The Washington Post offers tips on how to keep your EV battery running in frigid temperatures. The link at the end of this graf is supposed to be a "gift link" (from me, Marie Burns, the giftor!), meaning that non-subscribers can read the article. Hope it works: https://wapo.st/3u8Z705
Tuesday
May032022
May 4, 2022
Afternoon Update:
Jeanna Smialek of the New York Times: "The Federal Reserve raised interest rates by a half percentage point and announced a plan to shrink its massive bond holdings, decisive measures aimed at tamping down the fastest inflation in four decades. Wednesday's move marked the Fed's largest interest rate increase since 2000, and Chair Jerome H. Powell signaled at a news conference following the meeting additional half percentage point increases will be 'on the table' at the Fed's upcoming meetings."
Kyle Cheney, et al., of Politico: "Donald Trump Jr., interviewed with the Jan. 6 committee on Tuesday, according to two people familiar with the matter.... Trump Jr. is also the latest select panel witness believed to have been in the Oval Office the morning of Jan. 6 with [Donald] Trump, his top aides and family members. Shortly after they arrived, per a private White House schedule obtained by the committee, Trump called [Mike] Pence to make a final effort to pressure him to overturn the election. Trump Jr.'s interview, confirmed on condition of anonymity and conducted without a subpoena lasted several hours...." ~~~
~~~ Marie: Former lead impeachment counsel Daniel Goldman pointed out on MSNBC that likely the reason members of the Trump Crime Family -- Junior, Ivanka, Jared & Kimberly Guilfoyle -- agreed to be interviewed by committee staff is that voluntary witnesses -- as opposed to those who appear under subpoena -- cannot be compelled to answer questions so don't have to plead the Fifth to refuse to answer.
Clare Foran & Melanie Zanona of CNN: "House Republican leader Kevin McCarthy discussed the 25th Amendment on a call with GOP leadership days after the January 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol and said the process 'takes too long,' according to an audio recording obtained by two New York Times reporters and shared with CNN. McCarthy also said during the call that he wanted to reach out to then-President-elect Joe Biden as he expressed hope for a 'smooth transition,' and said he thought impeachment would further divide the nation. The call took place on January 8, 2021, and the audio was obtained for the new book "This Will Not Pass..." by Jonathan Martin and Alex Burns.... The fact McCarthy was pressing one of his aides for details about how the 25th Amendment process would work shows there was a serious conversation at the highest levels of GOP leadership about the idea -- not just idle chatter -- even if it was ultimately deemed not a viable option."
Libby Cathey of ABC News: "President Joe Biden on Wednesday said that the federal government will pay down the national debt this quarter for the first time in six years. His remarks on economic growth came ahead of the Federal Reserve announcing a hike in interest rates Wednesday afternoon in an attempt to manage soaring inflation.... 'For all the talk the Republicans make about deficits, it didn't happen a single quarter under my predecessor, not once,' Biden said. 'The bottom line is the deficit went up every year under my predecessor, before the pandemic and during the pandemic, [and] it's gone down both years since I have been here. Period. There are the facts.'" ~~~
The New York Times is live-updating reactions to Sam Alito's leaked draft opinion.
Alito, shocked -- shocked -- to discover so little in the law books of the eighteen-sixties guaranteeing a right to abortion, has missed the point; anything in the law books of [that period] guaranteed women anything -- because -- usually they still weren't persons. Nor for that matter were fetuses. -- Historian Jill Lepore in the New Yorker (via P.D. Pepe)
Michael Scherer of the Washington Post: "For nearly half a century, Republicans have railed against 'unelected judges' making rulings that they claim disenfranchise voters from deciding for themselves what laws should govern hot-button issues. But since the release this week of a draft Supreme Court opinion that would overturn the long-standing constitutional right to abortion, Democrats have been the ones embracing that complaint, flipping the script as the party vents its frustration with elements of the U.S. system that have empowered a minority of the country's voters to elect lawmakers who have successfully reshaped the high court.... The Democratic anger is anchored in structural advantages Republicans have recently enjoyed that grant them power disproportionate to their public support." ~~~
~~~ Marie: The real difference between Republican and Democratic "unelected judges," which Scherer doesn't bother to mention, is that in the last half of the 20th century, "unelected judges" tended to expand civil rights, while the Republicans' favored "unelected judges" tend to constrict or eliminate them. And every indication is those GOP-appointed judges are going to keep on keeping on.
