Tag Archives: Lindsey Graham

This, That, and ‘TOONS!

Posted on by under Bits 'n Pieces, cartoons, Election 2022, Environmental Issues, Humour, Law and justice, Political commentary, religion, Social commentary

Until the past week, I was generally able to focus on a single issue or topic for an entire post, but my mind seems to be made of rubber these days and just bounces all over the place, hence I have done a number of posts with a variety of ‘mini-thoughts’.  This afternoon’s post is yet another such …

Apparently, some people wish to live in a nation where all people are controlled by a single religious belief set.  To those people I say, “Then please, feel free to relocate to Iran.  I would caution you, though, if you are a woman, you will be controlled, manipulated, and killed if you break the religious laws. If you are a gay person, you will be killed if it is discovered, no questions asked.”  Meanwhile, here in the United States, women are, at least in theory, given equal rights, although only for the past 100 years or so.  We now have the right to divorce our spouse, to own property in {gasp} our own name, receive equal pay for equal work, and even to … VOTE!  Okay, so we’re still working on that ‘bodily autonomy’ thing, but we’ll get there, because it’s important enough for us to fight tooth and nail for.  That’s not quite how it works over in Iran, but hey … if people want religious laws to dominate the people, they’ll just have to … get over the level of bigotry that is the foundation of such a society.  Meanwhile, here in the U.S. the majority of us fully support women’s rights, LGBTQ rights, and realize it is nobody’s business whether a woman chooses to have children or who a person chooses to love.

I respect every person’s right to believe as they wish, to adhere to the religion of their choice or no religion, if that is their choice.  But what I cannot tolerate is people trying to force everyone into their own narrow-minded box.  One of the things that the United States is noted for is freedom of religion, freedom to believe as you choose.  You have the right to attend the church, mosque or synagogue of your choice and participate in the various rites & rituals of your religion. BUT … when politicians pander to a religious group that wants to impose their will on the entirety of the nation, they are attempting to rob us of one of our most fundamental constitutional freedoms.  Be a Christian, a Muslim, a Jew or a Jain, but don’t tell me that I have to believe as you do.  Freedom OF religion must also include freedom FROM religion as an option.  The United States is not and should not become a ‘Christian nation’ but is founded on the basis of welcoming people of ALL beliefs.

A reader recently commented the following in regard to my concern for the environment:

“Time for the USA to get the message. As far as destruction of the enviro, humans cause somewhere i between 0.00020% and o.00034% of global warming. We’ve seen far bigger periods of gobal warming and ice ages throughout recorded history. Guess why the ice desert Greenland is called Greenland. It was fuxn green when the first settlers arrived there. In late Roman times they made wine in England! And we had periods of unusual warm weather but also mini ice ages and freak storms not too far in the past. Vineta (Atlantis) happened in medieval times, Tenerife will probably split in two during our lifetimes. With or without our ‘help’.”

How does one even converse with someone who is so convinced their ignorant views are correct and who looks down their nose at those of us who believe the science that tells us human activities, particularly continually increasing emissions of CO2 are creating an environment that will no longer be able to sustain human … or most other … life within a relatively few short years?  I have come to the point that I no longer bother to respond to such, for there is no give-and-take, no meaningful dialog, just arrogance and an unwillingness to consider facts.

Lindsey Graham said that if Catherine Cortez Masto beats Adam Laxalt in the race for the senate seat from Nevada, then it was fraud.  So, let me get this straight:  If the candidate Lindsey likes loses, it was fraud, but if his candidate wins, it was a fair and honest election.  Sounds to me like a rather juvenile viewpoint, rather like the ten-year-old child turning over the checkerboard and running in tears to her room and slamming the door because her dad won the game.  “No fair!  You cheated!”  But then, I guess the ten-year-old mentality is in keeping with the Republican modus operandi of late, ever since they decided to make a ‘man’ with a funny creature atop his head, a pocky complexion, a contorted mouth, and lies flowing from his mouth their “Supreme Leader”.  As of 8:49 p.m. last night, Cortez Masto is the projected winner of the race for the senate seat from Nevada, giving the Democrats a majority in the U.S. Senate.  I wonder what ol’ Lindsey will have to say this morning?  Will he have the decency to keep his mouth shut, or will he whine and demand that the election be overturned?

