, TC. Historians will be out of a job. The propagandists will take over.

Expand full comment

We'll still be around. We write about the past, for the future.

Expand full comment

TC: yes, but what's that line? 'History is written by the victors'? Let's hope I'm being hyperbolic. But we are at a place in time that few guessed we would be

Expand full comment

We certainly are. If I had submitted a screenplay in 2014 that used facts from 2015-2024 in it, I'd have been thrown out of the room for coming up with an idiot scenario,

Expand full comment

If the Democrats manage to keep the White House and the Senate, and regain the House, I hope the first order of business is to do three things: 1) Eradicate the filibuster; 2) Provide one Supreme Court Justice for each of the 13 Federal Appellate Circuits; and 3) Fix Citizens United; corporations are not persons. We need our own Project 2025 to stem the authoritarian corruption of our democratic foundations.

Expand full comment

Is it possible with the freedoms they have already stolen that the country might wake the eff up and get us a 2/3 Senate. Corrupt, fascist SCOTUS judges need to be impeached!!!

Expand full comment

Nah, they are too busy with the crisis of the moment, elsewhere. Maybe our existential crisis should be front and center

Expand full comment

I agree with you completely! Your three points must be the agenda after the new Congress is assembled!

Expand full comment

Sherman, *we* already do….called the Constitution, Declaration of Independence, Bill of Rights, etc…..you know, the original “Project”!!!

Expand full comment

Absolutely!

Expand full comment

The right-wing justices on the Court are betraying the rule of law in the US.

Expand full comment

They are arrogant enough to believe that they ARE the law in the US.

Expand full comment

And they have absolute immunity themselves and never need to recuse themselves no matter the conflict of interest.

Expand full comment

A travesty

Expand full comment

In a way, I hope they do grant Biden absolute immunity so he can replace Alito, Thomas, Roberts and Kavanaugh with 4 justices of his own choosing.

Then they could reinstate Roe, invalidating all of the draconian laws the red states have put into place.

I was going to add "/S" but I'm not so sure.

Expand full comment

You can believe that they would do an about face faster than a bullet could kill someone on 5th Avenue.

Expand full comment

Jeri, “ I object, your honor! This trial is a travesty. It's a travesty of a mockery of a sham of a mockery of a travesty of two mockeries of a sham.” Woody Allen in Bananas….’cept this time it’s not funny. At. All.

Expand full comment

I feel like we are living in an unfunny version of all that, but our neighbors love the new reality

Expand full comment

Shock! Quoting my comment on Joyce Vance's Substack as to whether they will grant Trump limited immunity.

Limited immunity. I'm not sure whether this was argued at t he DC level so by rights should have been waived. As Robert Hubbell is saying: "The hearing itself was a supreme outrage. While the reactionary majority may not adopt the most extreme version of Trump’s defense, they need not do so to grant Trump a victory. Indeed, they have already granted Trump most of what he asked for: a lengthy delay." Ian Millheiser says Republican justices, engaged in dizzying feats of reverse logic. https://www.vox.com/scotus/24140309/supreme-court-donald-trump-immunity-jack-smith

Someone mentioned "scope and course" of employment. IMHO there are probably mixed questions of law and fact. Could be a jury question. This is the kind of stuff that comes up in civil law and workers' comp all the time. "Personal" matters like trying to subvert the will of the people.

Consider the concepts of frolic and detour. Generally, a “detour” constitutes a minor departure from an employee's duties but is still considered acting within the scope of employment, whereas a “frolic” would be a major departure from the scope of employment undertaken for that employee's own benefit. I think Trump blew it by failing to address it at the DC level.

But anything goes at SCOTUS.

Expand full comment

Could embezzlement be considered part of an accountant's "official duties"?

Expand full comment

"Justice Clarence Thomas, whose wife, Ginni, participated in that effort, did not recuse himself from today’s hearing, and the court did not object to his presence."

Nor did those hand picked by the person whose fate is under discussion, but of course, that was the point.

Expand full comment

Recusal, J L, suggests ethics, or at least awareness or a modicum of that.

America has never in its history had such a rank, vulgar, in-your-face example of such constant bribery by the billionaire classes that one individual so reliably keep them in their privileges, arrogance, and corruption.