The Lost City of Atlantis Jamestown. Michael Ruane of the Washington Post: "The 400-year-old colonial site [Jamestown, Va.,] is losing its battle with climate change, experts say, and Wednesday the National Trust for Historic Preservation placed it on a list of the country's most endangered historical places.... Katherine Malone-France, chief preservation officer for the trust, said, 'You've got resources there underwater, that are staying underwater.'... Jamestown, in 1607, became the place of the first permanent English settlement in what would become the United States. The earth here holds the bones of hundreds of the early colonists and the artifacts that are clues to their lives. It is also the place where, in 1619, the first enslaved Africans arrived, and where generations of Native Americans had already lived for centuries."
Michigan. Clara Hendrickson & Arpan Lobo of the Detroit Free Press: "In an upset win Tuesday, Democrat Carol Glanville defeated Republican Robert 'RJ' Regan in a special election for a Michigan House seat that had only ever been held by a Republican. Results remain unofficial, but with all precincts in the district reporting, Glanville led Regan by more than 1,500 votes as of 10:30 p.m. She topped 51% of the total votes cast; Regan garnered 40% and 7.9% went to write-ins.... Regan made national headlines in March for suggesting rape victims 'lie back and enjoy it,' after he promoted conspiracy theories about the COVID-19 pandemic and shared antisemitic rhetoric. He was favored to win in the heavily Republican district."
~~~~~~~~~~
Will this institution survive the stench that this creates in the public perception that the Constitution and its reading are just political acts? -- Justice Sonia Sotomayor, during oral arguments on Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health
Nope. -- Marie Burns
The Roberts Court Is So Over. Adam Liptak of the New York Times: The Supreme Court's "reputation was in decline even before the extraordinary breach of its norms of confidentiality, with much of the nation persuaded that it is little different from the political branches of the government. The internal disarray the leak suggests, wholly at odds with the decorum prized by Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr., was a blow to the legitimacy of the court. Relations among the justices, too, on the evidence of questioning at arguments and statements in opinions, have turned fraught and frosty."
John Kruzel of the Hill: "Chief Justice John Roberts on Tuesday directed the marshal of the Supreme Court to launch an investigation into the source of a leaked draft opinion showing that a majority of justices were poised to overturn Roe v. Wade. 'This was a singular and egregious breach of that trust that is an affront to the Court and the community of public servants who work here,' Roberts said in a press release that verified the authenticity of the document published Monday evening by Politico." Update: A CNN report is here. (Also linked yesterday.) The Washington Post's report is here. ~~~
~~~ As unwashed pointed out in yesterday's Comments, Marcy Wheeler, with a little help from Joan Biskupic & Stephen Collinson of CNN, has speculated on Roberts' Machieavellian motives in this "shit-show." According to Collinson, "Roberts is willing ... to uphold the Mississippi law that would ban abortion at 15 weeks of pregnancy...." So the game, Wheeler writes, is that by leaking Alito's radical opinion, "Roberts is trying to get his colleagues to adopt a less radical opinion." (Also linked yesterday.) ~~~
~~~ Other Theories: (1) The leaker was a clerk of one of the liberal justices who wanted to alert the public to the radical nature of Alito's opinion; (2) the leaker was a clerk of one of the confederate justices who worried that one or more of the confederate justices might defect from the Alito coalition. (3) Marie's theory: Ginni Thomas poured herself a gin & tonic, waltzed into her husband's home study & copied the opinion off Clarence's unsecured laptop. Okay, I'm kidding, but the point is that nobody knows -- except a few Politico reporters, editors & lawyers and the leaker herself.
President Biden addresses the implications of Alito's draft decision:
~~~ Earlier in the day, President Biden released a statement responding to the purported draft decision overturning Roe v. Wade. He says, in part, "I believe that a woman's right to choose is fundamental, Roe has been the law of the land for almost fifty years, and basic fairness and the stability of our law demand that it not be overturned." (Also linked yesterday.) ~~~
Here's a scathing joint statement from Nancy Pelosi & Chuck Schumer. They write, in part, "Several of these conservative Justices, who are in no way accountable to the American people, have lied to the U.S. Senate, ripped up the Constitution and defiled both precedent and the Supreme Court's reputation -- all at the expense of tens of millions of women who could soon be stripped of their bodily autonomy and the constitutional rights they've relied on for half a century." (Also linked yesterday.)
