Friends, the Supreme Court was a massive disappointment in the midst of the controversy surrounding the 2020 election. It refused to get involved in the systemic violation of election laws perpetrated by Biden backers. For shame! It's also been fairly quiet since Biden took office. That may be changing, though, as SCOTUS has ordered the Biden Administration to reinstate President Trump's "Remain-in-Mexico" policy for asylum seekers. Assuming the Justices succeeded in forcing the current administration to change its approach to border enforcement, everybody could end up a winner. The flow of illegals could be massively reduced, pleasing both Americans and Mexicans. Trump would be vindicated. Even Biden could emerge on the plus side, because it's become painfully obvious that his border policies need to change, but because of pressure from the Left Biden can't act. If his hand was forced by SCOTUS, however, he could tighten things up at the border and blame conservative judges for it... It will be interesting to see how all this plays out. There's a good chance, though, that Biden and his cronies will find a way to weasel out of obeying the high court, in which case it will be business as usual at the border, and those Guatemalans living in your rafters will be impossible to get rid of. Stay tuned.
In other news, Biden's approval numbers continue to tank! It's a beautiful thing. Long may it last!
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/president-biden-job-approval-7320.html
Tragically, former dictator of the People's Republic of New York, Andrew Cuomo, has been stripped of his Emmy. Ouch! That's gotta sting. Special thanks to the International Academy of Television Arts and Sciences for confirming the fact that its awards are just a popularity contest for leftists...
The state of Oregon is now requiring outdoor masking. Next will presumably be mandatory masking for babies in the womb. Personally, I'd much rather get the jab than wear a mask all day, but then again the powers-that-be won't be happy until I do both!
https://www.newsmax.com/us/oregon-covid-masks-outdoors/2021/08/25/id/1033701/
The Dems' $3.5 trillion "infrastructure" farce has passed the House, but don't despair. There are many more steps in the legislative process before the money starts flowing, and the political demise of Joe Biden won't help matters.
In all likelihood, the result in California's recall election will be close, and it's entirely possible, if not probable, that it will be determined by fraud. The biggest concern is the fact that 20 million ballots will be mailed, and no doubt most will be returned...but by whom? By the person the ballot was addressed to, or by someone else living at the same address (or not)? Such fraud is almost impossible to detect and eliminate. The Democratic machine will be in overdrive trying to get Newsom over the finish line. No one should be shocked if it succeeds.
"President" Biden has received the confidential report that conveys the intelligence community's assessment of where COVID came from. I confidently predict that the upshot of that report will be "we don't know for sure". And -- presto! -- China will get away with murder and/or manslaughter on a gargantuan scale.
Finally, here's the REAL test of the courage and convictions of all those "Trump judges": will they uphold Donald Trump's legal challenge against Twitter, Facebook, and Google? Will they defend the free speech rights of countless conservatives who have been thrown off of social media, in collusion with the censorship regime recommended by the Biden Administration and the Democratic Party? The biggest victory in the courts that conservatives could win, if you ask me, would be an order forcing Big Tech to reinstate all the accounts of DJT. Fingers crossed!
Dr. Waddy from Jack: Nah , an abortion playground like Oregon would be loath to do anything recognizing the humanity of fetuses or any hint of a right to life inherent in them.
ReplyDeleteIt should always be remembered that millions of "Hispanic" (for want of a better word) immigrants entered through our LEGAL points of entry on The Border between The United Mexican States and The United States of America. They simply never showed up for their court appointments, and now their kids born in The U.S. want a path to citizenship. Any reason to believe that thousands of Central Americans will ever show up for their court dates, even with the SCOTUS decision?
ReplyDeleteRegrettably, the focus is always on people immigration and people's rights and all that, and real border security fades into the background. A secure, fortified border is needed to protect the U.S. from the ravages of drugs, sex traffic, illegal weapons, unknown, potential pandemics. You know, those sort of things. In addition, I would say the INS needs a five year moratorium on any sort of immigration from south of the border, except in very special cases. Come to think of it, the IRS is swamped/backlogged from immigration from all over the world.
BUILD A SECURE BORDER, OR STOP TALKING ABOUT THIS ISSUE. This means a substantial role of the U.S. Armed Forces in doing this. Our Armed Forces are experts at securing borders, and can supplement the U.S. Border Patrol on this. Nothing wrong with that, because this is an international border. Far better to have our Armed Forces patrolling our borders for drugs and so on, then running around all over the world, engaged in futile missions in "stone age" countries like Afghanistan.
Yes, NAFTA is great for trade and all that, but point of entry security needs to be tightened up beyond all current recognition.
The SCOTUS decision is good, but we are right back in the same corner before Trump came along with "good fences make good neighbors" thinking. Start building that wall again, which of course is unlikely to happen any time soon.
Dr. Waddy from Jack: TheScotus vote was 6-3 straight down common sense vs leftist lines and I rejoice at it. Let they who have no respect when the numbers tilt ever so slightly and doubtfully to their side, who blithely bid us remember "well elections have consequences you know" and make obvious their disdain for our views,feel the sting of the real America's dominance of one of the nominally coequal of the three branches. Let them realize that we are as willing to play power games with them as they have been with us since the 60s. And our Scotus power embraces the rule of law, rather than leftist fantasy and presumptuousness. This decision was based in law and it effectively countered totalitarian adventurism by Executive branch radicals through their marionette. Of course the left will seek to game it. Bring it on: 6-3, yeah, 6-3! Won't be the last time you see that count.
