I must correct Heather here, as the Fresno Bee is not the newspaper within Speaker McCarthy's district. Fresno is a tad more than a hundred miles north of Bakersfield, where the Bakersfield Californian is the local paper.
Bakersfield is a very interesting city. Although it is not large by Los Angeles, San Diego, San Francisco, San Jose and Long Beach standards, (or even Fresno in the San Joaquin valley for that matter), it is a fairly good size city, and probably the most conservative of California good sized cities. In the mid twentieth century, it became the new home for the transplanted "Okies" and "Arkies" fleeing the rigors of the Dust Bowl and the horrors of the Depression. A city that gave America Frank Gifford, Buck Owens and Merle Haggard, it was built on the booming oil industry of the early to mid century. In recent years, while its wealth and political power remain white and conservative, its Hispanic population has boomed, as has its restaurants and cultural life.
I am hoping that the likes of Kevin McCarthy are not long for the town known as "Rig City"
What a great summation of "The Field," Daniel! It's one of the settings in my new book, and you nailed it. It really is more like a transplanted chunk of Oklahoma than anything Californian. But - home of the Bakersfield Sound, so there's always something.
How interesting. Isn't Southern Cal conservative just because people migrated westward across the country, from where they were, so So. Cal. is populated by people coming from the South, which is traditionally considered more conservative. I know that there were a huge number of people from Oklahoma during the Dust Bowl. I thought some of that was the Federal Works Program making work for them. It is hard to fathom how Hollywood culture can live side-by-side with the rest of So. Cal. Does anyone know a generic address for a business in McCarthy's district, because it is impossible to write to him. I usually use a hospital address in a district when I want to write a representative not in my district who has restrictions on emails. With him, even when I pick an address right across the street I get a message that says that I am served by multiple districts and he only takes messages from those only in his district. I want to know whether this is a generic answer to everyone, to avoid answering mails, or whether there really are addresses only in his district.
Linda, I don't know where you read that Southerners went straight south (to Southern California) but I've never read anything that's said that before! Where people migrated to had much more to do with the era they migrated in, and the railroad infrastructure. For a long, long time, San Francisco was THE destination if you were going to California. That's where the Transcontinental Railroad ended. And then some people radiated out to Sacramento, and the central basin for farming. There just wasn't much to go to in Southern California. At all! Southerners definitely came to California during the Gold Rush but after the Civil War if they went West they were more likely to go to ex-Confederate/ Confederate-minded states, like Texas.
Not one bit surprised McCarthy isn't taking correspondence. There are not enough four letter words in the English language....
At the start of WWII, there was dignificant southern migration to RICHMOND, CA in the BAY area to work in Henry Kaiser's shipyards building 'Liberty Ships' There's still is a Rosie-the-Riveter Museum out there. Henry ("find a need & fill it") Kaiser's workforce was able to assemble a Liberty Ship in 5 Days. Henry Kaiser was a major health care provider, KAISER HEALTH, provided by the Employer as a benefit with a tiny cost for access. Post WWII, with Baby Boomer Families needing housing Kaiser accelerated his Construction products industry notably Kaiser Cement which built quite a few dams that produced electrical power. Don't encourage me. I'm still living in the Bay Area not far from John Muir's old homestead well after the gold rush ...
🎶 "looking for Mother Nature's silver seed heading to a new home in the Sun".🎶
Thanks, Bryan - I don't know much about middle 20th century California history! I'm obsessed with the decades from the Gold Rush to the earthquake and rebuild.
My family (father and his parents) were Okies and landed in Kern County just outside of Bakersfield. There was a huge colony of like folk! They even literally built their own school. LA Times has a great article about them (https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1987-01-18-vw-5315-story.html)
I live in Chicago, so I consider Texas, Oklahoma, Arkansas, and Missouri Southern. It has to do with where they stood in the Civil War. So, reading things like this, where a lot of people settled around Los Angeles and Kern Valley, makes me think South.
What are called Plains States are Southern States to me if they are south of the Mason Dixon line. That they went closest to where they were from I know about people from China for example working on the Railroad, and being in San Fransisco, and Japanese going to Hawaii. I understand that a lot of people went north for the Gold Rush. But, I pictured them going straight across for some reason. I am not sure when or where I read it. I also met a lot of people I consider Southerners in Los Angeles in the 1980s.
Seems to me that bribing a justice is illegal, and for a justice to accept a bribe is illegal. This looks like a job for AG Garland. If we want to have more appointments to the Supreme Court, then maybe We should remove the criminal element from the court to make room for people that will actually follow the law. The United States Constitution, Article III, Section 1 states, "The Judicial Power or the United States shall be vested in one Supreme Court, and in such inferior courts, shall hold their offices during "good behavior". Accepting bribes is certainly not "good behavior".
Then there is the fact that five justices of the Supreme Court violated the rights of every woman in this country by turning a woman rights over to the decisions of fifty very different states, and they did it in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment. How can Michigan assure the rights of the women in their state, while Texas violates the rights of every woman in that state. That is not equal protection under the law. Either you have a right or you do not. It cannot be both ways depending on what state you live in..
The justices that overthrew Roe broke the law by violating the rights of every woman in the country and they did it in violation of not just the Fourteenth Amendment, they also violated Title 18, U.S. Code 242, Deprivation of Rights Under Color of Law.
I fail to understand why no one seems to understand this. We are leaving criminals in charge of Law Enforcement.
David, you've said it all, succinctly and eloquently. It's not that no one understands this. It's that the whole country is hostage to the lawless Republican party, who does not give a flying **** about women. Suppressing women's rights is a key plank of their agenda.
As a native Californian, who was raised in Northern CA and now resides in Southern CA, Bakersfield is in Central CA, which most Southern Californians consider "northern" because one has to drive through mountains to go "north" out of Southern California. It's a geography thing.
Bakersfield is at the Southern end of the central valley.
If you want to reach McCarthy, you have to do it via the US Postal Service. Any congressperson or senator, only accepts calls or emails from their constituents. But they'll take money from anyone, right?
Nope, it really is supposed to be from your district only, and the convention is that out of professional courtesy, they won't respond to another legislator's constituent.
If you are looking for the speaker or committee members, it appears the phone message works best. A fax might get through as well, but the LONG standing idea is that your rep or senator is the contact for those are supposed to be working for their constituents. (Pause for deep sigh, I'm lookin' at you, Cliff Bentz et. al).
Anyway, you can also send letters (though slowed by anthrax screening and now Covid mail protocols to some degree). Don't expect a reply though.
I used to think that an address in the desired district was clever, but it struck me that there might be an 18 USC Sec 1001 component and that no longer sounded so great.
Pre covid there was a marvelous volunteer group in DC called "Herd on the Hill" that would carry messages to offices around the capitol using the stampslicked app. While I see some minor activity on their social media, it looks like covid has disorganized that activity, but the model is wonderful and it seems like it could be adapted. To that end, ask a friend to send your message, or make contact with an Indivisible type group and see if they have such an option or would be willing to ensure the message got to one of the district offices.
Meanwhile I'm going to send a note to Herd on the Hill and see what they are up to.
Seems to me that bribing a justice is illegal, and for a justice to accept a bribe is illegal. This looks like a job for AG Garland. If we want to have more appointments to the Supreme Court, then maybe We should remove the criminal element from the court to make room for people that will actually follow the law. The United States Constitution, Article III, Section 1 states, "The Judicial Power or the United States shall be vested in one Supreme Court, and in such inferior courts, shall hold their offices during "good behavior". Accepting bribes is certainly not "good behavior".
Then there is the fact that five justices of the Supreme Court violated the rights of every woman in this country by turning a woman rights over to the decisions of fifty very different states, and they did it in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment. How can Michigan assure the rights of the women in their state, while Texas violates the rights of every woman in that state. That is not equal protection under the law. Either you have a right or you do not. It cannot be both ways depending on what state you live in..
The justices that overthrew Roe broke the law by violating the rights of every woman in the country and they did it in violation of not just the Fourteenth Amendment, they also violated Title 18, U.S. Code 242, Deprivation of Rights Under Color of Law.
I fail to understand why no one seems to understand this. We are leaving criminals in charge of Law Enforcement.
The coastal cities and communities hold the majority of the population in California and are left leaning. Bakersfield and Los Angeles are separated by the San Gabriel mountains and Bakersfield is an agricultural community, which is conservative, along with most of the big ag communities in the San Joaquin valley. McCarthy is absolutely spineless.
Seems to me that bribing a justice is illegal, and for a justice to accept a bribe is illegal. This looks like a job for AG Garland. If we want to have more appointments to the Supreme Court, then maybe We should remove the criminal element from the court to make room for people that will actually follow the law. The United States Constitution, Article III, Section 1 states, "The Judicial Power or the United States shall be vested in one Supreme Court, and in such inferior courts, shall hold their offices during "good behavior". Accepting bribes is certainly not "good behavior".
Then there is the fact that five justices of the Supreme Court violated the rights of every woman in this country by turning a woman rights over to the decisions of fifty very different states, and they did it in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment. How can Michigan assure the rights of the women in their state, while Texas violates the rights of every woman in that state. That is not equal protection under the law. Either you have a right or you do not. It cannot be both ways depending on what state you live in..
The justices that overthrew Roe broke the law by violating the rights of every woman in the country and they did it in violation of not just the Fourteenth Amendment, they also violated Title 18, U.S. Code 242, Deprivation of Rights Under Color of Law.
I fail to understand why no one seems to understand this. We are leaving criminals in charge of Law Enforcement.
Friendly correction: McCarthy's district is in Central California, not Southern.
It's good that you understand that the most effective way to reach members of Congress is to focus on your own. While it might be tempting to try and fake an address, it's really a waste of time, especially when the person you're trying to contact is the Speaker. I'll never forget the time image of people failing to deliver 80 boxes of petitions to Paul Ryan. Can't remember the issue but it was a lesson I never forget.