Olafimihan Oshin of the Hill: "Former President Obama and former first lady Michelle Obama issued a strong statement criticizing the draft Supreme Court opinion knocking down the Roe v. Wade decision, saying it would limit U.S. freedoms just like other past actions by the court. 'Today, millions of Americans woke up fearing that their essential freedoms under the Constitution were at risk,'the couple said in the joint statement on Tuesday. 'If the Supreme Court ultimately decides to overturn the landmark case of Roe v. Wade, then it will not only reverse nearly 50 years of precedent -- it will relegate the most intensely personal decision someone can make to the whims of politicians and ideologues,' the Obamas added." (Also linked yesterday.)
Mike DeBonis & Seung Min Kim of the Washington Post: "The stunning leak of a draft Supreme Court opinion indicating that the federal constitutional right to abortion may be on the cusp of evaporating has brought new and intense scrutiny to two prominent Republican supporters of abortion rights, Sens. Susan Collins (Maine) and Lisa Murkowski (Alaska), who provided key Senate support to justices who now appear poised to overturn Roe v. Wade. Both women voted for Supreme Court justices nominated by ... Donald Trump, explaining that they were convinced through public and private statements that those nominees would respect existing court precedent and leave Roe in place. On Tuesday, both suggested that if in fact the court moves to overturn the decision in sweeping terms -- as the leaked draft opinion signed by Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. would indicate -- it would represent a breach of those prior assurances."
Last night's stunning breach was an attack on the independence of the Supreme Court. By every indication, this was yet another escalation in the radical left's ongoing campaign to bully and intimidate federal judges and substitute mob rule for the rule of law. -- Mitch McConnell, in a statement designed to distract from his pivotal part in the plot not only to overturn Roe v. Wade but also to undermine the courts by further politicizing them (from the WashPo live updates)
The Washington Post is live-updating reactions to the leaked Alito opinion. (Also linked yesterday.)
** The Case Against SCOTUS. Ian Millhiser of Vox: "The Court was the midwife of Jim Crow, the right hand of union busters, and the dead hand of the Confederacy, and is now one of the chief architects of America's democratic decline.... For nearly all of its history, it's been a reactionary institution, a political one that serves the interests of the already powerful at the expense of the most vulnerable. And it currently appears to be reverting to that historic mean.... [Now, the Court] is systematically dismantling voting rights protections that make it possible for every voter to have an equal voice, and for every political party to compete fairly for control of the United States government. Justice Alito ... is also the author of two important decisions dismantling much of the Voting Rights Act." Read on.
There have only been three justices in American history who were appointed by a president who lost the popular vote, and who were confirmed by a bloc of senators who represent less than half the country. All three of them sit on the Supreme Court right now, and all three were appointed by Donald Trump. -- Ian Millhiser, linked above ~~~
~~~ Philip Bump of the Washington Post: "Rarely ... will the [U.S. government] system's structure so obviously have rewarded a minority of Americans as it would if the Supreme Court overturns the decision in Roe v. Wade. To reach a point where the decision legalizing abortion is on the brink of being rescinded required a cascade of victories by the minority -- and would be effected despite a majority of Americans hoping it doesn't happen.... [It] is also a reminder of the cascade of victories a minority of Americans enjoyed to bring this potential opinion to reality." Bump goes on to lay out how a president* who won a minority of the popular vote and a Senate "majority" of Republicans who won fewer votes than the Democratic "minority" senators. The Senate confirmed Gorsuch 54-45; "senators who supported his confirmation represented 45 percent of the country's population. The same pattern held for Brett M. Kavanaugh" and Amy Coney Barrett."
Annals of Journalism, Ctd. Benjamin Mullin & Katie Robertson of the New York Times on how Politico got & handled the big scoop.
