Below is my column in the Hill on the leak and the refusal of President Joe Biden to denounce such conduct. It is a defining moment for his presidency that, even in the face of such a disgraceful and unethical act, the President cannot muster the courage to condemn it. He then magnified that failure by refusing to condemn the doxing and targeting of justices and their families at their homes.
Here is the column:
Nearly 70 years ago, a little-known lawyer named Joseph Welch famously confronted Sen. Joseph McCarthy (D-Wis.) in defense of a young man hounded over alleged un-American views. Welch told McCarthy that “I think I have never really gauged … your recklessness” before asking: “Have you no sense of decency, sir? At long last, have you left no sense of decency?”
It was a defining moment in American politics as Welch called out a politician who had abandoned any semblance of principle in the pursuit of political advantage. This week, the same scene played out in the White House with one striking difference: This was no Joseph Welch to be found.
After someone in the Supreme Court leaked a draft opinion in the case of Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, a virtual flash-mob formed around the court and its members demanding retributive justice. This included renewed calls for court “packing,” as well as the potential targeting of individual justices at their homes. Like the leaking of the opinion itself, the doxing of justices and their families is being treated as fair game in our age of rage.
There is more than a license to this rage; there is an addiction to it. That was evident in March 2020 when Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) stood in front of the Supreme Court to threaten Justices Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh by name: “I want to tell you, Gorsuch, I want to tell you, Kavanaugh, you have released the whirlwind and you will pay the price! You won’t know what hit you if you go forward with these awful decisions.” Schumer’s reckless rhetoric was celebrated, not condemned, by many on the left, even after he attempted to walk it back by stating that “I should not have used the words I used … they did not come out the way I intended to.”
What occurred at the White House this week is even more troubling. When asked for a response to the leaking of a justice’s draft opinion, White House press secretary Jen Psaki declined to condemn the leaker and said the real issue was the opinion itself. Then she was asked about the potential targeting of justices and their families at their homes, and whether that might be considered extreme. It should have been another easy question; few Americans would approve of such doxing, particularly since some of the justices have young children at home. Yet Psaki declared that “I don’t have an official U.S. government position on where people protest,” adding that “peaceful protest is not extreme.”
In reality, not having an official position on doxing and harassing Supreme Court justices and their families is a policy.
Whether protests are judged to be extreme seems often to depend upon their underlying viewpoints. When Westboro Baptist Church activists protested at the funeral of Beau Biden, it was peaceful — but many critics rightly condemned the demonstration as extreme; some even approved of Westboro activists being physically assaulted. When the church brought its case before the Supreme Court, some of us supported its claims despite our vehement disagreement with their views, but 42 senators filed an amicus brief asking the court to deny free-speech protections for such protests. The court ultimately ruled 8-1 in favor of the church.
In this case, the Biden administration and the Justice Department have condemned the court’s leaked draft — but not the threatened protests at justices’ homes, even though those arguably could be treated as a crime. Under 18 U.S.C. 1507, it is a federal crime to protest near a residence occupied by a judge or jury with the intent to influence their decisions in pending cases, and this case remains pending. (Ironically, prosecution could be difficult if the protesters said they had no intent other than to vent anger.)
Even if protests at justices’ homes are constitutionally protected, that does not make them right, any more than the lawful Army-McCarthy hearings of 1954 were right.
In 1954, the left was targeted for its political views; today, it is the left which is calling for censorship, blacklisting and doxing. In such moments of reckless rage, presidents often have become calming voices, tempering extremist passions in their own parties. When they have failed to do so, history has judged them harshly, as in the case of President Eisenhower’s belated condemnation of Sen. McCarthy, something he reportedly regretted for the rest of his life.
President Biden has repeatedly shown that polls, not principles, guide his presidency. He showed integrity as a senator by denouncing court packing as a “bonehead … terrible, terrible” idea. However, he has stayed silent as today’s Democrats have pushed to pack the court with an instant liberal majority, a demand that increased this week. Biden long supported the Senate’s filibuster rule and said efforts to eliminate it would be “disastrous” — but when today’s mob formed, he flipped and denounced the filibuster as a “relic” of the Jim Crow era.