My jaw dropped last night when I logged onto Twitter and found that an off-the-cuff remark I had left on someone’s tweet had gained 1,281 likes, 92 retweets, and 51 comments!!!  I’M A TWITTER CELEBRITY!!!  (just kidding)  I have never had more than 30 or so likes on any tweet or tweet comment I’ve made.  Never!  This is the tweet and my response that gained so much notoriety …

And I conclude with a few political ‘toons I’ve run across over the past few days …

No elected official is above the law, that includes you Senator

Posted on by under Election 2020, History, Law and justice, Political commentary, Re-blogs

Good ol’ Lindsey Graham … the man who stabbed his ‘best friend’ John McCain in the back. The man who long ago forgot the meaning of that Oath of Office he swore to uphold. Our friend Keith sums up his latest perfidy pretty well … thank you, Keith!

musingsofanoldfart

Oh, Senator Lindsey Graham. You still think you are above the law, just like the former president for whom you keep white washing away his sins and crimes. This is highly disappointing, especially for an attorney who served in the military. So, you should know better as you technically have sworn the same oath to protect our constitution on three occasions.

For those who are not keeping up, Senator Graham had twice asked the courts to not require him to testify in the former president’s election meddling case in Georgia. Two judges have said no to his requests. Now, he is asking the Supreme Court to allow him to blow off a subpoena. If you have even only a small dose of skepticism, you have to ask why is he so adamant to not testify? Call me crazy, but I think he does not want to have to perjure himself…

View original post 230 more words

Something To Think About

Posted on by under Election 2022, Free Press Issues, History, Law and justice, Political commentary, Social commentary

Yesterday I came across this OpEd in The Hill by William S. Becker, a U.S. Army combat correspondent in the Vietnam War who is currently executive director of the Presidential Climate Action Project, a nonpartisan think tank that develops recommendations on federal energy and climate policies.  Talk of a new civil war breaking out is the ‘in’ thing these days, and I find it a) disgusting, and b) irresponsible.  Mr. Becker examines the threat and what feeds it.

When civil war becomes all the rage

BY William S. Becker, Opinion Contributor – 10/07/22

There was a time when Americans had values. It seems those values have disappeared, and many things that used to be unacceptable, even unthinkable, became common.

When did it become acceptable to lie? Or to spread fake conspiracies? Or to govern with fear rather than ideas? When did it become okay to deny and reject what the majority of Americans decide? Is it now socially acceptable to send death threats to people with whom we disagree? Is it responsible for a sitting United States congresswoman to make outrageously false statements like “Democrats want Republicans dead, and they have already started the killings,” as Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) recently did. However, all the automatic weapons and body armor that are now de rigueur under the GOP tent indicate the shoe is likely on the other foot.

When did we decide a president, current or former, is above the law — actually, above many laws in the case of Donald Trump — and law enforcement agents should be targeted for investigating? Where does free speech stop, and domestic terrorism begin? Don’t vile threats against individual Americans and their families cross the line?

When did it become acceptable for militants to lock, load and try to incite civil war in America? The New York Times, quoting data from media-tracking services, reports that mentions of civil war are no longer confined to radical groups. The threats have become common on social media. They jumped 3,000 percent in the hours after the FBI confiscated documents from Trump’s Mar-a-Largo home.

With no apparent regret about the 2021 insurrection, Trump predicts that if he’s indicted, “you’d have problems in this country the likes of which perhaps we’ve never seen.” Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) was more explicit, predicting “riots in the street.” These high-level provocateurs hide behind the First Amendment, but social media traffic shows that militant groups and individuals have received the actual message. Others get the message, too. As the New York Times notes, a survey in August found that 54 percent of “strong Republicans” believe a civil war of some kind is at least somewhat likely in the next decade.

As one of the millions of Americans who have experienced combat, I have few observations:

First, fantasies of violence against the government come too easily for the armchair soldiers who have never experienced war. The scenes from Ukraine are a hint. War not only destroys buildings; it also destroys emotional health, livelihoods, families and souls. Unless men in combat are exceptionally good at compartmentalizing the experience and dehumanizing the enemy, wars remake the soldiers who fight them. Many become addicted to the camaraderie, clarity of mission, adrenaline rush, as well as the gift and guilt of survival. Many learn the limits of their compassion, caring and resilience. Some discover an inner monster that is licensed in war but has no place in civilized society unless it finds or starts another war. I suspect that describes some of my brothers in today’s militant groups.

Second, Trump is a cult leader, not a national leader. He is not a patriot. He is not and never will be a savior. It makes no difference how immense his fortune is, how many lawyers he stiffs, or that he was president for a time. If we believe rich and powerful Americans should be held to the same standards of justice and social responsibility as we in the 99 percent, then we should not object to holding him accountable for his conduct as a businessman and politician.