The New York Times' live updates of developments Wednesday in Russia's war on Ukraine are here: "The European Union on Wednesday proposed a total Russian oil embargo, banning the import of crude oil in the next six months and refined oil products by the end of 2022, in its biggest and most costly step yet toward supporting Ukraine and weaning itself from its dependence on Russian fossil fuels.... Hungary's foreign minister said his country would not support sanctions that would jeopardize its energy supply from Russia.... [The] United States and its allies were also trying to capitalize on Russia's slow progress on the battlefield by escalating their efforts to weaken its military and tip the war's balance toward Ukraine. The United States and Britain have been sending a stream of increasingly powerful arms, and Russia's nordic neighbors-- Finland and Sweden -- are inching closer to joining NATO." ~~~
~~~ The Washington Post's live updates for Wednesday are here: "Russia has stepped up missile attacks across Ukraine, striking railways and power stations in the latest sign that the Kremlin may be trying to restrict the flow of weapons and supplies to battlefields in the east -- just as Western countries are boosting Ukraine's arsenal. The attacks on Ukraine's infrastructure Tuesday hit at least six train stations in central and western Ukraine and three electrical substations in Lviv, officials said."
Zolan Kanno-Youngs & John Ismay of the New York Times: "President Biden made a forceful call on Tuesday for ramping up American military support for Ukraine as his administration rapidly dispenses artillery, antitank weapons and other hardware, raising questions about the surge in spending at a time when his domestic agenda is stalled. Speaking at a Lockheed Martin plant in Troy, Ala., that manufactures Javelin antitank missiles, Mr. Biden said the transfer of the weapons has been crucial to Ukraine's defense against the Russian invasion.... Mr. Biden's embrace of the military assistance comes amid widespread bipartisan support for helping Ukraine in the fight, which he described as part of the 'ongoing battle in the world between autocracy and democracy' around the world."
Jonathan Abrams & Michael Crowley of the New York Times: "More than two months after the W.N.B.A. star Brittney Griner was accused of having drugs in her luggage and taken into custody in Russia, the U.S. State Department on Tuesday said that it had determined she was 'wrongfully detained.'... A State Department official said in a statement ... that an interagency team would work to have her released. Griner, 31, has been held in Russia since February on drug charges that could carry a sentence of up to 10 years.... Russian customs officials accused Griner of carrying vape cartridges with hashish oil in her luggage at an airport near Moscow as she returned to Russia to resume playing for UMMC Yekaterinburg, a professional women's basketball team, after a two-week break."
An Unusual How-to Manual. Shane Harris of the Washington Post: "On Monday, the CIA published instructions for how Russians can covertly volunteer information using an encrypted conduit to the agency's website. The hope is to attract intelligence -- and potentially gain more access to official Russian secrets -- from disaffected people who have been trying to contact the CIA since the war began, officials said. To ensure the would-be informants are not caught by Russian state security, the CIA spelled out detailed Russian-language instructions in three social media posts on how to use the Tor Internet browser, which lets users move online anonymously, as well as virtual private networks, or VPNs."
Rachel Siegel of the Washington Post: "The Federal Reserve is expected to raise interest rates again Wednesday, this time by half a percentage point, in an aggressive step toward combating the highest inflation in 40 years. The rate increase would be the sharpest since 2000 and the second of seven hikes forecast for this year. Faced with soaring prices and a hot job market with record numbers of job openings, the Fed began raising rates in March, betting that a steady series of hikes will slash inflation, cool down the economy and get the coronavirus recovery on more sustainable footing."
Priscilla Alvarez & Zachary Cohen of CNN: "... Donald Trump's Department of Homeland Security delayed and altered an intelligence report related to Russian interference in the 2020 election, making changes that 'appear to be based in part on political considerations,' according to a newly released watchdog report. The April 26 Homeland Security inspector general's assessment provides a damning look at the way DHS' Office of Intelligence and Analysis dealt with intelligence related to Russia's efforts to interfere in the US, stating the department had deviated from its standard procedures in modifying assessments related to Moscow's targeting of the 2020 presidential election. The conclusion that Trump's appointee appeared to have tried to downplay Russian meddling in a key intelligence report is the latest example of how his aides managed his aversion to any information about how Russia might be helping his election prospects."
Eric Lipton of the New York Times: "The Trump family business and ... Donald J. Trump's 2017 inauguration committee have jointly agreed to pay $750,000 to settle a lawsuit filed by the attorney general for the District of Columbia, who claimed that the Trump International Hotel in Washington illegally received excessive payments from the inauguration committee. The settlement in the civil suit came with no admission of wrongdoing by the Trump Organization, the former president or the inaugural committee." MB: Well, of course it did. (Also linked yesterday.)