Seems to me that bribing a justice is illegal, and for a justice to accept a bribe is illegal. This looks like a job for AG Garland. If we want to have more appointments to the Supreme Court, then maybe We should remove the criminal element from the court to make room for people that will actually follow the law. The United States Constitution, Article III, Section 1 states, "The Judicial Power or the United States shall be vested in one Supreme Court, and in such inferior courts, shall hold their offices during "good behavior". Accepting bribes is certainly not "good behavior".
Then there is the fact that five justices of the Supreme Court violated the rights of every woman in this country by turning a woman rights over to the decisions of fifty very different states, and they did it in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment. How can Michigan assure the rights of the women in their state, while Texas violates the rights of every woman in that state. That is not equal protection under the law. Either you have a right or you do not. It cannot be both ways depending on what state you live in..
The justices that overthrew Roe broke the law by violating the rights of every woman in the country and they did it in violation of not just the Fourteenth Amendment, they also violated Title 18, U.S. Code 242, Deprivation of Rights Under Color of Law.
I fail to understand why no one seems to understand this. We are leaving criminals in charge of Law Enforcement.
Seems to me that bribing a justice is illegal, and for a justice to accept a bribe is illegal. This looks like a job for AG Garland. If we want to have more appointments to the Supreme Court, then maybe We should remove the criminal element from the court to make room for people that will actually follow the law. The United States Constitution, Article III, Section 1 states, "The Judicial Power or the United States shall be vested in one Supreme Court, and in such inferior courts, shall hold their offices during "good behavior". Accepting bribes is certainly not "good behavior".
Then there is the fact that five justices of the Supreme Court violated the rights of every woman in this country by turning a woman rights over to the decisions of fifty very different states, and they did it in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment. How can Michigan assure the rights of the women in their state, while Texas violates the rights of every woman in that state. That is not equal protection under the law. Either you have a right or you do not. It cannot be both ways depending on what state you live in..
The justices that overthrew Roe broke the law by violating the rights of every woman in the country and they did it in violation of not just the Fourteenth Amendment, they also violated Title 18, U.S. Code 242, Deprivation of Rights Under Color of Law.
I fail to understand why no one seems to understand this. We are leaving criminals in charge of Law Enforcement.
I believe that my comment should be seen by as many people as possible. Just replying to one person does not mean that everyone will get to see my comment.
Did you have anything to say about my comment? If so I would like to hear what you have to say.
In fact, I believe I only posted once on you comment, if I posted more than once on your comments, I apologize.
Seems to me that bribing a justice is illegal, and for a justice to accept a bribe is illegal. This looks like a job for AG Garland. If we want to have more appointments to the Supreme Court, then maybe We should remove the criminal element from the court to make room for people that will actually follow the law. The United States Constitution, Article III, Section 1 states, "The Judicial Power or the United States shall be vested in one Supreme Court, and in such inferior courts, shall hold their offices during "good behavior". Accepting bribes is certainly not "good behavior".
Then there is the fact that five justices of the Supreme Court violated the rights of every woman in this country by turning a woman rights over to the decisions of fifty very different states, and they did it in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment. How can Michigan assure the rights of the women in their state, while Texas violates the rights of every woman in that state. That is not equal protection under the law. Either you have a right or you do not. It cannot be both ways depending on what state you live in..
The justices that overthrew Roe broke the law by violating the rights of every woman in the country and they did it in violation of not just the Fourteenth Amendment, they also violated Title 18, U.S. Code 242, Deprivation of Rights Under Color of Law.
I fail to understand why no one seems to understand this. We are leaving criminals in charge of Law Enforcement.
Seems to me that bribing a justice is illegal, and for a justice to accept a bribe is illegal. This looks like a job for AG Garland. If we want to have more appointments to the Supreme Court, then maybe We should remove the criminal element from the court to make room for people that will actually follow the law. The United States Constitution, Article III, Section 1 states, "The Judicial Power or the United States shall be vested in one Supreme Court, and in such inferior courts, shall hold their offices during "good behavior". Accepting bribes is certainly not "good behavior".
Then there is the fact that five justices of the Supreme Court violated the rights of every woman in this country by turning a woman rights over to the decisions of fifty very different states, and they did it in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment. How can Michigan assure the rights of the women in their state, while Texas violates the rights of every woman in that state. That is not equal protection under the law. Either you have a right or you do not. It cannot be both ways depending on what state you live in..
The justices that overthrew Roe broke the law by violating the rights of every woman in the country and they did it in violation of not just the Fourteenth Amendment, they also violated Title 18, U.S. Code 242, Deprivation of Rights Under Color of Law.
I fail to understand why no one seems to understand this. We are leaving criminals in charge of Law Enforcement.
Seems to me that bribing a justice is illegal, and for a justice to accept a bribe is illegal. This looks like a job for AG Garland. If we want to have more appointments to the Supreme Court, then maybe We should remove the criminal element from the court to make room for people that will actually follow the law. The United States Constitution, Article III, Section 1 states, "The Judicial Power or the United States shall be vested in one Supreme Court, and in such inferior courts, shall hold their offices during "good behavior". Accepting bribes is certainly not "good behavior".
Then there is the fact that five justices of the Supreme Court violated the rights of every woman in this country by turning a woman rights over to the decisions of fifty very different states, and they did it in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment. How can Michigan assure the rights of the women in their state, while Texas violates the rights of every woman in that state. That is not equal protection under the law. Either you have a right or you do not. It cannot be both ways depending on what state you live in..
The justices that overthrew Roe broke the law by violating the rights of every woman in the country and they did it in violation of not just the Fourteenth Amendment, they also violated Title 18, U.S. Code 242, Deprivation of Rights Under Color of Law.
I fail to understand why no one seems to understand this. We are leaving criminals in charge of Law Enforcement.
I believe I heard about this book from someone on this forum? Anyhow, everybody should read "American Nations: A History of the Eleven Rival Regional Cultures of North American" by Colin Woodard. This amazing and enlightening book explains the cultural history of regions and why they vote the way they do. I was fascinated by the theory that some areas vote the way they do thanks to a few dozen original immigrants over 200 years ago. I've handed my copy off to several people and they all gave it 4 star reviews.
One of the biggest CW venues outside of Nashville. Not known for interesting dining. Voted the worst city in America to raise kids 2-3 years ago. Oil, ag, and an AFB built Bakersfield.
And don't forget Tom Hanks in Castaway when a large slice of fiberglass, which he would fashion into his rescue sail, reads the name stamped on its side: "Ba-kers-field."
Seems to me that bribing a justice is illegal, and for a justice to accept a bribe is illegal. This looks like a job for AG Garland. If we want to have more appointments to the Supreme Court, then maybe We should remove the criminal element from the court to make room for people that will actually follow the law. The United States Constitution, Article III, Section 1 states, "The Judicial Power or the United States shall be vested in one Supreme Court, and in such inferior courts, shall hold their offices during "good behavior". Accepting bribes is certainly not "good behavior".
Then there is the fact that five justices of the Supreme Court violated the rights of every woman in this country by turning a woman rights over to the decisions of fifty very different states, and they did it in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment. How can Michigan assure the rights of the women in their state, while Texas violates the rights of every woman in that state. That is not equal protection under the law. Either you have a right or you do not. It cannot be both ways depending on what state you live in..
The justices that overthrew Roe broke the law by violating the rights of every woman in the country and they did it in violation of not just the Fourteenth Amendment, they also violated Title 18, U.S. Code 242, Deprivation of Rights Under Color of Law.
I fail to understand why no one seems to understand this. We are leaving criminals in charge of Law Enforcement.
Seems to me that bribing a justice is illegal, and for a justice to accept a bribe is illegal. This looks like a job for AG Garland. If we want to have more appointments to the Supreme Court, then maybe We should remove the criminal element from the court to make room for people that will actually follow the law. The United States Constitution, Article III, Section 1 states, "The Judicial Power or the United States shall be vested in one Supreme Court, and in such inferior courts, shall hold their offices during "good behavior". Accepting bribes is certainly not "good behavior".
Then there is the fact that five justices of the Supreme Court violated the rights of every woman in this country by turning a woman rights over to the decisions of fifty very different states, and they did it in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment. How can Michigan assure the rights of the women in their state, while Texas violates the rights of every woman in that state. That is not equal protection under the law. Either you have a right or you do not. It cannot be both ways depending on what state you live in..
The justices that overthrew Roe broke the law by violating the rights of every woman in the country and they did it in violation of not just the Fourteenth Amendment, they also violated Title 18, U.S. Code 242, Deprivation of Rights Under Color of Law.
I fail to understand why no one seems to understand this. We are leaving criminals in charge of Law Enforcement.
Sounds like the description of Youngstown I heard some years ago: “One of the two most beautiful sights in America. The Grand Canyon and Youngstown in the rear-view mirror.”
Seems to me that bribing a justice is illegal, and for a justice to accept a bribe is illegal. This looks like a job for AG Garland. If we want to have more appointments to the Supreme Court, then maybe We should remove the criminal element from the court to make room for people that will actually follow the law. The United States Constitution, Article III, Section 1 states, "The Judicial Power or the United States shall be vested in one Supreme Court, and in such inferior courts, shall hold their offices during "good behavior". Accepting bribes is certainly not "good behavior".
Then there is the fact that five justices of the Supreme Court violated the rights of every woman in this country by turning a woman rights over to the decisions of fifty very different states, and they did it in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment. How can Michigan assure the rights of the women in their state, while Texas violates the rights of every woman in that state. That is not equal protection under the law. Either you have a right or you do not. It cannot be both ways depending on what state you live in..
The justices that overthrew Roe broke the law by violating the rights of every woman in the country and they did it in violation of not just the Fourteenth Amendment, they also violated Title 18, U.S. Code 242, Deprivation of Rights Under Color of Law.
I fail to understand why no one seems to understand this. We are leaving criminals in charge of Law Enforcement.
Seems to me that bribing a justice is illegal, and for a justice to accept a bribe is illegal. This looks like a job for AG Garland. If we want to have more appointments to the Supreme Court, then maybe We should remove the criminal element from the court to make room for people that will actually follow the law. The United States Constitution, Article III, Section 1 states, "The Judicial Power or the United States shall be vested in one Supreme Court, and in such inferior courts, shall hold their offices during "good behavior". Accepting bribes is certainly not "good behavior".
