The Hill was thrown into near chaos this week when Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and Sen. Joe Manchin (D-WV) unveiled the Inflation Reduction Act. Republicans charged that Manchin misled them into supporting a $280 billion chips and science bill — a bill they would have otherwise opposed. Others criticized the name of the bill, which contains a significant number of climate change items long sought by the Democrats. Now, the respected Wharton School at the University of Pennsylvania has found that the Inflation Reduction Act would actually have no impact on inflation. Continue reading ““Statistically Indistinguishable from Zero”: Wharton Study Finds the Inflation Reduction Act Has No Impact on Inflation”
Below is my column in The Hill on a shift in the rhetoric in the aftermath of the overturning of Roe v. Wade. From politicians to pundits, pro-life positions are being treated as virtual hate speech. The demonization of those with pro-life views is meant to cut off any debate on the basis or scope of abortion rights. It is the latest attack on free speech as critics seek to silence those with opposing views.
Here is the column:
New disclosures are demolishing the continued denials of President Biden that he had no knowledge and nothing to do with his son’s business interests. The emails (reviewed by Fox and The Daily Mail) include exchanges with at least 14 of Hunter Biden’s business associates while Joe Biden was vice president. They cast further doubt on the president’s repeated claims that he had no knowledge of his son’s foreign business dealings. In one almost plaintive email, Hunter actually complains to an associate that he had delivered on everything that was demanded of him in getting access to his father and the White House. Continue reading ““I’ve Delivered”: New Disclosures Demolish President Biden’s Denials on Hunter Dealings”
Democratic members have continued their unrelenting attacks on the Supreme Court and its conservative majority. This week, Senate and House members have introduced a bill to impose term limits, regularized confirmation schedules, and other changes. In introducing the legislation, Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D., R.I.), Rep. Hank Johnson (D., Ga.), and others have left no question that this is just the latest effort to change the balance of the Court in favor of a liberal majority. Such comments make the bill seem like little more than legislative graffiti. Continue reading ““Rebalance the Bench”: Democrats Introduce Sweeping Changes for the Supreme Court”
My recent column explored whether time is running out for Hunter Biden. The answer may be “no” if Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) is right about what whistleblowers are telling him about the investigation. CBS is reporting that “highly credible” whistleblowers informed him that officials within the FBI and the Justice Department are downplaying or dismissing negative evidence on Hunter Biden. Given the documented bias of the FBI and DOJ during the Russian collusion investigation, such allegations must be considered seriously given the baffling refusal of Attorney General Merrick Garland to appoint a Special Counsel. Continue reading “Grassley: Whistleblowers Report That DOJ Downplayed Hunter Biden Evidence in 2020”
Below is my column in The Hill on the expiration of the grand jury in Delaware and reports that the Hunter Biden investigation is at a “critical stage.” These lingering questions could have been avoided if Attorney General Merrick Garland had responded to new disclosures with the appointment of a special counsel. In 2021, emails and recordings from the laptop further fueled questions of whether President Joe Biden could have been a beneficiary of some of these dealings and how his early denials of knowledge appear demonstrably false. The failure to appoint a special counsel in this case is a textbook example of why such appointments are necessary to avoid such doubts about the scope or independence of an investigation.
Here is the column:
Continue reading “Is the Clock Finally Running Out on Hunter Biden?”
There was a telling exchange today on CBS’ Face the Nation when host Margaret Brennan asked J6 Committee member Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) about issuing a subpoena of Ginni Thomas, the wife of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas. I have previously written how the calls for Justice Thomas to resign or be impeached are wildly out of line with ethical and constitutional standards. What was interesting, however, was how Schiff justified such an unprecedented subpoena: to question her about one of Thomas’ opinions dealing with the authority of Congress to investigate what occurred on that day. Continue reading “Schiff: The Committee Could Subpoena Ginni Thomas About Justice Thomas”
The South Carolina legislature is moving to enact a new law with deeply troubling free speech implications. Following the Jackson Women’s Health Organization v. Dobbs decision overturning Roe, the legislators have sought to criminalize any effort to ”aid, abet or conspire with someone” to obtain an abortion. That apparently includes sharing information over the Internet or other communication systems. In my view, the law violates the First Amendment and should be scuttled by the legislature. Otherwise, it would likely be struck down by the courts.
Continue reading “South Carolina Legislators Move to Criminalize Sharing Abortion Information”
As various states move to pass controversial new gun control laws after the decision in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen, one such law was just enjoined by a federal court in Colorado. In Rocky Mountain Gun Owners v. Superior, District Judge Raymond P. Moore granted a motion for a preliminary injunction to stop enforcement of the law enacted by the town of Superior, Colorado to ban on the sale or possession of a wide array of guns. Continue reading “Federal Court Enjoins “Assault Gun” Ban in Boulder County, Colorado”
J6 Committee Vice Chair Liz Cheney has been criticized by critics for participating in a one-sided series of hearings devoid of alternative or dissenting views. Some have called it a “show trial” with members reading off teleprompters in tightly scripted and controlled hearings. As if to fulfill that show trial portrayal, Cheney ended the hearing this week by calling for more officials to come forward and noting that Trump family members and former officials have now come forward with their own public “confessions.” Continue reading “True Confessions: Liz Cheney Declared Trump Family and Aides Have Now Publicly “Confessed””
Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan made a curious and concerning comment this week about how the Supreme Court’s legitimacy depends on the consistency of its judicial opinions with public opinion. It was a comment that seemed consistent with the criticism of Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D., Mass.) that the Court was improperly departing from “widely held public opinion.” Warren used the complaint to justify her call for raw court packing to produce an instant liberal majority. I am frankly astonished by the statement of Justice Kagan which runs against the entire purpose of the Court as, at times, a countermajoritarian institution designed to follow the constitution rather than the polls.
Below is my column in the Washington Times responding to the controversy over changes at the home of James Madison. While I have not been to Montpelier since the reported changes, I wanted to respond to the condemnation of Madison as “an enslaver.” He was indeed an enslaver but the truth is far more complex than presented by critics.
Here is the column: Continue reading “The Truth About Madison and Slavery”
Critics of the Supreme Court have tried every means to change the balance or decisions of the Court from threats of impeachment to harassing justices at homes or restaurants. Some of these reckless measures have been encouraged by law professors, including a Georgetown law professor who encouraged more “aggressive” measures targeting the justices. Now, Seton Hall Law Assistant Dean Brian Sheppard has called for Congress to “buyout” justices by offering them “large sums of money.” If needed, he suggests that President Joe Biden could scrape up the dough to prompt justices to cash in and get out.
Below is my column in the Hill on today’s final scheduled hearing of the J6 Committee. While the Committee can continue to schedule new hearings, the eighth hearing highlights the fact a compelling criminal case against President Donald Trump has still not been made. Despite the prior promises of the members, the hearings have largely amplified what was previously known rather than introduce new “smoking gun” evidence. Even in the absence of a single dissenting member, the Committee has not been able to make the long-promised criminal case.
Here is the column:
The media is reporting that the criminal investigation of Hunter Biden is at a “critical stage” with the grand jury considering an array of charges including various tax violations and possible foreign lobbying violations. I previously testified in Congress on possible criminal exposure for Hunter under the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA). There seems ample evidence for such charges but there remain some glaring questions in how the Biden Administration has handled the investigation of the Biden family. What is also striking is the initial response of pundits on cable channels like MSNBC that has long ignored or downplayed the allegations. Continue reading ““Republicans are Just Going After Him”: The Media Starts the Spin on Possible Hunter Biden Charges”