Posse Incitatus

Pack the Court?

The Democrats' far-left orientation, their raging anger and contempt for not just Donald Trump, but for his millions of supporters, will cause them to shred the U.S. Constitution if they take control of the White House and the Senate.

I firmly believe that the First and Second amendments would be in grave danger. Since the left does not tolerate dissent and often responds with profanities and demonization, the Schumer/Pelosi/Biden Democrats would move quickly to shut down conservative talk radio. They would deem it "hate speech"*   .... * Anything that dares to oppose liberal orthodoxy.... Sort of like what Abraham Lincoln did to newspaper publishers, editors and reporters who opposed his policies. Only this time, there is no Civil War going on; no open rebellion or secession (at least as far as I know).

Secondly, the Democrats and progressives, whose polices are pretty much identical to those of the 1930s Nazis, would push hard for strict gun control. While even they would not be foolish enough to attempt outright confiscation, don't put it past the Dems to weaponize the IRS to make gun ownership cost-prohibitive.

Think about the Obamacare penalty for noncompliance -- absurdly deemed a "tax" by the John Roberts-led Supreme Court in June 2012. I can see the IRS mandating a $500-per-year-per-gun fee on owners of firearms, and the often unreliable SCOTUS upholding the fee as a "tax." Don't think it couldn't happen here, because it already has.

Even if the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg's seat is filled by a conservative this year, that doesn't stop the Dems from packing the court if they take over the presidency and Senate in 2021. So this begs the question: In the spirit of, "The best defense is a strong offense," should the Republicans consider just packing the court right now? Or would that backfire on them?

Even some moderately conservative Republicans and independents might vote for Biden and Democrat Senate candidates if the GOP pulled such a stunt prior to the election. They would, as is often the case, have naive goodwill in their hearts and anticipate that the Democrats would reciprocate going forward. Good luck with that.

If the GOP tried that strategy following the election, who's to say that a majority Democrat Senate wouldn't attempt to pack the Supreme Court even more in the reverse direction? What's the end game? The U.S. Constitution does not stipulate how many Supreme Court justices there should be, so no one knows how ungodly and unwieldy this could get.

I suppose if Saturday Night Live or another comedy show wanted to run a parody of congressional debate in, say, 2045, it might deal with a bill expanding the Supreme Court to 1,200 justices. The Democrats, see, are enraged about the recent 545-455 ruling making euthanasia a misdemeanor. They control the White House, Senate and House, and have about 200 left-wing hacks waiting in the wings. There won't even be hearings. Just a straight up or down vote -- done by email.

Absurd? Perhaps. But so is a lot that is going on right now. A year ago, none of us dreamed the current shit-show would be playing out in our nation. A word to the wise: Expect the unexpected.... Oh, and BE PREPARED!

Justice Ginsburg's Passing Supercharges an Already Fraught Presidential Election

Even before the pandemic and George Floyd's death, which triggered widespread, sustained unrest in the cities, I believed the 2020 presidential election was going to be one of the most bitter and intense in our nation's history. I envisioned teams of lawyers litigating over mail-in ballots, polls that closed before everyone voted, ballot harvesting and other issues.

But now, with the passing of Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, coming on top of riots and a lockdown that has further ripped us apart, this election has gone from volatile to downright radioactive. Dangerous days are ahead, I'm afraid.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell is faced with a decision: He can either rush through a nomination and confirmation prior to the end of the calendar year (it's a total fantasy to think it could be done prior to the election), or leave the seat open until 2021 and risk the Democrats taking the Senate.

The no-brainer option is to get it done in 2020, while the Republicans hold a 53-47 lead. This will expose the GOP to charges of hypocrisy as they refused to take up Barack Obama's Merrick Garland nomination in 2016 after the passing of Justice Antonin Scalia.

But in my view, the Democrat whining over the Garland affair is patently absurd. The Republicans held a 54-46 lead in the Senate four years ago, and it was entirely McConnell's prerogative to not take up a nomination made by a lame duck president -- especially given the polarization among the electorate and the very real possibility that Donald Trump would defeat Hillary Clinton.

