Last week, a federal court did something that would seem not just counterintuitive but impossible under our legal system: it upheld an agency order despite the clear lack of authority to issue it. The order – to renew a moratorium on evictions – is a constitutional zombie that is neither alive nor dead. Yet it still walks the land.
I was critical of Justice Brett Kavanaugh’s baffling concurrence recently in the preserving the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) order for a nationwide moratorium on the eviction of renters during the pandemic. He did so despite agreeing with four of his colleagues that the CDC never had the authority for the moratorium. Instead of declaring it invalid, he preferred to let it die naturally in a matter of days when the deadline passed. That allowed President Joe Biden to declare that the CDC could reinstate the moratorium, even though he was told by his White House counsel and most experts (except Professor Laurence Tribe) that such a renewal would unconstitutional. Now this bizarre status of the undead moratorium has continued with a trial judge who first declared the CDC lacks authority to impose a new moratorium and then upheld that moratorium.
In Alabama Association of Realtors v. Department of Health and Human Services, the Supreme Court issued a 5-4 decision that kept the CDC moratorium in place despite five justices stating that the CDC order as unconstitutional. In dissent, Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch and Amy Coney Barrett wanted to suspend the eviction moratorium as unconstitutional. Justice Kavanaugh however saw no need to strike down the order since it was about to expire. He left no question that the CDC never had the authority for the order, expressly stating that the CDC “the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention exceeded its existing statutory authority by issuing a nationwide eviction moratorium.”
Thus, a majority of the Court made clear that, without a congressional act, the CDC lacks the authority to issue such an order. Yet, Kavanaugh supplied the fifth vote in favor of the CDC to allow the law to simply expire and thereby enable an “additional and more orderly distribution of the congressionally appropriated rental assistance.”
District Judge Dabney Friedrich of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia rejected a challenge by landlords to the new moratorium. In May, Judge Friedrich ruled the previous version of the moratorium was unlawful. She noted that the new order suffered from the same unlawful foundation. However, in the Friday decision, Friedrich basically blamed Kavanaugh for creating a mess of the controlling precedent with his much ridiculed concurrence:
These intervening decisions call into question the D.C. Circuit’s conclusion that the CDC is likely to succeed on the merits. For that reason, absent the D.C. Circuit’s judgment, this Court would vacate the stay. But the Court’s hands are tied. The Supreme Court did not issue a controlling opinion in this case, and circuit precedent provides that the votes of dissenting Justices may not be combined with that of a concurring Justice to create binding law.
In other words, a higher court will need to clean this up given the earlier decision of the D.C. Circuit and Kavanaugh’s judicial punt. However, it is not the victory that many have suggested. Friedrich is adhering to a strict view of the controlling precedent since the D.C. Circuit decision is technically still alive on the books.
Kavanaugh allowed an interpretation to continue despite being clearly but not finally declared unlawful. I have long been a critic of such unchecked and undefined authority in pandemics. This, however, would be a breathtaking claim of authority. It would give the CDC authority that is both unilateral and largely unlimited over our very economy. The CDC would have carte blanche “make and enforce such regulations as in [its] judgment are necessary to prevent the introduction, transmission, or spread of communicable diseases.” Thus, even the danger of the “introduction” or spread of a disease would allow the CDC impose sweeping economic and legal changes in our country.
The Framers struggled with the very concept of a centralized federal government. Many like George Mason were uneasy with such authority but the Framers expressly limited the federal authority while protecting the authority of the states. The Constitution’s overriding principle is the denial of the concentration of authority in any one branch or individual. James Madison warned in Federalist 47 that “the accumulation of all powers, legislative, executive, and judiciary, in the same hands, whether of one, a few, or many, and whether hereditary, self-appointed, or elective, may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny.” Yet, in this matter, a small agency is given authority over the economic conditions and contracts in every state based on its judgment of not simply public health but economic policies.
The protectors of this constitutional balance of power is supposed to be the courts. However, the courts have now expressly allowed an unconstitutional claim of authority to be exercised due to the anomaly created by Justice Kavanaugh. It is precisely what John Adams warned out when he wrote in 1787 that “The moment the idea is admitted into society that property is not as sacred as the laws of God, and that there is not a force of law and public justice to protect it, anarchy and tyranny commence.”
The result in this case is something that few lawyers or law students would expect to see in their lifetime. We have the bizarre sight of an unconstitutional order being upheld despite a majority of justices (and the district court judge) declaring it as facially unlawful. That is what comes when justices decide that their job is to reach convenient rather than constitutional results.
Twilight Amendment (i.e. penumbras and emanations), not limited to denying women and men’s dignity and agency, and reducing human life to a negotiable property in what is progress to the past.
Then there’s this:
ENEMIES OF THE PEOPLE:
Taliban Terrorist Leader Zabihullah Majahid Is on Twitter – President Trump Is Banned
– Gateway Pundit
You sound like a racist. Probably a homophone too! What’s your last name, George? ..asking for a liberal friend.
I am a patriotic American, not a hyphenate with fundamental, genetic, foreign allegiances, and my guess is that I’m normal and not a freak of nature or homophone [sic].
Please cite the Constitution wherein Americans are precluded from holding opinions on race and perversion and any and all other subjects.
The Israelite slaves had the gumption, intellect and acumen sufficient to get out of Egypt before the ink was dry on their release papers.
The freed slaves and their descendants in America are of a dependent and parasitic nature. The freed slaves and their descendants remain, illegal aliens, as freed slaves were not “…free white person(s)…,” could not become citizens and must have been immediately deported. Crime does not pay…or does it? Is America a society of laws or is it not?
It is axiomatic that the nature of perversion is insidious incongruence and incompatibility deserving of banishment and expulsion for the protection and benefit of the tribe, group or society.
Next question.
This is not new. The courts did the same thing with DACA twisting itself like a pretzel to find a way for it to stay in place.
This is the perfect storm of a feckless Judiciary and a craven Congress.
When will judges learn that theirs is not to secure or implement any policy or reach any desired outcome?
DACA is unconstitutional and must have been immediately struck down by the SCOTUS which is derelict, negligent, and treasonous in its facilitation of usurpation of power by the executive branch and in “…adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort…” by allowing the criminal breaching and invasion of the U.S. border by foreign nations, citizens and agents.
The executive branch has no power to legislate regarding immigration.
Obama must have been impeached, convicted and removed.
________________________________________________
Article 1, Section 8
The Congress shall have Power…To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization,
And justice Roberts did the same with Obamacare. The modern-day Supreme Court has become an overpowered beast of tyranny; all because our elected (representatives of We the People) have become corrupt, lazy, and self-serving.
“…courts…must…declare all acts contrary to the manifest tenor of the Constitution void.”
“…men…do…what their powers do not authorize, [and] what they forbid.”
“[A] limited Constitution … can be preserved in practice no other way than through the medium of courts of justice, whose duty it must be to declare all acts contrary to the manifest tenor of the Constitution void. Without this, all the reservations of particular rights or privileges would amount to nothing … To deny this would be to affirm … that men acting by virtue of powers may do not only what their powers do not authorize, but what they forbid.”
– Alexander Hamilton
Turley: “[This] is what comes when justices decide that their job is to reach convenient rather than constitutional results.”
***
A “Living Constitution” has led to a Dead Constitution.
9th Amendment
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________
The only “emergency power” Congress has is the authority to suspend habeas corpus in a condition of invasion or rebellion.
Personal healthcare is a responsibility, right and freedom of individual Americans.
This just kicked the can down the road. Now the Court will have to decide the issue again when the moratorium comes up on the docket…again.
There was a good logistical reason to let the moratorium expire naturally. Its sudden reversal would indeed have led to chaos and confusion, but that would not be the fault of the Court. If you don’t want chaos and confusion, then don’t make unconstitutional moratoriums or laws.
In the effort to prevent chaos, the Court has embolden the CDC to repeat its unconstitutional move. Perhaps the Justices thought that making Biden aware that it was unconstitutional would prevent him from repeating this moratorium. Of course being unconstitutional would be no impediment to their policy.
This administration does not believe in Free Speech. It’s working closely with social media to craft propaganda and quash dissent. These people don’t seem to care about the constitution.
Perhaps there is a lesson in this for SCOTUS.
Karen…”This administration does not believe in Free Speech. It’s working closely with social media to craft propaganda and quash dissent. These people don’t seem to care about the constitution.