Expand full comment

And his lovely lawyer Ali Baba [sic] 🤮admitted out loud that they are in the bag for him.

https://amp.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/jan/05/brett-kavanaugh-supreme-court-justice-trump-lawyer-ballot-election

Expand full comment

I am disappointed that at least three justices have not spoken out about Clarence Thomas - his corruption and especially the acts of his fascist wife. I know, I know, the court has this tradition of mutual respect and comradeship (Scalia and RBG having dinners and trips together) blah, blah, blah.

But how far must a fellow justice go to cross the line into being completely in the bag for an interest group before being ostracized? I'd like to see the three reasonable justices protest in some way. A little rebellion would be refreshing - and long overdue. Dobbs was too far. This particular case being entertained is too far.

Expand full comment

And hopefully that speaking out will not be only in the form of a scathing dissent to an anti-democratic ruling.

Expand full comment

Whoever is the AG for Biden when he is reelected needs to sit a grand jury to determine if Ginni Thomas committed crimes relating to January 6th.

If this is done before the election Biden will get crucified by the right wing media and the maganazis.

Expand full comment

Ginni's role is surely worthy of more attention.

Expand full comment

I continue to be surprised that I am surprised. Than you Heather for giving a sane respective on the insanity. I learned elsewhere for the first time today about something called the clear statement rule. In the immunity case today Brett Kavanaugh brought up the idea that a president might be immune from prosecution unless a law explicitly states that such a law applies to the president. I’m thinking everything from stealing kiddies piggy banks to assassination to a coup is immune since so far as I know no law against such things actually cites the president. I find it appalling that the so-called originalists seem to follow this line of jurisprudence and yet I’m reasonably confident that all the framers of the constitution were trying to ensure the US didn’t end up with our own version of King George III.

Expand full comment

Or worse. Far worse.

Expand full comment

Sioux Fleming,

No one, in my opinion deserves immunity from committing a crime especially a trusted government official elected by citizens of the USA! Each elected official holds the sacred responsibility for the care of this country, for its future, and for its people ie those who voted for the elected official or not!!! Not only the citizens of our country but our allies who have trusted their relationship with us for their protection against powerful adversaries who threaten our freedoms and the freedom and care of our children and grandchildren.

Has every thread of character been removed from those who were elected to serve ALL OF US???

For this reason, we need a great man like our current president, who loves this country and its people and our hard fought for freedoms. President Biden wants to see us work together with our resources for one another....for the health of our country and ALL of its people....to joyfully and respectfully care for one another. He wants to promote freedom throughout the world. He wants to promote relationships in order to help one another where needed. He is promoting the care of our environment for us and throughout the world.

Let's join him! Where we would like to contribute to "better" let's engage. For example at the border. How can we help...what can we do to meet the needs to encourage the many servants who have worked there for years. What can we do to provide pathways to help with education for the many children and young people who come to us? How can we better direct persons to areas where jobs and housing are available? Let's not give up on possibilities!

Where there is criminal behavior....the need to address must be immediate without brutality.

I also want to thank everyone on President Biden's team who promote freedom and positive relationships throughout this plant which is OUR home. We do not see all of you because, behind the scene your pour our your gifts, your brilliance, your goodness, your sincere love of this country and its battle for freedom for all....THANK YOU!!! and THANK YOU!!!!to family members who go without your presence as your loved ones serve.

Expand full comment

What the right wing in general does not get, or wish to get, is simple cause and effect as it applies to anybody but themselves. As if they were the only world that existed, and the rest are less everything, not *gasp* equals-in-fact. Completely selfish, which is why such ungreat minds as theirs literally cannot comprehend any outcome that affects others affecting themselves. They wall/will themselves off in so many ways, by class, by religious orthodoxies, by color and pretensions to 'whiteness', by sex, etc Ad infinitum. Especially when they themselves are the cause, the cause of themselves, and their basically insecure attitude that has to be constantly walled up and protected by every self-proclaimed privilege imaginable. Pitiful. It's an idea field full of landmines.

Expand full comment

Yeah, Originalists until they're not...

Expand full comment

They make up Schitt.

Expand full comment

CORRUPTION

1. deceit

2. fraud

3. malfeasance

4. embezzlement

5. bribery

( fascism, get the picture?)

The Supreme Court's apparent willingness to entertain arguments that would grant presidents extreme immunity undermines our democracy. By placing a president above the law, it challenges the foundational principle that no one is immune from legal accountability, risking the descent of our democratic system into unchecked presidential power. This sets a dangerous precedent that erodes public trust and the rule of law, foundational to our democratic system.

Expand full comment

My wife is listening to a podcast with John Fugelsang recounting yesterday's court room events and he said, "You know, it's almost like men invented this system."