Robert McFadden of the New York Times: "Norman Y. Mineta, who as a boy was interned with his family and thousands of other Japanese Americans during World War II, then rose in government to become a 10-term Democratic congressman from California and a cabinet official under Presidents Bill Clinton and George W. Bush, died on Tuesday at his home in Edgewater, Md. He was 90."
Starbucks Sucks. Noam Scheiber of the New York Times: "Starbucks announced Tuesday that it was raising pay and expanding training at corporate-owned locations in the United States. But it said the changes would not apply to the recently unionized stores, or to stores that may be in the process of unionizing, such as those where workers have filed a petition for a union election. On a call with investors to discuss the company's quarterly earnings, the chief executive, Howard Schultz, said that the spending would bring investments in workers and stores to nearly $1 billion for the fiscal year and that it would help Starbucks keep up with customer traffic." Remember when Schultz thought he should be president*?
The New York Times' live updates of Covid-19 developments Wednesday are here: "A handful of coronavirus cases have emerged among people who attended the White House Correspondents'Dinner over the weekend, the president of the correspondents' association said on Tuesday. A CNN story on the people who tested positive after the correspondents' dinner is here.
Ron Johnson Is Still a Senator. Henry Redman of the Wisconsin Examiner: "In a video interview published on the right-wing social media platform Rumble, Sen. Ron Johnson said it 'may be true' that vaccines against COVID-19 cause AIDS. Johnson was being interviewed by anti-vaccine lawyer Todd Callender, who alleged that the shots induce AIDS and that the FDA knew so when the vaccines were approved for emergency use."
Beyond the Beltway
New York. Luis Ferré-Sadurní & Nicholas Fandos of the New York Times: "Gov. Kathy Hochul announced on Tuesday she had chosen Representative Antonio Delgado, a Democrat from the Hudson Valley, as her new lieutenant governor, the second-highest ranking position in New York State. Mr. Delgado is expected to serve as Ms. Hochul's running mate as she campaigns for a full term this year. He will replace former Lt. Gov. Brian Benjamin, who was indicted on federal bribery charges last month, leading to his abrupt resignation. A group of New York Democrats empowered with formally replacing Mr. Benjamin endorsed the choice of Mr. Delgado, 45, as Ms. Hochul's running mate Tuesday morning, ensuring that he will be on the ballot in June's party primary, according to three people familiar with the process." (Also linked yesterday.)
Ohio Senate & Gubernatorial Primaries. New York Times live updates: "J.D. Vance, the author-turned-venture capitalist, parlayed an endorsement from Donald J. Trump into victory on Tuesday in the race for the Republican nomination for an Ohio Senate seat, beating a crowded field of conservatives vying to carry the former president's banner into the November election. Mr. Vance's come-from-behind victory in the race for the seat of the retiring Senator Rob Portman was a testament to the power Mr. Trump still holds with the Republican voting base in Ohio, a state that voted for Mr. Trump twice. The result on Tuesday night was called by The Associated Press.... Representative Tim Ryan, who won the Democratic Senate primary.... Gov. Mike DeWine has won the Republican nomination for a second term in Ohio. He held off a pair of Trump-inspired candidates, former Representative Jim Renacci and Joe Blystone, an underfunded farmer.... Former Mayor Nan Whaley of Dayton has won the Democratic primary for Ohio governor. She'll face a steep uphill climb in the general election against Gov. Mike DeWine." Includes updates on other primary races.
Share Article
Comments for this entry have been disabled. Additional comments may not be added to this entry at this time.
Reader Comments (25)
Well, it worked. I am distracted. Or was for a moment.
Had to pause to shake my head. I had no idea what Mitch's statement even meant.
Still don't.
Nicky or Neville?
Just thinking about that theory that suggests Little Johnny wants to go with an option not quite as draconian as Hit Man Sam’s idea, thus prompting the leaking of the memo.
Interesting. But here’s the thing. Really, what’s the diff? Going with the Mississippi plan to ban abortions at 15 weeks, or torching Roe altogether?