Even on abortion, Biden has shifted with the polls. He once opposed Roe v. Wade and supported an amendment that would negate the decision. At the time, he declared that “I don’t think that a woman has the sole right to say what should happen to her body.” Now President Biden has switched his position without really switching his logic. He recently declared that he supported Roe because “I’m just a child of God; I exist” and thus can decide what happens to his body. Accordingly, he denounced the Supreme Court’s draft opinion as “radical” and affirmed the right of a woman “to abort a child.“
Whether it is court leaking, packing, doxing or other tactics, many Democratic politicians and pundits continue to follow the mob rather than risk its ire.
Our national addiction to rage is captured in three indelible images. In June 2020, there was the White House surrounded by security fencing after nights of arson and rioting; in January 2021, Congress was surrounded by the same fencing after rioting that momentarily halted the certification of the presidential election. Now the set is complete with photos of the Supreme Court encased in the same fencing.
All three branches, having to be protected from enraged citizens on the left or the right.
Schumer’s 2020 pledge that justices would “pay the price” has been realized as they and their families are now bunkered in their homes. Despite the shocking image of a court system under attack, President Biden has not mustered the courage to dissuade these protesters. He appears to be following the lead of French revolutionary Abbe Sieyes, who watched as his 1789-99 revolution spun out of control; asked what he had done during “the Terror,” he replied: “I survived.”
President Biden is now in survival mode, too. It seems he does not lack decency, just the courage to defend it.
Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University. Follow him on Twitter @JonathanTurley.
“Leadership” is a word which no one uses to describe our current President. There was hope on inauguration day that he would lead this country and provide a stabilizing hand to the out of control situation left behind by Pelosi’s hurry to impeach Trump one more time, and left behind in the wake of January 6th. January 20, 2021 had hope that Biden was elected to lead. It is clear, even to his supporters and his handlers, that Biden is not capable of true leadership.
This piece by Professor Turley is yet more evidence of it.
Joe has devolved into moral bankruptcy and it’s a shame to watch this man’s lengthy career in public service come to such an end.
It’s not a shame at all. It is exactly who Joe Biden is. And his horrid wife, too.
But what their corrupt media will do is spin old Joe into a sympathetic figure. “Oh how awful to lose your mind to dementia, and what a public servant old Joe has been. What a guy. What a life of “service” he has led. All with his wife ‘call me Dr’ by his side.”
Make me puke. Biden deserves nothing but the contempt of the people he has screwed over and lied to for 50 shamefully corrupt years in public “service.”
FJB and his wife too.
Oh and you are 100% correct. Joe Biden is NOT a leader. He never was, never will be. Ask Clarence Thomas to tell you who Joe Biden really is.
Clarence Thomas is the very definition of a decent and honorable man. Something Joe Biden will never be.
It’s Democracy vs Mobocracy now. The Left has forced SCOTUS’ hand. Maybe that draft majority opinion had become the minority opinion, before the leak. Now, if it is not the majority opinion, no matter how the final opinion is crafted, the mob will perceive this as the winning strategy. SCOTUS is now on the clock to prove they are a viable separate branch of government, or a political tool of the mob.
Tell ya what. Let’s put 6 liberal justices on the court and 3 conservative ones. In exchange, Republicans can protest in front of Sotomoyer’s house when she votes to overturn a 50 year old precedent.
Fair trade?
I wouldn’t be surprised if Sotomoyer were involved to an extent. This is the level of infantility our modern Dems espouse. No respect for anything, and I’d wager that extends to themselves. Money and influence not equalling everything legitimately and honestly confuses such soulless people. Heaven forbid they just do the right thing and be friendly to others. The entire liberal/globalist agenda is a big, fat, f****** lie designed to placate the ignorant, and eventually, other countries that were formerly our allies will stop supporting us. Vote your little hearts out this November. If we don’t fix this now, it’s going to be a whooooole lot harder later on.