Then there is the fact that five justices of the Supreme Court violated the rights of every woman in this country by turning a woman rights over to the decisions of fifty very different states, and they did it in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment. How can Michigan assure the rights of the women in their state, while Texas violates the rights of every woman in that state. That is not equal protection under the law. Either you have a right or you do not. It cannot be both ways depending on what state you live in..
The justices that overthrew Roe broke the law by violating the rights of every woman in the country and they did it in violation of not just the Fourteenth Amendment, they also violated Title 18, U.S. Code 242, Deprivation of Rights Under Color of Law.
I fail to understand why no one seems to understand this. We are leaving criminals in charge of Law Enforcement.
Since the Valley lost a House seat and the boundaries shifted, I wondered, but didn’t check. Good call. Stockton and Bakersfield are about the the size, over 300,000. Fresno is about 450,000.
Seems to me that bribing a justice is illegal, and for a justice to accept a bribe is illegal. This looks like a job for AG Garland. If we want to have more appointments to the Supreme Court, then maybe We should remove the criminal element from the court to make room for people that will actually follow the law. The United States Constitution, Article III, Section 1 states, "The Judicial Power or the United States shall be vested in one Supreme Court, and in such inferior courts, shall hold their offices during "good behavior". Accepting bribes is certainly not "good behavior".
Then there is the fact that five justices of the Supreme Court violated the rights of every woman in this country by turning a woman rights over to the decisions of fifty very different states, and they did it in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment. How can Michigan assure the rights of the women in their state, while Texas violates the rights of every woman in that state. That is not equal protection under the law. Either you have a right or you do not. It cannot be both ways depending on what state you live in..
The justices that overthrew Roe broke the law by violating the rights of every woman in the country and they did it in violation of not just the Fourteenth Amendment, they also violated Title 18, U.S. Code 242, Deprivation of Rights Under Color of Law.
I fail to understand why no one seems to understand this. We are leaving criminals in charge of Law Enforcement.
Seems to me that bribing a justice is illegal, and for a justice to accept a bribe is illegal. This looks like a job for AG Garland. If we want to have more appointments to the Supreme Court, then maybe We should remove the criminal element from the court to make room for people that will actually follow the law. The United States Constitution, Article III, Section 1 states, "The Judicial Power or the United States shall be vested in one Supreme Court, and in such inferior courts, shall hold their offices during "good behavior". Accepting bribes is certainly not "good behavior".
Then there is the fact that five justices of the Supreme Court violated the rights of every woman in this country by turning a woman rights over to the decisions of fifty very different states, and they did it in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment. How can Michigan assure the rights of the women in their state, while Texas violates the rights of every woman in that state. That is not equal protection under the law. Either you have a right or you do not. It cannot be both ways depending on what state you live in..
The justices that overthrew Roe broke the law by violating the rights of every woman in the country and they did it in violation of not just the Fourteenth Amendment, they also violated Title 18, U.S. Code 242, Deprivation of Rights Under Color of Law.
I fail to understand why no one seems to understand this. We are leaving criminals in charge of Law Enforcement.
I live in CA’s Central Valley. Fresno is more liberal than Bakersfield, who keeps McCarthy in office. Dark pink vs deep red. But for The Fresno Bee to criticize The Valley’s Favorite Son is significant.
Just to add a bit more, Fresno is the ethnic capital of the nation, so I've been told. It has attracted migrants from everywhere, including such diverse places as Vietnam, Middle East, southern and eastern Europe, Asian Pacific nations, and the rest of the Americas. (Sorry! My original note left out Africa, although, other than Nigeria, I am not certain which nations.)The politics tend pink as you say, but in many ways it self-isolates as the enclaves tend to their cultures rather than America as a whole. I agree that the Bee has broken the mold! Thankfully.
IMHO, Fresno reflects the America of tomorrow as does much of California, in both good and not-so-good ways. Wealthy whites are aging out which may explain their desperation to repress the rest.
Very true. The growers, Country Western locus, and the AFB. Fresno has voted itself as California’s anti-abortion sanctuary, and has declared it will not enforce the State Constitutional Amendment making abortion legal if passed.
Good one, Eileen! I think the capital moves sometimes, seemingly everywhere I move! What a scourge meth is. Cheap to make, uses toxic, easy to find ingredients, and its use results in delusions of grandeur and power, makes a user mean as a ball of snakes, rots skin, teeth and then your mind.
Since Trut* Social started I have very few reports about him.
Recall T* hired him as CEO for Trump Media and Tech group, (TMTG) which is being investigated for money laundering.
Regarding that... remember the $8 million loan that had no repayment terms from Putin-linked entities, that was intended to prop up the holding so it could survive til Trump's Digital World Acquisition Group SPAC could illegally (kid you not!) purchase it?
For mini background, SPACs are investor groups in search of an investment; setting them up for the purpose of purchasing a specific investment is an SEC violation.
But Trump had set it up with 90% for him, 10% for the cofounder, and then tried to take over that 10% share, so as happens, the 10% guy blew the whistle to the SEC.
Agree. And newspapers aren't limited to writing about "their district". Fresno Bee was a bustler for many Western issues back in the day, and seems to be more so.
It went after Devin Nunes pretty hard a while back! Remember the winery cruise that was said to be complete with cocaine and prostitutes? He had a "Devin Nunes cow" over that reporting.
I loved that The Fresno Bee did that and cracked up when Devin Nunes’ Cow showed up on Twitter to harass him.😂 Nunes tried to sue “the cow” even though he didn’t know who he was!
It was pretty hard for the "Cow". I donated to the defense fund at the time. Nunes did backflips trying to get Twitter (back when it was a real live boy) to dox the cow, but it never did.
Being that, I, and numerous others, (much smarter than myself), fully believe he has no intention of stopping at the “brink” (“Speaker McCarthy, don’t take America to the brink of default”), I would say it’s far worse than just pretty bad!!!
McCarthy isn't going to last as it will be impossible to satisfy the rabid creatures he's beholden to, with only one needed to bring him to task. Blaming the democrats for the debt trump's tax cuts incurred is on the same level as the dog ate my homework. I'm just sitting back waiting to see, along with the myriad other debaucles, the outcome. We got the Proud Boys locked up...will anything happen with the Thomases? All in all, we should expect a satisfying summer.....
They don’t “see” the evil intentions? They believe he’ll pull out of this nose five at the very last second? Or they have faith that Dems will capitulate to the terrorist threats, because really are Dems going to let the fascist GOP kill masses of us? 🤷🏻♀️🤷🏻♀️🤷🏻♀️
Is there any recourse? Can those decisions be revisited? Can Justice Thomas be forced to return those funds? What about the IRS? Can he have a lien put on his undeserved salary? Can he be recalled?
If he didn’t disclose it, doubt he reported it in his tax return. Tax evasion. Wire fraud. Anybody want to bet there’s a whole lot more to come to light? Time to start some audits!
If we are going to arrest prominent Republicans, I would encourage whoever would do that (looks like nobody to me though) to arrest Trump first, or Kavanaugh. After all, Kavanaugh took money from "friends" to pay off his $200,000 baseball ticket debt before he was confirmed.
Thomas is simply doing what most white Republicans do: Collect money and perform favors.
Arresting Thomas (only) would sure look like America still penalizes black folks for doing the same thing white folks do routinely.
Trump has been collecting gifts and money from hordes of people and spending it on himself, or porn stars for years. Not to mention running an armed, seditious, violent attempt to overthrow the government.
Let's arrest a prominent white man, who is also a criminal, first, before we arrest a black man who has not even fielded an army against the government.
There are plenty of white guys to go round the jail.
Maybe go after Gorsuch and Trump or Kavanaugh first? If we cannot convict them, then, leave poor Thomas alone.
Hi Mike, did you say "poor" Thomas? Not poor, any longer. He's not above using the race card, either. Truth be told, he used it during his nomination hearings when his improper sexual peccadillos were ignored, just like Kavan-ugh during his hearings. (Well a token investigation was had.) I would not excuse his behavior. I am proud to say I stand for equality. At least when speaking of certain prominent Repubs, I would lock em all up.
Hi Mike. It's true - target the black man - just like blaming it all on 'dark' money ... reinforce the stereotypes, stir up animosity and keep us fighting against each other .... what about Alito, or Roberts? Interesting to note, Gorsuch and Kavanaugh supported a recent decision (in Oklahoma?) to honor tribal jurisdiction and land rights - something like that ... I wonder where that fits in the bigger picture ...
Have you tuned in to Senator Sheldon Whitehouse? Here are a few links:
Senator Sheldon Whitehouse on ethics in the Supreme Court
I hear that Mike, he makes honesty look so easy - how does he get away with that degree of 'truthiness'?! I love the way he puts it together - does not miss a beat ...!!
Blessings and Peace to you and yours - and all ....
Maybe that’s one reason the House to cut the increase in the IRS budget. Gotta protect those Supremes as well as what I suspect is a good lead number of legislators at the federal and state levels.
Since hiding behind imaginary protections is a thing these days, I would like to see IRS investigations into the SCOTUS purchasers. As we have learned, bad business records combined with a crime can be a felony in the right jurisdictions. I think Thomas lives in VA but there would be DC jurisdiction, too.
'The real reason for the Supreme Court’s corruption crisis'
'Who watches the philosopher kings with lifetime appointments?'
By Ian Millhiser Updated May 4, 2023, 10:45am EDT (excerpts)
'The Supreme Court has run out of excuses.'
'Earlier this month, after ProPublica revealed that Justice Clarence Thomas frequently takes lavish vacations funded by billionaire Republican donor Harlan Crow, Thomas attempted to defend himself by claiming that this sort of “personal hospitality from close personal friends” is fine because Crow “did not have business before the court.”
