Banana Republic Looming?

Has the Military Lost Middle America? Victor Davis Hanson – “The military is not yet a revolutionary people’s army overseen by commissars. But it is getting there.”

Why The Pennsylvania Supreme Court Was Right To Toss Bill Cosby’s Tainted Conviction. Margot Cleveland – “While Bill Cosby may have walked out of prison a free man yesterday, the courts saw to it that he endured two criminal trials and spent years in prison during his appeals.”

Giuliani’s Suspension: Questionable Statements, But Not by Him. John O’Connor – “upon closer examination of the ruling by the New York appellate court, we see clearly questionable statements — not by Giuliani, but about him.”

“What was bizarre about this ruling, especially to any experienced lawyer, is that Giuliani was suspended before it was even determined preliminarily that an investigation of him should be opened. The court disqualified Giuliani on an emergency ad hoc basis, implicating Trump’s Sixth Amendment right to counsel and Giuliani’s First Amendment right to free speech. The court’s ruling also does not find problematic the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments, requiring a due process hearing before any deprivation of a right, privilege, or property interest.

Ironically, a close examination of this extremely unfair opinion reveals it to be very much like a court ruling to be expected from a less developed, authoritarian country, and it lends strength, not weakness, to questions about our last election.

Is the Supreme Court gaslighting us? John Green – “Trying to gaslight everyone now is asking us to ignore 50 years of bad behavior.”

“The reality is that the court is in trouble. It is no longer trusted to be unbiased. The justices are belatedly learning that a referee who isn’t faithful to the rules also lacks the authority to control the game — as that authority is granted by the players. The justices find themselves in a predicament that was created by themselves and their predecessors.

Literal interpretation of the Constitution would have been easy and noncontroversial. It’s the philosophy that originalist justices subscribe to. Had we stayed out of the world of penumbras and emanations, most rulings would have been unanimous. After all, the document says what it says.

The court’s caseload would be substantially lighter. Everybody can read the Constitution and would know in advance how the court would be likely to rule on any given subject. Their rulings would be predictable, and hence noncontroversial. It wouldn’t matter if a justice’s leanings are conservative or liberal. The Constitution says what it says. If it needs to change, it’s someone else’s job to change it.

The Drug Whose Name Must Not Be Uttered. Peter O’Brien – “Doctors advocating the use of Ivermectin, and those conducting clinical trials (none of which are detailed in either government website), are not suggesting that people should self-medicate, that they should binge on the stuff or that they should take versions designed for horses.” … “And now the big question: How many people died (or will die) that need not have, due to this politicised, mercenary and cavalier approach to public health? And who will pay?”

Robocalls are out of control. But that could all change today. Marguerite Reardon – “Today is the deadline for voice providers to implement the Stir/Shaken tech designed to curb the flood of annoying and costly robocalls.

Comments are closed.