You make a misleading citation to 18 USC 1507, which not only prohibits picketing in front of a judge’s house, it also forbids “pickets or parades in or near a building housing a court of the United States”
So every anti-abortion protest of the last 50 years in front of SCOTUS has violated this statute.
Yea….well…SCOTUS has set aside an area about a block away from the court for protestors. Plus, we would need a law enforcement agency to actually do their job and arrest and charge law breakers. No LEO appears to see the need.
You can protest in front of the Supreme court. Not on the steps, but on the plaza facing the street. It’s a public space.
It’s illegal if it’s done “with the intent of interfering with, obstructing, or impeding the administration of justice, or with the intent of influencing any judge, juror, witness, or court officer, in the discharge of his duty.” If it’s done simply to express frustration, to publicize their views, or things of that sort, then it’s not ilegal under 1507.
“ That was evident in March 2020 when Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) stood in front of the Supreme Court to threaten Justices Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh by name: “I want to tell you, Gorsuch, I want to tell you, Kavanaugh, you have released the whirlwind and you will pay the price! You won’t know what hit you if you go forward with these awful decisions.” Schumer’s reckless rhetoric was celebrated, not condemned, by many on the left, even after he attempted to walk it back by stating that “I should not have used the words I used … they did not come out the way I intended to.”
It was free speech. Turley knows that. Turley often complains when conservatives get condemned for their speech and claims it is censorship. But when democrats engage in the same it should be condemned? Turley the hypocrite sure loves to feed the rage he spends a lot of time complaining about.
And as Schumer ‘incited’ millions of hard-wired Democrat followers to ‘rebel’ against these Justices, how come it was a violation worthy of investigation when the Dems alleged that Trump incited followers to let their views be known at the Capitol. Could this just be a case of ‘it got out of control?’
Trump’s speech occurred on the same day as the Capitol riot, and Trump explicitly sent his crowd marching to the Capitol without getting a permit for the march.
Schumer didn’t send listeners anywhere, and there was no riot after his speech that day.
marching to the Capitol without getting a permit for the march.
Because to exercise our enumerated rights, that prevent the government from abusing us, we first have to get permission from the govt.
A march down the middle of PA Ave. is not an enumerated right.
But it is OK for Antifa to riot in DC. You are a hypocrite and a liar.
“ Like the leaking of the opinion itself, the doxing of justices and their families is being treated as fair game in our age of rage.”
It is fair game. Doxing is not illegal under most circumstances. Especially when the information is publicly available.
“ In reality, not having an official position on doxing and harassing Supreme Court justices and their families is a policy.
Whether protests are judged to be extreme seems often to depend upon their underlying viewpoints. When Westboro Baptist Church activists protested at the funeral of Beau Biden, it was peaceful — but many critics rightly condemned the demonstration as extreme; some even approved of Westboro activists being physically assaulted.”
Turley’s poor attempt at comparison is laughable. The Westboro Baptist Church protests were extreme in that they protested funerals of military burials with signs with outright offensive statements. Protesting at justices homes is not equally offensive in that the protesters are merely airing their disagreement with the justices opinion. That’s not equivalent to what the westboro Baptist Church protesters were doing.
The leak is irrelevant by now. The draft’s opinion is more important because its what justice Alito said that matters.
Whether protests are judged to be extreme seems often to depend upon their underlying viewpoints
There is a federal law prohibiting protesting in front of any federal judges homes.
Why people are not being arrested? That would have to be at the State Level. AG Garland is much to busy monitoring local school board meetings, to enforce federal law.
Iowan2,
“ Whoever, with the intent of interfering with, obstructing, or impeding the administration of justice, or with the intent of influencing any judge, juror, witness, or court officer, in the discharge of his duty,…”
The federal law only prohibits protesting that is intent on interfering with, obstructing, or impeding the administration of Justice. That’s not what those protesters are doing. Alito already rendered his opinion. He wasn’t administering justice either. The protesters were not obstructing anything as well.