CO: True
“Perhaps there is a lesson in this for SCOTUS.”
One would think a lesson to SCOTUS is appropriate, but you’re forgetting something about the Court – they too, have opined to legislate from the Bench from time to time. There’s a bit of Kettle calling the CDC Pot ‘black’, if you know what I mean.
There was a good logistical reason to let the moratorium expire naturally. Its sudden reversal would indeed have led to chaos and confusion, but that would not be the fault of the Court. If you don’t want chaos and confusion, then don’t make unconstitutional moratoriums or laws.
Karen,
The road to hell is paved with good intentions.
You didn’t feel the same way when Robert’s amended the ACA and then ruled it constitutional. The court is not there to supply them with pavers to the next exit ramp. By doing so, the court is to be faulted for compounding the chaos and confusion.
The Robert’s Court wouldn’t want to interrupt a bank robber until he has finished his withdrawals apparently.
Too true. Serious question: On what legal authority are the January 6th prisoners being held?
Olly: “On what legal authority are the January 6th prisoners being held?”
That’s a good question and I haven’t looked into it. I do wonder what happened to the right to a speedy trial? And what happened to the Brady disclosures? The mass of video evidence the corrupt DOJ is sitting on should have been disclosed long ago. But nothing happens when these Stasi types break custom, rules, and laws.
Maybe they are being held under the Law of 22 Prairial. These DOJ types seem to be operating under rules like that. Would sneak it in if the could, by procedure if not by actual legislation.
No help from the judiciary at the trial level. We got a scary look at those types during the Flynn prosecutions and the judicial lynching of others. It almost seems our system of government is collapsing as fast as the Afghan government.
Law of 22 Prairial?
Well that should terrify us. I didn’t know that was even a thing. We are effectively treating American citizens like the Gitmo detainees, while at the same time enabling the former Gitmo detainees and other actual terrorists safe haven in Afghanistan.
The January 6 victims would be treated better in Gitmo than in the hands of the mini-Robespierres running ‘justice’ in Washington, D.C.
And that’s not hyperbole.
Olly,
Here is an interesting post on Legalinsurrection.com, a blog maintained by a Cornel law professor.
https://legalinsurrection.com/2021/08/jan-6-prosecutors-admit-to-possession-of-images-of-officers-hugging-or-fist-bumping-rioters-posing-for-photos-with-rioters-and-moving-bike-racks
No wonder the sleazy prosecutors in the Jan 6 cases want to retain exculpatory evidence.
Damn. Thank you for sharing the link. At what point is the prosecutor required to produce the evidence that supports the alleged crime(s)? I guess I don’t understand how this works. Is it that they haven’t been charged with a crime yet, so they don’t have to produce the evidence? Which would get back to my original question: under what authority are they holding these people in pretrial detention?
Olly, you are in the same place I am in. I didn’t think this type of thing could happen except in the world of fascist dictators. As the kids used to say, “Are we there yet? Are we there?’
I should have been more clear in my question. Aren’t prosecutors required to provide all evidence they have, especially potentially exculpatory evidence? Not just the evidence that they plan on using to prosecute?
Olly, Prosecutors have to provide Brady material, those things that might be exculpatory. Usually they are expected to provide it well before trial so that the defense has an opportunity to review it. I think that was one of the significant failures in the Chauvin trial. The prosecution apparently held onto things and then dumped masses of documents on the defense each night of the trial to overwhelm the attorney and, essentially, deprive Chauvin and his attorney of the ability to use the evidence while still claiming it had been provided. The judge should have done something about that, sanctions would have been nice, but he wasn’t going to do anything to disrupt what was essentially a political show trial.
I think the January 6 people are probably being held under some national security standard. Gitmo but much harsher. Pelosi and her allies are trying to turn this into a Reichstag Fire to justify enacting extreme national security measures. It’s a fraud.
This gives you an idea how far they will carry it for ‘optics’:
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9896791/Georgia-couple-linked-far-right-militia-leader-claim-FBI-raided-home.html
Forty federal agents to swarm the home of someone not even charged with a crime, some of them pointing loaded weapons at an 11-year-old girl.
Why aren’t these thugs ashamed to do that? Remember they sent 15 agents to Talladega to investigate a storage room door pull.
But how many agents did they send to investigate Hunter Biden’s laptops?
How many agents investigated Ilhan Omar’s immigration claims and the video evidence of vote buying in her district?
The list of their deadly failures is very long and their successes very short.
“I think the January 6 people are probably being held under some national security standard. Gitmo but much harsher.”
What bunk. They aren’t being held under a national security standard at all, much less is the standard harsher than Guantanamo. Are you too lazy to read the documents and to listen in on the hearings where the prosecution and defense present their arguments to the judges about whether a given individual should be held without bail prior to trial?
“Pelosi and her allies are trying to turn this into a Reichstag Fire…”
More bunk. The DOJ is prosecuting the cases, and Pelosi isn’t involved. It’s not even the same branch of government.
“… to justify enacting extreme national security measures.”
Can you name one of these “extreme national security measures” that you claim Pelosi is enacting? Let’s take a look at the actual text and the vote breakdown.
I think the January 6 people are probably being held under some national security standard.
With the recent alert published by DHS you’d have to conclude they have half of this country is in their crosshairs. The repeated assertion that January 6th was an insurrection and that the violence by Antifa and BLM was peaceful protests would seem to be setting the stage for their next tyrannical act. Don’t be surprised if there’s a false flag event prior to the 2022 election leading to a declaration of marshal law. Then they will start rounding up more political dissidents.
https://www.westernjournal.com/exclusive-gen-flynn-since-new-dhs-alert-potential-terrorist-oppose-white-house-lies/?utm_source=Email&utm_medium=aa-breaking&utm_campaign=can&utm_content=firefly&ats_es=4b5c429f887fae96cbd6b730a05ed04b
Olly– Here is another egregious example of the federal prosecutors trying to hide exculpatory evidence and their own misdeeds.
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2021/08/fbi-told-informant-whitmer-kidnapping-case-lie-frame-innocent-man-delete-text-messages/
This is classic lawfare. The FBI/DOJ are out of control
Olly, Young has answered much better than I can. However, we are looking at laws and agencies that are not functioning based on rule of law.
To me that means the center of power is fascistic. I do not believe many of the rights we had just a short while ago still exist.
I do not believe many of the rights we had just a short while ago still exist.
Seth, I understand your sentiment. But rest assured, there is nothing this tyrannical government can do, ever, to change the existence of those rights. They can and will disable them under the boot of their oppressive regime. But they will always be there for us to restore.
Keep up the great fight.
Olly, our histories differ. We may be entitled to certain rights, but that doesn’t mean we have those rights realized. Once gone it is a difficult task to make them return.
I understand your point. Yes, our natural rights are being disabled, but they remain our natural rights. Our security of rights has been and will always be the fight our citizens must be willing to accept.
“Where were the insurrectionists’ guns and weapons?”
An excerpt from LE officers testifying before Congress under oath:
Officer Hodges: “You know, once we got to the Capitol, and we were fighting, I was, I was wondering, you know, how many more bombs are there? [a reference to the pipe bombs that had been found at the RNC and DNC] How -, what’s the trigger? Is it, is it going to be a cell phone? Is it, is it a timer?
“Well, how many guns are there in this crowd? If we start firing is that the signal of them to set off the explosives? However many there are in the city? Is that the signal for them to break out their firearms and shoot back?
“So that’s the reason you know, why I didn’t shoot anyone. And I imagine why many others didn’t because, like I said, before, there were over 9000 of the terrorists out there with an unknown number of firearms and a couple 100 of us maybe, so we could not. If that turned into a firefight, we would have lost and this was a fight we couldn’t afford to lose.”
Rep. Aguilar: “What types of weapons did you see used against your fellow officers?”
Officer Gonell: “Police shields, police baton, the hammer, sledgehammer that you saw on that video, flagpoles, tasers, pepper spray, bear spray, – bats, PVC pipes, copper pipes, rocks, table legs breaking – broken down, furniture broken down, the guardrails for the inauguration stage, cones 4/4. Any weapons any item so they could get their hands on it …”
Officer Gonell:
“In Iraq, we expected armed violence because we were in a war zone, but nothing my experience in the army or as a law enforcement officer prepared me for what we confronted on January 6th. The verbal assaults and disrespect we endured from the rioters were bad enough. I was falsely accused of betraying my oath, of choosing my paycheck over my loyalty to the US Constitution, even as I defended the very democratic process that protected everyone in the hostile crowd. While I was at the lower west terrace of the Capitol working with my fellow officers to prevent the breach and restore order, the rioters called me traitor, a disgrace and that I, an Army veteran and a police officer, should be executed.