Third, if militants want to take over the government, they should tell us what they plan to do with it. What is their agenda? Do they have a vision? Do they share one beyond killing democracy? Do most Americans agree with them, or do these groups plan to impose and enforce their version of America with a police state?

Trump, too, never really defined what he meant by “great” in the slogan he stole from Ronald Reagan to “make American great again.” If it meant draining the swamp, he didn’t. If it meant fanning the flames of racism, hate and domestic terrorism,he obviously succeeded. His ongoing legacy — a nation at war with itself — is the opposite of great. A county whose people don’t trust their democracy is not great, either. And a nation so vulnerable to blatant falsehoods and crazy conspiracy theories is ripe for totalitarianism.

After the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol insurrection, the violent groups that participated reportedly went home and decided on a different type of uprising. They began running for public office, presumably to carry out their objectives by working within the system. That’s more difficult than pulling a trigger or scribbling a death threat but testing their ideas in the public square is the right way to do it. The Washington Post reports that 299 Republican candidates for Congress and important state offices deny that the 2020 election was valid.

The upcoming November elections are a test of whether voters will choose the candidates dedicated to the values that built and sustained our country, or to the minions Trump has chosen. As we approach the midterms, we must ask ourselves: Who should rule America? Will it be the majority of Americans and the president they chose two years ago? Or will it be the trolls who spread hate and the homegrown terrorists who vote with bullets and bombs?

Snarky Snippets Must Be Shared!

Posted on by under Bits 'n Pieces, cartoons, Election 2022, Law and justice, Political commentary, Racism & Bigotry, Social commentary

A buildup of snark, rather like a buildup of cholestrol, stomach acid, or any other substance, can prove to be very uncomfortable if not taken care of.  And the snark has been building for a few days now, so just in case you guys don’t have any snark of your own, allow me to share my excess with you!

The two faces of Mitch McConnell

It’s difficult to say which of the GOP candidates on the docket this November are the worst of the lot, for the entire lot seems to be infused with incompetence, venom, and an uncanny propensity to lie.  But, there can be no doubt that Mehmet Oz and Herschel Walker, both running for senate seats from Pennsylvania and Georgia respectively, are in the list of the 10 very worst choices.  Fortunately, neither is on a fast track to a win, if the polls can be believed.

Just a couple of weeks ago, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell attempted to tone down the GOP’s hopes for gaining a majority in the Senate, saying that ‘candidate quality’ was important, and while he didn’t come out and say as much, the implication was that the Republican candidates for Senate this time ‘round aren’t of the highest quality.  So, can anybody explain why on earth McConnell is co-hosting a fund-raiser with Mehmet Oz and Herschel Walker, as well as current Representative Ted Budd of North Carolina who is running for a seat in the Senate?

Walker and Oz are two of the absolute least qualified … one is a former football player, the other a former snake oil salesman with a medical degree.  Neither have government experience, neither have a Civics education, neither have ever taken a course in Constitutional Law … and both are polling below their Democratic opponents, thankfully!  I guess ol’ Mitchie has lowered his standards since he spoke of ‘candidate quality’ earlier this month, eh?

And speaking of really bad candidates …

Blake Masters, who nobody ever heard of until this year, is running for a seat in the U.S. Senate from Arizona.  He’s hoping to beat incumbent Mark Kelly, who filled the seat vacated by Senator John McCain at his death.  Masters has a bigotry problem:  he is one.

Back in June, he blamed Blacks for gun violence in the U.S. …

“We do have a gun violence problem in this country, and it’s gang violence. It’s gangs, it’s people in Chicago, in St. Louis, shooting each other. Very often, you know, Black people, frankly.”

And then last week, the Associated Press put out the following on Twitter:

“Leadership at the Federal Reserve has become its most diverse ever. There are more female, Black and gay officials contributing to the central bank’s interest-rate decisions than at any time in its 109-year history.”

To which Blake Masters sardonically replied …

“Finally a compelling explanation for why our economy is doing so well.”

The list of incidences where Masters put down Blacks, women, and/or LGBTQ people is endless. Fortunately, Masters is also polling behind Senator Kelly.  He is a blatant example of what McConnell meant by his concern over the quality of current GOP candidates … I’m surprised Masters wasn’t invited to join the little fundraiser McConnell, Oz, and Walker are holding!

A threat or a call to action?

