Below is my column in The Hill newspaper on the range of options referenced by Vice President Joe Biden in the last debate that may be considered by his new “commission” for reforming the Supreme Court. It is worth looking at the parade of horribles proposed by academics for changing the Court to legislatively negate the majority of conservative justices after the addition of Amy Coney Barrett to the Court (as early as today). The concern is that this is little beyond enablement by commission as Democrats claim license to do lasting harm to one of the most important institutions in our constitutional system.
Here is the column:
Continue reading “Biden’s Parade of Horribles: A Review Of The “Alternatives” For The New Biden Commission On Changing The Supreme Court”
A former business partner to Hunter Biden, Tony Bobulinski, has made a bombshell statement that not only are the emails on the Biden laptop authentic but the reference to giving a cut to “the big guy” was indeed a reference to former Vice President Joe Biden. More emails are emerging that show Hunter Biden referring to his family as his asset in these dealings. Continue reading “Witness: Joe Biden Was “The Big Guy” [Updated]”
Below is my column in The Hill newspaper on the censorship of the Hunter Biden controversy by Facebook and Twitter. The response of the Biden campaign and figures like Rep. Adam Schiff has been to dismiss the story as the likely product of Russian intelligence. Notably however they do not address the underlying emails. As many of us have written, there is ample reason to suspect foreign intelligence and the FBI is reportedly investigating that possibility. However, that does not mean that the emails are not authentic. Hillary Clinton was hacked by Russia but the emails were still real. It is possible to investigate both those responsible for the laptop’s disclosure and what has been disclosed on the laptop. The censorship by these companies however has magnified concerns in the controversy, particularly with the disclosure of close connections between some company officials and the Biden campaign. Continue reading “The Rise of The Corporate Censors: How America Is Drifting Toward The Chinese Model Of Media”
Recently, we discussed how House Intelligence Committee Chair Adam Schiff stated publicly that the recently disclosed laptop information from Hunter Biden was clearly part of a Russian intelligence operation. Schiff said that “we know that this whole smear on Joe Biden comes from the Kremlin.” This morning, John Ratcliffe, Director of National Intelligence, stated categorically that Hunter Biden’s laptop was not part of a Russian disinformation campaign. What is most notable is that Ratcliffe has stated that Schiff and his Committee have not been given any intelligence to support Schiff’s conclusion. The incident has raised lingering criticism of Schiff who previously told the public that he had clear evidence of collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia after that allegation was rejected in repeated investigations, including Special Counsel Robert Mueller. Schiff never produced the incriminating evidence and later it was shown that the widely cited Steele dossier was based on a source who was considered to be a Russian agent. Continue reading “Schiff v. Ratcliffe: DNI Reports That Hunter Biden’s Laptop Is Not Believed To Be Part Of A Russian Disinformation Campaign”
Below is my column in the Wall Street Journal on nomination of Amy Coney Barrett. While the confirmation hearing often seemed weirdly disconnected to the nominee, there were important moments where the jurisprudential views of Judge Barrett were expressed with striking — and rare — clarity.
Here is the column: Continue reading “Barrett Unmodified: Moments of Clarity Emerge From The Confirmation of Judge Amy Coney Barrett”
Below is my earlier column on the Biden controversy and the notable omission of three responses that one would have expected in the days following the disclosure in the New York Post. As I have said repeatedly, the timing and manner in which this information came to the public is highly suspicious and could well be the work of foreign intelligence. Even Rudy Giuliani now puts the chances that he worked with a Russian agent at “50-50.” However, that would still leave the question of whether the underlying emails are authentic. The Clinton emails were hacked by the Russians but they were also true. These emails show clear influence peddling, if they are authentic. Instead of addressing the specific emails or even denying their authenticity, figures like Rep. Adam Schiff simply dismissed the story as a Russian hit job. For his part, Joe Biden dismissed reporters asking him about the emails as participating in a smear campaign. There are legitimate questions about how this information was produced (questions that the FBI is reportedly investigating). However, there are also legitimate questions about the content of some of these emails and what they say about an alleged influence peddling scheme related to a presidential candidate.