“Some of the rioters had the audacity to tell me there was nothing personal, that they would go through me, through us police officers to achieve their goal, as they were breaking metal barriers to use as a weapon against us. Others used more menacing language. “If you shoot us, we all have weapons, we will shoot back, or we’ll get our guns. We outnumber you,” they say, “Join us.” I heard specific threats to the lives of Speaker Nancy Pelosi, and then also Vice President Mike Pence. But the physical violence we experienced was horrific and devastating. My fellow officers and I were punched, kicked, shoved, sprayed with chemical irritants. And he’d been blinded with eye damaging lasers by a violent mob, who apparently saw us law enforcement officer dedicated to ironically protecting them as US citizens as an impediment to their attempted insurrection. The mob brought weapons to try to accomplish their insurrectionist objectives, and used them against us. These weapons included hammers, rebars, knives, baton and police shields taken by force, as well as bear spray and pepper spray.
“Some of the rioters wore tactical gear, including bulletproof vests in gas masks. A rioter also forcibly took out batons and shields to use them against us. I was particularly shocked at the scene, the insurrectionist violently attacked us with the very American flag that they claimed to serve to protect. Based on the coordinated attacks that we observed and the verbal commands we heard, it appears that many of these attackers had law enforcement or military experience. The rioters were vicious and relentless. …”
Officer Fanone: “What I witnessed and experienced on January 6th, 2021 was unlike anything I had ever seen, anything I had ever experienced or could have imagined in my country. On that day, I participated in the defense of the United States Capitol from an armed mob, an armed mob of thousands, determined to get inside. Because I was among the vastly outnumbered group of law enforcement officers protecting the Capitol and the people inside it, I was grabbed, beaten, tased, all while being called a traitor to my country. I was at risk of being stripped of and killed with my own firearm, as I heard chants of, ” Kill him with his own gun.” I could still hear those words in my head today. …”
Officer Hodges:
“My particular station was in front of 1111 Constitution Avenue, where I stood on foot as the crowd poured down the street and into the park. There were a significant number of men dressed in tactical gear attending the gathering, wearing ballistic vests, helmets, goggles, military face masks, backpacks, and without identifiable visible law enforcement or military patches, they appeared to be prepared for much more than listening to politicians speak in a park. Two of my colleagues were approached by a group of three to four such men. They were white men in good shape with load bearing vests equipped with MOLLE pouches. They were wearing BDUs, or battle dress uniform pants, tactical boots, black sunglasses, and short haircuts. They had radios and one was equipped with an earpiece. After a bit of small talk, one of them asked my colleagues something to the effect of, is this all the manpower you have? Do you really think you’re going to be able to stop all these people? Dumbfounded, my colleagues simply expressed they didn’t understand what the speaker meant, and the group continued on. As the day went on and speakers in the park said their peace, I monitored the crowd and the radio. Over the radio, I heard our gun recovery unit working constantly, monitoring those in the crowds suspected of carrying firearms and making arrests and seizures when possible. Multiple gun arrests were made from January 5th through the 7th against those attending and likely had attended or planned to attend Donald Trump’s gathering. Unfortunately, due to the course of events that day, we will never know exactly how many were carrying firearms and other lethal weapons. …”
Officer Fanone:
“That initial period of time where I was pulled of that line was kind of a blur. I just remember getting violently assaulted from every direction and eventually found myself out, probably about 250, maybe 300 feet away from the mouth of the tunnel where the other officers were at. And I knew I was in -, I was up sh*t creek without a paddle.
“I was trying to push guys off of me, create some space. All the while, I recognized the fact that there were individuals that were trying to grab a hold of my gun. I remember one of them distinctly lunging at me, time and time again, trying to grab my gun. And I heard people in the crowd yelling, “Get his gun, kill him with his own gun,” and words to that effect.
“I thought about using my weapon. I believe that there were individuals in the crowd whose intentions were to kill me. And I came to that conclusion because of the fact that separated from these other officers, who are only trying to defend the Capitol, I no longer posed any type of threat, nor was I an impediment to them going inside of the building. But yet they tortured me. They beat me. I was struck with a taser device at the base of my skull numerous times, and they continued to do so until I yelled out that I have kids. And I said that hoping to appeal to some of those individuals’ humanity. And fortunately, a few did step in and intervene on my behalf. …”
Rep. Mr. Kinzinger:
“If in the middle of all that melee, you see somebody with a gun in that crowd, would you be able to go out, apprehend, arrest them, read them their rights, and go through that process? Or was the mission at the moment survival and defense of the capitol? So I’m asking, is it possible that people maybe had guns -, and we’ve seen that actually there were -, but this idea that wow, people weren’t arrested with guns, at the time, it was raw survival. I’ll start with -, we can just start on the left. Let me ask you, what’s your response to that?
Officer Gonell:
“For those people who continue to downplay this violent attack on our democracy and officers, I suggest them to look at the videos and the footage because common things were used as a weapons, like a baseball bat, a hockey stick, a rebar, a flagpole, including the American flag, pepper spray, bear spray. So you name it, you have all these items and things that were thrown at us and used to attack us. Those are weapons. No matter if it is a pen, the way they were using these items, it was to hurt officers. It was to hurt police officers. …”
…
Officer Dunn:
“… So I looked -, we look on their hips, you see a print. I didn’t see that it was a gun, but a reasonable police officer would believe that that’s a gun on their hip.”
Mr. Kinzinger:
“And just to quickly be specific, a print is basically what looks like the outline of a gun.”
Officer Dunn:
“That’s correct.”
And that’s only a sample of what they said about it.
Did you listen to or read their July 27 testimony?
My guess is that you didn’t. If you had, maybe you wouldn’t be asking “Where were the insurrectionists’ guns and weapons?,” since the officers addressed this in their testimony.
Anonymous we are all very familiar with your deception and lies. We are also familiar with your links and quotes that do not prove what you say they prove.You must think most people are as stupid as you. They are not.
The so-called insurrection occurred in the Capitol building. Show us where the transcript says they found guns in the Capitol building. Saying that something looked like a gun but isn’t is not a gun. How can you be so ignorant
S. Meyer, it’s totally unsurprising that you ask “Where were the insurrectionists’ guns AND WEAPONS?,” and when I quote you and address what you asked, you then pretend that you only asked about guns and attempt to command me. I do not take commands from you. You are apparently too lazy to even do a simple text search for yourself on “firearm” to identify the insurrectionists who’ve been charged with firearms violations, using the DOJ link I gave earlier.
You are afraid to deal honestly with the testimony under oath about “guns AND WEAPONS.”
If you were hit repeatedly with a bat, tased, had your eye gouged out with a pen, were struggling to breathe after being sprayed with pepper- and bear-spray, …, you’d definitely want to focus solely on whether any of your attackers had a gun, right?
You can’t even get basic facts right. You say “The so-called insurrection occurred in the Capitol building,” when it also took place outside the building on the Capitol grounds. That’s where Officer Fanone was attacked: outside the building.
You lack the integrity of the LE officers who faced the insurrectionists and testified about it. I bet you’re too afraid even to simply listen to the entirety of their testimony under oath. You can watch the entirety on CSPAN.
You can claim insurrection took place when it didn’t, but that is usual for you. However, entry into the Capitol building is the argument. There were no guns found on any that entered the Capitol building. You change the subject to prove a case that doesn’t exist. The only one who was killed was a woman. The central question that remains is not, was there an insurrection, there was not, but was she murdered or killed by a shot errantly fired.
Now produce the evidence for guns in the Capitol building on Jan 6 or shut up because your deception is an insult to Americans of all parties.
As I told you earlier, S. Meyer: I do not take commands from you.
You only underscore that you lack the integrity of the LE officers who faced the insurrectionists and testified about it under oath. You are afraid to deal honestly and sincerely with their testimony.
“As I told you earlier, S. Meyer: I do not take commands from you.”
You only take commands from your Amygdala. Your frontal cortex has been out of service for years.
Evidence has been produced for all of the people who’ve been charged. You can read some it here: justice.gov/usao-dc/capitol-breach-cases, and you can read more of it if you look up the individual cases.