It's more couth than Emma Watson's, "Fuck the patriarchy," but they both have their place in civil discourse. /S

Expand full comment

I agree with you Michael 👍!!!

Expand full comment

I thought that a king could do no wrong?

Expand full comment

Thank you, Heather. What happened today at SCOTUS is horrifying. It is more important than ever that we do everything in our powers to get out the blue vote in overwhelming numbers in November. The Extreme Court has moved us perilously close to the edge of the precipice of losing our democracy

Expand full comment

But on a lighter note, there are many hilarious "Pecker" jokes out there all of them at Don Snoreleone's expense.

SNL should have a field day on Saturday assuming there's show.

Expand full comment

When you hear Gorsuch saying “I’m not concerned about this case, but I am concerned about future uses of the criminal law to target political opponents based on accusations about their motives.", we are feeling the demise of democracy. It brings tears to my eyes. It's like the crime of hurting/killing someone with a knife and being more worried about the condition of the knife, was it rusted?, than the crime committed.

Expand full comment

To be frank, I have found this to be a recurring trait in conservative thought at all levels. They tend to be far more guided by the details and rules of their dogma than any material effects on the people that might be affected. "I'm sorry Rule 432 means you and your family will die in destitution, but not only has Rule 432 always been there, but you didn't fill out the rule-change application the right way! Dismissed!"

...which makes it even more infuriating when these particular 6 conservatives just make sh!t up as they go.

Expand full comment

What the right wing in general does not get, or wish to get, is simple cause and effect as it applies to anybody but themselves. As if they were the only world that existed, and the rest are less everything, not *gasp* equals-in-fact. Completely selfish, which is why such ungreat minds as theirs literally cannot comprehend any outcome that affects others affecting themselves. They wall/will themselves off in so many ways, by class, by religious orthodoxies, by color and pretensions to 'whiteness', by sex, etc Ad infinitum. Especially when they themselves are the cause, the cause of themselves, and their basically insecure attitude that has to be constantly walled up and protected by every self-proclaimed privilege imaginable. Pitiful. It's an idea field full of landmines.

Expand full comment

That justice, Thomas did not recuse himself is a Crime of and by itself

Expand full comment

And the Chief Justice does nothing, says nothing.

Expand full comment

Absolutely disgusting.

Expand full comment

By the time this case is complete, with its acceptance of assassination of opponents (and judges?) as a legitimate political tool and its (nearly) explicit political purpose to protect Donald Trump through delay, if it is not the case now, the Court, as it is currently composed, will have destroyed its credibility. One more deteriorating American institution.

Expand full comment

I mean... I feel like we keep doing this over and over. "If they rule [xyz], then they will have destroyed all credibility!" The court then rules [xyz], waits a year, and finds a way to sink even lower. Rinse and repeat.

They already have destroyed their credibility to most of the country. It has been gone like dust in the wind for two good years now. Since the court is a bedrock institution whose power derives from general respect more than anything else, we are already in a pretty dangerous area.

Expand full comment

Agreed. The power of the Constitution is our aggregated faith in it's legitimacy. Without that, it is just a curio. The same could be said of our institutions.

Expand full comment

If SCOTUS rules the Prez has absolute immunity, couldn't Biden place 4 justices on the Supreme Court and reverse all of the Fascist decisions the court has made since 2020?

And while he's at it remove Alito, Thomas, Roberts and Kavanaugh?

Expand full comment

The Senate needs to return to 60 votes to confirm a nominee. Simple majority is to blame for Gorsuch, Frat Boy and Miss Prim

Expand full comment

Not if the President has absolute immunity. DeSatan remove an elected prosecutor in FL with no repercussions.

What's stopping Biden? McConnell wouldn't allow impeachment hearings for Trump. Why would Schumer allow them for Biden? Gorsuch and Comey-Barrett were put on the bench "illegally" anyway without repercussions. The table has been set.

Expand full comment

I actually don't agree with this, not just because 60 votes was arbitrary to begin with, but because in today's climate it would make finding a nominee impossible. KBJ was confirmed with just over 50 votes as well.

The solution here is to not elect bonkers Presidents and Senators and - ironically - get rid of the 60-vote threshold entirely, for everything. Then a pro-democracy majority could actually rule as voters intended and put needed reforms in place.

