We have been discussing a slew of books and interviews by academics denouncing the Constitution or individual rights as a threat to democracy. The latest is Brown University Political Science Professor Corey Brettschneider who is warning about the “dangers of the Constitution.”
Moreover, he is correct that abusive presidents have avoided impeachment and the Court has historically failed to protect individual rights. We both criticize those failures, particularly by the Court. Ultimately, however, the Court did embrace more robust views of individual rights and has repeatedly blocked the overreach of presidents.
Brettschneider describes what he calls “constitutional constituencies” in their struggle against such abuses.
“These constitutional constituencies, the citizens readers of the Constitution who played a critical role in defending and furthering our democracy, therefore disrupt a standard story told by constitutional law scholars and political scientists – experts who declare that checks on the president come mainly from Congress or the Supreme Court, or locate the foundation of our democracy with the writers of the Constitution in 1787.”
He adds “If history is any guide, today’s crisis makes this a time ripe for constitutional recovery. In that sense, this book offers hope for current citizens seeking to restore democracy.”
While the book is about historical abuses by presidents and the struggle against them, the book’s pitch pushes all of the anxiety buttons: “Imagine an American president who imprisoned critics, promoted white supremacy, and sought to undermine the law to commit crimes without consequence.” (The book addresses five prior presidents and the pitch does not make direct reference to Trump).
I have no objection to those who speak out against Trump or his conduct. That is part of a worthy national debate in this election year. However, more professors and pundits are suggesting that it is not just Trump but our Constitution that is threatening our democracy. While others have called the Constitution “trash” in their books, Brettschneider is a bit more circumspect in his interview and reportedly calls the Constitution a “dangerous document.”
The remarks of Professor Brettschneider is part of a growing library of books and interviews attacking the Constitution. As discussed earlier, law professors have led this effort. For example, in a New York Times column, “The Constitution Is Broken and Should Not Be Reclaimed,” law professors Ryan D. Doerfler of Harvard and Samuel Moyn of Yale called for the Constitution to be “radically altered” to “reclaim America from constitutionalism.”
Other professors have called for amending the First Amendment and have attacked free speech as a danger.
The United States Constitution is the oldest and most successful Constitution in history. It has survived crises that have destroyed other nations. Yet, we are a people who have not experienced true tyranny. We can lose our appreciation for how fortunate we are to have this system and the stability that it has afforded this country.
In challenging constitutional values like the system of checks and balances, these academics are seeking to strip away the very elements that have forced compromise and moderation throughout our history. It is the very genius of James Madison that allowed the most pluralistic nation on Earth to govern as one.
The post-constitutional world that some professors describe is no doubt attractive to many. It promises more immediate gains from raw political power. However, it would endanger all rights by reducing the guardrails that have served us so well for centuries.
Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University. He is the author of “The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Rage” (Simon & Schuster).
Am I the only one noticing that university professors are increasingly soulless and stupid?
It looks like the battle for the Senate is over.
The R’s hold 46 seats, with Cruz, Hawley and Justice certain to win.
Scott is up 4 in Florida, and Sheehy is up 5 on Tester, who’s playbook is cooked with Trump on the ballot.
The filibuster will remain, and the Marxists will be kept at bay a while longer.
Casey and McCormick are in a dead heat in PA.
Larry Hogan is in a dead heat in MD.
About 1/3 of democrat incumbents are wnning by less than the margin of error.
while JT, and so many of the posters here, complain of left leaning universities shutting down free speech, here is DJT saying ABC should lose their license because they dared to fact check him.
Really, JT is worried about universities while the one term president and convicted felon says he wants to shut down a news organization because they called out his lies.
I am waiting for JTs piece on how corrupt DJT is.
Waiting..
Still waiting.
Yep, I’m waiting.
It might be a while, stand by, JT is working on it.
right?
JT?
JT?
I’m sure he.ll write about this one of these days.
Or maybe not.
“shut down a news organization”
Bwahahahahahahahahaha….news organization.
Bwahahahahahahahahahaha
Yeah, I want to see all those banking records indicating fraudulent transactions and activities. I want to see where Ivanka’s influence peddling is exposed and where the &50M of laundered money went! Those damn lifer bureaucrat Trumps!
You better call me, we need to talk about that condom breaking incident. I have some interesting test results.
Corrupt is taking milions for foreign oligarchs to use public power to alter US policy in their favor.
It is NOT corrupt to reduce the extent to which you infringe on the rights of others.
DJT has said many things. Even Christ judges people by their DEEDS, not their words or their alleged motives.
What has Trump DONE that is corrupt ?
I would note that not only ests the sincerity of what he has said, but also the accuracy of your claims about what Trump has said.
The fact that Trump has not DONE what you claim he has said, undermines your claim that he said what you claim.
Everything can be improved, and must be to withstand the unpredictable challenges that come along.
Of course the Constitution could be improved. Every decade there are ever more questions that it does not address.
Here’s where it is currently fallen behind the curve:
1. Borderless products, systems and architectures (like the Internet). How does the United States fight
internet cybercrime waged from abroad? Are those who field borderless systems that circumvent the reach of domestic law enforcement violating the Constitution?
