In the aftermath of the historic ruling in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, politicians and pundits have denounced the Supreme Court justices and the Court itself for holding opposing views on the interpretation of the Court. Speaker Nancy Pelosi called the justices “right-wing politicians” and many journalists called the Court “activists.” Most concerning were legal analysts who fueled misleading accounts of the opinion or the record of this Court. Notably, it is precisely what the Court anticipated in condemning those who would make arguments “designed to stoke unfounded fear.” Continue reading “The Dobbs Decision Unleashes Rage and Revisionism”
As we wait for the release of the most significant Second Amendment case in over a decade from the Supreme Court (as early as tomorrow), CBS featured Ibram X. Kendi on Face the Nation on gun rights. Host Margaret Brennan discussed with the Boston University professor how “freedom to enslave” was linked to the “freedom to have guns.” There was no push back on that controversial claim or the underlying suggestion that gun ownership is largely a white impulse or practice. Continue reading “Boston University Professor: Second Amendment is Based on “Freedom to Enslave””
Below is a slightly augmented version of my Hill column on the report that the Biden Administration will go forward with administrative punishment for border agents who were falsely accused of “whipping” Haitian migrants in Texas.
We have previously discussed the increasing censorship at YouTube where conservative and dissenting viewpoints are now increasingly blocked, including U.S. senators and physicians with opposing views of Covid. It has also banned videotapes of former President Don Trump. Other social media companies have banned others from posting the voice of Trump. The problem with censorship is that it becomes an insatiable appetite. As you censor opposing views, it demands more and more censorship. It becomes increasingly ridiculous as was the case this week. According to a New York Post report YouTube censored the Democratic-controlled Select Committee for a video that included a clip of Trump. It was being posted to implicate Trump in the January 6th riot but YouTube has continued to blindly follow its “he-who-must-not-be-heard” policy.
Rep. Bill Pascrell (D-N.J.) has joined the call for Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas to resign due to the communications of his wife, Virginia “Ginni” Thomas, with lawyer John Eastman supporting the certification challenge. It is still unclear what that email contains, but Ginni Thomas was a vocal supporter for former President Donald Trump in both public and private. Pascrell called Thomas “a corrupt jurist” and said that he could not be considered “neutral” given the fact that his wife is a political activist. Pascrell’s demand comes after Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse called for an investigation into the matter. The demand is entirely without legal or ethical merit absent new evidence that Justice Thomas himself engaged in political advocacy while ruling on related cases. Continue reading “Democratic Member Calls for Justice Thomas to Resign Over Wife’s Activism”
In Oscar Wilde’s The Importance of Being Earnest, Cecily observes “I have never met any really wicked person before… I am so afraid he will look just like every one else.” The quote came to mind this week after Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) demanded an investigation of Ginni Thomas. Whitehouse insists that there is a “big investigative gap” in pursuing the leaker of the draft Supreme Court opinion in the pending abortion case, but not the wife of Clarence Thomas. Ginni Thomas supported the challenge to the certification of the 2020 election. Continue reading “Sen. Whitehouse Calls for Investigation of Ginni Thomas”
The Washington Examiner recently gained access to texts on Hunter Biden’s laptop with the help of a computer expert. One of the newly acquired texts addressed the scandal over his lost gun. In prior interviews, Hunter insisted that he was never aware of federal law enforcement getting involved in the case and did not believe that it was true. However, in the text, he attacked his sister-in-law Hallie for throwing out the gun. He laments that her tossing the gun to protect him meant that the matter was now “in the hands of the FBI.”
Below is my column in The Hill on the January 6th Committee hearings and how the Democrats undermined the legitimacy of their investigation by breaking the long tradition of bipartisan and balanced membership on such special committees. Many of us support the effort to release more information and evidence on what occurred on that day. However, Speaker Nancy Pelosi decided to forego even the pretense of a bipartisan and full inquiry.