Alito’s plan: we’re gonna beat you to death. How you like them apples?
Kindly Johnny’s plan: we’re gonna beat you right up to the point of death, then stop. After that, if you die anyway, it’s your own fault. Loser.
Yeah. That’s much better.
But if Roberts were that much of a Machiavellian manipulator, we’d have seen evidence of it long before now. The truth is more mundane but no less scary. Roberts is not up to the job of Chief Justice (not sure who would be). He’s a Reagan winger, which is bad enough. But Trump has surrounded him with flat out thuggish maniacs (in addition to the thuggish maniacs already there). He’s lost all control.
And if his idea really was “Beat ‘em to the point of death so’s we don’t look all that bad”, then he’s more Neville Chamberlain than Nicollo Machiavelli.
Ken,
Right. When I first heard McConnell moaning about the end of civilization, I was confused. For a moment I thought he might have been referring to Trump’s attempted coup.
But no.
He’s pissed that the outcome of his evil, treasonous skullduggery is on full display, and making Mitch look bad is waaaay worse than an attempted overthrow of the government. What was I thinking?
So yeah, maybe leaking the Alito memo was a breach, but whining about like it’s the horror of horrors when your party is engaged in full on treasonous destruction of democracy is like complaining that your kid took a twenty out of your wallet while across the street, your pals are sticking up a Brinks truck.
With the record of Trump endorsed candidates in Ohio and Indiana I'd say it's time to quit the talk of Trump losing his grip on the GOP.
Once upon a time the legal historian Morton Horwitz asked:
"What did the Warren Court stand for?"
"Like no other court before or since, it stood for an expansive conception of the democratic way of life as the foundational ideal of constitutional interpretation."
Unfortunately, across the span of American history, the Supreme Court has most often been the obstacle of progress. Today we see that loud and clear and millions of voices are voicing that loud and clear!
Listening to the many, mostly women, last night was/is heartbreaking and infuriating. I thought Lizzie Warren was going to explode–-she is so angry.
Some time ago I came upon a chart that shows with nine judges, the US S.C. is one of the world's smallest constitutional courts. Belgium, Ireland, Spain and the United Kingdom all have twelve judges and Germany's highly respected court has sixteen. Time for a change here ya think??????
@Bobby Lee: Yeah, most distressing. We'll have to see how others pan out but you are probably right––Fatty's fingers are still in those pie in the sky guys and gals that "are doing such a great job!" Hard to let go of sleaze when it has such power.
@Bobby Lee: The two top candidates in Ohio's GOP Senate primary each tried to out-Trump the other. These two Trumpy candidates got about 55 percent of the total vote yesterday. So I think the headline here is "Republican Voters Are Still Stupid."
Bobby Lee,
Maybe, but I'm not yet convinced.
Considering the Ohio Republican vote only, Vance won by about 10 points over his opponents, but his opponents together (one of whom was only mild MAGA) garnered a significantly greater percentage (47 to 32), and the Ohio Governor's race easily went to the relatively moderate (he actually believed Covid was real) Republican incumbent.
No doubt the Pretender still wields star power among some, but the results seemed a mixed bag to me.
From a WaPo piece (linked above):
“On Tuesday, both suggested that if in fact the court moves to overturn the decision in sweeping terms — as the leaked draft opinion signed by Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. would indicate — it would represent a breach of those prior assurances.”
“Breach of prior assurances”. You mean bald faced lies, right?
Confederates have weaponized mendacity to the point where lying has become their Swiss Army Knife. It’s used for everything, everywhere, by everyone. And when their “justices” see no problem with lying to get what they want (power over all the rest of us, despite their representing a minority), there is little hope for actual justice.
“Justice”, for these people, has become little more than a snarky cover for ideological assault. “Justice”, on the Trump court, is now a three card monte game. And honestly, I’d trust the guys running those games on 6th Ave. street corners far more than I would a single one of these skeezy, lying-ass “judges”.
P.S. In 1965 right after the Griswold v Connecticut ruling I was in a drugstore–-in Connecticut–--to purchase a new diaphragm–-I had a prescription. You would have thought I wanted some lethal potion to kill myself by the way the pharmacist was treating me. I was not aware of the court case ––I had only recently moved here from Michigan . He wanted proof that I was married––examined the prescription ––made me feel like a felon. It wasn't until later that I realized why.