2. Multi-national businesses. What fealty (loyalty) to the United States is owed by corporations that were chartered first here in the U.S. but now operate on a global scale, and have multi-national ownership/leadership?
3. What are the checks and balances on abdication of Congressional responsibility? How can the Constitution insure due diligence with the responsibilities laid out in 1787? How can a dysfunctional Congress that cannot even meet its statutory deadlines (budgets and authorizations) be disciplined back into shape?
4. What are the limits on the power of political parties where they infringe on the governing blueprint in Articles I && II?
For example, erecting obstacles to candidacy for office not mentioned in the Constitution? For example, partisan capture of a Constitutionally defined leadership Office, such as Speaker of the House, President, V.P./Presiding Officer of the Senate? If these Offices are captured by one party, doesn’t that weaken overall productivity of the body they lead?
Does the Constitution mean specify these 3 High Offices are non-partisan Leadership Positions?
5. Indebtedness. Is the racking up of unsustainable debt a violation of the “secure the blessings of liberty for ourselves and our posterity” clause in the Preamble?
It would be stupid to try to throw out the Constitution. But it’s equally dumb to think it is fully up-to-date as a governing blueprint. If it were, we’d be governing much better at this point.
MORE TORT!!
“How does the United States fight:”
1) “internet cybercrime waged from abroad?”
What change in the Constitution would succeed without denying Americans their free speech?
When a nation is as powerful as ours, it can write its own ticket and solve problems that would require a constitutional amendment.
Biden could have finished Trump’s fabulous work and finished closing the border. Instead, he and the Democrats made sure it was wide open for criminals, slavery, prostitution, child slavery, drugs and a lot of death.
2) “Multi-national businesses. What fealty (loyalty) to the United States is owed by corporations that were chartered first here in the U.S. but now operate on a global scale, and have multi-national ownership/leadership?”
One can do many things without a Constitutional Amendment, but Democrats are causing many of these problems and preventing them from being solved.
When Biden deals for personal profit with foreign nations it prevents good things from happening. When his colleagues obstruct stopping him, one should realize that Democrats are the problem.
Maybe we should not permit imports of products produced by slave labor.
3) “What are the checks and balances on abdication of Congressional responsibility?”
The most significant way is to not vote for them. Democrats vote for power, while a bunch of us on the blog vote for good government.
4) “For example, erecting obstacles to candidacy for office not mentioned in the Constitution?”
That is mostly a Democratic problem. Kamala didn’t get a single vote and was nominated, but Democrats are keeping RFK off the ballot.
Of course, Trump is being attacked for his remarks on voting (see the dumb comments of the imbecile George Svelaz promoting American stupidity) because
Trump recognizes things need to be done, possibly on a federal level, to ensure that cheating doesn’t occur by Democrats.
5) “Indebtedness.”
Pass a balanced budget bill.
You can presently correct the abuses you mention by voting for Trump.
“1. Borderless products, systems and architectures (like the Internet). How does the United States fight
internet cybercrime waged from abroad? Are those who field borderless systems that circumvent the reach of domestic law enforcement violating the Constitution?”
Government is the problem not the fix. Cyrptro currencies do not have this problem. The government has confiscated crypto currencies from crimnals.
Yet, having confiscated them – even the governemnt can not spend them. Why would someone steal information regarding cyrpto transactions if they were unable to turn that into personal profit.
W@hile I would love to see Bitcoin replace the Dollar – that is NOT my point, The point is that the technology already exists and is in use to secure all our financial transactions whether local or foreign and whether over the internet or however they are done.
Most peopel do not understand how massive the improvement that crypto currencies bring.
They are capable of replacing credit and debit cards entirely cleariong payments worldwide in seconds rather than days – that would free up over 3 T in credit that is tied up securing transactions DAILY – that is $3T olf additional wealth that could be used to fund new businesses and other growth producing uses. One of the reasons that we are not seeing that is because the people who own that $3T make money securing credit and debit card transactions.
While they would also make money investing in other ways no one voluntrarily moves from a high profit low risk investment that they are happy with to something new.
That is ONE of the myriads of brenefits off crypto currencies. Another is that they entirely replace our western world system of titles and deeds and other official documentation andf proof of ownership. When you buy or seel something with crypto you create a record that is unforgeable of that transaction that you can use to provide proof of ownership. This is a HUGE problem for the developing world. One of the reasons that the West has done much better than the rest of the world is that we have a robust system of records of ownership of major asserts.
If you want to start a new business you can borrow against the value of your home – you can not do that in egypt because almost no one in egypt can prove they own the buildings they occupy. And no bank will loan yhou money secured by an asset that they can not sell if you default.
The blockchain records EVERYTHING
The Next big deal is that all the various forms of cyber crime and credit card fraud are impossible with crypto. You can not do man in the middle attacks.
You can not intercept and steal information from crypto transactions. Even if you actually manage to steal someones cyrpto currency you can not spend it – because you are not the owner.
While again I would like to see Bitcoin replace the dollar – none of the above is specifically about bitcoin.
We already have an end to end digitial currency system – you use debit cards and credit cards and bank transfers. Cash is used very rarely anymore, checks are used very rarely any more.