If you want to know why certain of the charged people are being held without bond, why don’t you read the relevant documents? Here’s an example: courtlistener.com/docket/58966875/united-states-v-sealed/ (McCaughey is one of the people who attacked Officer Hodges)
Anon– “Evidence has been produced for all of the people who’ve been charged.”
The question is whether those in jail have been given Brady material that might aid their defense. Many of the videos in the government’s hands could do that but the prosecutors fight to keep it away from the defendants.
I wonder if some of those videos reveal Antifa/BLM/federal agent types doing most of the damage. That has been alleged and it is not out of the question given the fiasco revealed in the Whitmer kidnapping case which looked absurd on its face when it was first announced. Are they stealing plots form Batman comics?
I am not sure that a trespass case is very strong when videos show guards holding the doors open and waving people in.
“The question is whether those in jail have been given Brady material that might aid their defense.”
Young, my comment responded to Olly’s August 17, 2021 at 12:48 PM questions. He asked more general questions, and I responded to those more general questions.
If you want to know about Brady material for each person charged, look at their dockets. Or don’t, and just keep wondering.
“I am not sure that a trespass case is very strong when videos show guards holding the doors open and waving people in.”
Their defense lawyers can make that argument. But plenty of people who’ve been charged clearly broke in (e.g., the video of Dominic Pezzola breaking windows and people climbing through) and most if not all are facing multiple charges. I’m not going to do your work to identify whether there’s someone where the sole charge was trespass and that person can show that they were waved in.
Anon — As to McCaughey look at this:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/legal-issues/man-released-capitol-riot-officer-pinned/2021/05/04/c8724430-acf2-11eb-ab4c-986555a1c511_story.html
The case is not as clear cut as Pelosi and our corrupt DOJ [and you, which might be the same] would like us to believe.
I think a number of these ‘hot’ cases of insurrection have begun to fizzle when examined in an actual court.
Why do you want me to look at a months-old article that says something I already knew from the case docket?
“The case is not as clear cut as Pelosi and our corrupt DOJ [and you, which might be the same] would like us to believe.”
You’re deluded if you think I’ve argued that the case is clear cut. You’re also deluded if you think that this particular case has fizzled. Maybe you should catch up on where the case currently stands.
I don’t mistake allegations for evidence
Here is where some of your cases stand:
https://legalinsurrection.com/2021/08/jan-6-prosecutors-admit-to-possession-of-images-of-officers-hugging-or-fist-bumping-rioters-posing-for-photos-with-rioters-and-moving-bike-racks
“I said that I thought some of the hot cases “of insurrection” have begun to fizzle.”
Have whatever opinion you want, but if you’re trying to convince others, then you’ll need to name the cases and present some evidence.
“Even if they end up charged as trespass or obstruction they are humiliating reductions from the Reichstag Fire rubbish being publicized.”
It’s odd that you’re calling the cases of trespass “hot cases,” instead of limiting that phrase to the cases with the most serious charges. It also sounds like you’re suggesting that if some cases are not the most serious charges, then none of hundreds of cases are serious charges, which is illogical.
The big case, the one that relies on the collection of individual cases, is the claim that January 6 was an insurrection that threatened the country.
The more the individual cases dissolve into petty offenses charged to uncoordinated individuals the more the ‘insurrection’ claim collapses like a punctured balloon.
There was no insurrection.
I think it is not at all beyond question that there were agents mixed in to cause as much trouble as possible, rather like the clown car of agents in the Whitmer plot or the obscene raid of 40 armed agents to serve a search warrant on a family and little girl. There is a record of spectacular malice and incompetence to guide analysis.
Swamp Thing = by the book.
Respond accordingly.
The Jan 6 Capital Attack was an attempt to overthrow the election, promoted and coordinated by the President. He was aided by Representatives and Senators who voted against certifying the EC vote.
That’s an insurrection.
“That’s an insurrection.”
Swamp, That’s nonsense and ridiculous. Where were the insurrectionists’ guns and weapons? How many people did the insurrectionists kill or capture at the Capital?
We know of one shooting victim. An unarmed protestor shot while it was clear that she presented no significant threat. Yet, the details of the shooting or homicide have been withheld. (That is why no one can rule out homicide.)
S. Myers, the ineffectiveness of an effort – even Trump would not think he could get away with encouraging those he asked to fight for him to bring weapons, though some did, as well as a noose – does not make it less culpable. The goal was clear and was promoted by the President and supported by a majority of his parties elected representatives – stop the certifying of a lawful election, which would effectively overturn the government. That is an insurrection.
As to the woman shot – you can watch the incident on video – she was in the act of breaching the area where members of Congress were, and those tasked with defending them – one can see these officers with pistols drawn at more than one door to the House – were almost assuredly and rightly told to let no one enter. The first one in unharmed could turn into ten, twenty, and more very quickly. If someone had been shot as they broke into the Capital, the entire event may have been averted and i would have had no problem with that.
Tell us who had a gun in the Capitol? You can’t.
Swamp, Trump didn’t tell anyone to be violent or to bring weapons. Anyone who says he told people to carry guns is lying.
A noose is a prop. There is political tomfoolery, so if you wish to be one of the fools, you are free to do so. I don’t think that is your desire.
“The goal was clear and was promoted by the President and supported by a majority of his parties elected representatives – stop the certifying of a lawful election”
It was a lawless election. The march on the Capital was the use of political pressure, something well understood by our founders, whether or not you recognize the importance of political speech.
Political speech, even if a few got out of hand, is not insurrection. It is not a revolt against civil authority. That was people exercising their rights of protest and letting our officials know how lawless the election was.
“you can watch the incident on video ”
If it is as simple as that, there is no reason not to reveal all the details and videos. Babbitt was not an immediate threat to anyone. Her hands weren’t holding a gun. Other police were in the room, and I don’t believe any Congressmen were. There is a dispute over what happened. If this was a clean shoot, there is no reason to hide the details. If this was a homicide, there is a reason some would want to hide the details.
“were almost assuredly ”
When bloggers use words like almost assuredly, one can count on the fact that they are making things up and can’t present data without adding potential fiction. They become less than credible.
“I don’t mistake allegations for evidence”
Neither do I. You’ve presented no evidence that that case has “fizzled.”
“You’ve presented no evidence that that case has “fizzled.”
***
Why should I? I didn’t say “that that case” has fizzled. I said that I thought some of the hot cases “of insurrection” have begun to fizzle. Even if they end up charged as trespass or obstruction they are humiliating reductions from the Reichstag Fire rubbish being publicized.
I remember many times when activists for favored causes have disrupted sessions of Congress only to be escorted out the door, yet someone who attended a Trump rally but did not enter the Capitol is chased across the country by 40 heavily armed agents to execute a search warrant and point gun lasers at a terrified 10-year-old.
As for Antifa and BLM who literally rioted in Washington, the few charges filed were dropped.
Stick to scaring little girls. Worthless for anything else.
If you look at the superseding indictments for the case I linked to, you’ll find that the reverse occurred.
“There was no insurrection.”
Your opinion.
In the future, when there is a critical evaluation of Jan 6, the historians will call it political tomfoolery. When they read some of the day’s comments, they will note how many people made fools of themselves believing this political game.
Thou your comments might never be read, you would be one of the fools.
https://www.theepochtimes.com/exclusive-space-force-officer-punished-after-denouncing-marxism-to-leave-military_3953154.html?utm_source=sharemorningbriefnoe
why don’t we discuss this removal from service and loss of retirement benefits just because he sees a Marxist movement in our Air Force…thanks Biden/Harris…also Hollywood star Colbert said the all Trump supporters were exactly like the Taliban…well that statement sure unites my country…and finally the Taliban commander in Afghanistan said all women between 15-40 will be forced to marry a Taliban fighter…what a country!!!
“Why don’t we discuss this removal from service and loss of retirement benefits just because he sees a Marxist movement in our Air Force”
1949, Because the left, including the anonymous writing above, is subject to tomfoolery and makes fools out of themselves. Those that disagree are expected to be nice and polite while being relieved from duty, dismissed from a university, etc. because one might object to Marxism or making Caucasians say they are privileged. The left is using violent force against anyone disagreeing with their policies.
Enough of this stupidity. Fight back. Tell the leftists what they are in whatever words one chooses. Protect free speech and protect oneself from violent leftists.
I am probably the most plain spoken man I know…it has gotten me in trouble before but I still speak my mind…that’s why I have very few close friends…can count them on ONE hand.