Lindsey Graham … back-stabber, two-faced, split-persona Lindsey … made the following statement a couple of days ago …

“If they try to prosecute President Trump for mishandling classified information after Hillary Clinton set up a server in her basement, there literally will be riots in the street. I worry about our country.”

Just for a bit of reference here, Lindsey went from being a hater of the former guy to his present-day status of one of the former guy’s chief bootlickers.  There was a time when Lindsey Graham actually believed in democracy, that no person was above the law, but today … he has drunk too much of the Kool-Aid being offered by those who would gladly destroy this nation and its people.

Lindsey’s comment could be taken merely as an observation, or more darkly, as a threat, as a notice to the same groups that attempted to overturn the government at the U.S. Capitol on January 6th, 2021, to “stand by”.  In this day of radically divisive political views, a time when the entire nation feels like a tinderbox just waiting for the right spark, such talk is simply unconscionable coming from a member of the United States Congress.  Unconscionable.

Unfortunately, Lindsey Graham is not up for re-election until 2026, so we cannot simply vote his fat patootie out of office.  Too bad.

A couple of ‘toons to help you find your smile again …

The Week’s Best Cartoons 8/20

Posted on by under Bits 'n Pieces, cartoons, Election 2022, Environmental Issues, Humour, Law and justice, Political commentary, Re-blogs, Social commentary

Sometimes these days I think that if I were a political cartoonist (I can’t even draw an egg properly, so no danger of that!) I would just post a black screen, or one depicting a super storm, for ‘bleak’ is the word that often comes to mind (thank you, Republicans, for the ulcer).  But this past week, there has been a bit of good news — a BFD in fact — and I was happy to see at least a couple of cartoons about that, although the rest remain rather dark humour.  At any rate, as usual, our friend TokyoSand has given us the best of the best from the internet this week.  Thank you, T.S.!

I was especially happy to see a handful of cartoonists pick up on something this week that I was sensing — namely, that the national narrative was turning around (for the better) for President Biden. Here’s those cartoons, and so much more! 

Be sure to check out the rest of the ‘toons!

Confirmation Hearing Or Political Circus?

Posted on by under cartoons, education, History, Law and justice, Political commentary, Racism & Bigotry, Social commentary

Who could have seen it coming, eh?  Yesterday was day #2 of the Senate confirmation hearings for Supreme Court nominee Ketanji Brown Jackson.  She answered questions for the better part of twelve hours … heck, five minutes of talking does me in.  I have no doubt that Ms. Jackson wished, on more than one occasion, that she could fire back at some of the questions she was asked, but to her credit, she proceeded with dignity and respect, only letting out the occasional sigh to indicate a bit of frustration.

Barring some dramatic revelation that I cannot foresee, I strongly believe that Ms. Jackson will, indeed, become the next Justice on the U.S. Supreme Court.  I even think a few of the more … shall we say ‘honest’ Republicans … will vote to confirm her … perhaps Senator Collins of Maine, Senator Murkowski of Alaska, and Senator Romney of Utah.  Others are likely to vote ‘Nay’ for a number of stated reasons, but the main reason being that Judge Jackson has two strikes against her:  she is Black, and she is a woman.  Period.

I did not watch the 12-hour confirmation hearing … I really haven’t got either the time or the patience … but I have read numerous accounts of the questions and answers from the day.  The first one to come to my attention was, unsurprisingly, from Senator Marsha Blackburn of Tennessee.  Among Blackburn’s false or distorted accusations, she …

  • linked Jackson to the controversy over transgender athletes and women’s sports
  • suggested Jackson would trample parental rights
  • accused Jackson of wanting to put dangerous criminals on the street
  • accused Jackson of saying every judge has a hidden agenda
  • said Jackson praised the 1619 Project
  • said Jackson thinks judges must use ‘critical race theory’ when sentencing criminals

Blackburn went so far as to suggest to Jackson, a Black woman, that white privilege doesn’t exist in America, a country where of the 114 justices to have been confirmed to sit on the highest court in the land, only two have been Black.  She also asked Judge Jackson to “define the word ‘woman’”.  When Jackson told her she couldn’t, at least “Not in this context. I’m not a biologist,” Blackburn responded with acidity … “The meaning of the word woman is so unclear and controversial that you can’t give me a definition?”  Sigh.  Seriously, is this what we’re paying our lawmakers to do?