The difference between Cryptocurrencies and the existing digital system is that crypto was designed from the ground up to solve all the problems of existing digital financial systems. Bitcoin is MORE than digital money – it is an enitre secure digitial financial system.
For the past decade we have had a political mess with crypto – whjile YOU might not understand this – even Jamie Diamond of JP Morgan ultimately came to understand the Crytpto in some form is the future – it solves incredible numbers of financial problems we have today.
At the same time Governments and central banks HATE crypto because it takes massive amounts of fiscal control from them.
Especially the Western Central Banks and ESPECIALLY the US federal reserve and by extension the US federal govenrment.
All existing cyrpto currencies use the same fundimental underlying technology as Bitcoin – the blockchain – which is the heart of all the benefits I described above.
Thus far no government or bank or financial institution has been able to devise a replacement for existing Crypto currencies that provides all the benefits above – as well as others I did not mention. While still allowing govenrments and central banks all the advantages they get from controlling money.
It is probably not possible to do most of the beneficial things that CryptoCurencies do while leaving central banks and governments the power over money that they want.
The result is that we have a massively inefficient, highly insecure digital currency system that encoiurages cybercrime, when a much better alternative exists – because Govenrments are unwilling to give up power over money.
Wait, I thought Foreign governments loved trump, Why are the Germans making fun of him?
“Like it or not: Germany’s energy system is fully operational, with more than 50% renewables. And we are shutting down – not building – coal & nuclear plants. Coal will be off the grid by 2038 at the latest,” Germany’s foreign office tweeted. “PS: We also don’t eat cats and dogs.”
“And we are shutting down – not building – coal & nuclear plants.”
That’s an obvious lie.
Germany has resurrected and extended some 20 coal-fired power plants. Why? Because so-called renewables caused Germans to freeze to death.
And it is building new gas-fired power plants. Why? because so-called renewables are a sham.
Wait,, I thought Foreign governments loved trump?
“Like it or not: Germany’s energy system is fully operational, with more than 50% renewables. And we are shutting down – not building – coal & nuclear plants. Coal will be off the grid by 2038 at the latest,” Germany’s foreign office tweeted. “PS: We also don’t eat cats and dogs.”
What “office” is “Germany’s foreign office” that ostensibly tweeted this? Please provide a link.
HEADLINE:
“TRUMP WINS BIGLY!”
“TRUMP’S VICTORY IS HUUGE!”
Thanks, Abe.
* 9/11 today.
How will you pick up the pieces?
1. Free speech removed. In its place a sickening array of forced shut and worse.
2. Capitalism removed. Work by the sweat of your brow and share it with the world. Leave yourselves the leftovers.
3. Freedom of press. Hefner and Flynt are unhappy.
4. Women WILL bring forth children in travail.
5. Your institutions shall be as pearls thrown to the swine.
6. And so much more..
I suppose the two professors are trying to keep their jobs until retirement.
M
* The despots of the world wanted their freedom from the USA and in concert sought its destruction.
Were there questions about Israel last night?
Be in the world but not of the world.
“Kamala is a —– — —-.”
– Judge Joe Brown
Yawn.
I love this comment about trumps “performance” last night.
“Yet he couldn’t help but prove the charge. As practiced a liar as Trump is, he can’t hide who he is and how much worse he’s getting. He spent the debate vomiting out all the weirdest right-wing conspiracy theories as though he was a scowling human embodiment of an illiterate MAGA meme.”
I love this comment about Kamala’s “peformance” last night.
“Yet she couldn’t help but prove that she is a lying, fake, pretender. She spent the debate vomiting out all of the weirdest left wing tropes about Trump as though she was the embodiment of a butt hurt Libs of Tik Tok episode.”
Do we feel better now?
“There’s no question I’m in favor of banning fracking.”
– Kamala Harris, September 4, 2019
https://x.com/i/status/1169384141923606528
Oh, and I’ve never had a baby, I’ve never had a job, I’ve never created a human being, and I’ve never created wealth.
Oh, and I don’t need a teleprompter anymore.
I receive my instructions from the Deep Deep State, “Swamp,” Regime, Blob directly in my earpieces.
What I want to know is, how is it that when Kamala’s opening statement last nite was to warn viewers that Trump tells a lot of lies; then she proceeds to tell several lies, answers no questions with a responsive answer to the question, makes faces, wide-mouth laughter, smirks, rolls her eyes, and interrupts Trump, but MEDIA within minutes of the end of the debate, talk about Trump’s failure and declare her the winner?!@#$%^&
What a set-up.
Martha Raddatz, et al was trashing Trump even before the debate started (on the pre-debate ABC network)
That is because trump lies all the time. The guy has no bearing of truth or falshoods. He just blathers.
LMAO how ironic that this^^^^is posted right above this VVVV
Actually, Trump’s “blathering,” with “no bearing of truth or falshoods” is much less harmful and disgraceful than the cold, calculated, and prepared lies that Kamala and the media told, don’t you agree?
Dennis McIntyre LIE OF THE DAY
Jonathan
It would seem that Dennis McInliar received his DNC talking point email early today. Typically we concentrate on only ONE of Denny’s lies in his senseless screeds, but today’s was so chock-a-block full of them, we simply must mention a few.