The federal law doesn’t prohibit protesters from congregating in a public sidewalk to air their disagreement in front of a justice’s home. As Turley grudgingly acknowledged it IS protected free speech. He thinks it’s wrong, but admits it’s not illegal. Just like the Westboro Baptist Church protests.
You have edited out… Under 18 U.S.C. 1507, it is a federal crime to protest near a residence occupied by a judge or jury with the intent to influence their decisions in pending cases,
Gosh, I wonder why a person portending to engage in good faith would hide part of the law that is on point.
Iowan2,
No, because the first part of the statute points out that there has to be intent to obstruct, interfere and impede an administration of justice. That was not happening at the residence. It was just people expressing their disagreement which is completely legal according to Turley.
There is a prima fascia intent to obstruct. They are protesting something that has not happened.
Listen to what they say.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/watch-pro-abortion-rights-protesters-march-to-brett-kavanaughs-house/vi-AAX3dMy
You can agree with what they say, but that does not change that they are engaged in intimidation and obstruction.
You can argue that the law is wrong if you want, But it is the law and it is being violated.
I find it interesting that The Hill has removed commenting from their website. Their reasoning is very weak
“The Hill has removed its comment section, as there are many other forums for readers to participate in the conversation. We invite you to join the discussion on Facebook and Twitter.”
it’s a classic strategy. No opinions are better than an overwhelming ratio of dissenting opinions. This is the entire reason even our White House has freaked out over Elon Musk acquiring Twitter, has created literal, actual departments in response in what used to be a free country, and why they are now staffing the MSM with actual, former employees of the Biden administration. it is not uncommon. Free speech, telling the truth, it’s really the only thing other than our votes (which can be manipulated to a larger extent that the random comment online) that they can control. Millennial Silicon Valley is absolutely complicit, 100%. The only solution at this point, other than firing bullets, is to stop voting dem for *anything*. Even the PTA. Sadly though, a lot of older dems do not understand technology, do not pay attention, and fail to notice that the very good things that they espouse have been twisted beyond recognition by the party they support. Very smart people, in fact. That someone like Neil Degrasse Tyson could write an op-ed about abortion and miss the fact (an abortion weighs less than a paper clip.’, they aren’t delusional, just insular and intellectually lazy. There’s that privilege again) that his left are pushing for killing full-term babies, is telling. They don’t pay attention, and the don’t care like we care. The meek shall inherit the Earth, indeed.
Classical liberals are mind-blind idiots. Stop voting dem. Stop doing that right now. That the penultimate progressive and self-proclaimed libertine Bill Maher thinks the modern DNC is full of s*** should tell you everything you know. I lived through the Cold War. There is no better evidence that our younger voter (-35) do not understand a great deal could not be more obvious. Stop. Voting. For. Democrats.
Most likely the result of the cost-benefit ratio.
Peterk says:
“I find it interesting that The Hill has removed commenting from their website. Their reasoning is very weak.”
Thehill does not wish to be associated and embarrassed by the kind of Trumpists that infest Turley’s blog. Why do you think Turley does not post comments here? He does not wish to get covered with mud by participating in our discussions. By staying away, he can pretend he is unaware of this slop.
Jeff: you mean the slop you dish out regularly? I wouldn’t guess Turley would find many of your comments to be those that would make him reconsider his positions, much like I do not.
My positions and Turley’s coincide since we are both NeverTrumpers.
Your positions coincide ?
Not a chance.
Even when I disagree – Turley atleast knows what he is talking about and can make an argument.
I do not think I have ever seen you make an argument.
If arguments from you exist – they are rare.
You are the anti-Christ
Since your on a religious rant.
Even a fool is thought wise if he keeps silent, and discerning if he holds his tongue.
Proverbs 17:28.
Better to keep your mouth shut and appear stupid than to open it and remove all doubt.
Mark Twain
Jeff might make Turley reconsider his positions – Jeff provides an example not to follow.
He called Turley a “never Trumper”
Never Trumpers are republicans – Turley is not a republican.