And then there was good ol’ Ted Cruz, never one to mince words, or even to attempt to make his words sensible. Noting that the judge is a board member of her kids’ private school Georgetown Day, the senator began pulling out books, including Antiracist Baby, in order to claim the school is definitely teaching CRT. “There are portions of this book that I find really quite remarkable. One portion of the book says babies are taught to be racist or anti-racist,” Cruz bellowed, displaying an enlarged page from the book. “Do you agree with this book that is being taught with kids that babies are racist?”  Her response …

“I do not believe that any child should be made to feel as though they are racist or though they are not valued or though they are less-than. That they are victims. That they are oppressors.”

 She also noted that her understanding was that “critical race theory is an academic theory is taught in law schools.”

I’m not sure what got into Lindsey Graham … I seriously believe that man has some mental issues!  In the middle of his questioning Judge Jackson, he asked … “What faith are you, by the way?”  Say WHAT???  Since when is religion a qualifier for a seat on the bench???

Then Lindsey began berating Judge Jackson for defending detainees at Guantanamo Bay back in her days as a public defender.  He went on a verbal diatribe, spouting …

“We’re at war, we’re not fighting crime! This is not some passage of time event. As long as they’re dangerous, I hope they all die in jail if they’re going to go back to kill Americans. It won’t bother me one bit if 39 of them die in prison. That’s a better outcome than letting them go and if it cost $500 million to keep them in jail, keep them in jail because they’ll go back to the fight. Look at the freaking Afghan government made up of former detainees at Gitmo. This whole thing by the left about this war ain’t working!”

And then he stormed out of the hearings without waiting for a response.

John Cornyn, who I typically think of as one of the less toxic Republicans in the Senate, questioned Judge Jackson about her stance on LGBTQ rights, claiming that granting equal rights to LGBTQ people conflicts with the religious beliefs of some people. To which Jackson responded, “Well, senator, that is the nature of a right. That when there is a right, it means that there are limitations on regulation, even if people are regulating pursuant to their sincerely held religious beliefs.”

From everything I’ve read and the video clips I have seen, it appears that Judge Jackson handled herself well through the entire ordeal … far better than I would have in similar circumstances!  It’s just too damn bad that the confirmation of a Justice who will serve on the highest court in the nation for life has been turned into a political circus in recent years.  The Supreme Court are the people who will make the decisions we have to live by.  They will decide if women have the right to control their own bodies, whether LGBTQ people should have certain unalienable rights, whether a single religion will force us all into a small, airless box, and whether we have the right to vote.  And yet … the Republicans in Congress seem to care more about the colour of a potential justice’s skin and about her gender.

Note to readers:  This just in from the New York Times … “Conservatives are pressuring Senator Joe Manchin, a centrist Democrat, to oppose Judge Ketanji Brwn Jackson’s confirmation to the Supreme Court.”  Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr

Thoughts From The Mind of Filosofa

Posted on by under Election 2020, Election 2022, Environmental Issues, History, Personal, Political commentary, Racism & Bigotry, Social commentary

I seem to have a real knack for getting ‘punished’ by the great Tweety god, aka Twitter aka Jack Dorsey and his robocrew.  I find it hilarious that Margie Greene, Matt Gaetz, Don Junior, Lindsey Graham and the rest can say pretty much whatever they wish, but when I make what I consider an innocuous reply to a post, I am suspended.  Here’s what happened …

The two-faced toadie Lindsey Graham made a really stupid comment whereby he said that …

“If Trump was right about the lab leak, it would change the image the public had of President Trump regarding the Coronavirus …”

I nearly choked on my laughter when I saw that one, and immediately just had to respond with …

No, Stupid, Trump is still single-handedly responsible for the more than 600,000 U.S. deaths, as he kept telling us it was “no big deal” and would be gone, and to just drink bleach. Your ‘hero’ is a madman who deserves the death penalty that he gave to this nation.

Had I not been limited to the 270 character limit, I could have done even better!  Now, you’ll note that nowhere did I call for violence or for an insurrection as some have done.  However, in less than 20 seconds, I received the following notice …

Hi Jill Dennison,

Your account, @GrannieJ has been locked for violating the Twitter Rules.

Specifically for:

Violating our rules against promoting or encouraging suicide or self-harm.

You may not promote or encourage suicide or self-harm. When we receive reports that a person is threatening suicide or self-harm, we may take a number of steps to assist them, such as reaching out to that person and providing resources such as contact information for our mental health partners.