'As it turns out, that’s not true. As Bloomberg reports, the Supreme Court — including Justice Thomas — did briefly consider a $25 million copyright dispute involving a company that Crow was a partial owner of in 2005. At that point, Crow had already given a number of gifts to Thomas, including a $19,000 Bible that once belonged to Frederick Douglass.'
'As ProPublica later revealed, Crow even paid for the private school education of Thomas’s grandnephew, who Thomas said he is raising “as a son.” That includes tuition at a boarding school that charged more than $6,000 a month.'
'Similarly, if the rule is that justices must be extra careful when dealing with people who have business before the Supreme Court, then Justice Neil Gorsuch may also have violated this rule. According to Politico, a tract of land that Gorsuch owned with two other individuals was on the market for nearly two years before it found a buyer — nine days after Gorsuch was confirmed to the Supreme Court. The buyer was the chief executive of Greenberg Traurig, a massive law firm that frequently practices before the Supreme Court.'
'As Politico notes, “such a sale would raise ethical problems for officials serving in many other branches of government,” but the rules governing the justices are particularly lax.
The Constitution makes it virtually impossible to discipline or remove a corrupt Supreme Court justice.'
'Roberts’s 2011 report is correct about one thing: One major barrier preventing Congress (or anyone else) from imposing meaningful ethics reforms on the Supreme Court is the Constitution itself.'
'The Constitution provides that federal judges shall “hold their offices during good behaviour,” a provision that’s widely understood to require a judge to be impeached before they can be removed from office. And the impeachment process requires two-thirds of the Senate to vote to remove a justice from office — meaning that, in the current Senate, 16 Republicans would need to vote to remove Thomas, even if the GOP-controlled House agreed to begin an impeachment proceeding against him in the first place.'
'(Although a 2006 paper published by the Yale Law Journal argues that this understanding of the Constitution is wrong, that paper concedes that there is a “virtually unquestioned assumption among constitutional law cognoscenti that impeachment is the only means of removing a federal judge.”)'
'Similarly, the Constitution provides that all federal judges shall receive “a compensation, which shall not be diminished during their continuance in office.” So Thomas or another justice cannot have their salary reduced because they behave unethically, or have their pay docked to cover the cost of expensive gifts received from wealthy benefactors.'
'And there’s also another provision of the Constitution that effectively immunizes justices from any meaningful consequences so long as they remain loyal to the political party that put them in office to begin with. Federal judges are chosen by a partisan official, the president of the United States, and confirmed by other partisans in the Senate.'
'That means that both parties have an extraordinary incentive to appoint ideologically reliable judges to the courts, and to protect them. Once a staunch conservative like Thomas (or Gorsuch) is in office, Republicans have an overwhelming incentive to keep that justice in his seat regardless of whether the justice behaves unethically. This is especially true right now, when Democrats control both the White House and the Senate, and thus could replace Thomas with his ideological opposite.'
'The entire system is set up, in other words, in a way that rewards political parties that treat the judiciary as a partisan prize. It encourages presidents to appoint reliable partisans to the Supreme Court whenever they get the chance to do so. And, because neither party is likely to control 67 Senate seats any time soon, it also gives each party a veto power over any attempt to remove a justice — even if that justice is corrupt. '(VOX) See link below.
Thanks for sharing this enlightening yet hope-darkening article. Looks like we’re stuck with these Supremely Corrupt members. We can thank nefarious Mitch McConnell for blocking Obama’s appointments of moderate justices to the SCOTUS—one among the many infamous instances of Mitch sabotaging our nation’s democracy.
Agism! Shame on you! If she's not competent, vote her out or help the party set up a successor.
But conflating age with something you don't like is like dehumanizing someone due to color or gender.
Call out the problems by all means, but saying its age - a protected class, by the way, and notorious in the US as being a tool to put people out of their jobs without cause -- is as disgusting as Trump saying that a woman isn't pretty enough to rape.
I don't care how old she is, but if she isn't able to show up and vote on critical issues, and the repubs won't let someone else fill her shoes, she should step down....
She is definitely physically and mentally impaired and no longer competent to serve. She hasn't been there in months. If she needs to be voted out, so be it, they should do it. But if she really wanted to selflessly serve her country and her party, she should step down. It is causing real issues that only compound with time.
Regarding Feinstein, NY Times has an editorial today. Gift link below. They argue based on her absence and her inability to remember anyone's name or face that she should be removed. Also, significant movement on judge confirmations are held up.
As long as RBG was alive her votes were a known quantity. After MM held back Merrick Garland, what assurance do we have about any appointment. The Republican refusal to allow a place holder for Senator Feinstein is where we should be focused.
Obama asked her to step down way before the McConnell / Garland thing. During one of the times he had a democrat Senate majority, so McConnell couldn't block it.
CJ, even though I wasn’t certain of the chronology, it is just possible that RBG “knew” what we have since discovered, with this Republican Party, if a nomination can be messed up, MM and Co. will do it. But thank you for reminding me and recalling the timing.
So, SCOTUS judges are dictators? Immune to corruption? Immune from consequences? When they were appointed to the court all their human desires and frailties for wealth and privilege automatically disappeared and a metaphysical change that these human like qualities are suddenly no longer an issue because they become Demi-gods? Their biological/psychological makeup is so changed that they can no longer access their most basic desires for power? Whose stupid idea was that?
Punishment for crimes is reserved for the lower classes who are unable to defend themselves. They are called common criminals. White collar crime is an extension of the days work and as such is usually not only expected but politely overlooked. It is extended as a courtesy amongst business associates.
You know very well they are not our heroes. I wish you could have known Mr. Olivas a railroad employee living in Rock River, Wyoming. He kept the rail line open in the deep snow and heavy winds of southeast Wyoming winters. Mrs. Olivas shared her table and warm fire with the small town’s hungry children. They are the unsung. They make up the tapestry and lifeblood and soul of us. We can live with the interlopers but we cannot live without the Olivas family.
Thank you so much Fern. Brilliant summation of the politicization of the judicial branch of our government. The toboggan loaded with all of us continues rushing down the slope - out of control.
Thank you, William. I am thrilled to have found Ian Millhiser. 'He is a senior correspondent at Vox, where he focuses on the Supreme Court, the Constitution, and the decline of liberal democracy in the United States. Among other things, he clerked for Judge Eric L. Clay of the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit and served as a Teach For America corps member in the Mississippi Delta. He received a BA in philosophy from Kenyon College and a JD, magna cum laude, from Duke University, where he served as senior note editor on the Duke Law Journal and was elected to the Order of the Coif. He is the author of two books on the Supreme Court: Injustices: The Supreme Court's History of Comforting the Comfortable and Afflicting the Afflicted and The Agenda: How a Republican Supreme Court Is Reshaping America.'
I'll be back with info on Supreme Court, judges, the Constitution, court cases, Trump and other legal matters perched on Ian's shoulders.
When the Fresno Bee calls out Republicans it must be pretty bad.
I must correct Heather here, as the Fresno Bee is not the newspaper within Speaker McCarthy's district. Fresno is a tad more than a hundred miles north of Bakersfield, where the Bakersfield Californian is the local paper.
Bakersfield is a very interesting city. Although it is not large by Los Angeles, San Diego, San Francisco, San Jose and Long Beach standards, (or even Fresno in the San Joaquin valley for that matter), it is a fairly good size city, and probably the most conservative of California good sized cities. In the mid twentieth century, it became the new home for the transplanted "Okies" and "Arkies" fleeing the rigors of the Dust Bowl and the horrors of the Depression. A city that gave America Frank Gifford, Buck Owens and Merle Haggard, it was built on the booming oil industry of the early to mid century. In recent years, while its wealth and political power remain white and conservative, its Hispanic population has boomed, as has its restaurants and cultural life.
I am hoping that the likes of Kevin McCarthy are not long for the town known as "Rig City"
What a great summation of "The Field," Daniel! It's one of the settings in my new book, and you nailed it. It really is more like a transplanted chunk of Oklahoma than anything Californian. But - home of the Bakersfield Sound, so there's always something.
How interesting. Isn't Southern Cal conservative just because people migrated westward across the country, from where they were, so So. Cal. is populated by people coming from the South, which is traditionally considered more conservative. I know that there were a huge number of people from Oklahoma during the Dust Bowl. I thought some of that was the Federal Works Program making work for them. It is hard to fathom how Hollywood culture can live side-by-side with the rest of So. Cal. Does anyone know a generic address for a business in McCarthy's district, because it is impossible to write to him. I usually use a hospital address in a district when I want to write a representative not in my district who has restrictions on emails. With him, even when I pick an address right across the street I get a message that says that I am served by multiple districts and he only takes messages from those only in his district. I want to know whether this is a generic answer to everyone, to avoid answering mails, or whether there really are addresses only in his district.
Linda, I don't know where you read that Southerners went straight south (to Southern California) but I've never read anything that's said that before! Where people migrated to had much more to do with the era they migrated in, and the railroad infrastructure. For a long, long time, San Francisco was THE destination if you were going to California. That's where the Transcontinental Railroad ended. And then some people radiated out to Sacramento, and the central basin for farming. There just wasn't much to go to in Southern California. At all! Southerners definitely came to California during the Gold Rush but after the Civil War if they went West they were more likely to go to ex-Confederate/ Confederate-minded states, like Texas.
Not one bit surprised McCarthy isn't taking correspondence. There are not enough four letter words in the English language....
At the start of WWII, there was dignificant southern migration to RICHMOND, CA in the BAY area to work in Henry Kaiser's shipyards building 'Liberty Ships' There's still is a Rosie-the-Riveter Museum out there. Henry ("find a need & fill it") Kaiser's workforce was able to assemble a Liberty Ship in 5 Days. Henry Kaiser was a major health care provider, KAISER HEALTH, provided by the Employer as a benefit with a tiny cost for access. Post WWII, with Baby Boomer Families needing housing Kaiser accelerated his Construction products industry notably Kaiser Cement which built quite a few dams that produced electrical power. Don't encourage me. I'm still living in the Bay Area not far from John Muir's old homestead well after the gold rush ...