Lets start with one that demonstrates his ignorance, and proves he gets his “news” from Tik Tok.
It [the photo] was a jab at JD Vance by showing she is also an “unmarried cat lady”!
The term Vance used was “childless cat lady”. And Swift wasn’t being “clever” as Demented Dennis claims she was. Her post was literally SIGNED “Childless Cat Lady”.
You see, as usual, lazy Dennis didn’t bother to read the post himself, he just took the word of his favorite Tik Tok reporter.
She supports a woman’s reproductive rights and would sign legislation to overturn the Dobbs decision.
Here, Dennis demonstrates his ignorance of the law. There can be no legislation “overturning the Hobbs decision”, which ruled that there was no Constitutional “right to privacy” in the 14th amendment. No “legislation” can change that.
<The day Dennis is a lawyer, is the day I'm a goddam astronaut—Lt Dan
Denny WANTS abortion to be an issue in federal elections. It’s not, except to low IQ sycophants.
How much of the wall did DJT complete? About 15 miles!
Jonathan, do you know what is the primary symptom of a pathological liar? Someone who will lie about even inconsequential things. Here, our draft dodging friend shows he is a pathological LIAR. Trump completed 453 miles of border wall, much of it replacing ineffective barriers in the areas it was most needed, and of which 77 miles was brand new wall. His efforts were of course thwarted by powers who benefit from a lawless border.
Everyone with half a brain knows that an effective “wall” includes a combination of physical barrier, natural barrier, technology, and manpower, to stop illegal crossings. But most of all, it requires the WILL to stop it. Harris and Biden PROMOTED illegal entry, they did not attempt to STOP it.
Dennis McIncrier is perfectly welcome to enjoy his circle jerk watch party with the childless cat ladies in his neighborhood, but we won’t allow him to lie with impunity here. We will continue to point out the falsehoods in his keyboard diarrhea.
Quite mysoginistic and patrimaniacal of Dennis to conflate “unmarried” with “childless”.
In the Dobbs decision, SCOTUS turned over abortion policy legislatures and the people they represent. The decision did NOT rule out Congress being one such legislature. The idea that it did comes from biased commentators, i.e. wishful thinking.
Were Congress to pass national abortion law (defining rights and responsibilities), there is no way SCOTUS can then invalidate the law because the Constitution is tacit on the subject. To do so would mean tearing up Article I, the ability of the People to legislate via Representatives in Congress. In fact, since the Constitution is silent on the issue, SCOTUS is obliged to defer to Congress.
Pbinca, why would you want to go in the direction of less democracy? Why do you want people to be more polarized? You want to create a national abortion law. No such law will pass today, but in the future, it might, with the only question being, would it limit abortion or would it abolish abortion? Why do you want to run the risk of a national abortion ban? Do you not learn from prior experience?
Seth Meyer,
pbinca doesn’t appear to know what she/he is talking about. SCOTUS rules some congressional laws as unconstitutional all the time–even though the Constitution is “tacit” on the specific topic. Capital punishment for minors a good example-is that in the Constitution?
binca says, “Were Congress to pass national abortion law (defining rights and responsibilities), there is no way SCOTUS can then invalidate the law because the Constitution is tacit on the subject.”
s. meyer says, “No such law will pass today, but in the future, it might, with the only question being, would it limit abortion or would it abolish abortion?”
Your statement is more correct than binca’s. The Constitution DOES cover this under the Fifth Amendment’s “life, liberty, and property” clause, among others. If, as medical technology and commensurate ethics rulings develop, there is a more clear understanding of when a fetus can think, suffer pain, emote, etc., -and the appropriate case is brought before it,-SCOTUS may rule on the limits or parameters of the right to an elective abortion.
* perhaps the president would defer to SCOTUS in agreement that abortion is not a federal issue. There’s some doubt it’s even a State’s issue. With mifepristone on board now it’s 80% non issue.
Do you know, pbinca, the number of abortions per year due to rape, incest or the life of the mother, fetal death in the womb pre- term? You probably have that number at your fingertips…
oh but it is a federal issue when the govt pays for abortions.
* no one on Medicare requires an abortion.
Rape is now a probability and no longer merely a possibility in this world. Females must now think in terms of when and not if. Many are opting for sterilization. Females might have a mifepristone regime in their emergency medicine kits just in case the probability occurs.
There are zero stats regarding males in the abortion data.
Peace
?
who’s talking about Medicare. The subject was government paying for abortions. Look it up.
“In fact, since the Constitution is silent on the issue, SCOTUS is obliged to defer to Congress.”
You are obviously a fvcking idiot who has no idea what the 10th amendment says.
I never ceased to be amazed how supposedly intelligent and educated people are so ignorant of the Constitution and its origins (and purpose). It did not (and was never intended to) establish a “democracy.” Ergo, the USA was not (and is not) a democracy and the Constitution is not “destroying” it.
The Founders were fully aware of the inherent dangers of democracies (Athens being the classic example) and the tyranny of the majority. That is why only one half of one branch of the government was to be directly elected (and recall at that time that universal male suffrage was the rare exception, not the rule).