If you are having thoughts of self-harm, suicide, or depression, we encourage you to please reach out to someone and request help. Our Safety Center has a list of resources you can consult for a variety of reasons, including depression, loneliness, substance abuse, illness, relationship problems, and economic problems. You can find those resources here: https://about.twitter.com/safety/safety-partners.html#mental-health/us.

Please know that there are people out there who care about you, and that you are not alone.   

avatar                 

Jill Dennison

@GrannieJ

No, Stupid, Trump is still single-handedly responsible for the more than 600,000 U.S. deaths, as he kept telling us it was “no big deal” and would be gone, and to just drink bleach. Your ‘hero’ is a madman who deserves the death penalty that he gave to this nation.         

Please note that repeated violations may lead to a permanent suspension of your account. Proceed to Twitter now to fix the issue with your account.

Where in the Sam Hell did they get the idea that I was suicidal???  They didn’t even have time to read the f*cking message, let alone to ponder its meaning!  I took my comment down, but then when I tried to simply ‘like’ a post by Bro, it popped up the same message, saying that my account is suspended for 12 hours!  I don’t care, I think it’s funny and I was soon headed to bed anyway, but I DO care in the sense that many people have said much worse than I and not been ‘punished’.  This is my third suspension from these jackals … Jack Dorsey is now on my shit list … and as soon as my suspension is lifted, I shall let him know it!  Stay tuned!

Y’know, folks … I’ve said to more than one person of late that this nation has let me down, that I am so disappointed in the people of this nation, that it is no longer a country that I recognize.  Racism, guns, the Big Lie, and more have darkened my view of the country I’ve spent 70 years in.  My dilemma is whether to try to escape to either Canada or the UK, likely saving my life, or to stay and fight, to keep trying to wake the ignorant masses and inject just a spot of remorse into the politicos.  And then I remember the words of the late, great Maya Angelou.  I would like to share those words with you today, ask you to think about them, decide whether you will rise …

Still I Rise

Maya Angelou – 1928-2014

You may write me down in history

With your bitter, twisted lies,

You may trod me in the very dirt

But still, like dust, I’ll rise.

 

Does my sassiness upset you?

Why are you beset with gloom?

’Cause I walk like I’ve got oil wells

Pumping in my living room.

 

Just like moons and like suns,

With the certainty of tides,

Just like hopes springing high,

Still I’ll rise.

 

Did you want to see me broken?

Bowed head and lowered eyes?

Shoulders falling down like teardrops,

Weakened by my soulful cries?

 

Does my haughtiness offend you?

Don’t you take it awful hard

’Cause I laugh like I’ve got gold mines

Diggin’ in my own backyard.

 

You may shoot me with your words,

You may cut me with your eyes,

You may kill me with your hatefulness,

But still, like air, I’ll rise.

 

Does my sexiness upset you?

Does it come as a surprise

That I dance like I’ve got diamonds

At the meeting of my thighs?

 

Out of the huts of history’s shame

I rise

Up from a past that’s rooted in pain

I rise

I’m a black ocean, leaping and wide,

Welling and swelling I bear in the tide.

 

Leaving behind nights of terror and fear

I rise

Into a daybreak that’s wondrously clear

I rise

Bringing the gifts that my ancestors gave,

I am the dream and the hope of the slave.

I rise

I rise

I rise.

Lookin’ Good, Merrick Garland!

Posted on by under Biden's Staff Picks, Law and justice, Political commentary

Merrick-GarlandYesterday was the first of the two-day confirmation hearings for Merrick Garland, President Biden’s choice to head the Department of Justice.  I have felt for weeks that Garland would be confirmed by the Senate, for he is both liked and respected by those on both sides of the aisle.  According to an article in The Washington Post …

“… there was little acrimony and many Democrats and Republicans on the panel appeared to treat his confirmation almost as a foregone conclusion.”

Several Republicans seem certain that Garland will be confirmed …

“I believe so. There were people that weren’t totally satisfied with his answers, but i didn’t hear anybody get really irritated. … For the most part, he answered pretty well.” – Senator Chuck Grassley (republican) from Iowa

“That certainly seems likely. I thought he did fine. It was frustrating in that he answered very few questions. He approached it more like a judicial nominee dodging every question.” – Senator Ted Cruz (republican) from Texas

“Judge Garland is about as sure a bet as you can have in the Congress these days that he will be confirmed. He has navigated these questions with extraordinary adroitness and aplomb.” – Senator Richard Blumenthal (democrat) from Connecticut

To be sure, there were contentious lines of questioning, especially from the likes of Senator John Neeley Kennedy, a republican from Louisiana, and the ignoble Josh Hawley who cheered the attackers on January 6th, and did everything in his power to try to overturn our votes on that day.  But, Garland remained cool and his answers brought no rebuttal.  For example, Hawley arrogantly twirled his pencil while attempting to goad Garland into a conversation on defunding the police, and on what constitutes ‘domestic terrorism’.