🎶 "looking for Mother Nature's silver seed heading to a new home in the Sun".🎶
Thanks, Bryan - I don't know much about middle 20th century California history! I'm obsessed with the decades from the Gold Rush to the earthquake and rebuild.
John Muir, though - what a character!
My family (father and his parents) were Okies and landed in Kern County just outside of Bakersfield. There was a huge colony of like folk! They even literally built their own school. LA Times has a great article about them (https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1987-01-18-vw-5315-story.html)
I live in Chicago, so I consider Texas, Oklahoma, Arkansas, and Missouri Southern. It has to do with where they stood in the Civil War. So, reading things like this, where a lot of people settled around Los Angeles and Kern Valley, makes me think South.
https://capitolmuseum.ca.gov/exhibits/the-dust-bowl-california-and-the-politics-of-hard-times/#:~:text=Hopeful%20migrants%20drove%20Route%2066,in%20the%20San%20Joaquin%20Valley.
https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/americanexperience/features/surviving-the-dust-bowl-mass-exodus-plains/
What are called Plains States are Southern States to me if they are south of the Mason Dixon line. That they went closest to where they were from I know about people from China for example working on the Railroad, and being in San Fransisco, and Japanese going to Hawaii. I understand that a lot of people went north for the Gold Rush. But, I pictured them going straight across for some reason. I am not sure when or where I read it. I also met a lot of people I consider Southerners in Los Angeles in the 1980s.
Seems to me that bribing a justice is illegal, and for a justice to accept a bribe is illegal. This looks like a job for AG Garland. If we want to have more appointments to the Supreme Court, then maybe We should remove the criminal element from the court to make room for people that will actually follow the law. The United States Constitution, Article III, Section 1 states, "The Judicial Power or the United States shall be vested in one Supreme Court, and in such inferior courts, shall hold their offices during "good behavior". Accepting bribes is certainly not "good behavior".
Then there is the fact that five justices of the Supreme Court violated the rights of every woman in this country by turning a woman rights over to the decisions of fifty very different states, and they did it in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment. How can Michigan assure the rights of the women in their state, while Texas violates the rights of every woman in that state. That is not equal protection under the law. Either you have a right or you do not. It cannot be both ways depending on what state you live in..
The justices that overthrew Roe broke the law by violating the rights of every woman in the country and they did it in violation of not just the Fourteenth Amendment, they also violated Title 18, U.S. Code 242, Deprivation of Rights Under Color of Law.
I fail to understand why no one seems to understand this. We are leaving criminals in charge of Law Enforcement.
David, you've said it all, succinctly and eloquently. It's not that no one understands this. It's that the whole country is hostage to the lawless Republican party, who does not give a flying **** about women. Suppressing women's rights is a key plank of their agenda.
As a native Californian, who was raised in Northern CA and now resides in Southern CA, Bakersfield is in Central CA, which most Southern Californians consider "northern" because one has to drive through mountains to go "north" out of Southern California. It's a geography thing.
Bakersfield is at the Southern end of the central valley.
If you want to reach McCarthy, you have to do it via the US Postal Service. Any congressperson or senator, only accepts calls or emails from their constituents. But they'll take money from anyone, right?
Send a snail mail letter.
It is acceptable to include snails in the package?
Nope, it really is supposed to be from your district only, and the convention is that out of professional courtesy, they won't respond to another legislator's constituent.
If you are looking for the speaker or committee members, it appears the phone message works best. A fax might get through as well, but the LONG standing idea is that your rep or senator is the contact for those are supposed to be working for their constituents. (Pause for deep sigh, I'm lookin' at you, Cliff Bentz et. al).
Anyway, you can also send letters (though slowed by anthrax screening and now Covid mail protocols to some degree). Don't expect a reply though.
I used to think that an address in the desired district was clever, but it struck me that there might be an 18 USC Sec 1001 component and that no longer sounded so great.
Pre covid there was a marvelous volunteer group in DC called "Herd on the Hill" that would carry messages to offices around the capitol using the stampslicked app. While I see some minor activity on their social media, it looks like covid has disorganized that activity, but the model is wonderful and it seems like it could be adapted. To that end, ask a friend to send your message, or make contact with an Indivisible type group and see if they have such an option or would be willing to ensure the message got to one of the district offices.
Meanwhile I'm going to send a note to Herd on the Hill and see what they are up to.
Seems to me that bribing a justice is illegal, and for a justice to accept a bribe is illegal. This looks like a job for AG Garland. If we want to have more appointments to the Supreme Court, then maybe We should remove the criminal element from the court to make room for people that will actually follow the law. The United States Constitution, Article III, Section 1 states, "The Judicial Power or the United States shall be vested in one Supreme Court, and in such inferior courts, shall hold their offices during "good behavior". Accepting bribes is certainly not "good behavior".
Then there is the fact that five justices of the Supreme Court violated the rights of every woman in this country by turning a woman rights over to the decisions of fifty very different states, and they did it in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment. How can Michigan assure the rights of the women in their state, while Texas violates the rights of every woman in that state. That is not equal protection under the law. Either you have a right or you do not. It cannot be both ways depending on what state you live in..
The justices that overthrew Roe broke the law by violating the rights of every woman in the country and they did it in violation of not just the Fourteenth Amendment, they also violated Title 18, U.S. Code 242, Deprivation of Rights Under Color of Law.
I fail to understand why no one seems to understand this. We are leaving criminals in charge of Law Enforcement.
The coastal cities and communities hold the majority of the population in California and are left leaning. Bakersfield and Los Angeles are separated by the San Gabriel mountains and Bakersfield is an agricultural community, which is conservative, along with most of the big ag communities in the San Joaquin valley. McCarthy is absolutely spineless.
Seems to me that bribing a justice is illegal, and for a justice to accept a bribe is illegal. This looks like a job for AG Garland. If we want to have more appointments to the Supreme Court, then maybe We should remove the criminal element from the court to make room for people that will actually follow the law. The United States Constitution, Article III, Section 1 states, "The Judicial Power or the United States shall be vested in one Supreme Court, and in such inferior courts, shall hold their offices during "good behavior". Accepting bribes is certainly not "good behavior".
Then there is the fact that five justices of the Supreme Court violated the rights of every woman in this country by turning a woman rights over to the decisions of fifty very different states, and they did it in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment. How can Michigan assure the rights of the women in their state, while Texas violates the rights of every woman in that state. That is not equal protection under the law. Either you have a right or you do not. It cannot be both ways depending on what state you live in..
The justices that overthrew Roe broke the law by violating the rights of every woman in the country and they did it in violation of not just the Fourteenth Amendment, they also violated Title 18, U.S. Code 242, Deprivation of Rights Under Color of Law.
I fail to understand why no one seems to understand this. We are leaving criminals in charge of Law Enforcement.
Why not write to Kev at his office in DC? Not email. Better yet, mark the letter Confidential and send it FedEx.
Friendly correction: McCarthy's district is in Central California, not Southern.
It's good that you understand that the most effective way to reach members of Congress is to focus on your own. While it might be tempting to try and fake an address, it's really a waste of time, especially when the person you're trying to contact is the Speaker. I'll never forget the time image of people failing to deliver 80 boxes of petitions to Paul Ryan. Can't remember the issue but it was a lesson I never forget.
The Indivisible guide has been very helpful in this regard. https://indivisible.org/democracy-guide
Seems to me that bribing a justice is illegal, and for a justice to accept a bribe is illegal. This looks like a job for AG Garland. If we want to have more appointments to the Supreme Court, then maybe We should remove the criminal element from the court to make room for people that will actually follow the law. The United States Constitution, Article III, Section 1 states, "The Judicial Power or the United States shall be vested in one Supreme Court, and in such inferior courts, shall hold their offices during "good behavior". Accepting bribes is certainly not "good behavior".
Then there is the fact that five justices of the Supreme Court violated the rights of every woman in this country by turning a woman rights over to the decisions of fifty very different states, and they did it in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment. How can Michigan assure the rights of the women in their state, while Texas violates the rights of every woman in that state. That is not equal protection under the law. Either you have a right or you do not. It cannot be both ways depending on what state you live in..
The justices that overthrew Roe broke the law by violating the rights of every woman in the country and they did it in violation of not just the Fourteenth Amendment, they also violated Title 18, U.S. Code 242, Deprivation of Rights Under Color of Law.
I fail to understand why no one seems to understand this. We are leaving criminals in charge of Law Enforcement.
Seems to me that bribing a justice is illegal, and for a justice to accept a bribe is illegal. This looks like a job for AG Garland. If we want to have more appointments to the Supreme Court, then maybe We should remove the criminal element from the court to make room for people that will actually follow the law. The United States Constitution, Article III, Section 1 states, "The Judicial Power or the United States shall be vested in one Supreme Court, and in such inferior courts, shall hold their offices during "good behavior". Accepting bribes is certainly not "good behavior".
Then there is the fact that five justices of the Supreme Court violated the rights of every woman in this country by turning a woman rights over to the decisions of fifty very different states, and they did it in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment. How can Michigan assure the rights of the women in their state, while Texas violates the rights of every woman in that state. That is not equal protection under the law. Either you have a right or you do not. It cannot be both ways depending on what state you live in..
The justices that overthrew Roe broke the law by violating the rights of every woman in the country and they did it in violation of not just the Fourteenth Amendment, they also violated Title 18, U.S. Code 242, Deprivation of Rights Under Color of Law.
I fail to understand why no one seems to understand this. We are leaving criminals in charge of Law Enforcement.
Please stop posting the same comment repeatedly!
I believe that my comment should be seen by as many people as possible. Just replying to one person does not mean that everyone will get to see my comment.
Did you have anything to say about my comment? If so I would like to hear what you have to say.
In fact, I believe I only posted once on you comment, if I posted more than once on your comments, I apologize.
it's standard for the House of Representatives, none of them will take correspondence from outside their districts.