In the past 36 hours or so, a lot of (virtual) ink has been spilled over the degradation of the Supreme Court, both because of Alito's sophomoric opinion & the leak itself. Numerous observers have pointed out that Trump's Three Stooges reportedly signed on to Alito's opinion, thus making it possible to overturn a nearly-50-year-old human rights precedent.
That's all true. But there is another way in which Trump undermined not just the Supreme Court but ALL the courts in our federal system. Trump's allies brought something like 63 cases before various lower federal courts & state courts arguing that the 2020 presidential election was illegally rigged in some way or the other. The Trump rigged-election proponents lost all but one case, as I recall, and that decision was later overturned by a higher court. I think they lost two in the Supreme Court. Judges and justices ruled almost unanimously (well, there's Clarence & Sam) against Trump's team.
In other words, Trump was left with no legal path to retain power.
Alas, as far as Trump is concerned, the judiciary's opinion matters only when it sides with him. So when the judiciary nearly unanimously threw him out of court, Trump waged a violent insurrection. That insurrection was an attempt not only to overturn the election but also to overturn nearly every judicial decision regarding his claim to the throne.
Republicans across the country are preparing to institutionalize the insurrection. It won't be necessary to resort to violence if they get their ducks in a row by 2024 and every one of them ratifies fake slates of electors in certain states that voted Democratic. It won't be necessary if a few Republican state elections officials "find 11,780 votes" when necessary to overturn the true results. It won't be necessary if the "undecided" Electoral College is forced to throw the election to the House of Representatives and the Republican candidate wins because more states are controlled by Republicans than by Democrats.
And if, by chance, some judges & justices are yelling in the distance, "You can't do that!" who's going to hear them?
@P.D. Pepe: Thanks for sharing your first-hand experience with Griswold. Very interesting. Having Constitutional rights and being able to exercise them without constraint are two different things.
From the WaPo article linked above, about Collins and Murkowski's disappointment:
"... Collins offered a similar rationale in 2017 when voting to confirm Gorsuch: “I asked him if it would be sufficient to overturn a long-established precedent if five current justices believed that a previous decision was wrongly decided,” she said in a floor speech before voting to confirm him. “He responded: ‘Emphatically no.’ And that, to me, is the right approach. He said a good judge always starts with precedent and presumes that the precedent is correct.” ... "
One of them (Gorsuch or Collins) lied. It is hard to believe that a nominee would give a senator a "yes" or a "no" answer to such a fraught question. Nominees are coached. intensively, that there is no upside to telling any senator what you would do on the bench for any procedure, issue or case. The answer has to be "I can't speculate, and there is no point in doing so without reference to the particulars and circumstances of a given case."
But let's assume that despite his coaching, Gorsuch lied and DID tell Collins "Emphatically, no!", with fingers crossed behind his back. Collins was then ALSO lying when she relayed that to the public: she would know that such an answer was impossible -- any time five justices determine that a prior precedent must go, it goes ... so by assuring her voters that Gorsuch was "reliable on stare decisis" she was complicit in his lie.
ANOTHER SUBJECT: yesterday Driftglass used the word "faunch" which means "angrily and excitedly chomping at the bit, rant and rave". A great word. I had never heard it before.
As I mentioned yesterday, Collins is either a liar or an idiot. Either way, her mendacity or her idiocy have done great damage to the nation.
The Republican Way.
And in the end, she accepts no responsibility. Also the Republican Way.
Collins and Murkowski support abortion access the same way Manchin and Sinema support voting rights, with empty words and zero action.
WHAT? NO WOMEN IN THE CONSTITUTION?
Jill Lepore explains why to Sam I am:
https://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/why-there-are-no-women-in-the-constitution
"Alito, shocked––shocked ––to discover so little in the law books of the eighteen-sixties guaranteeing a right to abortion, has missed the point; anything in the law books of [that period] guaranteed women anything–––because––usually they still weren't persons. Nor for that matter were fetuses."
Not to change the subject, but yesterday (rain all day) was reading
magazines at the library and there was an article about Vlad's net
worth (Time, maybe?).
Anyway, he is reported to be worth 200 billion $. That's billion, with
a B.