If Jeff is – the GOP should give him back to democrats.
Biden certainly does lack decency — he actually never had it. The guy is a puppet, and we don’t even know for sure who’s pulling his strings. In 2020 the Democrats gave us mobs of BLM and Antifa thugs. In 2022, they’re giving us hysterical feminists who don’t know enough about this issue to realize that reverting abortion decisions to the states isn’t “denying women’s rights” — it’s abiding by the democratic process. But the Democrats have proven that they’re afraid of the democratic process, so they go straight for bullying, violence and mob rule. At some turning point, the rest of the country is going to reciprocate.
Giocon blusters:
“At some turning point, the rest of the country is going to reciprocate.”
Bring it, buster.
Two thoughts:
1. It should not be that hard to prove intent under 1507 — there have been numerous public statements that one purpose of the demonstrators is to change votes, and social media/text/emails would no doubt surface many more. This biased DOJ will do nothing, however.
2. Turley was good right up to the end. He came to an incorrect conclusion though. Biden’s entire public career shows that he lacks not only courage but also, and especially, decency.
For almost 50 years, Joe Biden satisfied the large corporations in tiny Delaware. They liked him. He was crooked and intelligent enough to do their bidding and help get the job done. He wasn’t smart enough to exact a price on the corporations too high. Why would they permit anyone to replace him?
S. Meyer,
“ For almost 50 years, Joe Biden satisfied the large corporations in tiny Delaware.“
Do you realize how bad that phrasing sounds? Read it to yourself out loud and ask yourself if that sounds right?
Satisfied what?
“ He was crooked and intelligent enough to do their bidding and help get the job done.“
What did these companies do? What were their demands of evil Joe? Lower taxes?
“ He wasn’t smart enough to exact a price on the corporations too high. ”
What the hell does this even mean? Are you having an aneurysm? Jesus S. Meyer.
1) Do you think your style of writing is better? If so, you demonstrate ignorance as well as arrogance.
2) “What did these companies do? What were their demands of evil Joe? Lower taxes? ”
Since you don’t know, you are proving the ignorance discussed in #1
3) You have shown arrogance and ignorance in #1 and #2. Now you demonstrate your naivety.
S. Meyer, nobody knows what the heck you are talking about. What you wrote is not a style of writing. It’s a grammatical pile of nonsense.
Explain this statement you made,
“ He wasn’t smart enough to exact a price on the corporations too high.”
What is “the corporations too high.” What is that? Read it out loud and ask yourself if that makes sense.
“S. Meyer, nobody knows what the heck you are talking about”
You don’t know. You claim you are not stupid and I claim you are. I rest my case.
Nobody knows. That mangled cluster of grammatical nonsense you posted is a clear indication of your stupidity. The fact that you couldn’t even explain it speaks volumes about that epic failure.
Daniel, decency? Why? Because he is not condemning an irrelevant act instead he condemned the draft’s reasoning?
Nobody is required to condemn something they don’t see as worthy of condemnation. Trump did this all the time and Turley was silent on the lack of condemnation from Trump. Remember the White supremacists protesting in North Carolina during the early days of his term? Trump refused to condemn white supremacists. He had to be harangued into condemning the easiest thing to condemn. Turley wasn’t demanding trump condemn the group’s views. But suddenly he is demanding Biden condemn a leak?
Turley is complaining that Biden is not joining the rage of the conservatives who are raging about the leak while complaining about the “age of rage”. Turley must be suffering from cognitive dissonance.
“…..Turley must be suffering from cognitive dissonance”
FJB
Biden has no decency:
1. He has plagiarised.
2. He lies repeatedly.
3. He pilloried Bork and Thomas.
4. He divides at every opportunity for political gain, particularly on racial issues.
5. He unconstitutionally ordered the vaccination of tens of millions against their will.
6. He leveraged his political offices to enrich himself and his family.
In my view he is a shape-shifting corrupt mediocre machine politician who believes with little evidence that he has intelligence and talent. The propaganda about his supposed decency is absurd.