Here is the column:
Below is my column in USA Today on the alleged attempted murder of Justice Brett Kavanaugh at his home outside of Washington, D.C. Less than 24 hours later, protesters were back in front of the Kavanaugh home as well as the home of Justice Amy Coney Barrett. In addition, pro-choice activists posted the location of the school of the Barrett children. It is all part of a national rage addiction where neither decency nor responsibility are relevant. Indeed, seven children of a justice are no longer even a concern in venting one’s rage.
Here is the column: Continue reading “The Kavanaugh Murder Attempt is Shocking But Not Surprising”
- There was an interesting moment last night when President Joe Biden appeared on “Jimmy Kimmel Live!” for his first network interview in 118 days. When Kimmel pushed Biden on the possibility of issuing an executive order on gun control. After all, Kimmel said, “Trump passed those out like Halloween candy.” Biden said that he did not want “to emulate Trump’s abuse of the constitution” and “pass those out like Halloween candy.” It was an ironic statement from a president who has racked up an impressive array of losses in the courts which have found that he has repeatedly disregarded constitutional limits. There is an advantage to arranging to be interviewed by a comedian rather than a reporter. There was no push back from Kimmel on a statement that is dramatically at odds with the President’s actual record in the courts.
The acquittal of Clinton campaign lawyer Michael Sussmann has been the subject of furious debate among politicians and pundits. Some have argued that the case collapsed from lack of evidence while others have alleged that prosecutors faced as biased judge and jury. For his part, Sussmann claimed that the jury found that “I told the truth.” The truth is more complex and few would assume that the verdict was based on Sussmann’s veracity. However, a statement from a juror immediately after the verdict fueled speculation of the impact of juror bias. According to the Washington Times’ Jeff Mordock, the juror reportedly said “I don’t think it should have been prosecuted. There are bigger things that affect the nation than a possible lie to the FBI.” If that statement had been made during voir dire, it is likely that the juror would have been challenged.
Below is a slightly expanded version of my column in the Hill on Sussmann trial and what it revealed about the role of the Federal Bureau of Investigation in the combined Russian collusion investigations. It also looks down the road at whether Special Counsel John Durham will be allowed to write the same type of public report that concluded the Mueller investigation.
Below is an expanded version of my column in The Hill on the implication of Hillary Clinton in false Alfa Bank claims of Russian collusion. While most media ignored the testimony of Clinton’s former campaign manager in the Sussmann trial, it adds to a damning record on how the Clinton campaign was behind arguably the most successful disinformation campaign in American political history with both the Steele dossier and the Alfa bank claims. Ironically, despite Sussmann efforts to conceal his connections to Clinton in the FBI meeting, it was his counsel who effectively outed Clinton in the scandal. Former Clinton Campaign manager Robby Mook then violated the Eleventh Commandment of Democrats: Thou shalt not name a Clinton in a scandal.
Here is the column:
In our age of rage, humor was one of the earliest victims. It is not that humor is not allowed, it is merely selectively tolerated. Thus, Twitter suspended the satirical site, Babylon Bee, with the support of many who claim to support free speech. In Canada, a comedian was actually prosecuted for trash talking in a comedy club. Even non-comedians can find themselves on the wrong side of a punch line. Recently, Ben Domenech of The Federalist found himself pursued over a single tweet teasing the employees at his publication. After referencing the struggle of Vox Media with a union, Domenech joked in a tweet that the salt mines await any employees who spoke of unionizing. No one was calling for a union at The Federalist and it was received by the staff as an obvious joke. However, a liberal lawyer from Massachusetts, Joel Fleming, filed a complaint with the National Labor Relations Board. In a highly controversial opinion, NLRB administrative law judge, Kenneth Chu, ruled against The Federalist. The United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit just overturned Chu and stated the obvious: it was a joke. Continue reading “No Laughing Matter: The Third Circuit Reverses NLRB Sanction Over Joke”