Good, 1949. I am well mannered but if someone tries to push me around, they generally are sorry they did.
Keep speaking your mind but when the leftist brown shirts start surrounding you make sure you have what you need.
We’re on the road to hell, judging by all the yellow-brick intentions… R2P
Jab this experiment, citizen. Do it now, or… else.
What legal authority? — OLLY
Jazzed up trespassing for 80%+ of January 6th political prisoners. Show-trials need be drawn out to maximize public exposure.
This is where heretics end up… citizen.
These people don’t seem to care about the constitution. — Karen S
They do not argue in good faith… and cannot be trusted.
No kidding Spanky.
Political Prisoner
someone who is put in prison for expressing disapproval of their own government, or for belonging to an organization, race, or social group not approved of by that government
https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/political-prisoner
That’s exactly what they are.
They are using Gestapo intimidation tactics. What they are saying is no political protests unless you agree with them.
Sounds fascistic, right?
BS.
Take McCaughey as an example, since I already linked to his case docs. Given the charges and the evidence, just why are you arguing that he should be released on bond pending trial?
The same legal authority that allows other people accused of violent federal crimes to be held without bail.
Are you suggesting that it’s illegal for anyone to be held without bail?
Olly you are correct. Further letting the moratorium expire naturally didn’t fix the problem of one person owing so much rent. Today or tomorrow, the result is the same. The directive was unconstitutional. That means it is unconstitutional unless Congress provides a fix it. I wonder what Kavanaugh will think of next.
S. Meyer – I agree that the CDC was acting far beyond its writ by imposing a moratorium, but I suspect a moratorium of this nature would also be unlawful if imposed by Congress.
At least three problems come to mind immediately. What happened to the Constitutional protection of contracts? What happened to the Constitutional prohibition of taking without fair compensation? Whence comes the authority for Congress to do anything like this? The federal government was established as a LIMITED GOVERNMENT, just as the federal courts are courts of LIMITED JURISDICTION. Both are ranging far beyond their lawful authority.
It is possible that states, some of them, can rip back powers that the federals have taken. There is some sign of that already and individuals should support their state politicians who are smart enough and courageous enough to make the effort.
On an individual level, apart from supporting the right politicians and running for local offices, there may not be much that can be done. We are becoming increasingly and dangerously tribal and it seems the corporate media and Deep State are pushing that.
The corrupt politicians have forgotten that absent a bigger and more terrible police state this society operates largely on the willing cooperation of its citizens. We obey the laws because we think they are just and make for a safer and more civil society. We want to follow the law. But the federal government and some states are losing that citizen loyalty and cooperation to the big idea of this nation. Why not? States and cities proclaimed themselves sanctuaries from federal law. Antifa and BLM riot without penalty. Federal District Courts and federal agencies ignore or work around Supreme Court decisions and effectively nullify them. Now, with Kavanaugh and others on the Court, the Supreme Court itself openly declares it isn’t going to follow the law. With corruption infused that deeply into the system people can be forgiven for thinking that they are going to be on their own.
Very good comments you two. What you’re describing is what Bastiat warned:
Victims of Lawful Plunder
Men naturally rebel against the injustice of which they are victims. Thus, when plunder is organized by law for the profit of those who make the law, all the plundered classes try somehow to enter — by peaceful or revolutionary means — into the making of laws. According to their degree of enlightenment, these plundered classes may propose one of two entirely different purposes when they attempt to attain political power: Either they may wish to stop lawful plunder, or they may wish to share in it.
Woe to the nation when this latter purpose prevails among the mass victims of lawful plunder when they, in turn, seize the power to make laws! Until that happens, the few practice lawful plunder upon the many, a common practice where the right to participate in the making of law is limited to a few persons. But then, participation in the making of law becomes universal. And then, men seek to balance their conflicting interests by universal plunder. Instead of rooting out the injustices found in society, they make these injustices general. As soon as the plundered classes gain political power, they establish a system of reprisals against other classes. They do not abolish legal plunder. (This objective would demand more enlightenment than they possess.) Instead, they emulate their evil predecessors by participating in this legal plunder, even though it is against their own interests.
It is as if it were necessary, before a reign of justice appears, for everyone to suffer a cruel retribution — some for their evilness, and some for their lack of understanding.
Young, I believe the impairment of contracts clause applies to the states not the federal government. And after the “switch in time”, the Supreme Court gave the states substantial leeway to suspend the operation of contracts in the case of emergencies under their police powers. I agree with you that there could be issues under the takings clause, though that would be solved by compensating landlords for any losses they may suffer as a result of their inability to reclaim their property when rent is not paid. And the authority of the federal government to act at all, presumably under the commerce clause, could be disputed, though the court has given Congress a lot of flexibility on that.
The main problem here is that Biden acted knowing that what he was doing was unlawful. He was enabled in this by Kavanaugh, who somehow fancied himself a “judicial statesman” rather than a justice merely doing his job. The 11th Circuit and the 6th Circuit have found that the CDC lacked authority, as did a majority of the Supreme Court justices. But the district court here was bound by the renegade panel of the D.C. Circuit under the law of the case doctrine, notwithstanding the district court’s continuing view that the CDC lacked authority. Assuming the D.C. Circuit maintains its intransigence, it will be interesting to see if the Supreme Court acts swiftly to counter Biden’s flouting of its authority.
Daniel, you are right to say that the impairments clause does not apply directly to the federal government. It says no state shall pass a law impairing contracts.
Good call on your part.
But I think it might be a little bit more complicated.
The federal courts do not normally do evictions. Those real property actions are carried out under state law and in state courts. Even the federal government doing an eviction may have the district court as a forum but must use the state law of the state in which the property is located.
So, we must ask if it is the case that the impairment provision in the Constitution bars states from impairing contracts can any federal administrative agency, or even Congress, compel a state to impair rental contracts that exist under state law and are enforced entirely under state law and, perforce, be in violation of the federal Constitution?
I like questions like that. But with people like Kavanaugh on the bench I am not sure any law or reasoning can make any difference. His frankly stupid position has set a sort of precedent for black-robed idiocy that opens the door to many other abuses.
I have thought since then that there is something flawed in the way we choose Supreme Court justices. They spend too much time in very thin intellectual air. I think that I would rather have someone like Joe the Plumber on the bench, someone who knows what life is like back here on Earth. Someone who knows the difference between ‘Constitutional’ and ‘Unconstitutional’.
“I think that I would rather have someone like Joe the Plumber on the bench, someone who knows what life is like back here on Earth.”
Perhaps the chances of them having their brains scrambled are better if they are chosen from places outside DC, NYC,SF-La.
S. Meyer– I agree. We fish for judges and justices in much too small a pond and wonder why they almost all come out with the same stripe, inbred and a bit twisted. They are like puffer fish, overinflated and a bit toxic.
We need genuine talent rather than only a wall of certificates from the ‘right’ institutions. I wouldn’t mind if nobody from Harvard ever got on a federal bench again.
You match Bill Buckley’s vision
“S. Meyer – I agree that the CDC was acting far beyond its writ by imposing a moratorium, but I suspect a moratorium of this nature would also be unlawful if imposed by Congress. ”
I agree. The fix I was talking about would be that money allocated to citizens for rent be issued directly to the landlords. I’m not too fond of that idea, but I could live with very selected use containing payback provisions.
Without property rights, one is not free.
This is School House Rock civics.
I wonder what Kavanaugh will think of next. — S. Meyer
Kavanaugh will blow any direction Shrub’s (43) WH torture memos dictate.
Olly, agreed. The Court has compounded the chaos in its desire to avoid it.
👍
“It would give the CDC authority that is both unilateral and largely unlimited over our very economy.”
This is “science” in the service of fascism. And yet another reason why there should be a complete separation of government and science.
9th Amendment
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________
The only “emergency power” Congress has is the authority to suspend habeas corpus in a condition of invasion or rebellion.
Personal healthcare is a responsibility, right and freedom of individual Americans.
I suspect that had the original Korematsu’s case come before this court, they would have concluded that although Korematsu’s civil rights were violated, it was a wartime decision that would be resolved as soon as the war was over.
In a strongly worded dissent, Justice Robert Jackson contended: “Korematsu … has been convicted of an act not commonly thought a crime,” he wrote. “It consists merely of being present in the state whereof he is a citizen, near the place where he was born, and where all his life he has lived.” The nation’s wartime security concerns, he contended, were not adequate to strip Korematsu and the other internees of their constitutionally protected civil rights.
https://www.uscourts.gov/educational-resources/educational-activities/facts-and-case-summary-korematsu-v-us
I’m thinking about not paying property taxes while we’re at it. Why bother if my property can be taken away anyway?