Garland, who prosecuted the Oklahoma City bombing perpetrators before becoming a federal judge,  looked Hawley straight in the eye and responded …

“As you no doubt know, President Biden has said he does not support defunding the police, and neither do I. We saw how difficult the lives of police officers were in the body-cam videos we saw when they were defending the Capitol.  The use of violence or threats of violence in an attempt to disrupt democratic processes.  So an attack on a courthouse while in operation trying to prevent judges from deciding cases, that plainly is domestic extremism, domestic terrorism.”

Lindsey Graham, who would not allow Garland’s hearing to take place earlier this month, reared his typically ugly head, quizzed Garland on whether he thought James Comey, who was fired by the former guy early in his administration, was a good FBI Director.  Garland calmly replied that the question was not useful and that he didn’t intend to get into critiquing other directors.  Then Graham responded churlishly with …

“Well, you’ve been very political, and appropriately so, at times. I just find it pretty stunning that you can’t say, in my view, that he was a terrible FBI director.”

However, at the end of the day, Lindsey told Garland, “I think you’re a very good pick for this job.”  Even Senator Kennedy, one of the more obnoxious among republican senators, said “You’ll be a good attorney general.”

Perhaps Garland’s most powerful statement, at least in my eyes, was when he said …

“I am not the president’s lawyer, I am the United States’ lawyer.”

Quite the contrast from previous Attorney General William Barr who saw himself and the entire Department of Justice as tools at the former guy’s disposal.

No doubt there will be some Republicans who will oppose the nomination, likely Tom Cotton, Mike Lee, and Josh Hawley among them, but the general consensus is that Garland will win senate confirmation when the vote is taken on March 1st.  Score one for justice.

Not Time To Go Home Yet … Or Perhaps It Is

Posted on by under Election 2020, Law and justice, Political commentary, Social commentary

They hoped to vote this afternoon, then wrap it up and go home for the remainder of the weekend, to be with their families, eat nachos, and watch whatever sport is trending at the moment.  Now they are angry, for it appears their job isn’t quite done as the Senate voted 55-45 to call witnesses in the impeachment trial of Donald Trump.  Even five republicans, Mitt Romney, Susan Collins, Lisa Murkowski, Ben Sasse, and shockingly, Lindsey Graham voted in favour of calling witnesses.  But the rest are angry, including Ron Johnson who yelled at Mitt Romney in the Senate chambers.

What changed the mind of Lindsey Graham?  Initially, Graham said …

“If you open up that can of worms, we’ll want the FBI to come in and tell us about how people preplanned this attack and what happened with the security footprint of the Capitol. You open up Pandora’s box if you call one witness.”

Hmmm … isn’t the whole purpose to get at the truth, to find out what really happened, how, and why?

Apparently one thing that changed Graham’s mind and perhaps others was a statement by Republican Representative Jaime Herrera Beutler regarding a phone call she witnessed between House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy and Donald Trump during the attack on Congress.  She said McCarthy pleaded with the president, telling him, “You need to get on TV right now, you need to get on Twitter, you need to call these people off.” Trump replied, “Kevin, they’re not my people.”

“Yes, they are. They just came through my windows and my staff is running for cover. Yeah, they’re your people. Call them off.”

At that point, she said Trump told McCarthy, “Well I guess these people are just more angry about the election and upset than you are.”

Ms. Herrera Beutler ended her statement with …

“To the patriots who were standing next to the former president as these conversations were happening, or even to the former vice president: if you have something to add here, now would be the time.”

Perhaps that, if nothing else, stirred Mr. Graham’s conscience just a bit, helped him remember that there was a hangman’s noose waiting for Mike Pence that day, and all Trump cared about was overturning the election.

So, witnesses will be called, perhaps by both sides, though I have no idea where the defense team will find any witnesses whose stories will help their client look less guilty than he currently does.  Apparently one of Trump’s attorneys, Michael van der Veen, is well aware that there aren’t any credible witnesses on his side of this equation, for he claimed that if a single witness is called, it would require over 100 depositions, and would include deposing House Speaker Nancy Pelosi in his Philadelphia office.  Many in the Senate chambers could be heard laughing at this display of pomp. 