Think about it: If the Democrats controlled the Senate today, would they hold a hearing on a Trump nominee to replace RBG? Of course not. And for Democrats who whine about the elimination of the filibuster (long a great obstruction tool for the party in minority), they've no one to blame but Harry Reid. He got rid of it back in 2013 for judicial nominees excepting the Supreme Court. McConnell demonstrated that Republicans can play hardball, too, and upped the ante to include Supreme Court nominees.

When then Sen. Joe Biden chaired the Senate Judiciary Committee in 1992, he said that if a Supreme Court vacancy happened that year, the president should not nominate anyone and, if he did, the Judiciary Committee should not hold a hearing “until after the political campaign season is over.” Ditto for Sen. Chuck Schumer in 2007, who said, 19 months before the election, that no George W. Bush SCOTUS nominees should be considered for the remainder of his term.

The danger for McConnell is that unreliable Republican senators and/or those in tough re-election battles might vote against confirmation. The odious Sen. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska said she will not vote to confirm a Supreme Court nominee until after the election (and even then, her vote is not guaranteed). Then there's the ever-petulant Mitt Romney, who would delight in tweaking Trump's nose by voting against a Trump nominee -- possibly even playing the role of the late John McCain (the deciding vote in opposing the overturn of Obamacare).

Senators Susan Collins of Maine and Martha McSally of Arizona are engaged in close, difficult re-election campaigns and might vote no.

One thing's for sure: Whoever the nominee is, he or she had better develop a thick skin and get psychologically tough. This process promises to be every bit as ugly and appalling as the Brett Kavanaugh hearings of September 2018 -- probably even worse.

The liberals' frothing at the mouth promises to continue. Stay tuned, stock up on popcorn (and ammo, too, if you have exercised your Second Amendment rights). Fall 2020 is gonna be a wild ride.

Big Ten Football is Back!

About five weeks after voting 11-3 to postpone the 2020 football season, the Big Ten Conference today announced it would indeed have a season -- albeit an abbreviated one. The conference plans to begin an eight-game schedule on the weekend of Oct. 23-25, with the conference championship taking place on Saturday, Dec. 19. The four College Football Playoff picks will be decided on Dec. 20.

The conference's 14 universities voted unanimously to resume competition, citing improved daily testing capabilities and greater confidence in the latest medical information. Fans will not be permitted to attend the games. A "Return to Competition" task force presented Big Ten presidents and chancellors with information on daily antigen testing, enhanced cardiac screening and a data-driven approach to make decisions about practices and competition.

Back on Aug. 11, when the conference voted not to move forward with the season, there was talk about either cancelling it outright or playing it in the spring. Many fans harshly criticized the conference for not being transparent with its decision -- for voting in a clandestine manner.

Several universities, players from all of the teams, and many players' parents pushed back hard. Even President Trump got in on the action, personally calling coaches, athletic directors and others to lobby for a season. Now, as you would expect, he's taking all the credit for the decision to play.

Conference Commissioner Kevin Warren has been in office less than a year but has already built up a reputation as a social justice warrior. He's made no secret of the fact he's a staunch Democrat. It's no surprise he was behind the effort to prevent football from taking place. What is surprising is that Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer, who a few weeks ago said she was glad there would be no Big Ten or high school football (she has since reversed her decision on the latter), now says she supports the Big Ten's decision to play. Suddenly, that seemingly always vague "SCIENCE!" has become more clear, Madame Governor says.

Look, there's no question these football teams and coaching staffs are going to have to keep a tight rein on things. The players cannot be going out to bars and parties, swigging off of beer bongs, making out with strangers and passing bottles of Wild Turkey around. If they do, they may ultimately wipe out many of their most talented players from the starting lineup, and at worst case their squad to have to forfeit the rest of its games.