Daniel, You’re describing Trump to a “T”.
Sorry, but no. Not even on the same playing field. Trump is superior to Biden on every level of evaluation. Biden is and has always been a lowlife sleezy politician. Nothing to write home about. Not now. Not ever. He is awful in every way.
Turley has never eviscerated Biden by calling him a “carnival snake charmer” as he has Trump. Face it.
Daniel, the courts disagree with you that Biden “unconstitutionally ordered the vaccination of tens of millions.” For example: https://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/22/22-40043-CV1.pdf If you’re referring instead to federal contractors, those cases are pending.
As for the rest, some of it is a matter of opinion (e.g., “He divides at every opportunity for political gain”), and some things (e.g., “He leveraged his political offices to enrich himself and his family”) are pretty common among politicians. Biden, like everyone, is a flawed person. He is decent at times and not at other times.
You are lying and being deceptive. You produced a link that only dealt with a small portion of those Biden tried to force vaccinations. That was your proof. That is what you do. You provide deceptive links. Your lying never ceases.
“ 1. It should not be that hard to prove intent under 1507 — there have been numerous public statements that one purpose of the demonstrators is to change votes, and social media/text/emails would no doubt surface many more.”
Were those statements made at the protests occurring at their homes? One can argue such public statements are still protected speech. Statements alone are not enough to prove intent. There has to be action behind those statements such as physically blocking a Justice’s driveway to prevent them from going to work or physical intimidation. Mere statements are not enough evidence of intent. The intent has to be quite specific and actionable. Just calling for demonstrators to demand change or air opposition to the justice’s opinion is not enough probable cause for arrest.
Daniel,
The public statements you reference are likely only admissible if they come from the people demonstrating near a justice’s house or in front of the Supreme Court building (not other demonstrators elsewhere, not people interviewed on behalf of an organization, …), and even then, you’d have to look at the specifics of what was said, to distinguish someone having a general desire that the justices change their minds from someone having an express goal of “interfering with, obstructing, or impeding the administration of justice, or … influencing any judge … in the discharge of his duty.”
Can you quote some examples you’ve seen?
I find Biden to be much more decent a person than Trump is. But these judgments are matters of opinion.
“Can you quote some examples you’ve seen?”
Alito had to be moved and likely that call was made by his protective detail and the Court’s marshal service. That is more than enough proof for now.
Daniel says:
“Turley was good right up to the end. He came to an incorrect conclusion though. Biden’s entire public career shows that he lacks not only courage but also, and especially, decency.”
Unlike you, Turley is a NeverTrumper. You’ll never understand his thinking or share his values.
Professor Turley,
I thank GOD, literally, for fair-minded truthful legal scholars like you.
Keep fighting the good fight, even though you must feel betrayed by so many fellow “intellectual legal scholars”.
It’s lonely at the top, but stay up there,…….and stay healthy!
It appears that the SCOTUS right wing is about to issue a pugnacious, in your face, “bring it on” opinion. Did they really expect an effete response? I would say that the draft opinion itself is part of the “age of rage” and was intended to further inflame the culture wars. And what makes you think that Biden “lacks the courage” to say anything? He likely thinks that the protesters have every right to protest an outrageous assault on their Constitutional rights.
It appears you like kleptocracies just like Brandon.
I am sorry you seem somewhat surprised by the Biden White House Actions or lack of action. Watching this man as a senator for 30 plus years gave me no feeling that he would ever moderate the discourse in this country or be a principled defender of anything. I read him as having no principles, not excessively smart, more like a good con man who tried to build a semblance of a friendly face where underneath he was anything but that. There have been many democratic senators with principles as well as republican ones. Uncle Joe was never one of them, from my point of view.
And you assume no connection between the leaker and people in the Biden White House or DoJ, why?