Seems to me that bribing a justice is illegal, and for a justice to accept a bribe is illegal. This looks like a job for AG Garland. If we want to have more appointments to the Supreme Court, then maybe We should remove the criminal element from the court to make room for people that will actually follow the law. The United States Constitution, Article III, Section 1 states, "The Judicial Power or the United States shall be vested in one Supreme Court, and in such inferior courts, shall hold their offices during "good behavior". Accepting bribes is certainly not "good behavior".
Then there is the fact that five justices of the Supreme Court violated the rights of every woman in this country by turning a woman rights over to the decisions of fifty very different states, and they did it in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment. How can Michigan assure the rights of the women in their state, while Texas violates the rights of every woman in that state. That is not equal protection under the law. Either you have a right or you do not. It cannot be both ways depending on what state you live in..
The justices that overthrew Roe broke the law by violating the rights of every woman in the country and they did it in violation of not just the Fourteenth Amendment, they also violated Title 18, U.S. Code 242, Deprivation of Rights Under Color of Law.
I fail to understand why no one seems to understand this. We are leaving criminals in charge of Law Enforcement.
Thank you, Alexandra!😀
Seems to me that bribing a justice is illegal, and for a justice to accept a bribe is illegal. This looks like a job for AG Garland. If we want to have more appointments to the Supreme Court, then maybe We should remove the criminal element from the court to make room for people that will actually follow the law. The United States Constitution, Article III, Section 1 states, "The Judicial Power or the United States shall be vested in one Supreme Court, and in such inferior courts, shall hold their offices during "good behavior". Accepting bribes is certainly not "good behavior".
Then there is the fact that five justices of the Supreme Court violated the rights of every woman in this country by turning a woman rights over to the decisions of fifty very different states, and they did it in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment. How can Michigan assure the rights of the women in their state, while Texas violates the rights of every woman in that state. That is not equal protection under the law. Either you have a right or you do not. It cannot be both ways depending on what state you live in..
The justices that overthrew Roe broke the law by violating the rights of every woman in the country and they did it in violation of not just the Fourteenth Amendment, they also violated Title 18, U.S. Code 242, Deprivation of Rights Under Color of Law.
I fail to understand why no one seems to understand this. We are leaving criminals in charge of Law Enforcement.
Seems to me that bribing a justice is illegal, and for a justice to accept a bribe is illegal. This looks like a job for AG Garland. If we want to have more appointments to the Supreme Court, then maybe We should remove the criminal element from the court to make room for people that will actually follow the law. The United States Constitution, Article III, Section 1 states, "The Judicial Power or the United States shall be vested in one Supreme Court, and in such inferior courts, shall hold their offices during "good behavior". Accepting bribes is certainly not "good behavior".
Then there is the fact that five justices of the Supreme Court violated the rights of every woman in this country by turning a woman rights over to the decisions of fifty very different states, and they did it in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment. How can Michigan assure the rights of the women in their state, while Texas violates the rights of every woman in that state. That is not equal protection under the law. Either you have a right or you do not. It cannot be both ways depending on what state you live in..
The justices that overthrew Roe broke the law by violating the rights of every woman in the country and they did it in violation of not just the Fourteenth Amendment, they also violated Title 18, U.S. Code 242, Deprivation of Rights Under Color of Law.
I fail to understand why no one seems to understand this. We are leaving criminals in charge of Law Enforcement.
I believe I heard about this book from someone on this forum? Anyhow, everybody should read "American Nations: A History of the Eleven Rival Regional Cultures of North American" by Colin Woodard. This amazing and enlightening book explains the cultural history of regions and why they vote the way they do. I was fascinated by the theory that some areas vote the way they do thanks to a few dozen original immigrants over 200 years ago. I've handed my copy off to several people and they all gave it 4 star reviews.
Added to my ever expanding book list.
I’m a native Californian. We always called Bakersfield “The Armpit of California”. It makes sense that McCarthy hails from that place!
It absolutely is!☹️
Restaurants and cultural life???
One of the biggest CW venues outside of Nashville. Not known for interesting dining. Voted the worst city in America to raise kids 2-3 years ago. Oil, ag, and an AFB built Bakersfield.
Mick Jagger sings glowingly about Bakersfield in the Rolling Stones' "Girl With Far Away Eyes."
And don't forget Tom Hanks in Castaway when a large slice of fiberglass, which he would fashion into his rescue sail, reads the name stamped on its side: "Ba-kers-field."
Seems to me that bribing a justice is illegal, and for a justice to accept a bribe is illegal. This looks like a job for AG Garland. If we want to have more appointments to the Supreme Court, then maybe We should remove the criminal element from the court to make room for people that will actually follow the law. The United States Constitution, Article III, Section 1 states, "The Judicial Power or the United States shall be vested in one Supreme Court, and in such inferior courts, shall hold their offices during "good behavior". Accepting bribes is certainly not "good behavior".
Then there is the fact that five justices of the Supreme Court violated the rights of every woman in this country by turning a woman rights over to the decisions of fifty very different states, and they did it in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment. How can Michigan assure the rights of the women in their state, while Texas violates the rights of every woman in that state. That is not equal protection under the law. Either you have a right or you do not. It cannot be both ways depending on what state you live in..
The justices that overthrew Roe broke the law by violating the rights of every woman in the country and they did it in violation of not just the Fourteenth Amendment, they also violated Title 18, U.S. Code 242, Deprivation of Rights Under Color of Law.
I fail to understand why no one seems to understand this. We are leaving criminals in charge of Law Enforcement.
He was high and forgot what town he was in 🤣
Seems to me that bribing a justice is illegal, and for a justice to accept a bribe is illegal. This looks like a job for AG Garland. If we want to have more appointments to the Supreme Court, then maybe We should remove the criminal element from the court to make room for people that will actually follow the law. The United States Constitution, Article III, Section 1 states, "The Judicial Power or the United States shall be vested in one Supreme Court, and in such inferior courts, shall hold their offices during "good behavior". Accepting bribes is certainly not "good behavior".
Then there is the fact that five justices of the Supreme Court violated the rights of every woman in this country by turning a woman rights over to the decisions of fifty very different states, and they did it in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment. How can Michigan assure the rights of the women in their state, while Texas violates the rights of every woman in that state. That is not equal protection under the law. Either you have a right or you do not. It cannot be both ways depending on what state you live in..
The justices that overthrew Roe broke the law by violating the rights of every woman in the country and they did it in violation of not just the Fourteenth Amendment, they also violated Title 18, U.S. Code 242, Deprivation of Rights Under Color of Law.
I fail to understand why no one seems to understand this. We are leaving criminals in charge of Law Enforcement.
Sounds like the description of Youngstown I heard some years ago: “One of the two most beautiful sights in America. The Grand Canyon and Youngstown in the rear-view mirror.”
What AFB are you referring to? Edwards, formerly Muroc and the site of Chuck Yeager's feats is further south in the high desert north of L A. County
Lemoore Naval.
Seems to me that bribing a justice is illegal, and for a justice to accept a bribe is illegal. This looks like a job for AG Garland. If we want to have more appointments to the Supreme Court, then maybe We should remove the criminal element from the court to make room for people that will actually follow the law. The United States Constitution, Article III, Section 1 states, "The Judicial Power or the United States shall be vested in one Supreme Court, and in such inferior courts, shall hold their offices during "good behavior". Accepting bribes is certainly not "good behavior".
Then there is the fact that five justices of the Supreme Court violated the rights of every woman in this country by turning a woman rights over to the decisions of fifty very different states, and they did it in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment. How can Michigan assure the rights of the women in their state, while Texas violates the rights of every woman in that state. That is not equal protection under the law. Either you have a right or you do not. It cannot be both ways depending on what state you live in..
The justices that overthrew Roe broke the law by violating the rights of every woman in the country and they did it in violation of not just the Fourteenth Amendment, they also violated Title 18, U.S. Code 242, Deprivation of Rights Under Color of Law.
I fail to understand why no one seems to understand this. We are leaving criminals in charge of Law Enforcement.
Seems to me that bribing a justice is illegal, and for a justice to accept a bribe is illegal. This looks like a job for AG Garland. If we want to have more appointments to the Supreme Court, then maybe We should remove the criminal element from the court to make room for people that will actually follow the law. The United States Constitution, Article III, Section 1 states, "The Judicial Power or the United States shall be vested in one Supreme Court, and in such inferior courts, shall hold their offices during "good behavior". Accepting bribes is certainly not "good behavior".
Then there is the fact that five justices of the Supreme Court violated the rights of every woman in this country by turning a woman rights over to the decisions of fifty very different states, and they did it in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment. How can Michigan assure the rights of the women in their state, while Texas violates the rights of every woman in that state. That is not equal protection under the law. Either you have a right or you do not. It cannot be both ways depending on what state you live in..
The justices that overthrew Roe broke the law by violating the rights of every woman in the country and they did it in violation of not just the Fourteenth Amendment, they also violated Title 18, U.S. Code 242, Deprivation of Rights Under Color of Law.
I fail to understand why no one seems to understand this. We are leaving criminals in charge of Law Enforcement.
😂
Believe it or not, they are getting there
Since the Valley lost a House seat and the boundaries shifted, I wondered, but didn’t check. Good call. Stockton and Bakersfield are about the the size, over 300,000. Fresno is about 450,000.
McCarthy’s district now includes the eastern part of Fresno.
Really?!? How did the Commission conjure that up?
Seems to me that bribing a justice is illegal, and for a justice to accept a bribe is illegal. This looks like a job for AG Garland. If we want to have more appointments to the Supreme Court, then maybe We should remove the criminal element from the court to make room for people that will actually follow the law. The United States Constitution, Article III, Section 1 states, "The Judicial Power or the United States shall be vested in one Supreme Court, and in such inferior courts, shall hold their offices during "good behavior". Accepting bribes is certainly not "good behavior".
Then there is the fact that five justices of the Supreme Court violated the rights of every woman in this country by turning a woman rights over to the decisions of fifty very different states, and they did it in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment. How can Michigan assure the rights of the women in their state, while Texas violates the rights of every woman in that state. That is not equal protection under the law. Either you have a right or you do not. It cannot be both ways depending on what state you live in..