They expose their ignorance (and motives) by complaining that the Constitution is an impediment or obstacle. THAT’S THE WHOLE POINT!!! Its purpose was (and is) to: 1) establish the framework of the national government; 2) define its relationship to the States; and, 3) to LIMIT the authority and powers of the government. Woe be on the students that have wasted their tuition being “taught” by these morons.
What about the absolute and immutable rights and freedoms provided to individuals? What are those, chopped liver?
“No, I don’t think she’s abandoning her ideals, I think she’s trying to be pragmatic and doing what she thinks is right in order to win the election.”
– Bernie Sanders
@ 00:50
Those people have allowed their ideology (stateism) to override everything else. Their supposed love of democracy seeks only to perpetuate the status quo and the elitists that support the modern Democratic Party.
It is a general popular error to suppose the loudest complainers for the publick to be the most anxious for its welfare.
Edmund Burke – Observations on a Late Publication on the Present State of the Nation (1769)
How many lies did trump spew last night…
https://www.factcheck.org/2024/09/factchecking-the-harris-trump-debate/
How many times did Kamala provide a response?
You know that Bill Clinton invited Yasser Arafat the PLO terrorist to Camp David in 2000. Isn’t that the same as Trump inviting Abdullah in an effort for peace?
Deflection much?
EXCELLENT! Too bad Trump didn’t mention that, but at least he got enough time to call her out on her lie about IVFs. Absolutely disgusting media and moderators who let her spew her JOY and glad tidings but skirt direct answers to questions.
Good point, Traveler. One has to wonder why the leftists think it a bad thing to be polite to our enemies. It tells us that leftists don’t know how to handle international politics.
Trump gave Abdullah a picture of his home and no more American deaths.
At another time, Trump was having dessert with Xi at Mar a Lago when he was told our missiles were locked and loaded to hit targets in Syria. Trump wanted to make a point and he did. He ordered the strike, and when it was completed, he turned to China’s President and said, ‘Mr. President (Xi), let me explain something to you. We’ve just fired 59 missiles,’”
Reagan walked out on Gorbachev over the SDS.
Reagan did what everyone told him not to say: “Mr. Gorbachev, tear down that wall.
Trump and Reagan were strong Presidents, and that is why the Berlin wall was torn down in Germany under Reagan and the American Embassy was built in Jerusalem under Trump.
Wars were stopped under those Presidents, peace prevailed, and we moved forward, not backward.
What happens with weak Presidents? WAR. Obama and Biden were both weak in foreign affairs. Russia attacked Ukraine under Obama and again under Biden. Based on Obama’s discussion with Trump, we were in a near war when Obama left, but in a short time er, Korea settled down with Trump. China started to exert its military might under Obama and again under Biden, threatening Taiwan and pushing the Asian nations around. China calmed down under Trump. Under Trump, his 25-cent photo of Abdullah led to no American deaths, but Biden killed 13 American servicemen, caused havoc, didn’t force the Taliban to follow the agreement and then left Bagram airbase. The Middle East was becoming more peaceful with Trump, but under Biden, there is war.
These things are just some of the reasons people think intelligently. War can wipe us all out. A vote for Kamala can kill you, your kids and your grandchildren. The rhetoric we hear from Democrats is silly things like Trump supports Project 25. That is untrue. He provided his 20 promises loud and clear, many of which he provided before, in his first term, where he fulfilled most. No leftists know what Kamala’s/ platform is today because it changes too fast, but everyone should know that what she says she will do will not be done unless she is honest and provides her Marxist positions.
Thank you for another blistering truth to these leftist idiots. America may stumble but she will stand, it won’t be them.
We don’t want their love. We don’t want their respect. We want their fear.
S. Meyer: Trump is an international joke. Reagan was an actor–not really much of one (he was a barfly in “Dark Victory), but an actor. As it turns out, he had Alzheimer’s, even when he was in office, and Nancy ran interference for him and did everything possible to hide the symptoms. The “Mr. Gorbachev tear down tha wall” was an act, just like Trump’s lip biting and fist-pumping performances that hide his massive insecurites. I’d still like to know why he had to lean on a petite female Secret Service officer for a less than one inch scratch to his ear that required no sutures or anything other than antibiotic ointment. During a debate with Jimmy Carter, who made several points critical of Reagan, Reagan said “there he goes again”. Turns out, Carter was absolutely correct–all of his criticism of Reagan was the truth. Trump is also an actor, and a loser. There is absolutely no connection between Biden being on office and Putin’s decision to attack Ukraine, other than the fact that Putin was betting that Trump had so alienated our EU and NATO allies with his threats and insults that Biden couldn’t pull together an effective coallition of NATO and EU allies to help Ukraine fight off Russia. Putin really thought he’d be in Kiev in a week or two. He was wrong. Biden is respected internationally–Trump is a joke. Do you really think world leaders don’t see him for the fat fop narcissist he is–the pathological liar, racist, xenophobic misogynist who cheated his way into office and started an insurrection to try to stay in power and who, to this day, continues to lie about losing? Do you think that they don’t see that he is so emotionally insecure that he will do anything if you just flatter him and that his admiration of people like Orbahn and Putin are reflective of his emotional insecurities? Do you think it is lost on world leaders that Pence and over 40 former members of his administration want nothing to do with him, and that Bush didn’t show up to endorse him at the RNC? Neither Reagan or Trump was a “strong president”, least of all Trump. Respected historians say that he is the worst president in recent history. Talk is cheap.