Loud noise executed by some very savvy political activists. Paid protesters, well organized with stipends available… The fact is few of us will ever deal with abortion but we do buy stuff, gas, groceries for example. Single interests prevail only in slow political times. Good try but term no way… early yes and raise your kid so the criminal system doesn’t have to. Now back to inflation LOL
Courage? Democrats are Fascists…that has been clear since Obama’s first day in office
There is no one more Greedy, Hate Filled, lying, cheating, hypocrite than a Democrat…Every Democrat!
The quote from Welch is a perfect way to address the Biden, his administration, and the radical left.
Never forget – McCarthy was right!!!!
He appears to be following the lead of French revolutionary Abbe Sieyes, who watched as his 1789-99 revolution spun out of control; asked what he had done during “the Terror,” he replied: “I survived.”
Turley links to the following book which I just ordered. Should be eye opening.
The Coming of the Terror in the French Revolution, Timothy Tackett
https://www.amazon.com/Coming-Terror-French-Revolution/dp/0674979893
Paul, if I remember correctly, not only was McCarthy right, but Welch’s answer that we remember didn’t reflect the discussion. For hours Welch kept asking Roy Cohn and McCarthy to name the communists, which they refused. Welch also used Roy Cohn’s homosexuality against the lawyer. After refusing to provide any communist names, McCarthy finally said he would name one. That was a partner in Welch’s firm who Welch was pushing for a position in the US government and who had had communist affiliations.
Yea sow shall you reap, Mr President
Lefties are full of rage.
And that rage distorts their view of the world.
Just look at the lefties who post on this blog as a microcosm of the country.
Whether it is Natacha and her endless screeds of rage, Silberman with his presumption to tell Turley what to write, or Anonymous who spends his entire day writing repetitive “thoughts”, lefties’ rage drives them to socially stupid actions.
But like dog poop on the sidewalk, they are a fact of life and something that normal people just have to adapt to.
*** I DID IT ***
It was ME!
It was I whom leaked the Supreme Opinion
It was I whom instigated the Steele Dossier
It was I whom started the War
It was I whom orchestrated the Insurrection
It was I whom made your Lives small & miserable
yes Yes YES! it was -I-
Pleased to meet You! Hope you guess my Name …
Please allow me to introduce myself
I’m a man of wealth and taste
I’ve been around for a long, long years
Stole million man’s soul an faith
And I was ’round when Jesus Christ
Had his moment of doubt and pain
Made damn sure that Pilate
Washed his hands and sealed his fate
Pleased to meet you
Hope you guess my name
But what’s puzzling you
Is the nature of my game
Stuck around St. Petersburg
When I saw it was a time for a change
Killed Tsar and his ministers
Anastasia screamed in vain
I rode a tank
Held a general’s rank
When the blitzkrieg raged
And the bodies stank
Pleased to meet you
Hope you guess my name, oh yeah
Ah, what’s puzzling you
Is the nature of my game, oh yeah
I watched with glee
While your kings and queens
Fought for ten decades
For the gods they made
I shouted out
Who killed the Kennedys?
When after all
It was you and me
Let me please introduce myself
I’m a man of wealth and taste
And I laid traps for troubadours
Who get killed before they reached Bombay
Pleased to meet you
Hope you guessed my name, oh yeah
But what’s puzzling you
Is the nature of my game, oh yeah, get down, baby
Pleased to meet you
Hope you guessed my name, oh yeah
But what’s confusing you
Is just the nature of my game
Just as every cop is a criminal
And all the sinners saints
As heads is tails
Just call me Lucifer
‘Cause I’m in need of some restraint
So if you meet me
Have some courtesy
Have some sympathy, and some taste
Use all your well-learned politnesse
Or I’ll lay your soul to waste, mm yeah
Pleased to meet you
Hope you guessed my name, mm yeah
But what’s puzzling you
Is the nature of my game, mm mean it, get down
Woo, who
Oh yeah, get on down
Oh yeah
Aah yeah
Tell me baby, what’s my name?
Tell me honey, can ya guess my name?
Tell me baby, what’s my name?
I tell you one time, you’re to blame
What’s my name
Tell me, baby, what’s my name?
Tell me, sweetie, what’s my name?