Republican Senator Roger Marshall says the trial should end, that the Senate has other work to attend to, and the country should “move on.”  My response is … did we just ‘move on’ after the assassination of President John F. Kennedy?  Did we just ‘move on’ after the terrorist attacks of 9/11?  No, some things are too important to simply turn a blind eye and ‘move on.’  The attempted overthrow of a fair and honest election by a sitting president, the highest office in the land, is entirely too important to simply ‘move on.’  It is important that the transgressor never be allowed to hold a public office again.  It is important that We the People know the truth about that day, how it was planned, financed, and implemented.  It is important, most of all, that this never be allowed to happen again, that no future president believe he can get away, literally, with murder.

Meanwhile, Moscow Mitch not surprisingly, has decided he will vote to acquit Trump, despite the evidence of Trump’s guilt in inciting and encouraging the deadly attack.  Whatever little shred of conscience he experienced was so small that it blew out of his nose as he snored during the night.

The importance of calling witnesses and hearing their testimony is not that it will sway enough senate republicans to do the right thing, but that it will be presented to the ultimate jurors, We the People.  We will know what actually happened that day, how it came to be, and we will remember those in the United States Senate who lacked the courage to uphold their constitutional oaths, who put their own political futures ahead of our freedom, our lives.

UPDATE:  Just as I was about to hit the ‘Publish’ button to schedule this post, the following ‘breaking news’ crossed my screen:

Lawyers strike deal to prevent witness testimony in trial

Sigh.

We Will NOT Forget!

Posted on by under Election 2020, Law and justice, Political commentary, Rants

In case you didn’t notice, there is a trial of some importance taking place this week in Washington, D.C.  Now, I used to watch Perry Mason, and a number of other courtroom dramas, the names of which elude me at the moment, so I have an idea how a trial is supposed to be conducted, how lawyers, defendants, and jurors are supposed to act, but this trial is like nothing I have ever seen before.

First, the defendant is nowhere to be seen.  He decided that it was too cold up north to leave his Florida resort, and besides, he had a golf game scheduled for yesterday.  But what really blows my mind is the jurors!  Have you ever seen a trial where the jurors, rather than being bothered with listening to the evidence being presented by the prosecution, got up and walked around, texted on their phones … about breast milk, for some strange reason?

Worse yet, can you imagine a murder trial where three of the jurors have a closed-door session with the defense attorneys???  NO, just NO … this is illegal, immoral, unconscionable, and a number of other adjectives I can think of once the steam stops coming out of my ears!

House impeachment managers, the prosecution, were presenting compelling evidence of the attack on Congress and the Capitol and the defendant’s involvement in said attack on Wednesday afternoon, but Ted Cruz and several other Republican senators were apparently bored watching themselves narrowly escape the violence on January 6th and instead sought other distractions, such as shuffling papers, or playing on their cell phones like Teddy was doing.

Under absolutely no circumstances, in a trial, are the lawyers on either side allowed to meet in private with jurors.  That is called tampering with the jury, it is illegal.  Period.  No ifs, ands, or buts.  Trump’s legal team and the three Republican senators, Ted Cruz, Lindsey Graham, and Mike Lee are all in violation of the law for their little tête-à-tête .  They are attempting to turn this trial into a sham, but all they are doing is further destroying their reputations and that of the Republican Party, for they are proving with every passing minute that there is no collective conscience.  The Republican Party has decided that they don’t need to represent the will of the people, but instead will do whatever they damn well please, and force us to continue to pay their salaries.

“We were discussing their legal strategy and sharing our thoughts,” said Cruz.  No, jackass … you are not a member of the legal team … you are the jury!  Your job is to listen to both sides and decide which has merit, not collude with one side against the other.  You are the damn jurors in this case!  In a normal trial, the judge would at this point likely declare a mistrial and schedule a new trial, else dismiss the jurors and call for a new selection.  But this is an impeachment trial and apparently the Republicans in Congress are allowed to make and break the rules with impunity. Imagine if the Democrats tried that!

The public has heard the evidence, and while the corruption is so rampant in the Republican Party that the senators will allow a conman, a man guilty of plotting murder free to incite further violence, to kill again, We the People know that he is guilty.  We weren’t playing on our cell phones while the evidence was being presented, and we did not collude with the lawyers for the defense.  We saw the evidence, we know Donald Trump is guilty, and we will never again trust him or those senators who refused to perform their duty, to uphold their oaths.  We Will Not Forget. Ever.