Biden did not kill 13 American servicemen–if anyone’s bad judgment was reponsible for their deaths–it’s Trump, who FAILED to get people out BEFORE turning 5,000 Taliban loose, FAILED to arrange for an air or land base, who drew down our troops from 14,000 to 2,500 and ignored our Afghan allies in negotiations, who just gave up. The messy withdrawal is Trump’s fault–he’s no “master dealmaker”. Trump has nothing to do with the Middle East, and the BS “Abraham Accords” were nothing but formal trade agreements between Israel and Bahrain and UAE–Israel is not and was not in conflict with either of these.
Last night’s debate reinforced the fact that Trump will literally say anything to get what he wants. He flip flopped all over the place on abortion. He refused to say he would support Ukraine–because he’s already promised Putin he’d pull support, funding and equipment. He made up lies about Haitian immigrants eating dogs and cats, and lied about Kamala Harris paying people to attend her rallies. He can try to distance himself from Project 2025, because he’s found out how unpopular it is, but J.D. Vance wrote a foreword to the book and multiple members of his former administration are contributors. It plainly says it is a playbook for the next Republican President. Trump is a liar–so you can’t believe him when he says he won’t implement it.
You speak of Trump’s “promises” kept–you mean like “Mexico will pay to build the wall”? Or, how about “you’re going to get sick and tired of winning”? How about “COVID will go away when it warms up”‘or “it’s no worse than the flu”. Lie upon lie upon lie. Now, he’s threatening to jail journalists, critics, and even donors to Harris’s campaign. That’s what a dictator does. He can deny wanting to be a dictator all he wants, but he said “I am your retribution”.
Kamala Harris is strong, intelligent and respected. Trump is none of these things. Putin and Xi know they can’t push her around with flattery like they can Trump. According to multiple economists, his tariffs will put us in a recession, but Harris’s economic plan will bring long-term growth especially for the middle class.
Someone must’ve really hurt you. You are so filled with vengeance, hatred. You are one sick little cookie, girl.
“Trump is an international joke.”
Gigi, that can only come from the lips of a stupid person. Trump was respected as the President of the United States, the most powerful country in the world. That is why under Trump, Russia didn’t attack Ukraine, North Korea reduced its militant behavior, China stayed closer to home, and there was peace in the Middle East.
You think Obama and Biden are respected, but they are not. That is why Russia attacked Ukraine in both administrations, China increased the pressure on the countries in Asia, North Korea increased its missile launches into the Japan Sea, and we now have war in the Middle East that can become WW3, which, if it occurs, is a creation of Biden.
“Reagan was an actor–not really much of one”
Reagan appeared in B movies and wasn’t interested in promoting his career. The left, as they always do, called him a dumb actor and disparaged his intelligence, which is how they react to any threat to their rule. Later, when they found out how great he was, they all said they voted for him and always thought he was a great leader. They were as stupid then as you are today.
” The “Mr. Gorbachev tear down tha wall” was an act”
You can call it that which is preferable stupidity to the usual. Reagan announced what would be to the world on both sides, and the wall came down one to two years later. You don’t have your facts, and you do not know history. You are a zero, here to talk rubbish because you’re a leftist and don’t even know why.
“I’d still like to know why he had to lean on a petite female Secret Service officer for a less than one inch scratch to his ear”
Like Reagan, no one knew the extent of either of their injuries at the time they occurred. Reagan could have died. Trump was fortunate, but he bent down because he is very tall, and neither he nor the Secret Service wanted another bullet shot to his head. You are too stupid to realize how one protects themselves from gunfire. You probably would have run directly toward the bullets with your mouth wide open and all your extremities flailing in the wind.
“Carter was absolutely correct–all of his criticism of Reagan was the truth.”
Then you can tell us what Carter was right about. Carter failed on most things, though he appeared to be a nice guy. Presently he is at the end of his life, so I do not wish to dissect his political legacy.
I stopped reading here because you are ridiculous, and there is a limit to the crapola I wish to read in one sitting. I never thought so many braindead would occupy space on this type of legal blog, but they do. Keep trolling, though. You would be better off bowling. You could be one of the pins knocked down over and over.
Explain to me specifically what alleged deterrent effect Trump would have vis a vis Putin, Xi, Kim Chong Un or any other world leader. What could Trump do that Biden and Harris couldn’t do? This BS lie is part of the fake Trump image of a powerful person who is admired and respected—-just like his “self made boy wonder billionaire “ narrative. All lies. He has to borrow money to keep his businesses afloat, and he lies to get larger loans on better terms by misrepresenting the value of his assets. This is after 6 bankruptcies and when his father wasn’t around anymore to bail him out of one financial mess after another. In short, he’s no financial wizard and can’t even manage to turn a profit without being propped up financially. No reputable economist supports his stupid tariffs. Given a chance, he will kill our economy with higher inflation and the national debt at record levels. Other world leaders know this and that he is clueless. They don’t respect him.