The justices that overthrew Roe broke the law by violating the rights of every woman in the country and they did it in violation of not just the Fourteenth Amendment, they also violated Title 18, U.S. Code 242, Deprivation of Rights Under Color of Law.
I fail to understand why no one seems to understand this. We are leaving criminals in charge of Law Enforcement.
Seems to me that bribing a justice is illegal, and for a justice to accept a bribe is illegal. This looks like a job for AG Garland. If we want to have more appointments to the Supreme Court, then maybe We should remove the criminal element from the court to make room for people that will actually follow the law. The United States Constitution, Article III, Section 1 states, "The Judicial Power or the United States shall be vested in one Supreme Court, and in such inferior courts, shall hold their offices during "good behavior". Accepting bribes is certainly not "good behavior".
Then there is the fact that five justices of the Supreme Court violated the rights of every woman in this country by turning a woman rights over to the decisions of fifty very different states, and they did it in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment. How can Michigan assure the rights of the women in their state, while Texas violates the rights of every woman in that state. That is not equal protection under the law. Either you have a right or you do not. It cannot be both ways depending on what state you live in..
The justices that overthrew Roe broke the law by violating the rights of every woman in the country and they did it in violation of not just the Fourteenth Amendment, they also violated Title 18, U.S. Code 242, Deprivation of Rights Under Color of Law.
I fail to understand why no one seems to understand this. We are leaving criminals in charge of Law Enforcement.
I live in CA’s Central Valley. Fresno is more liberal than Bakersfield, who keeps McCarthy in office. Dark pink vs deep red. But for The Fresno Bee to criticize The Valley’s Favorite Son is significant.
Just to add a bit more, Fresno is the ethnic capital of the nation, so I've been told. It has attracted migrants from everywhere, including such diverse places as Vietnam, Middle East, southern and eastern Europe, Asian Pacific nations, and the rest of the Americas. (Sorry! My original note left out Africa, although, other than Nigeria, I am not certain which nations.)The politics tend pink as you say, but in many ways it self-isolates as the enclaves tend to their cultures rather than America as a whole. I agree that the Bee has broken the mold! Thankfully.
IMHO, Fresno reflects the America of tomorrow as does much of California, in both good and not-so-good ways. Wealthy whites are aging out which may explain their desperation to repress the rest.
Hope is right. But Fresno has a large population of Christian Armenians.. I
Very true. The growers, Country Western locus, and the AFB. Fresno has voted itself as California’s anti-abortion sanctuary, and has declared it will not enforce the State Constitutional Amendment making abortion legal if passed.
Ye gods, it never ends...
I always think of Fresno as the meth capital of the world.
Good one, Eileen! I think the capital moves sometimes, seemingly everywhere I move! What a scourge meth is. Cheap to make, uses toxic, easy to find ingredients, and its use results in delusions of grandeur and power, makes a user mean as a ball of snakes, rots skin, teeth and then your mind.
There is a lot of it. And big gangs of South of the border descent.
True that. And Nunes is not popular in Fresno proper.
Since Trut* Social started I have very few reports about him.
Recall T* hired him as CEO for Trump Media and Tech group, (TMTG) which is being investigated for money laundering.
Regarding that... remember the $8 million loan that had no repayment terms from Putin-linked entities, that was intended to prop up the holding so it could survive til Trump's Digital World Acquisition Group SPAC could illegally (kid you not!) purchase it?
For mini background, SPACs are investor groups in search of an investment; setting them up for the purpose of purchasing a specific investment is an SEC violation.
But Trump had set it up with 90% for him, 10% for the cofounder, and then tried to take over that 10% share, so as happens, the 10% guy blew the whistle to the SEC.
I love litigation disaster tourism.
Agree. And newspapers aren't limited to writing about "their district". Fresno Bee was a bustler for many Western issues back in the day, and seems to be more so.
It went after Devin Nunes pretty hard a while back! Remember the winery cruise that was said to be complete with cocaine and prostitutes? He had a "Devin Nunes cow" over that reporting.
I loved that The Fresno Bee did that and cracked up when Devin Nunes’ Cow showed up on Twitter to harass him.😂 Nunes tried to sue “the cow” even though he didn’t know who he was!
So that’s the origin of Devin Nunes’ Cow. Now it’s even funnier!
It was pretty hard for the "Cow". I donated to the defense fund at the time. Nunes did backflips trying to get Twitter (back when it was a real live boy) to dox the cow, but it never did.
Being that, I, and numerous others, (much smarter than myself), fully believe he has no intention of stopping at the “brink” (“Speaker McCarthy, don’t take America to the brink of default”), I would say it’s far worse than just pretty bad!!!
McCarthy isn't going to last as it will be impossible to satisfy the rabid creatures he's beholden to, with only one needed to bring him to task. Blaming the democrats for the debt trump's tax cuts incurred is on the same level as the dog ate my homework. I'm just sitting back waiting to see, along with the myriad other debaucles, the outcome. We got the Proud Boys locked up...will anything happen with the Thomases? All in all, we should expect a satisfying summer.....
Or unsatisfying.
If Fani Willis does her RICO thing and all the big guys go to prison and trump is ordered to pay E. Jean lots of money, I will be beyond satisfied....
I keep looking for signs that banks and billionwidgeteers and going to lean on him. They can't all be JP Morgan.
They don’t “see” the evil intentions? They believe he’ll pull out of this nose five at the very last second? Or they have faith that Dems will capitulate to the terrorist threats, because really are Dems going to let the fascist GOP kill masses of us? 🤷🏻♀️🤷🏻♀️🤷🏻♀️
Q: did that happen?
Actually, looking at the district map right now, and it DOES include the east side of Fresno.
Hah! Seriously.
Is there any recourse? Can those decisions be revisited? Can Justice Thomas be forced to return those funds? What about the IRS? Can he have a lien put on his undeserved salary? Can he be recalled?
If he didn’t disclose it, doubt he reported it in his tax return. Tax evasion. Wire fraud. Anybody want to bet there’s a whole lot more to come to light? Time to start some audits!
I know it can't happen, but...I am savoring a delicious image of Thomas being arrested for tax evasion and wire fraud as I sip my coffee...
Him and his obnoxious wife.
Juanita,
If we are going to arrest prominent Republicans, I would encourage whoever would do that (looks like nobody to me though) to arrest Trump first, or Kavanaugh. After all, Kavanaugh took money from "friends" to pay off his $200,000 baseball ticket debt before he was confirmed.
https://www.cnn.com/2018/09/12/politics/brett-kavanaugh-baseball-ticket-debt-washington-nationals/index.html#:~:text=Brett%20Kavanaugh%2C%20the%20Supreme%20Court,tickets%20%E2%80%9Cto%20the%20dollar.%E2%80%9D
Thomas is simply doing what most white Republicans do: Collect money and perform favors.
Arresting Thomas (only) would sure look like America still penalizes black folks for doing the same thing white folks do routinely.
Trump has been collecting gifts and money from hordes of people and spending it on himself, or porn stars for years. Not to mention running an armed, seditious, violent attempt to overthrow the government.
Let's arrest a prominent white man, who is also a criminal, first, before we arrest a black man who has not even fielded an army against the government.
There are plenty of white guys to go round the jail.
Maybe go after Gorsuch and Trump or Kavanaugh first? If we cannot convict them, then, leave poor Thomas alone.
Hi Mike, did you say "poor" Thomas? Not poor, any longer. He's not above using the race card, either. Truth be told, he used it during his nomination hearings when his improper sexual peccadillos were ignored, just like Kavan-ugh during his hearings. (Well a token investigation was had.) I would not excuse his behavior. I am proud to say I stand for equality. At least when speaking of certain prominent Repubs, I would lock em all up.
Hi Hope and thank you for your perspective. I appreciate it.
poor Thomas might have been overly sympathetic, agree.
But, I am not proposing to excuse his behavior. I am proposing that we charge and arrest a white man first: Pick one:
Kavanaugh, Trump, Alito or Roberts, all who have questionable money or property acquisitions.
Good point Mike! I really think Trump is close to his "just desserts." I hope, I hope. Next, for me is Kavan-ugh!
(Signed, your friend, Hope)
Hi Mike. It's true - target the black man - just like blaming it all on 'dark' money ... reinforce the stereotypes, stir up animosity and keep us fighting against each other .... what about Alito, or Roberts? Interesting to note, Gorsuch and Kavanaugh supported a recent decision (in Oklahoma?) to honor tribal jurisdiction and land rights - something like that ... I wonder where that fits in the bigger picture ...
Have you tuned in to Senator Sheldon Whitehouse? Here are a few links:
Senator Sheldon Whitehouse on ethics in the Supreme Court
https://m.youtube.com/@SenatorWhitehouse
*******
Books:
The Scheme: How the Right Wing Used Dark Money to Capture the Supreme Court
https://www.amazon.com/Scheme-Right-Money-Capture-Supreme/dp/B0BFSTP3TP/ref=tmm_aud_swatch_0?_encoding=UTF8&qid=&sr=
Captured: The Corporate Infiltration of American Democracy
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B073PD9X5Q?plink=KSRBBnko8Ghph4yi&ref_=adblp13nvvxx_0_0_im
*******
Videos:
Senator Sheldon Whitehouse — The Scheme
(with Jane Meyer /Joan Claybrook)
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=_2EWaftzNvM&pp=QAFIAw%3D%3D
*****
Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, "Captured: The Corporate Infiltration Of American Democracy"
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=SNr0XcoJHsc
*****
Sen. Whitehouse Delivers Opening Statement at Judiciary Cmte Hearing on Supreme Court Ethics Reform
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ojOBGTUDPVA
*****
Senator Sheldon Whitehouse: Dark Money, The Supreme Court, and What Comes Next
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ZAdbWgmPEDkSs
*****
Kathleen,
Thank you for chiming in. Yes, I have seen Sheldon Whitehouse several times. I long for the day when his information is leveraged into consequences.
I hear that Mike, he makes honesty look so easy - how does he get away with that degree of 'truthiness'?! I love the way he puts it together - does not miss a beat ...!!