ReplyDeleteDr.Waddy from Jack: I think we can VERY safely assume the casually expeditious leftist, recently triumpant, leftist election tampering machine is hard at work in its spiritual home, California, yes. Oh I know from experience that the real America resides there and in great numbers but assumed California presumptuousness, dismissiveness and rootlessness has ever drawn the inspired "California Dreamers" who gain electoral status in that "immediate" state on a whim, yes? You need not even be a citizen! Why, being a citizen may be to your profound political discredit no?!
ReplyDeleteDr.Waddy from Jack: I' ve predicted that this lawful Scotus will yet rule against us at times. I fear it now. I think they may say Donald Trump's First Amendment right has not been denied since current technology provides him many avenues of expression. Gads, I hope I'm wrong and thatsince I am no expert, my misgivings may prove groundless and thatScotus will find lawful merit in his suit.
ReplyDeleteDr.Waddy from Jack: And now. . . another Scotus rebuff to the left.Rents can be enforced after this reasonable hiatus given extraordinary circumstances. Imagine that! Now, we DO know how despised the term "landlord" is in the 20th century proven lexicon of appellations which can get you killed in Marxist lands. And we must note the urging of one of the "Squad " members that all US rents be summarily cancelled! Oh how very atavistically, circa Dr. Zhivago, that is. Why sure, "property"owners have no rights to their by definition unjustly assumed "owned" substance of any nature be it soil and rock or needles! Therefore their insolent demand of compensation for its use is by definition oppression and punishable as such! No? Read Edgar Snow's Red Star over China for a detailed graphic description of how this concept was prosecuted in post "revolutionary" China and how the Maoists now in our Congress, due to our principled but perhaps unwise tolerance, would have it here! Sorry leftists but private property rights are enshrined in our political tradition all the way back to John Locke and you cannot presume your way out of that! Sorry, but landlords DO retain rights in this polity yet so polluted by your presumptuous diminutions of their rights!
ReplyDeleteDr.Waddy from Jack: That the Dems 3.5 trillion dollar (+ + +) proposal has been effectively countered is to a still evolving realization that the Dems are apologists for Marxists and their obsequious hosts at the doors of decisive, potentially totalitarian, POWER! Though it took much harrowing experience, the lesson was learned! All nationally organized Dem effort, including this madly conceived spending carnival , is dedicated to establishing totalitarian far leftist capture of our country and consequent unassailable dictation of all US life, "private" or public.
ReplyDeleteRay, you are of course correct that many illegal immigrants come across the border legally, and then stick around. Trump's wall was not the obvious solution to THAT problem. Now, Trump did implement, in the midst of the pandemic, a more or less total cessation of ALL immigration. That was refreshing and long overdue. The only way to revive such a policy would be, I strongly suspect, to put Trump back in the White House -- which is as strong an argument as I can think of for doing exactly that.
ReplyDeleteJack, I agree that leftist whining about the terrors of judicial activism is pretty rich, and it's also futile...unless of course SCOTUS decides to be intimidated by it, which we can't rule out, sadly.
Jack, most jurists seem to think Trump's Big Tech lawsuit is a shot in the dark. I dunno, but the collusion between social media companies and the Biden administration strengthens his case. All I know is: I stand convinced that Big Tech is, in fact, a perilous threat to free speech. I implore the courts to act accordingly.
Yes, the decision on the eviction moratorium was a breath of fresh air! Let the lefties fume. They got what was coming to them.
SCOTUS has actually been a surprise. Their rulings have tended to be narrow, sticking to the laws rather than venturing into policy. Even the border decision -- while it keeps a bad policy in place -- is justified legally in the decision. Striking down Biden on extending the moratorium was the correct one as Biden was throwing a Hail Mary to get extra time to get fed $ to the renters (which is happening.
ReplyDeleteSCOTUS did not get involved in the myriad of court cases trying to justify the Big Lie because the cases lacked both legal justification and evidence.
I find it high irresponsible that, without evidence, to say that fraud is going to occur in the recall election. Pushing it is just Big Lie 1.1
As for high tech, there is nothing in Sec. 230 that can be overturned on a constitutional basis. The only way Sec. 230 can be changed is legislatively.
Dr.Waddy from Jack: I meant to cite William Hinton's Fan Shen rather than Red Star over China above. Sorry.
ReplyDeleteRod, you forget that EVERY decision SCOTUS makes is at least cloaked in law. As our liberal jurists prove over and over again, legalisms can be manufactured on demand. But I agree that the high court's unwillingness to stray beyond certain legal/constitutional guardrails guarantees Dear Leader Biden a wide scope for executive action. if I were Biden, I wouldn't fear SCOTUS much either.
ReplyDeleteFraud WILL occur in the recall election -- the only question is how much. How many non-citizens will vote? Few, I hope. How many ballots will be returned by someone other than the addressee? Few, I hope. I also know that the California election system is about as loosey-goosey as any in the world.