No one is afraid of him. Do you really think that world leaders are unaware that Trump’s own military leaders say he’s a disgrace? Do you think they don’t know that he tried unsuccessfully to have his fans kill the VP when Pence couldn’t be bullied, and that he lacks the character to graciously accept the fact that 81 million Americans fired him? Trump and his supporters like you think he’s got some kind of sparkle magic that dazzles people—but you couldn’t be more wrong. Wide world leaders see a deeply flawed insecure person who is desperate to not be seen as a loser and who can’t stop lying.
“Explain to me specifically what alleged deterrent effect Trump”
Reagan and Trump did it. Biden failed. Despots, especially those in the Middle East, respond to strength, not weakness. You have to ask yourself why Trump was successful with North Korea, Russia, China and the Middle East. You can’t rely on the same BS and expect things to change.
The only question is whether or not you have the capacity to learn. A mule can learn, possibly better than you, but a mule doesn’t belong on this blog.
Trump is a billionaire. Do you get food stamps?
“No reputable [lawyer] supports [your] stupid [comments].
“Wide world [blog commenters] see a deeply flawed insecure person [gigi] who is desperate to not be seen as a loser and who can’t stop [pretending to be smart].
Gigi
Why did you lie on this blog about being an attorney and what percentage of abortionsare medical emergencies?
Trump is always right.
Trump always turns out to have been correct after scrutiny.
The illegal aliens stole and ate city pets, geese in the park, too; he may have incorrectly referred to “dogs and cats.”
Thank you.
You forgot to mention factcheck also listed Kamala’s lies. Why did you not mention that?
Except here is what passes for a “factcheck” in that worthless screed
And he said these migrants were “taking jobs” from “African Americans and Hispanics and also unions.” Employment and union membership data show no evidence of that, either.
WTF do they think THIS is??
The August jobs report reveals a sharp contrast in employment trends between U.S.-born and foreign-born workers. Native-born Americans lost over 1.3 million jobs over the last year, while foreign-born workers gained more than 1.2 million jobs.
You lazy pieces of shit want a “fact checker” to give you the “truth”. That turd don’t float here. Go to the source or continue to look like a spastic idiot.
Except here is what passes for a “factcheck” in that worthless screed
And he said these migrants were “taking jobs” from “African Americans and Hispanics and also unions.” Employment and union membership data show no evidence of that, either.
WTF do they think THIS is??
The August jobs report reveals a sharp contrast in employment trends between U.S.-born and foreign-born workers. Native-born Americans lost over 1.3 million jobs over the last year, while foreign-born workers gained more than 1.2 million jobs.
You lazy, low IQ sycophants want a “fact checker” to give you the “truth”. That turd don’t float here. Go to the source or continue to look like a spastic idiot.
Jonathan: Before getting to your column it’s important to point out the significance and reactions to Taylor Swifts’ endorsement of Kamala Harris.
In her long post Swift said, in part: “I’m voting for Kamala Harris because she fights for the rights and causes I believe need a warrior to champion them. I think she is a steady-handed, gifted leader and I believe we can accomplish so much more in this country if we are led by calm and not chaos”. Swift also said she never supported DJT despite his endorsing an AI-generated claim to the contrary.
So far DJT has not responded to Swift’s endorsement of Harris. But one person has. It’s Elon Musk. In a late night post last night Musk said: “Fine Taylor, you win…I will give you a child and guard your cats with my life”. Kind of misogynistic don’t you think?
Musk knows a lot about fathering children. He has fathered 12 known children. Maybe in his demented mind he thinks Taylor will take him up on his offer–despite the fact she is in a long term relationship with Travis Kelce. The Q is why has Elon fathered so many children? Musk has said that White people are not reproducing enough–compared to Blacks and other minorities. Maybe Musk thinks offering his services to Taylor will help increase the White gene pool!
In another twist Musk said: “Oh, my God, this has really become an Elon v. Taylor Swift election now”. Apparently thinks the election will come down to his followers who support DJT and those of Swift who will vote for Harris. We’ll find out in November if that could be the difference in the election.
I think musk is taking a playbook from trump
trump famously said he can grab em by the pussy
musk is gong the next step, he wants to put it in her pussy.
Yea baby!! Give it to her!!. You know she wants it!!
Maybe as much as Tara Reade wanted it.
What a great way to get women to vote for trump
“Swift said, in part: “I’m voting for Kamala Harris . . .”
Good for KH. She has the 12-14 age group locked up.
And the females who like to gripe publicly about their countless failed relationships.
Men in agreement wrote a Mission Statement founding the United States of America. Their mission was principled on the Laws of Nature and of God and enshrined to the benefits of the people. The Declaration of Independence was at the time and still is to this day a guidepost to for a Civil Society. These same Men endeavoring to complete their mission wrote a subsequent proclamation to be adopted by the parties all: and this is where I ask those who propose either amendment or abandonment of our founding documents, where their Mission Statement is and secondly where is their proclamation(s) to replace the structural basis of our government. They propose change as a broad concept but never arrive at a conclusive document, similar to what Congress has done for years about our budgeting process (continuing resolution), said in simple jargon NEVER EVER GET YOUR FEET WET for they may get wrinkled.