Blessings and Peace to you and yours - and all ....
A simple impeachment would satisfy me....
Majority of Americans know he is undeniably corrupt and has NO CREDIBILITY as a judge, no honor as a citizen.
Maybe that’s one reason the House to cut the increase in the IRS budget. Gotta protect those Supremes as well as what I suspect is a good lead number of legislators at the federal and state levels.
Oops. I meant House Republicans to attempt to cut....
Since hiding behind imaginary protections is a thing these days, I would like to see IRS investigations into the SCOTUS purchasers. As we have learned, bad business records combined with a crime can be a felony in the right jurisdictions. I think Thomas lives in VA but there would be DC jurisdiction, too.
Follow the money...
'The real reason for the Supreme Court’s corruption crisis'
'Who watches the philosopher kings with lifetime appointments?'
By Ian Millhiser Updated May 4, 2023, 10:45am EDT (excerpts)
'The Supreme Court has run out of excuses.'
'Earlier this month, after ProPublica revealed that Justice Clarence Thomas frequently takes lavish vacations funded by billionaire Republican donor Harlan Crow, Thomas attempted to defend himself by claiming that this sort of “personal hospitality from close personal friends” is fine because Crow “did not have business before the court.”
'As it turns out, that’s not true. As Bloomberg reports, the Supreme Court — including Justice Thomas — did briefly consider a $25 million copyright dispute involving a company that Crow was a partial owner of in 2005. At that point, Crow had already given a number of gifts to Thomas, including a $19,000 Bible that once belonged to Frederick Douglass.'
'As ProPublica later revealed, Crow even paid for the private school education of Thomas’s grandnephew, who Thomas said he is raising “as a son.” That includes tuition at a boarding school that charged more than $6,000 a month.'
'Similarly, if the rule is that justices must be extra careful when dealing with people who have business before the Supreme Court, then Justice Neil Gorsuch may also have violated this rule. According to Politico, a tract of land that Gorsuch owned with two other individuals was on the market for nearly two years before it found a buyer — nine days after Gorsuch was confirmed to the Supreme Court. The buyer was the chief executive of Greenberg Traurig, a massive law firm that frequently practices before the Supreme Court.'
'As Politico notes, “such a sale would raise ethical problems for officials serving in many other branches of government,” but the rules governing the justices are particularly lax.
The Constitution makes it virtually impossible to discipline or remove a corrupt Supreme Court justice.'
'Roberts’s 2011 report is correct about one thing: One major barrier preventing Congress (or anyone else) from imposing meaningful ethics reforms on the Supreme Court is the Constitution itself.'
'The Constitution provides that federal judges shall “hold their offices during good behaviour,” a provision that’s widely understood to require a judge to be impeached before they can be removed from office. And the impeachment process requires two-thirds of the Senate to vote to remove a justice from office — meaning that, in the current Senate, 16 Republicans would need to vote to remove Thomas, even if the GOP-controlled House agreed to begin an impeachment proceeding against him in the first place.'
'(Although a 2006 paper published by the Yale Law Journal argues that this understanding of the Constitution is wrong, that paper concedes that there is a “virtually unquestioned assumption among constitutional law cognoscenti that impeachment is the only means of removing a federal judge.”)'
'Similarly, the Constitution provides that all federal judges shall receive “a compensation, which shall not be diminished during their continuance in office.” So Thomas or another justice cannot have their salary reduced because they behave unethically, or have their pay docked to cover the cost of expensive gifts received from wealthy benefactors.'
'And there’s also another provision of the Constitution that effectively immunizes justices from any meaningful consequences so long as they remain loyal to the political party that put them in office to begin with. Federal judges are chosen by a partisan official, the president of the United States, and confirmed by other partisans in the Senate.'
'That means that both parties have an extraordinary incentive to appoint ideologically reliable judges to the courts, and to protect them. Once a staunch conservative like Thomas (or Gorsuch) is in office, Republicans have an overwhelming incentive to keep that justice in his seat regardless of whether the justice behaves unethically. This is especially true right now, when Democrats control both the White House and the Senate, and thus could replace Thomas with his ideological opposite.'
'The entire system is set up, in other words, in a way that rewards political parties that treat the judiciary as a partisan prize. It encourages presidents to appoint reliable partisans to the Supreme Court whenever they get the chance to do so. And, because neither party is likely to control 67 Senate seats any time soon, it also gives each party a veto power over any attempt to remove a justice — even if that justice is corrupt. '(VOX) See link below.
https://www.vox.com/politics/2023/4/25/23697394/supreme-court-clarence-thomas-neil-gorsuch-corruption-harlan-crow-constitution
Thanks for sharing this enlightening yet hope-darkening article. Looks like we’re stuck with these Supremely Corrupt members. We can thank nefarious Mitch McConnell for blocking Obama’s appointments of moderate justices to the SCOTUS—one among the many infamous instances of Mitch sabotaging our nation’s democracy.
Rose, I am eager for a book on Mitch --a real one that squarely throws the book at him.
LOL!! Nice play on words, Fern!
A good weekend to you!
Good to see you, Miselle. To better days ahead - make that years! Cheers!
We can also, unfortunately, thank RBG for her selfish and stubborn refusal to resign.
As a fan of RGB I agree. It is time for Feinstein to step down too already. We need term limits.
Agism! Shame on you! If she's not competent, vote her out or help the party set up a successor.
But conflating age with something you don't like is like dehumanizing someone due to color or gender.
Call out the problems by all means, but saying its age - a protected class, by the way, and notorious in the US as being a tool to put people out of their jobs without cause -- is as disgusting as Trump saying that a woman isn't pretty enough to rape.
I don't care how old she is, but if she isn't able to show up and vote on critical issues, and the repubs won't let someone else fill her shoes, she should step down....
She is definitely physically and mentally impaired and no longer competent to serve. She hasn't been there in months. If she needs to be voted out, so be it, they should do it. But if she really wanted to selflessly serve her country and her party, she should step down. It is causing real issues that only compound with time.
Regarding Feinstein, NY Times has an editorial today. Gift link below. They argue based on her absence and her inability to remember anyone's name or face that she should be removed. Also, significant movement on judge confirmations are held up.
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/05/05/opinion/dianne-feinstein-senate.html?unlocked_article_code=5_QcCtfFS1Jli7dNCP9gBgfrXb7gCV5GWTBOUIkGr-AvknQGsoIn_UWcy_WOm_yVknhABYPv1lX1A0Ok8GhB9YsEUqkoEZ0_SZw-Lh7TJyQe9a0rY503PnXaHaa-LdkwB7paYLV_CCu3h43xXMaTdDKYq0DQx-AHqaE2tzZEKPZMVDVSD5STeDfDE6rl1r70fTTy0KVNB34B2NlkUh0DQxYo6I84jDW-BPe_aQ_UhgKkAAfsDRP10BxEB8Nj9LTj-HBB7sNOjHdUhssQo-26DOP5i5PKJciCoF1b-Oxvlf-OtPTCbWRgJZ7t6VG1isCfgYL-Bw1BOxT61XXTcgMdONM&smid=url-share
I agree to being a fan of RGB and that Feinstein should step down. See below KathyintheWallowas with whom I agree age should not be the factor chosen.
Probably the worst decision of her career. Much like Dianne Feinstein's refusal to step down.
Selfish? You think she was doing it for herself? She was trying to keep the court from going full Dobbs.
As long as RBG was alive her votes were a known quantity. After MM held back Merrick Garland, what assurance do we have about any appointment. The Republican refusal to allow a place holder for Senator Feinstein is where we should be focused.
Obama asked her to step down way before the McConnell / Garland thing. During one of the times he had a democrat Senate majority, so McConnell couldn't block it.
CJ, even though I wasn’t certain of the chronology, it is just possible that RBG “knew” what we have since discovered, with this Republican Party, if a nomination can be messed up, MM and Co. will do it. But thank you for reminding me and recalling the timing.
So, SCOTUS judges are dictators? Immune to corruption? Immune from consequences? When they were appointed to the court all their human desires and frailties for wealth and privilege automatically disappeared and a metaphysical change that these human like qualities are suddenly no longer an issue because they become Demi-gods? Their biological/psychological makeup is so changed that they can no longer access their most basic desires for power? Whose stupid idea was that?
Punishment for crimes is reserved for the lower classes who are unable to defend themselves. They are called common criminals. White collar crime is an extension of the days work and as such is usually not only expected but politely overlooked. It is extended as a courtesy amongst business associates.
Pat,
In fact, in America, we LAUD white folks who break the law. They are our heroes.
Right? Remember Clint Eastwood? Shoot anyone in the street if you feel like it.
Remember Michael Milken? Heroes of Wall Street.
You know very well they are not our heroes. I wish you could have known Mr. Olivas a railroad employee living in Rock River, Wyoming. He kept the rail line open in the deep snow and heavy winds of southeast Wyoming winters. Mrs. Olivas shared her table and warm fire with the small town’s hungry children. They are the unsung. They make up the tapestry and lifeblood and soul of us. We can live with the interlopers but we cannot live without the Olivas family.
Thank you so much Fern. Brilliant summation of the politicization of the judicial branch of our government. The toboggan loaded with all of us continues rushing down the slope - out of control.
Thank you, William. I am thrilled to have found Ian Millhiser. 'He is a senior correspondent at Vox, where he focuses on the Supreme Court, the Constitution, and the decline of liberal democracy in the United States. Among other things, he clerked for Judge Eric L. Clay of the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit and served as a Teach For America corps member in the Mississippi Delta. He received a BA in philosophy from Kenyon College and a JD, magna cum laude, from Duke University, where he served as senior note editor on the Duke Law Journal and was elected to the Order of the Coif. He is the author of two books on the Supreme Court: Injustices: The Supreme Court's History of Comforting the Comfortable and Afflicting the Afflicted and The Agenda: How a Republican Supreme Court Is Reshaping America.'
I'll be back with info on Supreme Court, judges, the Constitution, court cases, Trump and other legal matters perched on Ian's shoulders.