It is impossible not to see that Roberts was behind this. Just because we know and follow the law, he says, don’t think of us as cruel. So he OKd Kavenaugh to write his nonsense because – next time! – the issue may not be moot any more.
“The result in this case is something that few lawyers or law students would expect to see in their lifetime. We have the bizarre sight of an unconstitutional order being upheld despite a majority of justices (and the district court judge) declaring it as facially unlawful. That is what comes when justices decide that their job is to reach convenient rather than constitutional results.”
I tend to applaud when decisions are made that end run the legal communities desire to cause humanitarian crisis, especially if it does it by obliterating the legal rationale for it.
eb
The problem is that the government could have readily “solved” the crisis, in a constitutional manner, but didn’t (or did they?) They provided the funds to the renters, via unemployment and welfare, but there is nothing that prescribed use of the unemployment, welfare, etc., to pay rent. The property owners aren’t being paid for the contracted use of their property. Notwithstanding financial support (often in excess of ordinary income) paid to the renters, the CDC mandated that the landlords can’t go to court to force payment of the rent or eviction. Sure seems like a 5th amendment taking, not to mention a pretty extensive overreach of administrative authority.
Bad facts make bad law. But here, nothing stopped the legislature from putting a legal solution in (payment of the rent in the form of a portion of unemployment paid in the form of unemployment credits, etc.), and allowing an unconstitutional overreach sets an awful precedent. I actually think the increased unemployment did solve the eviction problem, making this a power grab, rather than an honest attempt to resolve a humanitarian issue.
Interesting take on this. Thanks!
eb
Eb- “I tend to applaud when decisions are made that end run the legal communities desire to cause humanitarian crisis, especially if it does it by obliterating the legal rationale for it.”
***
Of course you do, comrade.
The problem is that your end not only does not justify the means, your end doesn’t justify the end.
If the national 55mph speed limit was to be tested in SCOTUS today, we would be limited to 55mph in all fifty states.
True they want to take us back to horse and stagecoach days.
Bill– I was thinking that too. I can see Kavanaugh agreeing it is illegal but ‘to hell with it’ let it stand anyhow.
Meanwhile we would all break the speed limit just like last time. No way to foster respect for laws, mandating something stupid.
Landlords:. Burn the units down. Collect insurance. Let the tenants go to hell in the handbasket.
No doubt that thought has crossed many property owners minds. Problem might be this: New CDC directive tells fire marshals to declare every fire event as arson (just like every hospital visit today is called CoVid-related regardless if the patient is actually tested or not). Sure, the squatters-in-waiting (tenants) are out, but the bank/county/state will still demand payment. No one wins except the Kavanaugh-backed CDC.
Impeach Biden
—
“It is time for Joe Biden to resign in disgrace for what he has allowed to happen to Afghanistan, along with the tremendous surge in COVID, the Border catastrophe, the destruction of energy independence, and our crippled economy,”
https://justthenews.com/government/security/what-went-wrong-afghanistan-unpacking-failures-amid-evolving-crisis
…And now we have Biden reenacting a law found unconstitutional.
Biden just continuing Trump policy in Afghanistan. Not to mention, he’s continuing it at the border now that he’s forced by the court at least temporarily. Also following his tariff policy with the Chinese.
The Covid situation??? That’s the result of idiot trumpist governors.
So if you’re saying Biden should be impeached for trumpist policies…, well, I just can’t stop laughing at you. But that’s been the case all along.
eb
you can not intelligently argue on August 16th, biden was following Trump’s May 1st deadline. You simply can’t.
Yes, I simply can.
eb
Si se pwodway
(as “Dr” Jill says it…and she’s the smart one in the family, allegedly….b/c demanding the world address her and her less-than-impressive EdD as “Dr” makes her seem smart, you see)
Si claro.
Re Afghanistan….Joe Biden has been in Washington DC for 50 years! He voted for it, funded it, did oversight on it while in Congress, then oversaw the war as Obama’s VP and for the past 7 months as President!
Donald Trump was in Washington for four years trying to cleanup all of Joe Biden’s messes.
This is 100% Joe Biden’s failure.
Here’s a little background, so you can brush up:
“PRESIDENT TRUMP HAS CONTINUED TO TAKE THE LEAD IN PEACE TALKS AS HE SIGNED A HISTORIC PEACE AGREEMENT WITH THE TALIBAN IN AFGHANISTAN, WHICH WOULD END AMERICA’S LONGEST WAR”
https://web.archive.org/web/20210615230810/https://gop.com/president-trump-is-bringing-peace-to-the-middle-east-rsr/
“GOP Quietly Scrubs Webpage Detailing Trump’s ‘Historic Peace Agreement With the Taliban'”
“The move comes in light of the Taliban taking control of Afghanistan.”
ByShoshana Wodinsky
57 minutes ago
https://gizmodo.com/gop-quietly-scrubs-webpage-detailing-trumps-historic-pe-1847492947
And?
Who fubar’d the exit?
100% responsibility on Joe Biden.
Biden screwed up badly even if the writer refuses to recognize it. All one has to do is look at pictures of the airport. Why did we give up the Bagram Air Base?
A screw-up is when you decide to leave and then add 7,000 soldiers.The dummies trying to justify Biden’s failure can’t seem to focus on an orderly and timely withdrawal or not withdrawing while leaving only about a quarter of what will be there in a short time.
Impeach Biden
Anonynous,
This is not entirely Biden’s fault. While he IS the commander in Chief he is responsible for some of the mistakes made. However if you really want to into the blame game then you will have to go as far back as Bush. Obama shares the blame as well. What makes this truly a sad spectacle is that Trump is responsible for setting the whole thing in motion the day he made some of the worst deals with the Taliban Trump negotiated and legitimized the Taliban. He allowed the freeing of ,5,000 taliban prisoners as well as the current leader. Pompeo legitimized the taliban and made really poor deals that culminated into what we are seeing today. Biden shares blame, but so do the other presidents before him.
“This is not entirely Biden’s fault. ”
The way he handled leaving Afghanistan is almost entirely Biden’s fault. No one but Biden could cause such a debacle. He’s an idiot. His lack of intelligence today doesn’t differ that much from years ago. The main difference is today he has trouble remembering his name.
The history of our involvement in Afghanistan is on every President though Trump is least at fault.
“He allowed the freeing of ,5,000 taliban prisoners”
Trump didn’t free 5,000 prisoners. Your problems in the reading department. It shows up every time you speak. You are ignorant as to what Trump did and didn’t do.
Anonymous,
“ Trump didn’t free 5,000 prisoners. Your problems in the reading department.”
Yes he did. It was part of his negotiations with the Taliban. He negotiated the freeing of 5,000 Taliban prisoners and their current leader in exchange for the promise to not allow terrorist groups to use Afghanistan as a base.
“ Prisoners for Peace: Trump Administration Mulls Releasing Taliban Drug Kingpin in Push for Afghan Peace Talks”
“ The tandem moves demonstrate the Trump Administration’s willingness to unleash potentially dangerous Taliban actors back into the country in order to get the next round of peace talks started and, in turn, deliver enough of a reduction in violence to justify the drawdown to between 4,000 and 5,000 U.S. troops that President Donald Trump announced in a recent AXIOS interview. ”
https://www.google.com/amp/s/time.com/5879018/trump-administration-prisoners-afghanistan/%3famp=true
Trump’s bad deals set all this in motion. Trump, Pompeo and his envoys negotiated with terrorists in order to secure a withdrawal of U.S. troops.
He allowed the worst of the worst to go free and they are now the ones who took over Afghanistan. Trump is very much at fault here too.
and their current leader…
Nope. The leader is one of the Taliban Five that Obama released from Gitmo in a trade for the deserter Bowe Bergdahl.
“Yes he did. It was part of his negotiations with the Taliban. He negotiated the freeing of 5,000 Taliban prisoners and their current leader in exchange for the promise to not allow terrorist groups to use Afghanistan as a base.”
Svelaz, He didn’t free them. Look up the word, if, and then read about all the great people that used the word, if. You still refuse to get that dictionary. You are making things up. What you say is wrong, misleading or incomplete. You fail almost every time you try to communicate.