Fools a many reside in the confines of academia, media and leftists’ political societies. They go from here to there without purpose, proposing nonsense, getting lost in their conceit of intellect, all while vilifying existing structures of government and those brave souls who wrote our original Mission Statement and risked all for a stable future.
Nietzsche “Daybreak” #318:
“Beware of systematisers’ – Systematisers practice a kind of play-action: in as much as they want to fill out a system and round off its horizons, they have to try to present their weaker qualities in the same style as their stronger- they try to impersonate whole and uniformly strong natures.”
Ending: like Jerry McGuire show me your proposed amendment, not some gibberish from the recesses of you addled mind.
George W,
Great comment. All they know how to do is shrike and cry. They add no substance nor offer any kind of solution. Just rage and hate.
Upstate
Continuing with your thoughts:
Lost in the folds of the Democratic dogma is the coming anarchy which may ensue. We are now experiencing sectarian differences, unchecked social change, doubt of governance, lawlessness, riotous undergraduates and diametrically opposed views of what a civil society should look like. Their dogma is based on superior intellectual conceit, forsaking the laws of nature, moral behavior, and Gods laws in pursuit of a Heavenly Nirvana of State Control. They have fostered an Age of Rage which is on display daily nationally and locally for anyone with eyes wide open. Their conceit has surmounted logic and reason to be replaced by outlandish concepts of a benevolent government.
These ninnies must be removed for the sake of a peaceful and prosperous future for America.
God help us ALL!!!
“OF THE FIVE, THE ONE THE AMERICAN FOUNDERS MOST FREQUENTLY CONSULTED WAS VATTEL.”
“The Ideas that formed the Constitution, Part 20: Vattel and the Law of Nations”
The Law of Nations
Legal terms of art also appear in what constitutional lawyers call the “Define and Punish Clause” (Article I, Section 8, Clause 10). This provision gives Congress power to “define and punish Offenses … against the Law of Nations.”
The Founders’ Sources of International Law
During the 17th and 18th centuries, five great scholars forged international law into its modern shape. In 1783, the Confederation Congress empaneled a committee consisting of James Madison of Virginia, Thomas Mifflin of Pennsylvania, and Hugh Williamson of North Carolina—all of whom were to serve at the 1787 Constitutional Convention. This committee recommended that Congress purchase the works of all five international law scholars.
Emer de Vattel
Of the five, the one the American Founders most frequently consulted was Vattel. Like Grotius, Vattel was both a scholar and diplomat. His principal work, “Le Droit des Gens” (“The Law of Nations”), was published in French in 1758 and translated into English two years later. You can learn more about Vattel’s life at the Online Library of Liberty.
There were four reasons why Vattel was so congenial to the American Founders: First, he was the most recent of the five great authorities. Second, his book was comprehensive and readable. Third, he was a strong advocate for individual liberty. And fourth, he discussed issues that, while not always part of the “law of nations,” were very important to the Founders: the nature of confederations, the superiority of constitutions to legislatures, the need for one and only one person to supervise the executive branch, and so forth.
Vattel was referenced at the Constitutional Convention, primarily in a speech by Luther Martin of Maryland. He also showed up during the ratification debates. For example, at the Pennsylvania ratifying convention, James Wilson argued about Vattel with an Antifederalist delegate. In the South Carolina legislature, Charles Cotesworth Pinckney also debated Vattel with an Antifederalist. In New York, Gov. George Clinton relied on Vattel in a speech to his state’s ratifying convention.
– Rob Natelson, Independence Institute . org
__________________________________________________
NATURAL BORN CITIZEN
The Law of Nations or the Principles of Natural Law (1758)
BOOK 1, CHAPTER 19
§ 212. Citizens and natives.
The citizens are the members of the civil society; bound to this society by certain duties, and subject to its authority, they equally participate in its advantages. The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens. As the society cannot exist and perpetuate itself otherwise than by the children of the citizens, those children naturally follow the condition of their fathers, and succeed to all their rights. The society is supposed to desire this, in consequence of what it owes to its own preservation; and it is presumed, as matter of course, that each citizen, on entering into society, reserves to his children the right of becoming members of it. The country of the fathers is therefore that of the children; and these become true citizens merely by their tacit consent. We shall soon see whether, on their coming to the years of discretion, they may renounce their right, and what they owe to the society in which they were born. I say, that, in order to be of the country, it is necessary that a person be born of a father who is a citizen; for, if he is born there of a foreigner, it will be only the place of his birth, and not his country.
“where their Mission Statement is and secondly where is their proclamation(s) to replace the structural basis of our government. ”
They want us to grant them the power to do whatever they please, whenever they please (making it up as they go along) in faith that the result will improve upon our general welfare. Unfortunately, our public education system has created a gargantuan quantity of fools too lazy to investigate that premise, and gullible enough to believe it completely without investigating.
Ah, yes.
The Communist Manifesto and “dictatorship of the proletariat.”
“From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs.”
Ain’t that America?
No, that is the direct and mortal enemy of the American Thesis of Freedom and Self-Reliance, the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, actual Americans, and America.