But on the same token, the paranoia and hysteria about COVID-19, particularly among young people, is ridiculous. Number One, younger people are less likely to contract the virus, and Number Two, their chances of recovering if they do get infected are in the neighborhood of 99.7 percent. Frankly, they have a much greater chance of sustaining a serious concussion or knee injury than dying from COVID-19.

I kind of had the feeling all along that the universities would find a way to play at least a trimmed down football season. Too many millions of dollars are at stake, and as we all know, the Benjamins are pretty much the be all and end all of academia, despite whatever high-minded, pompous bullshit they may profess.

Is John Durham Just Another Swamp Creature?

Just as the media vermin -- in particular CNN and MSNBC -- have frequently been the boy who cried wolf with regard to "bombshell" stories, Republican partisans have also falsely raised their supporters' hopes of having the final nail in the corrupt Democrat coffin.

More than 20 years ago, the Whitewater investigation failed to turn up much in the way of financial improprieties so severe that Bill and Hillary Clinton could be held accountable. It did, however, morph into the Monica Lewinsky affair and President Clinton's subsequent House impeachment for obstruction of justice and perjury to a grand jury. Still, Billary sailed on without any major ramifications, padding their bank accounts with hundreds of millions of dollars post-presidency.

In more recent years, former Rep. Trey Gowdy chaired the House Select Committee on Benghazi. Many conservatives hoped then Secretary of State Hillary would be skewered for her incompetence in the 2012 terror attack that killed 10 people (including four Americans) and wounded dozens more. The committee's final report stated that "Senior State Department officials" disregarded an obvious high threat environment in Benghazi, refusing to beef up security and in fact withdrawing security personnel.

Yet somehow, the vaunted prosecutor Gowdy failed to really get some body blows in on Clinton, whose insufferable arrogance was on full display during the hearings (Who could forget her screeching, "What difference does it make?") She pretty much skated clear unscathed.

In 2015 and 2016, the FBI's investigation into Hillary's home email server and mishandling of classified information failed to punish Hillary and the other main perpetrators. This despite non-wealthy, non-connected Americans being put away for a long time for committing less severe offenses. Slaps on the wrist were the order of the day, although then FBI Director James Comey did end up getting sacked, and his reputation has been irreparably damaged (except in the minds of delusional Democrat partisans).

Then in 2019, Inspector General Michael Horowitz took a deep dive into the FBI's "Crossfire Hurricane" investigation with its boatload of shenanigans including ill-gotten FISA warrants, a phony dossier full of Russian misinformation, and blatant political bias coming from Peter Strzok, Lisa Page and other hacks. There were a few tsk tsk's against the FBI and Department of Justice for some of their procedures, but not much happened in terms of punishments being meted out.

Eventually, FBI lawyer Kevin Clinesmith entered a plea agreement for illegally forging an email related to a FISA warrant application, but this was only after federal prosecutor John Durham opened his investigation into the FBI's Russia investigation related to the 2016 Trump campaign.

Durham's investigation has been going on since May 2019, and many are wondering if he will release a full report prior to the Nov. 3 presidential election, or even prior to Jan. 20, 2021, when the Trump administration could possibly end.

In the early days of the Durham investigation, I felt confident he was a no-nonsense guy who would deliver the goods -- that numerous hacks in the Brennan/Clapper/Comey/Strzok/McCabe/Rosenstein rotten tree would pay the price. But now I'm no so sure.

I suspect that Durham, and even AG William Barr, may be nothing more than swamp creatures wallowing in the Washington, D.C. cocktail circuit. They don't want to mess up the personal and professional lives, nor devastate the finances, of many of their pals in the tony establishment neighborhoods. I fear this is going to happen. God, I hope I'm wrong.

Nineteen years later

I don't think anyone who remembers Sept. 11, 2001 would have imagined that nearly two decades later, we'd not only still have troops in Afghanistan, but it would be a Republican trying to extract them against fierce Democrat opposition.

Indeed, the last few weeks have demonstrated that the Military-Industrial complex has bought out the Democrats and now calls the shots.  The party that rode anti-war sentiment to victory in 2006 and 2008 is now all about creating new and exciting conflicts that will claim the lives of people who come from social classes the elite openly despise.