Axios is providing fiction since they are creating the scene (errantly) and writing the script. No one knows how these things will occur. Biden thought things would be peachy because he isn’t smart enough to figure out the details and all the, ifs, involved. Trump was smart in that domaine and proved it over and over again.
“He allowed the worst of the worst to go free “
Trump didn’t allow any of them to go free. You make up stories all the time. You don’t know how to read and you don’t know the facts. All in all you are a waste of time.
Anonymous,
“ Trump didn’t allow any of them to go free.”
He negotiated with the Taliban by pushing the Afghan government to release 5,000 Taliban fighters. He negotiated for their release as a condition for removing U.S. troops.
You say axios is providing fiction, but Pompeo confirms that was what happened. Trump negotiated with terrorists. We are seeing the conveyor that right now.
Svlelaz, You are still having trouble getting things right. I find it amazing that one person can get the same things wrong so many times and still not learn. Then I saw Biden’s actions in Afghanistan.
Though approaching the real story, you are far from knowing what you are talking about. I keep repeating the same thing. Look up the word, if, but instead it seems you eat paint chips.
That Pompeo talked about what you mentioned is true, but that is as far as you get.
It used to be that I would provide you with the answers, but you were so impolite, I stopped. You ran away only to repeat what you previously said, over and over again. Now I don’t do that so you have become a Guess-O-Matic and keep guessing while remaining ignorant to the core.
Next time we meet what color paint should I bring?
Here’s the interview:
https://www.foxnews.com/transcript/fox-news-sunday-on-august-15-2021
WALLACE: Do you regret giving the Taliban that legitimacy? Do you regret
pressing the Afghan government to release 5,000 prisoners, which they did,
some of whom are now back on the battlefield fighting with the Taliban?
POMPEO: Chris, you make peace with your enemies, the statement that I made
that day was absolutely true.
Anonymous.
“ The way he handled leaving Afghanistan is almost entirely Biden’s fault. No one but Biden could cause such a debacle. ”
Nobody knew or predicted how fast the Taliban took over the country. Nobody saw that coming, not even Trump.
Trump set in motion this whole chain of events when he negotiated a peace treaty with the Taliban. Trump made a deal with the Taliban. He wanted to get our troops out and the way he did it was to give the Taliban 5,000 of the worst offenders so he could get our troops home. He expected the Taliban to cooperate with the Afghan government, obviously that didn’t happen.
I’ll repeat, Trump negotiated with the Taliban to release 5,000 of their fighters including the current leadership. So he could bring our troops home. Obviously that was a pretty bad deal. Trump even released a dangerous Taliban financial whiz from Guantanamo prison as part of the deal. Trump negotiated with terrorists and we got the results.
“Nobody knew or predicted how fast the Taliban took over the country. Nobody saw that coming, not even Trump.”
Svelaz, No one could predict anything, but what that means is that one has to be agile which is a characteristic of Trump. Biden was a slug and an open book. Trump set his management of the problem in motion, not Biden’s. The Taliban already broke any deals made. You still haven’t looked up the word, if.
You keep saying the same things but gradually came closest to the truth. Trump negotiated. Look up the word, if. You don’t have your facts straight and your conclusions are based on errant facts so they are irrelevant.
“The way he handled leaving Afghanistan is almost entirely Biden’s fault.”
You must not have read the agreement signed by the Trump Admin. that bound Biden’s choices. Among other things, that agreement, signed in 2020, says “The United States is committed to withdraw from Afghanistan all military forces of the United States, its allies, and Coalition partners, including all non-diplomatic civilian personnel, private security contractors, trainers, advisors, and supporting services personnel within fourteen (14) months following announcement of this agreement…”
Biden certainly could have done a better job, but Trump tied his hands on a lot, and Trump never should have excluded the Ghani Administration from the negotiations.
Must watch video of Afghanistan vet just blew up MSNBC’s entire Biden-simping Afghanistan narrative LIVE ON AIR.
“Brian Williams brought on Zeller and said, “It’s almost ironic now to state the name of the organization you founded, given what we’re watching go on, though I’m curious to hear your reaction of this consequential speech by the American president. Didn’t run from it. He owned it. He owned his decision, he the fact that — as he put it — the buck stops with him.”
Zeller said Biden should “own their deaths too” and told Williams, “I feel like I watched a different speech than the rest of you guys. I was appalled.”
Watch this video in the article.
https://www.mediaite.com/tv/afghanistan-veteran-says-on-msnbc-he-was-appalled-by-biden-address-i-feel-like-i-watched-a-different-speech-than-the-rest-of-you/
Video is Matt Zeller, an Afghanistan veteran and former CIA analyst who co-founded an organization — No One Left Behind — to help interpreters that aided the United States.
He was ON FIRE.
MORE of this, please.
“MORE of this, please.”
Here you go:
“Trump shuts the door on men and women who have sacrificed for America”
Opinion by Matt ZellerJanuary 28, 2017
“Matt Zeller is a veteran of the war in Afghanistan and the co-founder and chief executive of No One Left Behind”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/global-opinions/trump-shuts-the-door-on-men-and-women-who-have-sacrificed-for-the-us/2017/01/28/17a0e0b4-e5a3-11e6-a453-19ec4b3d09ba_story.html
“We are permanently harming the fabric of U.S. national security. Our credibility is forever tarnished if not eroded. Why would any potential ally trust the United States to keep its word again? It pains me to think how many U.S. service-members will die in future conflicts because we were unable to recruit the local, on-the-ground support that is often the difference between life and death. These men and women have sacrificed so much for the United States. Friday’s order means the enemy wins, and we have turned our backs on our own ideals.”
Wasn’t Nero the commander in chief?
And btw, where is the president? Where is Biden? Where is Harris? Where is the press secretary? AWOL for days! MIA.
When Joe Biden finally reads a prepared speech today @ 3:45pm from the White House, he needs to answer these questions: WHERE have you been, sir?
How much Donezepal does it take to get you coherent enough to stand in front of reporters and take questions, sir?
Settle down, kiddo.
https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/1475382/joe-biden-potus-health-update-walking-into-bushes-video-white-house-latest-vn
Biden is the commander in chief. He reversed Trump on Paris Climate accords. He reversed Trump when he rejoined the W.H.O. He reversed Trump on Stay in Mexico. He reversed Trump on XL pipeline.
He basically reversed Trump on everything. Which is fine. That is what got him elected.
Now he wants to blame Trump for the ONE policy he supposedly kept? And the policy was to get out. Not get out in a totally stupid and unprepared manner. Biden said about a month ago ” it is highly unlikely ” that the Taliban would overpower the Afghanistan military. He said there was no possibility of helicopters evacuating the U.S. Embassy like Saigon. WRONG ON BOTH COUNTS.!. Either Biden lied, he is totally inept or his intelligence services failed miserably. Those are the only reasonable conclusions.
Remember the iconic ” the buck stops here” sign on Truman’s desk?
Remember JFK taken total responsibility for the Bay of Pigs fiasco?
Biden needs to take full responsibility for this botched pullout.
And my fear is the worst is yet to come.
Paul…You don’t really believe Biden is in charge, do you? Reality says he’s PINO (President in Name Only). Harris, et al, is most likely using the time to fulfill Obama’s promise to “Fundamentally Change America” using ‘ends justify the means’ methodologies.
Don’t be surprised if Biden names his VP as his Afghanistan Czar to do a root cause analysis into the Taliban takeover.
Olly…and conclude, as Paul said, it’s all Trumps fault. Well, at least it won’t be “Bush’s” fault anymore. 😛
Maybe he’ll blame Republicans and conservatives for the Taliban rejecting the CDC guidance on masks, social distancing and holding a super spreader event.
Olly…and a dozen new variants, too! The misdirection from this administration’s ineptness knows no end. Sadly, the media prefers shiny objects over holding their benefactors accountable in any sense of the word.
Well here’s a “shiny object” lesson for the media.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/E863-JbWEAgxtTJ?format=jpg&name=small
Ya gotta wonder if there’s any connecting of the dots going on it Ward’s mind. Still, I hope she gets home, safely.
I pray she does as well.
I am not really sure who is in charge. Joe definitely in cognitive decline. But my fear is Kamala would be worse. And third in line is even more repulsive. My hope is that Joe will just take responsibility. But my prayers are that this is not totally so fubar’ed that Americans and those who helped us can get out safely. What I am hearing from cnn and msnbc is that anyone not already at the airport will not be permitted by the Taliban to evacuate.