So I thought about that 3rd grade math problem: If Vlad's wife spends
a million dollars a day on baubles, how long will it take for Vlad to
become a pauper?
Then I thought, WTF, he would just get together a bunch of rich
oligarchs, make them sign over their wealth, then most likely they
would accidentally fall off a skyscraper.
Anyway, it would be about 550 years if I remember my 3rd grade
math.
Patrick,
Yes, faunch is a great word. A one syllable word that packs a punch. Its interest is even more advanced in that its origin is a mystery. I recently came across another unusual word that at first I thought might be useful in defining the current state of confederate indolence and uselessness, especially when referring to politicians of the hack variety (ie, all of them).
The word, esquivalience, purports to describe one who shirks their duty, or the willful avoidance of one’s official duties.
Its etymology indicates that it derives from the French word esquiver, meaning to dodge or slink away.
A-ha, I thought. An excellent description of the pusillanimous peckerheads who take up oxygen in the legislatures around the country, but give nothing back but treasonous mewlings and phony cries of victimization.
Alas, “esquivalience”, as useful as it first seemed, is a made up word (then again, what words are not made up?). It is, in the parlance of lexicographers, a mountweazel, another word with a fascinating origin.
It appears that editors of the 1975 Columbia Encyclopedia stuck in an entry about a fictitious photographer (who began her career as a fashioner of fountains!) named Virginia Mountweazel. The entry also mentions her “famous” photo essay of rural mailboxes (which actually sounds like a pretty cool idea). The idea, so I’ve read, was to see if any other reference works would swipe this entry (plagiarism!).
Don’t know if anyone bit, but I’m guessing there’s a research paper or two in some PhD’s CV about Ms. Mountweazel. If so, I doubt anyone could accuse that person of esquivalience.
"Esquivalence" looks like a shurnuff portmanteau, and those are actual words even if they didn't exist before the enjambment.
@P.D. Pepe: So obvious, so brilliant. BTW, here's the whole text of the 19th Amendment: "The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex. Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation."
Now, what if you left two little words out of that Amendment: "The right of citizens of the United States ... shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex.
Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation."
Oh, gosh. It becomes, in effect, the Equal Rights Amendment. What an irony that Sam & the Dancing Supremes can abridge a woman's right to choose because of an Amendment that was supposed to expand women's rights.
The Conservative Court board game
While we’re on the subject of having rights bludgeoned by the Traitors, I read that Mad Marge is spouting off about abortions. You know why women decide to terminate a pregnancy?
Ready?
Satan. Of course!
Margie sez Satan whispers in their ears and tells them if they get an abortion, the guy who got them pregnant will marry them.
Oooohhh-kay.
Couple’a things.
First, what if the pregnancy was caused by rape or incest? Does she really want to marry Bart the Rapist? What about Uncle Randy, or better yet, Dad?
Second, how does she know about all this? Has Margie been in touch with Old Scratch? Does she have him speed dial? (Much more likely that he has HER on speed dial.)
Does she have a subscription to Sulfur and Brimstone Monthly?
You see, the problem with making up cuckoo shit like this is these idiots don’t think about the obvious follow up questions, like “Where did you get this very detailed information?” It’s one thing to say “Satan made them do it”, but it’s an entirely different cauldron of boiling cadavers to say “Satan called at 3:54 AM on April 4th and told them to blah, blah, blah, wedding bells.”
Oh, well, unless you’re talking to other blithering idiots.
Hmmm…never mind.
I’ve been thinking about the “what next” questions. Say, for instance, that there’s a federal law that says that the woman who has a miscarriage will be charged with murder. We know that women of childbearing age (15-45) get pregnant - a lot. Dr. Google says that 10-20% of pregnancies end in miscarriage, and this is likely an underestimation since very early miscarriages just seem like a delayed heavy period. As of 2020, there were 64,543,832 women of childbearing age. Let’s say 10% of these women get pregnant this year (6,450,000), and that 10% miscarry. Does this mean that 645,000 women will be charged with murder this year? Just trying to get my head around the new laws that are being set in place.
Republicans really do seem to be the dog that finally caught the car.
https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/us-supreme-courts-alito-cancels-conference-appearance-after-abortion-ruling-leak-2022-05-04/
Looks like Alito is exercising his Constitutional right to privacy....