The Lawfare War Declared on the Supreme Court, By Charles Taylor (Florida)
What is happening in the US is truly remarkable, and frightening, showing the sheer level of political corruption. Thus, Biden recently gave a speech, where incidentally he referred to himself as a "former president," and where he said that he will put in place regulations to control the Supreme Court. For example, the Democrats were upset about a decision relating to presidential immunity for acts of the president committed in the line of official business, which impacts upon the corrupt case against Donald Trump. Biden said that the president is not above the law. True, but the Supreme Court did not say this. More lies. And even if this was so, it will mean that future conservatives will go after presidents like him and Obama, if there are any future conservatives, or even a future.
The other piece of bs relates to failure to report gifts and having political views of the Supreme Court. Here Biden is joined by the likes of Hispanic Senator Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (AOC), who is going after conservative judges Clarence Thomas and Samuel J. Alito, Jr. AOC objects that Justice Thomas has questioned the legitimacy of the 2020 elections and the Democrat narrative regarding the events of January 6, 2021, and that Justice Alito's wife supported Donald Trump. All of this constitutes clear violations of the separation of powers, and free speech. But worse, Kamala Harris has indicated that she will stack the Supreme Court with radical Left-wing judges, so that they will give the thumbs up to any policy the Democrats want such as the total elimination of free speech and banning of all firearms.
The elements are being put into place for Civil War II when Donald Trump is defeated by electoral fraud in November 2024. Australians need to consider the ramification of such an event on their national security, because you will be alone. Perhaps it is time to get nuclear weapons going?
https://johnklar.substack.com/p/aoc-wants-to-impeach-two-supreme
"Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (AOC) has led the charge to impeach U.S. Supreme Court justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel J. Alito, Jr. on grounds of alleged failure to report gifts and for political views that AOC asserts compromise their ethical obligation toward impartiality. In particular, AOC is enraged that Justice Thomas has questioned the legitimacy of the 2020 elections and the Democrat narrative regarding the events of January 6, 2021, and that Justice Alito's wife passionately supported Donald Trump through the so-called insurrection and displayed flags AOC connects to extremism.
The impeachment resolutions attempt to dismantle the SCOTUS — not by depoliticizing it, but by hyper-politicizing it (like everything else in social justice America) into a one-party ideological apparatus. Co-sponsors of AOC's Court impeachment coup include the usual extremist suspects Ilhan Omar, Rashida Tlaib, and Jamaal Bowman, but equally revealing is the resolutions' "endorsers," a hodgepodge of dodgy socialist NGOs and radically progressive cultural Marxists.
Wives' Knives Out
Justice Alito has publicly explained that his wife was solely responsible for displaying an upside-down U.S. flag and that he permits her to exercise her political liberties. Still, the resolution faults the justice for "allowing" her to do so:
In January 2021, Justice Alito allowed an upside-down American flag to be flown outside his primary residence for several days. At the time, an upside-down American flag was widely understood to be an expression of support for the criminal efforts to overturn the results of the 2020 election and was a symbol displayed by those who attacked the Capitol on January 6, 2021.
Meanwhile, Justice Thomas's wife dared to express political speech verboten to the self-proclaimed Democrat protectors of American democracy. The resolution against Justice Thomas avers:
Mrs. Thomas advised the President to initiate and sustain political, legal, and extralegal attempts to overturn the results of the 2020 Presidential election (writing, "Do not concede"; "The majority knows Biden and the Left is attempting the greatest Heist of our History"; "save us from the left taking America down").
Among the endorsers of these resolutions is UltraViolet, whose website declares:
UltraViolet is a powerful and rapidly growing community of people mobilized to fight sexism and create a more inclusive world that accurately represents all women, from politics and government to media and pop culture. ... We fight attacks against women and work toward a proactive vision of what equality looks like for women.
This so-called "more inclusive world that accurately represents all women" does not include political views. According to UltraViolet and AOC, a "proactive vision of what equality looks like for women" means telling two women they are not free to engage in protected First Amendment political expression while demanding that their powerful husbands stifle them or face impeachment.
Extremist Endorsements
Other "endorsers" of AOC's ridiculous effort include the People's Parity Project, Our Revolution, NextGen America, and Take Back the Court. Their dogmatic jibber-jabber exposes the far-left extremism of these impeachments.