Expand full comment

When a Justice nominee had to be acceptable to bith sides to get confirmed, reasonable nominations were made in order to get confirmation

This was before the advent of blocking every nomination by the Senate Majority leader or the 51 vote acceptance of extremists

Expand full comment

Dave, the idea that reasonable nominations will result in votes from both sides is a fantasy of the past, plain and simple, and in this case there really is one particular side devoted to obstruction. Here is the official record of roll call votes for the Senate so far this year: https://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/vote_menu_118_2.htm Notice how few people get confirmed with a 60-vote margin, even to totally uncontroversial posts. Are ALL those Biden nominees extreme choices? (Spoiler: none of them are.) Was KBJ not a reasonable nominee? Is the current Secretary of the Interior an extreme nominee? How about the Health Secretary? I could go on, but you get my drift.

Expand full comment

Yes, sadly I do. The evolution of changes in comportment of elected officials from “representatives” into street gang mob rule has diluted the Constitution into a Lord of The Flies dysfunction

The Fantasy lies in its dependance upon the Honor of Men (and Women) to serve the Constitution instead of their Figurehead. Honor now has little value in the internal congressional war occurring before us. “After The Deluge, And Their Feathers Once So Fine, Grew Torn and Tattered”

Expand full comment

Reality.

Expand full comment

They have zero credibility

Expand full comment

“It cannot be that a president of the United States can attempt to steal an election and seize power but our justice system is incapable of bringing him to trial before the next election four years later,” she wrote. Liz Cheney. It cannot be Liz? Apparently it can be. I am as shocked as she seems to be. Is this how good-hearted well-meaning Germans felt as they watched in real time as Hitler took over their nation? I once felt that the SCOTUS was the ultimate back stop. If there is something wrong going on, and it can be applealed legally, ultimately they will make it right. That notion is destroyed, utterly. Apparently. Never say never perhaps. It is theoretically possible that we get a decision quickly that agrees with simple sanity. But that seems exceedingly unlikely - much more likely is that SCOTUS will have aided and abbetted an indicted criminal, scuttling the criminal trial that would hold him to justice. And BTW - give Cannon the confidence that she will prevail in her own efforts to scuttle the other federal case down in Florida. We are living in dangerous times.

Expand full comment

SCOTUS ignited the Appeals Court well written decision. These MAGA Justice feel that they know best! 🤬

Expand full comment

There is one reason I can thnk of, and only one, for this. The majority of SCOTUS are in with the notion that woke liberal America is no longer what America should be about. And to accomplish such a takeover involves a Project 2025 plan, and a second Trump administration is the trojan horse that allows it to take place. It is sinister to the max, and I don't know how to stop it other than vote against it and try to persuade others to vote accordingly. My anxiety about this is at an all time high, especially with new polling just today that shows Trump still ahead by a good many percentage points. Sooner or later, we have to give some credence to this polling.

Expand full comment

Justice Kagan managed to articulate the central question. Good for her!

Much of the other discussion in today's courtroom session should have been made offline in a different venue. I read about parts of that discussion in an article by ABC News, and the entire conversation made me angrier and sadder by the minute.

see: https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/10-key-moments-trumps-supreme-court-immunity-hearing/story?id=109635973

In that article, several items jumped out at me. Among them, aside from legitimizing political asassination, was BeerBro's assertion that Ford pardoning Nixon is considered nowadays to have been wise (you weasel Kavanaugh - sneaking that in is like telegraphing your punches!!).

Worse yet was that the Trump lawyer spoke from both sides of his mouth, saying that a president COULD be held accountable for crimes committed in office, but only if they were impeached and convicted by the Senate first. You can't have it both ways, can you? Is impeachment a political or a criminal process? Pick one and stick with it!

What this suggests to me is that if the US is to continue as initially conceived, it will one day become necessary to redefine the job of president and redistribute many of its responsibilities.

We're still dealing with the traditionl mindset that was established back when it seemed reasonable for a successful general to become a king and ruler. We're finding out that for a single Head of State to hold the ultimate authority over too many things is corrosive. An imperial presidency must never be allowed to become authoritarian, but the signs indicate today that this is exactly where the Trumpists would take us.

Expand full comment

"“I am in shock that a lawyer stood in the U.S. Supreme Court and said that a president could assassinate his political opponent and it would be immune as ‘an official act,’” lawyer Marc Elias, whose firm defends democratic election laws, wrote today on social media. He added: “I am in despair that several Justices seemed to think this answer made perfect sense.”