Here is the column: Continue reading “The Biden Scandal In Three Barks: Why The Most Telling Elements May Be What We Were Not Told”
We have been following the spending spree on Capitol Hill for years. Even before the pandemic, both the Trump Administration and Congress seemed to dispense with any notion of restraint on spending. The result is a towering debt that now exceeds our gross domestic product. The situation is worsening by the day as both the White House and the Congress seek massive new spending. The federal government spent a record $6,551,872,000,000 in fiscal 2020. That is a 45.4% increase from 2019 — an addition of $2,044,283,520,000 above the previous record of $4,507,588,480,000. The budget deficit has now tripled. Yet, there is no indication that the spending spree will end. Trillions of additional spending have been pledged by Democrats for programs ranging from free college to new environmental programs to bail outs for cities. The Trump Administration has pledged even greater tax cuts as the country struggles with a debt load that could be a burden for generations.
Continue reading “$6,551,872,000,000 . . . And Growing”
I will be continuing to blog on the hearing and occasionally tweak highlights. As noted earlier, I will step away for a speech at the Brookings Institution around 11 am. Continue reading “The Barrett Confirmation: Questions and Answers (Day 2)”
Below is my column in The Hill newspaper on Roe v. Wade and the doctrine of stare decisis (or the respect and preservation of precedent). One of the most notable moments in the hearing came when Judge Barrett suggested that Roe was not “super precedent.” Indeed, she noted that the concept of “super precedent” is the work of others in academic publications. However, on Roe, Judge Barrett had an interesting exchange with Sen. Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn. in which she identified Brown v. Board of Education as such super precedent. However, when pushed on Roe, she noted “I’m answering a lot of questions about Roe which I think indicates that Roe doesn’t fall into that category.”
This issue was addressed in the column: Continue reading “Barrett: There Is Nothing Super About The Precedent In Roe v. Wade”
I will be doing a running commentary today on the confirmation hearing of Judge Amy Coney Barrett for the Supreme Court of the United States. Continue reading “The Barrett Hearing — Questions and Answers”
Minority Leaders Chuck Schumer and various commentators have called for Amy Coney Barrett to recuse herself from any decision on the 2020 general election. There is no reason for such a recusal, which would be unprecedented in these circumstances. Moreover, it would establish a dangerous precedent of nominees securing their positions by promising results or positions if confirmed by the Senate. Continue reading “No, Barrett Should Not Recuse Herself From Any Election Challenge”
It seems as if people have gone virtually insane in this election year over remote testimony. We recently discussed the absurd excuse cited by former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe that he would not appear for testimony to answer questions about his alleged misconduct in the Russian investigation due to fears for his health. He then however refused to appear virtually despite the earlier remote testimony of his former superiors James Comey and Sally Yates. Now, Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D., Minn.), who once enthusiastically supported the use of “hybrid hearings,” has declared that remote testimony is entirely unacceptable because there is no ability to have exchanges with witnesses in a virtual space. The objection to the use of a hybrid hearing for Barrett is now part of a wider campaign, but it is based on a clearly false premise. While such bizarre statements would have once risked being called a lunatic or a Luddite, it has produced little media scrutiny or commentary.
Continue reading “Virtual Anxiety: Klobuchar Rejects Use Of Virtual Testimony For Barrett Hearing Because There Is “No Back and Forth””
Director of National Intelligence John Ratcliffe on Tuesday declassified notes of former CIA Director John Brennan showing that he briefed former President Obama on Hillary Clinton’s alleged “plan” to tie then-candidate Donald Trump to Russia as “a means of distracting the public from her use of a private email server.” My interest in this story is not simply the serious underlying allegation but the lack of coverage by major networks or media outlets. This was clearly released at this time for political purposes, but that does not make it a non-story. We have often discussed concerns over the active effort by many in the media to downplay stories that would either help President Donald Trump or hurt the Democrats in the upcoming elections. This would seem such a case. Whether this is true or a complete fabrication, it should be major news. In the meantime, the responses from Clinton allies have not addressed the substance of the document and have simply dismissed the entire story as groundless.
Continue reading ““A Means Of Distracting The Public”: Brennan Briefed Obama On Clinton “Plan” To Tie Trump To Russia”
Last night’s NBC’s town hall in Miami with former Vice President Joe Biden was panned, to quote Politico’s Marc Caputo, as another “Biden Informercial” that protected the candidate from both tough questions and skeptical voters. There was not a single question on Biden refusing to answer whether he supports packing the Supreme Court, a move supported by his running mate Kamala Harris and various top Democrats in this election. However, Biden did make one notable comment about the Court and nominee Amy Coney Barrett. He said that, if Barrett helped reverse Roe v. Wade, he would make “Roe the law of the land.” Continue reading “Biden Pledges To Make “Roe The Law Of The Land” If Overturned By The Supreme Court”