Terrorism was once an affront to America's security and pride, but then it became a problem that could be handled with optics and spin.

The official observance has been banned in New York, but block parties and demonstrations go on, demonstrating yet again that COVID is nothing more than a convenient way for Democrats to punish groups they don't like, such as Orthodox Jews and religious people.

Looking back at Edwardian English, Winston Churchill remarked that "the Old World in its sunset was fair to see."

So it was on a sunny morning in 2001.  Every year it becomes harder to imagine a world like it.

Remember September

Your humble bloggers have been less productive in recent months, I'll be the first to admit. Both of us have a lot going on in our lives, and it's been a very busy summer. But as autumn draws near, as the days get shorter and cooler and the U.S. presidential election fast approaches, methinks we'll soon be revving up the Posse.

I've only been producing one commentary per week for several months; my goal is to increase that to at least three per week -- after my son gets married on Sept. 12. Meantime, I'm preoccupied, but Sunday morning still offers a respite.

Rather than comment on presidential politics, riots or the latest outrage from the abysmal mainstream media, I decided to reflect a bit on September's importance in world history.

I was aware of some of the key dates -- e.g., the terror attacks on Sept. 11, 2001 -- as well as the official beginning and ending of World War II (Sept. 1, 1939 when Hitler's forces invaded Poland, and Sept. 2, 1945, when Japan surrendered to the Allies aboard the USS Missouri in Tokyo Bay).

I also recall, just a few months after my college graduation, on Sept. 1, 1983, Korean Air Lines Flight 007 was shot down by a Russian fighter jet en route from New York to Seoul, killing all 269 persons on board. The U.S. Congress passed a resolution condemning the Soviets' action, and the late Rep. John Conyers of Detroit was one of only two lawmakers who voted against the resolution. I'll give the guy credit for one thing: He was a consistent leftist throughout his career and made no bones about it.

Here are some other monumental events of history occurring in September:

• Sept. 14, 1812 - Napoleon and his troops first entered Moscow as the retreating Russians set the city on fire. Determining it would be impossible to stay through the winter in the ruined city, he then began a retreat from Moscow, which became one of the great disasters of military history. Fewer than 20,000 of the original 500,000 men with him survived the Russian campaign.
• Sept. 2, 1864 - Gen. William T. Sherman's troops conquered Atlanta;
• Sept. 8, 1883 - The Northern Pacific Railroad was completed, offering a route from Minnesota to the Pacific Coast;
• Sept. 8, 1935 - Louisiana Gov. Huey Long (aka "Kingfish") was shot and mortally wounded while attending a Louisiana House of Representatives session in Baton Rouge. He died two days later;
• Sept. 8, 1941 - The German Army began its blockade of Leningrad, which lasted until January 1944 and resulted in the deaths of nearly 1 million Russian civilians;
• Sept. 2, 1963 - Alabama Gov. George Wallace forcibly halted public school integration by encircling Tuskegee High School with state troopers;
• Sept. 6, 1991 - Russian legislators renamed Leningrad St. Petersburg following the collapse of the Soviet Union.

This could be much longer, but I'll spare you.

One thing I've learned as the years go by is that history is not just fascinating, interesting, and intriguing; it also helps us be more grateful for our blessings. History teaches us a lot about human nature, and humans' dangerous capacity for inhumanity and depravity.

Any time we think we're having a rough day, we just need to remember the suffering endured by so many people throughout the ages, and how much of it was not due to Mother Nature or the vicissitudes of fate, but rather, deliberately inflicted by evil, misguided people whose greed, pride, narcissism, ruthlessness and lust for power overcame them.

There is no doubt in my mind that if far more people studied and pondered history, we would have much better people leading our nation and world. Freedom and liberty would be the rule rather than the exception.

But to be ignorant of history is, as has been repeated ad nauseam, to have to repeat its tragic consequences.