The SCOTUS is hardly the only place where our democracy was being shredded today.

https://www.insidehighered.com/news/students/free-speech/2024/04/26/armed-crackdowns-student-protesters-evoke-vietnam-era?mc_cid=bcfe258017&mc_eid=2d13197685

Expand full comment

*Sigh* While I do not agree with the actions of the police described in this article, and abhor the militarization of US police forces in general...

Democracy is defined in Oxford Dictionary as: 1) a system of government by the whole population or all the eligible members of a state, typically through elected representatives, 2) a state governed by a democracy, 3) control of an organization or group by the majority of its members.

Democracy doesn't mean "having every aspect of our society live up to a selection of humanitarian values," and it certainly doesn't mean "freedom to trespass and cause public nuisance without consequences, provided you feel your cause is just."

Democracy as an imperfect-but-still-superior system of government is worth fighting for, and actually IS at risk in America. We need to be specific about what that entails and not define those dangers so broadly as to encompass anything we find unfair or unsavory.

Expand full comment

God forbid students and faculty should assemble in protest on an American college campus for anything so trivial, "unfair" and "unsavory" as being misrepresented by elected officials to support apartheid and genocide. In case you hadn't noticed something about America, "the majority of its members" do not support either.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/apr/25/emory-university-protest-arrests?CMP=GTUS_email

Expand full comment

I'm not gonna get too dragged into this, but I just need to point out that this incredibly shameless deflection proves my point.

My comment has nothing to do with whether I agree or don't with the protestors' actions or beliefs. It has nothing to do with whether I agree with the use of force by the police forces (in fact, I literally said I DISagreed). What my comment had to say was that the protests have nothing to do with *democracy as a structural system of government,* which is the topic of today's post by the professor. Free speech is intimately related, but distinct. Your initial comment that having protestors arrested "shredded" democracy is ridiculous. Being arrested at a protest is de rigeur. It's okay to be upset about something you are seeing, but just because something you don't like happens in your country does not "shred" its status as a democracy. Democracy does not mean "everyone is treated as I think is right;" it means "I can freely cast a ballot and those results temporarily determine who is in charge within limits."

P.S. Yeah, almost all Americans if asked would oppose genocide and apartheid. No shit. But there is no extant majority of Americans who consider Israel to currently be committing those acts. A bunch of polling has been done in the last 6 months on this issue, and public opinion largely remains mixed, with significantly more Americans still sympathizing with Israel than with Palestine, and very few people listing this issue as top of mind. Even if someone DOES agree with your position, that does not necessitate that they agree with how the protests are being conducted. I get that you are outraged, but refusal to acknowledge these facts and recognize nuance here dooms the actions you wish to see happen to remain on the fringe.

Expand full comment

The Constitutional right to peacefully assemble and engage in freedom of expression holds no requirement that either be kept invisible.

Expand full comment

Well, yeah. Duh. Totally agree.

But there are reasonable limits to every Constitutional right; they are not absolute. If you don't have permission to be on someone else's property and don't keep your people organized, you are going to get arrested for trespassing, disorderly conduct, vandalism, etc because that is factually what you are doing. Obviously authorities can mischaracterize, but you have to draw the line somewhere. "I'm American and I think I am right and this is important!" doesn't give you carte blanche.

Expand full comment

"But there are reasonable limits to every Constitutional right; they are not absolute."

True, and Netanyahu's government of Israel through its minions in ADL and AIPAC don't get to advocate for violence against American students and faculty on American campuses to call for police armed with weapons of war or the National Guard of the USA ("duh"...not under the command of the IDF) to silence these protests. Neither a foreign power nor our own citizens get to use mainstream media to call for violence and endangerment of any group. No...we don't get carte blanche to do this and if our elected were in control of governance instead of selling it for "campaign donations," they would be telling the source and minions of that foreign state to stop.

Now, start acting like you understand that limits don't just apply to only the assemblies of people you find inconvenient or offensive.

Expand full comment

…and the GOP controlled states will send in the National Guard or PD! TX and GA are using fascist actions, it reminds me that something awful, like Kent State, will happen.

Expand full comment

Me too, Janet. I'm suspicious that some escalating violence are trying to promote an event like a Kent State with a plan to blame the carnage on Biden in hopes of hurting his reelection.

For those who actually are interested in peace and want to learn to be more understanding, there's a webinar on May 2 at https://righttobe.org/events/bystander-intervention-to-stop-antisemitic-xenophobic-and-islamophobic-harassment-2/. I've signed up for it and recommended it to a group on the Best Democracy FB site that I help to moderate.

Expand full comment