American Thinker:
This has been such a newsworthy week that I will deal only briefly with a few items which normally would be column-worthy so I can concentrate on the blow to the Democrats and Jihadists by the President this week and the revelations about the Obama administration’s police-state tactics.
1.The Fourth Circuit Applies the Maxine Waters Doctrine on the Law
It was an amusing tell last week when Democrat demagogue Maxine Waters conceded it would have been fine if Hillary had been elected and fired James Comey, because he deserved it, but it was improper for President Trump to have done so. It’s less easy to dismiss the blow to the rule of law and our constitution that the Fourth Circuit dealt this week when in a lengthy opinion they said the same thing about the travel moratorium: Okay if a Democrat did it, not okay if Trump did. This will head to the Supreme Court, which unless it decides we are to become a banana republic where decisions are based on the political appetites of the judiciary instead of the law, it will be overturned. If you like this opinion — that is, to say if you are a Democrat — remember the political tilt of the federal judiciary is in the process of being altered and this precedent will work against you.
2. The Democrats’ Quixotic Effort to Create “Referenda on Trump” Fails Again
In the face of declining support in federal and state elections countrywide, the geniuses in the DNC decided on a strategy seeking to pick up seats in special elections. These elections usually involve low voter interest and turnout, and the DNC reasoned if they pumped millions into these elections they could pick up seats. Their media buddies prophesied each time that this election was going to be a “referendum on Trump.” If so, he’s continued to beat them time after time. This week it was Greg Gianforte who crushed their designated banner bearer. And he won despite a last-minute effort by a notorious political hack and provocateur; Ben Jacobs, previously with the Daily Beast, now sporting UK Guardian press credentials.
3. The President’s Splendid Foreign Adventure
Nancy Pelosi was critical of the President’s first foreign trip which began in Saudi Arabia, continued on to Israel, the Vatican City, Belgium, and Italy because it wasn’t done in “alphabetical” order.
“The Fourth Circuit Applies the Maxine Waters Doctrine on the Law”
Really? Get some rope. Time to correct this shit.
Here’s the counter opinion of the 4th circuit
The meaning is clear. If the order is supported by legitimate and bona fide reasons on its face, you simply don’t go beyond the document. By that standard, the executive order is easily and clearly lawful. On its face, the order asserts a legitimate and bona fide national-security justification. On its face, the order isn’t remotely a Muslim ban. On its face it doesn’t target the Muslim faith in any way, shape, or form. On its face it describes exactly why each nation is included. The Fourth Circuit, however, interpreted Mandel to argue that the Court looked only at the face of the document to determine whether its supporting reasons were legitimate, not whether they were “bona fide.” It could go “behind” the document to determine “good faith.”
The Supreme Court precedence supports the decanting opinion of the 4th. There are three precedent cases: Mandel, Fiallo, and Din have for decades been entirely clear that courts are not free to look behind these sorts of exercises of executive discretion in search of circumstantial evidence of alleged bad faith. The majority, now for the first time, rejects these holdings in favor of its politically desired outcome.
MJA, in light of the recent threats to Las Vegas, don’t expose yourself to public places tomorrow.
Bad_Brad, you need to start posting sources dude…..
Doze are some big teephus…
A primary goal of the Dumbacretans must be to appoint Maxine Waters to the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court (the only court mandated by our Constitution) is a creature of that Constitution, as are all courts established under THAT court.
Thus, any ruling contrary to that Constitution is an affront to the People of the United States, who ordained and established that Constitution, and (subsequently) that Supreme Court and all lesser courts. That Supreme Court (and this includes all lesser courts) is therefore, in error if it supposes any interpretation of the Constitution other than what is explicitly written – or, if knowingly circumventing that Constitution, it is in a state of Treason – to that Constitution and to those who established it.
Our “representatives” should step in at that point and rid us of the – either incorrectly reasoning or the treasonous “judges” – whichever the case may be.
There is no requirement in our Constitution (for the People of the United States – the Originators and Inheritors of that Constitution) to be constrained and enslaved by judicial fiat. In fact, and in deed, our Constitution is a restraint and shackle on our “Government:” Legislative, Executive, and Judiciary.
THIS is why the schools have been destroyed.
THIS is why Affirmative Action has scourged the nation.
THIS is why the teacher’s unions fight so viciously to ensure mal-education.
THIS is why we are saddled with debt.
THIS is why we are plagued with mendacity.
THIS is why we can’t have anything nice.
izlamo delenda est …