That would be catastrophic.
Way worse than Saigon
My guess is that at least partially Joe will stick to the favorite go to.
Blame Trump for everything.
Concur…no one and everyone seems to be in charge of the White House. Either way, Biden will say what ever his handlers tell him and the lapdog media will noddingly go along, playing exactly into Nancy’s long-range plans of bumping out Biden as just the first step.
Pres Biden is supposed to address the nation at 3:45 today. There’s a chance that he will announce his resignation. Prepare for the Cackler-in-Chief.
Yikes! Batten down the hatches, if true!
Ahh…, Q has obviously spoken. Laughable that you’d think Biden will resign. Blinken and Jake Sullivan might not be long for the administration though.
eb
Eb, totally agree. No way he steps down. But a sacrificial lamb may be necessary.
Biden is a shamefully weak president. He needs to ask for the resignations of Milley, Austin, Blinken and Sullivan.
Anon said: “Biden is a shamefully weak president. He needs to ask for the resignations of Milley, Austin, Blinken and Sullivan.”
***
Not all of them. He needs to keep a couple of scapegoats in reserve, maybe hire some more. He is going to need them.
Paul, we have three people that shouldn’t be in government much less so powerful. At this point I don’t know that Kamala would be worse. Not that she isn’t, but there might be more pushback against her then Biden unless it is the same people pulling the strings.
Almost everything Biden has done has caused great harm or is in the process of doing so.
“And my fear is the worst is yet to come.”
In 7 months the Biden Administration has destabilized the world and set our economy up for future failure (inflation has already started). I give it a 50:50 chance that a major terrorist attack will be attempted on 911 or its timeframe.
My comment about fearing the worst is yet to come, was in reference to the atrocities that the Taliban may commit. Especially as it relates to females. I fear for our nation as well under this particular Administration but nothing like those who are currently in Afghanistan. I pray that we will be able to evacuate all those who desire to do so. But honestly I am not optimistic.
“Biden just continuing Trump policy in Afghanistan.”
You are a phony, but we all know that. Biden is not following Trump policy nor the policy of his advisors or the military. His weakness makes aggressors more aggressive. That is part of his problem. Biden also doesn’t pay attention to detail (he is an old senile individual who never was smart). That is why we see those horrific scenes at the airport. Still further, Biden canceled whatever he could that was Trump’s. This is all Biden.
Covid: It has been reported that ¾ of the Covid beds filled in southern Texas hospitals are illegals. We can thank Biden for Covid being a threat today. Illegals have been sent throughout the nation.
Biden has been a disaster his entire career. Keep playing the fool and cheer for Biden. You will be among fools that are as unknowledgeable as yourself.
Hey EB, since it is “Trumpist governors” that are prolonging Covid can you please discuss the % of Black and other minority people not getting vaccinated in places like NYC? Are the 67% of Black people not getting vaccinated prolonging the pandemic?
Hillbobby- The leftists who blame Trump and or Global Warming for everything won’t want to answer that question.
But vaccination segregation in NYC will lead to a lot of blacks being denied service. Just like the good old days with Democrats.
An interesting survey discovered that vaccination resistance was highest among the uneducated on one hand and among PhDs on the other with the doctorates slightly ahead of the uneducated.
Apparently, too, there still remains a significant proportion of CDC employees who haven’t been vaccinated–what do they know that we don’t?
Why do we no longer hear about lab origins for this disease?
It seems a lot of important information is being suppressed.
How about you back up your claim about “67% of Black people not getting vaccinated”?
These data contradict your claim: kff.org/coronavirus-covid-19/issue-brief/latest-data-on-covid-19-vaccinations-race-ethnicity/
I’ve had it with the political left’s intentional B A S T A R D I Z A T I O N of our laws, these people need to be dragged out of government and thrown into jail.
Amen brother
Are you oblivious to the irony of your suggestion?
I wrote, “I’ve had it with the political left’s intentional B A S T A R D I Z A T I O N of our laws, these people need to be dragged out of government and thrown into jail.”
Anonymous replied, “Are you oblivious to the irony of your suggestion?”
To understand this reply from Anonymous one must first understand the meaning of a couple of key words:
B A S T A R D I Z A T I O N: change (something) in such a way as to lower its quality or value. This can be done by trying to add new elements or ignoring existing elements.
IRONY: 1. The expression of one’s meaning by using language that normally signifies the opposite, typically for humorous or emphatic effect. 2. A state of affairs or an event that seems deliberately contrary to what one expects and is often amusing as a result.
So now that the meaning of those two key words have been shared, we can ask Anonymous to explain their reply,
How is my comment ironic?
This is Anonymous’ chance to support the claim that was made.
I’ll hold my breath while I wait…
Your comment is ironic because “these people need to be dragged out of government and thrown into jail” would itself be an “intentional B A S T A R D I Z A T I O N of our laws.”
“How is my comment ironic?”
Because suggesting that people you disagree with “need to be dragged out of government and thrown into jail” is itself the kind of b@stardization of our laws to which you purport to object.
Sorry for the repeat reply, but my first two attempts to reply didn’t post, and the third only posted after a delay – apparently an issue with the word into which you’d inserted spaces.
Anon to Steve Witherspoon: “Are you oblivious to the irony of your suggestion?”
My guess would be “yes.”
I generally breeze right by his comments.
Anonymous wrote…
Please ignore the other bad formatted version of this comment.
Anonymous wrote…
With so many Anonymous commenters on this site I have to ask which one is replying this time? If it’s the same one that I asked “How is my comment ironic?” then you’re acting like a rhetorical coward. If not the same Anonymous I challenged, then I challenge you to support your “guess”.
It’s too easy to get a rise out of this guy.
Anonymous wrote, “It’s too easy to get a rise out of this guy.”
That folks is what a pure unadulterated ad hominem attack delivered straight from the fingertips of an internet troll looks like.
Grow up, Steve.
His name is synonymous with ‘clickbait.’
Confessions of a Dangerous Mind
This is the anonymous who consistently abuses the blog and the bloggers on it. He has little to say that adds to discussion. Most of what he does say is meaningless junk or false. A lot of his posts get taken down from the blog for good reason.
well duh!!!…the progressives have taken over all branches of government and therefore our lives…we are now about half way between socialism and Marxism…they are now even printing money without George Washington…or In God We Trust…welcome to a Godless secular world…does E Pluribus Unum come off next and George Floyd’s face go on plus CRT…i guess too white folks like me get a different dollar that says I Am A Racist, skinhead and KKK member…I just watched an interview or debate chaired by Dr. Jordan Peterson, a Canadian clinical psychologist, with 3 young men about the future of money…all are all into cryptos…why???…like me we do NOT trust governments anymore…they don’t even trust stocks and bonds…the day of buy and hold is over…if you don’t educate yourself about cryptos and blockchain…then stay in your cave…the boat has sailed and you missed it!
This is the new, improved, one size fits all law…
What happens when you are really smart, but lack the courage of your convictions.
Inferior officers do not possess broad discretion to interpret statutory laws for the purpose of implementing policy. They are generally limited to what the Supreme Court has described as “ministerial” functions. According to Marbury v. Madison, anyone limited to ministerial functions “acts, in this respect, under the authority of law, and not by the instructions of the president.” Having limited authority means, as Chief Justice John Marshall said, “[s]he is so far the officer of the law; is amenable to the laws for [her] conduct; and cannot at [her] discretion sport away the vested rights of others.”
https://lawliberty.org/lawlessness-at-the-cdc/?utm_source=LAL+Updates&utm_campaign=dc864ea214-LAL+Updates&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_53ee3e1605-dc864ea214-72413845
Sure seems like fewer and fewer judges are listening to their own heritage.
Reminds me of all the You had one job to do memes.
Indeed, it does.
Well if renters allowed not to pay their (in the words of Obacala) “fair share”, all the landlords should stop paying their mortgages! I’m sure if this is adopted nationally the banks will make a decision for Justice Kavanaugh.
Margot:
The foreclosure moratorium already ended. Failure to pay mortgages will lead to foreclosures.
In addition, the banks aren’t getting their money, either, when there is a moratorium on foreclosures. This will have far reaching effects on the banking industry.
This is going to lead to a massive downturn in rental property investment. I am curious if China will use this opportunity to snap up more real estate. It already owns large swaths of the country.
Only fools allow foreign countries to buy up their land, especially when those countries are hostile to that country’s interests.