The People's Parity Project advocates for a thinly veiled Marxism enforced by a legal system that does not feign objectivity:
The People's Parity Project is a movement of law students and attorneys organizing for a democratized legal system which empowers working people and opposes subordination in any form. ... We are working towards our long-term goal: a world in which lawyers understand that the practice of law is inherently political, that they are empowered to choose a side and choose to fight for the people, and that they are then held accountable by their professional community and the public as a whole for shaping the law into a force for true justice. ... Rather than seeing the courts as sacrosanct and above reproach, a referee standing apart from the game, we see the courts as another player on the field, capable of all the moves, pressures, and adaptations that we expect from members of Congress and other elected officials.
The Supreme Court must be mobilized, according to social justice ideology, not as an impartial arbiter of citizen disputes, but as an active political agent toward the liberation of the marginalized and the achievement of economic, environmental, and racial Nirvana:
NextGen America is the nation's largest youth voter organization, mobilizing millions of young people each year to support progressive candidates and causes.
At NextGen, we know that young people have the courage and imagination to make our leaders tackle our biggest challenges. Our nation needs that courage again to solve climate change, racial injustice, economic inequality, and to save democracy itself.
AOC, et al. seek to displace two justices for their (and their wives') conservative political views so that the institution of the Court may be more fully weaponized solely for the advancement of social justice causes instead. This is the declared intention of endorser Take Back the Court:
DEMOCRACY WILL DIE UNLESS WE TAKE BACK THE COURT. To restore the right to vote, ensure reproductive freedom, protect workers, halt our climate emergency, and save democracy, Congress must add seats to the U.S. Supreme Court.
AOC's impeachment initiative is a politically motivated ploy timed to distract national attention from a floundering POTUS while virtue-signaling faux righteousness before the Cult-Party faithful.
The Democrats lack a party majority in the House (necessary to pass the articles of impeachment to the Senate) and hold only a bare majority in the U.S. Senate (where the resolutions would require a two-thirds vote for conviction). There is no way that these outrageous, anti-American resolutions will pass.
AOC's hypocrisy is plain: she attacks these justices for political views she claims are inappropriate to the Court while shamelessly advancing far more partisan one-party totalitarianism — always in the name of justice."
"President Biden formally unveiled his planned overhaul of the Supreme Court on Monday — with a clear eye on limiting the powers of former President Donald Trump should he succeed him.
The commander-in-chief took the unusual step of unveiling his major planned policy steps in a newspaper op-ed, with the Washington Post helpfully telling readers: "The writer is president of the United States."
Biden laid out three main changes to the court — which he said is "mired in a crisis of ethics" — including term limits and a binding code of conduct.
However, the main focus was the court's recent decision to grant Trump broad immunity for any crimes committed in office.
"This nation was founded on a simple yet profound principle: No one is above the law. Not the president of the United States. Not a justice on the Supreme Court of the United States. No one," Biden wrote.
"But the Supreme Court's 6-3 decision on July 1 to grant presidents broad immunity from prosecution for crimes they commit in office means there are virtually no limits on what a president can do.
"The only limits will be those that are self-imposed by the person occupying the Oval Office."
Vice President Kamala Harris, who is running for president, endorsed the push. "Today, there is a clear crisis of confidence facing the Supreme Court as its fairness has been called into question after numerous ethics scandals and decision after decision overturning long-standing precedent," she said.
Making clear he was alarmed at Trump returning to office, Biden wrote: "If a future president incites a violent mob to storm the Capitol and stop the peaceful transfer of power — like we saw on Jan. 6, 2021 — there may be no legal consequences."
In addition to his so-called No One Is Above The Law Amendment, Biden proposed term limits for Supreme Court justices, advocating for the president to be able to appoint a new justice every two years to spend 18 years in active service on the high court
Biden also called for a binding code of conduct for the Supreme Court, writing that the court's current voluntary ethics code is "weak and self-enforced."
"Justices should be required to disclose gifts, refrain from public political activity and recuse themselves from cases in which they or their spouses have financial or other conflicts of interest. Every other federal judge is bound by an enforceable code of conduct, and there is no reason for the Supreme Court to be exempt," he wrote
Comments